Science of fluting:
- Thread starter Luckyorwhat
- Start date
Remember this is for one specific bullet weight/velocity combination. Make a slight change to the parameters and everything will change as he shows in his other experiments.
There are many modes of vibration in all barrels. Precision and accuracy is getting the barrel/bullet combination to have the same response each time.
He has been posting amazing work for may years. You should really read most of his website, many interesting topics such as what happens if you polish a chamber and his reloading pages.
Last edited:
Mystic Precision
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Summerland, BC
What would be great is to have this system to work up a load. That way you can dial in precisely to different nodes then confirm on paper which is most accurate.
I do like the animation of the rifle firing especially with the scope going through the barrel. Me thinks that load was a bit over pressure
Jerry
I do like the animation of the rifle firing especially with the scope going through the barrel. Me thinks that load was a bit over pressure
Jerry
What would be great is to have this system to work up a load. That way you can dial in precisely to different nodes then confirm on paper which is most accurate.
I do like the animation of the rifle firing especially with the scope going through the barrel. Me thinks that load was a bit over pressure
Jerry
You would also have to use a program like Quick LOAD to input the pressure curve characteristics of the powder and load into the model. A finite element computer model such as this can take from hours to days to complete when using PC's.
I don't believe they were intended as accuracy aids as much as weight reduction. The accuracy advantages gained by tuning are very small (by the standards of that era's infantry rifles).
In other words - to a target shooter, an accuracy of an inch or two at a hundred yards is not great, but it's acceptable for an infantry rifle (even by today's standards)
In other words - to a target shooter, an accuracy of an inch or two at a hundred yards is not great, but it's acceptable for an infantry rifle (even by today's standards)
Prosper, it is a rare day when I disagree! I do think though that you are underestimating the minds that made ALL (ok most) of the CF bolt action rifle advancements worth mentioning in the last 150 years.
Do we think that swede/brazilian/chilean etc mauser got to be more accurate then thier modern counterparts by accident! In this day of pressed out infantry arms and 400 dollar savage rifles we forget just how big a deal a mauser rifle was to say THE KING OF SWEDEN or the brazilians etc.
We are talking unprecendented investment made by organizations with an endless capacity for comittee review and quality assurance. Minute of gook or fascist might have been good enough for a yank or russian who was never going to learn to shoot any way but it sure mattered to a lot of proffesional armies.
As you defientley know more about ballistics and loading then I do (and probabley can shhot better) take a look at the 'efficiency' of say a 160 grain 6.5x55 (mauser design) Is it still the most efficient smokeless cartrdidge? i.e grain of powder/ft pound of energy carried over distance? It was for a long time after everyone forgot efficient was a key design concept. Also how many of you reading this know where the mechanical bedding device is on a small ring mauser?? It is there I carried one for a decade before I found it.
Any way I am rambling IIRC/IHMO/someone brighter then me said so, the steps in mauser barrels were placed with harmonics and accuracy in mind, Do we think they had no taper turning attachment in 1890?
I wish I had a an easy accessed refence but I don't. All I can offer is that smarter people then me assure me that thought went into barrel harmonics, cartridge design, rifling etc, etc.
Do we think that swede/brazilian/chilean etc mauser got to be more accurate then thier modern counterparts by accident! In this day of pressed out infantry arms and 400 dollar savage rifles we forget just how big a deal a mauser rifle was to say THE KING OF SWEDEN or the brazilians etc.
We are talking unprecendented investment made by organizations with an endless capacity for comittee review and quality assurance. Minute of gook or fascist might have been good enough for a yank or russian who was never going to learn to shoot any way but it sure mattered to a lot of proffesional armies.
As you defientley know more about ballistics and loading then I do (and probabley can shhot better) take a look at the 'efficiency' of say a 160 grain 6.5x55 (mauser design) Is it still the most efficient smokeless cartrdidge? i.e grain of powder/ft pound of energy carried over distance? It was for a long time after everyone forgot efficient was a key design concept. Also how many of you reading this know where the mechanical bedding device is on a small ring mauser?? It is there I carried one for a decade before I found it.
Any way I am rambling IIRC/IHMO/someone brighter then me said so, the steps in mauser barrels were placed with harmonics and accuracy in mind, Do we think they had no taper turning attachment in 1890?
I wish I had a an easy accessed refence but I don't. All I can offer is that smarter people then me assure me that thought went into barrel harmonics, cartridge design, rifling etc, etc.
Last edited:
So reading it, is it desirable for the barrel to be angled upwards when the bullet leaves, or straight horizontal? (talking only about flex)
And do they want the bullet to leave just as the barrel reaches the most flex, when it pauses motion between flexing up and back down? Otherwise does the barrel whipping add another acceleration vector to the bullet?
And do they want the bullet to leave just as the barrel reaches the most flex, when it pauses motion between flexing up and back down? Otherwise does the barrel whipping add another acceleration vector to the bullet?
You want the bullet to leave when the barrel is the most stable - i.e. not moving up or down. This will be a point of peak flex on a graph.
And because pressure is never 100% consistent from shot to shot, the load that produces the widest peak should be the most accurate. +/- 10% might still put you at a point of relatively small movement if the load produces wide peaks. If they're sharp peaks, a 10% difference might put you much further down the slope of the graph. (the sharper the slope, the faster the muzzle's rate of travel)
And because pressure is never 100% consistent from shot to shot, the load that produces the widest peak should be the most accurate. +/- 10% might still put you at a point of relatively small movement if the load produces wide peaks. If they're sharp peaks, a 10% difference might put you much further down the slope of the graph. (the sharper the slope, the faster the muzzle's rate of travel)
in the graph shown, the bottom trace would be the most accurate barrel as it flexest the least and produces the widest node.
However, the load that's graphed there is the wrong load for that barrel. A bit of load development would ideally place the middle of the node exactly with the point of the bullet exiting the muzzle. Basically, the barrel needs a hotter load to perform optimally.
With that particular load, the top trace (or second from top) would probably be most accurate
However, the load that's graphed there is the wrong load for that barrel. A bit of load development would ideally place the middle of the node exactly with the point of the bullet exiting the muzzle. Basically, the barrel needs a hotter load to perform optimally.
With that particular load, the top trace (or second from top) would probably be most accurate
- Location
- Ft. Mac. Alberta
" The science of fluting"??
I though it was more like
" fluting and other Voodoo related things"!
Cat
I though it was more like
" fluting and other Voodoo related things"!
Cat
