Powder differences - 150 years ago, 40 years ago and today.

[C. Cash]

Meshack Browning mentions getting ahold of some Dupont powder in the early 1800's and if I remember correctly he seemed to express suprise at it's power, as compared to what he had used for so long.   I think I remember it knocking him off his feet a bit.  I'm suprised by this as I'm pretty sure Browing used rifles that were not big bores at all....some where in the 40's I believe.   Always wondered about that Dupont powder of that time period.

[Dphariss]

Meshack Browning mentions getting ahold of some Dupont powder in the early 1800's and if I remember correctly he seemed to express suprise at it's power, as compared to what he had used for so long.   I think I remember it knocking him off his feet a bit.  I'm suprised by this as I'm pretty sure Browing used rifles that were not big bores at all....some where in the 40's I believe.   Always wondered about that Dupont powder of that time period.

Not knowing what he was using previous makes the power generated relative.
If they were using unpressed powder or poorly mixed/milled powder etc etc it might have been pretty poor stuff.
The poor quality C&H imported in the late 1960s-and 1970s took a LOT of powder to equal velocities with  Dupont/GOI which was not all that great and was incapable of duplicating velocities of old cartridges etc. Something that was not corrected until the advent of Swiss.

Dan

[C. Cash]

That thought ran through my mind Dan.  I guess the quote is irrelevant as to powder quality overall but thought I would mention it.   His one surviving rifle at the Smithsonian I believe is a 43 cal?.......think he probably had economy in mind with his rifles and probably did not shoot the big bores, as dear as his resources were to him.  So the description of him shootingand knocking him back stuck in my head upon reading it.  Here is his description on  pg. 255:
http://books.google.com/books?id=OooYAQAAMAAJ&pg=RA2-PA255&lpg=RA2-PA255&dq=Meshach+Browning+Dupont+Powder&source=bl&ots=_t__cxUwQ-&sig=3JZeM4Iiv4u9ivr3x61rwhNBId4&hl=en&ei=S4BdTte8JrPE0AGmo-mBAw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&sqi=2&ved=0CBkQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false  

[Dphariss]

That thought ran through my mind Dan.  I guess the quote is irrelevant as to powder quality overall but thought I would mention it.   His one surviving rifle at the Smithsonian I believe is a 43 cal?.......think he probably had economy in mind with his rifles and probably did not shoot the big bores, as dear as his resources were to him.  So the description of him shootingand knocking him back stuck in my head upon reading it.  Here is his description on  pg. 255:
http://books.google.com/books?id=OooYAQAAMAAJ&pg=RA2-PA255&lpg=RA2-PA255&dq=Meshach+Browning+Dupont+Powder&source=bl&ots=_t__cxUwQ-&sig=3JZeM4Iiv4u9ivr3x61rwhNBId4&hl=en&ei=S4BdTte8JrPE0AGmo-mBAw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&sqi=2&ved=0CBkQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false  

These things are always illuminating.
One of the reasons DuPont started making powder in the US, it is said, was the poor quality of the powder here.
If using cheap powder, powder that was not pressed and broken, was made by a stamp mill, perhaps of adequate rather than pure ingredients, its entirely possible that if using a volume measure to load his rifle and he surely was that Dupont being a pretty good powder may well have produced a significant increase in velocity. So if he were using a large charge of weak powder and substituted the same volume of a much stronger powder he could easily have experienced far more recoil than he was accustomed too since he was apparently  in a tree stand.

I find it interesting that he shot the deer in the neck and then tried to spine the bear.
Neither would have required a particularly large bore rifle and before he was born a 42-44 caliber rifle would have been a common bore size  and a good shot using neck shots one deer and bear would have needed nothing more.

Dan

[JCKelly]

Not my direct knowledge, but it was rumored that when du Pont stopped making powder on the Brandywine & went to the Moosic, Pennsylvania plant, the few round ball shooters in the 1920's did not like this Moosic powder as well. Also have heard that Moosic's normal production had been blasting powder. I presume that is a different grind.

