i thought id mention a late physicst/ballistician from back in the late 80's and early 90's karl hause. he studied the differenced in cut and button rifling in his later work. this information IS NOT PROVEN AND THEREFOR IS NOT FACTUAL UNTIL IT IS, IF IT IS. his work was cut short because of funding and soon after that he passed away.
his theory which he was trying to prove was the in cut barrels the risidual austenite in cut barrel even after stress relieving. he also was trying to prove that although austenite (bad) can be relieved into martensite(good), it is easier to do so when the austenite is stressed. unstressed austenite takes much more heat to remove. he also outlined that austenite (and later martensite after relief) formed in clusters along the cuts so after a relief there was clusters of martensite.
he believed that because of the process used by button rifling created a even surface of more thoroughly stressed austenite which translated to a good surface of martensite.
thats about where he stopped his work on cut vs button barrels. he himself couldnt get around to final testing but he believed that the bliss effect may come into play since no barrel truely has a prefect uniformaty in hardness along the groves/lands but this theory is even to me very questionable.
this is karl hause's thoery (hause, switzerland, 1993), not mine but i do think there may be some fact behind it. im only posting this to give everybody something to think about. if you guys want to start poking holes in his theory, go ahead, most scientists already have. i like his previous work on barrel harmonics which imo is the best kept sercets to contouring a better barrel.
__________________
they say god put everyone on this earth for a reason, i think im just here to enjoy the great view
innovation isnt building the most fuel effecient car, innovation is finding out that the belt clip on your knife doubles as a beer bottle cap opener
Last edited by dylan_b; 11-26-2009 at 04:12 PM.
|