That is my understanding. The change in smokeless gunpowder is slowly becoming inert. Perhaps in some cases (no pun intended) such a round might put a round in the barrel and leave it there. I have seen no reports of detonations of old powder, save the person who stuck a bullet in the barrel, didn't pay attention and fired an active round immediately following.Powder degrades with age and gets weaker as it uses its own chemical energy to consume itself. I've salvaged some WW1 era M1906 rounds and the powder sorta went poof vs "bang". Low velocity and the oprod hardly moved.
Brass is my major concern. If the round fires like it should, but the case fails, the loose gas is a problem. Typically corrosion and case splits are pretty obvious. There are exceptions. Not much way to tell - even a tiny smear of corrosion can be an indicator.Jeremy2171 said:The problem with the aforementioned Turk 8mm ammo is the brass has become brittle. Nothing wrong with the powder at all.
The oldest ammo I've shot thats performed as issues was some 1927 WRA M1 ball ammo. Still shot sub-2 moa.
Powder degrades with age and gets weaker as it uses its own chemical energy to consume itself. I've salvaged some WW1 era M1906 rounds and the powder sorta went poof vs "bang". Low velocity and the oprod hardly moved.
The problem with the aforementioned Turk 8mm ammo is the brass has become brittle. Nothing wrong with the powder at all.
Lord what a wall of mush.You have seen this all before. Your fizz theory of gunpowder (ie gunpowder looses it's fizz like soda pop) may be true at the very end of gunpowder lifetime,but well before that, shooters are having over pressure problems and are blowing up firearms.
This was interesting as I was able to acquire the TNO paper that lead to this presentation chart. It is well known that heating gunpowder ages it exponentially. Well known every where except in the shooting community. Accelerated life testing has been going on since I don't know when. I am sure it is pre WW1, and the Navy was conducting accelerate life testing for the munitions on its Battleships and Cruisers well before WW2. And I mean on the ship, it was that critical to know the condition of the powders in the magazines. Stocks were regularly tested on board because the US Navy did not want to duplicate the experience of the foreign capital ships which had magazine blowups with deteriorated gunpowder.
so this 2010 test by TNO is showing that after four weeks of aging 50 cal and 20mm propellant, peak pressures increased 25%.
View attachment 1135614
this is the TNO paper on the subject: AGEING EFFECTS ON PERFORMANCE OF SMALL AND MEDIUM CALIBRE MUNITION
An example how heat reduces the lifetime of smokeless propellants
View attachment 1135615
I cannot explain all that is going on in this chart. This is a Reinmetall presentation at an Insensitive Munitions Conference.
View attachment 1135616
But you can see, the single based powders clearly go up in pressure, and the double based propellants go up faster. I don't know what the heck the aged in ammo curves mean. I don't know how Reinmetall determined any of this, maybe by actual test, or with computer models. Reinmetall has been around since the 1880's, built artillery for the Kaiser and the Nazi's. They have ammunition plants all over the world, read about a kaboom of theirs in a South African plant. Reinmetall has a market cap of $9.5 billion and and tens of thousands of employees, so their analysis has a lot more credibility than Jermey's un instrumented one off tests.
This was the real reason Reinmetall was at the symposium, they wanted to sell new and improved gunpowder.
View attachment 1135617
What this shows is as Government WC855 ball powder ages, the peak pressures go up. Maybe not everyone can follow curves and X & Y plots of data, but the text at the bottom explains what is going on above.
This is an Army Research Development Engineering Command chart.
View attachment 1135618
It is fuzzy because Mr Cook had this tossed up on one chart multiple capabilities that ARDEC has, and this just one of the capabilities on the chart. Obviously ARDEC has the ovens and pressure gauges to conduct ballistic stability. This chart is non controversial. It is not shown as something worth talking about, that is, gunpowder peak pressures go up with age, rather, it is more a less a capabilities sales pitch. But as you can see, pressures go up with accelerated lifetime testing.
this was on the web before the Government started withdrawing documents in mass after 911. But this was interesting, it is about the testing going on to determine if ball powders ought to be adopted by the Department of Defense. And this is an accelerated age test.
View attachment 1135619
I am surprised the choices in test conditions, but anytime the propellant is heated for 26 or 42 weeks, the pressures go up.
At some point in deterioration, the gunpowder you own, or in the cases of your cartridges, pressures will go up. And, due to burn rate instabilities, the occasional guns blow up.
Jeremy hates the blow up examples I post. All deniers hate research, except for the psuedo science experiments they conduct and expect us to take seriously. I would rather take my experience of over pressure indications with pull down IMR 4895, and what I have found in the Insensitive Munitions literature on the web over Jeremy's experience. He just did not try hard enough to blow himself up.
