Annealing Brass - Science vs Myths

[Barelstroker]

Since I said it first - I don't have any proof. I offered it as an alternative to the original proposition that the flame was somehow 'burning away material' or 'producing oxide fumes.' Since only about 5% of oxide fumes come from the piece being welded, and the vast majority of welding fumes come from processing the welding consumables, I don't find it a satisfactory explanation. I propose it's similar to forge scale - which we see when there is incomplete oxygen burn happening next to hot metal. Copper 2 oxide is produced by heating copper, which produces black oxide. It was an easy logical leap to make.

Makes me wonder though, If we pushed more o2 to the flame would it still turn orange mid way through the 20s burn? And if it does stay blue, is there also a decrease of black coloration on the case? @Barelstroker , want to run that oxy acetylene torch with a large excess of oxy?

No, I'll give it a miss I think but, before I anneal now, I polish the patina off the cases with a pedestal drill mounted, circular automotive fine brillo pad. When the cases are prepared in this way, there is virtually no flame colour change during annealing. With a case with normal brass patina, the flame burns orange after the case.
I've proven to my own satisfaction that the orange flame is just the patina burning off &, is no indication of anything other than there's been a naked flame on the case.
The very same deal with, the so called annealing lines on the case which, supposedly tell if the case has reached the correct temp. After annealing a freshly polished case, there's usually no visible trace of those lines or blue rainbow colours down the case walls &, I anneal at 1400F.

 

[Barelstroker]

Any thought given to an advancement in annealing?

 

[918v]

An advancement?

 

[Barelstroker]

An advancement?

Hell Yes.
Sizes better, seats better, little to no case body growth firing max charge weights & 5 shot group velocity SD's of 5 & 9 out of a factory barrel. Id call that advancement.

 

[918v]

SD has nothing to do with neck hardness or whatever the barrel is factory or custom.

 

[Barelstroker]

SD has nothing to do with neck hardness or whatever the barrel is factory or custom.

Well, I can't unequivocally prove at this stage if a softer neck/shoulder is directly linked to velocity SD's but, neither can you prove that it aint. What I can say so far is that, results are pretty good with no notably adverse results.
I recall you mentioning in a thread about the mouth of the case neck curling in toward the centre when the necks became very hard. I'm getting the same thing but, the necks are soft ofcourse. What do you think causes that?
Another weird phenomenon is, with 88 cases, I can measure little to no headspace expansion or web expansion. I've tested chambered every case & every one I can close the bolt on with no resistance at all. They all chamber as if they'd just been resized.
Any ideas?
Regards..............Barelstroker.

 

[918v]

Headspace is a term that refers to the relationship between the chamber and bolt face, not to the case itself. Are you talking about shoulder length? What was your shoulder length on a fired case? How much did you bump it? What was it after firing?

Why does the case mouth curl inward? Why doesn’t it do that with factory brass? I dunno. I notice that as well. The more firings on a case, the greater the constriction. Why does it still do that after annealing? Maybe it’s due to brass degradation at the case mouth. Have you tried cutting half the neck off to see if it stops?

I know the alloy changes after repeated firings. For example, if you anneal a 1x fired case you get that nice change in color, typical of annealing. But if you anneal a 7x fired case you don’t get anything except maybe matte brown discoloration. I think some of the alloy components burn off with all that heat and pressure and the case mouth is right in the middle of it.

 

[lash]

I know the alloy changes after repeated firings. For example, if you anneal a 1x fired case you get that nice change in color, typical of annealing. But if you anneal a 7x fired case you don’t get anything except maybe matte brown discoloration. I think some of the alloy components burn off with all that heat and pressure and the case mouth is right in the middle of it.

I happen to think a lot of your experience and input, despite what you may think, but where did you come up with this cockamamie theory? Not only is it not correct or supportable from a metallurgical standpoint, but is incorrect even from an easily done test by those at home.

Maybe your experiences have led you to believe this, but it is most assuredly not correct.

 

[Barelstroker]

Headspace is a term that refers to the relationship between the chamber and bolt face, not to the case itself. Are you talking about shoulder length? What was your shoulder length on a fired case? How much did you bump it? What was it after firing?

Why does the case mouth curl inward? Why doesn’t it do that with factory brass? I dunno. I notice that as well. The more firings on a case, the greater the constriction. Why does it still do that after annealing? Maybe it’s due to brass degradation at the case mouth. Have you tried cutting half the neck off to see if it stops?

I know the alloy changes after repeated firings. For example, if you anneal a 1x fired case you get that nice change in color, typical of annealing. But if you anneal a 7x fired case you don’t get anything except maybe matte brown discoloration. I think some of the alloy components burn off with all that heat and pressure and the case mouth is right in the middle of it.

I referred to it as headspace because that's what everyone seems to refer to it as. Yes, I agree it is shoulder length but, with reference to fired cases of 1.622", I bump back to 1.618-20".
After previous firings, all cases measure at 1.621-22" with, a few at 1.623-24".
This last lot, not one measured at 1.622". The longest came in at 1.621 &, there was only 4 or 5 of those. The rest all measured at 1.618-20".

 

[918v]

I happen to think a lot of your experience and input, despite what you may think, but where did you come up with this cockamamie theory? Not only is it not correct or supportable from a metallurgical standpoint, but is incorrect even from an easily done test by those at home.

Maybe your experiences have led you to believe this, but it is most assuredly not correct.

It is a fact that case mouth diameter becomes constricted after repeated firings.

It is a fact that case mouth diameter becomes constricted despite annealing.

It is a fact that this does not occur with factory new brass. So why does it happen?

It is a fact that brass color after annealing is different on a 1x case vs a multi fired case. Why?

 

[Barelstroker]

I happen to think a lot of your experience and input, despite what you may think, but where did you come up with this cockamamie theory? Not only is it not correct or supportable from a metallurgical standpoint, but is incorrect even from an easily done test by those at home.

Maybe your experiences have led you to believe this, but it is most assuredly not correct.

Try to go easy.
918v & many others are honest with their replies, it's the fault of many years of false & misleading information which is to blame &, as I'm sure we are all aware, it's very difficult for any of us to change our beliefs, particularly when the conflicting information comes from an unknown & unrecognized source.
Regards.............Barelstroker.

