An interesting and informative discussion RE: chamber rings, with quotes from Mr. Charles E. Dell and his investigation into the phenomenon.

Available at;

(You need to Login or Register to view media files and links)

CMM

That is not correct per Charlie's findings. If the wad is left off the powder column by .10 it would create a faint ring and having it .20 off the ringing affect went away. There is more to it as wad material comes into affect as well. Anything that turns into a plasticized state while being burned must also be avoided. I highly recommend picking up Charlie's book it is a wealth of information and I reference it often. The chapter on chamber ringing is worth the cost of the book alone and he goes into great detail on the matter. The comment on Texas Mac's web site about Charlie ringing chambers by having the wad off the powder column is incorrect, that stops the ringing affect. It was when the wad was placed directly on top of the powder column that Charlie could ring chambers at will. From the book on page 343 in Charlie's words " With the cork wad on the powder ten shots and we had a ring forming, with the .010 standoff we saw possibly a hint of a ring and with .020 standoff there was no ring." Again wad material comes into play plus some other factors so buy the book to read the entire testing methods and materials and chamber ringing should no longer be a concern.

J.Louis

It is available from Buffalo Arms for a mere $195.00 of from the ASSRA Archives for $60.00 your choice. Fell free to add a donation to the ASSRA as we sell to to cheap. But it is what Charlie wanted.
Cheers,
Laurie

J.Louis
They are all unsigned.
Cheers,
Laurie

fallingblock wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 8:02pm:


Wow.  I thought that was a typo so I just went to the BACO sight to check.  I paid a lot less than that when I bought mine from them a couple of years ago.  I think I paid $60 or $70 dollars.  It is a great book.

Chris.

Thanks for the leads on Dell's book.

.......... is anyone using a wad with their smokeless loads? Specifically thinking 25-20WCF and 25-35WCF.

Quote:



Let me repeat, A More Than Interesting Article, by a substantial patron of the sport and worthy of your time reading it.

Thanks Wayne for your appearance here today and for your clarification.  Keep up the good work.   

CMM

Thanks Mike, you are correct with your statment having the powder held perpendicular to the bore   would ring the chamber. All of Charlies ringing tests did have an air space between the wad and the base of the bullet. In fact at times two wads were used, one a .020 standoff from the powder and one in the case mouth and or at the bullets base with no ringing effect. Air space was always present and anything under the .020 standoff either showed faint signs of a ring occurring and on the powder a consistent ringing of the chamber.

J.Louis

There are a couple of pieces of information that are being left out of this discussion. 
First for the purposes of testing Charlie made barrels out of brass. This was done so that the slightest ring left could be measured. He believed that most chamber ringing was done over time not in one catastrophic event that is what he was trying to study. 
The other thing is that when Charlie loaded the powder was ALWAYS oriented against the wad and the powder was allowed to slump at the rear of the case. Charlie was a bear on this one point. When others assisted him he never failed to double and sometimes triple check to make sure that this was done. 
I sat in on hours of the chamber ringing discussion and I will freely admit that sometimes we got so far out in the weeds I had a hard time finding my way out. Or it may have been the bourbon. The point is I got to hear it from the horses mouth. There is a lot said here that frankly is the writers interpretation of what is written, not what is actually there. I suggest that everyone read the entire chapter carefully with an open mind, not to confirm some personal notion.

A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing...so drink deep.
40 Rod

I just read the chapter (17B) in Charlie Dell's book, twice. 
I have read everything I can find on chamber ringing, and solicited opinions and experiences on the topic. Much of that is in the book.
Here's my question: Using a rifle with a "normal" load of smokeless powder and a Dacron wad on the powder, will the chamber acquire a ring?
With the greatest respect for Charlie, I'll say what I've said before. Charlie's book/chapter/experiments do not, in my opinion, answer the question.
What happens in a 38-55 blowing out 30-30 cases with 10/Bullseye and a 95 grain bullet
or 
38-55 with 38-55 cases , 10/Bullseye, .06" cork wad and ????bullet
or 
with a brass chamber insert
doesn't answer the question.
I believe that about any independent reader would not find the C. Dell argument convincing.
I do not know if normal load chambers ring.
I have yet to find any account of a rifle being fired multiple times with a normal load and 1 case, the case and chamber inspected and found to be ring-free, then fired multiple times with the same load and a Dacron or ? wad, and  a chamber ring appearing.
Ed Landers was/is a pretty good gunsmith. He believed that chamber rings were caused by a chip in the reamer during chambering.
I believe that Charlie did the tests, and got the results reported. 
I do not know if any wads in any position cause chamber rings. I recommend that wads NOT be used. But I would point out that putting wads .0x0" off the powder and firing the gun repeatedly without chamber rings does NOT prove anything.
I will be happy to send copies of Chapter 17B to anyone wanting one.
joe b.