I did challenge Jeremy to conduct a more rigorous gunpowder test. That is acquire some old ammunition, at least 150 rounds, shoot around ten over a chronograph and baseline the velocities. And then, pull the bullets and dump the powder of the rest and age it. Age it in a clear bottle at 165 F till the stuff fumes, and hold it a few days more to ensure all the stabilizer is out. Then load the brass with the original charge weights and go out and shoot the stuff over a chronograph before the brass becomes embrittled I think this would be useful as I don't know just how many rounds, or the level of deterioration it takes for old deteriorated gunpowder to detonate. Powder that is fuming would be very deteriorated from what I have read. Might have been the cause of the turret explosion on the USS Iowa. Some of the powder bags were fuming as the charges were being rammed. And I don't think it is immoral to suggest this to someone who earnestly believes that gunpowder fails benignly. And, maybe Jeremy is right about his fizz theory of gunpowder. The results of the test could be an eye opener, one way or another. I was so disappointed when Jeremy turned it down. So to say, Jeremy thinks he can fly, but he won't jump.
The basic problem with gunpowder is, you don't know when it turns bad, till it turns bad. Kind of like cigarettes, you don't know which one, or how many it takes to give you cancer. I can tell you, all the two pack a day guys I knew, few of them made it into their 60's. And they denied smoking caused cancer until, they got it.
Lord what a wall of mush.
No one is denying that heated gun powder doesn't cause excessive pressure... prime reason you don't leave ammo in the sun on range day.
The chart you posted that you claim to not understand clearly shows propellent aged "in" ammo loses pressure as it degrades.
Which is exactly what ballisticians say... and what happens in real life.
I have no need or desire to perform a test you want me to do just to make you feel better. Especially when we already know what happens to gunpowder that is degrading. If it's losing it's chemical energy during degradation how can it get "stronger"?
Maybe you should leave the Iowa out of this since it's been pretty much proven the explosion was caused by over ramming the powder bags.
I'm expecting you to respond with another wall of opine and pics of random blown up guns you've found online and claim it was all overpressure ammo ammo doing the damage.
The Navy performed a coverup and did everything they could to blame the turret Sailors for the incident. I
I think you miss entirely what they doing in ballistic stability testing. That powder was not put into a pressure barrel and fired hot. They let it cool down before firing. Heat is used for accelerated aging. It is true that hot cartridges produce more pressure than the same cartridge fired cool.
Not the only chart there. But the only one you use. How about getting your ballistican friend to run some aging tests on cartridges? But you cannot get him to produce that report you need to prove that all commercial ammunition is safe in Garands.
Well explain the in ammo propellant. What is happening to the chemistry and burn rate inside a cartridge case, as compared to an identical sample inside an ammo can? I would like to know. I cannot explain what those lines mean and what "in ammo" is supposed to represent. Not my chart, and I was not there to ask. But you know, right? And since you know, how about explaining how propellants stored in different containers degrade differently. Does propellant in round cans degrade differently from propellant stored in square cans? Be good to know what shape of can to use. What about different colors of cans? Does propellant in green cans degrade different from propellant in red cans? Love to know the right color of can to use.
As I have recommended, go an Insensitive Munitions Conference and ask real ballisticans what really happens in the real world.
Gunpowder does not burn like a candle. It is an exponential process, and if you ever read anything on the topic, just keeping it burning consistently is a real trick. And since the powders we use are highly dependent on their shape and porosity, changes you can't see with an eyeball make a huge difference in burn rate.
But, I will accept this, at some point in time, the energy content will go down. So, when does it? What do you have that shows the energy content of nitrocellulose versus time.
By the way, tell me about what you know about the explosive potential of gunpowder dust. Since America off shored its textile and other industries, I am sure that dust explosions are now out of the public mind.
bigger coal dust explosion
real coal dust explosion
by the way, this web site provides podcasts and very educational materials about dust explosions:
Dust Incident articles: https://dustsafetyscience.com/articles/
Textile Explosion Case Studies https://dustsafetyscience.com/textile-industries/
The Navy performed a coverup and did everything they could to blame the turret Sailors for the incident. I read the book by the Sandia Corporation investigation team and their analysis of the over ramming explanation offered by the Navy (and a light touch on the Gay suicide theory). Congress did not believe the Gay Suicide explanation, nor any of other accusations of negligence that the Navy claimed the turret crew had committed. So Congress hired Sandia Corporation as an independent investigator. The Navy made a drop fixture to simulate over ramming and even after several hundred drops the powder bags would not ignite. The Sandia team came onsite, and they rearranged the powder tubes in the trim bag (the end bag) so the tubes were longitudinal in the direction of the drop. The very next drop the whole stack of powder bags exploded, disintegrating the test stand. The Sandia book stated the propellant was from WW2, had been stored in hot barges, and at previous times turret crews reported powder bags fuming as the charges were rammed. The fumes were probably nitrogen dioxide gas, which if visible, shows serious depletion of the stabilizer. The book states that those listening on the communications system as the turret crew loaded the guns, that one or two of the turret crew were yelling that the bags were fuming.
