Deavis
Member
Does anyone have some AA#9 on hand that they could snap a decent close up picture of and send me? I want to compare the grains and I can't find a sample to buy, of course 
AA #9 picture
- Thread starter Deavis
- Start date
- Status
evan price
Member
Teeny-tiny little grey-black balls. Looks like a lot of other powders. If you are trying to identify an unlabeled powder as #9 this is not a good way to do it.
As Walkalong sort-of showed, you cannot go on a picture of any powder to determine what it is if that is why you want the picture. AA#2 looks like #5 looks like #7 looks like #9. If you made the wrong assumption, it could mean the difference in a weak load or a rapid and unexpected final disassembly of your handgun.
In other words, why do you want the picture?
In other words, why do you want the picture?
I got the idea he wanted to see a size comparison. That is why I showed the three powders. Everyone is absolutely right that you can not identify a powder by looking at it.
I need a macro lens. Great pic Steve C
I need a macro lens. Great pic Steve C
freakshow10mm
member
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2008
- Messages
- 1,951
Accurate powders are like sand.
Deavis
Member
Thanks SteveC, that is exactly what I wanted to see and sort of what I suspected.
Hardly. Powder can most certainly be identified through visual means. It isn't 100% reliable unless obvious taggets or a unique kernel structure are present but it is completely possible to narrow it down if that is your goal.
If you look closely you will see that there is an obvious difference between 2 and 5 and 5 and 9 which is apparent to the naked eye. If he had 7 up there you would see it is different from 5 as well. Hint: look at the difference in color and reflectivity from the flattened flakes along witht he background color from the balls. You don't need a microscope for that one, which is always nice but not necessary for my purposes.
Thanks SteveC, good pic.
Hardly. Powder can most certainly be identified through visual means. It isn't 100% reliable unless obvious taggets or a unique kernel structure are present but it is completely possible to narrow it down if that is your goal.
If you look closely you will see that there is an obvious difference between 2 and 5 and 5 and 9 which is apparent to the naked eye. If he had 7 up there you would see it is different from 5 as well. Hint: look at the difference in color and reflectivity from the flattened flakes along witht he background color from the balls. You don't need a microscope for that one, which is always nice but not necessary for my purposes.
Thanks SteveC, good pic.
Sure, I can tell AA #2, which is very unique in shape and color, from #5 and #9, but can you tell WSF, HS-6 and AA#5 apart? For sure?
The point stands. You can not use sight to identify powders, apart from a very few unique ones. AA #2 I think I could do. (I have never seen any that looks like it). I think I can do SR 4759. (I have never seen another like it with the hole through it) BUT, I would never use visual verification for an unknown powder. Too risky.
I would not even trust powder with blue or red flakes in it.
Oh, and my AA #9 doesn't look like Steves. I wish I could get a good pic.
At least you got to see what you were looking for.
The point stands. You can not use sight to identify powders, apart from a very few unique ones. AA #2 I think I could do. (I have never seen any that looks like it). I think I can do SR 4759. (I have never seen another like it with the hole through it) BUT, I would never use visual verification for an unknown powder. Too risky.
I would not even trust powder with blue or red flakes in it.
Oh, and my AA #9 doesn't look like Steves. I wish I could get a good pic.
At least you got to see what you were looking for.
That is only possible if they used the same vendor and that vendor made each lot the same. Since Accurate Arms buys its powders from different vendors and blends lots to reach a consistant pressure curve, I would never recommend identifying a powder by visual means.
The only thing that is going to be the same between powder lots is that X grains of powder gives Y pounds of pressure per square inch (plus or minus 5%)
Deavis
Member
Who said that is what I'm doing? Why is it that everyone has to give their opinion of what I should or shouldn't do with the information I requested even though they don't have that faintest idea of my purpose past the fact that I said, "compare grain size"? Is everyone out to save me from their imagined purpose of my query?
