does a bullet loose velocity through a pistol over a revolver?

The question poses interesting theory, but I'm not sure it amounts to much in the real world:

1) In either a pistol or a revolver, propellant combustion is complete before the bullet begins to move from the case.

This is not even close to being universally true. It's not uncommon for the powder to not be completely burned when the bullet leaves the barrel, say nothing of before it leaves the case.

In fact, that statement is closer to almost never true than almost always true.

Typical loads in typical cartridges like 9mm, 40SW, 357mag, 44mag, 45acp, 10mm, 357sig, etc, etc virtually never burn all of the powder before the bullet exits the case.

The only time that statement is generally true is for small charges of fast burning powders, most generally in very light, or "target" loads in revolvers.
 
Japle said:
The pressure created by a primer firing is enough to pop a bullet out of the case.

I guess we're wasting our time and money dumping powder in there, too.

I know this is a little off topic but a small rifle primer by itself in a .22 Hornet case with a .22 caliber air rifle pellet seated in the neck shoots about 340 fps out of my rifle, and is about as loud as dry firing the rifle. Great indoor plinking load.
 
I could not understand that a rifle can shoot a projectile farther, even though there is more frictional surface to go through.
 
^ The pressure behind the bullet continues to push it and accelerate it as long as it is in the barrel so even though longer barrels have more resistance, the bullet gets pushed the whole way so the bullet reaches higher speeds the longer it travels. If the barrel were really long (I have no idea how long, 10ft ???) then it would start to fall off but for the most part, the longer the barrel, the faster the bullet will travel when it leaves it.
 
This is not even close to being universally true. It's not uncommon for the powder to not be completely burned when the bullet leaves the barrel, say nothing of before it leaves the case.

In fact, that statement is closer to almost never true than almost always true.

Typical loads in typical cartridges like 9mm, 40SW, 357mag, 44mag, 45acp, 10mm, 357sig, etc, etc virtually never burn all of the powder before the bullet exits the case.

The only time that statement is generally true is for small charges of fast burning powders, most generally in very light, or "target" loads in revolvers.

You confuse the issues of (a) how much of the powder will be burned and (b) of the powder that combusts, when is the combustion process completed?

As a matter of physics, the time at which pressure peaks and then begins to decay marks the end of combustion. Back in the days of copper crushers, all we knew was the level of peak pressure, but not its time; with modern equipment, we can obtain a time series of pressure for the entire time of bullet travel down the bore. For virtually all rounds in virtually all calibers, gas generation (i.e., increasing combustion chamber pressure, i.e., combustion) is complete at or before the commencement of bullet movement, or before the bullet has moved a small fraction of bullet length. After that the force that results in bullet acceleration is entirely the result of the residual combustion product gas pressure, post combustion.

(To use just one example: the peak chamber pressure of an M2 ball round fired in a U.S. M1 rifle is about 48,000 psig. However, by the time the bullet reaches the gas port (short of the muzzle), combustion chamber pressure is down to the range of about 2,000 psig. Pressure is decreasing because combustion chamber volume increases as the bullet moves down the bore, but no more combustion product gasses are being generated (because combustion is long since complete). In fact, combustion chamber pressure has been decreasing since the bullet began to move, but so long as chamber pressure force on the bullet exceeds the coefficient of friction of the bullet in the bore, the bullet continues to accelerate.)

The fact that for some loads some of the propellant never ignites does not mean that combustion was on-going at the time the bullet exited the muzzle and the combustion chamber was vented to the atmosphere. At the risk of over simplification, it usually means that the propellant was too slow for the round in question, such that those particles more distant from the primer flash failed to ignite because, by the time they were exposed, chamber pressure and temperature were too low. In many cases, usually involving revolvers, unburned propellant is also linked to inadequate crimp.

Likewise, muzzle flash is not a manifestation of the primary combustion of propellant. Again simplifying a bit, it is the result of the flashing of combustion products suddenly exposed to atmospheric pressure (and a comparatively oxygen-rich environment). This is why muzzle flash can be controlled (to some extent) by controlling propellant chemistry.

Last item: it is usually observed that, given a certain charge, muzzle velocity goes up as barrel length increases (at least up to a point). This is sometimes taken to signify that the longer barrel allows more complete combustion than the shorter barrel. However, the fact of the matter is that the longer barrel exposes the slug to the positive force of the compressed combustion product gasses for a longer time. You can demonstrate the same phenomenon using compressed CO2 as the acceleration medium, with no powder or combustion involved. Hold the volume and pressure of the injected CO2 constant, and you will still see increased muzzle velocity with increased barrel length (again, up to a point).

Sorry; end of lecture.
 
In either a pistol or a revolver, propellant combustion is complete before the bullet begins to move from the case.