 

[918v]

I referred to it as headspace because that's what everyone seems to refer to it as. Yes, I agree it is shoulder length but, with reference to fired cases of 1.622", I bump back to 1.618-20".
After previous firings, all cases measure at 1.621-22" with, a few at 1.623-24".
This last lot, not one measured at 1.622". The longest came in at 1.621 &, there was only 4 or 5 of those. The rest all measured at 1.618-20".

I don’t know how hot your load is but a dead soft case hugs the chamber better than a hard case, so if the load was mild enough the case would have stayed forward in the chamber rather than slamming against the bolt face.

 

[918v]

Try to go easy.
918v & many others are honest with their replies, it's the fault of many years of false & misleading information which is to blame &, as I'm sure we are all aware, it's very difficult for any of us to change our beliefs, particularly when the conflicting information comes from an unknown & unrecognized source.
Regards.............Barelstroker.

Save it. I’ve been doing this for 2.5 decades and are used to criticism. The problem is lash’s criticism is not an explanation.

 

[Barelstroker]

I don’t know how hot your load is but a dead soft case hugs the chamber better than a hard case, so if the load was mild enough the case would have stayed forward in the chamber rather than slamming against the bolt face.

Yes, I see what you're getting at.
You're explanation may explain the reduced web expansion as well.
If the case were to expand more readily & adhere to the chamber walls earlier in the process then, it would remain slightly deeper in the chamber where the web area is slightly smaller in DIA.

 

[Barelstroker]

Save it. I’ve been doing this for 2.5 decades and are used to criticism. The problem is lash’s criticism is not an explanation.

I think he may have been referring to the comment about some of the materials in the brass burning off. At least that's what I took it as.

 

[918v]

Well then let him explain why annealing doesn’t cure the case mouth curling. Let him explain the difference in color, 1x vs 7x.

 

[Barelstroker]

Well then let him explain why annealing doesn’t cure the case mouth curling. Let him explain the difference in color, 1x vs 7x.

Well, when the case is polished prior to annealing, it turns a light mat brown colour with a velvety texture to the touch.
If the cases are not polished prior to annealing, they go black. I think it's just the natural oxide layer (patina)of the brass burning.

 

[918v]

Well, when the case is polished prior to annealing, it turns a light mat brown colour with a velvety texture to the touch.
If the cases are not polished prior to annealing, they go black. I think it's just the natural oxide layer (patina)of the brass burning.

No that’s not what I’m talking about. A 1x fired case that is stainless tumbled, perfectly clean, will acquire that beautiful color case hardened looking oxide when it is annealed.

Take that same case, fire it 7 times, stainless tumble it and try to anneal it. See what you get. It will look like shit.

 

[Barelstroker]

No that’s not what I’m talking about. A 1x fired case that is stainless tumbled, perfectly clean, will acquire that beautiful color case hardened looking oxide when it is annealed.

Take that same case, fire it 7 times, stainless tumble it and try to anneal it. See what you get. It will look like shit.

No, I haven't tried that.
I'm not sure why the annealed look of the case would be different if it was polished prior.
Interesting.

 

[lash]

It is a fact that case mouth diameter becomes constricted after repeated firings.

It is a fact that case mouth diameter becomes constricted despite annealing.

It is a fact that this does not occur with factory new brass. So why does it happen?

It is a fact that brass color after annealing is different on a 1x case vs a multi fired case. Why?

These facts that you claim are things that happen to you and are not universally experienced. That does not make them either normal nor does it make them universal facts. Why is it that I can reuse brass for twenty firings and do not experience any of your facts? I must be part of a different reality zone wherein these things aren’t the facts that they are in your reality zone.

Is it possible that for all of your 2.5 decades, your practices are such to cause these “facts” you tout as such?

And yes, I was addressing your comment about the alloy changing. Studies, some of which have been copied, linked and otherwise posted here in SH have shown that there is no alloy change happening when brass is fired and none happening when brass is annealed. You have been part of these threads. That you choose to ignore science for your experiential “facts” does not make it so.

 

[918v]

These facts that you claim are things that happen to you and are not universally experienced. That does not make them either normal nor does it make them universal facts. Why is it that I can reuse brass for twenty firings and do not experience any of your facts? I must be part of a different reality zone wherein these things aren’t the facts that they are in your reality zone.

Is it possible that for all of your 2.5 decades, your practices are such to cause these “facts” you tout as such?

And yes, I was addressing your comment about the alloy changing. Studies, some of which have been copied, linked and otherwise posted here in SH have shown that there is no alloy change happening when brass is fired and none happening when brass is annealed. You have been part of these threads. That you choose to ignore science for your experiential “facts” does not make it so.

The facts I stated are universally experienced. Just because you don't pay attention enough doesn’t mean they don’t happen. Maybe you should look more closely.

The studies you mention don’t explain why what I cited is happening. Or maybe the studies are wrong?

 

[orkan]

I realize that you heard/read this from Primal Rights, but does the yellow really mean what you/he think it does?

My friend, I'd like to kindly correct you here regarding how my information is portrayed in this thread. "He" being me, as in Greg @ Primal Rights... did not solidly anchor into what that color change signified. I plainly and clearly for all to hear, acknowledge that I didn't know what that flame color change was burning off. I merely speculated what it was, nor did I spend time trying to quantify it. I have no animosity toward you @lash , so don't read into it... but I just wanted to clarify for all that I left plenty of room for speculation in my video on annealing.

