Weighing primers testing results ANYONE DOING IT ???

[manitou210]

View attachment 1053432 Probably thing i am nuts well there is only one primer i use now es 0f 5 hard to beat look at speeds
of light primers verses heavy
speed on left is lab-radar on right is speed at 900 m on silver mountain electronic targets
only Fed Gold Match for me they ere not weighed

 

[mikecr]

Is this an IQ test?
How about hypothesis, testing method, results/trends, and what you want from us.

 

[group therapy]

What?????

 

[Medic505]

Paging Dr. Guffy....... Paging Dr. Guffy

 

[Falfan2017]

I'd say you got a ton of variables going on here. Focus in a bit. If you calculate your standard deviations and max spreads you haven't demonstrated any value to sorting primers by weight.

Your unsorted br4 shows a max spread of 22 and a standard deviation of 8.14.

When you sorted them by weight the max spread was even higher as was the standard deviation of 9.17 on the 368 batch.
It does seem that fed gms produce the most consistent speeds with a standard deviation of 1.87 on the first run.

I would say you don't have enough data points with only 5 shots of each to draw much of a conclusion but based on this data I would say there's no benefit to sorting and if you want consisten velocities use the fed gms with this powder.

 

[Dusty Stevens]

What did the actual targets measure?

 

[Ned Ludd]

The targets can look like anything you want them to and it won't matter. If the velocity results aren't statistically significant, no conclusions from observing the targets with regard to primer effect can be drawn.

The hypothesis here is that primer weight can be used as a sorting method to select sub-groups of different brisance. Personally, intuition tells me it's voodoo; however, there are those that really seem to buy into it, so I'll at least keep an open mind and entertain the notion there may be something to it until I see conclusive evidence one way or the other.

To test the hypothesis, it's usually a good idea to start out by devising the simplest test possible, with the widest possible difference between potential outcomes. In this case, I would suggest weighing a sufficient number of primers to create two groups (heavy and light), where each group is at the far end of each weight extreme. It would be best to test at a bare minimum at least 20 shots of each, recording velocity, and group spread. I would probably break up the 20 shots into 4 x 5-shot groups and take the average group spread. If primer weight makes a difference in brisance, and therefore velocity, directly comparing sub-groups composed of the lightest and heaviest primers you can weigh will give the the best possible chance to demonstrate that there actually is a difference in brisance that can be sorted on the basis of weight. If you can't demonstrate a statistically significant difference in brisance and velocity between the very lightest and heaviest primers in a given Lot#, you definitely won't be able to show there is a difference between small groups that span the entire weight range found within a given Lot.

 

[Ggmac]

Since the primers are NOT a single component , I don't see the benefit .
You can't disassemble the cup ,anvil ,powder slurry , and disc . Sooo , which one will be the offending weight difference?

 

[JBO]

Since the primers are NOT a single component , I don't see the benefit .
You can't disassemble the cup ,anvil ,powder slurry , and disc . Sooo , which one will be the offending weight difference?

Nailed it !

 

[Mulligan]

Not disagreeing with some of the assumptions above, however I will argue, pondering and then fleshing out the issue is a good thing. Vetting the issue on this site is good to get other opinions and help with writing the “problem statement”.
I believe testing is the fun stuff, after framing it up correctly.
I see lots of criticism for not framing “it” up correctly and not a lot of help to @manitou210
@Ned Ludd gave it a good go, thanks for that.
If I had a scale accurate enough, I would be testing this myself. I may anyway, and see how it goes.

I expect a few targets shot round robin with the heaviest and lightest primers at distance will separate the fly sh_t from the pepper if it has any merit.

Suggestions welcome

Edit
Is the 1s 64 Sartorius accurate enough to separate the primers? Maybe I will invest in a new scale and have some fun.

CW

 

[Ggmac]

Not disagreeing with some of the assumptions above, however I will argue, pondering and then fleshing out the issue is a good thing. Vetting the issue on this site is good to get other opinions and help with writing the “problem statement”.
I believe testing is the fun stuff, after framing it up correctly.
I see lots of criticism for not framing “it” up correctly and not a lot of help to @manitou210
@Ned Ludd gave it a good go, thanks for that.
If I had a scale accurate enough, I would be testing this myself. I may anyway, and see how it goes.

I expect a few targets shot round robin with the heaviest and lightest primers at distance will separate the fly sh_t from the pepper if it has any merit.

Suggestions welcome

Edit
Is the 1s 64 Sartorius accurate enough to separate the primers? Maybe I will invest in a new scale and have some fun.

CW

Just pointing out the problem with weighing the component. It's like weighing the entire cartridge.

 

[Mulligan]

Just pointing out the problem with weighing the component. It's like weighing the entire cartridge.

