Black powder

[smugglervt]

I've read the threads about fffg and ffffg black powder for deployment charges but has anyone used ffg? I've got a full container of it but none of the other.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Rocketry Forum mobile app

 

[Steve Shannon]

I’ve not used it, but if you have the right screen you could corn it to the smaller size.
Rather than that read some of Jim Jarvis’s posts about getting full combustion and ground test with the 2F. I bet you can make it work.

 

[Andrew_ASC]

I've never used FFG personally, but I've used P substitute successfully which some people on the forum are not fond of using P type at all. It was what was in stock under a time deadline and it sure beat using modern centerfire cartridge smokeless powder of any type for SEDS multistage comp. Since you have an ample supply of it you can ground test frequently and develop a charge load for your application experimentally. I ended up running a charge calculation based on FFFG, it was quite small at 0.1 grams. Experimentally incremented in 0.1 grams until 0.6-0.7 grams of P type got a wadding a wash rag about 15-20ft out of a scrap section of airframe tube 29mm MD airframe same volume as calculated from when a motor was inserted into real airframe etc. Then if you have any spare airframe tubing and wadding test it in the scrap airframe tubing with a wash rag so you don't trash your expensive rocketry gear first... I crisped a cheaper chute first try with nomex protector, it was a top flight chute. You can seal off the end of the airframe tube scrap you want to test with HVAC tape or another method of your choice. We later tried the real airframe with shock cord, wadding, and a chute, after we felt confident in charge amount.

You might want to start with FFFG calculation then try FFG BP in slow increments since grains are coarser. I wouldn't want to risk the real rocket kit or scratch airframe until you've got it tested several times in scrap tubing first on ground. I wouldn't have any doubts of FFG BP because it will be safer than any smokeless powder, but it will need ground testing first.

The student rocketry group I was with we were using 9/32" automobile vac rubber hoses compressed charges and sealing it then igniting with MJG FireWires. We later moved to HVAC tape tightly wrapped to save mass and packing volume. HVAC tape was sticker than duct tape, but wrapping it right took some practice else it would leak and burn rather than pressurize. We tried masking tape first out of curiousness.
If you want to do really high altitude stuff, the Jim Jarvis guy has a real cool T-shaped charge container you can make and it works way better than what I recommend. I'm still new at this too so take what I say with grain of salt. Hopefully I didn't rant or give too much bad advice...

 

[rharshberger]

I've never used FFG personally, but I've used P substitute successfully which some people on the forum are not fond of using P type at all. It was what was in stock under a time deadline and it sure beat using smokeless powder of any type for SEDS multistage comp. Since you have an ample supply of it you can ground test frequently and develop a charge load for your application experimentally. I ended up running a charge calculation based on FFFG, it was quite small at 0.1 grams. Experimentally incremented in 0.1 grams until 0.6-0.7 grams of P type got a wadding a wash rag about 15-20ft out of a scrap section of airframe tube 29mm MD airframe same volume as calculated from when a motor was inserted into real airframe etc. Then if you have any spare airframe tubing and wadding test it in the scrap airframe tubing with a wash rag so you don't trash your expensive rocketry gear first... I crisped a cheaper chute first try with nomex protector, it was a top flight chute. You can seal off the end of the airframe tube scrap you want to test with HVAC tape or another method of your choice. We later tried the real airframe with shock cord, wadding, and a chute, after we felt confident in charge amount.

You might want to start with FFFG calculation then try FFG BP in slow increments since grains are coarser. I wouldn't want to risk the real rocket kit or scratch airframe until you've got it tested several times in scrap tubing first on ground. I wouldn't have any doubts of FFG BP because it will be safer than any smokeless powder, but it will need ground testing first.

The student rocketry group I was with we were using 9/32" automobile vac rubber hoses compressed charges and sealing it then igniting with MJG FireWires. We later moved to HVAC tape tightly wrapped to save mass and packing volume. HVAC tape was sticker than duct tape, but wrapping it right took some practice else it would leak and burn rather than pressurize. We tried masking tape first out of curiousness.
If you want to do really high altitude stuff, the Jim Jarvis guy has a real cool T-shaped charge container you can make and it works way better than what I recommend. I'm still new at this too so take what I say with grain of salt. Hopefully I didn't rant or give too much bad advice...

Pyrodex P is a black powder substitute and it is SMOKELESS POWDER. However most of the flyers here use FFFG BP because its the easiest and most reliable to use of the powders, and get consistent results with.

 

[Andrew_ASC]

Didn't even know that about the P stuff... It was for sale with the muzzleloader components at Sportsman's Warehouse next to pyrodex. I had an actual can of smokeless IMR4064 for reloading centerfire .30-06 hunting rifle cartridges, at way higher pressures, and I wasn't going to play rocket with that IMR long burning cylindrical stuff either LOL.