Also, I'd like to point out that video was posted SIX years ago. I'd also like to point out that there are participants in this thread that haven't even been pursuing this sport that long, much less reloading that long. I've been handloading in one capacity or the next for about 28 years. My methods and understanding of annealing has advanced since the creation of that video. However, one thing is certain if you are flame annealing: Once you see that flame color change, you're done. Why you'd want to go further, is beyond my understanding. Despite claims to the contrary, if you go much further, the brass WILL shoot worse than the brass pulled at the right time. I've proven this for myself. Glowing brass is bad, and it will for sure show up on the target across a large batch of brass. Not sure if this is due to heat making its way too far down the case and causing unpredictable expansion in thicker parts of the brass across a lot number, or what. Yet I've seen it, and anyone shooting small enough can do their own testing and see it as well. However, if anyone thinks you're going to discover this in 20rnds of testing, you're quite mistaken. The advice I give shooters on a daily basis is an aggregate of experience. That advice is carefully curated to give them the most direct route to success in their shooting and get them up to the next plateau. My video on annealing is no different. Through it, I have helped thousands of shooters simplify their annealing process and take the mystery and temp paints out of the equation. That's good enough for me. That video was uploaded at a time when no one had even heard of this process. Now, I see the "orange flame change" referred to routinely on forums... and by all accounts, it works... and it works for everyone that is flame annealing.

The real question I have is, if the orange flame color change has proven itself as a good stopping point, which results in desirable performance on target (and it has), then why would you want your annealing op to take longer? Just for the sake of it?

Despite that, I have no illusions of being able to have an intelligent debate about any high level topic on the internet any longer. I once tried to fight and champion for the truth in the public square. That too has changed a lot over the last 6 years. Threads like this reinforce my opinion that we are witnessing the death of the expert. I have tens of thousands of purposeful precision rifle rounds down range each year, been reloading for 28'ish, been instructing shooters for 15, spend every day all day dealing with precision rifles, mentoring shooters, full time for a long time. No expense spared. This isn't meant to stroke my ego, as I really don't need it. It's meant as a statement of fact, to demonstrate my resolve to finding the truth of things in this discipline. My whole life is structured around shooting. Here's a picture from my office window. I spend so much time in here it's ridiculous. I can have target presentations to 3 miles out that window if I'm so inclined. I bought land based on how the shooting would be on it. I built my house there based on where that window was going to be and where my range would sit.

If people still want to argue with me, that's ok. Free country and all. Doesn't mean I have to argue with them. I'm not bitter about it anymore. Their loss and all that. lol Every single year, every month, week, day... a new guy pops up on a forum that works 40-60hrs a week as an accountant, or doctor, or HVAC installer, or who knows what, and they start shouting at people in here claiming they have it figured out. Shouting at guys that have been pursuing this discipline longer than I have... and I've been at it a long time. I've watched it happen consistently for almost 20 years on this forum.

I've always wondered how someone that spends that much time on something that ISN'T shooting, can know so much about shooting. How does that guy have it all figured out... when I don't? How can he own a boat, an RV, a pair of motorcycles, with all the social obligations, and all the other demands on what little free time he has... have it all figured out the way he talks on here? I guess devoting my life and the majority of my waking hours pursuing this discipline, isn't enough. I used to be bitter about it, and come down on the rookies really hard. I'm sure there are folks out there with more time invested than I. When I really think about it... I suck. I don't have my 300yd tunnel built yet. I don't have electronic target screens and high end analytical software to use them with. There's so much I don't have... it's pathetic. I still don't have an AMP annealer... mainly because I just haven't got around to ordering one. That, and they keep changing it for the better, so I keep waiting for the "final" best version to show up. lol

I think it would be good for people to remember that every individual has their own definitions of success. They each also have their own definition of what a positive experience looks and feels like. I'm an elitist that want's everything to feel perfect, flawless, and 100% correct. Other people are perfectly happy with something significantly less than the best. They don't have to worry about their reputation or what can happen with a customers time or money if they give wrong advice. They can just hop from one certainty to the next and never suffer any consequences for the posts they make here. They can be wrong, and it really doesn't matter to them. Just as others can be right, and it still won't matter to them. Those of us with perspective, have a duty to realize those without perspective, can't possibly see what we see. All we can do is politely encourage them to gain perspective, and we can't go about it directly... lest we draw their ire. We have to gently nudge them in the right direction, without them seeing us nudge them.

That's if we want them to improve that is. However, some people are too brash and disrespectful in their ignorance... in which case those with experience are far more likely to take offense and try to spare others from the idiocy by hitting the poster with a brick rather than a pillow. I've walked both sides... and find the pillow is better. Perhaps not for them, but for me. The more difficult to quantify the topic, the more brazen posters become. This is why threads started on annealing or barrel cleaning turn into such horrific displays of thoughtlessness and barbarism. Almost no one involved has the skillset or the equipment to definitively prove their theory, but they'll anchor in and die on that hill regardless. I'd suggest a different path. Allow me to demonstrate.

Here's a video I did on annealing 6 years ago. To my knowledge, this was the first time anyone shared how to anneal with this method. If I were to shoot that video today, I'd do it differently with significantly toned down language and much more open-ended stances. My equipment has changed for the better since that video, but the core method has stayed the same. I've annealed more cases than most, but I still have no idea what I'm doing. I have no metallurgical testing equipment. I found a method that allows me to shoot smaller than I was prior which allowed me to setup my annealer to account for any type of brass in any atmospheric condition, very quickly, and go to the next plateau as a shooter, and here I'll share that method with you. I will not defend it. I will not be drawn into an argument over it. If you try it and it helps you, then it is working as intended. If it doesn't work, then I'm sorry you wasted your time. Though before annealing your brass too long, I'd perform some very goal-oriented testing, if I were you. You might find that the real world shooting might benefit from annealing "as right as you can" rather than annealing with caution thrown to the wind. Just a parting thought.

 

[lash]

My friend, I'd like to kindly correct you here regarding how my information is portrayed in this thread. This will be my one and only post in it. "He" being me, as in Greg @ Primal Rights... did not solidly anchor into what that color change signified. I plainly and clearly for all to hear, acknowledge that I didn't know what that flame color change was burning off. I merely speculated what it was, nor did I spend time trying to quantify it. I have no animosity toward you @lash , so don't read into it... but I just wanted to clarify for all that I left plenty of room for speculation in my video on annealing.

