6lb Spherical shrapnel shell

[Bully1970]

I found this back in 2018 on the beach, EOD checked it and confirmed the powder was wet/sludgey, removed and passed back to me.

The wooden fuse went in PEG fluid at Jersey Heritage then in my freezer to freeze dry for 6 months, the lead shot soaked in fresh water and the shell in caustic and fresh water with weekly changes for 2 years.

The hard work paid off and I think it looks fantastic, I since found another which is similar but not exactly the same with more lead shot inside.

 

[adrian]

That is a super example & has restored very well, a credit to you. Nice to see that you have the grain of the wood bottom running in the correct direction for this type of projectile.
"Wood bottoms were made with the wood grain running in either of two directions. Most common were bottoms with cross grain, the grain direction running horizontally from one side to the opposite side. Those intended for diaphragm shells were made with short grain, whereby the wood grain direction runs from top to bottom, this was to reduce any danger when firing over the heads of friendly troops, as with short grain wood the bottoms broke up more readily."

 

[Bully1970]

Thanks Adrian, a mate made them for me on his lathe. Any ideas on age and what fired them? the roundshot themselves both have some slight differences. Slightly annoyingly one of them had some of the original string fuse inside but it got misplaced during stabilisation of the wooden fuses (not by me) :-(

 

[adrian]

It is difficult to determine their age, these appear to be the early type as there is no separate powder filling hole, I assume that these do not have a rivet hole on their base, is that correct? If no hole then they appear to predate the improvements that Boxer made from c1853. Is the fuze hole heavily or lightly threaded? Conical or straight? Bushed or simply cut into the iron body? Diameter? Can we please see some close ups of the fuze itself? How many bullets? Some of this may help narrow the date range however researching for answers is difficult as I don't know of a publication that pulls all this together in enough detail & over a broad date range.
These would have been for 6pr field guns.
I'm intrigued by the PEG fluid you mention, can you please elaborate on the process that the fuzes underwent?

 

[Bully1970]

Hi Adrian,

Sorry was a bit busy with the family yesterday....hence the late reply...

Balls were dug in different bays here in Jersey...not miles away from each other is its only 9x5 miles ;-)

No rivet hole on either
One hole heavily the other lightly threaded.
A slight taper on the light threaded hole, its deeper as the construction is thicker than the other ball.
Cut into the iron

Ive done the below to help..I hope.

Grouville 6lbr – 36 shot inside, average shot diameter 15.5mm
Flatter shoulder, no lip around fuse hole, thicker construction than the other 6lbr
Hole diameter – 22mm approx, lightly threaded and slight taper, maybe 2mm top to bottom
Wooden fuse length approx. 28.7mm
No rivet hole(s)
Unfilled weight – 2lb 11.6oz



Fuse:







St Aubin 6lbr – 51 shot inside, average shot size 15.5mm
Small lip around fuse hole, thinner wall construction accounts for more shot inside.
Hole diameter – 22mm approx., heavier thread pattern but not as thick, no or very little taper
Wooden fuse length approx. 29mm
No rivet hole(s)
Unfilled weight – 2lb 5oz (thinner construction for more shot)



Fuse (as above but not in as good condition)







Some comparison shots





The PEG fluid - the fuses went to Jersey Heritage and their conservator put them in the fluid for 3-4 months. I collected them, weighed them and put them in the freezer to freeze dry...weighing them every month. They lost a few grams over 6 months and when they flatlined they are ready.

A bit more info here (I googled it)

Waterlogged materials: PEG and Glycerol – Chloe Pearce Conservation (wordpress.com)

And cheers....

 

[adrian]

Fascinating, especially the difference in number of balls. Clearly these are two different 'patterns' but I am as yet unable to say what & from when. A ready reference, that I think is pre 1850s - notes 27 balls inside, so there were three types at least prior to Boxer's improvements. Your fuzes appear to be the early type with a single central composition channel that were cut to the desired length - rings marked around the fuze at set intervals, this correlates with the pre 1850s dating applied so far, but quite where they 'fit' in the potential prior 4 to 5 decades is beyond what I currently have at hand.

 

[Bully1970]

Thank you Adrian, appreciate you taking the time to look at these. If you come across anything or I do please update the thread ill continue to look at references as its all learning for me :tinysmile_grin_t:

 

[adrian]

Yes if & when I find something I will add it here.

 

[MINENAZ16]

Hello,
Thanks for sharing.
What is the diameter of these balls ?
Regards

 

[adrian]

Not sure exactly, but between 3.5" & 3.6" will be close.