Bullet and Shell Civil War Projectiles Forum

Author Topic: sea coast fuse?  (Read 10859 times)

CarlS

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2475
    • Email
Re: sea coast fuse?
« Reply #15 on: December 14, 2011, 09:12:46 PM »
To give some size perspective.......

Also have an image of the Alger drive in watercap fuse and it's center cap compared to the more common threaded watercap.  Note the hole configuration of the center cap is the same on both.
« Last Edit: December 14, 2011, 09:46:40 PM by CWArtillery »
Best,
Carl

John D. Bartleson Jr.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1786
    • Email
Re: sea coast fuse?
« Reply #16 on: December 15, 2011, 12:17:09 PM »
Below is an extract from Gibbons manual:

United States Sea -coast Fuze .- In the United States, a bronze fuze -plug has been adopted
for use with heavy shells, instead of the wooden one. It, however, fits the eye in the same
way, and is retained by friction.
It having been found that ricochets, more especially over water, were very apt to extinguish
these fuzes, a safety -cap and primer combined, have
been adopted in the navy, and found to succeed very
well, Fig. 188. A recess in the top is filled with priming
composition and covered, until the fuze
is required for use, with a leaden disk which fits
accurately the opening. A crooked passage filled with
the priming conveys the fire to the fuze -composition
beneath, and prevents water from being forced in, at
least in sufficient quantity to extinguish the fuze.
Another modification adds to the security of the fuze,
and removes one great objection to the use and storage
of loaded shells on ship -board. This consists of a small
leaden plug, A, Fig. 188, which fits the interior end of
the fuze-plug, and remains t here until the shell is fired,
when the shock of the explosion forces it out by blowing
the less dense shell away from it, exactly as it is stated a recent powder -explosion in the
streets of Wilmington, Del., blew the horses away from the shoes on their feet. No shock
less than that from a charge of powder is sufficient to produce this result, so that even were
the shell dropped from a considerable height on the end of the diameter opposite to the
fuze-hole, the plug would not leave its position. Or if, by any accident, the leaden disk of the
primer should be displaced, and the fuze take fire, the shell would not explode. In view of
the increased danger on board ship, and the terrible accidents which have happened from
shells, this improvement is a most important one. By means of it the shells can be loaded,
the fuzes set, and nothing remains to be done except to remove the leaden disk of the primer
when the shell is placed in the gun. The importance of the safety -primer is seen when it is
stated that four out of five fuzes are extinguished by ricocheting on the water.

Regards,
John aka Bart

CarlS

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2475
    • Email
Re: sea coast fuse?
« Reply #17 on: December 15, 2011, 01:19:39 PM »
Excellent info!  Thank you very much John.
Best,
Carl

John D. Bartleson Jr.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1786
    • Email
Re: sea coast fuse?
« Reply #18 on: December 16, 2011, 10:37:58 AM »
One of the many things I learned from Ed's excellent book was that the fuse burn time difference was not a result of the packing density but rather the proportion of one of the gunpowder elements, I think it is potassium nitrate but correct me if I am wrong, used in the mixture. 

Mike/Ed,
  Below is a quote from Gibbons manual:
"The composition for filling them should be well pulverized, thoroughly mixed and sifted;
and trial-fuzes should be made with the different compositions, and the time of burning
tested. With the same composition, the time of burning will depend very much upon the
manner in which the fuzes are driven."

     The manner of driving a powder train time fuse is very specific with regard to tools used, the weight of the maul, the number of times is is hit and a varible of how hard it is struck.  I wonder if this mainly applies to wooden case fuses.  Surely the Frankfort Arsenal was mechanized to produce better quality and more accurate fuses.  It is written somewhere that the gunners preferred fuses made at Frankfort.
     I think to summarize that although  powder density was not a selection factor to produce a particular time delay, the density affected by the fuse driving procedures did in fact affected its time.
Best Regards,
John aka Bart

emike123

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2348
    • Bullet and Shell
    • Email
Re: sea coast fuse?
« Reply #19 on: December 16, 2011, 11:35:45 AM »
Yes.

The constants in the equation, regardless of time of burn, were designed to be the packing density and fuse length.  Because of this and other superior processes, all fuse manufacture for the North was consolidated to the Frankford Arsenal after 1862 "to secure uniformity in size and rate of burning."  The variable in the equation was the amount of mealed powder (very fine grained gunpowder) not saltpeter as I mentioned above in the mixture.