Ogre showed me his test samples down in the basement, probably in the 1980's. He had an interesting story to tell about GOI powder. The appearance of his samples seemed to confirm it, and it was quite in line with what I knew about corrosion of metals. Odd combination, bear with me. When making black powder, the purity of water used is very important. It is not the taste or odd salts in the water that matter so much, but rather certain bacteria. These bugs live in rivers and definitely in wells, some where there is neither sunlight nor oxygen. Some like to eat sulphur. Incidentally their products of metabolism, i.e. Bug Pee, tend to be very corrosive. Moosic orignally powered the mill by a steam engine, so I've heard, and used the steam condensate for mixing powder. Fine, ideal. But at one point, maybe after the mill blew up around 1970 & du Pont sold it, that GOI/GOEX/Whatever plant began using deep well water. From the hard coal region of Pennsylvania. Them there little well water bugs were used to eating sulphur compounds, & now had the opportunity of being able got to chow down on nice fresh sulphur whilst the powder was being ground. Ogre might tell you what this did to the powder, I don't think it was a good thing.  I presume that current GOEX powder is made with bug-free water.

The bug thing is a concern for industries running river water though service water systems (Salem Nuclear plant in New Jersey, Delaware River) or guys leak testing large newly-fabricated steel tanks using river water, maybe Texas or Louisiana. Best drain the tank when finished, lest it drain itself after a couple of months. Was good business for my former employer, selling a 6% molybdenum BugPeeProof alloy.

[zimmerstutzen]

I read a similar account of sulphur eating bacteria in the 1970's powder, but the story I read claimed that in the old days, water was sterilized for powder making in large copper kettles.  That the water so sterilized contained traces of copper, sufficient to kill the sulpher eating bacteria that are floating around in the air.  When they switched to just using creek/spring water, the copper was no longer present and the powder after being opened and exposed to the air, would pick up this bacteria and begin the degradation process.

As I recall there was enough of a controversy floating around that there was a muzzle blast article in the late 1970's or early 1980's about it.

It seems in nearly every other county here in PA, there is a powder mill road.  I don't think they were named after flour mills.  If there were indeed so many powder mills, there must have been wide differences in powder.

[C. Cash]

Thanks for that info Dan.   This is a very interesting thread.

[Mad Monk]

I read a similar account of sulphur eating bacteria in the 1970's powder, but the story I read claimed that in the old days, water was sterilized for powder making in large copper kettles.  That the water so sterilized contained traces of copper, sufficient to kill the sulpher eating bacteria that are floating around in the air.  When they switched to just using creek/spring water, the copper was no longer present and the powder after being opened and exposed to the air, would pick up this bacteria and begin the degradation process.

As I recall there was enough of a controversy floating around that there was a muzzle blast article in the late 1970's or early 1980's about it.

It seems in nearly every other county here in PA, there is a powder mill road.  I don't think they were named after flour mills.  If there were indeed so many powder mills, there must have been wide differences in powder.

The sulfur eating bacteria were almost totally specific to black powder produced at the old Moosic, PA plant first owned and operated by Du Pont and then purchased by Gearhart-Owens in 1972.

The key in chemical stability in black powder centers mainly on the purity of the water used in the powder during the manufacturing process.

Into the late 1800's the powder plants purified raw "saltpeter" imported from India or Middle Eastern countries.  Arriving in a 95 to 96% purity state.  "Refined" in large copper pots using only distilled water in the process.  Large volumes of distilled water were used since the process evaporates a lot of water.  They were concerned that minerals in regular water would be concentrated in the process.


During WWII, and for some after, ICI operated a small black powder plant in Australia known as the Albion Works.  One of their tech papers describes an experiment.  One of the managers questioned the use of distilled water in the powder.  Was it really necessary?  So they made a batch of time ring fuse powder using distilled water and another using plant drinking water.  Milled and bagged to keep it from drying.  Periodically they sampled the bags and checked burn rates.  They found that the burn rate did not change in the powder made with distilled water.  The powder made with plant drinking water suffered a steady loss of burn rate.  This was out of the question in a time ring fuse powder.  So distilled water was used until the plant closed.


