Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > European Armoury
FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 7th April 2019, 07:19 AM   #11
adrian
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 130
Default

These are, I think you will find, the expanding rivets which were placed there to attach wood bottoms to the projectiles. The wood bottoms have, on projectiles that still have a rivet affixed, either split or rotted away. The use of expanding rivets replaced the use of tin straps, on British ordnance, in the 1860s. Wood bottoms were required with fuzed spherical projectiles, to keep the fuze pointed forward. There were also used with solid shot in brass guns to prevent bore damage. A single rivet in large natures indicates Land Service whilst two smaller rivets meant Sea Service. Below is an extract from an unpublished work, it relates to British artillery Circa 1865:

Common wood bottoms were a disc of wood and the sides were shaped to be either conical, for Gomer chambered ordnance, hemispherical for cylindrical chambers or were left cylindrical for all other ordnance. The nature for which the bottom was intended was stamped on the underside of it. They were hollowed out to accommodate the base of the projectile and common bottoms were fixed with a single central rivet of gun metal. Wood bottoms for naval use were in only 32pr and 8 inch, or 68 pr, size and were all conical shaped. The hollow went completely through the wood bottom, leaving the underside of the shell flush with the lower surface of the bottom. This was necessary to enable the projectiles to be in actual contact with each other when double shotted, it also meant that a single central rivet could not be used to fasten the bottom and so two rivets were instead used, inclined towards the center. Refer also Commentary on page 78.
The navy’s use of wood bottoms in bronze 6 prs with the 4 ounce charge for drill purposes was prohibited because it was found that firing a loose ball with such a small charge did not harm the bore and so wood bottoms were unnecessary.

adrian is offline   Reply With Quote
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:53 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.