To Anneal my brass or not?

[moondog]

I've had a Bench Source Annealing macine for about 7 years. I do it every time I shoot.
Easy enough to do. I will say after experimenting, my groups changed if I waited till the 3rd firing. Neck tension will change. Once you get comfortable with it, it's just one short extra step in the reloading process. Get the Templaq and follow the directions. Keep a few extra worn out cases to set it up. Keep the flame tip length the same each time. I find shorter flame works better than cranking it up.

 

[LEOK]

Just my opinion there really isn't any annealing machine beside Amp worth bothering with. Read
CHARACTERISATION STUDY OF BRASS CARTRIDGES FOR HIGH END COMPETITION TARGET SHOOTING
RYAN STEVENSON

 

[JimSC]

​

Just my opinion there really isn't any annealing machine beside Amp worth bothering with. Read
CHARACTERISATION STUDY OF BRASS CARTRIDGES FOR HIGH END COMPETITION TARGET SHOOTING
RYAN STEVENSON

Just another annealing will make my brass softer paper. No argument there. See if you can find a paper that tells you why annealed brass is better and how you can test your brass at your bench to see if you need to anneal and if your annealing method is effective

here is a table comparing fully annealed to full hard to spring tempered brass. Can anyone explain which of the properties affects neck tension of brass and why?

Property​	Annealed(OSO50)​	Full Hard(H04)​	Spring Tempered(H08)​
​	​	​	​
Elastic Modulus​	110 GPa​	110GPa​	110GPa​
Elongation at Break​	62.00%​	8.00%​	3.00%​
Fatigue Strength​	85MPa​	97MPa​	140 MPa​
Poissons ratio​	0.31​	0.31​	0.31​
Rockwell hardness​	64 F Scale​	80 B scale​	90 B Scale​
Shear Modulus​	40GPa​	40 GPa​	40 GPa​
Shear Strength​	230MPa​	300 MPa​	330 MPa​
Tensile Strength UTS​	330MPa​	610 MPa​	630 MPa​
Tensile Strength Yield​	110 MPa​	420 MPa​	430 MPa​

here is some help

Elastic Modulus measures an object or substance's resistance to being deformed elastically

Elongation at Break is the ratio between changed length and initial length after breakage of the test specimen.

Fatigue Strength is the highest stress that a material can withstand for a given number of cycles without breaking.

Rockwell hardness is a hardness scale based on indentation hardness of a material. B Scale uses 100 kgf pressure, F uses 60 kgf

Shear Modulus is the measure of the stiffness of materials

Shear Strength is the material property that describes a material’s resistance against a shear load before the component fails in shear

Tensile Strength UTS is the measure of the maximum stress that an object/material/structure can withstand without being elongated, stretched or pulled.

Tensile Strength Yield is the strength of a material representing the stress beyond which its deformation is plastic. Any deformation that occurs as a result of stress higher than the yield strength is permanent.

 

[CharlieNC]

​

Just another annealing will make my brass softer paper. No argument there. See if you can find a paper that tells you why annealed brass is better and how you can test your brass at your bench to see if you need to anneal and if your annealing method is effective

here is a table comparing fully annealed to full hard to spring tempered brass. Can anyone explain which of the properties affects neck tension of brass and why?

Property​	Annealed(OSO50)​	Full Hard(H04)​	Spring Tempered(H08)​
​	​	​	​
Elastic Modulus​	110 GPa​	110GPa​	110GPa​
Elongation at Break​	62.00%​	8.00%​	3.00%​
Fatigue Strength​	85MPa​	97MPa​	140 MPa​
Poissons ratio​	0.31​	0.31​	0.31​
Rockwell hardness​	64 F Scale​	80 B scale​	90 B Scale​
Shear Modulus​	40GPa​	40 GPa​	40 GPa​
Shear Strength​	230MPa​	300 MPa​	330 MPa​
Tensile Strength UTS​	330MPa​	610 MPa​	630 MPa​
Tensile Strength Yield​	110 MPa​	420 MPa​	430 MPa​

here is some help

Elastic Modulus measures an object or substance's resistance to being deformed elastically

Elongation at Break is the ratio between changed length and initial length after breakage of the test specimen.

Fatigue Strength is the highest stress that a material can withstand for a given number of cycles without breaking.

Rockwell hardness is a hardness scale based on indentation hardness of a material. B Scale uses 100 kgf pressure, F uses 60 kgf

Shear Modulus is the measure of the stiffness of materials

Shear Strength is the material property that describes a material’s resistance against a shear load before the component fails in shear

Tensile Strength UTS is the measure of the maximum stress that an object/material/structure can withstand without being elongated, stretched or pulled.

