526 DR. H. DEBUS ON THE CHEMICAL THEORY OE GUNPOWDER. 
by decided differences in the composition as well as in the size of grain of different 
powders (p. 137). 
3. “Very small grain powder, such as F. G. and It. F. G. furnish decidedly smaller 
proportions of gaseous products than a large grain powder (It, L. G.), while the latter 
again furnishes somewhat smaller proportions than a, still larger powder (pebble), 
though the difference between the gaseous products of these two powders is 
comparatively inconsiderable. 
4. “ In all but very exceptional results, the solid residue furnished by the explosion 
of gunpowder contains as important constituents, potassium carbonate, sulphate, 
hyposulphite and sulphide, the proportion of carbonate being very much higher, 
and that of sulphate very much lower than stated by recent investigators/’ 
The view of Noble and Abel may be briefly stated as follows :— 
One and the same description of powder, exploded several times in succession, will 
yield the products of combustion, in the different experiments, in variable proportions; 
hence: the metamorphosis of gunpowder cannot be represented by a chemical equation. 
One might suppose that, perhaps, the pressure developed during explosion had an 
influence on the quantities of the products of combustion. From a comparison of the 
analytical results and the corresponding pressures, published by Noble and Abel, this, 
however, appears not to be the case.'" 7 (See p. 85 of their first memoir.) 
According to Noble and Abel, the chemical metamorphosis of gunpowder during 
explosion is a very complicated, process, which cannot be explained with the data at 
their disposal. Berthelot t arrived at a different conclusion. 
The composition of the powders of Waltham Abbey can, according to him, be 
represented by the symbols 
2KN0 3 +3C+S 
which require for 100 parts of pow r der : 
Saltpetre . , . . , . . . 74’8 
Carbon.13*3 
Sulphur.11'8 
The analyses gave: 
Saltpetre. 73*55 to 75*04 
Carbon.10*67 L2'12 
Sulphur.9*93 10*27 
* An increase of pressure appears to diminish the amount of carbonic oxide. But this is not always 
the case, and when it does occur, it is not sufficient to explain the variations in the other products of 
combustion. 
t Comptes Rendus, tom. lxxxii., p. 487. 