Anyone with even moderate experience in handloading and chronographing knows this isn’t true. If it was, a .22LR pistol with a 4” barrel would produce velocities as high as one with a 14” barrel and that’s a fantasy. Depending on the round in question, a .22 will produce its highest velocity in a barrel somewhere around 14 – 16” long. At that point, the powder is burned, the pressure peak is past and a longer barrel just slows the bullet down through friction.

Naturally, the faster the powder burn rate, the quicker the pressure peak is reached and the shorter the barrel has to be to get the most out of the load. The load I fired for the photo above was a 90 gr 9mm bullet over a case full (24.0 gr) of WW296 powder in a .357 Mag case. I knew there was no way that amount of slow-burning pistol powder would burn in the 4” barrel of the Ruger I was using. I probably could have gotten the same velocity with less than 1/3 that weight of Unique, but I wouldn’t have gotten the huge flash as the powder burned out in front of the gun.

Pressure peaks sooner with fast-burning powders and later with slow-burning powders, but that peak comes well after the bullet has left the case.
 
I could not understand that a rifle can shoot a projectile farther, even though there is more frictional surface to go through.

Just because the burn is over does not mean the pressure is gone. After the burn is finished, you still have a chamber full of extremely hot and highly compressed gasses that still have a lot of energy to deliver to the bullet.
 
RGK,

I thoroughly understand the process. Decreasing pressure does not mean the powder is 100% burnt. It means that the remaining powder is not producing gas as fast as the bullet is creating the volume as it travels down the barrel.

There is internal ballistics software called QuickLoad that shows the truth perfectly. Many, many loads have powder burn percentages well below 100 at bullet exit. QuickLoad graphs the estimated pressure curve and the user can see the estimated powder burn percentages at any point along the curve. QuickLoad also estimates bullet travel distance at peak pressure, I can assure you that it is almost always when the bullet is WELL outside the case.

The powder virtually never burns completely before the bullet leaves the case. It is as I described in my previous post.

Peak pressure does not mean end of burn.
 
Anyone with even moderate experience in handloading and chronographing knows this isn’t true. If it was, a .22LR pistol with a 4” barrel would produce velocities as high as one with a 14” barrel and that’s a fantasy. Depending on the round in question, a .22 will produce its highest velocity in a barrel somewhere around 14 – 16” long. At that point, the powder is burned, the pressure peak is past and a longer barrel just slows the bullet down through friction.

This statement assumes that the force applied to the bullet ends with the end of propellant combustion.

In fact, the force exerted on the bullet comes from the volume of highly compressed combustion product gasses, and that force continues long after combustion is completed.

Even though combustion ends at the same time with both guns (long, long before the bullet exits the muzzle of the one with the 4" barrel), the gun with the 16" barrel will usually be higher than the one with the 4" barrel because the bullet in the former is subjected to a force causing acceleration for longer.
 
Peak pressure does not mean end of burn.

For any modern smokeless propellant available for loading small arms ammunition (including all available to civilians for reloading): so long as combustion continues, the expansion ratio of combustion product gasses exceeds -- by orders of magnitude -- the expansion ratio of combustion chamber volume (resulting from bullet movement down the bore).

As a result, so long as combustion continues, combustion chamber pressure must continue to rise.
 
Just because the burn is over does not mean the pressure is gone. After the burn is finished, you still have a chamber full of extremely hot and highly compressed gasses that still have a lot of energy to deliver to the bullet.

Quite correct. Understand, however, that the author's use of "chamber" (in "chamber full of") means the volume of the case (sitting in the barrel's "chamber") plus the volume of the bore aft of the moving bullet.

It is theoretically (but not practically) possible that a barrel could be long enough that combustion product gas pressure would reduce to atmospheric (about 14.7 psia or 0 psig) before the bullet exited the muzzle. In real life, however, acceleration of the bullet peaks earlier, specifically when the force applied to accelerate the bullet decays to the point where it is equal to or less than frictional drag of the bullet squeezing through the bore.

I am aware of one study involving .45 ACP, fired through a series of barrel ranging from 3" to (from memory) 20-something inches. Measured muzzle velocity increased as barrel length increased up to the next to last barrel length, after which it decayed slightly.
 
RGK said:
...so long as combustion continues, the expansion ratio of combustion product gasses exceeds -- by orders of magnitude -- the expansion ratio of combustion chamber volume...

I'd been tracking this discussion being a disbeliever (in near instantaneous combustion before bullet movement) until I saw the above -- which I admit has some merit.

But I'm a boundary-value type of guy who looks to the extreme to get a handle on upstream possibilities. So I ran QuickLoad as a combustion model looking for the bullet position when (1) pressure peaks; and (2) combustion progress down the barrel.

