Does this exist? Study of powder weight per piece?

[WestKentucky]

I have been further playing with my el cheapo digital scale. I found myself forcing the scale off of zero to a known amount (yay paperclip) and then weighing individual granules of extruded stick powders. Has anybody ever done a study on what the normal weight per granule of a given powder is? I understand it would likely fluctuate by lot so the info may not be very useful. Playing with a few granules of IMR 4350 I found that they very consistently weighed 0.04 gr and that if I put exactly 10 granules (any random 10) that it ALWAYS read .39 gr. This tells me that each granule of powder in my can weighs between 0.0395 and .04 or else the rounding would have kicked it off of an even .04 interval earlier.

I also messed with some 3031 but I didn’t do nearly as much as I did with the 4350.

One thing I dislike about this scale is that I have to preload it to get it off of zero. It must have some programming that holds it at zero until a certain point before it will display anything other than zero. I can get around it but I don’t like that. I prefer to preload at this point, although a gentle tap of a dipper got it off of zero every time but it simply will not weigh out itty bitty charges without a preload. I will have to make a calibrated preload of some even number and use that if I use this scale for individually weighed charges, but for verification of powder drop it will be perfectly fine since it moves off of zero somewhere around 0.25gr.

On topic of weight of a granule of powder, I realize ball powder is essentially a lost cause for weighing a single grain. Flake would also be difficult, but much easier than ball. Stick is by far the easiest and for counting purposes it seems it’s the only one that would be useful for loading purposes. A man might count out 30 sticks of powder or some such as a measure to maintain consistency but nobody is going to count out 1000 granules of ball powder or 500 flakes.

 

[Varminterror]

Observationally, Varget and H4350 are not 0.04grn/kernel. I get to unintentionally measure this a few times per month as I load match and practice ammunition. I correct my charges to the exact same output down to the maximum resolution available on my two analytical balances - one kernel of either of these powders is approximately the resolution of both machines, ~0.015grn/kernel. Removing one kernel from a charge NEVER moves 0.03 or 0.04grn, ONLY 0.02grn. Removing 5 kernels doesn’t reduce the mass by 0.1, but rather 0.08, such each kernel is less than 0.02grn, approximately 0.015grn/kernel. Neither of my machines resolve any smaller, nor do I need them to.

 

[FROGO207]

Dont forget that the kernels will vary with the amount of water vapor they absorb as well. Might be frustrating as well as fun.

 

[WestKentucky]

Observationally, Varget and H4350 are not 0.04grn/kernel. I get to unintentionally measure this a few times per month as I load match and practice ammunition. I correct my charges to the exact same output down to the maximum resolution available on my two analytical balances - one kernel of either of these powders is approximately the resolution of both machines, ~0.015grn/kernel. Removing one kernel from a charge NEVER moves 0.03 or 0.04grn, ONLY 0.02grn. Removing 5 kernels doesn’t reduce the mass by 0.1, but rather 0.08, such each kernel is less than 0.02grn, approximately 0.015grn/kernel. Neither of my machines resolve any smaller, nor do I need them to.

I need to try Varget. I don’t recall ever actually seeing it for sale though. One of these days…maybe. I have some old h4350 cans, I bet they have a few granules of powder in them that I could shake out. I may try that tomorrow.

 

[Carl N. Brown]

I think the individual kernals, flakes or balls of smokeless powder are not precisely indentical, but the pluses and minuses almost average out.

 

[LiveLife]

weighing individual granules of extruded stick powders ... Varget

Has anybody ever done a study on what the normal weight per granule of a given powder is?

For Varget, around .02 gr to .03 gr depending on length and cut angle of the kernel as shown by picture below - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...lab-scale-for-120.873830/page-2#post-11627511

Weight range was from my "analytical/lab" scale detection of 4 kernels averaged and sensitivity of additional kernel weight readings of 1 to 2 mg.

 

[Rule3]

Slow day in Tn???

 

[Nature Boy]

Generally speaking, stick powder = ~0.02gn/kernal

 

[johnjohn]

You fella's are splitting them hairs way too fine for me.

 

[LiveLife]

You fella's are splitting them hairs way too fine for me.

I agree as in my opinion 0.1 gr resolution is "good enough" for most reloading applications.

But OP did ask the question and some of us want to be able to resolve/trickle powder charge down to a single kernel ...

