Smokleless in cannon??

Cold rolled is more likely to have flaws.
Making the barrel of 1018 or such is not a worry to me though I suppose I would like 1010 even better. But I would want hot rolled and at least gun barrel quality.
I have no idea if cold rolled comes in gun barrel or aircraft quality or higher. Place I worked used hot rolled only for barrels.
Its not the theoretical strength of the material that is a worry.
The problems are:
Does the steel contain a significant number of inclusions. If so these can result in failures at pressure levels far below its technical "yield". Aircraft has fewer inclusions than Gun Barrel.
What are the inclusions? Lead can form inclusions in steel as will other additives designed to make the steel easy to machine.
I ordered three barrels from a man that probably makes more barrels, military and others, than the combined production of ML barrels for the custom trade and he went into a spontaneous rant on leaded steels in the course of the conversation. He flat stated he would not have leaded steel in the shop. Yes they make leaded 4140 BTW.
Alloy.
If you choose the wrong alloy the barrel may burst. Some steels have very poor resistance to internal pressure and others will not tolerate fast pressure rise. Others will work harden and become brittle.
Look into Remington's mistake a few years ago with 1140M shotgun barrels,injuries, lawsuits. Should have used something a little more durable.
So pardon me if I get nervous when people start making any gun barrel from hardware store variety steel.
If there is a brittle fracture in a cannon due to inclusions, poor alloy choice or the use of unsuitable powder someone will likely die.
Iron guns were notorious for bursting all though the American Civil War. Steel was a "little" better. The only guns that did not burst from rapid fire in combat (IIRC read the book years ago) were the bronze guns. They dissipate heat better and were not damaged by a wet mop in a hot bore.
I believe the book is titled "The Conduct of the War" put out after the CW by congress. But it was borrowed and returned 20 odd years ago. There is a section detailing the problems with artillery.
Not that being gun barrel quality is just that it DOES NOT mean the steel is suitable for gun barrels. Just that it meets inclusion criteria for that quality level.
Dan

That is the way the Armstrong Guns were made by the Brits.

juancho said:

I cannot recall were it was, but I saw pictures of modrern cannons (circa 1917) being made by sleeves over sleeves.All machined under size and shrink fitted over one another of increasing diameter.At the breach there was a section that was winded with very hard piano wire or the like,and a sleeve fitted over top.Aparently that was the section with the highest pressure.
All of this would create ginormous pressure on the inner tube,such ,that when fired, the innner pressure would ballance out with the pressure from the outter sleeves.Creating a state of "nearly neutral" stress on such inner tube.
For what I remember, the wall thickness at the breach was bigger than the bore of that particular gun.
I always wanted to make such a gun for black powder.I have to assume that such thing would be safe even at max service loads.

Click to expand...

If its made of the proper material. If not it might crack the sleeves.

Dan

1. Try to find out who he is.
2. Try go find out where he is from.
3. Never go near him.

You sound like you know what your talking about(technical stuff and such).In my younger years I recall knowing such things,but enough water went under the bridge since my university days....
What materials would You consider to make a cannon? I don't realy like bronze,what about 416 stainles? I read somewere that it is used for modern guns by some barrel makers.

juancho said:

You sound like you know what your talking about(technical stuff and such).In my younger years I recall knowing such things,but enough water went under the bridge since my university days....
What materials would You consider to make a cannon? I don't realy like bronze,what about 416 stainles? I read somewere that it is used for modern guns by some barrel makers.

Click to expand...

I would buy one from South Bend.
416...See http://forum.m1911.org/archive/index.php/t-1999.html
What is said here about free machining stainless and inclusions applies to carbon steels with lead and other materials added to make them "free machineing".


Dan

I must thank you for all that info.Like I said before I should remember all this things ,as I studied them many years ago.I have done destructive and non destructive tests before to know exactly what you are refering to.Cristalographic studies of fractures, X rays,ultra sound,etc.
Some of the materials avalible today were not availble in my days,and most of the really important characteristics of aloys are not made available by supliers,or quite simply not known.
Interestingly, my life as an ingeneer ended as I finished my studies, and ended up as a toolmaker.No regrets here as I have (sort of)the best of both worlds.I understand why things are designed the way they are, and I know how to make them.I am now working as a designer/programer/toolmaker.
If and when I find time, I want to MAKE my own cannon,and that is the reason I ask about the best materials to make it.
Thanks for any and all answers :hatsoff:

I am having trouble understanding something about the idiots who want to use smokeless powder in things meant for BP. Everyone has mentioned the safety factor, which obviously comes first. But theres another thing about cannons which is a personal thing for me.

