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
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Brass Hardnes and Annealing Test
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="4mesh063" data-source="post: 26336" data-attributes="member: 941"><p>Tailgunner, </p><p></p><p>Well, you could write what I know about the calibration on the head of a pin, if you used a big marker. </p><p></p><p>I will guess that what you meant was to have a ball size 5 times the thickness instead of the other way around. Knew what you meant though. I'm afraid that the Ames tester I have is only set up for B and C, Perhaps I could get another ball and maybe theres one in the case with the other anvils I missed. I'm not sure. I used a 3/8" anvil I believe, I didn't bring it home with me tonight so I can't say and yes, I had the IS radius facing up. I see you noticed I had some trouble getting a good "set". That was resolved by bending the piece with a pliers, just around the edges and then making sure that when the ball JUST touched, that the part could be turned freely (no 2 points touching) It seemed to work pretty well.</p><p></p><p>In any case, I'm not going to vouch for the rockwell as being ANSI perfect. But, the numbers did stay consistant regardless of the thickness as long as I treated the piece the same. For what I wanted to know, it was ok data. I figured to share the results and thought it was possible that the test would be skewed somewhat because of the thickness of the material. I will say this, the back side of the thinnest material tested has a "punch throug" mark roughly .080 to my eye, that is flattened on the anvil. That's the back side of course. The thicker material does not have that mark with the exception of the one that I annealed and got a similar reading of 34-36. That one also has a mark and for what it's worth, the mark is indistinguishable in diameter from the thinner material's mark. It's not punched through as far, but the size is the same within my view.</p><p></p><p>If you have access to a unit that would read on another scale, say E of F by all means, try the test yourself. You do loose a little blood cutting the cases up with a tinsnips though. You've been warned <img src="http://images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></p><p></p><p>Brent, As tail pointed out, and I specified at the beginning of my post, that was RB80 not RC80. The test is performed the same but instead of pressing a diamond into the part, you use a carbide or HSS ball penetrator of a calibrated radius for softer materials. They even have scales for plastics and that sort of thing though you won't find a tester like that in many machine shops. </p><p></p><p>Steve, I think you are getting the case red hot. Perhaps, white, at least bright yellow in 10 seconds Hehehe.</p><p></p><p>I tried the red hot thing and I ruined a bunch of cases. They were burnt to a crisp. Keep in mind again, my necks used to be a case body, so they're hard. Not like the guy who necks a case down and trims off .050. I did this test because I weld aluminum wire at work every day. The weld is done in a presswelder, no heat or electricity. This weld must pass through a crimper and survive so I started annealing the welds about a year and a half ago. I anneal the .063 wire about 1 second, with a bernzomatic torch using regular propane. Now, that wire is 5 times as thick as a case neck. It'll melt off in 2 or 3 seconds. Now, granted, that's not brass but the change is obvious. It's a limp noodle when I hit it for 1 second, and it's hard before. </p><p></p><p>My torch is the kind with the diffuser in the nozzle. The flame is not as nice as the old unit at work. That baby makes a real flame. Mine is roughly 5/8 to 3/4" diameter at it's greatest. The torch is a Bernz TS-4000 from Lowes about a year ago. I DO use Mapp gas instead of propane, but that's because it's what I've got for plumbing(Redid the whole house and didn't want to spend my life waiting for fittings to warm up). For this experiment, I placed the case neck into the flame about 1" from the orfice of the torch. My flame is about 2-1/2" in length if unobstructed. When doing this by hand with a cordless drill and fixture, I simply could not help myself making the time longer as I went along so I decided to make a gizmo that takes it out of my hands. I also spin the case (or the gizmo does now) so we are on the same page there. I think that I may have to move the case away from the flame some more because of the way I've attached the torch to the unit so I may be out near the tip of the flame like you are on the next try, unless I change the work I did tonight. I want less heat yet, so moving away may let me have more resolution with the timing. I will say this, the 1-1000 2-1000 is longer than the automated gizmo runs. I'd bet it does 1.5 seconds. I'm gonna have to run MPLab's simulator with the current code and see just how many machine cycles the case is left in place because I don't want to increase the time when I make some programming changes on it. Right now, it's clunky code and just has a loop in there to waste some time. Later, the user will be able to set the time with a switch and a manual run button. Then there will be a default setting for my run time since I have some friends who will most definitely use the thing till I make them one. I could also just keep a chip for me and one for them, whatever. </p><p></p><p>Oh yea, before I finish, about not leaving in the flame so long. That's what I am trying to get away from. I don't want the burnt crap on my cases, inside or out. If I was one of the guys who shot cases 3 times and threw em out, I wouldn't care, but I want mine to live forever. I am near convinced that there is no falloff in accuracy if the brass is cared for properly. I'll find out this season. </p><p></p><p>Just as another test, I may put a case in the oven at 500 and see how soft IT gets. I'd like to know really how hot you need to go till you get all your gonna get. Since you draw most tool steels at 300-700, I'd bet 1500 (red) is not necessary. I know for sure that if my gun doesn't shoot this year, it'll at least win the award for the prettiest ammo! No burn marks here!