And there now exists a 0.01 gr resolution scale while many higher resolution scales are at 0.02 gr resolution (Oh no, I don't NEED one ... but thinking about getting one to test for THR ... ) - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/creedmoor-sports-reloading-scale.902411/#post-12224791

 

[Airborne Falcon]

To answer your question, the study you are looking-for does exist. I may have it somewhere in one of my old Handloader's Digests or Handloaders magazines ... I'll look for it when I get some spare time. I've got 60 years worth up there beginning in 1962.

There was a supplement put out in '81 I think it was, titled Bullets & Powder Update. I own that one too and that may be where I saw it. Could be in one of the manuals ... I saw it somewhere not too long ago, it does exist.

 

[Nature Boy]

In my precision loads I will measure to the kernel, only because I can with the equipment I have.

Is it necessary to measure to +/- 0.02gn if my accuracy node is +/- 0.4gn? Maybe not, but I still do it.

If you’re going through the trouble of being precise, may as well go as far as you can.

 

[jmorris]

.02 gn is what I have seen for average size extruded “stick” powder kernels.

 

[JFrank]

I have been further playing with my el cheapo digital scale. I found myself forcing the scale off of zero to a known amount (yay paperclip) and then weighing individual granules of extruded stick powders. Has anybody ever done a study on what the normal weight per granule of a given powder is? I understand it would likely fluctuate by lot so the info may not be very useful. Playing with a few granules of IMR 4350 I found that they very consistently weighed 0.04 gr and that if I put exactly 10 granules (any random 10) that it ALWAYS read .39 gr. This tells me that each granule of powder in my can weighs between 0.0395 and .04 or else the rounding would have kicked it off of an even .04 interval earlier.

I also messed with some 3031 but I didn’t do nearly as much as I did with the 4350.

One thing I dislike about this scale is that I have to preload it to get it off of zero. It must have some programming that holds it at zero until a certain point before it will display anything other than zero. I can get around it but I don’t like that. I prefer to preload at this point, although a gentle tap of a dipper got it off of zero every time but it simply will not weigh out itty bitty charges without a preload. I will have to make a calibrated preload of some even number and use that if I use this scale for individually weighed charges, but for verification of powder drop it will be perfectly fine since it moves off of zero somewhere around 0.25gr.

On topic of weight of a granule of powder, I realize ball powder is essentially a lost cause for weighing a single grain. Flake would also be difficult, but much easier than ball. Stick is by far the easiest and for counting purposes it seems it’s the only one that would be useful for loading purposes. A man might count out 30 sticks of powder or some such as a measure to maintain consistency but nobody is going to count out 1000 granules of ball powder or 500 flakes.

Regarding Zero’s there is an auto correct function on some digital scales that you may be able to slide around by creating a false zero, place a small check weight next to your pan and leave it during a session. This is assuming your scale is capable of resolving one kernel equaling .02 ish grains.

 

[jmorris]

Regarding Zero’s there is an auto correct function on some digital scales that you may be able to slide around by creating a false zero…

Yeah, I would prefer to turn off that “feature”.



Having things change unbeknownst doesn’t make me happy. They do it to mask the load cells drift with temperature change but I wish they would allow the person that lets their equipment warm up, to turn it off.

 

[LiveLife]

They do it to mask the load cells drift with temperature change but I wish they would allow the person that lets their equipment warm up, to turn it off.

For those interested, myth busting of zero drift on digital scales and ways to address them - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...-scale-zero-drift-and-can-it-be-fixed.893402/

"What I found was any touch or slightest pressure on the four mounting screws changed the reading along with any pressure above four corner adjustable feet of the scale. Then the light bulb went on and I realized as temperature of the scale increased in relation to the ambient temperature, there could be unequal expansion of plastic parts/base to exert uneven pressure on the load cell mounting plate.

So when I loosened the screws and tightened again until touch/pressure on the four screws/adjustable feet did not produce change in reading, my zero drift essentially disappeared."​

 

[FROGO207]

For those interested, myth busting of zero drift on digital scales and ways to address them - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...-scale-zero-drift-and-can-it-be-fixed.893402/

"What I found was any touch or slightest pressure on the four mounting screws changed the reading along with any pressure above four corner adjustable feet of the scale. Then the light bulb went on and I realized as temperature of the scale increased in relation to the ambient temperature, there could be unequal expansion of plastic parts/base to exert uneven pressure on the load cell mounting plate.

