Sweden from 1600 to 1800. It was not a pease ful country. Everyone must do there part. Its just a bit from history and interesting to know.. The total war swedish style. From Google translate. Nitrates were found in large concentrations under barns. Previously, the majority of the gunpowder used had been purchased from abroad, but now the need was seen to start producing your own gunpowder on a large scale in Sweden. Consequently, the soil under the barns was declared krono regale. All the peasants (the priests made sure that no one was forgotten) were forced to deliver their imposed quota of nitrate soil together with ash, firewood and coal to the nearest shredder. This obligation was replaced in 1634 by a saltpetre tax. The saltpeter people now came instead to fetch the land themselves under the farmers' barns. The saltpetre tax was replaced in 1801 by an obligation for each mantal to supply 1/2 lispund of nitrates to the state annually. In 1830, the saltpetre tax ceased altogether. [1] The farmers were required to have wooden floors in the barns so that this nitrate formation could take place. The peasants complained about these levies and about the visits of the seven. The sewing lasted annually from May 1 to September 29. This simmering lasted for 6-7 days or until an egg could float on the surface. After this, lime and ash were added, which caused the constituent salt to crystallize, and could thus be removed. Then the whole was allowed to cool to about 25 degrees when the saltpeter began to crystallize. This raw nitrate was then transported to the powder mills. The simmerers had the right to take fuel for the cooking. sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salpetersjudare
@@chamberlane2899 At some point they changed to casting base down, when they discovered the top metal was relatively porous from the rising gasses in the melt. They had a lot of problems with the chamber end of the guns blowing up due to the chamber pressure. I found a document on cannon casting in the mid to late 1700s, and it indicates that they were casting base down by that point, so it probably changed in the early 1700s.
@@chamberlane2899 Basically they put the chamber on the bottom, then they made a 'barrel extension' several feet long at the top of the mold. So they cast something several feet longer than the finished gun. This is the part of the casting that would be porous, and they cut it off after casting and before drilling and cleaning up the gun.
@@lwilton there is evidence that the Ottoman bombard of 1465 which is currently in the Royal Armories Museum Portsmouth UK, was cast breech end lowermost. I can provide the metalurgical reference if required.
@@johnv341 I'm willing to believe you. I know that originally some cannon were cast base up, with predictably bad results, and they eventually learned to cast them base down. However, that is in one area of Europe, and people elsewhere may have started off the other side up, so the change (if there was a change) likely occurred at different times. The history I ran across noted that English cannon making was about 50 years behind Dutch cannon making until they imported some Dutch cannon makers, so obviously techniques developed at different times in different places. Besides, a bombard is a huge gun, and it may have made sense to them to cast the heaviest part down, and never thought of doing it the other way around. Frankly I don't know why anyone ever thought of casting cannon base up in the first place.
The same concept, except this time done with a real ship's cannon and the same powder charge and shot size as used on the original 1628 cannons on the ship Vasa, and also shot at a real properly constructed ship's side as a target, rather than at plywood on posts. They came to somewhat different conclusions than Adam and Jaime did when they did their test with a much smaller cannon. You can find RUclips videos of their tests and of the results.
This is meant to be humorous, and not critical in any way. It appears that they did NOT tether down the cannon, and when they touched it off, it aptly demonstrated Sir Isaac Newton's Third Law of Motion, that states, "for every action (force) in nature there is an equal and opposite reaction." And the cannon, and its carriage, elegantly rolled across the platform, and nearly out of the picture.
If you look at some of the other available footage they fire some with restraining ropes and some without presumably just to see what the unrestrained recoil would be
As someone else noted, this doesn't tell the whole story. There are restraining ropes, but the cannon is intended to recoil for a distance and lose energy rolling on not-well-rolling wheels (and on a ship, usually a bit uphill) before the rigging stops the movement. Looking at the other shots available here and there on RUclips, it looked like it rolled about a cannon length before being restrained. This reduces strain on the rigging and the attachments for the rigging, which would have been important on a wooden ship and using vegetable-fiber ropes. I think they were more or less duplicating how the cannon would have been restrained on the ship Vasa itself.
On board a ship the cannons were secured with a "breaching" which was a heavy rope attached to the hull of the ship and wrapped around the rear of the cannon with stopped the rearward movement of the gun after firing. Would not be good to have a 1200 pound gun rolling around on the gun deck of the ship. A set of block and tackle would be used to haul to gun back into firing position after loading.
@@tomtruesdale6901 This cannon is about 3m, And when shot in a ship it would recoil it's length (3m) in about an instant, Safe to say that you only stand behind this once when firing.
Excellent. Was the casting also done at KMV? Anybody know?
A bit of a late response but no KMV has no casting machines.
