Pressure "Spikes", "Powders for Short Barrels" and other Myths

Andy

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
329   0   0
Location
Ottawa
I see posts so frequently that warn that a particular powder can produce a dangerous "pressure spike" and folks asking for a load for a particular barrel length, that I though it might be useful to present a high level overview of what happens, pressure-wise in the barrel of a firearm when the trigger is pulled.

I pulled the graph below off the web from somewhere some time ago and modified it somewhat for my purposes. I can't provide specific credit for it, but want to start by saying it wasn't me. Thanks to its author whoever you are.

All powders, smokeless or blackpowder, "fast" or "slow", produce similar "Pressure Curves" and hence have similar "Internal Ballistics".

1. Upon firing, the pressure rises to a Peak Pressure very quickly (typically within 0.3-0.5 milliseconds) - that is less than 5 ten thousands of a second. During that time (rise to Peak Pressure) the bullet will have travelled at most 4-5 inches. You can see that point in the graph below as "A", "B" and "C" (for three different powders - explained later). The total time between firing and the bullet leaving the bore can be as little as 1 millisecond, but is rarely more than 4 milliseconds - that's 1/250 of a second; and

2. the pressure then drops very consistently as the bullet travels down the bore, in direct proportion to the increasing volume of the cylinder behind the bullet in the bore. Moments after the bullet leaves the bore, the pressure will be at zero (0). As you see in the chart, the bullet continues to accelerate even as the pressure is dropping - as long as the pressure is sufficient to overcome bore friction and bullet momentum, the bullet will move, if not accelerate. That's why longer barrels can exploit declining pressure more than shorter barrels - to a point.

PressureCurvevsBulletTravel_zps7a8a7cf7.png


Here's where the myths arise.

1. "You need a fast powder for short barrels to achieve a total burn" or "You need a long barrel with a slow powder to achieve a total burn". For barrels longer than about four (4) inches this is NOT TRUE.

The point where Peak Pressure occurs is the point where all the powder that will "burn" has been burnt. There is never 100% conversion of powders, and there are always "products of combustion" (e.g. soot). If the powder is not operating at its most efficient pressure there might indeed be "unburnt powder" among those products of combustion. The fact remains however, that at the point of Peak Pressure (A, B or C above) no more gasses are being produced, so with a fixed amount of gas, pressure will naturally drop as the bullet advances down the bore. That fire coming from the bore (muzzle flash) is real, but neither it, nor the soot that is produced is powder that didn't have a chance to burn - it's the products of combustion. So, unless the powder you are using hasn't yet reached Peak Pressure when the bullet exits the bore, you've achieved a "full burn". This is why powder that produce the highest Muzzle Velocity (MV) (at a given pressure) with long barrels will produce the highest MV with short barrels.

2. "This powder is notorious for producing dangerous pressure spikes". All powders produce a "Pressure Spike" - it's called the point of peak pressure. If you have more than one peak, it's due to a bore obstruction of "SEE" and that's a dangerous non-typical situation and Red Herring for this discussion. I think that what people mean when they say "This powder is notorious for producing dangerous pressure spikes" is that its peak pressure can rise quickly with small additions of powder, like with "fast" powders, which leads to:


"Powder Burn Rate"


Powders are designed to produce peak pressure in different ways - it might rise very quickly to a high peak with small amounts of powder ("Fast Powders"), or rise more slowly and require more powder to reach the same peak ("Slow Powders"), but at each end of the extreme it's still occurs in only a matter of fractions of a millisecond. In the chart above, the pressure curve for the fastest powder is "A", followed by "B" and "C". "A" would have used the least powder, followed by "B" and "C". You might ask: "Their Peak Pressures are all very close, so why not always use the least amount of the fastest powder?" The reason is that since every pound of powder contains roughly the same amount of energy, more powder used means more energy means higher MV and you might want that. Each firearm has a limit to the Peak Pressure it can withstand, so if you want a higher MV, you need to use a powder you can use more of without exceeding that Peak Pressure, i.e. a "Slower" Powder. The effect of using more powder (more energy) is captured in the chart by the area under curves "A", "B" and "C" - C is higher than B which is higher than A. You see this phenomenon in load chart (e.g. using more of H4350 I get the same Peak Pressure, but a higher MV than using less H4895). Here's a link to Hodgdon's "Powder Burn Rate Chart" which gives an approximation of relative burn rates: https://www.hodgdon.com/PDF/Burn Rates - 2014-2015.pdf

Please note that the graph of "Projectile Velocity" is a generic representation - each of powders "A", "B" and "C" would produce its own unique Projectile Velocity graph.

