HELP WITH SATERLEE VELOCITY TEST

[25WSM]

No one said it burns inconsistent and then magically is consistent. But the same thing happens every time you run this test with any combo. You find spots where the velocity doesn't change even though the powder is increased. Sometimes for up to 1 grain of charge increase there is no velocity change. These flat spots are nodes that are much more stable to shoot in than in between them where velocity increases with each charge change. Common sense. Just because some people don't think it works doesn't bother me at all. They can develop loads any way they like and I won't bash them for it. But it does work for me and the many I have taught it too.
Yes I did mean .2 grains, too much time with micrometers in my hands.
Shep

 

[PNWdude67]

That slight click is the first sign of pressure

Actually, it's the sign on the 4th or 5th firing of his brass that his FL sizing die is not sizing the base of the case enough. Primary extraction issue. Get a small base die and problem solved.

 

[Matt_C]

I've used the Satterlee method for the first time to get a 243 fine tuned. Prior to that I tried Dan Newberry's OCW method and discovered "I'm not smart enough for that method". I'm barely smart enough to follow Scott's method. Now I'm not a bench rest or PRS shooter, just a hunter but it worked very very well for me.

 

[User4302021]

No one said it burns inconsistent and then magically is consistent. But the same thing happens every time you run this test with any combo. You find spots where the velocity doesn't change even though the powder is increased. Sometimes for up to 1 grain of charge increase there is no velocity change. These flat spots are nodes that are much more stable to shoot in than in between them where velocity increases with each charge change. Common sense. Just because some people don't think it works doesn't bother me at all. They can develop loads any way they like and I won't bash them for it. But it does work for me and the many I have taught it too.
Yes I did mean .2 grains, too much time with micrometers in my hands.
Shep

Well, to what do you attribute the variation then?

Brass, brass prep, primers, bullet, seating depth are all the same (or should be). The only variable you are introducing is powder charge.

Either the powder burn stutters in certain places giving velocity nodes, or it doesn't.

Please tell me what causes this. If it isn't a random artifact of overlapping ES, then what is it? How is it caused?

 

[25WSM]

I don't know the exact science of why a node forms in the different charge weights. But it is definitely not random. Do the same test 5 times and it will be the same nodes that appear. I really don't care why they form. I know they do and use them to develop loads that shoot great.
Shep

 

[25WSM]

The same same nodes in the satterlee test also seem to be the same bullets that cluster together when doing ladder test also. So explain why when doing a ladder of increasing powder charges bullets travel up the paper vertically. Then there is a cluster of bullets that don't move vertically and stay on the same waterline. Then as you proceed the bullets move vertically again for a few then cluster up on the same waterline again. Same nodes showing up from a different test. So if you don't believe in the satterlee method then you surely can't believe in ladder testing either. Those little clusters must be random right. Well they are absolutely not random if they are repeatable.
To prove it do a ladder test round robin with 3 each of different charge weights. All the clusters will have all the bullets from the nodes in them. If it was random there would be no pattern to it.
Shep

 

[entoptics]

I don't know the exact science of why a node forms in the different charge weights. But it is definitely not random. Do the same test 5 times and it will be the same nodes that appear. I really don't care why they form. I know they do and use them to develop loads that shoot great.
Shep

I've never seen anyone do the same test 5 times and post their results. You know why? Most people find their keys in the last place they look...

Please post your targets or chrony results that show 5X reproducibility if you have them. Anyone else who doesn't believe that normally distributed variation is a real thing, please attempt this experiment yourself, and post the results.

In fact, I have tried 3 times (e.g. 3 shot per charge, round robbin, ladders at distance, using a LabRadar so recording vertical and velocity), and have never once seen the same "node" 3 times. On two different occasions in the last couple years, I also shot 2 shot per charge ladders at distance, realized I hadn't gotten to maximum pressure, so I then repeated the test a week or so later, overlapping the first test's top "node", and low and behold it was gone, or had moved up a charge weight or two. In other words, it was completely predictable random variation in a small sample set.

