Powder Designs

[Tucson-John]

I have a modest science background & have searched for a long time to determine the percentages of nitrocellulose & nitroglycerin as well as stabilizers in various canister powders. Knowing that most of this are "trade secrets", I didn't expect much but I found that common knowledge was that older manufactured formulations had SOME of their % available (Bullseye: high HG content; perhaps as high as 41% Diphenynlamine 1.3% - Titegroup 38% NG ? etc...). My question for the group is this: Does there exist any database or knowledge-base for the levels of compositions of DB canister powders? And do any of you have reliable information as to some of the levels of chemical compositions within some formulations?

Example: Nitro100 contains 21% NG & it seems that at that level certain things can be expected of the properties of the powder. One of which is levels of heat & reactions to existing ambient temp upon ignition. This is also reflected in the level of plasticizers, stabilizers (Centralite, etc) & graphite glaze in place.

I believe that I am on to something in hand loading for certain weather conditions by having both expected levels of pressure & chrono available. But I need info as to what DB powder has what component percentages. There are quite a few variables obviously but I have notes going back perhaps 6 years and I think I can start to project what powders may be more consistent for what levels of temperature on a very consistent level if I had even more info.

Alliant was rather forthcoming when I wrote to an older gentleman who was retiring and worked for the (Hercules) firm before it was bought out. Hodgen was pretty tight lipped (I could never figure out where some got the figure for Titegroup(?) - but AA was the toughest because they appear to buy up surplus and may not even HAVE accurate figures for their DB pistol powders. This could also explain why some Accurate Arms pistol powders have unaccounted for variances in both performance & pressure. I do not believe this discussion would be violating any ethics issues - as trade secrets in composition are only of any importance to a firm PRIOR to their bringing a product to market; the rest has patent protection. But it would REALLY help me have some official data behind what I've worked on for quite some time.

If anyone has ANY composition & formulation data could you please make that available: in terms of % of NC, NG, Centralite, diphenylamine, & polyesters/graphite glaze? Thanks in advance! I actually have searched for this info for several years with limited success.

Additionally, if anyone else has worked on chemical / performance observations with common canister propellants; please chime in! I'm sure others have thought this over beside myself.

[kevin c]

I'd think that all that info is proprietary, and therefore not likely to be available to the public (even the informed public that we represent, or the very informed subset you represent).

Most folks here are not industry types - our (or at least my) understanding of powders is in their practical uses, not the chemistry (though I've read a little and have a vague inkling what you're talking about). Guy Neill drops by on occasion, and may know some of what you asking about.

Good luck in your search.

[Tucson-John]

Thank you. I made a call yesterday & gave my word I would keep the manufacturer's name confidential but I found some very interesting information.

This manufacturer's employee stated that due to the re-blending level (number of times they re-blend)* of their powder they actually do not publicly publish their exact figures! Therefore a production run (about 10K pounds) may vary as much as 3-5%. This is startling and speaks to SAMMI's issue of continually lowering the load levels & yearly new booklets. Originally 357mag was loaded at levels we would consider today as way over-loaded. It also speaks to the lack of consistency experienced by some who have decades of experience &/or suddenly have a variance or accident. This company buys their powder and does not manufacture first level powder compositions. They start with a government or private lot & work with what they gave gotten. They are licensed as a manufacturer due to their manipulation (re-blending) of someone else material.

In fact, any actual published percentages speak to a very high level of quality. Therefore this information becomes even MORE valuable; as it gives guidelines as to who has either a direct production control over the powder from production to canister to sale - or who repackages to a point of the need for extreme carefulness in developing a load. Due to OSHA's regulations the solvent used many years ago has also been replaced in US held corporations and this is problematic as the substitute is either more costly or (if done on the cheap) does a less effective job in separation of materials.

*Powder is tested continually before it is released & if it does not meet a standard it goes back to be re-blended. This adds cost, time, & variance, that in a pressure sensitive cartridge like a .40 can mean a great deal in terms of safety. Thus we see figures going lower to maintain a safety margin. However, consistency (the very essence of accuracy) suffers from manufacturers who employ this dynamic in their facilities.

Safety has gone way up in the history of American handloading. This is reflected in the number of self-reports that SAMMI undertook with the help of another group but reflects in the lowering of published maximum loads. Look for a continual lowering of the suggested max load as time passes; primarily due to the loss of direct control over original production. On a negative note this also gives the handloader less control over his product due to companies that essentially "middleman" their product.

Knowing that a company can say "we have x percent of this material" in their product is a sign that YOUR loads will be the same from one session to the next.

Edited January 14, 2009 by Tucson-John

[kevin c]

Interesting stuff there.

