Looking for credible articles/papers/research references for the below

[FEENIX]

Yes, Zeglin, Siewart, Litz all provide their data. Army, Navy research papers are all good.
Spoomer is entertaining, but not credible for what I need.
Ackley was a designer/hunter and very opinionated...which is fine, just lacks credible data for the areas i am looking into...but he was obviously a leader and had great foresight on cartridge case design.

I am not sure if Michael Courtney is still an LRH member but he used to be active here. He is an independent researcher with a PhD in Physics from MIT that did various studies and publications on that might lead you to what you are looking for. He is also a professor at the US Air Force Academy. He also partnered with Amy Courtney who has a Ph D in Biomechanics and taught at the West Point's Department of Physics and Nuclear Engineering. Do a search on their works and you might find something to satisfy your curiosity. Good luck!

 

[Justice1327]

I am not sure if Michael Courtney is still an LRH member but he used to be active here. He is an independent researcher with a PhD in Physics from MIT that did various studies and publications on that might lead you to what you are looking for. He is also a professor at the US Air Force Academy. He also partnered with Amy Courtney who has a Ph D in Biomechanics and taught at the West Point's Department of Physics and Nuclear Engineering. Do a search on their works and you might find something to satisfy your curiosity. Good luck!

That is awesome and thanks. I am retired AF and consult for USTC, so I will try to make contact with him.

 

[FEENIX]

That is awesome and thanks. I am retired AF and consult for USTC, so I will try to make contact with him.

I, too, am a retired USAF (2007) but still work for DAF, and working for my second retirement ((maybe 2027). My son is a 2011 USAFA grad but I am not sure if he ever had Michael as one of his professors.

 

[MagnumManiac]

Yes, agree. that is why I am looking into a nitrided chamber and what it may or may not do. Obviously I am not the first, just looking for information on it and how chamber design/shape has changed and any proof that a particular change in design from past is quantifiably better.

Nitriding will not change the SURFACE FINISH other than darkening the colour. I am an Engine Reconditioner and specialise in performance engines, mostly high powered V8 engines for drag racing and oval track Sprint cars.
We get our forged steel cranks nitrided even if done by the factory first, it changes only the colour to a greyish hue, journals are polished again afterwards, just to make them shiny again, as they dull off after treatment.
Hope this helps, the treatment only goes a few tenths passed the surface.

Cheers.

 

[Justice1327]

Nitriding will not change the SURFACE FINISH other than darkening the colour. I am an Engine Reconditioner and specialise in performance engines, mostly high powered V8 engines for drag racing and oval track Sprint cars.
We get our forged steel cranks nitrided even if done by the factory first, it changes only the colour to a greyish hue, journals are polished again afterwards, just to make them shiny again, as they dull off after treatment.
Hope this helps, the treatment only goes a few tenths passed the surface.

Cheers.

Any experience nitriding barrels?

 

[MagnumManiac]

Any experience nitriding barrels?

I haven't nitrided any myself, but I owned a Kreiger that had cryo treatment and another that was nitrided, no difference could be seen between them and regular barrels, although the cryo barrel seemed to never get dirty, even after 100 shots or so, just dull to look down the bore and patches always came out clean in less than 10 passes.
Never saw any accuracy improvement.

Cheers.

 

[Bob Wright]

Yes, agree. that is why I am looking into a nitrided chamber and what it may or may not do. Obviously I am not the first, just looking for information on it and how chamber design/shape has changed and any proof that a particular change in design from past is quantifiably better.

Niriding will increase compressive strength of just the surface of the chamber walls. Extremely hard and wear resistant.
It's done at a lower temperature than the parent material was aged or tempered to a hardness as a stainless vs carbon barrel would be. That way the base material retains its strength after nitride. The smoothness would have needed to be established prior to nitriding. Nitriding can be thin .000x or up to say .005 thick. Some build up happens to change dimensions so that needs to be accounted for. Not ideal to have build up on a firearm chamber so they are thin on nitride. Usually there is no finishing processes after nitriding.
Hope this helps the op.

 

[Justice1327]

I haven't nitrided any myself, but I owned a Kreiger that had cryo treatment and another that was nitrided, no difference could be seen between them and regular barrels, although the cryo barrel seemed to never get dirty, even after 100 shots or so, just dull to look down the bore and patches always came out clean in less than 10 passes.
Never saw any accuracy improvement.

Cheers.

Thank you. I was mostly just looking for extended barrel life.

 

[Justice1327]

Niriding will increase compressive strength of just the surface of the chamber walls. Extremely hard and wear resistant.
It's done at a lower temperature than the parent material was aged or tempered to a hardness as a stainless vs carbon barrel would be. That way the base material retains its strength after nitride. The smoothness would have needed to be established prior to nitriding. Nitriding can be thin .000x or up to say .005 thick. Some build up happens to change dimensions so that needs to be accounted for. Not ideal to have build up on a firearm chamber so they are thin on nitride. Usually there is no finishing processes after nitriding.
Hope this helps the op.

