So you think your balance beam scale technique is good??

A place to discuss calibers, ammunition, and reloading

So you think your balance beam scale technique is good??

Postby Seismic Sam on Wed Feb 12, 2014 11:09 am

Learned an interesting lesson yesterday about my trusty Redding balance beam scale. I have been having all sorts of problems getting my 9x25 Dillon loads to behave, and have been plagued with inconsistent performance and velocity SD's in the 25 - 40 range, which can mean an extreme spread for 5 shots of over 100 FPS. (that's not good!!) Historically, I have always tried to get the beam dead nuts on the center mark, and regarded that if it was one mark high or low that means it was off buy 1/10th grain, which to me in unacceptable. Last night I decide to do the weighing on my very precise Mettler lab balance, which reads to .001 gram, and you can depend on that balance to be right down to a thousandth of a gram. So I make up a table of grain increments in tenths because I want to weigh Blue Dot powder from 11.0 to 11.8 grains, and then I convert that to gram weights rounded off to .001 gram.

You know how much an increment of a tenth of a grain is in grams?? Well, depending on the round-off error to a quantity of .001 grams, it's only .005 or .006 grams!! Yeah, it's THAT small!! First thing to realize if you have a scale that's good to .01 grams and you actually use it in grams to avoid the very large round-off error to grains that these scales have in converting grams to grains is that you're screwed right out of the gate!! Can't even begin to pick up .005 gram on a .01 gram accuracy scale. No chance in hell! No point buying it, or even taking it out of the box.

As far as my Redding scale, it turns out that a tenth of a grain is about 1/2 a mark high or low off the center point, and for a full mark high or low is at least .2 grains high or low. To get the actual weight you want to within +/- .001 grams, the beam needs to be DEAD EVEN with the center mark. If it's off at all you're not accurately weighing to .1 grain. So I went through the exercise of loading 40 rounds of 9x25 on my Mettler balance, and was reduced to the tactic that I normally save for my 338 RUM of adding or taking away individual particles of powder from the pan. Blue Dot particles less that 1/10th as heavy as Retumbo particles, so I was adding about 4 or 5 flakes of Blue Dot at a time to make the weight I wanted.

Granted, the 9x25 at the top end is touchy as hell, so minor variances in powder can produce big changes in velocity, and this round is NOTHING like my 9x23mm where I merrily load up 50 rounds and get SD's of 6 FPS, which is about as low as you can get. In other words, the 9x23 with VV3N37 powder is very stable at the top end, and relatively forgiving of minor variations in charge weight.

I had never calculated the gram weight of .1 grain of powder, and it was a surprise to me that it was as small as it is. So even after 41 years of handloading you can learn something, and I'm posting this to make other people aware of how small a 1/10th grain increment really is, and how OCD you have to be with a beam scale to actually measure out loads that are ACCURATELY 1/10th grain apart.

EDIT: Well, the data is in, and I'm starting to envy Erud's powder measure more and more. While I don't like this result, because it means I'll be fiddling with my Mettler to get my powder charges right and spending a LOT more time doing it, the data is pretty clear. If you weigh your powder charges to .001 gram (.015 grain) rather than with a balance beam scale that reads in .1 grain increments, the Standard Deviation of your velocity goes down, at least in this case. As I said before, I can get SD's of 6 with a 9x23 Winchester load with measure thrown charges, but obviously this is a very stable cartridge and powder configuration. The 9x25 is twitchy to say the least, and seeing as there are no set chamber dimensions, you are stepping clear off the reservation if you try and handload for this cartridge. Whatever you do that works or doesn't work is for your gun ONLY, and don't even begin to think that this data or any other data you have applies to your barrel.

So here's the data, and the overall trend is pretty clear: Counting out powder grains helps if you have the scale and the patience to do it.

Image
Last edited by Seismic Sam on Sun Feb 16, 2014 11:39 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Seismic Sam
Gone but not forgotten
 
Posts: 5515 [View]
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 1:02 pm
Location: Pass By-You, Loosianana

Re: So you think your balance beam scale technique is good??

Postby farmerj on Wed Feb 12, 2014 11:34 am

so there are 7000 grains to a pound and ~453.592 grams to a pound.

And you are going from grains to grams? why? Seems to me grains would be more accurate by far.
Last edited by farmerj on Wed Feb 12, 2014 12:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
We reap what we sow. In our case, we have sown our government.
Current moon phase
User avatar
farmerj
 
Posts: 4802 [View]
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2007 9:11 am
Location: The edge of the universe in the vertex of time on the space continuum of confusion

Re: So you think your balance beam scale technique is good??

Postby JJ on Wed Feb 12, 2014 12:10 pm

SS, you are way over thinking.

Powder is only one of many variables. I will put money that you will see a greater variance in SD from annealing/neck tension than from your 1/10th rounding error.
"a man's rights rest in three boxes: the ballot box, the jury box, and the cartridge box." Frederick Douglass
User avatar
JJ
 
Posts: 3541 [View]
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 9:43 pm
Location: Princeton

So you think your balance beam scale technique is good??