</p><p></p><p>And, Thank You for readin.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="4mesh063, post: 26336, member: 941"] Tailgunner, Well, you could write what I know about the calibration on the head of a pin, if you used a big marker. I will guess that what you meant was to have a ball size 5 times the thickness instead of the other way around. Knew what you meant though. I'm afraid that the Ames tester I have is only set up for B and C, Perhaps I could get another ball and maybe theres one in the case with the other anvils I missed. I'm not sure. I used a 3/8" anvil I believe, I didn't bring it home with me tonight so I can't say and yes, I had the IS radius facing up. I see you noticed I had some trouble getting a good "set". That was resolved by bending the piece with a pliers, just around the edges and then making sure that when the ball JUST touched, that the part could be turned freely (no 2 points touching) It seemed to work pretty well. In any case, I'm not going to vouch for the rockwell as being ANSI perfect. But, the numbers did stay consistant regardless of the thickness as long as I treated the piece the same. For what I wanted to know, it was ok data. I figured to share the results and thought it was possible that the test would be skewed somewhat because of the thickness of the material. I will say this, the back side of the thinnest material tested has a "punch throug" mark roughly .080 to my eye, that is flattened on the anvil. That's the back side of course. The thicker material does not have that mark with the exception of the one that I annealed and got a similar reading of 34-36. That one also has a mark and for what it's worth, the mark is indistinguishable in diameter from the thinner material's mark. It's not punched through as far, but the size is the same within my view. If you have access to a unit that would read on another scale, say E of F by all means, try the test yourself. You do loose a little blood cutting the cases up with a tinsnips though. You've been warned [img]images/icons/smile.gif[/img] Brent, As tail pointed out, and I specified at the beginning of my post, that was RB80 not RC80. The test is performed the same but instead of pressing a diamond into the part, you use a carbide or HSS ball penetrator of a calibrated radius for softer materials. They even have scales for plastics and that sort of thing though you won't find a tester like that in many machine shops. Steve, I think you are getting the case red hot. Perhaps, white, at least bright yellow in 10 seconds Hehehe. I tried the red hot thing and I ruined a bunch of cases. They were burnt to a crisp. Keep in mind again, my necks used to be a case body, so they're hard. Not like the guy who necks a case down and trims off .050. I did this test because I weld aluminum wire at work every day. The weld is done in a presswelder, no heat or electricity. This weld must pass through a crimper and survive so I started annealing the welds about a year and a half ago. I anneal the .063 wire about 1 second, with a bernzomatic torch using regular propane. Now, that wire is 5 times as thick as a case neck. It'll melt off in 2 or 3 seconds. Now, granted, that's not brass but the change is obvious. It's a limp noodle when I hit it for 1 second, and it's hard before. My torch is the kind with the diffuser in the nozzle. The flame is not as nice as the old unit at work. That baby makes a real flame. Mine is roughly 5/8 to 3/4" diameter at it's greatest. The torch is a Bernz TS-4000 from Lowes about a year ago. I DO use Mapp gas instead of propane, but that's because it's what I've got for plumbing(Redid the whole house and didn't want to spend my life waiting for fittings to warm up). For this experiment, I placed the case neck into the flame about 1" from the orfice of the torch. My flame is about 2-1/2" in length if unobstructed. When doing this by hand with a cordless drill and fixture, I simply could not help myself making the time longer as I went along so I decided to make a gizmo that takes it out of my hands. I also spin the case (or the gizmo does now) so we are on the same page there. I think that I may have to move the case away from the flame some more because of the way I've attached the torch to the unit so I may be out near the tip of the flame like you are on the next try, unless I change the work I did tonight. I want less heat yet, so moving away may let me have more resolution with the timing. I will say this, the 1-1000 2-1000 is longer than the automated gizmo runs. I'd bet it does 1.5 seconds. I'm gonna have to run MPLab's simulator with the current code and see just how many machine cycles the case is left in place because I don't want to increase the time when I make some programming changes on it. Right now, it's clunky code and just has a loop in there to waste some time. Later, the user will be able to set the time with a switch and a manual run button. Then there will be a default setting for my run time since I have some friends who will most definitely use the thing till I make them one. I could also just keep a chip for me and one for them, whatever. Oh yea, before I finish, about not leaving in the flame so long. That's what I am trying to get away from. I don't want the burnt crap on my cases, inside or out. If I was one of the guys who shot cases 3 times and threw em out, I wouldn't care, but I want mine to live forever. I am near convinced that there is no falloff in accuracy if the brass is cared for properly. I'll find out this season. Just as another test, I may put a case in the oven at 500 and see how soft IT gets. I'd like to know really how hot you need to go till you get all your gonna get. Since you draw most tool steels at 300-700, I'd bet 1500 (red) is not necessary. I know for sure that if my gun doesn't shoot this year, it'll at least win the award for the prettiest ammo! No burn marks here! And, Thank You for readin. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Brass Hardnes and Annealing Test
Top