Some facts about trying for super-consistency in gun powder

JerrySharrett

Senile Member
Copying from a previous thread but making a separate thread as to not hyjack that thread::


caroby;550222True... My hopes are simple... That Hodgdon / >>ADI<< produce a consitency between lots over the years as Jackie said and that this stuff meters like REAL 8208. Finally that its tune window is broad and not real TWEAKY!!!.. PV is shipping me my test 8lb lot of 8208XMR... Cautiously optimistic.:o cale[/QUOTE said:
Something to keep in mind about the chemistry of gun powder manufacturing, the final product is made up primarily of nitric acid and a cellulose source. Just as all Scotch and Beer are different so are powder lots.

The most common ingredient today for a source of cellulose is wood fiber. There is soft and hard woods in all parts of the world. There is tree trimmings and commercial chippings that are bulked ans sold to the various powder manufacturers. Since there are variations of the cellulose fibers in the different woods there will be various results in the outcome.

The most consistent of all the celluloses is cotton. Believe it or not but Vihtavuori claims to use cottoni!! Most all of the cannister powder producers use wood pulp. So Vihtavuori should have the most consistent products lot to lot.

In mid Summer 2003 I started on a project of getting IMR8208 back in production. That Summer, Tom Dierkin Marketing Manager of IMR in Canada, started to put this project underway. Jeff Summers and Kent Harshman both donated some of the original 8208 for test samples since IMR did not have any of the old production records from the period when IMR8208 and IMR8208M were produced for the military.

Bill Krazenski was to transport these samples to the IMR office in Plattsburg, NY which is not far from where Bill lives.

Not but a few months after that Hodgdon got the rights to distribute IMR powders. Shortly after that, at my request, Ron Reiber at Hodgdon started a file on the continuation of the previous project.

In 2006 I made a proposal through a well known shooter for Hodgdon to produce a 500# sample of the top benchrest shooters to test. My proposal was if that 500# batch proved worthy I would order an approximately 16,000-18,000# batch. Some of the agreed testers were Smiley Hensley, Don Powell, Wayne Campbell, Kent Harshman, Jeff Summers and a couple of others.

My offer to Hodgdon was refused at that time. Why? Because they (ADI) uses wood fiber as a cellulose source and they could not guarantee the tight lot-to-lot consistency we need.

I post this brief background of that first attempt to get a like-original IMR8208 powder back in production to bring benchrest shooters into the reality that there is no way, even using cotton, to exactly reproduce a cellulose based gun powder.

In early March 2009 I shot quite a bit of one lot of this new IMR8208XBR and I feel it will be a very worthwhile addition to the benchrest sport, but it ain't perfect either!!

If you are interested in some heavy reading about smokeless powder production get a copy of Phillip Sharpe's book "Complete Guide to Handloading". Good luck on finding this book since the first printing was 1937 and the last printing that I have found was 1953. It was a Funk & Wagnall publication. There are several very detailed chapters in this volume about powder production.
 
I just looked on Amazon and there are several copies of the Phillip Sharpe book for sale. Several months ago there were none listed by Amazon. These current books range in price from $19.95 through about $126.00!!
 
Good read Jerry, gonna get a copy of Sharpe's book.

I too understand that Vihtavuori bases its cellulose on cotton...
Wonder why it is that wood pulp is used by most single based powder makers..? Cheaper...?..... I honestly would guess that cotton fiber would be the cheaper at least here in the States...? Lotta cotton production.

Looking forward to seeing how IMR8208XBR impacts the Benchrest standings from around the US and abroad (eventhough its currently only marketed in the US) in 2010.

Thanks to Lou and the Hodgdon group we now have another option...
cale
 
Cotton is a staple crop. Trees that they use and tree bark are a byproduct. There is your answere. Thats one of the reasons VV is higher priced than other powders. At least I think so..

Donald
 
One would think

powder makers would have, by now, found a single specie of tree that produced the best fiber for powder and insist on only using that if wood is prefered. This might stabalize thing a bit. Considering there are companies that chip wood and sell it to bio mass electric plants for cheap money, it would be conceivable to me that a powder producer might be able to pay a bit of a premium for select fiber. Certainly the system is in place to do that.

Someone once told me that cotton fiber was unstable or caused the powder making process to be unstable; said IT was the cause of that plant in Scottland blowing up ?? On my recent road trip I saw enough wasted cotton lying in the fields in Texas to make a lot of powder; cotton that was the residue, if you will , of the harvesting process :)
 
Last edited:
Jerry,

How many pounds of wood or cotton does it take to produce a ton of powder?

Charlie
 
powder makers would have, by now, found a single specie of tree that produced the best fiber for powder and insist on only using that if wood is prefered. This might stabalize thing a bit. Considering there are companies that chip wood and sell it to bio mass electric plants for cheap money, it would be conceivable to me that a powder producer might be able to pay a bit of a premium for select fiber. Certainly the system is in place to do that.

Someone once told me that cotton fiber was unstable or caused the powder making process to be unstable; said IT was the cause of that plant in Scottland blowing up ?? On my recent road trip I saw enough wasted cotton lying in the fields in Texas to make a lot of powder; cotton that was the residue, if you will , of the harvesting process :)

Pete, the powder folks could make a real stable product, using a single surce cotton. But the powder would cost probably $50/pound or more to produce. Would you be willing to pay $65-75/pound??

Charlie, it would take several pounds. You can calculate the amount accurately but you have to know the chemical weight of each element and the amount of each element. Tain't worth the effort for me to get my CRC Chemistry and Physics handbook down and refresh something I haven't done in the last 50 years.
 
Cotton in southside Virginia is selling for 65-70 cents per pound (Texas too). Wood chips are also cheap... Do they need white oak, red oak, or hickory chips? I am sure I could find a source of clean chips from one kind of tree.

A lumber company in Staunton VA ships wood to Japan.
 
Back in my preteen pyrotechnologist years we were taught that coffee filters are an excellent commonly available source of very pure cellulose that unlike potassium nitrate arouses little curiosity from merchants. More difficult to explain was the nitric acid and the holes in our clothes that inevitably followed. The electric go-kart with auto starter motor and battery was good cover for the holes in the short run. Happily the statute of limitations has long since passed.
 
The last time I purchased potassium nitrate at the fertilizer store, it was about $16.00 per 100 lbs. It was not as pure as some sources.
 
Back
Top