Postby Erud on Wed Feb 12, 2014 12:24 pm

That's why I just use a scale that does it all by itself and I just dump it in the case when it's done.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
User avatar
Erud
 
Posts: 2521 [View]
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 6:31 am
Location: SE Metro

Re: So you think your balance beam scale technique is good??

Postby Seismic Sam on Wed Feb 12, 2014 12:43 pm

JJ wrote:SS, you are way over thinking.

Powder is only one of many variables. I will put money that you will see a greater variance in SD from annealing/neck tension than from your 1/10th rounding error.


I won't rule out that possibility, but you can't assign numbers to annealing or neck tension. Annealing is more or less a 0 or 1 situation, and I'm not aware of any way of quantifying neck tension.
User avatar
Seismic Sam
Gone but not forgotten
 
Posts: 5515 [View]
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 1:02 pm
Location: Pass By-You, Loosianana

Re: So you think your balance beam scale technique is good??

Postby Seismic Sam on Wed Feb 12, 2014 1:01 pm

Erud wrote:That's why I just use a scale that does it all by itself and I just dump it in the case when it's done.


Wow. Not sure if this is a serious reply or not, but if it is it's right out of the Wizard of Oz. Don't look behind the curtain, don't check out if this $X00 automatic powder measure is really throwing the charges it says it is, and just trust to the Omnipotent Wizard of Oz Brand Powder Measure that it is infallible and the amount of powder measured is exactly what the little readout on the scale says it is. This is particularly mind boggling since at least one of the scale manufacturers is totally ignorant of the round-off errors in going from grams to grains with their own scales, and you're willing to blindly trust an automatic machine depending on a scale where the processor was built in China and the software designer doesn't even know what a grain is, much less its critical significance in reloading.
User avatar
Seismic Sam
Gone but not forgotten
 
Posts: 5515 [View]
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 1:02 pm
Location: Pass By-You, Loosianana

So you think your balance beam scale technique is good??

Postby Erud on Wed Feb 12, 2014 1:10 pm

Seismic Sam wrote:
Erud wrote:That's why I just use a scale that does it all by itself and I just dump it in the case when it's done.


Wow. Not sure if this is a serious reply or not, but if it is it's right out of the Wizard of Oz. Don't look behind the curtain, don't check out if this $X00 automatic powder measure is really throwing the charges it says it is, and just trust to the Omnipotent Wizard of Oz Brand Powder Measure that it is infallible and the amount of powder measured is exactly what the little readout on the scale says it is. This is particularly mind boggling since at least one of the scale manufacturers is totally ignorant of the round-off errors in going from grams to grains with their own scales, and you're willing to blindly trust an automatic machine depending on a scale where the processor was built in China and the software designer doesn't even know what a grain is, much less its critical significance in reloading.


Yeah I'm serious, mine is pretty darned accurate...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
User avatar
Erud
 
Posts: 2521 [View]
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 6:31 am
Location: SE Metro

Re: So you think your balance beam scale technique is good??

Postby JJ on Wed Feb 12, 2014 3:20 pm

Seismic Sam wrote:
JJ wrote:SS, you are way over thinking.

Powder is only one of many variables. I will put money that you will see a greater variance in SD from annealing/neck tension than from your 1/10th rounding error.


I won't rule out that possibility, but you can't assign numbers to annealing or neck tension. Annealing is more or less a 0 or 1 situation, and I'm not aware of any way of quantifying neck tension.


Uh, yeah, you can:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/like/280800569039?lpid=82

And since it is a bottleneck cartridge, I'm sure the Redding will make you a competition bushing die, that you can tweak your neck tension .001 at a time. And then, you can take one of these: http://www.midwayusa.com/product/680804 ... let-puller and attach a shellholder to this: http://img.directindustry.com/images_di ... 459657.jpg and magically, you can quantify your annealing, neck tension, crimp tension, and put actual numbers to all of the above!
"a man's rights rest in three boxes: the ballot box, the jury box, and the cartridge box." Frederick Douglass
User avatar
JJ
 
Posts: 3541 [View]
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 9:43 pm
Location: Princeton

Re: So you think your balance beam scale technique is good??

Postby Erud on Wed Feb 12, 2014 4:40 pm

Seismic Sam wrote:
Erud wrote:That's why I just use a scale that does it all by itself and I just dump it in the case when it's done.


Wow. Not sure if this is a serious reply or not, but if it is it's right out of the Wizard of Oz. Don't look behind the curtain, don't check out if this $X00 automatic powder measure is really throwing the charges it says it is, and just trust to the Omnipotent Wizard of Oz Brand Powder Measure that it is infallible and the amount of powder measured is exactly what the little readout on the scale says it is. This is particularly mind boggling since at least one of the scale manufacturers is totally ignorant of the round-off errors in going from grams to grains with their own scales, and you're willing to blindly trust an automatic machine depending on a scale where the processor was built in China and the software designer doesn't even know what a grain is, much less its critical significance in reloading.