The tests started out with the use of 1985 barrel in 38-55 that was beyond repair with a clean chamber. Charlie was trying to replicate the procedures used by another shooter who rung his chamber while blowing out cases for his 38-55. That gentleman was using 10grs of Bullseye, a 95gr. Bullet in the case mouth and a tuft of Dacron fiber weighing.0.3 grains to hold the powder near the case head with the intent of building pressure to form the cases. Skipping along a ring formed the chamber was cut off and sectioned in the mill for microscope inspection. Barrel was re-threaded chambered and further tests were preformed with the case being sectioned to examine the rings being formed. Charlie wanted something weaker to make the tests more sensitive so that a lesser number of rounds would have to be fired to produce comparable effects. He settled on an annealed brass chamber insert with a Rockwell B hardness of 42 plus or minus 5. He moved on with the use of 240 grain bullet and all tests were with fixed ammunition with a 1.728 dimension from bullet base to breach face. The ringing always took place at the bullet base so the length of the cartridge was determined not to be a factor. Different materials were used to retain the powder at the case head and in all cases when the powder was held back against the cartridge head a ring developed and it was always at the bullet base. The test confirmed that the ring was not caused by the wad material impacting the base of the bullet. The basic cause of ringing is that a coherent column of high velocity gas and burning powder with considerable kinetic energy when hitting the stationary bullet has to stop and in the process generates a thin ring of stationary very high static pressure under the well know law regarding the conservation of energy.

Continued

Charlie performed these test with the assistance of two engineers one a retired rocket fuel engineer and the others specialty was not noted as well as the help and input from his several friends. The brief description I posted was out of the book while trying to get quickly to the point / bottom line and I would encourage buying the book and reading this chapter in it's entirety as there is allot more to it than I could supply in my very brief posting. The critical part is the slump in the powder and having the powder forward towards the mouth of the case or near the rear of case did not matter. Anything less than the 0.20 standoff created a ring with a .010 standoff being less severe yet still forming a ring with the wad directly on the powder having the severest affect.

J.Louis

If Charlie's experiments and explanation work for you, great. I have no hope, expectation or desire to convert anyone. This topic has been discussed to death.  I will only say this. Since the NRA "Cast Bullets" and Lyman's 3rd cast bullet handbook-the early 70s, a lot of shooters shot a lot of cast bullets with Dacron wads. I shot thousands of 30/06, 45-70 and other cartridges with Dacron wads. I never got a chamber ring. It's my experience and that of the thousands of others with no rings that makes any explanation or solution fuzzy.
The core of scientific experimentation is replication-if A can make it happen, B has got to be able to make it happen or A proved nothing.
If it works for you, have at it.
joe b.

joe,
If your loads with Dacron were at 60% (maybe even 50%) load density or more, I don't believe you would have had a problem. I shot my 30/40 at about 30% with a soft foam wad (1/16 thick x 1/2" sq) and "rang" my chamber, not at the bullet base but, just back of the shoulder.

Two friends of mine shot loads of 60 - 70% powder and shot thousands of rounds (between the two) with that very same wad and never had any issues.

I got the idea from them and my loads chronoed better but, I only got less than 100 rounds shot before it happened to me.

This happened to me about 1990 in preparing for CBA matches and before I new better. I wish that CD had done his work earlier so, I would have had a warning.

Lyman no longer recommends ANY wads or "fillers" for cast bullets for this very reason. I believe that guys can get away with the Dacron wad either because there loading density is high enough or because the amount of Dacron is small enough to still let the powder slump. There is at least one guy over on "Cast Boolits" that has "rang" a barrel using Dacron.

Also, it's spilt about evenly (for people that have tried it) as to whether wads or fillers in reduced charges, contribute to accuracy. My chono results show it can decrease ES and SD but, not increase accuracy. As you know in experimenting, you can prejudice your results and I beleave that is why a lot of people are advocates of Dacron but, when it happens to you, you don't care if you think it could be more accurate.

Let me put it this way, CD's work means a lot more to people that have "rung" a barrel w/wads than to those who have not!!!

Frank

I want to add through my personnel experience while experimenting with wads in my 32-40. Placing one of different compositions such as cork and floral foam down on the powder has made the web of the case swell to the point of extremely very hard extraction. I believe this to be a pressure spike and or sending the pressures through the roof as I don't have any other explanation for it. I load at the second node being very close to the 1500fps range, of which might be considered by some to be on the high / hot side. I have not tried it at the first node closer to the 1300fps range so I cannot comment about the affects with the milder charges. I bring this up because those who are using an action that is not as quite as strong as my CPA's as well as others might be flirting with a much bigger disaster than just ringing their chamber.

J.Louis

Joe it is posted for the benefit of the rest of the group that does not have access to the book. There are quite a few miss-statements being made here and I am clarifying them on behalf of Charlie Dell and the rest of his extended family.

If you have read the book more times than myself then you are getting some good use out of it and congratulations on a great purchase, keep on reading.

J.Louis

An excellent discussion of the use of wads!  In my own experience, in the early 1970's when articles first appeared in the Rifleman regarding Dacron Wads, a friend of mine and I tried them.  Small tuft of Dacron seated lightly on the powder.  Mine was a custom Ruger#1 in 30-30 and his was a nice original High Wall in 30 US.  We were using fixed ammunition with gas check bullets as it was several years before we discovered breech seating with plain base bullets.  After about 50 shots (very respectable accuracy) we noticed that cases were getting hard to extract.  Both chambers were ringed right at base of the bullet. Other than the occasional use of card wads at the base of the bullet in BPC loads, I wrote off any other wad use as not only a PITA but an expensive problem waiting to happen.  Your mileage may vary.
ACGould

Regarding the use of Dacron as wadding in cartridges, I have read that information based on testing done by  Col. E.H. Harrison, C.E. Harris and others of the NRA tech staff, was distributed through NRA publications. At least a couple of thes men had excellent credentials in the field(s) of small arms and ammunition development. On a level with Dell, it seems.

Reports from readers of chamber ringing problems when using Dacron wads caused NRA to cease publishing any loading data involving the use of Dacron wads. As I understand the story, the tech staff members did not personally cease to use Dacron as they had no problems with the practice, within the bounds of methods they had proven. All I have read recently on the topic sems to indicate chamber ringing incidents  arise from combinations of reduced charges of fast-burning pistol powders and Dacron wads. Those using rifle powders like 4895 combined with Dacron seem to have little if any problem with the practice.
It seems there is carefully thought-out and researched experimentation or there is give-er-a-try playing with dynamite (nitroglycerin?) which can hurt!

Not to argue just to add as it is a fascinating subject for some of those here.

When we look at the bottom line there are those such as AC Gould and friend as well as others who have rung their chambers with modern steel barrels. Powder position that included a powder slump was found to eliminate the ringing effects. One of those individuals who was actually involved in helping Charlie with his tests has been  using an over powder wad under those guidelines and has shot literally thousands of shots with no ill effects and still continues to do so.

In regards to Dacron from what I have read else where it is said that it turns into a goo thus becoming a solid and none compressible. It is then stated that it would have the same effect of pouring water down the carburetor and into the combustion chamber and because it can not be compressed by the piston a catastrophic failure of one of the metal components is the end result.

If you take a 1/16 inch cork wad and stick it on the end of a toothpick and ignite it, it very quickly turns to ash and is consumed in the burning of the powder and the same holds true with floral foam. If you take a piece of Dacron and this holds true for some other wad materials being used and ignite it, it will melt and turn into a solid and thus they should not be used.

J.Louis

I hold Charlie very dear to my heart, he has provided more for the Schuetzen community than any one has in several decades. He has always used state of the art practices for his testing and has recruited the help of those with the required credentials to assist in order to not provide false positives and or miss information. His integrity was unsurpassed and unquestionable, his hours of testing on our behalf endless and if you were fortunate to be a part of his extended family as myself, he would give you his shirt off his back, as well as rifles, moulds or anything required to shoot this wonderful sport to one in need. He was not biased in his testing, he had personal opinions same as all of use, but he would not include those into his test results. They were what they were and Charlie took them for just that then kindly passed it onto use, the shooting community. With that being said anyone who would question who he was as a person, or his integrity is no friend of mine. More importantly they know not what they speak and are foolish for not keeping their mouth shut.

J.Louis

My Hoch rifle has a few thousand rounds through it with Styrofoam wads seated firmly on the powder. If theres a ring it will be at the lead. 

Also use cork wads with BP and smokeless. They dont burn up. I find them on the ground and reusable.  

Dacron "melts into a solid"?   

I remember reading a long time ago that Dacron goes hydraulic  (liquid) under pressure. When it hits the base of the bullet it radiates 360 degrees at the bullet base causing a ring in the bore. The article recommended cotton as a filler.

          Joe. 

[quote author=617365627364787364160 
Dacron "melts into a solid"?  

I remember reading a long time ago that Dacron goes hydraulic  (liquid) under pressure. When it hits the base of the bullet it radiates 360 degrees at the bullet base causing a ring in the bore. The article recommended cotton as a filler. Joe. 
[/quote]

Joe, I have read these kinds of reports also. I have never read of a science lab-generated study as to just what "actually" happens within a cartridge containing a filler such as Dacron when the cartridge is fired. I have read emperical "evidence" (which I don't discount out of hand) and I have read much conjecture. 
This thread has me thinking about what happens to a filler and within a case during the milliseconds a powder charge burns. I'm leaning toward thinking what happens may not mesh with all the conjecture. A for-instance that comes to mind is why does toilet tissue not burn up within case or barrel when used as filler, being as easily ignited as it is. I think it has to do with the heat generated during the burn time of the powder charge.

