Graybeard Outdoors banner
1 - 3 of 3 Posts

· Registered
7,627 Posts
kappullen said:
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 - 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!

· Registered
7,627 Posts
Calamity Jane said:
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.
1 - 3 of 3 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.