No argument, what so ever.
But how do we know unless we test it? The answer will likely lead to more questions than answers.
CW

 

[6MMsteve]

must be tested at 1000yds for any real conclusion IMHO

 

[retired]

data sheets are not targets
NO TARGET, NO DATA.
and you will not see a diff till at long range
maybe 600 but most is done at 1000.

View attachment 1053431 View attachment 1053431 View attachment 1053432 View attachment 1053431 Probably thing i am nuts well there is only one primer i use now es 0f 5 hard to beat look at speeds
of light primers verses heavy
speed on left is lab-radar on right is speed at 900 m on silver mountain electronic targets
only Fed Gold Match for me they ere not weighed

 

[retired]

g.. i thought the same thing.
i was proven wrong. the consistency of the cup anvil and sealant,
makes the priming compound "weighable".
results seen on targets at 1000.
( no it is not perfect but it is measurable on targets)

does anyone on this thread shoot competiton br at 1000 ?
if not it is just noise

Since the primers are NOT a single component , I don't see the benefit .
You can't disassemble the cup ,anvil ,powder slurry , and disc . Sooo , which one will be the offending weight difference?

 

[Mulligan]

must be tested at 1000yds for any real conclusion IMHO

I suggest, if a difference can be seen at 300 yards why would testing further be needed?


Test at the distance you compete or “play” at and call it good.

I like testing at a grand, as it makes the data easier to see. However the 1000 yard range is a bit further of a drive so sometimes I test first at 600.
That range in an hour closer to home.
CW

 

[Ned Ludd]

It has been stated in other threads here that the weight of the primer anvils/cups are extremely uniform. Whether you actually believe that or not is one thing, but if true, it means it would be relatively easy to determine weight difference between the primers' internal combustible materials with an accurate analytical balance.

I have never personally disassembled spent primers in order to clean and then weight the anvils and cups. I don't want to do this. I have never personally weighed primers in an attempt to sort them into sub-groups of different brisance. I don't want to do this. Other than comparing primers from different manufacturers to see if one brand gives lower ES with a given load, I have never personally carried out any of these kinds of primer experiments. I don't want to do this.

The reason I don't want to do this is that if sorting primers by weight turns out to have a real and statistically significant affect on brisance, and therefore velocity, I will then be compelled to add sorting primers by weight to the sickeningly long list of other tedious and painful sh*t I already do in the quest for consistent handloads. I find I really seem to stay much happier, more satisfied, and emotionally whole by letting someone else carry out these experiments and reading about them here, after which I can then critique their approaches and results with minimal effort .

 

[Mulligan]

g.. i thought the same thing.
i was proven wrong. the consistency of the cup anvil and sealant,
makes the priming compound "weighable".
results seen on targets at 1000.
( no it is not perfect but it is measurable on targets)

does anyone on this thread shoot competiton br at 1000 ?
if not it is just noise

Are you saying you sort primers by weight and the difference is so small the signal gets lost in the noise of other variables?

CW

 

[Mulligan]

It has been stated in other threads here that the weight of the primer anvils/cups are extremely uniform. Whether you actually believe that or not is one thing, but if true, it means it would be relatively easy to determine weight difference between the primers' internal combustible materials with an accurate analytical balance.

I have never personally disassembled spent primers in order to clean and then weight the anvils and cups. I don't want to do this. I have never personally weighed primers in an attempt to sort them into sub-groups of different brisance. I don't want to do this. Other than comparing primers from different manufacturers to see if one brand gives lower ES with a given load, I have never personally carried out any of these kinds of primer experiments. I don't want to do this.

The reason I don't want to do this is that if sorting primers by weight turns out to have a real and statistically significant affect on brisance, and therefore velocity, I will then be compelled to add sorting primers by weight to the sickeningly long list of other tedious and painful sh*t I already do in the quest for consistent handloads. I find I really seem to stay much happier, more satisfied, and emotionally whole by letting someone else carry out these experiments and reading about them here, after which I can then critique their approaches and results with minimal effort .

That’s awesome!
I was just up at Dan Dowlings shop picking up my rifle and we were discussing this very topic. Dan is a short range BR shooter, he said if he had to do all the stuff the long range guys were doing he would hang it up and take up golf......”shooting is supposed to be fun”!
CW

 

[Ned Ludd]

Weight differential is the argument being used against weighing primers as a useful method of sorting. If the cup and anvil outweigh the primer compound by a significant margin, normal variance in their weights makes trying to estimate the primer compound weight by taking the differential a useless exercise. On the other hand, if the weights of the cups and anvils are extremely uniform, it would absolutely be possible to estimate the weight (amount) of primer compound by weighing the entire primer. As I stated above, I really don't want to do this.

On the other hand, figuring out whether it is even possible or feasible to do it would merely require weighing of a goodly number of new primers (several hundred ought to do it), then firing said primers, removing them, separating the anvils and cups of each, cleaning them thoroughly to remove the combustion residue, weighing each anvil and cup with an accurate laboratory analytical balance, and finally, statistical analysis of the resulting data.