Proof Testing

[runastav]

Hi Folks!
Made me a proof testing mekanism, it use perk caps and is sentering over the touch hole see the photos, and remember you must use a Fish case for fundament HaHa
I Proof test my barrels whith doable of standard load and 2 pathed roandball
Runar

[Rasch Chronicles]

Runar,

That's totally cool! Nice idea and awesome execution.

Best regards,
Albert “El Matamoro” Rasch
The Rasch Outdoor Chronicles
Squirrel Hunting Tips and Techniques
ΜOΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ!

[KNeilson]

Very interesting device, I like the upside down underhammer action.   Question....  is "proofing" a requirement of your government, or something that makes you feel safer about what youve built. From what info Ive gathered online, in North America it is not a requirement, but some places in Europe it is. And if so (required) is there a standard procedure such as "double load, two patched balls"    just wondering...........  Kerry

[runastav]

Thank you Albert and KNeilson!
When I finish a blackpowdergun, I MUST know it is safe to shoot therfore proof testing

Runar

[Dphariss]

Very interesting device, I like the upside down underhammer action.   Question....  is "proofing" a requirement of your government, or something that makes you feel safer about what youve built. From what info Ive gathered online, in North America it is not a requirement, but some places in Europe it is. And if so (required) is there a standard procedure such as "double load, two patched balls"    just wondering...........  Kerry

I use double ball with estimated double powder too. This would be double ball and 180 gr in a 50 cal. for example
But I use a fuze to powder at the vent.
If I built more percussion guns I would make a fixture to bang the cap.


Dan

[54Bucks]

 Runar.... are the barrels you use and test from your country?

[T*O*F]

I MUST know it is safe to shoot therfore proof testing

Runar,
That is the fallacy of proof testing.  It only proves that the barrel didn't burst this time.  However, it could have stressed the steel so that it might fail at sometime in the future, though that is rare.

[FRJ]

Back when I first started shooting muzzleloaders you had to have a sponsor to verify that you would be an asset to the NMLRA, Marion Hammer was my sponsor!!!
Also back then there was very little info on loading ML guns. Remember the internet hadn't even been thought of much less invented back then and I just went by what the guy in the gunshop told me. He said that black powder would stop burning before it reached a dangerous pressure so I could load whatever I wanted and in fact one of the methods of determining a max load was to put a sheet on the ground in front of your rifle and after shooting your gun inspect it for unburned powder. If there was unburned powder you were over max and could lower the load. I guess that is no longer or never was true!!! I do shoot double ball loads over my max load now and then but wouldn't think of a double powder charge!!!!Oh to be young and dumb again. I did at one time shoot 300 gr of 3f with a double ball in a 45cal flintlock made by Navy arms. Way too much recoil but no barrel blow up. Wouldn't do it today just because I would be afraid of stressing the barrel too much. To each his own. Frank

[Ken G]

Runar,
That's a right fancy barrel tester.  I like it!  Thanks for posting the pics.  It's always interesting to see how others are doing things.  
  
I test most of my barrels too.  I've heard most of the arguments for and against.  I understand TOFs reasoning and there is merit there.  I also agree with the argument that modern barrels are safe and do not need testing however as builders we do alter the barrel by installing barrel lugs, sights, and vent liners so.......................I want to test without it being in my face or a customers.  

I do not try to blow the barrel up.  Like you, I use a doubled normal load with two balls.  NOT a doubled max load.   I feel like testing verifies my installation of sights, barrel lugs, vent liner without it being in someones face.  I also measure the barrel on multiple axises every inch or so before testing and after testing.  I think the best test is running a rag up and down the barrel feeling for bulges.  Just my opinion based on nothing but my opinion.  

[smylee grouch]

Runar, as usual your imagination and ingenuity shine. Very interesting contraption for sure. Always look forward to your posts as you seem to be a very inventive gunsmith.  Keep up the great work.   Smylee

[KNeilson]

......I want to test without it being in my face or a customers. 

Ive only done a few (barrel proofs) now, and because of my inexperience, this is why..........  Kerry

[runastav]

Hi Guys, and thank you for comments. To Proof or not To Proof is your choice off course
Here is one exampel, my well used cal 58 Enfield Musketoon 1861 made by Parker Hale.It is proofed in Birmingham Proof House, see the photo is the Englishmen stupid?




And here is only some books who have Proof testing as a subjekt, and all is in English!



Runar

[alyce-james]

Thanks Runar for posting your method of barrel testing and introducing this thread. This topic produced some interesting theory's and methods. A unique system you came up to test your barrels. Jim & Alyce

[JCKelly]

If proof testing a modern barrel has any value, it is to determine if there is a dangerous crack present. Any grade of steel can have a seam or crack in it; some steels are inspected for cracks  before the barrel is made. Very few, if any, muzzle loading gun barrels are inspected for defects in the steel.

