Warning

 

Close
Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Cancel Confirm
AR15.COM
AR Sponsor
3/13/2003 9:24:32 AM EDT
Always seems to be question on what "weight bullet" for what "barrel twist rate", but the "length" of the bullet is never questioned.  I just found a small article with some very interesting info and thought some other may find it interesting.

A gentleman named Sir George Greenhill ( a Brit, if his name was something like Pierre Du Squat`, I would have taken this info as being false.) developed a hypothesis that the twist rate T multiplied by bullet length in calibers L is equal to 150.  So the equation is as follows straight from the article, so bear in mind a writer spelled out the equation not a mathetician:

(T)x(L)=150

We are looking for (T) so now the equation looks like this:

(T)=150/(L)

You with me?  Now it get a bit confusing.  To find the length of the bullet in calibers L you have to divide the bullet's length in inches by it caliber width.

(L)= bullet length in inches/bullet caliber

Here is an example:

A .224 cal 75 gr. Hornady BTHP length is .97", so the length is calibers = .97"/.224 or 4.33.  So (L)=4.33.

The equation looks like this:

(T)=150/4.33 or (T)=34.642.  

You're probably thinking that is an alfully slow twist rate, "my god, my muzzleloader is 1x28".  True, but right now (T) is equal to calibers, not inches.  To find (T) in inches, multiply (T) by the bullet's caliber, as such:

Twist in inches = 34.642 x .224 or 7.76

So by using this equation a Hornady .224 cal 75 grain bullet is best suited for a barrel with a 1x7.76, which they do not make.  It falls closer to a 1x8 twist, so a 1x7 twist barrel would not be optimal for this bullet.

Big deal huh?  Everyone knows to use a 1x8 for bullets 75 grains and up, right?  

What about those 80 grain Sierra (one the ones that wont fitted in a standard mag) or Hornady's 75 grain A-max bullets in 1x8 twist barrels.  Follow this equation and you will see a significant difference.

I promise to repost a much easier equation to work with soon.  
3/13/2003 9:36:27 AM EDT
[#1]
[b]Very[/b] interesting!  Thanks for posting this.
3/13/2003 9:51:27 AM EDT
[#2]
Actually Krieger barrels are 1 in 7.7 twist rate.  But then again I am a know nothing knuckle dragger so you might want to check that.
3/13/2003 12:02:01 PM EDT
[#3]
DevL, I stand corrected, Kriegers do come in a 1x7.7 twist.

Does anyone have an 80 grain Sierra bullet I can get a measurement on?

The math on a Hornady 75 grain A-max concludes the "optimal"* twist rate would be 1x6.8.
3/13/2003 1:11:54 PM EDT
[#4]
I've been Googling for some dimensions on the 80 gr. Sierra.  Closest I've come is [url=http://216.239.53.100/search?q=cache:gO086GOovu8C:no-treason.com/laissezfirearm/tracer.htm+sierra+.223+80+grain&hl=en&ie=UTF-8]here[/url], where it's said to be 1/32" shorter than the M856, which would equal 1 1/16" in length.
3/14/2003 7:17:09 PM EDT
[#5]
This is very interesting. Where did you find this article ?

I just did the M856 using el roto's length and .224 for the dia. and got 6.88 . Seems real close to the gov 1/7.

What if the bullets are the same length and different weights ?
3/14/2003 7:32:21 PM EDT
[#6]
Article was is the January '03 edition of the [u]American Rifleman[/u].

The article never discussed weight as a variable in the equation.

With this equation, the 80 grain Sierra would be best suited for 1X7 twist (7.09 was the figure).  I know a lot of HP shooters using 80 grain bullets in 1x8 barrels.  

Need some bullet lengths on lighter weigth bullets from comparison.

Any help?
3/15/2003 5:20:27 AM EDT
[#7]
The Greenhill formula is not real precise and assumes solid lead bullets.  When things like copper jacktes and partial steel cores get tossed into the mix it doesn't work as precisely as the formula implies.

With consistent bullet construction a longer bullet is, not surprisingly, heavier and vv.

-- Chuck
3/15/2003 6:49:21 AM EDT
[#8]
From: [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Barrel twist, Part 1
Message-ID:
Date: 27 Aug 93 15:01:36 GMT
Sender: [email protected]
Organization: AT&T
Lines: 96
Approved: [email protected]


This is the first part of a several part posting on the subject
of determining the barrel twist rate needed to stabilize a given bullet.

A spinning bullet behaves a lot like a spinning top.  Imagine a top
or toy gyroscope that is spinning and balanced on a post.  If the spin
is high enough it will remain balanced, and if it gets below a critical
point the gyro will fall off.  Now think of the spinning bullet
as a top balanced on its base.  Instead of the force of
gravity, we have the air resistance acting on it from the head of
the bullet, and the spin counteracting it.  If the spin decreases
enough, the bullet will fall or tumble, otherwise it will stay
heading into the wind although there may be some precession
evident.  With the bullet problem, the spin is determined by the
barrel twist and the bullet velocity.  The drag is dependent on
the air density, the cross sectional area of the bullet and the
shape.  The drag is expressed with the following equation:

drag = Cd * r^2 * v^2 * p  where

Cd is the unitless coeff of drag (varies with velocity)
r is the radius of the bullet
v is the velocity of the bullet
p is the air density.

