• This Forum is for adults 18 years of age or over. By continuing to use this Forum you are confirming that you are 18 or older. No content shall be viewed by any person under 18 in California.

Case volume question

One can certainly "ballpark" an estimate, and it will likely work pretty well. The downside to that is that making a good estimate usually requires empirically determining velocity with a given charge weight in a few different case volumes so that the estimate of how velocity changes with respect to case volume can actually be made. Alternatively, reloading programs such as QuickLoad and GRT can make these predictions given solid inputs. However, one problem with any of these approaches is that they're typically based on the assumption that the effect of chagning case volume must always be a linear response. I can assure you that that is not always the case.

An example of this is that combustion of powder is a chemical reaction. We use a defined amount of reactant (i.e. powder), in a defined reaction chamber or pressure cell volume (i.e. the case expanded to match the chamber space), at a given temperature, so on and so forth. The problem lies in that the chemical reaction (i.e. powder burn rate) will increase as pressure increases. Thus, as pressure increases due to increased charge weight or decreased pressure cell volume, the powder burn rate can also increase, leading to pressure increasing at a rate even faster than would be predicted from a simple linear response to charge weight or a change in case volume. In other words, the response is a "curve", not a straight line. This effect will be even more noticeable as one approaches MAX pressure. As long as one uses previous experimental data or one of the reloading programs to make predictions within a certain range of charge weights or case volumes, the "curve" will effectively be close enought to linear within that limited range that the estimates are pretty good. The farther away one tries to predict such changes, usually the farther away from "reality" the prediction will be.

So a lot of this depends on how much effort you want to put into this. In your position, I might consider conducting the following test: sort your brass into three volume groups - low/medium/high. Keep track of the values you used to sort the cases into each group (i.e. the group sorting parameters). Load up a few rounds of each holding all else besides case volume as close as possible (i.e. use the same primer, charge weight, bullet, seating depth). Then shoot each group and record velocity. With only minimal effort, you should be able to generate your own "formula" based on the velocity versus case volume data that will provide a reasonable estimate within a case volume range that is wide enough to be useful for you as you move forward with the reloading process.
That is helpful data. And what I'm looking for.
I think you're right. I can shoot my accuracy load, which shoots about 2720fps, shoot it through my other cases, [I have them sorted into five three grain variance groups]
Record velocities and apply the velocities to the case volumes of the shots fired and multiply to get my very own variance factor. If the curve is actually the volumetric difference, I should have a number to multiply each case before I load it and have down to the hundredth of grain what to load it to to mat h my 56.4 grH²0 Hornady brass and be shooting one holers with range brass.

You guys flipped my switch. Thank you thank you!!
 
Yes, that's what I'm saying.

When we work up a load and come upon what is typically described as a "node," we've happened upon a harmonious pressure profile / velocity / burn time in barrel / muzzle pressure... which results in tight groups downrange.

Assuming an accurate chrono, velocity is a good proxy for pressure. And assuming we're just talking about a very small change - like it would be with a case volume difference - those other factors won't change much. And so the chrono works for quickly finding our way back into that harmonious relationship.

The caution is that while velocity works great as a proxy for the entire pressure profile in a small-change example like this, and while velocity is always correlated with pressure in a general sense, we can't always say with certainty that just getting back to the velocity of our previous load makes us golden. For example, if we changed powder, to something faster or something slower, we might easily get back to the same velocity... only to find that our accuracy isn't nearly as good. That's because the pressure profile is different. And that pressure profile matters.
And thank you Jager as well! That's the way I needed to look at it
 

Upgrades & Donations

This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.


Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.

You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.


To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.

Forum statistics

Threads
166,259
Messages
2,215,102
Members
79,497
Latest member
Bie
Back
Top