To be clear, I don't think OCW/Charge/Satterlee nodes exist. There's no credible explanation for the process. That being said, vertical/horizontal stringing nodes (i.e. "Ladders") may exist due to harmonic "whip", but the rifle/shooter/ammunition combo that's necessary to actually see them is well outside most folks' budget and skill.

Also, for anyone who doesn't like my simulations, then you don't like Brian Litz's WEZ either. Also, you clearly shouldn't ever quote your SD numbers again, or explain how they affect long range performance, since you obviously must think they are meaningless too....

 

[25WSM]

So who said es and SD doesn't matter now.? I specifically said that the upper portion of the nodes have tighter es and SD and that one of the reasons that I drop the bottom 50% off the node. An easy explanation for your ladder being different on a different day is the atmospheric conditions. Small changes in atmospheric conditions chan take your gun out of tune. That's why I tune my 1000 yd rifles the day before each match. And I do it in the evening when the temperature is closest to when I'm shooting the next day. And you mention folks that don't have rifles or skills good enough to see repeatable results. Hogwash. I think most on this site have rifles capable and can shoot well enough to see consistent results. Maybe you don't and that's why you see these test so random.
The OP asked for help with his satterlee test not to be criticized and told it doesn't work. If you can't make it work and don't believe in it then obviously you can't help him.
Shep

 

[Bob Wright]

I am working up a new load for my 6.5x284 norma.
I did a coarse bullet seating test of a Lapua Scenar 139 gr at the minimum charge weight of 48.5 gr H4831SC with 140 grain bullets from my Berger manual.
The winner was .025" off the lands.
The following pictures should tell the story of how this test went using a Magnetospeed.
Berger's first edition manual says max load is 51.1 grains of H4831SC. So, I thought I would load up to 54.5 grains thinking I would surely hit max in my rifle before then. Well, I never did hit max.
The case pictured is the 54.5 grain load.
After checking Berger's website, I see they list 53.7 grains as the max for H4831SC with 140 gr bullets.
Is there a second edition Berger manual out with new maxs? I'm not sure why the difference in max loads.
Well, back to my original question.....
From the results on the target, good speed nodes don't show good accuracy.
Should I reshoot good velocity nodes or good accuracy nodes?
In my mind, I know speed nodes are important for long range work.
Conditions were mild and the barrel was never hot to the touch before each shot.
Where would you go from here?
I am also going to continue up the powder charge until I find max in my rifle.View attachment 207628View attachment 207630View attachment 207631View attachment 207632

Hopefully, you can pick out enough info in which you can put together a plan where you can start seeing good results in finding where your handloading settles in to achieve your goal.
Sometimes it's best to take what you read, sort it out and just do your best to complete your load testing.
Hoping to see your results soon.
There's a whole bunch of guys that consistently place high in championships, doing what they do best. Punch paper and win. We learn from them.

 

[entoptics]

So who said es and SD doesn't matter now.?

People who try and interpret noise as data, not me. Please read my posts more carefully in the future.

An easy explanation for your ladder being different on a different day is the atmospheric conditions. Small changes in atmospheric conditions chan take your gun out of tune. That's why I tune my 1000 yd rifles the day before each match. And I do it in the evening when the temperature is closest to when I'm shooting the next day.

Thank you for proving my point. Perhaps I'll try that every night the next time I'm on a 5 day hunt...

The OP asked for help with his satterlee test not to be criticized and told it doesn't work. If you can't make it work and don't believe in it then obviously you can't help him.

Again, read my posts more carefully. I never criticized the OP, but I concur that I may not have tried hard enough to help him. He's got a lot of posts, and so I assumed my first post made my point, but I'll give it another shot, without graphs...

@NW Hunter. This all assumes you've got your reloading practices and shooting skills pretty solid...