So when I loosened the screws and tightened again until touch/pressure on the four screws/adjustable feet did not produce change in reading, my zero drift essentially disappeared."​

But is that worth doing every time you use the scale first? I do not try to make things that accurate. I do not weigh and separate bullets either. So theres that.

 

[LiveLife]

But is that worth doing every time you use the scale first? I do not try to make things that accurate.

No. I use Ohaus 10-10/RCBS 5-0-5 beam scales and "cheap" digital scales for everyday powder charge verification as 0.06 - 0.08/0.1 gr check weight verification is good enough for my reloading applications.

Addressing zero drift was for the myth busting thread.

 

[irishlad]

No. I use Ohaus 10-10/RCBS 5-0-5 beam scales and "cheap" digital scales for everyday powder charge verification as 0.06 - 0.08/0.1 gr check weight verification is good enough for my reloading applications.

Addressing zero drift was for the myth busting thread.

That is what I use too, a 5-0-5 and a FA 750.

I agree as in my opinion 0.1 gr resolution is "good enough" for most reloading applications.

But OP did ask the question and some of us want to be able to resolve/trickle powder charge down to a single kernel ...

And there now exists a 0.01 gr resolution scale while many higher resolution scales are at 0.02 gr resolution (Oh no, I don't NEED one ... but thinking about getting one to test for THR ... ) - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/creedmoor-sports-reloading-scale.902411/#post-12224791

Please do test it. I always enjoy your reviews(myth busting). I would very likely buy one if you give it the thumbs up.

 

[Airborne Falcon]

So I knew I had seen it ... I finally found it.

Handloaders Magazine, bi-monthly, I only have them randomly back about 30 years. Each issue has a "Propellant Profile" article, usually profiling two different propellants. They break it down by burn rate on the quickness scale, kernal size, almost all of them include weight, and nitro content ... they really go all-out breaking down propellants.

Subsequently they have printed four or five "Propellant Profiles" volumes which includes all of their articles compiled over the years. I have one or two of those but I can't find them at the moment ... they're in a box somewhere. I ran out of bookshelf space in my new reloading man cave ... much smaller than my old one. When I find it I'll take pictures of pertinent articles on specific propellants.

 

[Engineer1911]

I am recovering from left shoulder joint replacement, but have run out of popcorn, This is a topic that has never entered my mind as possibly worth doing, What does the data validate?

 

[LiveLife]

What does the data validate?

That you are able to resolve/trickle powder down to a single kernel so you can work on other reloading variables to make your load more consistent.

In past decades, scales used for reloading like Ohaus 10-10 had resolution of 0.1 gr yet reloaders used different "tuning" techniques and camera at pointer to detect addition of single kernel to make powder charges more consistent.

If your load is not consistent enough to overshadow higher resolution of powder charges then this may not help.

 

[WestKentucky]

I am recovering from left shoulder joint replacement, but have run out of popcorn, This is a topic that has never entered my mind as possibly worth doing, What does the data validate?

The more precise and repeatable a person can get means less “error” aka slop. If you can only measure to the whole grain then you can’t be certain of whether you are over, under, or dead on for a lot of pistol rounds because the scale doesn’t report where you are. You just know that your at 3 which means somewhere between 2.50 and 3.49. That’s an extreme, but if your nailing everything down to an exact point then your eliminating error to be more repeatable which translates to more precise on target. Every digit we drill down, every variable we can stabilize puts the pressure straight to the shooter. If we make perfect ammo and shoot it through a perfect gun under perfect conditions then there is no reason we can shoot 1 hole groups til the cows come home… if the shooter does his part. That’s the big deal for me is in seeing how well I do my job when I’m behind the trigger.

 

[Varminterror]

if your nailing everything down to an exact point then your eliminating error to be more repeatable which translates to more precise on target.

The real problem is that, within the context of measuring powder charges to the nearest kernel, this isn’t true.

 

[JFrank]

The real problem is that, within the context of measuring powder charges to the nearest kernel, this isn’t true.

Without speaking for mr. VT I will attempt to translate.
A decent node would be about 3/10 wide let’s say 42.2 -42.4 gr
1/10 gr of Varget as earlier posted equals approx 6 kernels.
Total kernels within the node equals 18 …

Q- can 1 kernel make a difference on paper ?

jim