 

[Tonimus]

I use FFg exclusively for rocketry because that is what I buy for my muzzleloader. I have no issues with it. Ground test just like you would with 3Fg or 4Fg.

 

[smugglervt]

Guess I'll give it a try. I've got plenty of it. Thanks for all the suggestions.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Rocketry Forum mobile app

 

[cbrarick]

I'd do some ground testing before you do that. The results aren't gonna be close to FFFFg

 

[Bat-mite]

Pack it very tightly!

 

[smugglervt]

Yup, I'll be ground testing in the spring.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Rocketry Forum mobile app

 

[dhbarr]

Some muzzleloaders use 5-10% double-base powder together with FG in duplex loads. A similar approach may be useful here, but I don't know of any writeups.

 

[Andrew_ASC]

Man.. All of my modern cartridge reloading handbooks strongly advise against "mixing" different powder types. I'd just use what was in the can without making it more complicated or hazardous than it already is. It's just more consistent if he sticks with one powder type in my dumb opinion... Even if it sucks.. It will consistently and safely suck... Those books were very anal about only have one powder type on the bench at a time and people have still blown up hardened cold hammer forged steel barrels and receivers on firearms since. Lawyers kept "nerfing" the maximum charge loads each passing year.

 

[Andrew_ASC]

Granted people have made their own black powders out of chemicals and charcoal for centuries. I just don't like the idea of home powder chemist of mixing two commercial powders because you could really screw up the burn rates and pressure generated by accident. He's just trying to get a slight force from rapid pressurization in a circular cross sectional area of a tube to expel a chute. Not beat a powder company at its own game of powder optimization.

 

[dhbarr]

The purpose of duplex loads in this context is purely to use up coarser powder while still burning relatively clean.

 

[Andrew_ASC]

There's no way for an amatuer to ensure that powder A of type blah is consistently mixed with Powder B of type blah. You can measure by mass. But it will not disperse evenly amongst the granules in a safe repeatable fashion especially when container is moved about without commercial processes forming consistent new granules containing both types as one granule. Sorry if I got all wank about it... There's a reason you don't see write ups because some people really got hurt trying.

 

[dhbarr]

Please stop answering questions you are unqualified to ask. That's not how duplex loads work at all.

 

[Andrew_ASC]

The purpose of duplex loads in this context is purely to use up coarser powder while still burning relatively clean.

Usually a hot soapy wash rag with hot water will immediately clean any black powder residue with zero ill effects. There are already cleaner burning commercial black powder substitutes with consistent results should the OP decide to chose a cleaner burning powder. What you are recommending I do not trust at all unless you want to post a write up for doing this on blackpowders or have done this in the past frequently and proved it works. I am very skeptical. With modern smokeless powders this was a defienant will grenade a firearm into pieces zone due to higher pressures involved. And no book recommended mixing modern powders.

I can't see the duplex load worth the risks involved here when everyone else has used a single powder type successfully. I'm not going to argue with about it. I hope the OP makes the right decision.

 

[Andrew_ASC]

Please stop answering questions you are unqualified to ask. That's not how duplex loads work at all.

Please inform of source recommending mixing powder types. For safety reasons the Speer and Hornady reloading manuals advise against this practice. I'm all ears if you have tried this safely. I've fired thousands of rounds of modern smokeless reloaded ammo cartridges with once fired brass self reloaded with commercial powder brands and a few muzzleloader lead balls with FFG powder loads. They all used one powder type per trigger pull safely. Where's a source bud? So I can read it myself. When I see a topic advising doing something against a printed known safety protocol with commercial powders from known documented trusted sources it scares me, especially when a there's a no write up,and a generic you're an unqualified twat response is given. A Speer reloading handbook carries the same weight as a TRA safety code booklet except it's for firearms ammunition manufacturing at home using tools they sell to do it properly. This unqualified Drew Twat still has all his fingers attached... Never in my life has using a duplex load crossed my mind out of a safety aspect.

 

[dhbarr]

I think I'm probably done here, but just for everyone playing along at home lest they think I'm advocating for wantonly negligent recklessness: ya' don't mix 'em; and you push dog barf.

And sure, I'd love to test 0b vs 5fg vs 7fa vs meal xf with or without 5-10% over a range from VVN310 through HUS869. You buy the powder, I'll provide the test facility. You can even have first billing in the write-up.

 

[Handeman]

The OP wanted to know if he could use ffG black powder. The answer is yes. The 2f will burn slower and tend to disperse more. I haven't used 2f, but I found I had a lot more small burn holes in the chute protectors using 3f then 4f. I would expect 2f to cause more burn holes because more grains will be burning further from the initial point of ignition because of the slower burn rate.

Put a little dog barf between the charges and chute protectors, ground test for consistency and you should be fine. Much easier to use BP of any grade then trying to get the consistent and required containment with BP substitutes IMHO.