Home made black powder

Appalachiannative said:

Well that's the thing this is a vine but not a grapevine. It's a creeper type vine. Takes over trees like ivy or kudzu, my wife breaks out if she handles it while it's green I dont. I've got to cut it off my trees and dispose of it anyway Part of why I'm curious since I could at least find a new way to put some to use. I've found I can twist it into decorative wreaths and ladders for the Mrs roses to grow on so it would be great to make it useful to me as well. I'll get a clean paint can and give it a try ASAP and post info on the results

Click to expand...

Wow, that vine sounds like poison ivy.

Appalachiannative said:

Well that's the thing this is a vine but not a grapevine. It's a creeper type vine. Takes over trees like ivy or kudzu, my wife breaks out if she handles it while it's green I dont. I've got to cut it off my trees and dispose of it anyway Part of why I'm curious since I could at least find a new way to put some to use. I've found I can twist it into decorative wreaths and ladders for the Mrs roses to grow on so it would be great to make it useful to me as well. I'll get a clean paint can and give it a try ASAP and post info on the results

Click to expand...

What do the leaves look like brother?

CorsiarRiley said:

So many varieties of grapevines that its hard to tell which ones are better. I would use a chronograph to test FPS of different charcoal used.

Click to expand...

Appalachiannative said:

If only I owned one lol from what I understand they're pretty pricey

Click to expand...

Pricey is a relative term. I have this one which I don't feel was too expensive, and it's worked well for me.

https://www.amazon.com/Caldwell-720001-Ballistic-Precision-Chronograph/dp/B00HTN5DTE/ref=sr_1_3?crid=3NYYH8DEPNWGC&keywords=caldwell+chronograph&qid=1639926067&sprefix=caldwell+,aps,180&sr=8-3

Appalachiannative said:

I've heard that grapevine makes good charcoal. I've got a lot of sumac vines around my house that have a wooden texture. Thinking about making some charcoal with them. Any thoughts on this?

Click to expand...

Actually, burning sumac vines (actually a shrub) isn't such a good idea:

https://www.hgtv.com/outdoors/flowers-and-plants/groundcover-and-vines/remove-clinging-vines

"NEVER burn any parts of poison ivy, oak, or sumac vines. The fumes can seriously damage your nasal passages and lungs. "

Appalachiannative said:

Really? I've always disposed of the stuff by burning. I just done breath it in. Light the fire in my burning pit then get way back. Oh well I guess I'll try cedar chips or cut down some red maple

Click to expand...

I suggest you go with the cedar. From what I've been reading, hardwoods make less than awesome charcoal for BP. As I understand it, the open grain of softwoods has something to do with how well they work. Maybe the experts can chime in with more info, but to me, cedar sounds like the better choice.

Best wishes in your projects!
Dirty Bob

I finally ground my 7-8 pucks into a powder. Shortly after adding to this thread about buying a motorized hopper type grinder I decided to try it out, after about 2 years of the pucks sitting in a 1 gallon ziplock bag. The first need was to change the 1 3/4" X approximately 1/2-3/4" thick pucks into a size that the grinder could digest, and I failed to test the grinder for the upper limits of adjustment of that stainless corncob rollers opening (First mistake).
First method was crushing under the H press, the first puck broke up with a bang that shook the press, not an explosion but the same kind of bang it would have made had the puck been ceramic or granite, and small pieces of black powder skitter across the shop.
About 95% of the balance of "Black rock" remained within the ring (5" steel tube about 2" high) that I'd used to keep any flying particles on the platen, (That platen being a 1 3/8" thick plate of cotton based phenolic about 10" X 10", supported by 1" thick steel) and the average size of the particles were about the size of 3/4 X 1/2" of what looked like gravel. These were still way too large to fit down the arc of the rollls to "bite" and thereby be crushed.
I continued busting these particles up using the hydraulic press but that was clearly too slow. I grabbed a chisel and found that would break them in half with light hammer blows. As I was doing that it came to me that a 2" diameter steel barstock about 2" length, with sharp toothed waffle serrations machined on the working end about 4 teeth per inch would be great for the initial breaking up process. That's something I'll have to do before my next batch.