I hope this was useful.
 
Last edited:
The point where Peak Pressure occurs is the point where all the powder that will "burn" has been burnt. There is never 100% conversion of powders, and there are always "products of combustion" (e.g. soot). If the powder is not operating at its most efficient pressure there might indeed be "unburnt powder" among those products of combustion. The fact remains however, that at the point of Peak Pressure (A, B or C above) no more gasses are being produced, so with a fixed amount of gas, pressure will naturally drop as the bullet advances down the bore. That fire coming from the bore (muzzle flash) is real, but neither it, nor the soot that is produced is powder that didn't have a chance to burn - it's the products of combustion. So, unless the powder you are using hasn't yet reached Peak Pressure when the bullet exits the bore, you've achieved a "full burn". This is why powder that produce the highest Muzzle Velocity (MV) (at a given pressure) with long barrels will produce the highest MV with short barrels.

Sorry Andy but Quickload disagrees................

The first dotted line below on the left is peak pressure at approximately 1.4 inches down the barrel. The second dotted green line at 2.5 inches is 95% of the powder burnt and at 4.3 inches the powder is 100% burnt. If Winchester 296 or H110 were used the last two dotted lines would be off the chart. Meaning not all the powder is being burnt at peak pressure.

44231_zps745df461.jpg


The same applies to my AR15 with a 16 inch barrel and less than 95% of the powder is burnt using H335.

percentburn-b_zps50905a17.jpg
 
Last edited:
Sorry Andy but Quickload disagrees................

I expected you to pipe in and share some Quickload graphs, and I don't mind disagreeing with Quickload (if in fact I am). I own their product and their software tool does a reasonable job estimating where Peak Pressure is reached and the resulting velocity of the bullet. However, I'll stick with my main points that:

- all of the powder that will be burnt is burnt at the point of peak pressure (I never said there was ever 100% conversion);
- that the point of peak pressure is within 4 inches or so of the boltface; and
- that the powder that produces the highest MV in a long barrel will produce the highest MV in a shorter barrel.

Show me better evidence than a graph from Quickload that any of those points are incorrect, and I'll quickly recant, but I suspect that the differences are semantics and that we're in fact really in violent agreement.
 
Thanks Andy, I have heard a guy say that because there was a muzzle flash in the dark his powder was too slow. Firearms peak at nominally 50,000 psi. I shudder to think of the muzzle blast if the the pressure was still that high when the bullet left the barrel.,.
 
I think there is a squeak of merit behind these myths but they are not correct to the degree stated by so many. (I am agreeing with Andy). A faster powder can produce less pressure at the end of a shorter barrel making for less recoil and muzzle blast, one may draw a conclusion that the powder is burning completely which is true of that fast powder but also true of a slow powder too. The slower powder simply maintains a higher pressure to the end of the shorter barrel making for better fireworks. I've done enough load development over a chronograph with various cartridges and powders to tell you that much. However there are so many variables to picking the best powder that it challenges every "myth" the interwebz can come up with. Unless someone can explain why faster powders produced the best velocities in one short barreled rifle I own while slower powders produced the best velocity in another short barreled rifle then I'll be happy letting myths be myths.
 
Well I will give an observation and ask for an explanation. Shot a bunch of imported cheap ammo out of a mini years ago middle of the afternoon you could see a fireball out of the barrel. After numerous rounds I swept up all the products of combustion that were on the concrete pad in front of the bench. I threw a lit match into this and it burned up. So how was all the powder that could be burned was burned in the first four inches of the barrel? Am i misunderstanding something here?
 
