Author Topic: OK I'm hooked! (Read 1662 times)

Medbill · « **on:** July 05, 2005, 02:26:31 AM »

After years of owning this cannon I finally decided to shoot some blanks out of it yesterday. MAN WAS IT FUN. The neighbors actually LOVED IT! Firing at night was the best of all. Sorry I didn't capture the pics too well bit it was a blast.

Enjoy the pics of my lil friend.

Double D · « **Reply #1 on:** July 05, 2005, 02:42:53 AM »

Tell us more about your gun? Bore size, history, maker?

That's a dandy! Love the truck!

Medbill · « **Reply #2 on:** July 05, 2005, 07:06:25 AM »

Hi Double D,

Well its has a 20" deep tube, 1" bore and as far as the history of it I have no idea who made it or anything. Wish I did. I can tell you that it makes a nice kaboom and blows a smoke ring pretty high. It also looked amazing at night.

That's one of the reasons I haven't even fired a blank out of it till now. Someone who supposedly knows about such things took a look at it and said I could shoot ball out of it without any worries. Well I'm a worrier so I settled on blanks till someone really in the know takes a good look at it. I was concerned because of the casting marks that are still visible around the sides of it. The bore is nice and shiny without any seams or anything visible. If anyone knows more about and can tell by pics I'll be glad to take more of it.

Now I want a 1841 mountain howitzer! I hear they really rattle the windows. I guess if I sold my GTO I'd be able to afford one.

Billy

Calamity Jane · « **Reply #3 on:** July 05, 2005, 09:32:51 AM »

Quote

casting marks

?

Cast, especially a casting of unknown material and unknown quality, should be treated as a "looker", not a "shooter".

On the other hand, if you have enough wall thinkness, you could bore it out and install a liner of good known grade steel and have a FINE SHOOTER!

Medbill · « **Reply #4 on:** July 05, 2005, 12:06:56 PM »

Hi Calamity,

I'm guessing its cast because there are seam marks going all the way around that haven't been totally ground down.

How much thickness would I need to line it and who could do the work? Don't want to be doing anything potentially dangerous.

Thanks much,

Billy

guardsgunner · « **Reply #5 on:** July 05, 2005, 01:32:17 PM »

Medbill,
I enlarged the 3/4 veiw of your barrel. Does it appear to have a ring in the casting about 3/8" away from the edge of the bore? If it does it may already have a liner in it.
Most cannon barrels are and were cast.

Cat Whisperer · « **Reply #6 on:** July 05, 2005, 02:52:21 PM »

Medbill -

Welcome - thanks for posting your pictures!

TAKE NOTE EVERYONE, look and see the FIRE EXTINGUISHER. That's practicing good safety!

.

Medbill · « **Reply #7 on:** July 06, 2005, 02:25:32 AM »

Thanks folks, learning lots and appreciate the help. DD had the hose ready to go as well. Fire is scary stuff and seconds count.

Anyway...here are two pics of the muzzle. Best I can tell is it isn't lined. Will look it over with a magnifying glass later today.

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a295/medbill/muzzlewithflash.jpg" alt="Image hosted by Photobucket.com">

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a295/medbill/muzzlenoflash.jpg" alt="Image hosted by Photobucket.com">

Max Caliber · « **Reply #8 on:** July 06, 2005, 08:34:26 AM »

Have you checked to see if the barrel is made of steel? There was a cannon in a mall shoe shop here years ago that looked a lot like yours but the barrel was made of aluminum or zinc or something but it was not made to shoot.

Medbill · « **Reply #9 on:** July 06, 2005, 03:30:52 PM »

Hi Max,

It sure as heck isn't either, this thing weighs a ton! I think the over length is 26". Could have used some more filing to get rid of all the casting marks, might do that one day myself.

Now who do I talk too about getting this baby lined to play it safe?

Thanks much,

Billy

Max Caliber · « **Reply #10 on:** July 08, 2005, 01:56:27 PM »

Billy,

Read everything on this forum that you can find on barrel liners, breach plugs and vent pieces then contact a machine shop that can handle the project and discuss with them what you are trying to accomplish, then get back on the forum and run your findings by the group. There are some very knowledgeable people here that can steer you in the right direction. The important thing is to fit the proper liner to the barrel, don't try to fit the barrel to a piece of tubing because it is handy or cheap.