If it were me, and you think you've found near the top end for pressure, then I'd load 3 rounds each from about the max, at about 1% increments down (in your case 0.4-0.5 grains). Perhaps 3 sets. This is to ensure you're truly well away from overpressure issues. Hell, leave them in the sun for a few minutes, just to be sure you're golden.

From here (assuming groups aren't crazy for some reason), choose a charge that sits 20 to 30 fps below max, then do a seating depth run, with perhaps 5 at each length. Go from 0.02 out in 0.3 - 0.4 increments. Or just load to maximum length for your mag or 0.020 off the lands, whichever is longest. In my experience long is best, if only for more powder capacity, but not always.

At this point, shoot a few smallish batches of your ammo to confirm you're getting the same results day in day out. 10 shot groups (too bad no LabRadar, as I chrony everything). Fix any problems in your system that you notice (confirm drops, ensure temp/weather stability, realize you don't have a spare rangefinder battery in the case, etc.)

You're now 100 rounds in. Only 50 more than if you ignore basic statistics and burn these bullets at the range striving to find "forgiving ammo" before even confirming if your rifle can shoot OK with "crappy ammo".

Now's the hard part. Go shoot. Carefully and purposefully. Spend your time trying to hit what you want, as apposed to keeping bullets in small clusters not quite in the X. That being said, continually monitor your system. Shoot groups, try different bullets, play with ladders, adjust your eye relief, etc. Shooting is fun. It's unlikely, but possible you'll find something special. And even if you don't, you'll know the rifle like the back of your hand, and it will put them where you want.

Just make sure your action screws are tight, and that you're not looking at a tree (one little cluster) and thinking it's the forest (pew...................................................................ting).

 

[milo-2]

.

To be clear, I don't think OCW/Charge/Satterlee nodes exist. There's no credible explanation for the process. That being said, vertical/horizontal stringing nodes (i.e. "Ladders") may exist due to harmonic "whip", but the rifle/shooter/ammunition combo that's necessary to actually see them is well outside most folks' budget and skill.

Also, for anyone who doesn't like my simulations, then you don't like Brian Litz's WEZ either. Also, you clearly shouldn't ever quote your SD numbers again, or explain how they affect long range performance, since you obviously must think they are meaningless too....

I do not think the OCW method and the "S" method are the same thing. Doesn't the OCW represent impacts in the same location regardless of velocity, therefore a range of velocities that remain constant. Where the S method is flat spots in velocity. which really only Hodgdon powders are candidates for using this method, I have never saw a VV, Norma, or Alliant powder plateau unless it is right at max efficiency of the platform and when it exits with more powder, you'd basically be into pressure spikes.
I shouldn't do this, but I think 25wssm is using an extremely modified S method, and making things work in his favor with a chrono as a integral tool in his process.
And I am one who doesn't buy into wez, probability of a hit, surely doesn't mean if my loads are tuned for 80% of the max distance I plan to shoot my rifle, I cannot admire any numbers produced. Just like 25, he is tuning his load for 1K benchrest the day before a match.
OCW, Ladder, and OBT can all be tied together in a decent load, trying to separate them and decipher which one is dominant in the triangle is where confusion sets in. I feel OBT is real, it is just impossible for 99.9% of guys to actually measure.
Group size and chrono numbers shrink in accordance with each other, and they have forever, but the tightest group holding waterline at distance doesn't necessarily have to have the tightest numbers.
Now there is a guy on SH saying to actually collect correct chrono data, 50 shot strings are needed as a sample size. Most of my barrels are shot out in 1500 rds, not for me. Plus, guys have been shooting tiny groups for decades at 1K not realizing that Science now plays in the game.

 

[asd9055]

People who try and interpret noise as data, not me. Please read my posts more carefully in the future.


Thank you for proving my point. Perhaps I'll try that every night the next time I'm on a 5 day hunt...



Again, read my posts more carefully. I never criticized the OP, but I concur that I may not have tried hard enough to help him. He's got a lot of posts, and so I assumed my first post made my point, but I'll give it another shot, without graphs...