Yes, I've read similar things, but I gotta make sure that whoever does the nitro that it's not too thick

 

[MagnumManiac]

Thank you. I was mostly just looking for extended barrel life.

Seriously, the few micron depth of the surface hardening may or may not increase longevity, because heat is nitriding's worst enemy.
It does allow a bearings surface to last longer in 'normal' operation, but if something like a spun bearing occurs, it makes diddly squat bit of difference. The heat goes through the hardening in milliseconds.
Having used both nitriding and cryo, I did not see any evidence it improved upon barrel life other than the cleaning aspect, neither one fouled like hammer forged barrels.

Cheers.

 

[Jeff Heeg osoh]

Hopefully a friend of mine with great knowledge that has studied and worked in this area will respond. Tim, thank you

 

[Alex Wheeler]

1. It doesnt
2. It doesnt

Look at combustion like blowing up a balloon not like a gardon hose.
Chamber finish makes a big difference in pressure handling but not ballistics. I have tested this.

 

[timintx]

A lot of good info on this thread . I have not written papers publicly but have done long term studies on barrel life , velocity and in bore timing migration and can correlate specific variables to certain aspects of barrel wear. I have not done studies specifically on barrel coating because there is not much that can protect metal from damage when flames at over 1000-1200 degrees and under extreme pressure and friction that are directly contacting the barrel on a regular basis. But there are ways to increase barrel life depending on what is defined as a done barrel, exploding jackets, sudden large velocity drop,throat erosion on the leade, erosion in the bore just in front of the chamber. or just does not group anymore. What ever the situation there are a few variables that are really the main causes of shortened barrel life in general so my testing was geared towards reducing the determined causes rather then protecting the barrel from them . The first is heat under extreme pressure is just going to eat the barrel up , so what I can correlate from long term data is heat of explosion properties. This accounts for approximately 16% of total gains over a 1000rd mean . Using a powder with lower heat of explosion properties it reduced the length of bore erosion per a given number of rounds and measured muzzle temps were below 1200 degrees. With the higher heat of explosion properties the muzzle flame temps were above 1220 degrees. H1000 has the lowest temp property of most powders out there and has worked very well for me. Friction is a variable that is easy to reduce simply by using lower velocities. I was amazed how much better the barrels looked after 600 rounds when keeping the velocities below 2850 FPS verses 3000 FPS,This variable accounts for roughly 20% of the total gain over the mean . Static barrel temp can change the results a a bit but just dont run the barrel hot if possible. The end result is run powder with low heat properties and run velocities at or below 2850 FPS and the total gain of 36% more barrel life . Other factors such as land configuration can also have a effect but I lack solid confirmation . I have 2 barrels that are 3 land configuration that showed promise with the higher heat properties of powders used with one at 3300 rounds and one at 1680 rds. both are failing now so the jury is still out on that one. They could still be anomalies . I hope this helps sir .

Tim

 

[Justice1327]

A lot of good info on this thread . I have not written papers publicly but have done long term studies on barrel life , velocity and in bore timing migration and can correlate specific variables to certain aspects of barrel wear. I have not done studies specifically on barrel coating because there is not much that can protect metal from damage when flames at over 1000-1200 degrees and under extreme pressure and friction that are directly contacting the barrel on a regular basis. But there are ways to increase barrel life depending on what is defined as a done barrel, exploding jackets, sudden large velocity drop,throat erosion on the leade, erosion in the bore just in front of the chamber. or just does not group anymore. What ever the situation there are a few variables that are really the main causes of shortened barrel life in general so my testing was geared towards reducing the determined causes rather then protecting the barrel from them . The first is heat under extreme pressure is just going to eat the barrel up , so what I can correlate from long term data is heat of explosion properties. This accounts for approximately 16% of total gains over a 1000rd mean . Using a powder with lower heat of explosion properties it reduced the length of bore erosion per a given number of rounds and measured muzzle temps were below 1200 degrees. With the higher heat of explosion properties the muzzle flame temps were above 1220 degrees. H1000 has the lowest temp property of most powders out there and has worked very well for me. Friction is a variable that is easy to reduce simply by using lower velocities. I was amazed how much better the barrels looked after 600 rounds when keeping the velocities below 2850 FPS verses 3000 FPS,This variable accounts for roughly 20% of the total gain over the mean . Static barrel temp can change the results a a bit but just dont run the barrel hot if possible. The end result is run powder with low heat properties and run velocities at or below 2850 FPS and the total gain of 36% more barrel life . Other factors such as land configuration can also have a effect but I lack solid confirmation . I have 2 barrels that are 3 land configuration that showed promise with the higher heat properties of powders used with one at 3300 rounds and one at 1680 rds. both are failing now so the jury is still out on that one. They could still be anomalies . I hope this helps sir .

Tim

Yes, thank you. Do you have a source for for powders and their temperature properties?