Seismic Sam,
You are making quite a few assumptions here, namely:

1. That I haven't checked if the $X00 automatic powder measure is really throwing the charges it says it is.(I have and it is, consistently)
2. That I am trusting the Omnipotent Wizard of Oz Brand Powder Measure that it is infallible and the amount of powder measured is exactly what the little readout on the scale says it is(I trust it because I have verified it many times. It works, that's why I bought it).
3. That my powder measure/scale combo has a rounding error(it doesn't).
4. That my powder measure/scale combo converts from grams to grains(It doesn't).
5. That my powder measure/scale has a processor that was built in China and the software designer doesn't even know what a grain is, much less its critical significance in reloading(it doesn't).

So, with that added clarification, do you feel a little better about my post?
User avatar
Erud
 
Posts: 2521 [View]
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 6:31 am
Location: SE Metro

Re: So you think your balance beam scale technique is good??

Postby farmerj on Wed Feb 12, 2014 4:50 pm

Erud wrote:So, with that added clarification, do you feel a little better about my post?


:rotf: :rotf: :rotf:
1st Rule of discussion.....

KNOW your intended audience.

He has written many a diatribe over the last several years about the inaccuracy of the rounding errors in electronic scales and such.

I am just waiting for the day he comes and shows that the dulling of the knife edge on the balance of a beam scale has an inherent inaccuracy inducing drag that makes all beams worthless.
We reap what we sow. In our case, we have sown our government.
Current moon phase
User avatar
farmerj
 
Posts: 4802 [View]
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2007 9:11 am
Location: The edge of the universe in the vertex of time on the space continuum of confusion

Re: So you think your balance beam scale technique is good??

Postby Erud on Wed Feb 12, 2014 5:21 pm

farmerj wrote:
Erud wrote:So, with that added clarification, do you feel a little better about my post?


:rotf: :rotf: :rotf:
1st Rule of discussion.....

KNOW your intended audience.

He has written many a diatribe over the last several years about the inaccuracy of the rounding errors in electronic scales and such.

I am just waiting for the day he comes and shows that the dulling of the knife edge on the balance of a beam scale has an inherent inaccuracy inducing drag that makes all beams worthless.


See, that's just it. The powder measure/scale combo that I use doesn't have a rounding error, so that isn't an issue for me.
User avatar
Erud
 
Posts: 2521 [View]
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 6:31 am
Location: SE Metro

Re: So you think your balance beam scale technique is good??

Postby farmerj on Wed Feb 12, 2014 5:24 pm

Oh, I don't think I'd ever feel comfortable ever saying something like that about a digital scale.

A least not unless you spent some rather significant and silly amount on said scale....
We reap what we sow. In our case, we have sown our government.
Current moon phase
User avatar
farmerj
 
Posts: 4802 [View]
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2007 9:11 am
Location: The edge of the universe in the vertex of time on the space continuum of confusion

So you think your balance beam scale technique is good??

Postby Erud on Wed Feb 12, 2014 5:39 pm

farmerj wrote:Oh, I don't think I'd ever feel comfortable ever saying something like that about a digital scale.

A least not unless you spent some rather significant and silly amount on said scale....


It's not digital, but yeah, it was fairly expensive. A silly amount? I guess that depends on what your time is worth and how consistent you want or need your ammo to be.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
User avatar
Erud
 
Posts: 2521 [View]
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 6:31 am
Location: SE Metro

Re: So you think your balance beam scale technique is good??

Postby farmerj on Wed Feb 12, 2014 5:41 pm

What model scale do you use then...


Cuz I was under the impression it is digital.
We reap what we sow. In our case, we have sown our government.
Current moon phase
User avatar
farmerj
 
Posts: 4802 [View]
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2007 9:11 am
Location: The edge of the universe in the vertex of time on the space continuum of confusion

Re: So you think your balance beam scale technique is good??

Postby Rip Van Winkle on Wed Feb 12, 2014 5:46 pm

Seismic Sam wrote:
Erud wrote:That's why I just use a scale that does it all by itself and I just dump it in the case when it's done.


Wow. Not sure if this is a serious reply or not, but if it is it's right out of the Wizard of Oz. Don't look behind the curtain, don't check out if this $X00 automatic powder measure is really throwing the charges it says it is, and just trust to the Omnipotent Wizard of Oz Brand Powder Measure that it is infallible and the amount of powder measured is exactly what the little readout on the scale says it is. This is particularly mind boggling since at least one of the scale manufacturers is totally ignorant of the round-off errors in going from grams to grains with their own scales, and you're willing to blindly trust an automatic machine depending on a scale where the processor was built in China and the software designer doesn't even know what a grain is, much less its critical significance in reloading.

You've obviously never seen Erud's powder measure.

Image
I will never apologize for being an American.
Post 435 Gun Club
North Star Rifle Club
cmpofficer@post435gunclub.org
DR #2673
President's Hundred (#48 2018)
Certified NRA RSO
User avatar
Rip Van Winkle
 
Posts: 4232 [View]
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 5:04 pm
Location: Unfashionable end of the western spiral arm, Galaxy Milky Way

Next

Return to Ammunition & Reloading

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 4 guests

cron