Also, I'd like to point out that video was posted SIX years ago. I'd also like to point out that there are participants in this thread that haven't even been pursuing this sport that long, much less reloading that long. I've been handloading in one capacity or the next for about 28 years. My methods and understanding of annealing has advanced since the creation of that video. However, one thing is certain if you are flame annealing: Once you see that flame color change, you're done. Why you'd want to go further, is beyond my understanding. Despite claims to the contrary, if you go much further, the brass WILL shoot worse than the brass pulled at the right time. I've proven this for myself. Glowing brass is bad, and it will for sure show up on the target across a large batch of brass. Not sure if this is due to heat making its way too far down the case and causing unpredictable expansion in thicker parts of the brass across a lot number, or what. Yet I've seen it, and anyone shooting small enough can do their own testing and see it as well. However, if anyone thinks you're going to discover this in 20rnds of testing, you're quite mistaken. The advice I give shooters on a daily basis is an aggregate of experience. That advice is carefully curated to give them the most direct route to success in their shooting and get them up to the next plateau. My video on annealing is no different. Through it, I have helped thousands of shooters simplify their annealing process and take the mystery and temp paints out of the equation. That's good enough for me. That video was uploaded at a time when no one had even heard of this process. Now, I see the "orange flame change" referred to routinely on forums... and by all accounts, it works... and it works for everyone that is flame annealing.

The real question I have is, if the orange flame color change has proven itself as a good stopping point, which results in desirable performance on target (and it has), then why would you want your annealing op to take longer? Just for the sake of it?

Despite that, I have no illusions of being able to have an intelligent debate about any high level topic on the internet any longer. I once tried to fight and champion for the truth in the public square. That too has changed a lot over the last 6 years. Threads like this reinforce my opinion that we are witnessing the death of the expert. I have tens of thousands of rounds of purposeful precision rifle rounds down range each year, been reloading for 28'ish, been instructing shooters for 15, spend every day all day dealing with precision rifles, mentoring shooters, full time for a long time. No expense spared. This isn't meant to stroke my ego, as I really don't need it. It's meant as a statement of fact, to demonstrate my resolve to finding the truth of things in this discipline. My whole life is structured around shooting. Here's a picture from my office window. I spend so much time in here it's ridiculous. I can have target presentations to 3 miles out that window if I'm so inclined. I bought land based on how the shooting would be on it. I built my house there based on where that window was going to be and where my range would sit.

If people still want to argue with me, that's ok. Free country and all. Doesn't mean I have to argue with them. I'm not bitter about it anymore. Their loss and all that. lol Every single year, every month, week, day... a new guy pops up on a forum that works 40-60hrs a week as an accountant, or doctor, or HVAC installer, or who knows what, and they start shouting at people in here claiming they have it figured out. Shouting at guys that have been pursuing this discipline longer than I have... and I've been at it a long time. I've watched it happen consistently for almost 20 years on this forum.

I've always wondered how someone that spends that much time on something that ISN'T shooting, can know so much about shooting. How does that guy have it all figured out... when I don't? How can he own a boat, an RV, a pair of motorcycles, with all the social obligations, and all the other demands on what little free time he has... have it all figured out the way he talks on here? I guess devoting my life and the majority of my waking hours pursuing this discipline, isn't enough. I used to be bitter about it, and come down on the rookies really hard. I'm sure there are folks out there with more time invested than I. When I really think about it... I suck. I don't have my 300yd tunnel built yet. I don't have electronic target screens and high end analytical software to use them with. There's so much I don't have... it's pathetic. I still don't have an AMP annealer... mainly because I just haven't got around to ordering one. That, and they keep changing it for the better, so I keep waiting for the "final" best version to show up. lol

I think it would be good for people to remember that every individual has their own definitions of success. They each also have their own definition of what a positive experience looks and feels like. I'm an elitist that want's everything to feel perfect, flawless, and 100% correct. Other people are perfectly happy with something significantly less than the best. They don't have to worry about their reputation or what can happen with a customers time or money if they give wrong advice. They can just hop from one certainty to the next and never suffer any consequences for the posts they make here. They can be wrong, and it really doesn't matter to them. Just as others can be right, and it still won't matter to them. Those of us with perspective, have a duty to realize those without perspective, can't possibly see what we see. All we can do is politely encourage them to gain perspective, and we can't go about it directly... lest we draw their ire. We have to gently nudge them in the right direction, without them seeing us nudge them.

That's if we want them to improve that is. However, some people are too brash and disrespectful in their ignorance... in which case those with experience are far more likely to take offense and try to spare others from the idiocy by hitting the poster with a brick rather than a pillow. I've walked both sides... and find the pillow is better. Perhaps not for them, but for me. The more difficult to quantify the topic, the more brazen posters become. This is why threads started on annealing or barrel cleaning turn into such horrific displays of thoughtlessness and barbarism. Almost no one involved has the skillset or the equipment to definitively prove their theory, but they'll anchor in and die on that hill regardless. I'd suggest a different path. Allow me to demonstrate.

Here's a video I did on annealing 6 years ago. To my knowledge, this was the first time anyone shared how to anneal with this method. If I were to shoot that video today, I'd do it differently with significantly toned down language and much more open-ended stances. My equipment has changed for the better since that video, but the core method has stayed the same. I've annealed more cases than most, but I still have no idea what I'm doing. I have no metallurgical testing equipment. I found a method that allows me to shoot smaller than I was prior which allowed me to setup my annealer to account for any type of brass in any atmospheric condition, very quickly, and go to the next plateau as a shooter, and here I'll share that method with you. I will not defend it. I will not be drawn into an argument over it. If you try it and it helps you, then it is working as intended. If it doesn't work, then I'm sorry you wasted your time. Though before annealing your brass too long, I'd perform some very goal-oriented testing, if I were you. You might find that the real world shooting might benefit from annealing "as right as you can" rather than annealing with caution thrown to the wind. Just a parting thought.

After reading your post and re-viewing your older video, I will admit that I misconstrued your view and intent. I have no bone to pick with you either.

For the record, I was not recommending that one should anneal to glowing and beyond. I do not do it nor do I encourage others to do so. I was trying to point out that the whole alloy changing and brass loss has been overblown as a myth, which is what this thread is about, ostensibly.

I also freely admit that I am one of those that have, in the past been taken aback and insulted by your methods and approach to educating those of us with less experience than yourself. I responded in kind, probably more than once. I very much appreciate and respect your more measured approach.

