Tumbling

[coopermania]

As an outsider, so far only Trickg has shown any evidence to what powder looks like after a vibration session. All the other companies have taken the lawyer's way out. (and no just because you have a "Dr." in front of you name means you are the be-all-end-all subject matter expert)

There is a significant different between high g/RMS and low g/RMS and duration times. It's been stated by coopermania that companies tumble after the process to do a final "clean-up". I would guess that is a low g/RMS for a short duration.

A question I would ask a company, is how does your ammunition not break down after a 3 hour flight on a helo? The rotor chop on a Huey and 53E puts out high g/RMS for a sustained period of time. We have weapons on board firing ammo that (per all of the guidance shown above) should not be functional, i.e. powder has broken down. So does that mean that the military gets a different powder with different characteristics? Or do they get a little notice in their ammo can that says "Sorry, you cannot vibrate this ammo as the powder will break down and possibly won't work"?

As an engineer, I say myth busted

*edit* If you are interested in the vibration profile the ammo on a military aircraft must survive, see MIL-STD-810E/F/G (revision depends on aircraft and when the requirements went on contract)
http://assistdocs.com/search/search_basic.cfm (type 810 in the Document Number)

As an outsider, so far only Trickg has shown any evidence to what powder looks like after a vibration session. All the other companies have taken the lawyer's way out. (and no just because you have a "Dr." in front of you name means you are the be-all-end-all subject matter expert)

There is a significant different between high g/RMS and low g/RMS and duration times. It's been stated by coopermania that companies tumble after the process to do a final "clean-up". I would guess that is a low g/RMS for a short duration.

A question I would ask a company, is how does your ammunition not break down after a 3 hour flight on a helo? The rotor chop on a Huey and 53E puts out high g/RMS for a sustained period of time. We have weapons on board firing ammo that (per all of the guidance shown above) should not be functional, i.e. powder has broken down. So does that mean that the military gets a different powder with different characteristics? Or do they get a little notice in their ammo can that says "Sorry, you cannot vibrate this ammo as the powder will break down and possibly won't work"?


As an engineer, I say myth busted

*edit* If you are interested in the vibration profile the ammo on a military aircraft must survive, see MIL-STD-810E/F/G (revision depends on aircraft and when the requirements went on contract)
http://assistdocs.com/search/search_basic.cfm (type 810 in the Document Number)

Most Ammunition company's use a Short High Speed 2 minute cleaning at the end.

I believe if you took a slick or a stallion and did barrel rolls and end over ends that it would be the same as spending time in a tumbler / vibrator. . Maybe some of you guys need to look inside a running tumbler and see what actually happens. Have any of you ever noticed that mil spec ammo has a full case or a compressed charge of powder ?
Hummmmm, its tough to have wear on powder kernels if you can't move around.

I would say to a engineer that believed that this myth is busted.. His College cheated him and his daddy should go and get his money back.

 

[trickg]

I'm still waiting for trickq to explain how the annealing mark stays on the brass if it's supposedly tumbled after loading, I must be on his ignore list.

You aren't on my ignore list - I have no clue how that might come to be - all I have is the word of the guy from Lapua who made the statement. Considering it wasn't my statement - it was Kevin Thomas' statement - why don't you go ask him?

 

[BUFF7MM]

You aren't on my ignore list - I have no clue how that might come to be- all I have is the word of the guy from Lapua who made the statement. Considering it wasn't my statement - it was Kevin Thomas' statement - why don't you go ask him?

Fair enough, I just figured you had more insight on it since you use what he said. I see no need to contact him for my benefit.

 

[trickg]

Now Trick, Don't change the question now, The question has been is it safe to tumble / vibrate loaded ammunition,

Now why did you not post the email from Hodgdon , Winchester ?
With everyone's names ?

They don't have to give any data for anything, I myself did not ask for any data.

So what does Dr Cheese Undermydick with sanitary issues have to do this conversation?.

I bet you got plenty of emails from powder co, They just don't say what you want them to say.

The only other email I have gotten back came from Mike Daly at Hodgdon/Winchester, along with this notice at the bottom:

NOTICE – This e-mail message may contain privileged, confidential, or sensitive information intended only for the use of the identified recipient. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this e-mail is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately, and delete this e-mail and all attachments from your computer system

The email from Lapua did not contain that legal notice, which is why I posted it, and why I paraphrased the necessary part of the email from Mike Daly without reposting the whole thing.

