Q:

.308 blowup

Fired my .308 again last night, same result 🙁
For those of you who don’t know, I’ve been trying to blow myself up for awhile now with moderate success.

The breech doesn’t want to seal up against the valve tophat. A single O ring, 5/8″ OD and 1/2″ ID, 1/16″ cross section, kept blowing out; the ring actually extrudes into the space between the breech and tophat, which on my breech is about 0.0015″

I decided to cut a secondary O ring groove and place another O ring in front of the existing O ring since there was just enough space to do so… this was last night’s test, to see if the backup O ring would hold the pressure. No dice. Both O rings blew out. And yes, my ears are still ringing. I have 10 fingers left.

Did a bit of research on the net and found that the Buna-N (standard Nitrile O rings we all use) are normally 70 durometer and rated for 1500psi… all the charts I’m following with the groove dimensions were triple checked and my grooves are correctly dimensioned… but it seems the o rings themselves weren’t meant for this kind of pressure. Found one interesting graph which showed ring hardess, or durometer rating, vs pressure and gap size… if you go down to near .0005″ on the gap (breech to tophat radial clearance), the working pressure can go much higher, as high as 10,000 psi. Also, going to 90 durometer also ups the allowable working pressure. But, by far, the most interesting thing I found was that the standard nitirile O rings are very susceptible to extrusion; they like squeezing through small spaces under pressure. But there are many other o ring compositions, such as Viton and especially Urethane, which have several times the extrusion resistance of nitrile compounds. I just ordered some Urethane orings and will have to await these before attempting firing again. For anyone else interested in Urethane o rings, try http://www.marcorubber.com. I also found them at Grainger.com, but they only had urethane in 70 durometer; marco had 90 durometer urethane. In my size, they were .83 cents each and there is a 30 piece minimum order.

While awaiting the o rings, I’ve decided I should take my barrel out and taper the leade inside the chamber. I think the abrupt leade is causing too high a pressure inside the breeach area before the rifling becomes inscribed. I used a standard .308 match reamer to cut my leade… but after inspection, a powderburner leade is very abrupt compared to an airgun leade. Anyone out there already made a .308 cutter that I can borrow??? If not, gonna have to make a long tapered cutter for this job… I’m thinking at least 1/2″ or so with a very, VERY gentle taper in for the rifling to slowly take hold of the bullet ogive.

aloha,
walt

Mods/Machinists

All Replies

Viewing 4 replies - 16 through 19 (of 19 total)

1 2

Good luck with your project Walt, keep us posted. 😀

Are you using a rifle barrel or a air rifle barrel? There is a big difference in the rifling the grooves are much thicker in a standard rifle barrel compared to a air rifle barrel. here is a link to a company that sell o rings for all types of uses they might have a o ring that might work perfectly for you and I got the valve parts yesterday thanks if you need any help just ask
http://www.applerubber.com/login/index.cfm

I’d say the case is right on point, Acourvil. Pressure is pressure. The point with the AF design is that in use, that breech is sitting just an inch in front of my nose, and I like my nose and the rest of the stuff its attached to, so I thought that even if I went to a 90 durometer o ring in nitrile, I’d still be close to an extrusion event even if I got it to work… I like to have several times the safety margin when the device is close to my face, so the urethane looks to be the answer. I’ll know in a week.

Oh, btw, the 30 O rings were like $25 but the UPS shipping was about $20… ugh. 30 O rings would fit into an envelope and have cost me like 0.042 cents.

aloha,
walt

It’s not directly related, but long ago I worked with a company that made a specialized valve that involved several oring seals inside a cylinder that were opened and closed against a piston. We had a bunch of problems with orings blowing out of the grooves under high pressure. Our solution ended up being going from 70 durometer orings to 90 durometer orings. The higher durometer orings did wear out faster, but they stayed in their grooves. This was a water application, but it supports the point you were making.

Viewing 4 replies - 16 through 19 (of 19 total)

1 2
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.