Pglasgow
Now this is extremly interesting to me. It is really hard to argue a physically measured test.
Shooting aprojectile into a common medium at a common distance filling the channel and measuring the fill - this is how I understand it. Not much roomfor speculation.
He found this wound channel volume to be proportional to the product of the kinetic energy and momentum of the projectile.
I think I understand the principle momentum + energy ='s a channel. Volume of the channel then can be measured - makes sense
Tell me what you think? Does kp do a better job than kinetic energy or Taylor index?
This does make a lot more sense to me, but then again that worries me a bit if I understand it or do I understand it because the list of projectiles in the order arranged looks about how would have arranded them off the top of my head.
I must admit I think this is more valid - probably eveb more valid than normal ballistics
Months back a gentleman, his name escapes me at the moment and he even has a web site showing the test results,conducted these same type tests into a 5 gal bucket of soft soil then through a 2x6 plank measuring penetration. It was a very interesting test.
Pglasgow very good research to find this test.
Thanks
again my 2 bits