So even in canister powders in which some degree of consistency is needed/expected, the composition may vary, since the starting material varies. Sounds like the "manufacturer" is hoping for more consistency in internal ballistics/performance than in the actual powder composition. Still some inevitable variation results, hence the long standing recommendation to always do another load work up for any new batch of powder.

Some manufacturers do control the product from end to end (Vihtavouri is an example I think). That may explain some of the consistency of their powders.

I do recall reading that some older powders were, for at least a few years after WWII, based on left over cannon powders (I imagine just powder enough to fire one salvo from a battery of 16" guns would load a heck of a lot of pistol and rifle rounds).

Thanks for the info, Tucscon

Edited January 17, 2009 by kevin c

[Tom D.]

From the preceeding posts, it seems that it would be VERY useful just to identify the 'manufacturers' that do actually manufacture their own powders as opposed to the 'blenders'!!

Thankls for the info,so far & I do look forward to more.

[Tucson-John]

From the preceeding posts, it seems that it would be VERY useful just to identify the 'manufacturers' that do actually manufacture their own powders as opposed to the 'blenders'!!

Thankls for the info,so far & I do look forward to more.

To the best of my knowledge Alliant & Hogden come closest to that but even they still buy out gov't / mil-surp lots. However this may be so as to simplify the mfg process as powders can actually be broken down to their components on both a lab & plant level. Many triple based powders (containing nitroguanidine: used in artillery, etc) are bought (& manufactured) by the large canister firms. These products are not cheap to manufacture as they once were due to regulations of safety & environment so existing supplies cut cost.

The level of lab & field work that goes into a finished product is amazing. Only a really large & old firm could have available the knowledge base gathered through history & past work to make that happen. Most everyone has seen canisters of AA with the "Made in the Czech Republic" sticker on them. But AA is also the only company (again TTBoMK) to publish nitroglycerin figures plainly on their reloading booklets. That takes a LOT of confidence!

[Darrell]

I work for an oil refinery. We make gasoline, diesel, and avjet. It seems that all manufacturers whether it be gasoline, gun powder, cereal, etc. now do the same things to reduce cost, increase profit, streamline operations, and as a result sometimes quality is not what it used to be. Example, I make gasoline, if a blend is off test, we either rerun it, or blend it in something else. The end product still has to meet the specs, but it may be at the extreme limit than what we are comfortable with. I too would be interested in info like Tuscon is trying to gather because things like that interest me and allow my brain to eat up data. Thanks Tuscon for bringing this topic to the forefront.

[Tucson-John]

Since I haven't gotten too many responses I've done my best to gather info from other sources. Alliant appears to be one of the most consistent in terms of levels of energetic components. That is, ratio of NC to NG maintaining themselves for the longest "on market" time period. When the company was Hercules, it developed Bullseye, (colored) Dot series, 2400, & Herco. The RATIO formula has not altered but when the company was bought (& the canisters read "formerly Hercules") they did alter levels & even existence of Rosin, polyester as well as the stabilizers Diphenylamine & Ethyl Centalite. Thus the "cleaner burning" marketing agenda on their labels at that period.

The point being that this particular company has the longest proven powder (energetic) components of major canister providers. Their ratios of NC to NG have a track record going back about 60+ years w/ those quoted above. Their allocations to common loadings have remained fairly consistent through-out the years with alterations coming from SAMMI.

The interesting case of the LOWERING of loading data of 357mag being prominent. The changing of loading data of "new" cartridges being interesting in-so-far as chamber design changes also take place [Glock & .40S&W or some companies making their 357sig cartridges head space on the mouth others on both the mouth and shoulder of the cartridge like a rifle]. TTBoMK I have not heard of SAMMI LOWERING any loadings....

Hodgdon in a very interesting company. It's history is relatively new(er) starting off about the mid 1960's. They were interested in development of marketable powder from available material starting points like Cordite or Ballistite (which is 50/50 NC to NG with only a small % of dipheylamine). They are listed as an Importer/Exporter. They also acquired IMR and distribute for Winchester. They recently acquired Goex (Blackpowder). So they are a real "mover" & appear to be a competitive with Allient in the business, having some relationship with Primex Technologies which I suppose gives them the "in" to work with energetic material world-wide.

Due to quite a bit of research the levels of component elements range from zero to a highest level that will allow functionality in today's cartridges. The days of Cordite are over for the most part but canister powder does not HAVE to HAVE anything but an energetic material and a stabilizer: it's burn rate can be controlled by shape & weight alone (as in Cordite).