Tensile Strength Yield is the strength of a material representing the stress beyond which its deformation is plastic. Any deformation that occurs as a result of stress higher than the yield strength is permanent.

Jim in my experience I did not anneal until I experienced a major difference in bullet seating force and the resulting depth. In this case the neck diameter of the sized brass was quite variable, which is a sign of PLASTIC deformation, not elasticity or modulus. This is borne out when you compare fired vs sized dimensions, which are considerably different due to permanent deformation. I think you need info on the yield point, that is what is required to permanently deform the brass; the major differences for elongation at break may be an indication of this, although not the proper parameter.

 

[RegionRat]

@giannid ..."Hell, if I can get 6 or 7 firings out of Horandy and it still shoot accurately, I'd say the hell with annealing. Thoughts?"...

Annealing, accuracy, competition, bulk loading, brass management, etc., are not for everyone and even when someone decides that they need to go down these avenues, they are not the same for everyone.

You have answered your question for the most part. If you ever get to where you are picky about putting shots inside 10 rings and X rings, you may end up revisiting the neck tension and brass management issues. Unless someone needs to look at these issues, then I don't recommend annealing for them just because the high performance crowd is doing it. Neck turning and annealing isn't a thing for the general reloader.

Shooting can be explained with a more common metaphor about cars and driving. The folks who never drive at a track against a clock, probably shouldn't look to the ones that do for what tires to put on their daily driver. Race tires are not for everyone, but for those who compete they are very important.

Brass can be managed in many ways even at the highest levels. Some folks have set national and international records without annealing, others always anneal. Spending time on reloading and reloading tools is therapeutic for many and I get that, but most of the buyers of these tools are not shooting at the levels it takes to see the contribution these tools make.

Take your time and have fun. If you ever need to circle around to neck turning and annealing you will have plenty of advice and opinions to help. Shoot more, worry less.

 

[Dub]

@giannid ..."Hell, if I can get 6 or 7 firings out of Horandy and it still shoot accurately, I'd say the hell with annealing. Thoughts?"...

Annealing, accuracy, competition, bulk loading, brass management, etc., are not for everyone and even when someone decides that they need to go down these avenues, they are not the same for everyone.

You have answered your question for the most part. If you ever get to where you are picky about putting shots inside 10 rings and X rings, you may end up revisiting the neck tension and brass management issues. Unless someone needs to look at these issues, then I don't recommend annealing for them just because the high performance crowd is doing it. Neck turning and annealing isn't a thing for the general reloader.

Shooting can be explained with a more common metaphor about cars and driving. The folks who never drive at a track against a clock, probably shouldn't look to the ones that do for what tires to put on their daily driver. Race tires are not for everyone, but for those who compete they are very important.

Brass can be managed in many ways even at the highest levels. Some folks have set national and international records without annealing, others always anneal. Spending time on reloading and reloading tools is therapeutic for many and I get that, but most of the buyers of these tools are not shooting at the levels it takes to see the contribution these tools make.

Take your time and have fun. If you ever need to circle around to neck turning and annealing you will have plenty of advice and opinions to help. Shoot more, worry less.

this says it pretty well

 

[mdbruce]

27 posts and not one mention of @giannid making it to Nationals...

Christmas music and Hallmark movie channel must have us distracted

I concluded No for you after seeing the buzz words: surplus-ammo, mixed-brass, and semi-auto.

 

[rijndael]

FWIW: I don't just resize because I want consistent neck tension, I also do it to make my brass easier to work with (size/trim/etc). There is a significant effort difference when working with hardened vs. annealed brass. I notice it most with factory/sloppy chambered .308 and thin walled Winchester brass. The neck grows over .012" after firing.

 

[JimSC]

Jim in my experience I did not anneal until I experienced a major difference in bullet seating force and the resulting depth. In this case the neck diameter of the sized brass was quite variable, which is a sign of PLASTIC deformation, not elasticity or modulus. This is borne out when you compare fired vs sized dimensions, which are considerably different due to permanent deformation. I think you need info on the yield point, that is what is required to permanently deform the brass; the major differences for elongation at break may be an indication of this, although not the proper parameter.

