Lewis & Clark lead & powder storage

They had multiple canister failures over the trip.
Read the journals/diaries. It is interesting, from many perspectives and points of comparison.
 
"Undaunted Courage" by Ambrose is a worthy read on the Lewis and Clark expedition.
I recommend it to anyone.
 
Interesting the comment on the lead canisters, and how there were multiple failures of them. I've read the journals through and through and can't remember a failure mentioned of the lead canisters themselves. Might have missed something there, but according to the Moulton Journals my wife and I have, there's a good entry by Lewis regarding the canisters.

From Moulton Journals, Vol. 5, August 6th, 1805, page 52-3, (Lewis): On the Jefferson's Fork of the Missouri R.:

"...one of their canoes had just overset and all the baggage wet, the medecine box among other articles and several articles lost a shot pouch and horn with all the implements for one rifle lost and never recovered... found that two other canoes had filled with water and wet their cargoes completely...our partched meal, corn, Indian preasents, and a great part of most of our valuable stores were wet and much damaged on this ocasion. to examine, dry and arrange our stores was the first object... unloaded all our canoes an opened and exposed to dry such articles as had been wet. a part of the load of each canoe consisted of the LEADEN CANISTIRS (caps mine) of powder which were not in least injured, tho' some of them had remained upwards of an hour underwater. about 20 lbs. of powder which we had in a tight Keg or at l[e]ast one which we thought sufficiently so got wet and intirely spoiled. this would have been the case with the other had it not have been for the expedient which I had fallen on of securing the powder by means of the lead having the latter formed into canesters which were filled with the necessary proportion of poder to discharge the lead when used, and those canesters well secured with corks and wax..."

This entry goes on much longer, but it gives a pretty good description of what the canisters were and how they worked (pretty good on this occassion). Good comparison with the wooden keg, too (IMO). At the Fort Clatsop visitor's center, there's a replica of what the canisters might have looked like. Great place to visit.

The Moulton Journals of the Expedition are the best; recorded by the Captains where they were, and when they were there. Bad spelling and all... priceless.
 
Even the British officers of the Revolution didn't consult their cell phones for spelling consistency. I've seen the same word misspelled twice and each in a different way in the same paragraph. They should have paid their phone bills.
 
Can design is the key. Bet the lid had an extension that fit inside the lead can. The lid itself would have to overlap so as to be at least equal in diameter to the can's.

Tinsmiths of the old had a soldering iron that was a pentagon shaped piece of metal. That was held near the metal to melt the solder, so no live flame was used back then. (I'm only aware of it b/c my classmate had his union t-shirt on and I asked him what tools those were).

I'll ask my classmate who is a retired sheetmetal man his thoughts.
 

Attachments

  • proxy-image-6.jpg
    proxy-image-6.jpg
    5.3 KB · Views: 42
  • proxy-image-5.jpg
    proxy-image-5.jpg
    169.3 KB · Views: 31
I'll ask my classmate I'll ask my classmate
Click to expand...
I'd really kinda like to know...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Then again, here's what things apparently looked like:

...a part of the load of each canoe consisted of the leaden canestirs of powder which
were not in least injured, tho' some of them had remained upwards of an hour under water.
about 20 lbs. of powder which we had in a tight Keg or at l[e]ast one which we thought
sufficiently so got wet and intirely spoiled. this would have been the case with the other had it
not have been for the expedient which I had fallen on of securing the powder by means of the
lead having the latter formed into canesters which were filled with the necessary proportion of
poder to discharge the lead when used, and those canesters well secured with corks and wax.

...but Lewis's lead canisters, stoppered with corks and sealed with wax, were
watertight, and dry air meant nothing to them. The lead canister walls, although fairly soft for
metal and easily “brused,” were resistant to splitting open in accidents.
http://www.westernexplorers.us/Powder_Canisters_of_Lewis_and_Clark.pdf

Mystery solved.....

('Sorry if this was brought out/obvious by earlier posters and
I missed it. Mea culpa, Mea culpa.... Mea maxima culpa)
:(


.
 
Last edited:
4V50 Gary said:
Can design is the key. Bet the lid had an extension that fit inside the lead can. The lid itself would have to overlap so as to be at least equal in diameter to the can's.

Tinsmiths of the old had a soldering iron that was a pentagon shaped piece of metal. That was held near the metal to melt the solder, so no live flame was used back then. (I'm only aware of it b/c my classmate had his union t-shirt on and I asked him what tools those were).

I'll ask my classmate who is a retired sheetmetal man his thoughts.
Click to expand...
My dad had one of those. The tip was brass. I may still have it in the back of my toolbox. You still had to have a flame to heat the tip and I seriously doubt they soldered the top on. If that tip gets hot enough to melt solder it will be hot enough to set off bp.
 
We should experiment with solder and a few grains of 2f. For science or asking for a friend.

I'm womdering how much of a cork plug is needed. I can see it giving out if bumped.
 
Consider it was likley a traditional 18th-century cask bung driven in fairly hard, and then coated with wax.
Pretty solid technology in those days
 
Thank you mehavey for raising the issue that spins the wheels in the brain. It's like my attempt to figure out how a WW2 sniper rifle equipped American paratrooper would jump. I also appreciate your knowledge of naval history.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top