The range levels that you will really see (IF we can ever get the REAL information) of the powders will be:

Nitroglycerin

Cas Number: 55-63-0

Percentage Range: 0-40%

Nitrocellulose

Cas Number: 9004-70-0

Percentage Range: Remainder to 100%

Diphenylamine

Cas Number: 122-39-4

Percentage Range: 0.3-1.5%

Graphite

Cas Number: 7782-42-5

Percentage Range: 0.02-1%

Dibutyl phthalate

percentage Range: 0-10%

Polyester adipate

proprietary or simple polyester

Percentage Range: 0-10%

Rosin

Cas Number: 8050-09-7

Percentage Range: 0-5%

Ethyl Acetate

Cas Number: 141-78-6

Percentage Range: 0-1.5%

A powder does NOT have to have all of the above materials. Notice the potential high levels of burn-rate modifiers. The stabilizers can exist at a level of 1% but the Rosin & polyester can make up a very large percentage or VIRTUALLY NONE. REX powder (SB NC powder Mfg in Hungary) can be nearly pure NC in flake form. Their powders are named "0" - "3" with REX #2 being a VERY clean pistol powder.

A friend had a quality chrono & was shocked to see how fast some of the 9mm &.38 loads were with virtually no carbon or unburnt powder. The material claims to be NC with an extremely* small level of burn rate modifier (as it's shotgun powder). I believe that the percentages are unusually low; as I have actually not seen any powder this clean previously.

*REX is produced by NIRTOKEMIA of Hungary, available in 1Kg canisters at $23.99 USD

Information quoted above came from MSDS from PRIMEX Technology.

Edited January 27, 2009 by Tucson-John

[redmanfixit]

At risk of some thread drift, I've noticed that the propellant used by CCI in the Blazer Brass .45 ACP is remarkably clean. Would the Rex #2 be similar? I have wondered if I could find out what they were using! Didn't think I could just call them on the phone and ask.

[Tucson-John]

REX is actually remarkable. I mention it (for an example) as the exceptionally low level of unburnt powder in a variety of barrel lengths was similar. REX is not a panacea for all needs, but for clean burn; it's a jaw dropper.

With regards to your Blazer material; you would need to pop one open and actually SEE whats there before you could even start to choose what's competitive with it. An enormous amount can be determined by simple examination.

Would CCI actually tell you what's in it? I have no idea. Sometimes, if you get to a tech instead of a marketing rep, you may get a straight answer. It's worth a 2 minute call if you have an interest. I have wound up with a great deal of journals & books on the subject; just by collecting some esoteric information on smokeless powder when the opportunity arose.

REX has little to NO graphite. This may be a clue. The graphite is used as a method to enhance the metering & pouring of a material as well as helping it deal with static electric initiation problems. It burns poorly and frequently finds itself in residue. That does NOT mean that a powder having graphite will not burn cleanly, but powders that do - generally have little to none [& high residue powders often have a lot of it].

(revision)

I just did a bit of homework for you. CCI (& fellows) have a deal with Alliant for their powder in their packaged ammo. Their Mexico City dist. is a good place to start. I'm going to guess that it's not a canister powder of course, but a bulk lot of of something similar to Power Pistol.

Edited January 29, 2009 by Tucson-John

[redmanfixit]

Thank You!! TJ. I guess I'll investigate Rex as a possible hand loading propellant. Mostly I Load .45 ACP and 9mm. I had not heard of it before.

[Guy Neill]

CCI, Speer and Alliant all have the same corporate parent - ATK.

When CCI first developed the Cleanfire (lead free) primers, the name came from how clean the cases were after firing. I shot some of the first Lawman (brass case) ammunition using Cleanfire primers and the cases looked unfired except for the dimpled primer. Thus, a great amount of the residue you experience comes from the primer.

Factory powders are most commonly non-canister - meaning they are not blended to the same tolerances we see in canister (reloading) powders. It's economics. The unblended (non-canister) powders cost less. As an example, Primex 289 is the same powder as the old Winchester Action Pistol, except that it will have larger lot to lot variations than Action Pistol. Action Pistol, while the same basic powder as 289, is blended to maintain a tighter tolerance. You may have two or three production lots of 289 blended to make the Action Pistol lot.

Then there are powders that have no canister match. Continuing with the 289 example, it was available to the factories before Action Pistol was marketed by Winchester. Now, even though Action Pistol is no longer available (under that name), 289 is still available to the factories.

A powder that is used fairly commonly in factory handgun ammunition is Bullseye 84. The base powder is Bullseye, but it is granulated like 2400 to meter better.

Burn rate is greatly affected by geometry. The perforation seen in some (most?) extruded rifle powders is to control the burn rate by allowing the flame to work both from the outside in, and the inside out. Flakes have their own flame propagation as due Ball powders. Essentially, the more surface area that can burn at the same time, the more gas is generated in a given time.

Guy