Alloy Calculator Spreadsheet

  • 7.1K Views
  • Last Post 22 January 2009
CB posted this 10 January 2009

If seems we have a bit of controversy over an alloy calculator sheet a CBA member has made to assist others in getting an idea of how to blend alloys to get to a certain hardness.

The original sheet calculated bhn.. It was close, but not exact. Unless you know the percentages of the components in the alloy and the percentages of what you are adding, you can get a rough idea of the range of the hardness you could get.

The modified sheet removed this function because it was not exact. A member here pointed out that the sheet was inaccurate and said the CBA was allowing a tool on the website that gave incorrect information.

In an alloy you can change the percentages of tin and antimony around and still end up with the same hardness. For instance if an alloy with 5 % tin and 15 % antimony gave a hardness of 22 and you changed the percentages to 10% tin and 10% antimony and you could have a hardness of 22.. This is only an example to show that the percentages of components in an alloy and the hardness it results in are not linear. The old sheet calculated that they were linear. Close but no cigar.

The old sheet would get you close, usually within a couple of bhn.. For most folks this is more than accurate enough to help them get in the range they want to be in.

So now the almighty question: Which alloy calculator spreadsheet would you prefer? One that calculates a rough bhn that will get you in the ballpark or one that will not calculate bhn because it does not calculate it exactly?

Attached Files

Order By: Standard | Newest | Votes
joeb33050 posted this 10 January 2009

Jeff;

I think that you're still having trouble with this. It's not a matter of being close or exact, it's a matter of not-being-in-the-ballpark or exact, over a fairly wide range of alloys. If you want to take a vote, explain to the voters what the choices are. Show them the relationship between alloy constituents and the correctness of the estimate.

I'm reminded of the Representative who, sometime shortly after the end of the war, proposed a bill that would set the value of pi at 3. He said that this would eliminate a lot of confusion and reduce calculation time.

Sometimes Democracy just ain't appropriate.

joe b.

 

 

Attached Files

Duane Mellenbruch posted this 10 January 2009

Why not BOTH? 

The Cast Bullet Association's Nature and Purpose.... Stimulating and encouraging experiments in casting and handloading cast bullets that will improve the design, accuracy and effectiveness of the ammunition and increase the satisfaction and enjoyment of shooters...

Duane Mellenbruch  Topeka, KS

Attached Files

CB posted this 10 January 2009

just buy a hardness tester and be done with it.

Attached Files

PETE posted this 10 January 2009

 I own two hardness testers, and they are pretty good. The only problem I've found with them is that you have to have a sample of your alloy to test. If it's high or low from the bhn you want then you have to melt the whole batch and keep adding Lead, Tin, or Antimony till you reach the hardness you want. Unless you're a good guesser this could take a while. I know there are batches of alloy I have that I have no use for anymore and would like to “adjust” them to something I can use.

  I think it would be nice to have a program that if you had a batch you knew was 10 bhn and wanted to know how much Tin/Antimony to add to get a bhn of, say, 15.

  I didn't get a chance to see this deleted calculator sheet, so, will it tell you how much to add for a given wgt., or per pound, or.......?

  I would think one or two points off of actual bhn would be acceptable, but I wouldn't want it to be more than that. An example...... In a .28/30 Stevens 44 1/2 I have Stevens, in their introduction to the caliber, recommended 1/32 Tin/Lead as the best alloy. I thought that this was picking nits so tried 1-25, 1-30, 1-35 & 1-40 with moderate success, but not as good as I thought it should be. So tried 1-32. Bingo!!!

PETE

Attached Files

JetMech posted this 10 January 2009

joeb33050 wrote: Sometimes Democracy just ain't appropriate.

joe b.

 

  One of the bedrocks of democracy is the free exchange of ideas, along with the rights of the individuals to have a voice in their own destiny. Lay out the choice and let the people decide.

The opposite of democracy is communism, socialism, or a dictatorship, where the state decides what is best for the individual and forces everyone to comply.

You have a right, as a member of the CBA, to express your opinion, I do not believe you have the right to force your opinion on others.

I believe the proposal to restore the calculator as a tool to be used with the disclaimer concerning the accuracy of the result given is an appropriate move.

Attached Files

LWesthoff posted this 10 January 2009

I voted for “both” so the nit-pickers among us wouldn't feel discriminated against. For my own personal use, approximate BHN is plenty good enough. For that matter, most of the “home” BHN test methods - and most of the affordable BHN testers offered - are only going to give you an approximate BHN value, and unless you're working under laboratory conditions that's all you're gonna get anyway.