For some reason I can't get my cell phone to send to my computer, and I'll add photos after I reduce the sizes of them.

Once the "gravel" was down to 3/8" or 1/4" they would finally be able to be crushed by the rolls, so I rolled the whole rest of the pound.
This was all a learning experience of course, and by this time I'd run the whole batch through the grinder with a consecutively narrower gap for each pass. to break down the larger pieces, each grinding cycle took less than 80 seconds.

Very quickly the adjusted gap narrowed to about .060" and the grinder was making a noise that told me that the two gears that drove the rolls were in constant contact, so that process had to stop.

Mistake #2 was that I didn't make up a series of screens to separate the granulation's sizes, so I had a pile of fines mixed with granules up to .060" to .070". The two coarse gears that roll the two rolls in opposite directions are properly induction hardened, so they might be hard to relieve the tooth forms to allow a finer crush. So far I don't know what percentage is useful in my .44 cap and ball revolvers but at the upper end my friend's cannon has some nice sized powder.

I was going to reincorporate the fines and re-press them, but it occurred to me that they would also press nicely into rocket engine tubes, so the whole product is slanted heavily towards fun, something that's not been as abundant for the last couple of years.
parts.

By the way, what size screens will make approximately 4F, 3F and 2F granulations? Anyone here know? And where can I find the screen material in 2 foot squares?
Thanks,
parts

If you make your pucks thinner, they break up easier. No more than 1/4". If you don't let them completely dry, they break up even easier. I can break them to bits by pressing on them with an aluminum meat tenderizing hammer, the kind with a waffle surface. I don't know where you can find the right screen squares. I use screen strainers with varying mesh sizes. They were probably made in China, but they looked about right when I saw them. I also have used cooking splatter guard screens, but the strainers are easier for the quantities I make. Not sure of the actual mesh sizes.

I wish I had a scanner so I could post the drawings my uncle made for the machine he made to crush powder. Imagine if you will a revolving cylinder made from aluminum round stalk with a 1/8th inch gap. That cylinder is wrapped with an aluminum screen. The cylinder is treated much like a ball mill save the material falls through to the collection vessel at a certain size dependent on the size of the screen.

"If you make your pucks thinner, they break up easier. No more than 1/4"."

Yes, I mentioned that earlier, but didn't learn it until I saw the video I posted where they ran about 6" diameter pucks 1/4" thick.

A question about your statement; "If you don't let them completely dry, they break up even easier.", Does leaving it softer help to hold F the size wanted? Also, the hardness of my pucks was very hard immediately, because I used somewhere between 5 and 10 tons against a small diameter cylinder.
It seems logical to me that a larger diameter puck will take more tonnage to achieve high density, and high density is the way to maximize the power of a measure by volume, up to a limit of course.

HisSoldier said:

A question about your statement; "If you don't let them completely dry, they break up even easier.", Does leaving it softer help to hold F the size wanted?

Click to expand...

No not really. Just helps break the pucks into coffee bean sized chunks without spreading debris everywhere. The beans need to dry fully-ish before grinding to F sizes. Just how I do it. I'm sure there are other ways just as good.

HisSoldier said:

By the way, what size screens will make approximately 4F, 3F and 2F granulations? Anyone here know? And where can I find the screen material in 2 foot squares?
Thanks,
parts

Click to expand...

This is my screen stack. The sizes may not be exactly right but it works well for me. There are 3 screens in the stack, numbers 20, 40, and 60, with a pan to catch fines at the bottom.



I tried making screens from squares I bought online but it was hard to shake them enough without causing a lot of dust in the air and spilling powder. These screens were expensive but they work very well and have a lid so there's no spillage or dust problem.

