doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Pattern theory

I was gonna ignore this thread because it just got too stupid to believe, but WTF I got a couple min. IIRC the term simple physics was invoked. Was that a reference to traditional Newtonian Physics or some other brand? Can some actual examples be provided? And some documentation about the bottom being more deformed? - especially since they are not even touched by other shot on one side? Things like acceleration/velocity vs deformation rates. Some illustrative calcs of the load differentials top to bottom and the relation to deformation and whatever limits there may be to that.
I'm certain that this bottom load thing will prove to be a seminal component of shotgun ballistics in times to come and providing some real world scientific analysis to it at this point can only lead to furthering world peace and eliminating hunger everywhere.

have another day
Dr.WtS

If you could talk in a way that was not so perfectly condescending I would discuss this with you, Charles. But, you can't. And, I won't. Suffice it to say that I was not talking about the very bottom layer of pellets, but the ones on the bottom in general as compared to those in the top part of the column. And, yes. I could provide evidence, which I will not.

Go find somebody else to belittle with your arrogance.

SRH

"AMEN"

It would seem about 5 pages is as far as a thread can go before it starts to implode. I have learned a lot from this and hoped to continue. Those of you that have scientific facts to present please do. If you feel the Cliff note version is more appropriate please do so. I freely admit to having streak of laziness and hate counting little holes, I've had enough of that. Info is welcome the rest isn't very entertaining. Mark

Tom Roster:

There has been imported into this country for years electrolysis process, nickel-plated lead shot from Italy for reloading and in certain Italian-origin factory lead loads. The plating is excellent as is the sphericity of the lead core. Unfortunately, these pellets have universally measured quite low in antimony in my tests. The end result to any lead pellet with a low antimonial content, whether plated or not, is to suffer a high degree of setback deformation during combustion.

Layne Simpson:

Adding antimony to shot makes it harder, and the more antimony added up to a point, the harder it becomes. The harder the shot is, the better it is able to resist setback deformation during firing, .....

Bob Brister:

The modern plastic shot cup wad protects shot from barrel-scrubbing deformation, but not from ignition setback, forcing cones, and choke pressures ------------ Hard pellets can resist such pressures; soft ones may deform, particularly rearward rows of pellets at the time of ignition. .

SRH

Stan, I'm sure that Mr. Brister must've been in error.

Seriously, good quote.

I beg to disagree, I believe Brister is correct

I am on the road this week and next and do not have access to my Library, but feel comfortable with my response.

Larry said that in jest, old colonel. He believes Brister is correct, too.

Just for funsies here, let's hear someone who does NOT believe in lead shot setback deformation tell us why they think steel shot patterns so much tighter, out of the exact same barrel and choke, than lead. Steel shot is not subject to setback deformation, thus not nearly as many "fliers" on the periphery of the pattern.

SRH

Hmmm, now that doesn't sound too entertaining. Actually Stan, thanks for taking the time to offer examples.

Since when do unsupported imaginings need to be respected? Condescending? Guess again. Try dismissive of BS.

I didn't say there was no deformation - what I said was that this bearing the load/bottom load differential is BS no matter the gauge making something out of nothing. The "evidence" given above is nothing more than opinions and suppositions regardless of who said it. Including no reasonably scientific evaluation of whatever effect may be expected and how that might be of some demonstrable consequence. If you want to play the discovering the physical universe game you should learn first how to do that in a framework that provides some verification of whatever it is you are after.

Just because you think it doesn't make it real

Just because you believe it doesn't make it true.

have another day
Dr.WtS