If Cd is constant, this says the drag is proportional to v^2.
There is a table of drag force as a fuction of velocity for a
standard projectile in Hatcher's Notebook, which one can graph and
obtain Cd as a function of velocity. In computing Cd(v), r=.5in
for the standard projectile and p = 1.221 g/liter, standard air
density used for the table, 60 deg. F, 30" Hg, and 66% RH.

This shows Cd rises from about 0.1 at 900 ft/sec just below the
speed of sound to almost 1.0 around 1500 ft/sec, just above the speed
of sound, and then drops off slowly from there reaching a value of
0.77 at 3600 ft/sec.  The region between 1500 and 3600 ft/sec fits
nicely to a line:

Cd = 1.146 - 1.047E-4 * v

Cd is 0.98 at 1500 ft/sec and decreases by 0.01 every 100 ft/sec.
Since the drag of an arbitrary bullet may vary from that of the
standard projectile, the form factor "i" is introduced to scale
the observed to standard drag.  This is related to the ballistic
coefficient (BC).   i = m/(d^2*BC) where m is the mass in lbs and
d is the diameter of the bullet in inches.
So the drag for an arbitrary bullet is:

drag = Cd(v) * i * r^2 * v^2 * p

Moulton's book on Exterior Ballistics gives the criterion for
stability  when  

transverse (tumbling) angular acceleration < 1/4 * w^2 * (Il/It)^2

where It is the transverse moment of inertia
and   Il is the longitudinal moment of inertia
and   w is the longitudinal angular velocity ( the spin )

the transv. ang. accel = drag * moment arm / It

w depends on the barrel twist and initial velocity "v"

w = 2*pi*v/tw

where tw is the length of one turn of the barrel twist.

Now we have everything we need to write the equation for barrel
twist needed to stabilize the bullet when it just exits the
barrel.  Substituting for drag and using "Lm" for moment arm:

tw = pi*Il/r * sqrt( 1/(Cd*p*Lm*It*i))

Note that velocity cancelled out, and the only velocity dependence
is due to Cd(v).  
Velocity here was the initial (muzzle) velocity, but what happens
down range?  It would be safe to assume that the spin decays slower
than the forward velocity, so with the decreased drag as the bullet
slows down range, it should become more stable.  As long as the
bullet is supersonic above 1500 ft/sec, we would be safe to assume
stability is determined at the muzzle exit point.

To calculate the twist, we know Cd(v), p, r, and i can be determined
from the ballistic coefficient (BC), by dividing the sectional density
by the BC where sectional density is defined as the mass in lbs divided
by the diameter of the bullet in inches.  Il and It remain to be
determined. Lm, is the length from the base of the bullet to the
average point of the drag force.
In the next chapter we will use the moments of inertia for a cylinder
and derive the Greenhill equation.
After that we can calculate moments for a boattail bullet with
an ogive point and have a much more accurate method of determining
the twist.  Also since Cd(v) is now known, we know the velocity
dependence.

SRF
3/15/2003 6:49:55 AM EDT
[#9]
From: [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Barrel twist : Part 2
Message-ID:
Date: 31 Aug 93 00:10:50 GMT
Sender: [email protected]
Organization: AT&T
Lines: 93
Approved: [email protected]


Last time we derived the equation for twist needed to stabilize a
bullet:

tw = pi*Il/r * sqrt( 1/(Cd*p*Lm*It*i)) eq (1)

where:
Cd is the unitless coeff of drag (varies with velocity)
Cd = 1.146 - 1.047E-4 * v
r is the radius of the bullet
v is the velocity of the bullet
p is the air density.
i is the form factor  i=m/((2*r)^2*BC)*in^2/lb
Lm is the moment arm of the drag force
It is the transverse moment of inertia around bullet base
Il is the longitudinal moment of inertia

Lets assume a cylindrical bullet so
Il = 1/2*m*r^2
It = 1/3*m*L (approx)  where L is length of the cylinder
Lm = L
m (mass) = d*pi*r^2*L

#From the above equation we can write:

tw/(2*r)*L/(2*r) = sqrt( (3*pi^3*d)/(4^3*Cd*i*p) )  eq (2)

This is the Greenhill equation relating the twist length in calibers
times the bullet length in calibers equal to a constant.
According to Hatcher, the bullet used to derive the constant was
a Krag 220 grain, L=1.35in., v=2000ft/sec, d=10.9 gm/ml, p=1.221gm/l
For i=.61, the constant comes out to 150.

The Greenhill equation gives a lot of insight into the problem,
showing that the twist is mainly determined by the length to radius ratio
and sqrt of the bullet density to air density ratio.