If you are concerned about safety I would offer for your consideration you ought to know exactly what grade of steel is used in your barrel. A large number of American muzzle loading barrel makers use a grade designed for maximum machinability. That is, it makes very crumbly chips. It is not suited for impact loading. It is called here AISI 12L14

No one likes to hear this, few believe it. Nevertheless it is true.

Green Mountain says they make their barrels of gunbarrel quality 1137MOD, tolerable for black powder.
Ed Rayl, West Virginia, is said to use a low carbon nickel-chromium-moly steel, in the USA it is called AISI 8620, which is strong, tough and ductile. "Tough" is very good when something bad happens, that "something" that is not supposed to happen.

[Dphariss]

If proof testing a modern barrel has any value, it is to determine if there is a dangerous crack present. Any grade of steel can have a seam or crack in it; some steels are inspected for cracks  before the barrel is made. Very few, if any, muzzle loading gun barrels are inspected for defects in the steel.

If you are concerned about safety I would offer for your consideration you ought to know exactly what grade of steel is used in your barrel. A large number of American muzzle loading barrel makers use a grade designed for maximum machinability. That is, it makes very crumbly chips. It is not suited for impact loading. It is called here AISI 12L14

No one likes to hear this, few believe it. Nevertheless it is true.

Green Mountain says they make their barrels of gunbarrel quality 1137MOD, tolerable for black powder.
Ed Rayl, West Virginia, is said to use a low carbon nickel-chromium-moly steel, in the USA it is called AISI 8620, which is strong, tough and ductile. "Tough" is very good when something bad happens, that "something" that is not supposed to happen.

I have two 4150 alloy  heavy Mclemore barrels 1 1/4 x 44 long one 45 and one 50. VERY nice internal finish.  Very smooth. Tight patch slides through so nice...

4150 is basically mil-spec barrel steel and can be shot when its really hot with 60000 psi cartridges based on personal experience. Shortens the barrel life a lot but they don't blow.
Hope to have the 50 shooting in 2 weeks.

Dan

[T*O*F]

It is proofed in Birmingham Proof House, see the photo is the Englishmen stupid?

Runar,
Conversely, if Americans do not proof their guns, does that mean they are smart?

Intelligence has nothing to do with it.  It's all about politics and history.  Feltwad can fill in or correct any memory lapses I have.  When barrels were forge welded, there was a chance the welds would not hold, thus the need to "prove" the barrel.  At the same time, many provincial makers were flooding the market with cheap goods.  Influential London gunmakers banded together and lobbied for a law that all barrels must pass proof before they could be used.  The government passed the law and established the proof house.  Bureaucracies become self sustaining over time and are almost impossible to dismantle even though their time has passed.  Fast forward to modern times and modern gun steels.  The need for proving is long past but the law and entity still exist and must be complied with.

[Dan'l 1946]

  Well put, TOF. And then there's the fee that is often charged for proofing. More income for the government I suppose...
                                           Dan

[Dphariss]

I proof every ML I make. No matter whose barrel it is.
There have been failures from time to time. There have been failures documented here by people who never proof.
Years ago a maker stopped proving barrels and had a Douglas barrel split from the breech to the rear sight.
At the time, I have been told, they were using leaded screw stock.
Low quality steels are a problem.
In reading I have found that one maker of modern mass produced MLs instituted an "Xray"program for barrels after a rash of "events" it was thought they also changed alloys but that would have been admitting fault....
So for all you folks who don't proof?
There is liability. If you do not proof and some low end barrel blows someone's hand or head off  OR a bystander's and they or the family has a smart lawyer you will likely never be able to own anything as long as you live.
Not only to I proof I VIDEO TAPE it.

Sure, the chance of a gun barrel quality barrel failing with BP is extremely low.
But I have been slow developing the ability to regenerate body parts.

Its cheap and easy to do.
Most modern guns by Remington etc are proved. Its why there are SAMMI specs for proof loads and why the Military uses high pressure test cartridges. Even though its not required by law.

Dan

[Jim Kibler]

Xray or radiography is a poor choice in my view for non-destructive testing of barrels.  I would think seams are the biggest risk factor in barrels and radiography is not the test to detect these.  Magnetic particle testing would be a much better choice.  In my experience radiography will only typically show a defect around .020" in size.  Seams are much tighter than this.  I sometimes wonder why more barrel manufactures don't mag particls test their product.  People can debate the merits of one barrel steel over another, but by view is that barring gross stupidity the biggest risk are defects in the material.

Jim

[Dphariss]

Xray or radiography is a poor choice in my view for non-destructive testing of barrels.  I would think seams are the biggest risk factor in barrels and radiography is not the test to detect these.  Magnetic particle testing would be a much better choice.  In my experience radiography will only typically show a defect around .020" in size.  Seams are much tighter than this.  I sometimes wonder why more barrel manufactures don't mag particls test their product.  People can debate the merits of one barrel steel over another, but by view is that barring gross stupidity the biggest risk are defects in the material.