Actually the yield point was the point I was attempting to make. The test is take a piece of brand new straight from the box Lapua, Alpha, Peterson etc seat a bullet then pull it. Then do the same with some work hardened brass that has the same neck OD and thickness. Alternately they can take a piece of home annealed brass and substitute it for the new brass. It is easy enough that any reloader can do it with nothing more than a hammer bullet puller and a pair of calipers.

Anyone can try this themselves. If they find there is no difference between the fired brass results and the annealed brass then annealing will not affect the neck tension in any way

 

[RegionRat]

@JimSC I see your question, but these posts can be hard to sort for rhetorical statements versus sincere questions. In the case that I take it literally I will try and answer the short version and will be happy to expand it short of breaking out NASTRAN...

Of the analysis methods that would show the difference between work hardened as in several cycles old, versus first firing or virgin annealed... both the distributed analysis and classical simplified analysis methods would take into account the material properties.

To your point, the ones that show the biggest differences in the two outcomes, are the ones that are making those big swings in the strength values. You and others are correct to point out that the modulus and Poisson's Ratios are virtually identical, however, the yield points are vastly different and we hit those points well inside the typical stress levels of sizing and bullet seating.

Between a coarse analysis that would look like a simple unsupported cylinder of the neck (classical simplification using simple equations), and the more complicated distributed finite difference methods (NASTRAN), the shoulder support is the biggest hurdle. Both methods are completely dependent on the input of accurate material properties. It is a lot of work to take the classical method in fine enough detail to calculate the stress and pressure the neck puts on the bullet as the stress breaks the yield level, and it is also a lot of work to load a NASTRAN model, but the NASTRAN method would pay back sooner in terms of illustrating the forces and pressures at the bullet is seated deeper and deeper.

Since our model of the neck geometry looks identical between the two cases of virgin versus hardened, it isn't hard to see in the table above that the hardened neck must hit a higher stress level to get to the tensile yield strength. If we just assume an otherwise identical load case (sized neck and bullet) and use the extremes on the table, the virgin neck starts to yield at 110 MPa and the cycled work hardened neck goes closer to 420 MPa.

I know for folks who don't spend all day long doing stress and strain calculations that this terminology isn't easy to live with, but the dimensions of stiffness and yield are separate properties and parts of what folks call stiffness all look the same. That makes it easier to plot the force of seating an actual bullet into a fully annealed neck and compare it to a neck that has been cycled, than it is to run these analyses and make Power Point charts out of them.

 

[CharlieNC]

Actually the yield point was the point I was attempting to make. The test is take a piece of brand new straight from the box Lapua, Alpha, Peterson etc seat a bullet then pull it. Then do the same with some work hardened brass that has the same neck OD and thickness. Alternately they can take a piece of home annealed brass and substitute it for the new brass. It is easy enough that any reloader can do it with nothing more than a hammer bullet puller and a pair of calipers.

Anyone can try this themselves. If they find there is no difference between the fired brass results and the annealed brass then annealing will not affect the neck tension in any way

I think you are confusing modulus (elastic slope following initial strain) with the yield point ( stress and strain where plastic deformation occurs). Plastic deformation obviously occurs since the neck diameter (and many other measurements) are different between fired and unfired brass. The ability to permanently deform a brass to the desired dimensions when sizing the brass is the key. More than one thing going on.

 

[K22]

If you're sole purpose is to extend case life then I say no. I get about 15 to 17 reloads per case in my 223 Rem, 243 Win, and 308 Win bolt rifles. I do full size every time with a .001 to .002 shoulder bump.

I don't anneal and never will because I'm just a varmint and predator hunter and haven't seen the need for it. Precision is important of course but field shooting skills is just as important. So I take a balanced approach to reloading meaning I try to load reasonably accurate varmint hunting ammunition using a few extra steps like deburring flash holes, uniforming primer pockets, full sizing with an optimum shoulder bump, dedicating a group of cases from the same lot to a specific rifle, using high quality bullets, etc. But expanding my reloading costs and time beyond what I'm doing now is not something I want to do just for a few more .1's of group size reduction. Quite honestly, if I miss in the field it's me not the rifle or the load that's to blame. I know the rifle and load is capable of hitting vital zone every time at the distances I shoot so when I miss it's me.

But the bench guys I know who shoot very tiny groups on a consistent basis all anneal, turn necks and use bushing dies. I know virtually nothing about annealing but they tell me that annealing provides for more uniform sizing and neck tension since it keep the brass from becoming too hard from repeated firings and sizings. Having consistent neck tension is obviously something that can enhance accuracy. Annealing experts please chime in of this.

