Powder choice/burn rate and recoil. How are they related, How do you predict or measure effect?

[rebel]

I am not going to say anyone is wrong or right with the theories here. I shoot 50 gr of 3031 with a 300 gr bullet in my Marlin. I find it quite manageable. Big push - yes. Better stock design than dellets (at least in the case of "felt"recoil) -yes.
Does plastic or fiberglass transmit less "felt" recoil than wood? How bout walnut over birch?
Interesting rabbit hole we have wondered down, but I would think "felt" is different to each and therefore can only be scientifically measured as you guys have described. How it "felt" is up to the shooter. I would think the difference may lie in a fellow who had had his legs striped by a hickory branch and one who had been grounded from his computer for the same offense

 

[ireload2]

It is true you do not comprehend energy in any way shape or form or you would recognize the elementary formula for energy.

BTW none of this is related to quantum physics. Newton's laws do not deal with quantum theory. In your own words it appears that yada yada yada is about half of your physics vocabulary...

Learn more about work and energy otherwise you are wasting your time.
You have shown that you do not have the mathematical skills to explain the fly specks in your pepper.

I may not understand your narrow views about energy.


I made no such claim about fast or slow powders. A bullet in a given cartridge may react totally different relative to cartridge design and powder rates, bullet jam neck tension, yada, yada, yada yet produce the same results. A 300wsm vs a 300wea or 300wm are good examples.

I think I'd stay clear of debating Quantum Mechanics is I were you.

You may claim felt recoil is irrelevant and is the shooters personal problem, but recoil tolerance for your scopes is your problem. Testing recoil to provide guidance for your scopes is one thing. Felt recoil is all that matters to the shooter.

I'm done with your ramble, you're right and I'm wrong. Are you happy now? I hope you realize that you are making a mountain out of a molehill.

When you learn how to measure felt recoil, please...PLEASE enlighten us.

I'm done with you

BTW powder may very well accelerate faster from one or the other, but that's immaterial with out plotting the bullet rate of change within the barrel. Velocity is NOT correct. If you don't like it, take it up with Newton.

 

[TRA]

Newton's laws do not deal with quantum theory.

You finally got one thing right.

Now all you have to grasp is that velocity has nothing to do with force.

 

[ireload2]

Jajajajajaja
You really know nothing of physics do you?

Without velocity there is no energy.
Velocity is the change in location with respect to time
Acceleration is nothing more than the change in velocity.
Acceleration does not do work. Energy does work and makes things move.
Energy = 1/2 mass X velocity squared.
Read it and heed it.
Remember if you cannot quantify what you are talking about you don't really understand the subject.

https://www.outdoorlife.com/articles/guns/rifles/2007/09/calculate-recoil-energy

www.shooterscalculator.com/recoil-calculator.php

In physics, the kinetic energy of an object is the energy that it possesses due to its motion. It is defined as the work needed to accelerate a body of a given mass from rest to its stated velocity. Having gained this energy during its acceleration, the body maintains this kinetic energy unless its speed changes.

You finally got one thing right.

Now all you have to grasp is that velocity has nothing to do with force.

 

[TRA]

Jajajajajaja
You really know nothing of physics do you?

Without velocity there is no energy.
Velocity is the change in location with respect to time
Acceleration is nothing more than the change in velocity.
Acceleration does not do work. Energy does work and makes things move.
Energy = 1/2 mass X velocity squared.
Read it and heed it.
Remember if you cannot quantify what you are talking about you don't really understand the subject.

https://www.outdoorlife.com/articles/guns/rifles/2007/09/calculate-recoil-energy

www.shooterscalculator.com/recoil-calculator.php

Why do you continue to ramble on about Kinetic Energy? Kinetic Energy is 0 without motion and all motion has to have acceleration. Even the speed of light has acceleration, it remains at constant velocity until it's extinguished, but in the beginning it experience acceleration.

You are so far off base about recoil it's.........Beam me up Scotty.

 

[ireload2]

Because recoil energy is what the shooter feels. Don't you have any grasp of the subject?

Why don't you stay off of unrelated subjects that you know nothing about?
No all motion does NOT require acceleration!!!!
Constant motion is the result of zero acceleration!!!
Kinetic energy is the recoil energy possessed by a moving rifle as it is recoiling. That is the energy the shooter both feels and absorbs. Go back and review the formula for calculating recoil energy.

