How safe it is to electrify a live ammo?

electricjesus said:
Goddamn this thread is full of fail.

Chem PhD and ex-professor here.

You do not need multiple electrolytes. DC power source, positive to the ammo, negative to whatever the counter electrode is, as long as it conducts, it is fine. Like a nail or piece of pipe. whatever. The only safety concern is the resistance heating of the ammo. This could be an issue as if you want to remove the metals from the tip, you need decent currents. So you would not want to connect the positive to the primer or base of the case, which is more difficult anyway because it is painted. So just alligator clip to the projectile right before the case. You only want the tip submerged to dissolve it anyway. Copper is a better conductor than the steel case, the area being heated is mostly the bullet, which luckily is partly submerged in a heatsink (water) so the chance of the propellant or primer heating enough for ignition is low. (all the same, first time turn on remotely and wait, as well as using a low-current power source). Current can also be controlled by electrode spacing, the closer bullet and other electrode are together, the lower the resistance of the solution, and the higher the current.

In terms of electrolyte, your counter electrode will be producing hydroxide ions which will precipitate copper or iron ions from solution, potentially passivising the bullet and ending the process. You will want something acidic like diluted HCl (muriatic acid from the hardware store) to avoid this.

Now, as the process continues, stuff gets complicated. The bullet is a non-symmetrical electrode, so current densities are higher at points and edges. The very tip will be dissolved first, and you will see blue coming off of it from copper ions in solution. Once the copper is through, the iron core of the surplus ammo is shown. Iron likes to lose electrons more than copper so once the copper is breached the iron core will be removed leaving a copper shell. When all iron in range of electrolyte is consumed, copper will be dissolved off again. It will stop itself once the electrolyte is no longer in contact with the ammo.

Of course, set it up, turn it on remotely for a couple hours, and come back later. The chance of heating it up to ignition temp is low but high enough to warrant a couple precautions.
Click to expand...

actually, the heat will be focused on the point of highest resistance, i.e. the thin steel case with laquer over it due to ohms law (I^2xR)
 
Nope. Because there is no current needing to go through the steel part. electrolysis at the tip, electrical connection made at the base of the projectile, not cartridge. There is no need for the current to go through the steel part to get where it is going, so it will not heat up.
 
householdreg said:
I want to try to electrolyze FMJ live ammo to get soft point ones.
Click to expand...

A problem folks ran into when "cutting back" the tips of surplus FMJ to try and make cheap soft points was leaving a jacket in the bore, and on the next shot blowing up the gun / their face due to the bore obstruction. Since FMJ ammunition uses an open / exposed base, unlike a proper soft point where the jacket is drawn from the rear and closed at the tip, you can force the core through the jacket on firing and leave the jacket in the bore.

Combine this with running current through live ammunition, and indeed we're in Darwin award territory I'm afraid, this is one of those very bad ideas that seemed smart at the time. Soft point is so cheap with the PVRI / S&B / Wolf , there is absolutely zero point in this as well. Also, as others mentioned, the bimetal jackets would likely foil this plan anyhow.
 
Ardent said:
A problem folks ran into when "cutting back" the tips of surplus FMJ to try and make cheap soft points was leaving a jacket in the bore, and on the next shot blowing up the gun / their face due to the bore obstruction. Since FMJ ammunition uses an open / exposed base, unlike a proper soft point where the jacket is drawn from the rear and closed at the tip, you can force the core through the jacket on firing and leave the jacket in the bore.

Combine this with running current through live ammunition, and indeed we're in Darwin award territory I'm afraid, this is one of those very bad ideas that seemed smart at the time. Soft point is so cheap with the PVRI / S&B / Wolf , there is absolutely zero point in this as well. Also, as others mentioned, the bimetal jackets would likely foil this plan anyhow.
Click to expand...

do you have real-world examples of that happening?
there are perforated gas checks for lead bullets (think about a really short jacket) and they stick to the bullet by mechanical means (as in neither glued nor bonded) rather than having the lead erupt in a burst.
 
legi0n said:
some are
Click to expand...

He mentions Czech 7.62x39 surplus, there may be some M67 Czech out there (???), but as far as I know it's M43... the stuff on Budget Shooter Supply is steel core, probably steel jacketed as well and should be boat tail (open base) M43 style. So the stuff he's using (most likely) isn't just a SP with a closed tip, and by removing the tip could result in the steel core being blown out leaving the jacket behind.

legi0n said:
...and yes, you do need a certain kind of degree to comment on the issue.
With people like you we'd still be in the stone age.
Let the guy experiment. Maybe he'll come up with something out of the ordinary.
Click to expand...

Yes because practical experience and specific relevant technical knowledge are always so useless! Hah...
The stone age? Yeah... the stone age was all about getting results with what you have available, wasn't it? Which coincidentally is exactly what the OP is looking to do, not a theoretical science project. I guess reading comprehension wasn't part of that degree you mentioned.