Personally the use of BP has a magical factor for me. The big flame, large billows of smoke and really deep BOOOM!!!! which smokeless does not do. Its like a steam locomotive versus a maglev train. The maglev has nothing special. What 8 year old boy has dreams about a maglev? Like oak and canvass versus nuclear reactors on ships... Like I said, something personal. :wink:

I'm just wondering why people are having a hardtime understanding these words.... :youcrazy:

I'm whith you 100%.My question refers more to materials than powder.If I were to use smokless, I would have to add something to make it smell, smoke and sound like the real thing.Beter yet, just get the real thing and save the truoble,time and money.As an added bonus, you get to stay in one piece! :thumbsup:
Some people in this forum make their own guns, and I'm sure that some also make their own cannons.Some safe ,some....??? When it comes to cannos I prefer to have more steel(the rigth one) than not enough! :wink:

I had a guy at the parts store ask me if I had any 4f black powder to spare, for use in his cannon, I think you can guess my answer, then he asked if I had any 3f to spare, I casually changed the subject. A few friends have cannons, I back way away when they shoot them. flinch

I have had the same experience with chamber pressures as Mr. Phariss. In thirty years of shooting ML Artillery we have deduced that F grade will work well in up to 2.5" bores and in 3" chambered howitzers and up to 5" chambered mortars. All larger barrels and tubes need cannon grade BP to avoid dangerous pressures. Of course what is used for a projectile/wad also plays an important role in chamber pressures. The weight, material density or fit of projectiles matters in providing a safe situation

A 110 Grain charge of FG will throw a 4" mortar ball (from a chambered tube) about 400 yards with nearly no report but wad it heavily and it'll crack like a rifle signaling excessive pressures. No one needs to do this!

Our first three mortars were 3" and would throw a lead ball 200 yards with 70 Grains of 1F powder while thumping lightly. Mortars are not supposed to crack or even boom when they go off. If a blank is fashioned to do that, it will generate unnecessary pressures and is not realistic mortar fire either.

So not only is the powder grade important, but how much one uses to do the job can usually be tiny compared to any original battle charges one might find. After all, we're not fighting a war with these things today. It was common for iron tubes to last about 500 shots and then fail killing their crew. That was OK in wartime when casualties were typical and expected. Today casualties are unexpected, unnecessary and horrible for the Muzzle Loading Fraternity. Stick with black powder in an appropriate size.

Best
Capn D

Did anyone besides me notice that the charge of Red Dot was just about 6 grains more than the standard 12 GA Trap charge under 11/8 oz shot column? I think this guy is a fantasy poster. he knows a little about reloading or at least enough to be conversational but clearly is ignorant about the details. A 25 gr. load of Red Dot with a 11/2 projectile in a smooth barrel would very likely generate pressures in excess of 18-25,000 psi perhaps as high as 35,000 depending on how much windage there was in the projectile. I would think the blast out of the touch hole would be horrendous even if the barrel held.

I am kind of lost with this video., the powder test is on a 1/2" galvinized water pipe. this is hardly a cannon ., some people may this videp and get the wrong idea ., that its ok to use a pipe. ITS NOT.

We have a strong disclaimer on the video. We in no way promote re creating this attempt. The pipe is actually reinforced around the combustion chamber becoming a total of 1 1/4 inches thick. The purpose was to use household products to create a cannon that would fire a projectile at long distance. We tend to not spend a lot of time on one project and keep moving to the next idea, while recording findings for future endeavors.

maybe you can help us a little, if you don't mind. Wondering if cannons are usually made of Black Iron? If not what do you suggest we use as a barrel metal?

Thanks

I am no cannon maker., just a collector, however 660 bronze is my favorite and then there is DOM . The cannon should be a minimum of 1 caliber thick in all directions at the breach. For powder testing perhaps the wall thickness should be even greater. There are others with more knowledge than on this board. Hopefully they will chime in.

Thank you very much, this does help.

Modern muzzle loading cannon are made from several materials depending on the method of manufacture. They can be cast from grey iron or bronze, or machined from some kind of steel. 1018 cold rolled steel is more than adequate material if the design is good, 4140 is even stronger. Water pipe should never be used for cannon barrels as it is rated for pressures below those encountered in firing. And only black powder should be used. If the bore is greater than 1", I would recommend the use of cannon grade powder only. Never use the fine grades in large bore guns.

the 'smokeless powder' used in modern artillery is actually 'cordite' - long strands of powder which if you separated one out you can hold one end, light the other and it will burn like a sparkler. this is used on anything over 5" ( or WAS in 'Nam, if there's been a replacement for it I haven't heard) the big boys (6" and over used cylindrical 'bags' of the cordite - the bigger the bore the bigger the 'bag' of course and multiple 'bags' were used for longer distance shots. a complex calculation is needed to figure this. the big guns (5" and over and maybe even on down to 3"[75mm]) have removable liners which are rifled, they are frozen and the tube is heated and they are pressed together. 5" bore life is surprisingly short particularly if 'call for fire' results in firing when the barrel is hot - this wears the rifling rapidly.
I served on an 8" howizer crew on an artillery barge (which also had 2 5" and 4 3" and 2 80mm mortars + machine guns and 20mm's)near the DMZ in 'Nam.
DO NOT USE ANY SMOKELESS POWDER MEANT FOR HANDLOADERS OF MODERN ARMS IN A BP CANNON!