Attached Files

CB posted this 10 January 2009

We're not talking designing the Space Shuttle here so “close” is good enough.

Attached Files

Fred Sinclair posted this 10 January 2009

Want Pat said, both tmes.

Attached Files

corerf posted this 11 January 2009

I am relatively new to the CBA. This controversy is a joke I must say. One member says it's metallurgically incorrect and one says it's good enough to get “most” casters close enough to get by. So since Comet cleanser is not perfect, sometimes completely destroying a surface (when advertised to be safe), I think the product should be pulled from the manufacturers product line and banned from the US and abroad.....becuase it's not perfect and mathematically sound for every purpose. Well my soiled stainless pots I use to make popcorn will suffer due to one persons personal accuracy issues. Similarly, if ones accuracy when shooting is so bad, that barn doors no longer fear firearms, that person should loose the opportunity to shoot at said barn doors in great delight, whether they hit or miss by great deviations.

My pastor is a wise man. I have been told that I am a perfectionist, so be it. He has imparted to me much wisdom on the matter of perfectionism and the problems it causes and their solutions. My perfectionism has pushed me to say and do some things that were patently unGodly and not unifying. Pride! Yep I have some in my field of expertise and I councel the highest orders of business people here in Los Angeles.PRIDE has caused me to fall outside of business on occasion.

This scripture sums up this debate, I believe.

In life if one will not be actively “part” of the answer, than one should NOT be speaking at all. For when one speaks and will not ACTIVELY assist in the journey to the FINAL answer, then this happens. James 3:16, ” For where envying and strife is, there is confusion and every evil work.” King James Version

This thread I have been following has some envy, lots of strife and the outcome is non-productive.

Merely complaining about the problem and spouting off about how far off it is, that's not ACTIVELY assisting anyone, just pissing and moaning and I believe is a product of maybe some envy and jealously and a large dose of pride. Pride comes before a fall as I recall.

Forgive me if the member with the degree who has complained has already published an update the the form and is complaining that his “correct” version has not replaced the one that leaves something to be desired. I have not yet found that download or link yet and maybe someone can redirect me to it. Then I shall flame myself on this forum and offer apologies to all that I have offended.

I think the thing that caused me to become part of the CBA was not that I shoot, cast bullets, am a penny pincher, blah, blah, blah. It's the unity of enthusiasts globally that create a unified sourcepool of information, subjective and scientific. That unity is what makes the CBA great, the members even greater and the power of the corporate entity so much more. Sometimes subjective overrules scientific. You find that one clearly spelled out in asprin vs. Tylenol. Belly ache or alzheimers liver failure. You folks can now argue over that one in another thread.

In closing...

So if the stupid calcs are wrong in the spreadsheet, then put a clause in the download note and say ” some crap about how it's not warranted to work properly or be accurate, use at your own risk” and stop being a one man US Federal Gov't telling me I can't ride a motorcycle without a helmet cause you say it's not GOOD and it's dangerous. I am an adult, said so in my CBA app-. I can use the spreadsheet, wrong as it may be, if I want to cause I am in America still, were still mostly free and my God gave me free will to do so. Until you “whomever” you may be who has deemed the sheet incorrect ante up and learn to code some software, clam up and let the downloads begin.

Jeff, please repost the spreadsheet in it's operating form and let me decide whether or not to trust it.

Remember, I didn't graduate from MIT with a metallurgy degree, I am obviously a stupid, God fearing electrical/communications contractor who builds vacuum tube audio amps cause they mathematically are inferior to all more modern solid state devices that are more mathematically (per the Audio Industry and basic math) correct but sound like total feces WHO never got to use the broken sheet and would like to do so to better my life, wrong or right!

That was my final closing.

I really hate it when for my own good, people act on behalf of me without my permission or request. I like to screw up and make math errors and make bullets that have alloys that don't make sense. It hasn't stopped my from producing sub .100 groups, yes I said tenth inch 100M groups. I like when LAYpeople get involved and hook me the village idiot up with a spreadsheet that will indeed steer me in the wrong direction and completely screw my shooting into a mudhole. To all oppressors my deepest thanks. document.write('/images/emoticons/bowsmilie.gif');images/emoticons/bowsmilie.gif

I am very sorry that I did not go to school and learn how to alloy right, or I would write a spreadsheet that is correct and fix this dilemma, ACTIVELY. Forgive me for my poor education, it is failing us all miserably!

Attached Files

KenK posted this 11 January 2009

I'm mostly just a wheel weight shooter and generally  take alloy as a constant.  However; I'm curious about the formula now (bean counter).