Next, Ernie Hanyecz, Turret Two’s leading petty officer suddenly called out, “Mort! Mort! Mort!” Ziegler shouted, “Oh, my God! The powder is smoldering!” About this same time, Hanyecz yelled over the phone circuit, “Oh, my God! There’s a flash!”
Then the turret exploded before the breech was closed. The Sandia team did prove that the longitudinal orientation of those old gunpowder powder tubes plus an impact would cause the propellant to ignite. I have been told, and I have learned enough about UXB to learn, that propellants and explosives sensitize with age.
I expect nothing less than continued denial from you. I do expect you to make your statements on why you believe old gunpowder looses its fizz over time, and I will use what I have to make my case. I am of the opinion that at some point, gunpowder will lose all its energy, but till then, the evidence shows, burn rates shift and create over pressure conditions, including, detonation. You will nit pick, demand information and make "I say so" philosophical arguments. It is up to the readers to decide what is more credible.
I just love how you always come in with your random photos of blown guns. Usually already prepared...and then post random opinions not related the OPs question.I think you miss entirely what they doing in ballistic stability testing. That powder was not put into a pressure barrel and fired hot. They let it cool down before firing. Heat is used for accelerated aging. It is true that hot cartridges produce more pressure than the same cartridge fired cool.
Not the only chart there. But the only one you use. How about getting your ballistican friend to run some aging tests on cartridges? But you cannot get him to produce that report you need to prove that all commercial ammunition is safe in Garands.
Well explain the in ammo propellant. What is happening to the chemistry and burn rate inside a cartridge case, as compared to an identical sample inside an ammo can? I would like to know. I cannot explain what those lines mean and what "in ammo" is supposed to represent. Not my chart, and I was not there to ask. But you know, right? And since you know, how about explaining how propellants stored in different containers degrade differently. Does propellant in round cans degrade differently from propellant stored in square cans? Be good to know what shape of can to use. What about different colors of cans? Does propellant in green cans degrade different from propellant in red cans? Love to know the right color of can to use.
As I have recommended, go an Insensitive Munitions Conference and ask real ballisticans what really happens in the real world.
Gunpowder does not burn like a candle. It is an exponential process, and if you ever read anything on the topic, just keeping it burning consistently is a real trick. And since the powders we use are highly dependent on their shape and porosity, changes you can't see with an eyeball make a huge difference in burn rate.
But, I will accept this, at some point in time, the energy content will go down. So, when does it? What do you have that shows the energy content of nitrocellulose versus time.
By the way, tell me about what you know about the explosive potential of gunpowder dust. Since America off shored its textile and other industries, I am sure that dust explosions are now out of the public mind.
by the way, this web site provides podcasts and very educational materials about dust explosions:
Dust Incident articles: https://dustsafetyscience.com/articles/
Textile Explosion Case Studies https://dustsafetyscience.com/textile-industries/
The Navy performed a coverup and did everything they could to blame the turret Sailors for the incident. I read the book by the Sandia Corporation investigation team and their analysis of the over ramming explanation offered by the Navy (and a light touch on the Gay suicide theory). Congress did not believe the Gay Suicide explanation, nor any of other accusations of negligence that the Navy claimed the turret crew had committed. So Congress hired Sandia Corporation as an independent investigator. The Navy made a drop fixture to simulate over ramming and even after several hundred drops the powder bags would not ignite. The Sandia team came onsite, and they rearranged the powder tubes in the trim bag (the end bag) so the tubes were longitudinal in the direction of the drop. The very next drop the whole stack of powder bags exploded, disintegrating the test stand. The Sandia book stated the propellant was from WW2, had been stored in hot barges, and at previous times turret crews reported powder bags fuming as the charges were rammed. The fumes were probably nitrogen dioxide gas, which if visible, shows serious depletion of the stabilizer. The book states that those listening on the communications system as the turret crew loaded the guns, that one or two of the turret crew were yelling that the bags were fuming.