Regarding the idea that they don't have to give data for anything, no they don't, but the details are in the data. Anything that is said without backing data is worth about as much as it would take to get a bus ride in Baltimore City - not much. If you don't ask for data, then why ask at all? So you can get the same, standard disclaimer that they've been regurgitation for liability purposes for decades?

Mike Daly kind of dodged my question - he said, "yeah, tests have been done that support x, x and z," but then gave no additional information other than his statement saying so.

How roughly were the cases tumbled? For how long? Are they conditions that duplicate conditions you'd find in a hobbyist reloader's tumbler? Why is your standard answer not to tumble when much of the ammo manufacturers do just that before they distribute to the consumer?

Those are questions I asked him in a follow-up email, but I doubt if I'll get anything other than their standard disclaimer.

 

[jjones88]

Most Ammunition company's use a Short High Speed 2 minute cleaning at the end.

I believe if you took a slick or a stallion and did barrel rolls and end over ends that it would be the same as spending time in a tumbler / vibrator. . Maybe some of you guys need to look inside a running tumbler and see what actually happens. Have any of you ever noticed that mil spec ammo has a full case or a compressed charge of powder ?
Hummmmm, its tough to have wear on powder kernels if you can't move around.

I would say to a engineer that believed that this myth is busted.. His College cheated him and his daddy should go and get his money back.

I think you need to actually read the MIL-STD that I posted and review the vibration profile. It's the exact same as what a vibration tumbler does. There is a "slow" ramp up, a duration of some length of no change in g/RMS, then a "slow" ramp down. That duration can be scaled accordingly. It doesn't matter if it's a barrel roll (tumble is not defined the same a vibration) or just a standard flight profile. Vibration is vibration, and I can tell you are not a scientist/engineer because you don't seem to understand that.

I find it funny that you say that when a scientist/engineer says "Don't tumble a loaded round you listen" but when a scientist says that we do it every day you immediately diss me and assume my father paid for my schooling. (I should be mean and diss back and say your father should have made you go to college, but I won't)

I don't tumble loaded rounds, don't really see the purpose in super shiny brass that I'm going to dirty. But I had to speak up as I hate when a non-scientist talks down on normal every day folk and their quest for knowledge. If you aren't going to debate but instead stay on your broken record of "don't tumble because a company says so" and talk smack, then cool glad MDShooters promotes that type of behavior.

 

[coopermania]

I think you need to actually read the MIL-STD that I posted and review the vibration profile. It's the exact same as what a vibration tumbler does. There is a "slow" ramp up, a duration of some length of no change in g/RMS, then a "slow" ramp down. That duration can be scaled accordingly. It doesn't matter if it's a barrel roll (tumble is not defined the same a vibration) or just a standard flight profile. Vibration is vibration, and I can tell you are not a scientist/engineer because you don't seem to understand that.

Help a underachiever understand.
So, With what you are telling me Mr Scientist/ Engineer is if I take a 500 cc plastic container that has a 5% compressed load of smokeless powder and another 500 cc plastic container that is 75% full of the same smokeless powder and put them through the same 20 hour Vibration / Tumbling machine or a ride on a truck, helo, C130, train, pack mule and the last 4 hours with a sandflea humping it. They will have the same wear to the powder kernels ?
Lord knows I am not a educated man but I do believe in my small withered mechanical mind that the 75% container would surely have much more wear to the powder than the compressed powder that can't move around so easily.
Turn me into a believer......
The next day or so I will fire up that big blue Dillon Tumbler and do that test I wrote above, Me like yourself would never tumble loaded ammo. And what I don't understand that some people listen to a unknown on the web before the manufacture.

 

[coopermania]

I don't tumble loaded rounds, don't really see the purpose in super shiny brass that I'm goito dirty. But I had to speak up as I hate when a non-scientist talks down on normal every day folk and their quest for knowledge. If you aren't going to debate but instead stay on your broken record of "don't tumble because a company says so" and talk smack, then cool glad MDShooters promotes that type of behavior.

