Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

jimmy the one

(2,708 posts)
15. cavitation
Fri Jul 10, 2015, 12:06 PM
Jul 2015

ezra: All bullets cavitate; that's what produces the temporary cavity.

Bullets cause cavitation, the temporary wound cavity. Actually bullet mass, velocity, & rotation combined can cause cavitation. That a bullet can cavitate doesn't say much (if even valid), it's the degree of cavitating expansion which causes the damage, moreso to surrounding internal organs. Handgun bullets below ~1,000 fps (iirc) generally don't cause significant cavitation, their wounds are often considered akin to being stuck by a dagger or run thru by a thin fencing foil (sword) - the permanent wound cavity.

ezra: Rifle bullets cavitate more than handgun bullets. Big rifle bullets like .30-06 cavitate more than small rifle bullets like .223 (and .30-06 can throw a 55gr bullet at over 4000 ft/sec, or a 110gr at 3400, if you want to talk high velocity).

Bullets fired from rifles will cause greater cavitation - that being a larger diameter of expansion within the target/body - typical damaging cavitation 2-3 inches diam. Cavitation thru adipose tissue doesn't cause much damage, usually heals readily - so if you're being shot at, bend over as you run away (the general 'you').

ezra: What you appear to be thinking of is fragmentation, which can result in a shallow, nonfatal wound if an inappropriately fragile bullet is used to hunt a big-game animal.

No, I was thinking of cavitation. After fragmenting, the .223 inside an animal could result in two separate temporary cavities, just like in a human, but greater likelihood than larger hunting rifles for the .223 wound NOT to be fatal, thus resulting in the animal running off mortally wounded & in great suffering.

ezra: And what you don't seem to understand is that fragmentation is a function of bullet choice, not caliber choice.

Well aware that bullet characteristics are finicky, and that fragmentation is not solely a function of caliber.

wiki, eh; most all of this you will concur, but it backs me up: Most handgun projectiles wound primarily through the size of the hole they produce. This hole is known as a permanent cavity. For comparison, rifles wound through temporary cavitation as well as permanent cavitation. A temporary cavity is also known as a stretch cavity. This is because it acts to stretch the permanent cavity, increasing the wounding potential. The potential for wounding via temporary cavity depends on the elasticity of the tissue, bullet fragmentation, and the rate of energy transfer.
Many handgun bullets do not create significant wounding via temporary cavitation, but the potential is there if the bullet fragments, strikes inelastic tissue (liver, spleen, kidneys, CNS), or if the bullet transfers over 500 ft·lbf (680 J) of energy per foot of penetration.



Great rebuttal Ben DonP Jul 2015 #1
Great post! Hangingon Jul 2015 #2
Wait a minute! I smell a rat! Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2015 #3
I would assume you can use both, depending on your target Travis_0004 Jul 2015 #4
The author of the OP you just fisked posted this a few months ago: friendly_iconoclast Jul 2015 #5
"In my case, you called me names, insulted my intelligence and integrity." pablo_marmol Jul 2015 #6
More guns than fingers? Ooooh. Sooo impressive. AtheistCrusader Jul 2015 #31
Another outstanding takedown, benEzra. pablo_marmol Jul 2015 #7
You are approximately five times more likely to win the lottery than be murdered by a .223 cal rifle the band leader Jul 2015 #8
It seems a response to this thread was posted Somewhere Else... benEzra Jul 2015 #9
picking nits & bigger game jimmy the one Jul 2015 #10
Facts inconvenient to your thesis = "nitpicking". benEzra Jul 2015 #11
+1. Once again, verifiable truth is shown to be superior to mere weight of verbiage friendly_iconoclast Jul 2015 #12
cavitation jimmy the one Jul 2015 #13
You are confusing cavitation with fragmentation. benEzra Jul 2015 #14
cavitation jimmy the one Jul 2015 #15
Thoughts... benEzra Jul 2015 #16
incredible super cavitation jimmy the one Jul 2015 #17
Given that we are talking about the least misused guns... benEzra Jul 2015 #18
the dancer undulates to the music jimmy the one Jul 2015 #19
Well, to get pedantic... benEzra Jul 2015 #21
pink floyd is wrong jimmy the one Jul 2015 #22
modification jimmy the one Jul 2015 #23
Then you should tell all the physicists working on supercavitating projectiles, blades, and foils benEzra Jul 2015 #24
What's the big deal? discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2015 #25
"A little learning is a dang'rous thing;... friendly_iconoclast Jul 2015 #27
This subthread gives me life. Brickbat Jul 2015 #28
enriched jimmy the one Jul 2015 #30
. Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2015 #20
This is all the more hilarious if you know the origins of this image. AtheistCrusader Jul 2015 #33
I'm afraid I don't. Now I'm aching with curiosity. Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2015 #34
Allow me AtheistCrusader Jul 2015 #35
Oh my. Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2015 #36
Possibly the most expressive cat I've ever seen AtheistCrusader Jul 2015 #37
Um, no. AtheistCrusader Jul 2015 #32
As I'm sure you know HassleCat Jul 2015 #26
The posters were arguing for bans, not background checks. benEzra Jul 2015 #29
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»More scaremongering about...»Reply #15