Does said formula compute a simple weighted average?

 15 lbs. of  bhn 10 + 5 lbs. of bhn 12 = bhn 10.5

Attached Files

CB posted this 11 January 2009

To clarify a couple of points:

The version of the spreadsheet that is available on the website is the modified version.

The version that has the bhn calculation is not on the website...

In the interest of fairness I will post both versions of the spreadsheet so they may be properly evaluated and the members of this forum may choose which version they would like to use.

Please keep in mind the CBA does not endorse either version nor do we attest to the accuracy therein. This is a use at your own peril, risk or what ever you want to call it.

And in closing...

Corerf Quite an oration. My compliments and thank you for reminding us that we are the masters of our own destinies.

Attached Files

JetMech posted this 12 January 2009

corerf wrote: I think the thing that caused me to become part of the CBA was not that I shoot, cast bullets, am a penny pincher, blah, blah, blah. It's the unity of enthusiasts globally that create a unified sourcepool of information, subjective and scientific. That unity is what makes the CBA great, the members even greater. Thank you, sir. Your entire post gives pause for thought but the part quoted sums up my feeling also.

Attached Files

corerf posted this 12 January 2009

Thank You Jeff for posting both versions.

Attached Files

joeb33050 posted this 12 January 2009

KenK wrote: I'm mostly just a wheel weight shooter and generally  take alloy as a constant.  However; I'm curious about the formula now (bean counter).

Does said formula compute a simple weighted average?

 15 lbs. of  bhn 10 + 5 lbs. of bhn 12 = bhn 10.5

1510+512 = 210/(15+5) = 10.5. Yup.

Perhaps we could ressurect tosis anf phlogistin. Votes?

joe b.

Attached Files

Paul Pollard posted this 12 January 2009

Pi is an irrational number, which means that its value cannot be expressed exactly as a fraction m/n, where m and n are integers. Consequently, its decimal representation never ends or repeats. It is also a transcendental number, which means that no finite sequence of algebraic operations on integers (powers, roots, sums, etc.) can be equal to its value.

Some references have it at 50,000,000 digits to the right of the decimal.

What should we, on this forum, use for pi?

When I asked my wife, she said raspberries or strawberries.

Attached Files

joeb33050 posted this 12 January 2009

Paul Pollard wrote: Pi is an irrational number, which means that its value cannot be expressed exactly as a fraction m/n, where m and n are integers. Consequently, its decimal representation never ends or repeats. It is also a transcendental number, which means that no finite sequence of algebraic operations on integers (powers, roots, sums, etc.) can be equal to its value.

Some references have it at 50,000,000 digits to the right of the decimal.

What should we, on this forum, use for pi?

When I asked my wife, she said raspberries or strawberries.

Paul;

Jeff has asked me to stay out of this, so for the most part I will.

The error in the weighted average method is a variable, and i see it as needing 3 dimensions to express the error. Sometimes the error is zero, sometimes it is small, but sometimes it becomes big-half the actual value.

If it were true that the error were small, say 5% or 10% everywhere, the method would be fine for most applications. 

It ain't.

Now, you're dead wrong on pi. The nun told me that pi was 22/7, a rational number. When I mentioned that Indian fellow and his infinite series, the nun explained that pi is 22/7, followed by a whack. Be carefull, she might be reading this!

joe b.

Attached Files

devin1955 posted this 12 January 2009

Paul Pollard wrote: Pi is an irrational number, which means that its value cannot be expressed exactly as a fraction m/n, where m and n are integers. Consequently, its decimal representation never ends or repeats. Right. Some people approximate it at 22/7, but 355/113 is much better. -Don

Attached Files

JetMech posted this 12 January 2009

I use the Pi button on my calculator. Before that, it was the Pi position on the B scale of my K&S slide rule.

Attached Files

shdwlkr posted this 22 January 2009

jeff thanks for the calculator's for lead I will play with both and  if I really really really need to know the exact bhn of my bullets I will use my bhn tools and get close enough for shooting which is all I care about any way. thanks for the info Since I use the lead that I can get and that it meets my needs and I mix it to see what happens not to be an expert in lead alloy I am pleased with the tools you have given me.

Attached Files

CB posted this 22 January 2009

I have hardness testers, but before I do a couple of hundred pounds of alloy, I would like to know the basic ratio of materials before starting to smelt the materials

Jerry

Attached Files

Categories
Search
Popular Tags
This Weeks High Earners
Hot Topics
Close