The simple fact is that powders can be identified visually with some degree of accuracy based on the physical characteristics of the powder in question. That fact is not debatable, anyone who disagrees with that is being ignorant. Notice I said with some degree of accuracy, it may be 100% or it may be .0001%, but it exists nonetheless. So, I'm sorry Walkalong, but no point stands without facts to back it up. Some of you may choose not to ID powders visually but it doesn't mean that it can't be done, shouldn't be done, won't be done, or that I plan on doing it. Again, would someone like to tell me what my intentions are so I can follow them?
A valid identification flow, if that were my purpose, might be to narrow the choices down a few powders of interest visually and then compare the suspect powder versus known samples at set quantities in a test barrel. Based on the pressure and velocity data from the setup, I could probably then narrow the identity of the suspect powder further. Perhaps to a degree is sufficient to prove the identity of the powder to myself once I do a statistical comparison of those data.
Hmm... maybe I could just use my test setup to work up a load with the unknown powder that is within SAAMI specs for the caliber and forget about figuring out what this alleged bottle of unknown powder that I am apparently in possession of really is. Paid all that money for the equipment, why not just do that?
Sport45
Member
About the only powder I can reliably identify visually is Trail Boss. That, and maybe some of the colored dot powders. For some powders like the 4895's one can of the same powder may not look like the last one. They can be yellow to dark gray.
FlyinBryan
Member
lol. that is so funny on so many different levels.
The internet can be hard on those who are sensitive to being contradicted.
Do not let it effect your sense of self. And someday, I will follow my own advice.
Of course it is easy to sort powders by shape. Flake, tubular, granular, ball. Beyond that I would be cautious.
While I can tell my H4895 is green, and my IMR4895 is black, I cannot tell the difference between AA4064 and IMR 4895.
I have a number of ball powders. I was thinking of putting piles on a sheet, taking a picture, and letting some here guess which is which. But I am too lazy. It would be interesting to see if anyone could really identify between H110, AA#5, AA#9, AA2520, AA2700, and different lots of these powders, and do it with an accuracy better than chance.
freakshow10mm
member
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2008
- Messages
- 1,951
Deavis, you sound like the cable company. A technician will arrive between 8am and 6pm.
Wayne_E
Member
Deavis, your intentions were not stated and in fact are irrelevant. This is not a private conversation, it is an internet forum. It is quite possible that some noobie reloader may google for a picture of powder in order to identify some unknown powder months or years after this thread ends. It would be irresponsible not to include warnings about the difficulties of identifying powder visually.
I won't even grant you that point. In engaging in any potentially dangerous pursuit, be it disagreeing with the wife, commuting on I-10, jumping out of airplanes or reloading metallic cartridges, there is a degree of risk management that must take place. It doesn't matter whether you recognize it as such, or just think of it as having a tight process.
When you say that the accuracy can be between 100% and .0001%, you are in fact stating what most of us see as obvious; there isn't enough certainty in that process to arrive at a workable confidence level. While you can certainly tell ball powder from extruded from Trail Boss, there is simple no way to get any more granular than that with a degree of certainty that would fall within the realm of what most of us regard as safe reloading practices. Yes, you can describe a powder in terms of color gradient or reflectivity or taste, but these are not fixed variables - they can change over time and sometimes from lot to lot. Anybody that fails to take that into account, to paraphrase you, is simply being willfully ignorant.
You go on to say that you will do the various pressure testing and so forth; but at the end of all that, you still haven't identified the powder visually, you have only allocated it into the appropriate little grain/big grain, ball/extruded/Trail Boss silo, further described it in terms of its qualities by magical/brainiacal means and equated it to a known powder.
Thus, you still haven't contradicted us: you can't confidently identify an unknown powder visually, but you can certainly take it into a lab, do science guy stuff and describe it in terms of its physical properties and equate it to a known powder.
Or in short: you can't confidently visually identify an unknown powder.
- Status