Sweden from 1600 to 1800. It was not a pease ful country. Everyone must do there part. Its just a bit from history and interesting to know.. The total war swedish style. From Google translate. Nitrates were found in large concentrations under barns. Previously, the majority of the gunpowder used had been purchased from abroad, but now the need was seen to start producing your own gunpowder on a large scale in Sweden. Consequently, the soil under the barns was declared krono regale. All the peasants (the priests made sure that no one was forgotten) were forced to deliver their imposed quota of nitrate soil together with ash, firewood and coal to the nearest shredder. This obligation was replaced in 1634 by a saltpetre tax. The saltpeter people now came instead to fetch the land themselves under the farmers' barns. The saltpetre tax was replaced in 1801 by an obligation for each mantal to supply 1/2 lispund of nitrates to the state annually. In 1830, the saltpetre tax ceased altogether. [1] The farmers were required to have wooden floors in the barns so that this nitrate formation could take place. The peasants complained about these levies and about the visits of the seven. The sewing lasted annually from May 1 to September 29. This simmering lasted for 6-7 days or until an egg could float on the surface. After this, lime and ash were added, which caused the constituent salt to crystallize, and could thus be removed. Then the whole was allowed to cool to about 25 degrees when the saltpeter began to crystallize. This raw nitrate was then transported to the powder mills. The simmerers had the right to take fuel for the cooking. sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salpetersjudare
Horrible music.... I really mean horrible!
Nice chips, someone know how to bore.
This cannon is full casting i think. Not barrel boring casting. The reamer was more a drill and reamer.
Deep boring with multi TC tipped, coolant fed and through-bar chip removal - must be a FRIST for this type of cannon.
How much gunpowder was used to proof test this cannon?
In another clip one of the test supervisors say 2,65 kg in this particular shot, but they used between 1,1 kg up to 3,3 kg in different tests.
It would be interesting to know how they machined the barrels of the guns in the 1600s when they were originally made.
@@chamberlane2899 At some point they changed to casting base down, when they discovered the top metal was relatively porous from the rising gasses in the melt. They had a lot of problems with the chamber end of the guns blowing up due to the chamber pressure. I found a document on cannon casting in the mid to late 1700s, and it indicates that they were casting base down by that point, so it probably changed in the early 1700s.
@@chamberlane2899 Basically they put the chamber on the bottom, then they made a 'barrel extension' several feet long at the top of the mold. So they cast something several feet longer than the finished gun. This is the part of the casting that would be porous, and they cut it off after casting and before drilling and cleaning up the gun.
@@lwilton there is evidence that the Ottoman bombard of 1465 which is currently in the Royal Armories Museum Portsmouth UK, was cast breech end lowermost. I can provide the metalurgical reference if required.
@@johnv341 I'm willing to believe you. I know that originally some cannon were cast base up, with predictably bad results, and they eventually learned to cast them base down. However, that is in one area of Europe, and people elsewhere may have started off the other side up, so the change (if there was a change) likely occurred at different times. The history I ran across noted that English cannon making was about 50 years behind Dutch cannon making until they imported some Dutch cannon makers, so obviously techniques developed at different times in different places. Besides, a bombard is a huge gun, and it may have made sense to them to cast the heaviest part down, and never thought of doing it the other way around. Frankly I don't know why anyone ever thought of casting cannon base up in the first place.
I may be incorrect here, but I'm fairly sure they didn't, just relied on the cored hole and plenty of stuffing around the ball to seal everything.
Looks a bit Mythbusters :-)
The same concept, except this time done with a real ship's cannon and the same powder charge and shot size as used on the original 1628 cannons on the ship Vasa, and also shot at a real properly constructed ship's side as a target, rather than at plywood on posts. They came to somewhat different conclusions than Adam and Jaime did when they did their test with a much smaller cannon. You can find RUclips videos of their tests and of the results.
This is meant to be humorous, and not critical in any way. It appears that they did NOT tether down the cannon, and when they touched it off, it aptly demonstrated Sir Isaac Newton's Third Law of Motion, that states, "for every action (force) in nature there is an equal and opposite reaction." And the cannon, and its carriage, elegantly rolled across the platform, and nearly out of the picture.
I think that is supposed to happen. The recoil moves it back and reduces the stress on pins and the wagon.
If you look at some of the other available footage they fire some with restraining ropes and some without presumably just to see what the unrestrained recoil would be
As someone else noted, this doesn't tell the whole story. There are restraining ropes, but the cannon is intended to recoil for a distance and lose energy rolling on not-well-rolling wheels (and on a ship, usually a bit uphill) before the rigging stops the movement. Looking at the other shots available here and there on RUclips, it looked like it rolled about a cannon length before being restrained. This reduces strain on the rigging and the attachments for the rigging, which would have been important on a wooden ship and using vegetable-fiber ropes. I think they were more or less duplicating how the cannon would have been restrained on the ship Vasa itself.
On board a ship the cannons were secured with a "breaching" which was a heavy rope attached to the hull of the ship and wrapped around the rear of the cannon with stopped the rearward movement of the gun after firing. Would not be good to have a 1200 pound gun rolling around on the gun deck of the ship. A set of block and tackle would be used to haul to gun back into firing position after loading.
@@tomtruesdale6901 This cannon is about 3m, And when shot in a ship it would recoil it's length (3m) in about an instant, Safe to say that you only stand behind this once when firing.
This is a reproduction of one cannon salvaged from the Wasa wreck site in 1961.
I think they are smoothing the bore from any misshapen issues so it can be safely fired