Next, Ernie Hanyecz, Turret Two’s leading petty officer suddenly called out, “Mort! Mort! Mort!” Ziegler shouted, “Oh, my God! The powder is smoldering!” About this same time, Hanyecz yelled over the phone
Then the turret exploded before the breech was closed. The Sandia team did prove that the longitudinal orientation of those old gunpowder powder tubes plus an impact would cause the propellant to ignite. I have been told, and I have learned enough about UXB to learn, that propellants and explosives sensitize with age.
I expect nothing less than continued denial from you. I do expect you to make your statements on why you believe old gunpowder looses its fizz over time, and I will use what I have to make my case. I am of the opinion that at some point, gunpowder will lose all its energy, but till then, the evidence shows, burn rates shift and create over pressure conditions, including, detonation. You will nit pick, demand information and make "I say so" philosophical arguments. It is up to the readers to decide what is more credible.
PS : I've got lead sealed wooden crated 8mm Mauser German manufactured WWll ammo and also shoot it in My 98's .
Not a single problem with any of it either . I had some silly bugger on a gun forum try and tell Me ,that brass had a #20 year self life So clearly everything you read and see on the Internet ISN'T GOSPEL
5.2.1 Level A All level A containers shall have a printed label affixed to the side with the following information:
AFTER FIVE YEARS FROM DATE OF MANUFACTURE, APPROVAL BY RESPONSIBLE PROCURING AGENCY IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO THE LOADING OF THIS PROPELLANT INTO SMALL ARMS AMMUNITION
5.2.2 Level C Containers shall be marked on the side with the same markings as required for the side of the box shown on Drawing 8858848. DOT markings shall be in accordance with CFR 49, section 173.93 (f) and the applicable Hazardous Component
Safety Data Statement.
5.2.3 Special markings All level C containers shall have a printed label affixed to the side with the following information:
AFTER TWO YEARS FROM DATE OF MANUFACTURE, APPROVAL BY THE RESPONSIBLE PROCURING AGENCY IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO THE LOADING OF THIS PROPELLANT INTO SMALL ARMS AMMUNITION
Regardless of what the Army decides to do with its industrial base, the fundamental issue does not change: the Army needs to produce more war reserve ammunition, Naughton said. Time is running out, he said. “Most of the ammunition in the stockpile today was built 20 years ago during the Cold War buildup.” Most rounds are designed to have a shelf life of 20 years. “We are outside the envelope of the shelf life on 40 percent or more of our existing ammunition. The rest is rapidly approaching the end of its shelf life.”
Ammunition does not “go bad” overnight, after it reaches a certain age, but “once it’s over 20 years old, the reliability rapidly degrades,” said Naughton. Within a few years, it will become increasingly difficult to shoot it. “You can predict that you’ll lose 7-8 percent of the ammo after the 20-year mark.”*
To replace the obsolete rounds, the Army would have to produce 100,000 tons of war reserve ammunition a year for the next seven years. Past that point, it would need 50,000 tons to 60,000 tons a year to sustain the stockpile. That represents about “half the level of the Cold War buildup,” he said.
The shelf lifetime of gunpowder is "unknown". It varies so much, due to acids left in the nitrocellulose, that there is no good mathematical model nor predictive technique for lifetime. Instead, those militaries that can afford it, pay people to inspect and test.
These charts came from a 1969 and 1970 Munitions Symposium that I found on DTIC. Incidentally, lots of documents that were in the public domain were pulled back, and not knowing this would happen, I did not save the entire symposium packages. I just saved these charts.
But what you do see is that Ammunition Specialists pull ammunition lots, test the stability of the gun powder, and discard the lot once it fails their stability tests. These lots are from WW2, so they would have been from 27 to 24 years old in 1969, and they are fuming because they have used up the stabilizer in the gunpowder.
View attachment 1136825
This one was good as it shows a span of fuming times, and the dates of manufacture
View attachment 1136826
As an aside, it used to be that the documents on the Defense Acquistion University website were downloadable. Now, you can see the titles, but you cannot open them. But, even with the titles, it should be obvious that a lot of people are examining, testing, sorting, etc, through DoD munitions
Munitions and Explosives Safety DAU
I clicked through the various sub forums, could see titles, was blocked from opening the documents. I have a 2010 version of the Ammunition Reference Guide, but now, the 2020 version its blocked. Very frustrating.
