I have the test data comparing AnXI cannister to Gribeauval. however the data is not really comparable as the two differ in number of balls. I can email you the data if you want a close look at it. a quick overview shows the AnXI cannister having a longer range and greater effect than the proceeding design.
However the two cannister designs differ greatly. This I think is crucial.
The gribeauval design or for ease of use M1765, had the iron plate soldered to the body of the cannister and the top plate of the cannister soldered in place also. this made a very strong tube, its strength reliant on the solder. Inorder for the cannister to rupture the solder would have to melt, or the cannister is somehow shreaded in its passage down the gun tube.
The AnXI design, is quite different. The cannister is made from rolled tin. The bottom edge of the cannister is flanged and the iron base plate dropped into place. the cannister is then filled with the shot and packed with saw dust. the top plate is the put in place and the top edge crimped over. The points of failure being the bent tin and the number of crimped over portions of tin. In this design, the cannister sits directly onto the powder charge. thus when the charge is fired, the resulting gas expansion acts directly on the base plate of the cannister. it is relatively free to move and has a larger surface area for the expanding gases to act upon than the edges of the tin cannister. The iron plate is shoved up the cannister like a plunger, the top if nocked off by the percusive force of the moving balls and iron plate, the balls being free of the cannister upon leaving the tube. the remaining cannister being shredded I assume on leaving the tube or carrying on its flight along with the iron base plate. SHAT 2w 84