Foot Pounds

Jim Taylor
[subject]
Friday, March 17, 2023, 07:27 (399 days ago)

Foot-Pounds As Related To Bullet Energy

"foot-pound" = A unit of work equal to the work or energy needed to lift a one-pound weight a distance of one foot against the force of the Earth's gravity.
From: https://www.thefreedictionary.com/foot-pound

The foot-pound force is a unit of work or energy in the engineering and gravitational systems in United States customary and imperial units of measure. It is the energy transferred upon applying a force of one pound-force through a linear displacement of one foot. The corresponding SI unit is the joule.
From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foot-pound_(energy)

Those definitions are interesting, but, Foot-Pounds as listed for rifles and handguns is something that does not exist.

There. I said it.

If "foot-pounds" is defined a the "work or energy needed to lift a one-pound weight a distance of one foot against the force of Earth's gravity", the only conclusion possible is that it does not exist when applied to rifle and handgun projectiles.

For instance: The muzzle energy of a 150 gr. bullet fired from a .30-06 is calculated at over 3000 foot-pounds. That means the bullet fired into 3000 pounds of weight should lift it one foot. Fire a 150 gr. .30-06 into a 50 pound log hanging on rope and it won't move it sideways 1 foot let alone lift it if you fired up into it from underneath! If the muzzle energy figures were true, a 50 pound log laying on the ground should roll like a tin can when shot with 3000 foot-pounds of energy. But it won't do it because muzzle energy figures are a myth.

Newton's Third Law of Motion, speaking of objects in motion, states in part: "To every Action there is always an equal Reaction: or the mutual actions of two bodies upon each other are always equal, and directed to contrary parts." If the .30-06 could actually move a 3000 pound object, can you imagine what it would do to the person firing it?

"Muzzle Energy" figures are an easy way for ammunition companies and handloaders to compare their ammunition with other ammunition. But the figures do not translate into the real world. In hunting, animals are not taken cleanly because of muzzle energy. They are taken cleanly when the hunter has the skill to properly place his shot into the anatomy of the animal so that vital organs are damaged enough to release a rapid loss of blood, dropping the blood pressure so fast that the animal is incapacitated quickly. Sometimes to do that the bullet must break or penetrate bones, which requires the bullet retain its integrity and not come apart easily. "Foot-Pounds" of muzzle energy while useful for comparing cartridges has little value beyond that. Bullet weight ... construction and design .. velocity ... all are important. For prairie dogs a nice high velocity bullet that expands easily and rapidly is great, but it won't work on large game no matter how much muzzle energy it is rated at.

Many years ago I did a test to see how hard bullets actually hit something. I built a rig that had a 48 pound Mesquite log hung on a 6 foot long arm. It swung freely and had a tape fixed to it so we could record to the 32nd of an inch how far the log moved when struck by a bullet. All bullets expended their total energy into the log. Nothing moved the log more than a few inches. If the bullet fired actually produced several hundred foot-pounds of energy the log would have been torn from the rig! This is what the ammunition fired into the log actually did.

[image]

[image]

[image]

What we were actually measuring is called "Momentum Energy" by professionals. Momentum is the amount of "push" a moving object has. Obviously the weight of the moving object is a big factor and influences the results more than velocity. So how does this translate in the real world? Not too well a lot of the time. I have been present when someone was shot and the physical reaction to several thousand pounds of energy being dumped into the body was ... underwhelming. Those of you who hunt game such as deer or elk can testify to the same thing. There is not always a physical reaction to being hit by a bullet. Not in the sense of being hit by enough power to move a heavy weight.

For a video demonstrating this watch this guy being shot at close range with a .308 NATO round on a vest.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5f1Fo4r4_I

If the .308 actually had all those thousand pounds of muzzle energy it would make a 175 pound man go flying. As well as the shooter! Thus my initial statement that muzzle energy does not really exist.

Very true, and a good work!

WB
[subject]
Friday, March 17, 2023, 08:12 (399 days ago) @ Jim Taylor

Plus there are so many varibles. If it is ft. lbs. it is also distributed over area. It's only 0.1 sq. inches for a .35 cal. projectile. I've always thought if it as that many "pounds" of weight, dropped from 1 ft. height, onto that much area. Obviously penetration and the rate of slowing are big absorbing factors. Bullet design and projectile expansion all factor in. on soft media you get into temporary cavities and all. It makes your head hurt. The physics are logarithmic, often, not proportional.