@NW Hunter. This all assumes you've got your reloading practices and shooting skills pretty solid...

If it were me, and you think you've found near the top end for pressure, then I'd load 3 rounds each from about the max, at about 1% increments down (in your case 0.4-0.5 grains). Perhaps 3 sets. This is to ensure you're truly well away from overpressure issues. Hell, leave them in the sun for a few minutes, just to be sure you're golden.

From here (assuming groups aren't crazy for some reason), choose a charge that sits 20 to 30 fps below max, then do a seating depth run, with perhaps 5 at each length. Go from 0.02 out in 0.3 - 0.4 increments. Or just load to maximum length for your mag or 0.020 off the lands, whichever is longest. In my experience long is best, if only for more powder capacity, but not always.

At this point, shoot a few smallish batches of your ammo to confirm you're getting the same results day in day out. 10 shot groups (too bad no LabRadar, as I chrony everything). Fix any problems in your system that you notice (confirm drops, ensure temp/weather stability, realize you don't have a spare rangefinder battery in the case, etc.)

You're now 100 rounds in. Only 50 more than if you ignore basic statistics and burn these bullets at the range striving to find "forgiving ammo" before even confirming if your rifle can shoot OK with "crappy ammo".

Now's the hard part. Go shoot. Carefully and purposefully. Spend your time trying to hit what you want, as apposed to keeping bullets in small clusters not quite in the X. That being said, continually monitor your system. Shoot groups, try different bullets, play with ladders, adjust your eye relief, etc. Shooting is fun. It's unlikely, but possible you'll find something special. And even if you don't, you'll know the rifle like the back of your hand, and it will put them where you want.

Just make sure your action screws are tight, and that you're not looking at a tree (one little cluster) and thinking it's the forest (pew...................................................................ting).

Many roads lead to Rome. Some will take you there faster and at a lower cost. (OCW (Dan Newberry), Satterllee, Variation of Ladder Test, Modelling first, combination of all or some, and always end up with the proof of the pudding, the final shots on target)
I don't need to know the precise physics why I stay on a bicycle, yet I am able to ride it to where I want to go.
Interior ballistics is a very complex subject of which I know very little. However, why the difference each time? Because each case is different, each primer is different and each bullet is different along with environmental factors. Some things you have no power over. You try to adjust the ones you do. I know however, if you use one of these methods I will get consistent groups on a target.
Do you truly want to know about nodes? Read Chris Long's OBT. You don't believe in it, no problem. Google FEA (Finite Element Analysis) of a rifle barrel.
Various people have experimented and developed methods of finding these nodes. Some are improvements or previous. Others are totally different, but they work. They just don't get there at the same time (number of shots)
Even your method, whether you like to admit it or not, I am willing to bet is a combination of OCW and some ladder variation.
Now, my main gripe. The OP asked for help of interpreting his data. You don't believe in what he is doing? no problem. No need to say anything.
It just never fails, someone will post asking about something and a few people out there will attack instead of help. Take time. Read and understand the post. If you have something positive to add, great. If you don't, no problem. You don't need to hear your self talk every time there is a post.
I am done with this post.

Good and Safe Shooting Everyone!!!

 

[User4302021]

OCW maps gross barrel harmonics, it has little to do with ES, SD, or any other measure of velocity.

If you have ever shot an Audette ladder at distance, you have seen the exact same barrel harmonics show up on the target. The POI moves up and down as well, it is just harder to read and has much more noise to sort out of it.

Any field shooter would do just as well to work up till they find pressure, then back off a safe amount, and adjust seating depth until the group comes together. There is a range where the powder is burning optimally, and that is typically anywhere within 1.5%-2% of max charge.

 

[User4302021]

Now, my main gripe. The OP asked for help of interpreting his data. You don't believe in what he is doing? no problem. No need to say anything.
It just never fails, someone will post asking about something and a few people out there will attack instead of help. Take time. Read and understand the post.

All the dissenting posts in this thread have been explaining exactly why his data is uninterpretable.