Anybody look at the LASC Cast Bullet pages, sulfur for grain refiner instead of arsenic

  • 2.6K Views
  • Last Post 21 February 2009
corerf posted this 15 February 2009

Per the article, arsenic is a grain refiner, makes sense as usually hardening is realignment of molecules to a more streamlined form in a compound. So the writer indicates that per his testing (and it's substantial testing), sulfer is as good or better for grain refinement than arsenic, without toxicity and maybe with less antimony?? That reduces cost of alloys and maybe stretches pure lead stocks further without other precious metals.

Here is the link::

http://www.lasc.us/WiljenArsenic.htm

Any thoughts??

I have a pound of sulfur , USP grade. I am willing to try heat treating some alloys that are low in hardening components.

Anybody else willing to give it a go? We may find a solution. Lead here where I am is cheaper that wheel weights. I have alot of salvage scroungers raiding tire companies for the 5 cents per lb they get for the scrap. Then i have to buy it at the scrap yard for a buck a pound!,, NICE eh??

Pure lead is a giveaway at the scrap yd. Much cheaper than modified lead compounds.

Attached Files

Order By: Standard | Newest | Votes
JetMech posted this 19 February 2009

That's a great experiment! I think it's a viable alternative to arsenic that will become more valuable as wheel weights, as we know them, are phased out of the auto industry.

My local scrap dealers make no distinction between pure lead and alloys. It all goes in the same barrel, for $0.75/lb.

It's interesting that, in the experiment, alloys quenched in the dry ice / antifreeze mix hardened more than a water quench. I think this is a function of how fast the alloy's temp is reduced from the solution temp to a lower, grain structure stabilized temp. When heat treating aluminum alloys (for aircraft work) delays in quenching leads to discontinuities in the grain structure leading to intergranular corrosion. I think the same process is at work here, As soon as the alloy is removed from the heat, the grain stucture starts returning to it's original matrix. The faster the temp is reduced, the finer the resultant grain structure.

Attached Files

corerf posted this 19 February 2009

If you have ever watched crystals grow rapidly, during a preciptation in the bottom of a beaker, they are fluid in their form with a smooth progression. Until you disturb them that is. I agree that the dry ice/AF mix would allow for the fastest transition from paste to solid with the least room for disturbing the alloy while the grain realigns. My water quenching experiments have had best results when I dropped into ice water that was as cold as I could get with some agitation but without the use of salt to reduce temp. Harder bullets were the outcome.

Unfortunately here in California the scrappers are really hitting the tire shops hard, for pennies. My scrap yard is who I buy my new metals from, he's big and I have bought and sold to him for 20 years. My company uses him exclusively for raw materials in fabrication jobs. He will give me a good rate on lead, pure lead. He can't get rid of it at a high margin. Especially sheets and large product. But the scrap shot, balls, small bars, sinkers, WW, etc he gets a premium on, especially knowing that more precious metals are alloyed, raising the price.For him, the chemestry matters. I have not found another yard that would do any better with pricing either. Don't even ask for tin, they laugh at you. I am hoping that next week I can take some stick on WW and test for BHN at 24, and 48 hrs, with and without sulfur. Then I will heat treat bars after 48 hrs from each alloy to see where it stands. I currently have a tremendous amount of stick on weights that I have no use for. Not hard enough to help me and I don't shoot BP. I may try using them for 38 specials real slow, like old lyman or speer lead wadcutters.

Thanks Bill for the reply. If you do any experiments, keep me posted.

Attached Files

CB posted this 19 February 2009

Wow that is interesting! As I am a member of another forum or two, I know of the author and have always regarded him as a knowledgeable fellow. His article is compelling to say the least.

My problem is the time.. I have enough on my plate to keep me buzy about 30 hours a day, but even at that, I would be interested in doing some work with this. I have on hand about a ton and some of range scrap I use to make pistol bullets for the masses at my club.

To be able to sweeten the mix by realigning the granular structure would be a great thing and certainly less expensive than adding antimony or tin.

The only thing I see that I disagree with in Wiljens article is that water quenching high antimony content alloys does result in a much harder bullet. In fact I did this my accident after obtaining what I though was lino and water quenched, not to harden, but to make them easier to handle after casting when I inspected them.

The result was a bullet that was around 34bhn and I later learned that what I had was monotype from the Detroit Free Press when they went from letterpress to the new fangled printing machines.

These bullets where so hard I broke a lubersizer trying to size the bullet down .001. Also I had several that broke in two when I crimped on the gas check.

Anyhow enough on that and back to the testing.

I have no idea of what the composition is of the range scrap, but I can measure the hardness.