This all comes down to identifying your personal standards for shooting and how much time and money you want to spend on achieving it. Reloading is not something I enjoy. After 50 years of sizing cases, dropping powder into cases, and seating bullets it has long lost it's allure. I'd rather be shooting or hunting.

 

[JimSC]

Why do you guys keep thinking I am arguing the yield point differences, I agree 100% with everything you say about the yield point. Neither will I argue that annealed metal is more malleable and ductile. But then I have never seen a bullet seating contest, if they ever do have one the annealed cases will win hands down

The question is how much can the brass be elongated to reach the yield point. Will inserting a bullet .003 larger than neck ID put the brass past yield point ? How about 002 larger? .001 larger? Is there a difference between brand new quality brass and some that has 5 firings with no annealing, 10 firings?

Everyone loves the AMP articles. So here is a question. In this test

https://www.ampannealing.com/articles/57/annealing-under-the-microscope/

shouldn't the annealed cases have a flat line from first firing to the 20th in every test by every shooter and the unannealed have erratic results. What I see is both annealed and unannealed are all over the place in terms of vertical POI and velocity. I see no difference in real world performance with the annealed cases in AMP's own study which reinforced my belief that annealing no matter how perfect will make a difference at the firing line

 

[Bginvestor]

Jim in my experience I did not anneal until I experienced a major difference in bullet seating force and the resulting depth. In this case the neck diameter of the sized brass was quite variable, which is a sign of PLASTIC deformation, not elasticity or modulus. This is borne out when you compare fired vs sized dimensions, which are considerably different due to permanent deformation. I think you need info on the yield point, that is what is required to permanently deform the brass; the major differences for elongation at break may be an indication of this, although not the proper parameter.

I agree w/ Charlie..

See pic below. Brass forming is not in the region of elasticity. If it was , the deformation would go back to original shape after load was removed.

What's happening here is that the brass is strain hardening and generating a permanent strain between the yield and fracture strain values. See pic.

stress = force divided by area
strain = delta change in length divided by length

I believe that multiple brass forming /firing cycles changes the stress - strain profile with each iteration. Even though the elastic region is the same annealed vs. full hard, the strain hardening profile under load changes.

That is why if you measure seating force after each forming iteration, load increases.

For me, once you get the "sweet" spot in load development, I don't want that one piece of brass to work harden more than the others which can create a flyer. I HATE flyers at 1000 yards. Many ways to get a flyer, but I believe this is one way to get them.

Hope this helps and doesn't confuse the topic more.

PS I couldn't find brass strain hardening data on google. ;(

 

[INTJ]

In LR BR, I haven't seen any difference with annealing or not and I tested for that one season. I choose to anneal simply to extend the life of the brass, and since I have an AMP with Aztec it's fast.

Some in LR BR anneal and some don't. Some of the ones that don't consider the brass only goes with a particular barrel. A couple hundred cases with 6-7 firings on them is usually enough to last the life of the barrel. Lapua cases last that long un-annealed and maybe even longer. With annealing they can last a very long time and still be competitive, wearing out a few barrels.

It's important to remember that just about everything works if one is disciplined and consistent in their processes. An exception to that might be the old "anneal every 3 firings" approach, unless you retune the load after annealing.

If brass isn't annealed, the lot generally work hardens together and changes slowly. Brass annealed every time stays consistent. However, going three firings then annealing is introducing a more significant change that may show up in the target each time the brass is annealed.

 

[Bginvestor]

Why do you guys keep thinking I am arguing the yield point differences, I agree 100% with everything you say about the yield point. Neither will I argue that annealed metal is more malleable and ductile. But then I have never seen a bullet seating contest, if they ever do have one the annealed cases will win hands down

The question is how much can the brass be elongated to reach the yield point. Will inserting a bullet .003 larger than neck ID put the brass past yield point ? How about 002 larger? .001 larger? Is there a difference between brand new quality brass and some that has 5 firings with no annealing, 10 firings?

Everyone loves the AMP articles. So here is a question. In this test

https://www.ampannealing.com/articles/57/annealing-under-the-microscope/

shouldn't the annealed cases have a flat line from first firing to the 20th in every test by every shooter and the unannealed have erratic results. What I see is both annealed and unannealed are all over the place in terms of vertical POI and velocity. I see no difference in real world performance with the annealed cases in AMP's own study which reinforced my belief that annealing no matter how perfect will make a difference at the firing line

JimSC,

No, I don't expect annealed cases to show a flat line, because it is test data which is a function of many parameters.. Variability is expected.

