Safe Practice to Consider

[ET1]

I'm not experienced with B31.1 Severe Cyclic Loading. I am experienced with Sect I and VIII.

I currently hold none of those tickets...I did receive training and performed RT, MT, PT and had started UT training. I had finished my CEDO accreditation before I left NDE. I know a number of Level 3s in UT, RT, MT & PT in both GGSB and ASNT accreditations.

But this isn't a determination of NDE...this is understanding strength of materials and design.

The direction of the threads in the hole do not create a stress riser in the direction of the greatest stress.

A plug will not reinforce the barrel.

In a failure the barrel will fail in the weakest location...the hole definitely is going to create the weakest point so of course it will tear/splits there.

FW

Fishy Wishy

There is no B31.1 Severe Cycling and Severe Cycling is only found in B31.3.
Section 1 is power boilers, Section 8 deals with pressure vessels and B31.1 deals with pressure piping. Because drawings are sometimes confusing showing the boundary of Section-1 and connecting pipe I hated to have to go back to the engineers for that boundary specification.

Everyone is entitled to express their thoughts and opinions on the barrel thread hole subject they feel is right.
I will say without more substantial proof from a reliable source neither one is proven correct or incorrect.

“The direction of the threads in the hole do not create a stress riser in the direction of the greatest stress.” According to who??



Ed

[rippin_355]

Still claim to not be insinuating that screw holes don't cause barrel failure? The entire premise of this thread is exactly this topic. For someone who likes to imply they are of a higher level on everything related to firearms, a guy who feels discussing the optimal pressure curves of expanding gasses on a forum like this, some here have questioned your advice and or motives. You are the one who drops the Engineer title and every third sentence it seems like. Anyway you are too predictable and obvious here. I'll leave you to your audience. But I can't help but repeat:
Where is the manufacturer of rifles and barrel data supporting your claim of these screw hole failures? Unless this is in your next response please don't bother, I know I'm done with this/you.

Someone who likes to imply things? Kinda sounds like you. You seem to be very abbrasive in replying to posts. Judging by the number of posts you have, you should get outside more!

[jaycee]

Someone who likes to imply things? Kinda sounds like you. You seem to be very abbrasive in replying to posts. Judging by the number of posts you have, you should get outside more!

Now we are judging people by the number of posts they have on this forum ,that is bordering on the "ridiculous "

[rippin_355]

Now we are judging people by the number of posts they have on this forum ,that is bordering on the "ridiculous "

Ridiculous is bashing people who are trying to be innovative and make things more efficient. If people want to play it safe and do the ordinary, then get a flintlock!

[terrym]

Ridiculous is bashing people who are trying to be innovative and make things more efficient. If people want to play it safe and do the ordinary, then get a flintlock!

Wow. Did you really say that? Pretty well proves my point again.

[Greenhorn]

ET1,is correct. THe screws gives the integrity back and prevents rust especially the front holes. My brother is a retired gunsmith for the military.

[ET1]

Greenhorn

Thanks for providing and sharing that info from your brother who would be more knowledgeable in this area.


Ed