 

[verdugo60]

@orkan, Greg thank you for clarifying and sharing your insight.

I think this thread is a great example of the value of humility when discussing these things.

This thread started in 2017 with the OP essentially claiming that “over-annealing brass is a myth because these metallurgy studies say so “ without hardly any practical experience in reloading and annealing. He thought that because of a background in science, he was better qualified to tell people here with decades of experience actually applying these things to real world performance how dumb they were “cuz science”. He was not overly abrasive about it and was probably sincere in trying to help but was still wrong, and actually was sharing disinformation while trying to eliminate it. This is not to say that just doing something a long time makes you an expert, because we all know that guy in any field that has become dogmatic and does things “because that’s how you do it but is kind of a dummy.” Orkan is not that guy.

It’s obvious to anyone who’s done it, you can easily over-anneal brass for our application of precision cartridge reloading.

For those of us who have been around awhile and doing it a while this gets old. Newbs show up with no humility and drive off the people that are actually experts and are sharing the best information we have at that time.

As Orkan said, the body of information can expand over time with new technologies and understanding. Science is always changing and progressing and thus by nature is not infallible.

Greg, I would be curious what your equipment and system looks like now if you’re willing to share. As I mentioned in the “brass prep thread” best-practices change over time and that’s ok.

 

[orkan]

Greg, I would be curious what your equipment and system looks like now if you’re willing to share.

The most significant breakthrough I have had since the original annealing video has been moving to swirl flame torches. That little blue-tip nonsense in my original annealing video is amateur in comparison. Swirl flame torch heads/tips have allowed me to drop back to a single torch, and reduced my time in flame by a significant margin. This reduces the heat down the body of the case, and reduces the heat transferred to the annealing machine due to the freedom in positioning the torch as well as the reduced run time across a batch.

This video is from 4 years ago. Not much has changed since then. Very uniform annealing.

 

[verdugo60]

Video’s not working but thank you. No amp huh?

 

[stevenc23]

 

[stevenc23]

Also lots of good articles published by AMP since this thread was posted years ago:

Induction Annealer | The Latest Research | AMP

View the latest articles from AMP Annealing. Get tips and tricks from our R&D. Here we upload articles to provide your the best possible information on innovations in the annealing process.

www.ampannealing.com

 

[orkan]

No amp huh?

Not presently. Frankly I've been so happy with my gas setup as outlined above, that I haven't been in a rush to move to induction. I've been patiently waiting for the guys at AMP to "finish" going where they are headed with it. First there was the AMP, then there was the MK2, and now the AMP mate feeder... I'm just kind of waiting for the nuclear option, if you will. There's also the fact the AMP needs those pilots and case holders... where as my bench source flame setup is much more flexible to the large number of different cartridges I find myself working with.

Now the AMP force measurement press... that I probably won't wait for. I'll probably jump right onto that as soon as it launches... as I think it will bring a demonstrable down range improvement immediately. It could cost $5,000 or $10,000... and I'd still buy one at launch. That's how much I believe bullet seating force uniformity can affect down range performance.

Annealing has a direct bearing on that equation. So don't let the fact that I don't have one or use one presently discourage anyone from going down that path, as I think it's a good path. If I'm asked for a recommendation on an annealer, I almost always recommend the AMP if they have the budget to do it. If they don't, and they don't mind the safety issue of having gas bottles in the house, then the Bench Source is a solid option. If they don't have the budget for that, then I'll usually see myself out of that conversation, as right answers must be free of financial consideration at some point, if they are to continue being right. At some budgets, only wrong answers are available... and I'm not interested in that.

 

[orkan]

"video"

Was someone here suggesting that brass color was a good indicator of proper annealing?

 

[stevenc23]

Was someone here suggesting that brass color was a good indicator of proper annealing?

Many have suggested and inferred it, so thought it was worthwhile pointing out again that brass color is not a good indicator.
Was not directed at you. Just general reference for all hide members as well as the articles published by AMP.

 

[orkan]

Many have suggested and inferred it

I see. I must have missed those inferences.

@stevenc23 Do you still hold the same opinions today as you did 3 years ago? Would you care to share what equipment you are using presently and any documentation of the range sessions you've used to proof those methods and equipment?

 

[verdugo60]

Not presently. Frankly I've been so happy with my gas setup as outlined above, that I haven't been in a rush to move to induction. I've been patiently waiting for the guys at AMP to "finish" going where they are headed with it. First there was the AMP, then there was the MK2, and now the AMP mate feeder... I'm just kind of waiting for the nuclear option, if you will. There's also the fact the AMP needs those pilots and case holders... where as my bench source flame setup is much more flexible to the large number of different cartridges I find myself working with.

Now the AMP force measurement press... that I probably won't wait for. I'll probably jump right onto that as soon as it launches... as I think it will bring a demonstrable down range improvement immediately. It could cost $5,000 or $10,000... and I'd still buy one at launch. That's how much I believe bullet seating force uniformity can affect down range performance.

Annealing has a direct bearing on that equation. So don't let the fact that I don't have one or use one presently discourage anyone from going down that path, as I think it's a good path. If I'm asked for a recommendation on an annealer, I almost always recommend the AMP if they have the budget to do it. If they don't, and they don't mind the safety issue of having gas bottles in the house, then the Bench Source is a solid option. If they don't have the budget for that, then I'll usually see myself out of that conversation, as right answers must be free of financial consideration at some point, if they are to continue being right. At some budgets, only wrong answers are available... and I'm not interested in that.

I’ve kind of been in the same boat with the AMP annealer but now it’s still hard to swallow that $1400 pill. I have been using a manual/flame annealer for years off and on but I’m not sure I’m happy with the consistency or lack thereof.

I may do the bench source in the meantime while I save up for the AMP, which I hear is a pleasure to use. I hate annealing which means it doesn’t get done every time.

 

[stevenc23]

I see. I must have missed those inferences.

@stevenc23 Do you still hold the same opinions today as you did 3 years ago? Would you care to share what equipment you are using presently and any documentation of the range sessions you've used to proof those methods and equipment?