Well I will give an observation and ask for an explanation. Shot a bunch of imported cheap ammo out of a mini years ago middle of the afternoon you could see a fireball out of the barrel. After numerous rounds I swept up all the products of combustion that were on the concrete pad in front of the bench. I threw a lit match into this and it burned up. So how was all the powder that could be burned was burned in the first four inches of the barrel? Am i misunderstanding something here?

Yours is a good question, because it illustrates the most common reason why shooters believe that long barrels are required for "complete burns" - muzzle flash and residue.

We don't know the powder, the load nor the pressure, all we know is that the "stuff" that was expelled "burned with a match". Lots of things can be burnt with a match, but would it, if loaded in a cartridge act as a propellant? I'd be willing to bet it wouldn't.

Too many unknowns, but I am confident to state that another 20" of barrel length wouldn't have changed things.
 
would it, if loaded in a cartridge act as a propellant? I'd be willing to bet it wouldn't
Not exactly scientific, but Iraqveteran8888 on YouTube has used range sweepings as powder before in failure tests. In all the videos I've seen it blows up or totally seizes the firearms when loaded intro cartridges. It does more damage to the firearm than an entire case of pistol powder in a rifle.

I read one theory that it's the same stuff that causes a SEE. It's some byproduct of incomplete combustion in the chamber that, if there's enough of it produced, can blow up a rifle. It more often just gets thrown out of the muzzle after the bullet if it doesn't combust for some reason.

Again, this is an unscientific series of YouTube videos and an unsupported internet theory. It seems like it could be a possibility.
 
Not exactly scientific, but Iraqveteran8888 on YouTube has used range sweepings as powder before in failure tests. In all the videos I've seen it blows up or totally seizes the firearms when loaded intro cartridges. It does more damage to the firearm than an entire case of pistol powder in a rifle.

I read one theory that it's the same stuff that causes a SEE. It's some byproduct of incomplete combustion in the chamber that, if there's enough of it produced, can blow up a rifle. It more often just gets thrown out of the muzzle after the bullet if it doesn't combust for some reason.

Again, this is an unscientific series of YouTube videos and an unsupported internet theory. It seems like it could be a possibility.

A powder has a coating of a deterrent. This slows down the initial burn when the surface area is maximum. The powder burns faster as the deterrent layer is burned off, offsetting to a degree that the surface area is getting smaller, giving off less gas.

The range sweepings or the remains if the uncoated powder. This burns very differently (much faster) than the original powder.
 
I have tested thousands and thousands of rounds in the lab, using a pressure gun. The modern pressure guns generate pressure curves directly to file.

They all look about the same, differing only in peak pressure and the slope of the curve. Note that you can see the initial pressure from the primer. This generates 5,000 to 10,000 psi, depending on make of primer and how full the case is.

PRESSURECURVEGOLDCROSS308.jpg
 
2. "This powder is notorious for producing dangerous pressure spikes". All powders produce a "Pressure Spike" - it's called the point of peak pressure. If you have more than one peak, it's due to a bore obstruction of "SEE" and that's a dangerous non-typical situation and Red Herring for this discussion. I think that what people mean when they say "This powder is notorious for producing dangerous pressure spikes" is that its peak pressure can rise quickly with small additions of powder, like with "fast" powders, which leads to:

I would like to contest this a little. I think we all know that all powders produce a pressure peak, but to me the work "spike" suggests a sudden elevation in pressure beyond normal levels, and that can of course be dangerous. When I see this comment I interpret it as meaning the powder burn rate is sensitive not only to small variations in quantity, but to any of a number of variables such as ambient temperature, bullet seating depth, crimp, brand/type of primer, position of powder, etc. If a certain powder charge in a specific load gives acceptable performance at 10 degrees but exceeds SAAMI limits at 25 degrees, well, that meets my definition of being prone to dangerous pressure spikes. And if a variable that can be expected to vary in the normal course of events (such as ambient temp and powder position) is sufficient to produce a secondary ignition, then SEE is very much germane to the discussion.

None of this is intended to suggest this isn't an excellent thread topic, and a very commendable post.
 
Unless this information can be verified by powder manufactures it should not be "stickied". It's simply one man's opinion.
 
Back
Top Bottom