However, if you believe the data, you cannot argue that ES spreads are greatly reduced, and MOA's are demonstrated to be greatly lowered by over 30%. That improvement is HUGE. What's not to love?

 

[RegionRat]

I will add a little more to the discussion at the risk of the controversy it may add, because we are now deep enough to say this... I am pointing out one more thing that needs to be managed in general, and needs to be taken into account or testing results can be confused.

The neck properties that affect the hoop stress and "grip force" on the bullet are due in part to the "pressure" the case neck puts around that bullet, but that pressure is multiplied by a complex friction coefficient before we get our result. Don't underestimate the contribution to that total grip scatter made by the scatter in the friction coefficient.

If we think of the general friction simplification used when we show a body resting on a surface due to gravity, the force required to slide that body is roughly Mu X N where Mu is the friction coefficient and N is the normal force. We like to say the sliding forces are roughly 15% to 30% of the normal force, but mother nature can be cruel. When things go per plan, we will say that the ratio of the grip force on the bullet follows a typical ratio of about 1/5 to 1/3 of that force applied by the neck. If the friction coefficient doubles, then so does the grip force and so on. This is why things like galling can be so detrimental and galling is easier when two similar metals are very clean. Friction can be as difficult to control as work hardening condition.

The friction coefficient adds as much scatter and difficulty to the discussion as the stress/strain issues and work hardening do. It is one more thing that requires management by the loader to avoid scatter. Keeping the friction coefficient lower, means the percentage of change in the brass is reflected lower on the total. So, it pays to keep it lower and the same every time.

 

[JimSC]

JimSC,

No, I don't expect annealed cases to show a flat line, because it is test data which is a function of many parameters.. Variability is expected.

However, if you believe the data, you cannot argue that ES spreads are greatly reduced, and MOA's are demonstrated to be greatly lowered by over 30%. That improvement is HUGE. What's not to love?

the fact that the annealed cases should have been more consistent, in particular in the hands of the world class shooters while the non annealed batches should have shown steadily worse performance with each firing. Those numbers in that article look good at first glance but looking at the whole picture they really are not convincing.

All the way around l that was not much of a test considering that it should have been ran double blind to prevent the placebo effect. I would have thought that engineers would know better, that looked like something marketing thought up

I guess I am just down to the point where I am trying to get that last 2% now and would love to find the magic pill to get me there kind of hoping to be convinced a AMP would get me there. So far common sense has prevented me from pulling the trigger on one

 

[Bginvestor]

I will add a little more to the discussion at the risk of the controversy it may add, because we are now deep enough to say this... I am pointing out one more thing that needs to be managed in general, and needs to be taken into account or testing results can be confused.

The neck properties that affect the hoop stress and "grip force" on the bullet are due in part to the "pressure" the case neck puts around that bullet, but that pressure is multiplied by a complex friction coefficient before we get our result. Don't underestimate the contribution to that total grip scatter made by the scatter in the friction coefficient.

If we think of the general friction simplification used when we show a body resting on a surface due to gravity, the force required to slide that body is roughly Mu X N where Mu is the friction coefficient and N is the normal force. We like to say the sliding forces are roughly 15% to 30% of the normal force, but mother nature can be cruel. When things go per plan, we will say that the ratio of the grip force on the bullet follows a typical ratio of about 1/5 to 1/3 of that force applied by the neck. If the friction coefficient doubles, then so does the grip force and so on. This is why things like galling can be so detrimental and galling is easier when two similar metals are very clean. Friction can be as difficult to control as work hardening condition.

The friction coefficient adds as much scatter and difficulty to the discussion as the stress/strain issues and work hardening do. It is one more thing that requires management by the loader to avoid scatter. Keeping the friction coefficient lower, means the percentage of change in the brass is reflected lower on the total. So, it pays to keep it lower and the same every time.

RR,

absolutely correct. friction is fickle , and scatter in friction coefficient can be high.. I have considered this in my reload process.

But, going to back to anneal versus non-annealed, I have taken data which shows "half" the seating force to a fresh piece of annealed brass compared to another that was formed/fired 3 to 4 times.

 

[RegionRat]

I'm in agreement with @JimSC on the field test results on the AMP web site article. They should have been run double blind. I found myself in the choir with that feedback when they posted that stuff, so most of us would have handled that effort differently. I do like their machine and think it does a great job, so I don't want to sound like a detractor, but their marketing and "studies" come off like they were done by used car salesmen...