Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Reloading
Relative Burn Rate Charts. . .
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Hand Skills" data-source="post: 1453821" data-attributes="member: 103303"><p>It's true, burn rate is just one characteristic. I have seen a couple of different 'units' used to measure burn rate, but 'relative' burn rate charts seem to be most available. Given lot to lot variances and differing expansion ratios powders can easily 'change places' on the relative burn rate chart, but it does offer a place to start. </p><p></p><p>The other two characteristics I consider when choosing a powder are energy density, (usually in kJ/kg) and bulk density (usually relative - how many grains fit in a given case or volume). These stats are harder to find, and more often a dynamic model like Quickload can be very helpful for predicting how different powders will behave in a given set of conditions (cartridge, bullet, OAL, case capacity, barrel length etc.).</p><p></p><p>RL-26 is a good example. It's listed as slower than H1000. However, it has a significantly higher energy density as well as a higher bulk density. RL-26 works really well in a .270win with 140-150gr bullets. Even though H1000 is a faster powder, with its low bulk density and low energy density, I can't fit enough of it in the case to create optimal velocity. In fact, RL-26 behaves a lot like IMR7828ssc in the .270 a which resides quite a few spots up the burn chart.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Hand Skills, post: 1453821, member: 103303"] It's true, burn rate is just one characteristic. I have seen a couple of different 'units' used to measure burn rate, but 'relative' burn rate charts seem to be most available. Given lot to lot variances and differing expansion ratios powders can easily 'change places' on the relative burn rate chart, but it does offer a place to start. The other two characteristics I consider when choosing a powder are energy density, (usually in kJ/kg) and bulk density (usually relative - how many grains fit in a given case or volume). These stats are harder to find, and more often a dynamic model like Quickload can be very helpful for predicting how different powders will behave in a given set of conditions (cartridge, bullet, OAL, case capacity, barrel length etc.). RL-26 is a good example. It's listed as slower than H1000. However, it has a significantly higher energy density as well as a higher bulk density. RL-26 works really well in a .270win with 140-150gr bullets. Even though H1000 is a faster powder, with its low bulk density and low energy density, I can't fit enough of it in the case to create optimal velocity. In fact, RL-26 behaves a lot like IMR7828ssc in the .270 a which resides quite a few spots up the burn chart. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Reloading
Relative Burn Rate Charts. . .
Top