Interesting posts!  I have a question..Back in the 1930's and 40's the use of a grease type wad under a jacketed bullet in high velocity .22 varmint loads was practiced in the hope of reducing bore wear.
   The grease wad didn't need to melt to become a liquid..it would be able to exert hydralic force in it's natural state.   And some of those early .22 centerfire barrels started out as  re-chambered soft steel .22 rimfire barrels.
   If there was ever a perfect condition for barrel ringing..this would have been it.
   Yet I can find nothing written of this in early loading books.   Just a thought.

In using 1/16 cork of the highest grade for well over 4 years I tried in vain to find a wad for examination. When sticking one of this type on a tooth pick and ignited by a match, it was very quickly was reduced to ash. The wad was being used at the base of the bullet and not as an over powder wad. I purchased some lesser quality 3/32 cork and I did not achieve the same results. The performance of the 3/32 cork of lesser quality also provided sub-standard results at the target and were quickly discontinued from use.

J.Louis

Not sure what words to use to describe it, it was substantially more tighter grained / finer grained, compressed more like a solid if that makes sense. It was also what I would consider to be quite pricey, pushing close to 2.00 a sq.ft. The 3/32 was only a tad over 5.00 for an 8 foot roll 12 inches wide and very chunky / course and not as tightly compressed.

J.Louis

I have used cork for many years as a wad in the case mouth to keep small quantities of smokeless powder from falling into my action when breech seating in CBA competition; I found most of the mechanic/gasket grade cork material was a combination of cork and other things, rubber/vinyl and or some form of binders to hold it together. Once I went to CR 117 cork from the Cork Store {it comes in 2' x 3' sheets} (You need to Login or Register to view media files and links) stopped having the burning rubber smell and mild but tough to remove fouling in the bore. I use the .8mm or 1/16" and it has worked perfectly for many years now. If you care to experiment with cork they have many  varieties including colored which I thought to purchase so I could find the wads in front of the rifle barrel easier.
Mike


PS:Still never found a cork CR 117 wad I have fired!

I shoot my bench rifle free recoil with my head up off the gun so I can watch the wind flags. I have seen hundreds of my cork wads come out of the barrel and flutter down to the ground 10 or 12 yards out. 
The oddest thing I have had happen, and I have had it happen more than once, is that after firing the wad that I placed .100 off the powder is still in the case. There is no appreciable difference in the point of impact but when I go to de-cap there is an obstruction in the case using tweezers I pull out the wad. 
40 Rod

Quote:


  Manufacturing Engineers are almost synonymous with Industrial Engineers, they manage work flow, where to place the machines for efficiency, production statistics, robotics, loading dock heights, etc., etc.

  For the type of engineering necessary to solve this chamber ringing phenomenon, my choice would be a four year university educated mechanical engineer with a minor in physics. 

CMM

Gone Fly Fishing wrote on Oct 31^st, 2012 at 5:12pm:


That was my connection with him.  His reputation was that of being most professional in tool and die.  That translates directly (to me) to thorough hands-on knowledge/experience with materials, machining prectices as well as mechanical design.

But look at his work and look at those who worked with him (what they have said).

In essence it was "A" produces ringing and by changing it a little to "B" ringing was not produced.

THAT is the basis from which to dig deeper.  If "A" did it, don't do "A".  If "B" didn't do it then use "B" within reason.

Dig deeper!  Why did "A" produce ringing?  What were the physics behind it?  Delimit the potential reasons and devise experiments to prove them.

Page 2
The ringing force is caused by the transformation of the kinetic energy of a moving GAS column coming to an abrupt halt, the kinetic energy is transformed into a ring of static (stagnation) pressure at the base of the bullet. When this stagnation pressure exceeds the yield strength of the barrel of steel a ring begins to form. It is not the result of a single shot but is an accumulative effect, often not noticed until case extraction becomes a problem. Anything that breaks up the coherent nature of the gas column reduces or eliminates the static stagnation pressure which is the ringing force. We have demonstrated the ringing force with no powder restraint at all by merely firing vertically. The solution has been outlined in earlier posts that being the postilion of the powder / slump and having the wad .010 to 0.20 off the powder. While keeping in mind the .010 did show slight signs of ringing and 0.20 eliminated the effect.

J.Louis

I have the C. Dell article in clear .pdf format, 5 pages, for anyone who wants it.
joeb33050@yahoo.com
joe b.

Cat_Whisperer wrote on Nov 1^st, 2012 at 6:25am:

If you'll send me copies of the other pages, I'll include them.
The .pdf pages are too large to attach here, just tried. Why is that?
joe b.