As I have stated I don't tumble loaded ammo either, What has been brought by the supporters of tumbling / vibrating is a internet video and a person opinion of a Lapua's that is the USA Factory Rep and he stated that this was not Lapua's opinion on this topic. And nothing more, Like I have said provide a manufacturer of powder that says its ok. Of the hundreds of people that have read this thread nobody else has kicked up anything else that says its ok or its not ok.
I have provided 3 powder manufactures that all have said no no no
Oh that they don't do it. I wonder why they don't do it ?

 

[BUFF7MM]

And what I don't understand that some people listen to a unknown on the web before the manufacture.

And this brings me right back to the same question I asked at post #65 of this thread, does everybody who tumbles after loading not follow minimum and maximum loading datas from the manufactures? Or are you reading the loading manuals and saying that's just lawyer talk?

Let's see here 23.5 grains of titegroup should be fine in a 223 case, those loading manuals don't know what their talking about.

 

[coopermania]

And this brings me right back to the same question I asked at post #65 of this thread, does everybody who tumbles after loading not follow minimum and maximum loading datas from the manufactures? Or are you reading the loading manuals and saying that's just lawyer talk?

Let's see here 23.5 grains of titegroup should be fine in a 223 case, those loading manuals don't know what their talking about.

Yep, Reminds me of SLUGMANNNN AND HIS CLAYS POWDER !!!
That Hodgeon Company they don't know shit, Even with them having no data for what I need I am just going to use it because that's what I have plenty of.
How about the Subsonic clays loads ????? WTF.LOL. What a tool he was.

 

[BUFF7MM]

Yep, Reminds me of SLUGMANNNN AND HIS CLAYS POWDER !!!
That Hodgeon Company they don't know shit, Even with them having no data for what I need I am just going to use it because that's what I have plenty of.
How about the Subsonic clays loads ????? WTF.LOL. What a tool he was.

My thoughts also.

 

[jjones88]

Help a underachiever understand.
So, With what you are telling me Mr Scientist/ Engineer is if I take a 500 cc plastic container that has a 5% compressed load of smokeless powder and another 500 cc plastic container that is 75% full of the same smokeless powder and put them through the same 20 hour Vibration / Tumbling machine or a ride on a truck, helo, C130, train, pack mule and the last 4 hours with a sandflea humping it. They will have the same wear to the powder kernels ?
Lord knows I am not a educated man but I do believe in my small withered mechanical mind that the 75% container would surely have much more wear to the powder than the compressed powder that can't move around so easily.
Turn me into a believer......
The next day or so I will fire up that big blue Dillon Tumbler and do that test I wrote above, Me like yourself would never tumble loaded ammo. And what I don't understand that some people listen to a unknown on the web before the manufacture.

No you are correct they will not have the same wear after 20 hours. BUT given enough time the one that is compressed will break down IF that is a failure mechanism. It's just an acceleration factor that causes the 75% loaded container to break down sooner.

If I had to listen to every single corporation saying that their product does this or don't do that, nothing in the military would work. That's why the DoD hires engineers, to re-test the crap that a company sells us...

I ask you this: find me ONE example where vibration has caused smokeless powder degradation. I cannot find even one whitepaper that shows chemical breakdown after vibration. I see your two emails and one case where an unknown has shown that 300 hours does nothing.

 

[jjones88]

http://www.texaschlforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=28&t=50346

Another board showing Kevin Thomas's reply and his saying its okay in moderation.

http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/index.php/t-156750.html

and another link on another respectable forum where someone actually did a test and came to the conclusion of no changes.

http://www.m4carbine.net/archive/index.php/t-35477.html

and a quote from Alliant from 2009: Alliant Powders Response 08/04/2009
We do not recommend tumbling loaded ammo. We are aware that this has
been done at times but it makes us very uncomfortable from a safety
standpoint. We have not conducted any testing to see if it negatively
affects the powder. Thanks for your note and have a nice day.

Ben Amonette
Consumer Service Manager
Alliant Powder Company
www.alliantpowder.com/

They haven't even done testing to see if it negatively affects the powder. Straight from some dude's mouth, they don't even scientifically know.

Your turn cooper find me ONE example of a negative result.

 

[coopermania]

No you are correct they will not have the same wear after 20 hours. BUT given enough time the one that is compressed will break down IF that is a failure mechanism. It's just an acceleration factor that causes the 75% loaded container to break down sooner.