If I get some time and get the sulfur from the same company I get some of my bullet lube chemicals, whihc I need to do very soon, I will give it a try.

I will do a rather large batch over 150 lbs, so I should have plenty to work with. 

Attached Files

wiljen posted this 20 February 2009

Jeff, no argument from me that higher antimony concentrations would have resulted in greater hardness.  I standardized on 2% because it was the generally accepted minimum concentration that would acceptably heat treat. 

I think the real find in the bunch may well be selenium lead.  Since it is a commonly used alloy for battery manufacture, it may well be readily available from foundries near such producers.  

If you do decide to play with Sulfur, do it outside and when the neighbors aren't home. It does put off an odor that isn't pleasant and draws strange looks from those around you.

The good news is after years of casting and smelting in the driveway, the neighbors are pretty well versed on what to expect out of me.

Attached Files

sundog posted this 20 February 2009

I've got a bag of sulfur that I use for chamber casts. Might give it a try just for grins. WHEN I GET THE TIME....

I've used copper, in the form of copper babbit. Copper has a tendency to freeze to early when pouring, thus creating sheeting action. To avoid this I dipper pour with direct contact to the mould thus disallowing contact with air. It works and it can make good, hard bullets. With copper a little goes a long, long way.

Attached Files

CB posted this 20 February 2009

Wiljen I will go back and re-read the article.. I may have misread... Recall that part I said about being short on time.. Well I read it, but real fast like.. I might have missed a thing or two. I remember something about water quenching and the resulting hardness did not change. That was the part I refer to. I think it was one of the results charts. Nice article though.. I find it very interesting.. Best article I have seen in some time on alloying lead and you provided the science in way it was easy to understand. My hats off to you!

Jeff

Attached Files

wiljen posted this 21 February 2009

For the record, the original article is on www.castpics.net and has the shooting results too.

Rick got a prelim copy and is going to update it with the shooting results shortly I believe.

Attached Files

CB posted this 21 February 2009

sundog wrote: I've got a bag of sulfur that I use for chamber casts. Might give it a try just for grins. WHEN I GET THE TIME.... I've got an old container of arsenic wondering what to use it for. Might give it a try just for grins when times get tough.......  Plenty of good alloy in stock right now......Dan

Attached Files

corerf posted this 21 February 2009

As I understand it, the arsenic needs to go into an alloy at the lowest temp possible as it vaporizes at low temp. I had read that casters used rat poison back years ago to bump tyhe arsenic. But I assume the arsenic had fillers in the poison and that the arsenic would just vaporize off. I would think that the arsenic would require a process of some sort to place it in the alloy. It's a metal, so it's act like a metal. I suppose at the levels it needs to be at, even if 90% of it flared off, still some would bond to the parent metals.

I've been wondering about the loss of sulfur and at what temp it was added. Sulfur burns pretty easily, thats why it's in BP. It's used as a sensitizer to aide combustion start and maintenance. Would the addition of a sulfur based metal salt, such as lead sulphide,, holy crap I just hit it. Antimony sulphide. SIDEBAR>>>I used to use it when I made homebrew fireworks growing up. I used it for a flash intensifier, antimony made the already bright magnesium and aluminum flash brighter, and aided in flame progression. Plus it was a metal salt in a combination with magnesium, aluminium and zinc. It acted as another fuel component as well. It was the fourth metal counterpart. Burnt around 3500 feet/sec for it's desired purpose, in a confined space. NUf said. About as close to the 5kfps boundary as one can get without the use of nitrated organics.

Could antimony sulfide be used to bump the sulfur in the alloy????? The amount of sulfur in Antimony Sulphide in miniscule as well as the amount of antimony to deliver the sulfur. Witht the percentages Wiljen used in Sulfur, maybe as little as tablespoon or two would deliver the sulfur without even hitting the 1% antimony value to unfairly realloy the pure lead to an antimony based alloy. Adding this kinda cheats as I would be adding some antimony while adding the sulfur, defeating the purpose of the antimony-less alloy. Well I just shot myself int he foot.

It wont combust without significant oxidizers present, air is not significant. It's readily available and “should” alloy with it's parent metal with ease.

I was a garage chemist, passed high school chem with flying colors but I can't remember spit about moles and charge, etc now.

Attached Files

wiljen posted this 21 February 2009

An antimony-less alloy is not particularly desirable as it is needed for the strengthening process just as a grain refiner is. 2% is an approximate functional minimum.

Attached Files

corerf posted this 21 February 2009

Well then I think Antimony disulphide needs a look as a direct bump to pure lead, plus tin. I need to do some math and convert moles to ounces and come up with a value for a ten pound pot.

Attached Files

Categories
Search
Popular Tags
This Weeks High Earners
Hot Topics
Close