Yes, I do hold the same opinions on annealing (which was based on researching scientific literature). I don't have the means to do enough testing to get statistically significant data. The only new good scientific data I am aware of since starting this thread are the AMP annealing articles linked above which I believe support my initial conclusions.

I anneal with a home made induction annealer. I do Not own an AMP

Erik Cortina did a video which also supports those conclusions but would say it is more anecdotal than a scientific test:

 

[Western Living]

Cartridge brass needs to be soft enough not to split upon firing but hard enough to maintain enough grip on the bullet to...

One of the biggest problems with annealing processes is that people are doing them to "change the hardness" of the brass, and yet they have no practical way to measure the hardness either before or after. I've described this before as "faith in ignorance," because most annealers simply don't know how hard their brass actually is. They certainly don't know in a quantifiable way, and most of the ways they subjectively evaluate it are hocus pocus. I am not claiming that they aren't accomplishing anything good or useful -- just that they don't really know. They mostly "suppose."

AMP has gone to the effort of actually measuring the hardness of brass after various processes using a Vicker's hardness tester. I'm not going to give more of my opinion on their results as you can read them for yourself at their website.

Instead, I will cast some doubt on the idea that hardness is what matters at all. AMP is "all in" on the idea that "hardness" is the thing we're trying to change. I think almost every annealer is even though few of them ever measure it. There are some annealers that just want to "color" their necks so they look like factory Lapua.

I will interject here a note about why Lapua and every factory "anneals" their case necks. The process of cold-drawing and forming the necks leaves residual stress. This stress can be exploited by corrosive elements (most famously ammonia) to create stress-corrosion cracking. This was a problem in military stores until it was understood and the necks were stress relieved by heat at the brass factories following initial forming. Merely resizing the necks doubtfully introduces as much stress as initially forming them, but how much stress is induced by resizing is not something I can speculatively quantify for every possible situation.

Many annealers believe that resizing "work hardens" the brass and that heating the necks softens it. The benefits often cited for whatever process they use are improved neck tension qualities and more resizing cycles before necks crack.

"Work Hardening"
If work hardening is happening (how many people have actually measured it?), this hardening itself does not crack the brass. I assert that cracking is caused by the expansion of fractures introduced through metal fatigue. While hardening can contribute to metal fatigue, it is not the process that causes it. There are many metals and alloys that do not work harden but that will break due to metal fatigue. Metal fatigue will crack brass independent of work hardening. If "annealing" or some other heating process is effective at reducing brass loss due to cracking, it must reverse the effects of metal fatigue. Merely "softening" the brass is not adequate unless the metal fatigue is undone. What metalurgical process can accomplish this (whether heating or to what temperature etc.), I do not know. Is there some nominal temperature that is sufficient, do we need to re-crystalize the grain? I don't know -- however...

I assert that brass cracking is not a significant problem for the reloader. Personally, I have never had a piece of brass crack*. It just doesn't happen to me, so I can't believe that other people are losing large amounts of high-quality brass due to cracking.

(* I have seen some nickel-plated R-P headstamped range-scrounge crack, but never once have I seen a piece of brass that I purchased new crack even after more than a dozen reload cycles -- I'm not saying it never happens. I'm saying it doesn't happen on the large scale that demands we buy very costly annealing machines and anneal every firing to ensure thousands of pieces of our brass doesn't spontaneously shatter).

"Neck Tension"
It seems much more reasonable that annealers who are getting some kind of benefit from annealing besides just a warm feeling are obtaining the benefit in neck tension quality. Neck tension, like hardness, is something that few people can directly measure. We can measure things like bullet seating friction (with a hydro-gauge arbor press for example) and we can compare neck diameters before and after seating. Bullet seating friction is affected by a number of other factors besides the neck tension (such as bullet and neck surface qualities and lubrication). The comparison of diameters gives us an idea of how "far" the brass is squeezing the bullet, but it does not tell us with how much force it is squeezing.

The tension or "squeeze" is not directly a function of brass hardness, but of its springiness. Technically this is the modulus of elasticity, or the Young's modulus. If the brass has a low modulus of elasticity, it will plastically deform as the bullet is shoved in the neck and "tension" will be lower. If the modulus of elasticity is higher, the bullet will only elastically deform the neck and the brass will grip the bullet with more "tension." However, this elasticity also effects the result of resizing. If I resize brass that has a low modulus of elasticity to some diameter, it will probably stay there. If I resize brass with a high modulus of elasticity, it will probably spring back.

This "spring back" is an explanation for why some reloading processes are accomplished with a good deal of success more immediately before shooting. In other words, this is one of the reasons competitive shooters who reload (at the range) shortly before firing their cartridges are less likely to have problems that those who fire cartridges that were reloaded many months prior to shooting. We absolutely can measure brass necks "springing back" over a period of weeks or months and this will effect a loosening of neck tension over similar periods of time.

Conclusion
Until hundreds or thousands of cases start shattering after a few reload cycles, "annealing" brass seems like a costly a time-consuming solution to the problem of neck-cracking that doesn't really exist.

It is not "hardness" due to work hardening that significantly affects neck tension. Instead, it is the modulus of elasticity. Good neck treatments should focus on achieving a consistent modulus of elasticity and not on obtaining a certain temperature, color, flame behavior, recrystalization, or hardness value.

 

[918v]

My observations in regards to brass color after annealing have nothing to do with using color as a guide for the duration of heat during annealing.

Again, so there is no misunderstanding, my observation is that a new or 1x fired case will acquire a deep and rich oxide during annealing. That same case, after multiple firings, will no longer acquire that oxide. It will be faint brown at best. Same annealing time on the same machine. In my case, an AMP.

This isn’t something we can disagree over or debate. It happens with every case. When I get some free time I’ll do a pictorial essay.

 

[orkan]

I don't have the means to do enough testing to get statistically significant data.

You've got a rifle, right? How many rounds would it take? Probably not more than a couple thousand to get some quantifiable results. What's stopping you?

It would be good to have first hand experience that demonstrates you've done work which led you to your conclusions. If there is not work of your own, but that of others, which has led you to your conclusions... surely the burden of truth requires that you at least test those conclusions, doesn't it?