Using my standard 243Win heav(ier) bullet load, I see the following two items:
1tlaap.jpg


Note that (1) Pressure peak occurs when the bullet is ~2½" down the bore/out of the case

and
or5ekl.jpg

Where combustion is still occurring (though rapidly decreasing) as the bullet approach the muzzle.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

BREAK BREAK:

Note the relative locations of Pmax (max chamber pressure) and Z1 (limit of progressive burning) in the first chart above. While nosing around cyberspace this morning I found this:

http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f19/quickload-4483/index2.html#post31733

Wondrous stuff, Helmut Brömel's creation and Al Gore's Internet. ;)
 
1) I do not use, and am not conversant with, QuickLoad. I observe that all of its "data" is predicted, not measured.

2) I also observe that while the legends of the two curves appear to refer to the same load, the two curves predict fairly radical differences in the time of peak pressure.

3) If I interpret what the second curve appears to be saying, it is that peak pressure occurs when approximately 45% of the powder charge (or approximately 21 grains) has combusted, and it appears to be saying that during the combustion of approximately 47% of the powder charge (or approximately 22 grains), combustion chamber pressure is decaying. That could be possible only if the rate of combustion chamber volume expansion were greater than the rate of combustion gas volume production (under conditions where the combustion chamber pressure ranged from 40 kpsi to 10 kpsi). I believe that translates into an impossibly slow burn rate for the powder in question (or any canister grade smokeless ammunition propellant).

4) The only possible explanation for the anomaly seems to lie in the program's employed definitions of "combustion" and "progressive burning," neither of which are revealed.
 
Believe what makes you happy, sir. It's obvious that no amount of information is going to change your mind. No further discussion is worthwhile, IMO.
 
Wow. I just learned a whole lot of general ballistics reading this thread. Thanks all you knowledgeable guys! I will throw out the highs and the lows...:D

...yeah, I'm using my phone.
 
I do not use, and am not conversant with, QuickLoad. I observe that all of its "data" is predicted, not measured.


The contestants for the powder burn model are indeed measured data.

Researchers have been using models like QuikLoad for many many years, and some are painfully accurate.

Your ideas about pressure and burning are simply wrong.
If you simply compare the shape of the declining pressure curve from a piezo measurement you will notice it is not tracking simple gas expansion and volume change.

Additional gas is being generated.

Trying to define the issue away with semantics does not make it a correct description of reality.

Believe what makes you happy, sir. It's obvious that no amount of information is going to change your mind. No further discussion is worthwhile, IMO.

You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make them drink.

Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.
Abraham Lincoln
 
You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make them drink.

Or think.

Anyone who tries to tell me that the 74 grains of IMR4350 I load in my .358 Norma Mag has completed the combustion process by the time the base of the bullet clears the case mouth is living in a dream world.
 
Couple of loose ends...

In terms of handguns holster makers measure barrels of pistols from the breech face and revolvers from the front of the cylinder.

In ballistics, barrel length is measured from the base of the bullet to the muzzle. (I keep posting this hoping someone will notice every once in a while.) Therefore, a 'four inch' revolver barrel is actually longer than four inches in terms of powder burn. AND, a 'four inch' semi-automatic barrel is actually shorter than four inches in terms of powder burn.

So, in response to who ever made the comment 'four inches is four inches'; no, it is not the same.

Powder burn: Typically, not all powder is burnt in the combustion process. There is always some kernels of powder that do not burn. Artillery pieces are the worst 'non-burner' types. When we say 'all powder is burnt in the first xxx inches of bullet travel', we are really saying 'all the powder that is going to get burnt is burnt in the first xxx inches of bullet travel'.

There was something else and my brain has ceased. So I'll quit for now.
 

Attachments

  • Pistol barrel length holster vs ballistics.JPG
    Pistol barrel length holster vs ballistics.JPG
    61.9 KB · Views: 10
  • Revolver barrel length holster vs ballistics.JPG
    Revolver barrel length holster vs ballistics.JPG
    42 KB · Views: 10
Some where in my information stacks, I have the results of firing .38 Special wadcutter loads (148 grain HBWC and 2.9 grains of WW 231) through several handguns.

One of the handguns was a six inch target revolver, another a Colt Gold Cup in .38 Special (a blow back autopistol), and yet another was a S&W M52 (locked breech autopistol) and some rather ordinary revolvers.

I cannot find the chronograph results right now. I do remember the two autos gave the over all highest velocities, and the six inch revolver was just behind them.

However, there is so much variation from this one to that one, making sweeping generalizations is shakey. There are some four inch guns in my collection who shoot faster than at least one six inch gun - which probably has excessive cylinder gap.

I'll see if I can find the information and publish it. It's interesting at the very least.
 
Back
Top