Whatever stays on the top #20 screen is bigger than 3f so I regrind it. Powder that passes the top screen but stays on the second #40 screen is about 3f size and that's what I want so it's all saved. Any that passes the second screen but stays on the third #60 screen is right about 4f size, and any that passes that screen is caught in the pan at the bottom to be repressed as it's very fine.

After screening most of my powder is 3f. I get a little more 4f than I want so some of that can join the fines for repressing.

HisSoldier said:

"If you make your pucks thinner, they break up easier. No more than 1/4"."

Yes, I mentioned that earlier, but didn't learn it until I saw the video I posted where they ran about 6" diameter pucks 1/4" thick.

A question about your statement; "If you don't let them completely dry, they break up even easier.", Does leaving it softer help to hold F the size wanted? Also, the hardness of my pucks was very hard immediately, because I used somewhere between 5 and 10 tons against a small diameter cylinder.
It seems logical to me that a larger diameter puck will take more tonnage to achieve high density, and high density is the way to maximize the power of a measure by volume, up to a limit of course.

Click to expand...

I have a 3 inch puck die and use 30 grams of powder per puck which keeps them about 1/4 inch thick. Anything thicker is too hard to break up. I use delrin discs as separators and can press 3 pucks at a time on my 12 ton press.

I run my pucks in a dehydrator for 72 hours before breaking them up and screening, so they are completely dry and very hard. I've found that the powder flows better if I can minimize the amount of fines in it. To that end I run the screen stack on a vibrating table to make sure the fines fall all the way through to the bottom pan.

I could be wrong but to my thinking if I break up the pucks before they are dry enough to be good and hard they will tend to generate more fines during screening and the resulting powder will still need additional drying to work well. As long as I don't make the pucks too thick they aren't that hard to break up.

I've shot a couple pounds of my homemade powder so far and it's not far off of Goex in power, and I don't see any delay or difficulty in ignition.

I'd like to buy the "New TITAN" screens, probably the same set you have, 20,40, 60 and the bottom pan. Where can I find them? The cost is easily defrayed in a few pounds of powder, especially since commercial sources are becoming scarcer.

I bought all my screens at Amazon. They are really nice but also really pricey. They should last a lifetime though.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07TLWMTN1?ref=ppx_yo2_dt_b_product_details&th=1

mmb617 said:

I bought all my screens at Amazon. They are really nice but also really pricey. They should last a lifetime though.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07TLWMTN1?ref=ppx_yo2_dt_b_product_details&th=1

Click to expand...

Why on earth would those be so expensive? I screen outside, so not really worried about the dust.

So I bought soil sieves similar to what mmb617 shows, made in Japan for a much more moderate price and more moderate capability unfortunately, the next preparation is acquiring suitable charcoal.

I thought this website may be found interesting though written for fireworks BP making, not gun BP making, https://pyrodata.com/chemicals/Charcoal.
Note that two types of alder are mentioned as "Very suitable", plus Paulownia and willow, of course. The Alder is very common in my area but it's not that simple, there are two species that are listed as very suitable and the other two just "Suitable". Obviously a study of what is available to the experimenter in his or her area is indicated, and, it seems to me, when it is cut, at what moisture levels during the coking process, and whatever the process used as per below.

The author also mentions that the process are very greatly important, and that's the first time I've heard that; "scientific tests show that speed increases up to 500% are possible when using ,high performance charcoal. Thus, who wants optimum performance is referred to the latter."
Since I'm looking only for maximum power per volume from my BP I can see that it's not simply as simple as tossing a paint can into a fire with some little sticks in it, that is if I want to make better powder than what's available commercially.
A 500% increase in speed is huge!
parts

HisSoldier said:

"scientific tests show that speed increases up to 500% are possible when using ,high performance charcoal. Thus, who wants optimum performance is referred to the latter."
Since I'm looking only for maximum power per volume from my BP I can see that it's not simply as simple as tossing a paint can into a fire with some little sticks in it, that is if I want to make better powder than what's available commercially.
A 500% increase in speed is huge!

Click to expand...

