Re: New post
- From: james_kaiser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2007 06:09:15 -0800 (PST)
On Nov 25, 12:25 am, Kelly <kellyjon...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
shockwaveriderz wrote:
I would say ramming does maybe 1.2-1.3 g/cc whereas hydraulic presses
can do 1.9 g/cc +.
Density affects the burn rate of black powder. The higher the density
the lower the burn rate....
burn rate as measured in inches per second, or mass per second?
If it decreased the linear burn rate, but maintained higher mass burn
rate (which is possible since the density is greater), then the casing
pressure and thrust go up, as density goes up. If it decreased the
linear burn rate AND the mass burn rate, then these go down...
Do you know which it is?
Kelly
In my detailed studies of the archaic ramming with a 4# beater on a
concrete floor, to the advent of the industrial revolutions pressing
with a bench vise and cheater bar.
There was a good leap in getting the "snort" in a rocket case.
So without using a lifeline I'm going with: B, mass per sec.= raw
power.
Or, if by putting in more it burns longer then: A, longer burn= less
chance of CATO.
All tests were done with non-sparking tooling and a case sleeve.
My brother gave me a 2 ton hydro jack and when I get the stand built
the tests will become ubiquitous.
I've shot 1# rammed, and semi pressed stingers, the "pressed" came off
the peg like a kick in the pants with a twerping snort.
Dan
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: New post
- From: Auriga
- Re: New post
- References:
- New post
- From: Auriga
- Re: New post
- From: shockwaveriderz
- Re: New post
- From: Kelly
- New post
- Prev by Date: Re: Is 1/4 inch diameter SS media too small for efficient ball milling?
- Next by Date: Re: The Mosques Destroyed, as Millions Cheer
- Previous by thread: Re: New post
- Next by thread: Re: New post
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