Sorry but you beamed yourself. I had nothing to do with your energy state or lack there of.

Why do you continue to ramble on about Kinetic Energy? Kinetic Energy is 0 without motion and all motion has to have acceleration. Even the speed of light has acceleration, it remains at constant velocity until it's extinguished, but in the beginning it experience acceleration.

You are so far off base about recoil it's.........Beam me up Scotty.

 

[ireload2]

This should cover the subject.

A change in momentum of a mass requires a force; according to Newton's first law, known as the law of inertia, inertia simply being another term for mass. That force, applied to a mass, creates an acceleration, which when applied over time, changes the velocity of a mass. According to Newton's second law, the law of momentum -- changing the velocity of the mass changes its momentum, (mass multiplied by velocity). It is important to understand at this point that velocity is not simply speed. Velocity is the speed of a mass in a particular direction. In a very technical sense, speed is a scalar (mathematics), a magnitude, and velocity is a vector (physics), magnitude and direction. Newton's third law, known as conservation of momentum, recognizes that changes in the motion of a mass, brought about by the application of forces and accelerations, does not occur in isolation; that is, other bodies of mass are found to be involved in directing those forces and accelerations. Furthermore, if all the masses and velocities involved are accounted for, the vector sum, magnitude and direction, of the momentum of all the bodies involved does not change; hence, momentum of the system is conserved. This conservation of momentum is why gun recoil occurs in the opposite direction of bullet projection -- the mass times velocity of the projectile in the positive direction equals the mass times velocity of the gun in the negative direction. In summation, the total momentum of the system equals zero, surprisingly just as it did before the trigger was pulled. From a practical engineering perspective, therefore, through the mathematical application of conservation of momentum, it is possible to calculate a first approximation of a gun’s recoil momentum and kinetic energy, and properly design recoil buffering systems to safely dissipate that momentum and energy, simply based on estimates of the projectile speed (and mass) coming out the barrel. To confirm analytical calculations and estimates, once a prototype gun is manufactured, the projectile and gun recoil energy and momentum can be directly measured using a ballistic pendulum and ballistic chronograph.

 

[TRA]

This should cover the subject.

A change in momentum of a mass requires a force; according to Newton's first law, known as the law of inertia, inertia simply being another term for mass. That force, applied to a mass, creates an acceleration, which when applied over time, changes the velocity of a mass. According to Newton's second law, the law of momentum -- changing the velocity of the mass changes its momentum, (mass multiplied by velocity). It is important to understand at this point that velocity is not simply speed. Velocity is the speed of a mass in a particular direction. In a very technical sense, speed is a scalar (mathematics), a magnitude, and velocity is a vector (physics), magnitude and direction. Newton's third law, known as conservation of momentum, recognizes that changes in the motion of a mass, brought about by the application of forces and accelerations, does not occur in isolation; that is, other bodies of mass are found to be involved in directing those forces and accelerations. Furthermore, if all the masses and velocities involved are accounted for, the vector sum, magnitude and direction, of the momentum of all the bodies involved does not change; hence, momentum of the system is conserved. This conservation of momentum is why gun recoil occurs in the opposite direction of bullet projection -- the mass times velocity of the projectile in the positive direction equals the mass times velocity of the gun in the negative direction. In summation, the total momentum of the system equals zero, surprisingly just as it did before the trigger was pulled. From a practical engineering perspective, therefore, through the mathematical application of conservation of momentum, it is possible to calculate a first approximation of a gun’s recoil momentum and kinetic energy, and properly design recoil buffering systems to safely dissipate that momentum and energy, simply based on estimates of the projectile speed (and mass) coming out the barrel. To confirm analytical calculations and estimates, once a prototype gun is manufactured, the projectile and gun recoil energy and momentum can be directly measured using a ballistic pendulum and ballistic chronograph.

You have a serous comprehension flaw. You just posted what I've said from the get go. I hope you step back and try to make some sense out of your rambling.