I set up to chronographs once, with a consistent medium between for the bullet to penetrate fully. Measuring the residual velocity I could "calculate" the "energy" exerted to the soap blocks. This was used for very lightly powered rimfire bullets. I was toying with round nose vs flat tipped bullets, .22 shorts actually. I DID get some notable results with the flat tips adding about 10-15% more energy dumped or lost with nothing being changed other than Gary's flat tip. This was determined simply by residual velocity numbers.

The soap blocks are small and I didn't have problems with pieces of media tripping the chrono downstream. It seemed legit.

Next he will be going after the holy horse power!

Mike H.
[subject]
Friday, March 17, 2023, 09:28 (399 days ago) @ WB

with a team of 500 horses in a pulling contest with a hot rod. Pretty much same deal, "for comparison purposes only, your mileage may vary, tax, title, and dealer prep not included".

Very interesting.. What are your thoughts about TKO

james
[subject]
Friday, March 17, 2023, 10:23 (399 days ago) @ Mike H.

- No text -

my only experience with the Taylor Knock Out

Jim Taylor
[subject]
Friday, March 17, 2023, 15:48 (399 days ago) @ james

was a fairly decent straight right that I could throw pretty well when I was younger. Put quite a few bigger guys down though I did have it fail me once against an ASU Half Back. But I wouldn't even try it anymore. :-)

The Taylor Knock Out was not to give the actual

Gary Reeder
[subject]
Friday, March 17, 2023, 16:45 (399 days ago) @ Jim Taylor

power of a cartridge. John Pondoro Taylor gave us a formula to figure somewhat the power of a cartridge, not the energy or the knock down. He just said if you are going hunting Impala (which relates to our white tail deer) then go with a cartridge that has XX TKO. Or of you are going after a Cape Buffalo then use a cartridge with XX TKO. His TKO was just a basis to go by when hunting various animals. He even gave us a full chart listing all the animals he could think of and the TKO value of each. Mainly this was just so a novice going hunting would look at his chart and see what the TKO value of a cartridge was, for instance maybe he had the 35 Remington with a TKO of 30 and a 300 Win Mag had a TKO of 40. His chart told us if we were going after bull elk to go with a TKO of at least 40 and so on. His TKO value made a lot of sense as he didn't go into the energy of a cartridge as that is mythical number. He just gave us a chart and a formula to place a certain cartridge somewhere on that chart.
Back in the early 90s before our first Africa safari Kase and I went over the chart almost daily so we would have the correct TKO value for a certain animal we planned to hunt. It was just a simple chart and a simple formula but it made sense, especially for someone not knowing what TKO was needed for a Wildebeest or whatever animal we planned to hunt. It kept us from being stupid and bringing a 30-30 for a Gemsbok or Kudu.

That really is a fine explanation with personal examples.

Mike H.
[subject]
Saturday, March 18, 2023, 10:36 (398 days ago) @ Gary Reeder

- No text -

Yes... a good explanation

james
[subject]
Saturday, March 18, 2023, 10:50 (398 days ago) @ Mike H.

- No text -

I've always used TKO to pick a cartridge for hunting

Lymey
[subject]
Saturday, March 18, 2023, 16:58 (398 days ago) @ Gary Reeder

things that want to take issue with me about getting shot.

still would`ent want to owe you any money

james
[subject]
Saturday, March 18, 2023, 10:48 (398 days ago) @ Jim Taylor

- No text -

I lost some and won some and in the end it still hurt ..

Jim Taylor
[subject]
Saturday, March 18, 2023, 12:03 (398 days ago) @ james

:-)

I was told that if I had never lost a fistfight I hadn't fought enough.

These days I don't want to hit anyone and I don't want anyone hitting me. :-D

I thoink its all due to head space

jthomson
[subject]
Friday, March 17, 2023, 11:30 (399 days ago) @ WB

- No text -

hahaha!...my guess is lack of primer pocket uniforming.

Mike H.
[subject]
Friday, March 17, 2023, 12:59 (399 days ago) @ jthomson

- No text -

muzzle energy

tedt
[subject]
Friday, March 17, 2023, 13:46 (399 days ago) @ Jim Taylor

I have always ignored muzzle energy figures. The Taylor values seem better as comparison, which is all muzzle energy is.
The Taylor KO factor multiplies bullet mass (measured in grains) by muzzle velocity (measured in feet per second) by bullet diameter (measured in inches) and then divides the product by 7,000, converting the value from grains to pounds and giving a numerical value from 0 to ~150 for normal hunting cartridges.
I know this is not anything new,but it fits in with the and supports the findings, I think.

powered by my little forum