I think if people do not have the best rifles, with the best optics, with the best reloading gear, the most advanced skillset, and the enormous amount of time to dedicate to really proofing a concept, then perhaps things should be left a little bit more open ended... to leave room in the discussion for people that DO have all those things. Do it not, and we'll continue witnessing the death of the expert, as people with those resources will simply continue to remove themselves from the discussion.

 

[supercorndogs]

Yes, I do hold the same opinions on annealing (which was based on researching scientific literature). I don't have the means to do enough testing to get statistically significant data. The only new good scientific data I am aware of since starting this thread are the AMP annealing articles linked above which I believe support my initial conclusions.

I anneal with a home made induction annealer. I do Not own an AMP

Erik Cortina did a video which also supports those conclusions but would say it is more anecdotal than a scientific test:

That video does not support anything. He did not shoot any of the brass.

 

[lash]

One of the biggest problems with annealing processes is that people are doing them to "change the hardness" of the brass, and yet they have no practical way to measure the hardness either before or after. I've described this before as "faith in ignorance," because most annealers simply don't know how hard their brass actually is. They certainly don't know in a quantifiable way, and most of the ways they subjectively evaluate it are hocus pocus. I am not claiming that they aren't accomplishing anything good or useful -- just that they don't really know. They mostly "suppose."

AMP has gone to the effort of actually measuring the hardness of brass after various processes using a Vicker's hardness tester. I'm not going to give more of my opinion on their results as you can read them for yourself at their website.

Instead, I will cast some doubt on the idea that hardness is what matters at all. AMP is "all in" on the idea that "hardness" is the thing we're trying to change. I think almost every annealer is even though few of them ever measure it. There are some annealers that just want to "color" their necks so they look like factory Lapua.

I will interject here a note about why Lapua and every factory "anneals" their case necks. The process of cold-drawing and forming the necks leaves residual stress. This stress can be exploited by corrosive elements (most famously ammonia) to create stress-corrosion cracking. This was a problem in military stores until it was understood and the necks were stress relieved by heat at the brass factories following initial forming. Merely resizing the necks doubtfully introduces as much stress as initially forming them, but how much stress is induced by resizing is not something I can speculatively quantify for every possible situation.

Many annealers believe that resizing "work hardens" the brass and that heating the necks softens it. The benefits often cited for whatever process they use are improved neck tension qualities and more resizing cycles before necks crack.

"Work Hardening"
If work hardening is happening (how many people have actually measured it?), this hardening itself does not crack the brass. I assert that cracking is caused by the expansion of fractures introduced through metal fatigue. While hardening can contribute to metal fatigue, it is not the process that causes it. There are many metals and alloys that do not work harden but that will break due to metal fatigue. Metal fatigue will crack brass independent of work hardening. If "annealing" or some other heating process is effective at reducing brass loss due to cracking, it must reverse the effects of metal fatigue. Merely "softening" the brass is not adequate unless the metal fatigue is undone. What metalurgical process can accomplish this (whether heating or to what temperature etc.), I do not know. Is there some nominal temperature that is sufficient, do we need to re-crystalize the grain? I don't know -- however...

I assert that brass cracking is not a significant problem for the reloader. Personally, I have never had a piece of brass crack*. It just doesn't happen to me, so I can't believe that other people are losing large amounts of high-quality brass due to cracking.

(* I have seen some nickel-plated R-P headstamped range-scrounge crack, but never once have I seen a piece of brass that I purchased new crack even after more than a dozen reload cycles -- I'm not saying it never happens. I'm saying it doesn't happen on the large scale that demands we buy very costly annealing machines and anneal every firing to ensure thousands of pieces of our brass doesn't spontaneously shatter).

"Neck Tension"
It seems much more reasonable that annealers who are getting some kind of benefit from annealing besides just a warm feeling are obtaining the benefit in neck tension quality. Neck tension, like hardness, is something that few people can directly measure. We can measure things like bullet seating friction (with a hydro-gauge arbor press for example) and we can compare neck diameters before and after seating. Bullet seating friction is affected by a number of other factors besides the neck tension (such as bullet and neck surface qualities and lubrication). The comparison of diameters gives us an idea of how "far" the brass is squeezing the bullet, but it does not tell us with how much force it is squeezing.

The tension or "squeeze" is not directly a function of brass hardness, but of its springiness. Technically this is the modulus of elasticity, or the Young's modulus. If the brass has a low modulus of elasticity, it will plastically deform as the bullet is shoved in the neck and "tension" will be lower. If the modulus of elasticity is higher, the bullet will only elastically deform the neck and the brass will grip the bullet with more "tension." However, this elasticity also effects the result of resizing. If I resize brass that has a low modulus of elasticity to some diameter, it will probably stay there. If I resize brass with a high modulus of elasticity, it will probably spring back.

This "spring back" is an explanation for why some reloading processes are accomplished with a good deal of success more immediately before shooting. In other words, this is one of the reasons competitive shooters who reload (at the range) shortly before firing their cartridges are less likely to have problems that those who fire cartridges that were reloaded many months prior to shooting. We absolutely can measure brass necks "springing back" over a period of weeks or months and this will effect a loosening of neck tension over similar periods of time.

Conclusion
Until hundreds or thousands of cases start shattering after a few reload cycles, "annealing" brass seems like a costly a time-consuming solution to the problem of neck-cracking that doesn't really exist.

It is not "hardness" due to work hardening that significantly affects neck tension. Instead, it is the modulus of elasticity. Good neck treatments should focus on achieving a consistent modulus of elasticity and not on obtaining a certain temperature, color, flame behavior, recrystalization, or hardness value.

That’s a lot of words to say that you have no proof of anything and are ignoring the facts. Sounds like a great theory (despite many having shown that the “springback” you’re touting doesn’t really exist for rifle brass alloys) and is not supported in any way. Then consider that you neither show nor claim to have any actual proof for any of this, much less any anecdotal testing. I take it that you’ve read some things somewhere though.