Modern bullets have an i a bit less than .6 sometimes, and
the velocities used are higher, so the Cd is a bit lower -
affecting the results.  
Now we are in the position to write our own equation for the
cylindrical bullet approximation where we can take into account
those effects.  We could also use the exact form
of It = 1/3m*L^2 + 1/4*m*r^2
but the latter term is less than a 1% effect, so we will also
ignore it, giving:

tw = sqrt(3*pi^3*r^4*d/(4*Cd*i*p*L^2)) eq (3)

Note that the L from substituting m in Il cancels Lm=L.
If the bullet is pointed and not a cylinder, this equation is
using L as if it were a cylinder given the density of the bullet.
This gives a good approximation for Il.  L then is a length to a
point somewhere between the cylindrical part of the bullet and the
tip which also  gives a good approximation for Lm, these then
cancel with good accuracy.  The remaining L in eq. 3 is from "It".
If we use the L calculated from the density here,
it would underestimate It, since It is sensitive to the distance
the mass is from the base of the bullet.  It turns out that using
the measured length is a much better approximation.

The table below compares the results of the original Greenhill
equation, our version that takes into account "i", and Cd, and
equation 1 using accurately calculated values of "Il" and
measured values of "It" (more on this later).

1. Greenhill : tw(calibers)*L(calibers)=150
2. equation 3 with appropriate "i" and calculated Cd, measured "L"
3. equation 3 with L determined from the density
4. equation 1 with accurate "Il" and measured "It".

all bullets are FMJ boattail .30 caliber at 2500 ft/sec except
the 55 and 62 grain (ss109) which are .224 caliber at 3200 ft/sec

bullet "i" _1_ _2_ _3_ _4_
150 gr .581 12.9 13.1 14.3
168 gr .533 12.0 12.8 12.7
174 gr .53? 11.1 11.8 11.6
220 gr .526 9.5 10.3 13.6 10.2
55 gr .626? 10.1 10.6 14.2
62 gr .61? 8.3 8.4 9.8

The results show that equation 3 with the "i" and calculated
Cd (column 2) is a good improvement on Greenhill (column 1), and
is in good agreement with equation 1 using exact moments of
inertia (column 4) for the .30 caliber bullets that have a longer
cylindrical section.
One should use equation 1 with the bullets that are mostly point
with little body, or that have a non-uniform density.
Equation 1 requires more refined calculations of It, Il, and Lm.
This is the topic of a subsequent installment.

SRF
3/16/2003 7:01:59 AM EDT
[#10]
You lost me right here:

bullet "i" _1_ _2_ _3_ _4_
150 gr .581 12.9 13.1 14.3
168 gr .533 12.0 12.8 12.7
174 gr .53? 11.1 11.8 11.6
220 gr .526 9.5 10.3 13.6 10.2
55 gr .626? 10.1 10.6 14.2
62 gr .61? 8.3 8.4 9.8

What's the decimal number in the [s]first[/s] second column?

-- Chuck
3/16/2003 8:46:07 AM EDT
[#11]
Here's the legend for the columns:

1. Greenhill : tw(calibers)*L(calibers)=150
[b]2. equation 3 with appropriate "i" and calculated Cd, measured "L"[/b]
3. equation 3 with L determined from the density
4. equation 1 with accurate "Il" and measured "It"


3/16/2003 6:00:14 PM EDT
[#12]
Interesting.  GOtta find some time and read it all, remininsent of transport phenomena in Grad School.

Someone was looking for the length of the Sierra 80 gr HPBT MK (Item# 9390) it is 1.090" in the QuickLoad database

Also from QuickLoad, the following:
"The author provides these formulas only as a source of comparative and historical information. The user may decide himself about the usefulness of such formulas.) Described by Julian S. Hatcher in : Hatcher's Notebook, 1962, Formula: (150 * Squareroot(10.9/Specific gravity of bullet material) / length of bullet in calibers = twist length in calibers)."

We use a proprietary formula that takes into account bullet velocity as well .... tends to give good results with subsonic rounds ...

Marty
3/16/2003 6:09:44 PM EDT
[#13]
I love it when people discover that length plays more of a role in determining twist rate than weight.


Best example I use when trying to explain it to them is the ordinary 62grain SS109 bullet which can stabilize in a 1:9 twist and then compare it to the comparable tracer round which has all the length of an 80grain match bullet and requires a 1:7 twist to stabilize.



Neat thing would be going with something like the corbin bullet press where you can make use of powdered metals for bullet cores with tungsten being one of them.    Having a specific density that is higher than lead, it would be possible to make a bullet with a tungsten core having a lower volume than one of equal weight using lead.    The resulting tungsten core bullet should have a much reduced over all length which could open up other twist rate possibilities to the shooter.    I often wonder what a 100grain powdered tungsten core bullet would be like in over all length, close to a 70grain bullet perhaps lower?
3/17/2003 7:04:30 PM EDT
[#14]
Quoted:
I often wonder what a 100grain powdered tungsten core bullet would be like in over all length, close to a 70grain bullet perhaps lower?
View Quote


Powell 87 gr BT Tungsten 223 bullet = 1.000"
Berger 80 gr VLD 224 bullet = 1.087"
Hornady 75 gr AMax 224 bullet = 1.070"
Hornady 100 gr FBHP 224 bullet = 1.145"

Marty
3/19/2003 12:14:40 AM EDT
[#15]
But remember guy's,it's not the length it's what you do wtih it that counts!

[NI]
AR Sponsor