If I had to listen to every single corporation saying that their product does this or don't do that, nothing in the military would work. That's why the DoD hires engineers, to re-test the crap that a company sells us...

I ask you this: find me ONE example where vibration has caused smokeless powder degradation. I cannot find even one whitepaper that shows chemical breakdown after vibration. I see your two emails and one case where an unknown has shown that 300 hours does nothing.

That post with 300 hours was posted by Trick not me
I posted 3 emails from powder manufacters that stated that is was unsafe / or we don't practice that here.

 

[coopermania]

http://www.texaschlforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=28&t=50346

Another board showing Kevin Thomas's reply and his saying its okay in moderation.

http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/index.php/t-156750.html

and another link on another respectable forum where someone actually did a test and came to the conclusion of no changes.

http://www.m4carbine.net/archive/index.php/t-35477.html

and a quote from Alliant from 2009: Alliant Powders Response 08/04/2009
We do not recommend tumbling loaded ammo. We are aware that this has
been done at times but it makes us very uncomfortable from a safety
standpoint. We have not conducted any testing to see if it negatively
affects the powder. Thanks for your note and have a nice day.

Ben Amonette
Consumer Service Manager
Alliant Powder Company
www.alliantpowder.com/

They haven't even done testing to see if it negatively affects the powder. Straight from some dude's mouth, they don't even scientifically know.

Your turn cooper find me ONE example of a negative result.

--------------------------------------------------------
If I read correctly it does not look like Hodgdon, IMR or Winchester want you to tumble loaded ammo. Kinna looks like Lapua does not like it either. I gonna jump off for a bit, But I'll be back.

umbling loaded cartridges is not a good idea. The powder is mechanically degraded by friction creating a very fine dust-like powder and reducing the size of the powder kernels both of which increase the burn speed of the propellant in the cartridge. If the propellant has an externally applied deterrent coating, this coating may also be removed from the individual powder kernels which, again, increases the burn speed of the powder. Increases in burn speed of the powder will cause pressures to escalate along with the degree of degradation of the powder by the mechanical action of tumbling or vibration.

In other words, it is not recommended to tumble or vibrate loaded ammo. There can be no positive outcome from doing this, only negative outcomes.

Mike Daly

Customer Service Manager

Hodgdon Family of Fine Propellants

Hodgdon Smokeless Powder

IMR Powder Company

Winchester Smokeless Propellants

GOEX BlackpowderT

Just a little friendly heads up.

"To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them." George Mason Texas and Louisiana CHL Instructor, NRA Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, Personal Protection and Refuse To Be A Victim Instructor

MoJo Senior Member

Posts: 4657 Joined: Thu Dec23, 2004 6:10 pm Location: Vidor, Tx

Re: Cleaning live ammo in a tumbler by SeaHawk » Mon Nov 28, 2011 6:13 pm

I also found this floating around at : http://www.handloadersbench.com/forum12/8877.html

Lapua/Vhitavouria's response from today.

Tumbling loaded cartridges

Tuesday, August 11, 2009 10:44 AM

"Kevin S Thomas" <ksthomas@lapua.us>

Dear David,

Adam forwarded your inquiry to me, and I'll be happy to answer. The short answer is, no, it's not going to cause a problem, but I do want to cover a few things just to be safe. The slightly longer answer is yes, it could. Tumbling of loaded ammunition is a common practice for ammo manufacturers, and it's done all the time. The key is, they don't do it for very long; usually nothing more than required to remove any traces of lube from the loaded ammunition, or whatever else may need to be accomplished. I normally do this with large lots of pistol ammunition if I've bulk loaded them on a progressive press. Again, the key is, they're run for a very short period of time, never more than 10 minutes. You're obviously familiar with powder "construction" and the application of deterrent coatings such as graphite or dinitrotoluene (DNT), and I assume your concern stems from the possible removal of or damage to this coating. Actually, this is precisely how many of these coatings are applied to begin with, and the powder goes through several tumblings during its production. In short, damaging it via this same process is fairly unlikely, especially once the powder is contained in a loaded cartridge.