I already applauded him for thinking outside the box. Yeah it's great, so if he just wants to experiment... that's fine. What he's talking about is producing SPs from FMJs with little to no cost involved, suggesting he's wanting to do this in some quantity, not just as a theory or experiment. I look forward to his experiment results and ballistics gel tests. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
The problem is getting addicted to these types of experiments. I couldn't stop making plasma in the microwave, over and over again melting or blowing up glasses from a simple green grape! Eventually I destroyed my brand new microwave, all for one hell of a show for my kids and guests. Oh, and the wonderful noise of plasma scared everyone in the room. I am sure that my experiments with green grapes in the microwave were more dangerous than the little discussion going on in this thread. Plasma = 10000 degrees C. What's the temperature of the gas escaping from a bullet casing? Not even close. It's not like the bullet has eyes either, it's not a bogeyman that will chase you around the corner and get you. People have been known to hide their Glocks in the oven, then preheat the oven to bake a cake, and then they barely got injured when all was said and done. Your experiment is not even close. Let the naysayers say what they will but I predict that your experiment will not be a danger to you or others, and that you will live to tell the tale. Like I said in the beginning, the biggest problem will be addiction and destruction of property - so keep a fire extinguisher nearby. And don't stare at it, no don't ever stare at it. Got it?
 
legi0n said:
do you have real-world examples of that happening?
there are perforated gas checks for lead bullets (think about a really short jacket) and they stick to the bullet by mechanical means (as in neither glued nor bonded) rather than having the lead erupt in a burst.
Click to expand...

The problem with gas checks is you would need to disassemble the round to install them, which I think is the step the OP is attempting to avoid. To the OP, I don't think this endeavour is the way I would go. You're looking at all sorts of potential issues and could probably get the same result faster and easier with a file. And even if you succeed you're looking at potential bullet failure issues which are not what you want when you're hunting. (Which I assume is why you're attempting to make soft points on the cheap) Far better to get yourself a $20 bullet puller and a box of .312 bullets. A Lee press and dies can be pretty inexpensive and the result a heck of a lot better. And if you do attempt this, please wear some eye protection, maybe a full face shield.
 
nullshine said:
He mentions Czech 7.62x39 surplus, there may be some M67 Czech out there (???), but as far as I know it's M43... the stuff on Budget Shooter Supply is steel core, probably steel jacketed as well and should be boat tail (open base) M43 style. So the stuff he's using (most likely) isn't just a SP with a closed tip, and by removing the tip could result in the steel core being blown out leaving the jacket behind.



Yes because practical experience and specific relevant technical knowledge are always so useless! Hah...
The stone age? Yeah... the stone age was all about getting results with what you have available, wasn't it? Which coincidentally is exactly what the OP is looking to do, not a theoretical science project. I guess reading comprehension wasn't part of that degree you mentioned.

I already applauded him for thinking outside the box. Yeah it's great, so if he just wants to experiment... that's fine. What he's talking about is producing SPs from FMJs with little to no cost involved, suggesting he's wanting to do this in some quantity, not just as a theory or experiment. I look forward to his experiment results and ballistics gel tests. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...


Nop, tried to cut it, it is lead in it.

PS: Tried to cut the tip and applied some glue, so far so good.
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BxGVrgo7Lm8nMVRmQl9CU2tiUEU/edit
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BxGVrgo7Lm8nZWxHaGdvRF80ZDA/edit
 
legi0n said:
Ok, everyone without a degree in science back off. You don't understand $hit so refrain from commenting.

to the OP
Electrolysis will only remove one metal. if the bullet is composite you'd need many electrolytes.
It's easier to go with corrosion baths. Like ammonia for copper, acid for steel. It'll work just the same.
The engineering challenge here is to have a device that reliable dips the tip of every bullet the same depth into the "soup".
Click to expand...

OOOoooo. Everybody stop and listen to legion. Even though some of you may think he comes across as a bit of a self-important twit, he is obviously a professional and his opinion should be regarded with the appropriate degree of respect.
 
coldestcanuck said:
OOOoooo. Everybody stop and listen to legion. Even though some of you may think he comes across as a bit of a self-important twit, he is obviously a professional and his opinion should be regarded with the appropriate degree of respect.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, I forgot, I meant to mention that Professionals built the Titanic........................On the other hand the Ark was built by amateurs!!
 
householdreg said:
Nop, tried to cut it, it is lead in it.

PS: Tried to cut the tip and applied some glue, so far so good.
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BxGVrgo7Lm8nMVRmQl9CU2tiUEU/edit
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BxGVrgo7Lm8nZWxHaGdvRF80ZDA/edit
Click to expand...

Ok, cut the tip? Or Cut through the bullet past the ogive? Because even steel core has lead in the tip.

http://www.ar15.com/ammo/project/ammo_cross_sections/index.htm#7.62x39 Steel Core

I'm curious as to what the glue is for?
 
legi0n said:
do you have real-world examples of that happening?
there are perforated gas checks for lead bullets (think about a really short jacket) and they stick to the bullet by mechanical means (as in neither glued nor bonded) rather than having the lead erupt in a burst.
Click to expand...

Google turned one up for me, fellow had his M1 carbine blow up due to a shed jacket, and a million warnings. Cast bullets with perforated checks is quite a bit different than high pressure modern centerfire. A little ring of copper versus a soft lead bullet (comparatively, vs bimetal jacketed) at low velocity and low pressures given such checks are usually used in .45-70's, .45-110's, 38-55's etc is quite a bit different. The hard jacket of 7.62x39 and the pressures / velocities we're talking make one ask a big "Why?" when commercial soft point 7.62x39 is so cheap.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom