"12pdr cannonball question" Topic

My Uncle has a iron object he found 35 years ago or so under his porch in Penns. I always thought it might be a ACW 12 pdr solid cannonball but not sure. Measures 4.65", 4'73", 4.70" taken 90 deg from each other. It is mildly rusty and could account for the differences. It weighs 13lb 7 oz no identifying marks.

Could be. The 12 lb solid shot was a 4.62" ball weighing about 12.3 pounds.

Dear Skip
French cannonball measured about 120mm or 4.72-in and weighed 6.1kg or 13lbs 7oz. Therefore I think it is a French 12-pdr shot. Now that probably puts it back to American War of Independence. From DDS (2007) Napoleonic Artillery derived from Gassendi (1809) Aide Memoire.

I hope that assists.
Stephen

Steven – I hoping Kevin sees this too, AWI peice would be awsome, The town it was found in is next to where the Phonix Iron Works was. I far as I know they made Napoleon 12 pdrs and cannonballs. The town it was found in could have also produced cannonballs. Evensburg another town not far away other direction made muskets in ACW. Whoever knows sometimes how objects show up where they do

Well, it would go through the go/no go rings as they ensured a spherical shape roughly (contra what Alder claimed). If there is local ACW production, that is however more likely as it does have to reach the locality.

Dave – the ball is a bit rusty as I said, my Uncle is a pattern maker and had the perfect measuring divice to 1/1000". also looking for sabot measurements (wood) as he could make it perfectly as display stand

Give me a day or two and I can dig out the sabot measurements for you. It's in the US 1862 Ordnance Manual.

FWIW, you might check and see if that book is online anywhere. Many ACW manuals are there days.

V/R

That will be greatly appreciated, seeing I have or soon will have plenty of artillery books on Nap wars and loaded with sites of and none on ACW. thanks. also my guess is the extry .03+" could be rust

14Bore,

I don't want to rain on your parade, but that could be
a forged steel ball that you have and the measurements would be about
what you gave or very close, that's how they were shipped to
the smelter, then put in the blast furnace. I had many as my
Grandfather worked in a foundry in the 50s to the 70s. Later
the sizes varied as we seen them in our rail cars when I
worked for the Railroad. I am not saying this is correct
but seeing as it was near a foundry its possible maybe ask
them if you can they should be able to tell you.

Link to the Clarksville foundry with cannon ball for 12lb Howitzer
link

This may help to identify it as well.

Regards
James

Whatever it is ,it is. just tring to solve the mystery. all help is appreciated

Dear Skip
The US Ordnance followed the weights and diameter of British Ordnance. The weight of the ball is 1lb 7oz heavier than US or British 12-pdr shot.

M1841 12-pdr had bore of 4.62in (117mm)
M1857 12-pdr had bore of 4.62in (117mm)

This is not the size of the shot which would be 4-5mm smaller. British 12-pdr shot was 112mm [4.41in]

As you can see the weights and diameter do not fit it being US or American.

The Weight matches that of the French and Spanish. The Mexicans used French/Spanish Ordnance during the Mexican-American War but you are in North-Eastern USA as far as I am aware. Although it could be from this with the iron ammunition / ordnance transported to be smelted. Certainly interesting.

Rust will give a small increase in weight but you are talking less than an onze (25g).

Stephen

It does look like link picture minus jet which is removed. also shows slight line partially around possibly from coquille. still guessing its taken out at some point of manufacturing

Does it look like this kinda…

picture

James

Little more pock marked, seam part way around, no other marks. (it was found under a porch on bare ground). It has given me a better feal for the power of the round.

Is there any scoring on it to indicate it was fired?

Dave – no I thoughtof that as soon as I saw it, my guess is it might have been left over at factory and then picked up. As I said this area (Philadelphia suburb countys)was a heavy manufactureing of steel and heavy goods pre and during civil war.

Dear Skip
I find it interesting that it matches almost exactly to a French 12-pdr in weight and dimensions. I do not know of the use of a cannonball other than as ammunition. It is quite an involved process. After casting the ball would be hammered with drop hammers.

Stephen

Perhaps it fell off the back of an ammunition wagon?

14bore,

Sounds to me like you have a forging ball, there is no
big hole like the one in the picture, then its not a cannon
ball, but like I said take it to one of the steel plants they
should be able to tell you.

Regards
James

Dear James
I have never seen a cannonball with a hole in. They are spherical. What do mean a forging ball and what would that be used for?

The ball that he has from the dimensions and weight is cast iron and not steel.

Stephen

James – also what Stephen says, god knows nobody has read as much (and I'm not done) about artillery/ manufacturing, its defiantly cast iron. Have to measure again, wonder if slight joint, maybe 1/4 round is changing measurements

Additional measurements – fattest part 4.73, seam I would have thought was fattest is 4.65, 2 other points 4.7, 4.67. Also He said was mostly under ground when found under a open porch.

Does it look something like this;

picture

or maybe like these ones

picture

James

2nd picture top left corner is close, more pock marked than 1st picture

14bore,

I will tell you to take it to a steel plant near
your location and they will tell you its a forged steel or
cast ball or they will tell you its a cannon ball that's
how you will find out. I had several as a kid from my
Grandfathers foundry were he worked and that is the
pictures I just put up so I suspect they are not cannon
balls but I could be wrong that's why I am saying CHECK.

Regards
James

James – I 'm a 25 yr carpenter and as stated my Uncle is a way longer pattern maker. I'm about 99 percent sure its cast iron. This afternoon we re measured and discused this, and through out the idea of scraching it to be sure. Could take it to some steel shop to see what they think. I do thank you for info. Also still wondering what Kevin thinks.Skip

Your not understanding me, what I am saying is they ship
these balls 'about the size of a cannon ball' to the
foundries to be melted down in the blast furnaces into
metal parts for whatever equipment maybe on order.

I worked in metal my whole life at the railway as a pattern
maker, a welder, carpenter…

All I am saying is check it I don't see the big deal I am
just trying to help you is all.

James

Yes I do. a Ingot so to speak to be made into something else. I thank you a million. The where is the only question and I've been thinking the last 15 min on this. Also in Phoenixville they made 12pdr Napoleons and they have a original in a glass building at the park. (not sure if its there or was moved) I think they had a stack of balls too (haven't stopped there in a long time). Not many foundrys around here anymore. Phonix Iron went out operation in 70's

Ok skip just let me know what you find out I am curious as
well to know one way or the other.

Regards
James

Didn't have chance yet to take it somewhere but picture in NV72 pg 34 w/ above remarks is pretty dead on

unfortunately, that pic didn't come out clearly enough. I didn't actually talk about the lumpy surface – that was caused by being in the ground for nearly 200 years! The original photo shows much more clearly the seam where the two parts of the mould met. Also there is clearly circular scoring on the ball, which was caused by spinning as it went down the barrel.

Dave this one was possibly in ground for a hundred. visible seam is only 1/4 of way around. why would it spin? rolling a better term? I always thought it was more like a knuckleball (baseball) in having no spin

It varied by ball, depending on where the explosive force struck the ball, but most would spin as they moved down the barrel.

I had a correction ready, no spin is to definite, little spin but not like a rifle. But I've trying to discribe it is pitted like in picture

Skip,

I tend to agree with you on the motion of the roundshot in the gun tube. If it was used with a sabot with the roundshot attached to it, that would also have an effect on how the round acted in the gun tube upon being fired.

Sincerely,
Kevin

I have wondered about this all evening. If I have Daves book right the Austrians didn't use sabots of wood. A wood sabot fastened to ball will push out w/o spin. If no wood sabot, and wool or cow hair used I can see ball spin down barrel but very little spin like a knuckelball would from a pitcher unlike spin from fastball.

Yes, the Austrians did not use wooden sabots, just hair, so the spin was irregular. On the 6pdr ball, you can see circular scoring lines, where it has spun as it went straight down the barrel.

Next question, would velocity be diminished since hair would be consumed and though I've read wood also, I can't see that happening to a wood sabot.

Dear Skip
The wooden sabot would be attached to the cannon ball with iron straps. The sabot in effect acted as a plug to contain the huge increase of air pressure at the deflagration of the gunpowder. This was more important than the windage at the time of igniting the gunpowder.

Huge amount of heat would be produced which would consume most of the sabot. The remainder would be lost almost as soon as the shot left the barrel.

In addition the charge would normally be fixed to the sabot in fixed ammunition.

Stephen

Steven thanks as always, As I wrote I read it a hundred times but it's hard to imagine a block of wood being vaporized in a instant

'The wooden sabot would be attached to the cannon ball with iron straps. The sabot in effect acted as a plug to contain the huge increase of air pressure at the deflagration of the gunpowder. This was more important than the windage at the time of igniting the gunpowder.'

Could you explain this process, please, as the sabot was not of the same diameter as the roundshot and was angled towards the bottom in order to have the powder cartridge attached to it. In short, the diameter of the sabot was less than the diameter of the round. To accomplish what you are suggesting, the sabot would have to have the same diameter, or very close to it, as the round.

Further, if the Austrian roundshot didn't use a sabot, then the firing process would be less efficient than the French system of using a wooden sabot, would it not?

K

Kevin- my question on 1/20/11 0546hr PST.

Ian,

Yes-I was interested also. There hasn't been an answer yet, though. I was concerned with the efficiency of the round in the bore.

Sincerely,
Kevin

It is only necessary of you have a problem with windage and need to maintain velocity. Shells were fired loose as were some forms of canister. The Austrians cast their balls in carbon moulds and so, within certain tolerances, had a sufficiently tight fit, so that the loss of explosive force was minimised. Their powder was suppsoed to be the strongest in Europe.
The French kept the sabot as their windages are all over the place – remember that exchange about problems casting balls which were even spherical and Tousard's inability to be sure what the intended G windage was?

In the end, it probably made little difference as all the force was applied instantly to an Austrian ball while the French retained all the force but no doubt some effect was lost by the surviving wood. Looking around the Net, the suggestion seems to be that the surviving wood was eparated from the ball on leaving the barrel, but there would have been drag inside the barrel from this contraption.

Technicaly not drag, but it certainly effected interior ballistics.

I thought the effect of gunpowder blast against a flat wood sabot would propel the round better out of the barrel better than no sabot would. I assumed the sabot would be charred enough to lose any nails which held the strapping to which the round was secured with by the time the round left the barrel. Granted if windage was small enough maybe having no sabot is not a problem.

Skip,

The sabot would stabilize the round as it went down the bore and it also enabled the round to be 'fixed' ie in one piece which made loading easier.

The windage of the French field pieces was all a uniform .13 inches by the manuals.

Sincerely,
Kevin

14Bore

Check it out

link

Regards
James

and another one on the same subject;

link

Regards
James

The other problem with the iron straps is of course that they increase windage in themselves where there is no strapping (ie: over most of the ball). Austrian rounds were ixed without a sabot, so that is not a problem.

It is really windage by this time and possibly some surviving outdated ideas. Older guns with larger windages needed a sabot to ensure a spread of explosive power and a steady movement of the ball down the barrel. Once you get precision in production, you don't need it as the explosive force/gases will remain behind the ball. Rifles were loaded at this time with sabots as it was an accurate weapon and manufacturing tolerances were not good enough with these smaller weapons/ammo – muskets were not.

I am afraid that once again Kevin is trying to repeat a false claim. There was no standard windage as there were tolerances in both ball and barrel, while French sources all say that it was reduced by Maritz (supported by G) from one sixth to one-twelth, which are proportionate measures not inch measurements. The French have production problems as the go/no go rings show with a tolerance of 0.07in in spherical shape, which other nations do not. In addition, the thickness of the iron must in itself have added windage, whenever the iron was cast off.