What does speed refer to in this context? Are we talking about how fast the powder burns?

The type of charcoal used can certainly have an effect on the quality of the powder. I've been using charcoal made from cedar fence pickets and don't notice any delay between the time I pull the trigger and the firing on my flintlocks. However I did get some charcoal my neighbor had stored away in his shed for many years. It was supposed to be willow which everybody says is one of the best woods for charcoal. I made up a batch of powder using that charcoal and it was quite noticeably slower in that there was always a delay between the trigger pull and the boom. Now that charcoal was really old and may not have even been willow, my point is simply that the charcoal used does make a difference. But I would be highly suspect of any claim to increase speed by 500%, and would ask what are they measuring that against.

You mention that you want the maximum speed per volume so I assume that means you want the maximum muzzle velocity from a given volume of powder. If that's the case there is no way any powder is going to increase that by 500%. If you could hit 10% over what commercial powder gives that would be a lot. On another forum there are a lot of guys who have been making powder and experimenting for years and I think that's about the best any of them have done.

Maybe I'm just a born skeptic but when I read a claim of 500% improvement on pretty much anything I write it off as bogus.

HisSoldier said:

So I bought soil sieves similar to what mmb617 shows, made in Japan for a much more moderate price and more moderate capability unfortunately, the next preparation is acquiring suitable charcoal.

I thought this website may be found interesting though written for fireworks BP making, not gun BP making, https://pyrodata.com/chemicals/Charcoal.
Note that two types of alder are mentioned as "Very suitable", plus Paulownia and willow, of course. The Alder is very common in my area but it's not that simple, there are two species that are listed as very suitable and the other two just "Suitable". Obviously a study of what is available to the experimenter in his or her area is indicated, and, it seems to me, when it is cut, at what moisture levels during the coking process, and whatever the process used as per below.

The author also mentions that the process are very greatly important, and that's the first time I've heard that; "scientific tests show that speed increases up to 500% are possible when using ,high performance charcoal. Thus, who wants optimum performance is referred to the latter."
Since I'm looking only for maximum power per volume from my BP I can see that it's not simply as simple as tossing a paint can into a fire with some little sticks in it, that is if I want to make better powder than what's available commercially.
A 500% increase in speed is huge!
parts

Click to expand...

Too each their own, like MMB617 I'm a bit skeptical of the 500% claim. For no other reason when my uncle was still alive I was in earshot of a number of discussions when his PGII friends would visit. Each had their own preference to the wood species for charcoal and they all tended to make very good powder. However, very few of them used paint cans but some of the coking methods were just as simple.

First, you need the context, which I alluded to, that it is a fireworks website. I also don't know what they mean by 500% increase in speed, BUT! If it means anything at all to them it is important to firearms I expect. For instance, it says some kinds of charcoal make more sparks, well, that may or may well not be important for a firearms propellant.

But I've read many times in various places that willow charcoal is very good, better by far than many other types of wood charcoal, so that's in many reference books.

The way to prove your powders is a chronograph I think, but really high chrono results with lots of garbage left in the bore would be an important negative for me. Of course the old timers used a powder gun; (http://firearmshistory.blogspot.com/2012/10/testing-black-powder-quality.html) and from what I've read no one bought large quantities for warfare without repeatable testing methods.

For my own needs both a chronograph and a first patch from the cleaning rod tells me all I need to know.

Now, if someone has more comprehensive information on types of wood and processes I'd like to see it, I only spent 10 minutes looking and I'm sure there must be lots more info on it, but but just saying "Mine's great BP" without proof is what's called anecdotal information. Not that it's subject automatically to doubt, but it's also not subject to acceptance without proof.
parts

HisSoldier said:

...but but just saying "Mine's great BP" without proof is what's called anecdotal information. Not that it's subject automatically to doubt, but it's also not subject to acceptance without proof.
parts

Click to expand...

Oh yeah? Well my powder is so fast, the ball hits the target before the frizzen hits the spring!