GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-20-2013, 14:06   #1
Burncycle
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 780
Performance Criteria Based Caliber Design

If you had an arbitrary set of specifications, such as

"One inch expansion and a total of 13" Penetration through calibrated ballistics gel"

Is there a formula to calculate the ratios of diameters, masses, weights, and velocities that would work to achieve that performance, assuming the metallurgy knowledge was there to tune the HP to expand predictably and consistently?

Obviously the more the round expands the more it experiences drag (like a parachute) and the more quickly it loses velocity in tissue which can lead to less penetration... increasing overall velocity may compensate somewhat assuming the bullet doesn't over expand or tear itself apart, so maybe increased mass (and therefore momentum / inertia) would be superior in achieving the depth of penetration with that kind of expansion. The bullet would have to be designed and tuned to those tolerances and particular velocity ranges.

Basically if you were to come up with a novel cartridge design from a clean sheet (not just a wildcat unless that would meet your criteria) just as a thought exercise, how would one go about calculating it so that it's in the ballpark?

Last edited by Burncycle; 01-20-2013 at 14:06..
Burncycle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2013, 10:02   #2
RichardB
Silver Membership
Senior Member
 
RichardB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NC
Posts: 1,438
Since I don't do any math beyond simple algebra can't give you the magic formula. Many products are the result of test, evaluate test, modify product, and test again until the desired product is created.

Previously on this site a book by someone named McPherson was referenced as a scientific starting point. Since i don't do advanced math that book never made into my library but some others here can point you in it's direction. The M4 carbine site seems to have access to many folks with technical backgrounds who could assist you.

http://www.m4carbine.net/forumdisplay.php?f=91


Have fun in your quest!
__________________
Richard

“Food for thought is no substitute for the real thing”
RichardB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 19:32   #3
SCmasterblaster
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Hartford, Vermont
Posts: 16,020
What is this all about?
__________________
Gun Ownership Offers Freedom in Many Dimensions
SCmasterblaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 20:09   #4
kaech
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: CG wisconsin
Posts: 409
:confused:

posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
__________________
17,19,19fde,26,23,32*
kaech is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 21:21   #5
rustytxrx
Senior Member
 
rustytxrx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,068
I am sure there are those who could calculate all the relative data. Not sure it is us . We know from fluid dymanics that the drag is proportional to the density of the fluid and proportional to the square of the speed. I guess we would need the reynolds number of the projection before expansion......

Ah, better get your calculus book out
__________________
Rusty
Texas, I luv u
rustytxrx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2013, 07:00   #6
RichardB
Silver Membership
Senior Member
 
RichardB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NC
Posts: 1,438
Burncycle, I found the book. It may or may not be what you are seeking. Many other folks on this web site found it enlightening.



__________________
Richard

“Food for thought is no substitute for the real thing”
RichardB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2013, 12:39   #7
1canvas
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: ne ohio
Posts: 2,480
Quote:
Originally Posted by Burncycle View Post
If you had an arbitrary set of specifications, such as

"One inch expansion and a total of 13" Penetration through calibrated ballistics gel"

Is there a formula to calculate the ratios of diameters, masses, weights, and velocities that would work to achieve that performance, assuming the metallurgy knowledge was there to tune the HP to expand predictably and consistently?

Obviously the more the round expands the more it experiences drag (like a parachute) and the more quickly it loses velocity in tissue which can lead to less penetration... increasing overall velocity may compensate somewhat assuming the bullet doesn't over expand or tear itself apart, so maybe increased mass (and therefore momentum / inertia) would be superior in achieving the depth of penetration with that kind of expansion. The bullet would have to be designed and tuned to those tolerances and particular velocity ranges.

Basically if you were to come up with a novel cartridge design from a clean sheet (not just a wildcat unless that would meet your criteria) just as a thought exercise, how would one go about calculating it so that it's in the ballpark?
after hunting large game for over 40 years one thing I have learned is that performance on paper and even gel often does not square with real life on flesh perfomance.
__________________
Member - Armed Citizens Legal Defense Network
1canvas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2013, 12:56   #8
M 7
Senior Member
 
M 7's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Burncycle View Post
If you had an arbitrary set of specifications, such as

"One inch expansion and a total of 13" Penetration through calibrated ballistics gel"

Is there a formula to calculate the ratios of diameters, masses, weights, and velocities that would work to achieve that performance, assuming the metallurgy knowledge was there to tune the HP to expand predictably and consistently?

Obviously the more the round expands the more it experiences drag (like a parachute) and the more quickly it loses velocity in tissue which can lead to less penetration... increasing overall velocity may compensate somewhat assuming the bullet doesn't over expand or tear itself apart, so maybe increased mass (and therefore momentum / inertia) would be superior in achieving the depth of penetration with that kind of expansion. The bullet would have to be designed and tuned to those tolerances and particular velocity ranges.

Basically if you were to come up with a novel cartridge design from a clean sheet (not just a wildcat unless that would meet your criteria) just as a thought exercise, how would one go about calculating it so that it's in the ballpark?
Here is another book

http://quantitativeammunitionselection.com/the_book

that contains the formulas (or formulae, if you like ) that would allow you to make calculations like those. I also found the presentation of the formulas to be much clearer and more usable than in Bullet Penetration where you must first find them and then put them into more usable form.

There are also lots of examples (two whole chapters worth) that will help you use the equations, too.

From the website:

Quote:
QUANTITATIVE AMMUNITION SELECTION presents a mathematical model that allows armed professionals and lawfully-armed citizens to evaluate the terminal ballistic performance of self-defense ammunition using water as a valid ballistic test medium.

Based upon a modified fluid dynamics equation that correlates highly (r = +0.94) to more than 700 points of manufacturer- and laboratory-test data, the quantitative model allows the use of water to generate terminal ballistic test results equivalent to those obtained in calibrated ten percent ordnance gelatin.

The quantitative model accurately predicts the permanent wound cavity volume and mass, terminal penetration depth, and exit velocity of handgun projectiles as these phenomena would occur in calibrated ten percent ordnance gelatin and soft tissue.

The quantitative model is concisely explained using plain language and illustrated with clearly presented computational examples that provide guidance in every aspect of the model's application.

Besides including a variable for the density of soft tissue, the quantitative model employs a material strength variable within its governing expression that allows for the computational evaluation of any type of soft tissue. Within a confidence interval of 95%, the quantitative model predicts the terminal penetration depth of projectiles in calibrated ordnance gelatin with a margin of error of one centimeter.
There is also a couple of models near the end of the book that can be used to calculate penetration through clothing and sheet steel panels. (Very easy to use, too. )
__________________
For those who CCW:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

Last edited by M 7; 01-25-2013 at 14:51..
M 7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2013, 20:33   #9
rustytxrx
Senior Member
 
rustytxrx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,068
M 7, got the book for Kindle from amazom for $3.98. Interesting read
__________________
Rusty
Texas, I luv u
rustytxrx is offline   Reply With Quote

 
  
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 00:32.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 656
150 Members
506 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,672
Aug 11, 2014 at 2:31