Luckily, these old TM's are still out there:
TM 9-1300-214 Military Explosives
Section7-7 Nitrocellulose
q. Nitrocellulose, even when highly purified, is much less stable than most of the non initiating military high explosives, as judged by elevated temperature test. It appears to undergo very slow decomposition even at ordinary temperatures, the rate of decomposition increasing 3.71 times with each increase in temperature of 10 ºC. The presence of moisture increases the rate of decomposition considerably and the presence of free acid or alkali has an even more pronounced effect.
r. The great care taken in the purification of nitrocellulose is due to the necessity of removing impurities that are much less stable than nitrocellulose itself. Cellulose sulfate is unstable, with respect to heat and moisture.
US Ammunition manufacturer's used to warranty their ammunition for 10 years, last I looked, it was down to one year! The market will buy anything so they don't have to provide realistic warranties. I did read an article where the writer claimed that CIP had a 20 year shelf life requirement for gunpowder. I have not been able to access a CIP standards database, but something that is very different from SAAMI standards and CIP standards is that these European standards have the force of law. Manufacturers have to submit their guns and ammunition to the proof house for testing. And the ammunition lot fails, the lot is rejected. Don't know what happens after that, obviously it cant be sold in Europe, but probably it gets sold to Americans who will buy anything!
Interesting short videos of the proof testing process for a shotgun and a S&W revolver. American made firearms have to pass the proof test to be sold in Europe
EPREUVES VIDÉOS
Based on discussions with a real Insensitive Munitions expert, twenty years is a common DoD lifetime requirement for munitions. And they have stability tests, such as accelerated aging, where the ballistic stability of the propellant are tested.
I thought this was interesting.
MIL-P-3984J MILITARY Specification on Propellants for Small Arms Ammunition.
What you see is that propellant that has been sitting in storage containers has a "shelf" life. What I presume is that the Procuring Agency will require ballistic stability tests, section 400 Mil Std 286 Propellants, Solid, Sampling Examination and Test, and that the gunpowder has to pass those tests, before being loading into cases. I provided a link to Mil Std 286, and it is worth looking at the test procedures, and it is worth comparing and contrasting the amount of laboratory equipment a Test Laboratory uses to determine ballistic stability, versus what Jeremy did with some old, undefined powder, and a chronograph. Which shows a deeper understanding of the thermochemical issues of gunpowder?
I often give shooters/reloaders the advice to shoot up their ammunition and powder before it is 20 years old. I have been giving the advice not to load up ammunition and have it sit around for years and years. It is better to load cases when you expect to shoot the stuff. That way, you don't lose brass due to brass embrittlement from NOx. I have lost a number of good cases that I loaded in the late 80's and did not shoot till 2017 or so. The powder was deteriorating in the case. Twenty years is not based on any hard and fast line in the sand. Neither is the advice to replace tires older than six years old hard and fast. However, if your commercial truck blows its ten year old tire, and hurts someone, (as has happened), expect a lawsuit. The UK got tired (pun intended!) of commercial trucks killing people when their old tires blew, so the UK passed a law requiring 10 yr + tires to be removed. I am sure the deniers in the truck industry were loud and vocal about how the lifetime of a tire is forever. But for ammunition, 20 years is pretty old.
Army Not Producing Enough Ammunition
http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/archive/2003/May/Pages/Army_Not3866.aspx
* I think what is meant, 7-8 percent per year after 20 years.
When I thought ammunition lasted forever, because that is what I read in the inprint magazines, I purchased and shot thousands of rounds of surplus 6.5 Swede, 7mm Mauser, 303 British, 7.62 Nagant, 30-06 and 308. I purchased surplus for my collection of military rifles. And I had high pressure indications, and I did not know what that meant, because the elites of the shooting community were out there claiming gunpowder last forever and fails benignly. I had 303 Brit and 8mm ammunition so hot they pierced primers and the firing pin would snap back. I am glad I never cracked a lug or developed receiver seat set back. I am sure some have. Luckily, I never experienced a detonation event. I do know shooters who have. Old ammunition is prone to detonating, very rare, but it happens.
It is good if the buyer of old ammunition is aware of the signs of deteriorating ammunition, is able to recognize the signs. The gross indications are corrosion inside the case, velocities higher than spec, and obvious signs of high pressures. These are all indications of deteriorated gunpowder, and with cases full of deteriorated gunpowder it is prudent to disassemble the stuff and dump the powder. If the cases are corroded, it is best not to re use them.
But, its up to you. Every day, one million fentanyl/opioid users get high, sometimes several times a day, and only 175 of them die. (the web does not have firm estimate of fentanyl users, but with over 100,000 dying per year, I think 1 million active users is a good guess) Not a single one of the alive ones think what they are doing is too risky to quit. There are those who have that mentality when it comes to all risks, and nothing anyone says is going to change their behavior.
Bruce Hodgdon would totally disagree with you as to powder life and I also KNOW that powder properly stored can exist for decades