 

[salks]

When I anneal my brass so the neck just barley turns red in a dark room it works. Trims better, sizes better, seats better, shoots better and no split necks.... Hardness has nothing to do with modulus of elasticity that don't seem right. Hmmm.

 

[Western Living]

I don't know what you're referring to. If brass does not have a modulus of elasticity, then there is no such thing as neck tension. It is the elasticity of the metal that creates the tension. Without it, there is none. Hardness does not create tension, and neither does temperature, flame color, brass colors, or crystalization. The only thing that directly affects neck tension is elasticity. If a bullet is inserted in a neck, and the brass is not trying to spring back towards the diameter the neck was sized to, then there's no tension at all, just a little friction. I don't believe that "springback... doesn't really exist for rifle brass alloys." I am sure they do indeed have a Young's modulus.

 

[918v]

Spring back does exist in properly prepared cartridge brass. The ability to extract a case after firing is a clue.

I like to size my necks in a Lee Collet Neck Die. Once, I over annealed a case. When I proceeded to size the neck in the LCND, the neck cold welded itself to the mandrel and tore off the body when I forcibly extracted the case. No spring back there. Properly annealed brass springs away from the mandrel after the collet does its job and the case extracts from the die without issue.

 

[918v]

The one on the left is new unfired and annealed in the AMP. The one on the right has been fired a bunch of times and then annealed. Why does it look like it hasn’t been annealed?

 

[orkan]

The one on the left is new unfired and annealed in the AMP. The one on the right has been fired a bunch of times and then annealed. Why does it look like it hasn’t been annealed?

I've observed a similar change in appearance, but as it will persist regardless of annealing, I'm only left to conclude that the exterior surface of the brass becomes more smooth across firings. Could be that getting mashed hard against the chamber wall like that gives it a smoother surface finish than new brass. All of the scratches and various little imperfections that exist in new brass, get "hammered" out against the chamber wall.

Just a possibility.

 

[Barelstroker]

After reading all the latest comments, it's difficult to know what to say or how to say it.
There are so many guys who have put their heart & soul into this subject &, I find that most commendable. We do have to recognize the fact that, there cannot, in reality, be 3 or 5 or 7 different ways & explanations of supposedly accomplishing the same outcome that they are all correct.
At the moment, if we ask 5 different guys about the right way to anneal, we get 5 different answers.
So, what can we do?
Well, we can start by separating scientifically measured fact from anecdotal fact.
The main issue with anecdotal facts is not necessarily the results but, the assigning of the mechanism by which the results are derived. In any testing, it's all too easy to jump to conclusions about the mechanism which appears to cause a certain result. Forming incorrect assumptions as to the causal mechanism has been the bain of science & physics since the beginning.
For much of our testing, we usually have the luxury of taking up where others have left off or, of combining previously established scientifically derived findings & using those to anchor our starting positions.

The 1st thing I did was to search for, download & read every scientific study on 70:30 cartridge brass I could find.
I'm glad I started the process here because, very little of what we see on YouTube vids remotely resembles the scientific findings.
None of the studies I have read have dealt with rifle case annealing from an accuracy or velocity perspective but, the studies are an integral part of determining the most practical & effective method of case annealing from a purely physical perspective.
For those who are genuinely interested in arming themselves with correct annealing knowledge, I strongly urge YOU to download "GRAIN SIZES PRODUCED BY RECRYSTALLIZATION & COALESCENCE IN COLD ROLLED CARTRIDGE BRASS" by Harold L Walker of the university of Illinois.
This is, IMO, is probably the best study report on brass annealing because it deals with annealing times & temperatures pertinent to the home annealer.
If we all read this, there'll be a lot less disagreement, at least about the mechanical/physical aspects of brass annealing.
Respectful Regards............Barelstroker.

 

[Western Living]

That’s a lot of words to say... I take it that you’ve read some things somewhere though.

I just did some anecdotal testing. I resized a brass neck that has been reloaded for many cycles without annealing.

Brass case worked through many reloading cycles, un-annealed
resized OD: .3710" -- looks like 1 thou immediate springback comapred to .3700 ID bushing size
OD with seated bullet: .3765"
OD after bullet extracted with inertia method: .3730" -- looks like 3.5 thou springback, aka "tension"

Brass case annealed (by propane torch-based machine)
resized OD: .3700" (using the same die bushing as above, no immediate springback)
OD with seated bullet: .3765"
OD after pulling bullet with inertia method: .3740" -- looks like 2.5 thou springback, aka "tension"

Don't take my word for it. Anyone who reloads can repeat this test for themselves:

1. size brass under the OD of the bullet and measure OD with a micrometer (or at least an accurate caliper), or the ID with a pin gauge
2. seat bullet and measure (OD) again -- this step isn't necessary but it confirms the brass has been expanded
3. pull the bullet
4. measure the brass OD or ID again and compare to step 1
5. ask yourself, "How did the brass neck return to a smaller diameter after the bullet was pulled?"


I also found, anecdotally from the results mentioned above, that my annealing process appears to reduce the neck spring back once the bullet is removed. This suggests the "annealed" neck has less tension than the un-annealed neck.

I can't think of why one would be better than another, but it does make sense that having a consistent condition would provide the most consistent results.

 

[918v]

I've observed a similar change in appearance, but as it will persist regardless of annealing, I'm only left to conclude that the exterior surface of the brass becomes more smooth across firings. Could be that getting mashed hard against the chamber wall like that gives it a smoother surface finish than new brass. All of the scratches and various little imperfections that exist in new brass, get "hammered" out against the chamber wall.

Just a possibility.

If you rough up the brass, like by turning the necks, the same thing happens.

 

[Western Living]

Another good experiment to generate an anecdote:

1 resize some necks (some un-annealed, and some annealed)
2 measure them
3 measure them again in a couple months (or preferably more often over such a period)

What I've found personally: the diameter necks grew by 2 thou over a period of time of just sitting. I have not studied annealed vs un-annealed yet, nor have I studied at what rate the necks appear to increase their diameter. This would take careful observation over a period of time and I just haven't done it.

 

[918v]

Did you measure them at the same temperature?

 

[918v]

Also, necks are seldom perfectly round. Did you measure them in the same spot?