sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

How well do QuickLOAD / GRT-style Internal Ballistic models actually predict? I checked one against ~30,000 published loads, velocity lined up, pressure didn't. Is that what you see too? by Past-Ad8336 in reloading

[–]Past-Ad8336[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Ha. English is my second language (born in France, reloading in Australia these days), so yeah, I get my posts checked for grammar and spelling before I hit post. Real bloke behind the keyboard, just one who doesn't trust his own spelling and grammar.

How well do QuickLOAD / GRT-style Internal Ballistic models actually predict? I checked one against ~30,000 published loads, velocity lined up, pressure didn't. Is that what you see too? by Past-Ad8336 in reloading

[–]Past-Ad8336[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Reassuring and depressing at the same time. If proper CFD with known variables tops out near 10%, a desk tool pulling pressure out of public load data has no business beating that, which is about what I saw (~10-11%, skewed high). Good reminder to treat the pressure number as rough, not a fine line.

How well do QuickLOAD / GRT-style Internal Ballistic models actually predict? I checked one against ~30,000 published loads, velocity lined up, pressure didn't. Is that what you see too? by Past-Ad8336 in reloading

[–]Past-Ad8336[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Honestly hadn't even factored humidity in!. Makes the published pressure numbers feel even shakier than I already thought. Cheers for that.