This said, anything can be overdone. Tumbling cartridges for an excessive length of time, or in too vigorous a tumbler could be detrimental. I can't hazard a guess as to how long this may take, as I suspect there will be several variables coming into play. The bottom line is, minimum tumbling, in as gentle a process as will accomplish the task. For my own loadings, as I said before, I use ten minutes as my own personal maximum, in a vibratory tumbler. Loaded cartridges will likely see much more severe treatment than this in the field (bouncing around in SUVs off road, etc.) so I personally regard this as an acceptable limit.

Longer tumbling times and/or exceptionally rough tumbling methods could, theoretically, create problems. These may relate to the deterrent coatings, or to the possibility of external damage . The potential for accidental ignition via a primer being impacted by an FMJ, that sort of thing. I've never heard of such an occurrence, but I wouldn't discount it, either. The key here is some moderation and common sense.

I hope this answers your concerns, but if you'd like to address anything more specifically, I'd be happy to discuss this with you further. Please feel free to contact us again, anytime. As always, we're more than happy to be of service.

Sincerely,

Kevin Thomas

L

 

[Rem700fan]

The only conclusion I can come after reading all of this is that there is a 3% chance of danger when tumbling live ammo.

 

[Traveler]

The only conclusion I can come after reading all of this is that there is a 3% chance of danger when tumbling live ammo.

Now you are just looking to create Antimosity.

 

[BUFF7MM]

The only conclusion I can come after reading all of this is that there is a 3% chance of danger when tumbling live ammo.

Touché, we'll played sir.

 

[jjones88]

Looks like all that can be found is that some companies say don't do it with no evidence, one company saying don't do it and admitting to having zero data saying why not, and one company saying its okay for short durations. Some internet unknowns show the one thing that all the companies do not, actual rounds post-tumbling.

I think this can be concluded with the fact that you won't listen to science and I refuse to listen to just a company spokesperson saying something to CYA.

As with m4carbine, The High Road, and Ar15.com, people will continue to say don't tumble loaded ammo and people will say and show posts saying it's okay.

So good day sir, if you wish to continue this you can PM me, but it looks like the childish responses have yet again started and the actual debate has ended.

 

[coopermania]

Found this on the web, It looks official so it must be true.

From: jepsen@telepost.no (Morten B Jepsen) Newsgroups: rec.guns Subject: Re: **** WARNING TO RELOADERS **** MORE DETAILS Date: 6 May 1995 22:04:17 -0400 Organization: Stolt Comex Seaway A/S Lines: 137

In my first article i wrote: # #WARNING to reloaders # #**** DO NOT PUT LOADED ROUNDS IN THE TUMBLER **** # #Recently a poor guy found some of his old .44mag rounds #on the shelf. They were covered with particles and partly #oxidated so he descided to make them nice and shiny before #firing. He put them into his tumbler for half an hour. # #When firing the first round he discovered that, apart from #making the rounds look nice, the tumbling had converted #his magnum powder into VERY FAST BURNING PISTOL POWDER. # #RESULT: The revolver disintegrated and he spent some #time in hospital.

Here I am back with more information regarding accident described above.

Sorry for not responding earlier, but from the reply to my first article, I could see that this subject was "burning hot". I decided to make my homework and I have collected information from powder manufacturer and the source of the "accident story".

Below you will find the facts from my investigation along with my personal opinions.

SOURCE OF INFORMATION The incident is published in "Vaapenjournalen Nr. 8 - 1994" page 18 - 19. The article is titled "Hvordan man lager en haandgranat" - "How to make a handgrenade". Vaapenjournalen is the Norwegian equivalent to "Guns and Ammo". This magazine is quite serious and they do normally not publish anything without proper documentation. The authors are Erik Braathen and Svein Solli. They are also the authors of "Ladeboka", a Norwegian handbook for reloaders, 694 pages worth reading and used throughout Scandinavia.

THE POWDER USED The powder was Vithavuori N110, the fastest burning of Vithavuori's rifle powders. It is the most popular powder in Norway for reloading Magnum ammo for handguns. For comparison with Hercules power I have found the following loading data both for Lyman 429421 Pb, 250 grain bullet:

N110 22.0 grain

2400 22.0 grain

Vithavuori is a well known Finish powder manufacturer established in 1922. They produce rifle and handgun powders for the European market and they are currently producing powder for US defence and they are approved in accordance with AQAP and SFS-ISO 9001 standards.