Max

Double D · « **Reply #11 on:** July 08, 2005, 05:32:30 PM »

Get your self a copy of this book and learn how to make and install a proper liner THE MORE COMPLETE CANNONEER By M.C. Switlik with selected excerpts from other artillery manuals

(Man, I need to get Switlik to give me a commission)

Medbill · « **Reply #12 on:** July 09, 2005, 05:16:23 PM »

THANKS!!!

Billy

kappullen · « **Reply #13 on:** August 10, 2005, 10:11:00 AM »

Hi, my name is Kap,

I'd give the thing a magnet test, proof it with two balls, and a double charge. Isn't that standard practice?

I might also check the bore depth for metal thickness at the breach.

Check to see if the breach end of the bore is like a drill point, or spherical like it should be.

If it's a drill point, take care to get your hot embers out.

Hide behind a big tree, or stone wall.

Let her rip, or burst.

If that dosen't phase it, have fun.

If she blows, call Hern Iron. They have to make a living too.

I can't see the trouble and expense of lining it just to shoot blanks.

Kap

Cat Whisperer · « **Reply #14 on:** August 10, 2005, 12:54:40 PM »

Quote from: kappullen

Hi, my name is Kap,
I'd give the thing a magnet test, proof it with two balls, and a double charge. Isn't that standard practice?
I might also check the bore depth for metal thickness at the breach.
Check to see if the breach end of the bore is like a drill point, or spherical like it should be.
If it's a drill point, take care to get your hot embers out.
Hide behind a big tree, or stone wall.
Let her rip, or burst.
If that dosen't phase it, have fun.
If she blows, call Hern Iron. They have to make a living too.
I can't see the trouble and expense of lining it just to shoot blanks.
Kap

Kap - WELCOME to the board!

You've said a mouthfull in your first post! If you can, put up some pictures of what you shoot - we'd love to see them.

Let me make a few comments from my experiences.

Proof testing is not a bad idea, and there are a number of ways doing it.

Checking metal thickness at breach and form of the end of the bore are fundamentally sound common sense things to do! The spherical end removes a sharp inside corner (stress riser) making the piece stronger. Hadn't heard any thing about sparks, but it sure doesn't hurt to be wary.

When it comes to lining & shooting blanks, there I have a much different opinion. Read the 'stickys' at the top of the forum. I have seen from 15' away an unlined bronze signal cannon (designed for salutes) explode. 1" bore about 18" long, professionally made. When you light the fuse you would really like to KNOW that it's a cannon and not a bomb.

Now that's done, we really do WELCOME you here! Toss ideas out & you will get several perspectives.

Keep it safe, legal, polite and fun!

Calamity Jane · « **Reply #15 on:** August 11, 2005, 07:37:02 AM »

Sorry to butt in but "proof testing" has not been standard practice in engineering since about 1880-something.

The only "proof testing" that is allowed (in engineering) is testing one sample to destruction.

It was found that "proof testing" could (and often DID) cause material over-stress that left the item weaker than it was originally and led to eventual failure.

Please do not think "proof testing" has anything to do with safety - proof testing is a design or process verification and the item so tested should NEVER be used "in regular service"

Cat Whisperer · « **Reply #16 on:** August 11, 2005, 09:25:14 AM »

Quote from: Calamity Jane

Sorry to butt in but "proof testing" has not been standard practice in engineering since about 1880-something.

The only "proof testing" that is allowed (in engineering) is testing one sample to destruction.

It was found that "proof testing" could (and often DID) cause material over-stress that left the item weaker than it was originally and led to eventual failure.

Please do not think "proof testing" has anything to do with safety - proof testing is a design or process verification and the item so tested should NEVER be used "in regular service"

WELL PUT, Very well explained.

Thanks for posting this explanation from a design perspective.

