NovX Ammunition
BY Herschel Smith
6 years, 8 months ago
Beyond increasing on-target energy, the additional velocity greatly enhances the ARX’s terminal effect. “The fluted design of the ARX bullet is quite amazing, as it operates on the principle of fluid dynamics rather than hydrostatic shock,” explained Schultz. Molded into the projectile are three distinct flutes that, as the bullet penetrates soft tissue (and fluid), transfer the forward energy laterally. The fluids, spinning at around 120,000 rotations per minute (r.p.m.), are forced in an outward direction at upward of two times the speed of the bullet itself. “A new phenomenon has been realized,” Shultz said. “NovX can achieve breaking the liquid sound barrier, actually causing a sonic boom inside whatever water-based material it may encounter—water, clay, gel, flesh, blood, et cetera.”
The rest of the article is interesting, but testing on the round thus far lack field data from hog hunting, deer hunting, etc., and the ammunition also lacks convinced buyers.
I had missed this from Ammoland a few days ago when Glen Wunderlich wrote on NovX ammunition in .450 Bushmaster. His concluding paragraph[s] is this.
The experiment concluded with a search for what remained of the two bullets. The recovered Inceptor made a violent entrance and completely disintegrated to its final resting place where only a tiny fragment of the original projectile was found – not even enough to bother weighing! On the other hand, the Hornady Flex Tip was peeled from well over 4,000 layers of paper, weighed 170 grains and had mushroomed to about 50-percent more than its original diameter of .452 inches, although the copper jacket had separated from the lead core.
The conclusion is that velocity and energy are only important if they can deliver a better wound channel and the less-expensive Hornady ammo and its Flex Tip design provide a much more appropriate transfer of said energy for a big-game hunting round.
No offense to Glen, but I think he’s utterly missed the point. It isn’t the design of the NovX round to disintegrate in order to “deposit” energy.
I’ll grant the point that one has to think differently in order to understand what’s supposed to be happening here, but this round was designed using CFD (Computational Fluid Dynamics). The flutes in the round accelerate liquids and other material in the direction of its path by virtue of twist, so it would be contrary to the intent to disintegrate (i.e., it would fail to perform its intended function of imparting energy by virtue of its design if it shattered).
But what I would like to see (I hinted at it above) is field tests using the cartridge. Anecdotal data. Yes, anecdotal data is perfectly admissible in logical discourse. Induction cannot prove a point, but it sure can disprove it. Show me a 500 lb. hog taken with this round. Or better yet, invite me to this hunt and let me take the hog.
Prior:
AR-15 Ammunition And Barrel Twist Rate
Considerations In Selecting AR-15 Ammunition
Small Caliber Lethality: 5.56mm Performance in Close Quarters Battle
Oversimplifying Ammunition Ballistics
|
|
On April 24, 2018 at 2:58 pm, rocketguy said:
I’ll confess I’m skeptical about the amount of rotational energy present…but it would be interesting if I’m wrong. Agreed that we need more than ballistic gel data. I’ll stick with conventional hollow points for the foreseeable future.
On April 24, 2018 at 3:46 pm, Gryphon said:
Another Novelty Round, IMO. Fluting the length (or partially) of the Bullet would Weaken it, and Excessive Fragmentation in Small-Caliber (less than .70 cal., or Artillery) Rounds is not going to be of Greater Effect than the Bullet Deforming and/or Tumbling once it enters the Target.
Also, from a simple Mechanical Standpoint, while “120,000 RPM” sounds like a lot going on, remember, the Bullet is Moving Forwards at a High Velocity – the Spin RATE is High, but if Fired from a 1:12 Barrel, it Rotates only ONE Revolution in a Foot of travel, hardly giving off any ‘Drilling Effect’.
I’ll stick with a 5.56 Bullet with enough Instability to get Sideways in the Target, or 7.62 Hollow-Points that Peel Back but don’t come Apart for the Ouch Factor.
On April 24, 2018 at 3:58 pm, billrla said:
Sounds like a lot of marketing spin, perhaps with a grain two of truth.
All the talk of fluid dynamics and cavitation has the aura of quantitative science, but, once the bullet hits the target (flesh and bone), reality introduces all sorts of uncontrolled variables.
Admitedly, I am always inclined to scepticism, having studied too much science as well as too much marketing, and seeing the difference between lab results and studies “in the wild.”
On April 24, 2018 at 4:04 pm, Pete said:
I am skeptical. 120,000 rpm sounds impressive but the time of a bullet impact is measured in milliseconds, so divide that by 60,000 (60 seconds per minute * 1000 milliseconds per second).
The rifling in a 9mm is about 1 turn in 15 inches (1 in 9 to 1 in 16). Figure maybe 1-3 rotations during penetration of a target.
The shooting community has been down the high-velocity/low-weight projectile road before.
On April 24, 2018 at 4:21 pm, Herschel Smith said:
@Pete,
I know all about the “community” and it’s position on bullets. Tam and I had an argument over that, and I won.
http://www.captainsjournal.com/2018/01/16/pistol-ammunition-ballistics-part-2/
@Bill,
CFD isn’t an “aura of quantitative science.” I assure you sir. You might not like the round after use, but again I simply cannot overemphasize how non-aura CFD is. It is cutting edge in the 3D application of the Navier-Stokes equations.
I would also encourage everyone to watch the gelatin tests of this round. Pretty impressive, although I want to see field data as I said.
In conclusion and to summarize my position with Tam, there are no “flying dimes.”
On April 25, 2018 at 1:34 am, billrla said:
Herschel: Yes, of course, fluid dynamics is hard-core, quantitative, and rigorous. My “aura” comment was referring to what the marketing people tend to do, which is to oversimplify and generalize, when, in fact, real-world conditions can be enormously more complex than conditions created by-design in a controlled laboratory environment
What happens is, the customer gets romanced by the science terminology, much of which may not translate into any significant practical value. The marketing of ammo is not immune to this phenomenon.