• You are using the old Black Responsive theme. We have installed a new dark theme for you, called UI.X. This will work better with the new upgrade of our software. You can select it at the bottom of any page.

Liquid Fuel

Status
Not open for further replies.

lizziedog1

Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2010
Messages
942
Location
The Silver State
I guess its time to start this thread. There are a couple of guys here that have been experimenting with a liquid propellant for cartridges. I have been sort of helping them, they are doing most of the technical and scientific stuff, I am just along for the ride.

The goal was to come up with a liquid to replace powdered gun powder. Months and months of trials and error have finally reulted in a liquid that seems to have the right properties to launch a bullet. In fact, two weeks from today will be the big day. We are going to reload a handful of rifle and handgun rounds and take them into the desert for testing. The Nevada desert has been used for testing atomic bombs, a few cartridges can't harm anything around here.

We are debating whether to use one of us to pull the trigger or have the trigger pulled remotely, like with a long string. I am voting for the string, the other guys want to use a person.

Don't ask! I will not post any data or formula about our liquid powder. It would be iresponsible and dangerous to do so.

I'll keep you guys posted about our progress over the next two weeks. Then, two weeks from today, I'll post the results and I will try include a photos and/or a video of the test.

So, what do you guys think?
 
I am voting for the string, the other guys want to use a person.

I think "the other guys" are about as brain dead as one could be and still be able to walk and talk. Run away, run away as fast as you can!
 
Liquid propellants have been in the works for years now.

With that said without piles and piles of pressure trace data from test receivers there's no way I'd offer up my hands and face as the experimental guinea pig


Tapatalk post via IPhone.
 
The goal was to come up with a liquid to replace powdered gun powder.

ummmmmm.......why?

they are doing most of the technical and scientific stuff...the other guys want to use a person

So the guys that did the "technical and scientific stuff" are the same guys that want to use a live person for testing? This has Darwin Award written all over it.
 
If making homemade fire crackers is considered illegal, I can imagine this little experiment could have legal issues, as well. Not to be insulting, but I think this is a dangerous and stupid idea…
 
Why a liquid? It's heavier, messy, spills, leaks, you need to worry about seals with reloading equipment and cartridges. I personally would hate to undertake reloading with a liquid.

What are the foreseen advantages?
 
Are trying to say that this is a dangerous experiment?

Seriously? You're talking about testing a combustible liquid with unknown explosive capabilities in a firearm that may or may not be able to contain the pressure. Of course it's dangerous.

The fact that the two fellows you're working with are willing to subject themselves to the possibly fatal consequences of pulling the trigger themselves says a lot about their intelligence, IMHO. As others suggested, I'd keep your distance while they play crash test dummy with the first few rounds of your new concoction.
 
depending on the propellent, they could get better energy density. Also won't have the air gaps between powder granules, potentially better efficiency. In addition, a large part of throat erosion is caused by the still burning powder scrubbing the throat as it goes down the barrel. This is on of the reasons why bottleneck catridges burn up throats faster than straight wall cases.

I'd go for a long long string...
 
So, what are you/they going to use for a primer, an electric spark gap? Normal primers are less sensitive to oils and water than most people presume but they WILL eventually be soaked and killed in liquids.

Given that dry, granular gun powder works quite well, it's unlikely your friends have any insight greater than the hundreds of scientists and engineers working on propellants and I doubt they are on the trail of anything useful.
 
Assuming that this is legitamate R&D and not garage tinkering, I can see where those "technical and scientific" guys may also have blind faith in their product. You need to be the objectively reasonable person and ensure that this is done remotely until enough data is collected to prove the safety of it.
 
Years ago a friend bubba mounted a .458 magnum winchester mod 70 barreled action in a GI surplus M14 stock and wanted to try it out. We convinced him to secure it with butt inside a truck tire and barrel secured to the oposite side of the tire, couple sand bags and a string to the trigger.
We were all very glad we did.
Take no chances when they can be avoided.
 
The relative surface area of a pool of liquid is terrible compared to that of powder. Do you intend detonation rather than ignition or do you intend to atomize the liquid before igniting it.

What sort of test gun are you using. I hope you are trying this in 7.62x54R. Lots of cheap disposable test "victims" in that caliber.
 
1: Any liquid fuel will soak and disable a standard primer.
2: Except for Hypergolic rocket fuel all other fuels must be in a vapor form to ignite.
So filling a standard primed case with a liquid probably ain't gonna work anyway.
And it is just plain stupid to try anything like this.
 
In the name of science, use a long string. a Led-Sled might not be a bad idea for holding your victim either.

Please, please get video...............
 
I would think a univeral type receiver and test barrel be used long before testing in an actual firearm. Possibly using a testing labratory? No offence, but it does sound kinda "Bubba thinking"...
 
This one is easy. If they want someone to pull the trigger, then let them have at it. If they ask you to do it, bring up the string idea, again.
 
Just what we need. A "propellant" that is more temperature sensitive. This time to expansion. A couple of heat cool cycles and the bullet will probably come out of the case on it's own.

We already have liquid in our propellants. A lot starts out as Nitro-Glycerin only processed onto a solid state for safety and handling.
 
What are the foreseen advantages?

It will be a one size fits. If this works, one can reload 25 ACP and 45-70 rounds with the same fuel. It would make logistics much easier for the average reloader.

A regular primer will be used for the ignitiion source.

We have been working on this for some time now. We are currently preparing the trial batch of the liquid to used in the shooting experiment. We are going to use regular brass, regular cases, and regular bullets. Instead of filling the cases with a powder, they will be filled with a liquid. When ignited, it will burn and propel the bullet out of the barrel.

We have no idea what the velocities will be. We will chronograph each shot. Those results will also be published here exactly two weeks from today.

Stay tuned!
 
So how volatile/unstable is your propellant? Are you using a filler, or something for a stabilizer? And what caliber will you test in? How do you know about how much you will use per round?
 
The Russians couldn't make it reliable on a big scale with Soyus resources and scientists and military backing and with an actual benefit in mind. Tanks saving space by carrying only projectiles and a fuel supply.

You think it will work at metallic cartridge size with garage engineering? :eek:
 
Good luck with your project. For many, many years people thought the world was flat. I guess in 2 weeks, we will find out if is flat, or maybe round. I hope you are onto something. Inovation is always a good thing. If you ever need to pressure test some of these cartridges, let me know.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top