GGaskill · « **Reply #17 on:** August 11, 2005, 09:29:45 AM »

It is my understanding that all modern firearms are test fired with at least one "proof" load in excess of standard maximum pressure. How much in excess I do not know, but presumably within a range that is not expected to cause permanent deformation in the absence of a defect.

kappullen · « **Reply #18 on:** August 11, 2005, 09:47:52 AM »

Quote from: Calamity Jane

Sorry to butt in but "proof testing" has not been standard practice in engineering since about 1880-something.

The only "proof testing" that is allowed (in engineering) is testing one sample to destruction.

"

Hi Jane,

I work for NASA, and we proof test every thing that goes in space, as well as every lifting, holding fixture etc.

That's part of my job as a machinist to make tooling and fixtures for proof testing of one kind or other.

We shake em, pull em, push em, blast en, freez em, and bake em, to try to break em before they go up in the wild blue yonder.

Even a quarter inch flight bolt gets proof tested. You know some of those bolts don't break untill you load em up to over 1000 pounds.

Once in a while one gets by us!

I guess I'm behind the times.
I'll try to re-educate myself, sorry.

Kap

Calamity Jane · « **Reply #19 on:** August 11, 2005, 09:51:55 AM »

GG: I know most new firearms are "proof tested" but such testing would be only slightly over the normal "maximum" load. I do not know what the actual figures are.

I DO know about boilers. A boiler is tested to 125% of its design pressure. Any pressure over 150% of design is cause to condem the boiler. Mechanically, from an engineering perspective, any item stressed beyond 80% of its designed "ultimate strength" is considered no longer useable.

kappullen · « **Reply #20 on:** August 11, 2005, 02:26:04 PM »

Jane,

You are right on about boilers.
I've been a fire bug all my life fooling with steam boilers and cannons and such.

Here's one I built back around 1985.

The state boys do want to come and watch me pump her up, and then steam her up once a year.

About cannon.

Probably the most famous cannon to blow up was the Swamp Angel in the Civil War.

She was an eight inch Parrott firing 160 pound rifled slug, or shells, at Charleston South Carolina. After 36, or was it 37 shots she blew up.

The Parrott as you know was a cast iron gun with a wrought iron collar shrunk around near the breach of the gun. The cast iron broke inside the collar and the breach went by by.

We all know this hobby has some risk, unless you set your gun by the fireplace to never move it.

But then again, a very experienced bicycle rider in my club bought the farm a couple weeks ago t-boned by a mini van.

Everything has risk, and those with cast guns have to be especially careful
not to be a cowboy with your gun. Find a safe charge, and stick to it.

Oh yea Jane, Where did you get your hat? My wife would look hot in one too.

Thanks,

kap pullen

kappullen · « **Reply #21 on:** August 11, 2005, 02:55:03 PM »

Tim,

Maybe you can give some particulars on that blown up signal cannon.
Just like to know. Was it the gun, operator or a combination of errors?
Thanks,

Kap

Double D · « **Reply #22 on:** August 11, 2005, 04:22:52 PM »

Quote from: Calamity Jane

Sorry to butt in but "proof testing" has not been standard practice in engineering since about 1880-something.

The only "proof testing" that is allowed (in engineering) is testing one sample to destruction.

It was found that "proof testing" could (and often DID) cause material over-stress that left the item weaker than it was originally and led to eventual failure.

Please do not think "proof testing" has anything to do with safety - proof testing is a design or process verification and the item so tested should NEVER be used "in regular service"

Tell that to the europeans Calimity they still proof test all firearms. I sometimes think it is a process called job protection...for the proof house people.

Double D · « **Reply #23 on:** August 11, 2005, 04:27:47 PM »

Quote from: GGaskill

It is my understanding that all modern firearms are test fired with at least one "proof" load in excess of standard maximum pressure. How much in excess I do not know, but presumably within a range that is not expected to cause permanent deformation in the absence of a defect.

New designs and models are blue pill tested, but the gun tested with proof loads is retained for historical reference. All other guns made for market are test fired for function with standard ammunition.

Calamity Jane · « **Reply #24 on:** August 12, 2005, 03:04:36 PM »

Nice engine Kap! Seen mine? http://www.geocities.com/diannebest