N110 is a cylindrical powder with 94-98% nitro-cellulose content. It has a hole through the cylindrical grain which gives a continuous burning rate (according to the factory). The reason is that the burning surface does not noticeably diminish during the burning. The outer surface of the grain diminishes while the surface area of the hole grows correspondingly.

The burning rate of the Vithavuori powders is primarily controlled by the grain size (Vithavuori does not provide any information regarding surface treatment of the powder). Smaller grain size gives a higher burning area to the grain weight and thereby a higher burning rate.

THE TUMBLING Our unlucky friend was using a steel sizer die so he had to use case lubricant, but he was to lazy to remove the lubricant after loading, so he threw the ammo in the tumbler. In my first article I stated that the cases was partly corroded. This was wrong. after the incident, the remaining rounds was inspected and no sign of corrosion was mentioned.

THE REVOLVER The revolver was a S&W M29. There was no indication of failure in the revolver before the incident.

The article show a picture of the gun after the accident. Unfortunately I do not have a scanner, so I have to describe the damage. The top of the frame is missing along with the rear sight. Approx. 1/3 of the cylinder is missing, two chamber completely opened. No other visible damage.

INSPECTION OF REMAINING AMMO After the accident the bullets was pulled from the remaining rounds. It was confirmed that the powder was in fact N110 and that the weight of the powder was correct. Nothing wrong with his scale. However, most of the powder was broken down to much smaller grains than the original N110. Smaller grains, higher density, higher burning area, higher burning rate.

CONCLUSION OF THE ARTICLE The tumbler is for empty brass only. Never put loaded rounds in the tumbler. As a matter of fact, all tumblers sold in Norway (mostly from USA) comes with a warning: "Do not put loaded cartridges in the tumbler".

MY PERSONAL COMMENTS

N110 is quite safe to use with magnum loads. Even a very compressed load with N110 will not blow up your S&W N29 or 686.

One of the comments to my first article was that ammo can ride in a truck for long time without any accidents. Consequently, thumbing will not represent any danger. I disagree with this argument. Vibration in a truck is low frequency and high amplitude. In a tumbler you have high frequency and low amplitude. This is the reason for the brass coming out clean and shiny. Think of a heavy pile with lots of corrosion and rust scale. You swing it from side to side with a crane and nothing happens. You then work it with a small vibrating hammer and the rust scale will come off instantly. If the pipe is filled with grains of porous material you will transform that into fine powder.

The effect of thumbing may vary with type of tumbler, type of powder etc. You may be in for a big surprise if you change tumbler or powder.

While composing this article I suddenly remembered a mysterious incident a few years back. The Norwegian police use S&W M10 as their sidearm. Some years ago the police bought a large quantity of .38 special ammo from Norma. This ammo was cheap reloaded ammo for training. Within a few months after this ammunition was introduced four police revolvers blew up. The investigation was unable to identify the cause of the accidents, but it was concluded that the cause lay with the ammunition. Norma ammunition was banned and the police now uses CBC for training. Since then there has been no more accidents. Was the Norma ammo thumbled after reloading?

Finally, you can thumble your ammo if you want, but do not stand next to me on the shooting range.

regards Morten B Jepsen jepsen@telepost.no

 

[coopermania]

Looks like all that can be found is that some companies say don't do it with no evidence, one company saying don't do it and admitting to having zero data saying why not, and one company saying its okay for short durations. Some internet unknowns show the one thing that all the companies do not, actual rounds post-tumbling.

I think this can be concluded with the fact that you won't listen to science and I refuse to listen to just a company spokesperson saying something to CYA.

As with m4carbine, The High Road, and Ar15.com, people will continue to say don't tumble loaded ammo and people will say and show posts saying it's okay.

So good day sir, if you wish to continue this you can PM me, but it looks like the childish responses have yet again started and the actual debate has ended.

Mister,,,, Mister Jonesss Mister Jonesssssssss Mister Jonesss,
We had a thing going onnnn, And you got BUTTHURT and your goneee.

Lighten up man, You will do better here.
This is a full service community here, The education goes from one Spanish guy that took 4 years to get out of 3rd grade, to Attorneys and Doctors Hell we even let Engineers in here. And everyone with education in between.I can't find a butthurt report to send him. Crap. I had him on the run to.