E. Ogre

[Leatherbelly]

  Great thread you guys! ...and Daryls...stop telling these guys our secret...soon they'll be able to shoot as good as we do,lol!...no more,enough...we've pounded it into their heads...with our shortstarters!
~Of all the things I've lost, I miss my mind the most~...Leatherbelly

[Mike R]

I went back and checked the article that I mentioned above.  It states that US Army tests indicated that the powder used by the 1840s was 29% 'stronger'/more powerful' than that of the Rev War period.  In other words, it said that, for example, an 80 gr load of ca. 1840s was equal in power to a 103 gr load of 1770s [29% more].  I think I got that right--I keep forgetting to bring the mag to work with me...

[Daryl]

Mike- the original .69 ctg. load with ball, including priming was 165gr. - Rev War period + until about 1820, when it was reduced to 135gr. due to 'improvement in powder quality and power'.

I wonder how many reinactors/shooters are loading 165gr. or even the reduced charge of 135gr. in their 1700 through 1822 designed US .69 calibre Muskets?

I'd strongly wager NONE.

 

[bryanbrown]

I thought perhaps some period references might interest folks reading this discussion

A memoir on gunpowder
John Braddock - 1832
http://books.google.com/books?id=ua06AAAAcAAJ&dq=gunpowder&pg=PA1#v=onepage&q&f=false

Die Explosivköper und die Feuerwerkerei , Volume 6, Part 3, Issue 2
http://books.google.com/books?id=15dBAAAAIAAJ&dq=gunpowder&source=gbs_similarbooks

Das schiesspulver, dessen geschichte, fabrikation, eigenschaften und proben
, Volume 6, Part 3 (Google eBook)
http://books.google.com/books?id=MgINAAAAYAAJ&dq=gunpowder&source=gbs_similarbooks_s&cad=1

Report of experiments on gunpowder, made at Washington arsenal, in 1843 and 1844
http://books.google.com/books?id=s3UDAAAAYAAJ&dq=gunpowder&source=gbs_similarbooks

A treatise on gun-powder: a treatise on fire-arms; and a treatise on the service of artillery in time of war 1789
http://books.google.com/books?id=ThzZFyQ9FpAC&dq=gunpowder&source=gbs_similarbooks

Sketch of the mode of manufacturing gunpowder at the Ishapore mills in Bengal, with a record of the experiments carried on to ascertain the value of charge, windage, vent and weight, etc., in mortars and muskets; also reports of the various proofs of powder, with notes and additions by lieut.-col. Parlby

Mémorial des poudres et salpêtres , Volume 6  Gauthier-Villars et fils, 1893
http://books.google.com/books?id=XZYZAQAAIAAJ&dq=gunpowder&source=gbs_similarbooks

[Daryl]

Interesting - the Washington arsenal url - results page 322/323 gives reference to a musket ball having 50 thou windage - which would be the normal pre 1820 .64 ball in the .69 calibre musket. The 1820's ball was increased to .65" which increased hits by 50%.

.64 ball and 120gr. of powder producing with:
 musket powder - 1,500fps
 new rifle powder - 1,600fps
 fine sporitng powder - 1,800fps

Note that the pre 1820 issue paper ctg. load with the .64" ball was 165gr. which included prime - so perhasp 155gr. to 160gr. for the charge. The velocity listed by the Armories was 1,700fps with the OLD powder - mixed loose.

If we can trust the velocities obtained using ballistic pendulums which were used right up into the late 19th and early 20th centuries we can have a direct comparrison of those powders and our wonderful powders today.

25 years ago, in the mid 80's, I needed 165gr. of powder to achieve 1,500fps from my .69's tight ball and patch combination. With 140gr. 2F GOEX today, I get 1,500fps using the same tightly patched ball.

 Some day, I'll try an unpatched, undersized 16 bore ball that is much tighter, ie: only 30 thou undersized and see what happens.  Would I EVER like to get 1600fps or 1,800fps with a ball from my .69 with a safe black powder charge of only 120gr.  I doubt it's going to happen in my life time.  I did achieve 1,700fps, but to achieve that speed, I had to load 225gr. of 2f to do it.