Jim

My mistake they advertise "continuous Magnaflux". I see it as a bandaid/window dressing anyway. I am sure they changed alloys decades ago but would never admit it.

There is no test that will make a low quality cold rolled steel safe for gun barrels. Metallurgists tell us its unsuitable. The people that make the stuff specifically tell us it should not be used for ML (or any) gun barrels. If does not require a seam to fail, though is does have far more flaws than high quality steels that do not have high levels of lead, sulfur and phosphorus. It is susceptible to failure due to unsuitability for the use. But it cuts SO SMOOTH... and FILES SO EASY 

Some will tell us that even low pressure cartridge barrels are/have been made from 12L14. But the ASSRA is on record in "discouraging" its use since the 1980s due to catastrophic BARREL FAILURES at competitions. But of course the stuff "never blows up". Even though there ARE failed ML barrels out there as well.
But nobody likes to think about it. It makes them nervous. Its made me nervous for over 30 years.

Dan

[runastav]

Thank you all!
T*O*F,  of coarse the Americans are much smarter then the Englishman, and the Norwegians are much smarter then the Swedish  e.t.c.
I find this artikel in a oooold The American Rifleman juli 1972, the man is building a perk shotgun and again he Proof Test!

Runar






Red marked

[JCKelly]

I recall Owen Cecil from my days shooting with Old Westmoreland Rifles. Very precise gentleman.

Agree the best, probably only, way to inspect steel bar for seams, assorted crack-ish defects, is magnetic particle inspection. Xray is useless for this. And some alert Human Being has to use his eyeballs to actually see the defect which Mag particle has made visible.

Any modern steel bar, including expensive nickel alloy bars, can have a seam in it. I worked 30+ years for a specialty alloy distributor and have seen a range of interesting bar defects. They are uncommon, but they do exist. The steel mill does NOT inspect effectively for such defects, unless such inspection is specifically called out by the purchaser.

Proof testing indeed has its limitations but may be considered better than nothing. Not much better, though. The crippling barrel failure that finallly convinced a large West Virginia barrel maker to cease promoting their muzzle loading barrels, circa 1985, was in a barrel that the riflemaker had proof tested. Regardless of what details may have convinced XXX Barrel Co. to settle, I personally saw the remains of a rather large pre-existing crack. I also recall that the Illinois PhD involved in this matter saw numerous smaller cracks in his metallographic examination. Not so uncommon to have such cracks in 12L14. It is the very worst possible steel to use for a gun barrel of any sort.

[Rasch Chronicles]

Hey fellows,

I am writing this without doing a search, so I bet if I do a search there are plenty of comments about it.

I do remember reading more than a couple of articles/posts/comments on 12L14 steel's lack of suitability for gun barrels. Coincidentally I've seen more than a few references by barrel makers that say they use 12L14.

Me, I seem to feel that erring on the side of caution is prudent...

Just saying.

Best regards,
Albert “El Matamoro” Rasch
The Rasch Outdoor Chronicles
Squirrel Hunting Tips and Techniques
ΜOΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ!

[Don Getz]

Mr. Kelly...........I don't want to re-hash all of this barrel steel inadequacies.    You didn't explain the type of barrels that
the company in West Virginai was using.   While it may have been 12L14, they were using barrel blanks that had been
cold formed into an octagon shape.  In this process, cracks can be produced and these are the things that caused those
blow ups.    We also use 12L14 steel, but it is cold formed into a round configuration.  In our process of making a barrel,
if, in the cold forming of a round blank there are cracks occurring in the outer shell, it will show up in the turning of the
blank, and you can hear it while in the turning stage.   If the crack does not disappear in this turning stage, the blank is
discarded.   And, by the way, we have made nearly 30,000 barrels using this type of steel.    ..........Don

[Daryl]

Runar - I was surprised to see the suggested 'proof load' for that drum and nipple 12 bore being only 4 drams of 2F and 1 3/4oz shot.

That's less than many guys use for regular duck shooting with muzzleloaders.

Some even use 85gr. of 3F just over 3Drams - equivalent to about 105gr. which is almost 4 drams of 2F plus 1 5/8oz shot in a 20 bore - for normal upland, turkey and duck shooting.

I guess I'm saying that 'proof load' isn't much of a proof load afterall.

I feel that's pretty much the same as proofing using 2 balls and a normal charge - not much 'extra stress, really.  Most of us have double - balled or double loaded and merely shot it out.  With tight combinations, there is no opportunity for the second 'charge' of powder to ignite.  Recoil of the 2 balls + extra powder charge weight is not much more than normal.

I've seen a number of guys at rendezvous using over 2oz in a Bess for trap shooting with 4 1/2 drams of powder - no worse for wear.