You continue to skirt or spin the the fact that with the conservation of momentum, that only holds true if all thing are equal. (learned that in third grade science class) The bullet weighs ~200 grain, the rifle may weigh 20lb. The more the rifle weighs the more the two forces change.

Grasp this, well you can try....what goes on within the barrel is all that matters. Your measurement 10 ft away is irrelevant.

The only reason the gun industry uses a formula created so you can compare recoil is that it's impossible to put a number on acceleration of the projectile, and at what point it occurs. Take any published calculator and get your numbers then if you have the shills, savvy, and funds to actually measure your actual recoil and you will find the numbers are basically nothing more than an educated guess. They are in no way accurate and should be disclosed as such. The engineering world is full of these generic formulas, like the one for thread stretch. You select a modifier for a family of metal and claim that's gods word. They totally ignore all the details that is reality. same as Newtons F=MA.

There has been such a squabble of this that the Hogdon clan removed their references to burn rates affecting recoil. The last I knew, Alliant still makes those statements, And I'd trust them far more so than your misguided ramble.

In theory a 30" barrel with a powder charge in the middle and a projectile on each side of the powder when fired would create the same kinetic energy. With a lab capable of measuring it, would likely show they in fact are not equal. Just don't try to tell an educated engineer that.

 

[ireload2]

No I am just repeating classic facts of physics.
The quotes come from well established sources.

In your previous post you said that there was no velocity without acceleration. Everyone knows by definition that constant velocity is the result of zero acceleration. Until you quit posting nonsense no one will take your posts seriously. It is clear that you did not learn any physics in the 3rd or any other grade.

That formula is not a gun industry creation. That is Newton's equation. If you cannot quantify what you are talking about you do not understand the subject. You don't explain it with a barrage of words. The relationships are described by the formulas.

Your last example is also not related to this discussion since by definition there would be no recoil. Your word "LIKELY" means that you were guessing because you did not know the answer. There is really no need to guess when you can quantify the answer and it is clear that you can't. You simply resort to dragging in some unrelated bit of irrelevant nonsense.

You have a serous comprehension flaw. You just posted what I've said from the get go. I hope you step iback and try to make some sense out of your rambling.

You continue to skirt or spin the the fact that with the conservation of momentum, that only holds true if all thing are equal. (learned that in third grade science class) The bullet weighs ~200 grain, the rifle may weigh 20lb. The more the rifle weighs the more the two forces change.

Grasp this, well you can try....what goes on within the barrel is all that matters. Your measurement 10 ft away is irrelevant.

The only reason the gun industry uses a formula created so you can compare recoil is that it's impossible to put a number on acceleration of the projectile, and at what point it occurs. Take any published calculator and get your numbers then if you have the shills, savvy, and funds to actually measure your actual recoil and you will find the numbers are basically nothing more than an educated guess. They are in no way accurate and should be disclosed as such. The engineering world is full of these generic formulas, like the one for thread stretch. You select a modifier for a family of metal and claim that's gods word. They totally ignore all the details that is reality. same as Newtons F=MA.

There has been such a squabble of this that the Hogdon clan removed their references to burn rates affecting recoil. The last I knew, Alliant still makes those statements, And I'd trust them far more so than your misguided ramble.

In theory a 30" barrel with a powder charge in the middle and a projectile on each side of the powder when fired would create the same kinetic energy. With a lab capable of measuring it, would likely show they in fact are not equal. Just don't try to tell an educated engineer that.

 

[TRA]

No I am just repeating classic facts of physics.
The quotes come from well established sources.

In your previous post you said that there was no velocity without acceleration. Everyone knows by definition that constant velocity is the result of zero acceleration. Until you quit posting nonsense no one will take your posts seriously. It is clear that you did not learn any physics in the 3rd or any other grade.

I've had just about enough of your narcissistic, condescending, and nasty attitude. A quick search of your posts shows you have trash talked just about everyone on this forum.

 

[ireload2]

You have proven you don"t know your physics so you have resorted to trash talk.
I will remind you that you posted earlier that there is no velocity without acceleration.
If you will go dig out a text on statics you will find that constant velocity is a static condition because there is no change in velocity.

Statics just for you

I've had just about enough of your narcissistic, condescending, and nasty attitude. A quick search of your posts shows you have trash talked just about everyone on this forum.