Login    Register
User Information
Username:
Password:
We are a free and open
community, all are welcome.
Click here to Register
Sponsored
Who is online

In total there are 66 users online :: 4 registered, 0 hidden and 62 guests


Most users ever online was 155 on Mon Aug 15, 2016 1:40 am

Registered users: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] based on users active over the past 5 minutes

The Team
Administrators
Global Moderators
global_moderators.png CS

Aeolus's Trident- MAJOR UPDATE! 11/26/2010

Built a pneumatic cannon? Then post it here! This section is for completed, finished cannons that you have built. Please include pictures and information.
Sponsored 
  • Author
    Message

Unread postAuthor: saefroch » Mon Sep 06, 2010 2:09 pm

That's what I'm thinking, even though GGDT is adamantly telling me it won't. Oh well. HPA first.

Wait... sexy piston?
  • 0

User avatar
saefroch
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 1679
Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2009 8:47 am
Location: U.S.A.- See Map
Country: United States (us)
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: Technician1002 » Mon Sep 06, 2010 5:13 pm

One of the reasons besides muzzle velocity is impact forces. A steel piston has about 8X the mass of a HDPE piston. consider the bumper requirements.

I use a steel hammer to drive nails, not plastic.
  • 0

User avatar
Technician1002
Chief of Staff
Chief of Staff
 
Posts: 5190
Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2009 11:10 am
Reputation: 14

Unread postAuthor: saefroch » Mon Sep 06, 2010 7:47 pm

Impact force is mass*change in velocity/time, I got that, and how a lighter, more flexible piston will certainly decrease impact force... but what does that have to do with valve opening time? It stands to reason (F=ma) that there is an exponential valve opening speed increase with a lighter piston. But again, how do bumper requirements and impact force relate to valve opening speed?
  • 0

User avatar
saefroch
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 1679
Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2009 8:47 am
Location: U.S.A.- See Map
Country: United States (us)
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: Technician1002 » Mon Sep 06, 2010 8:31 pm

This was a benefit other than opening speed. You are less likely to have a piston in your shoulder with a lighter piston. Many PVC cannons have failed because the piston broke the rear of the cannon.
Image

As you use longer barrels and heavier projectiles, the opening speed matters less. As you go to a shorter barrel and lighter projectile, the opening speed becomes a factor in performance. Play with the numbers in GGDT to see this. I open full cans of pop by hitting them with a marshmallow.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=TW3bUP-Fov4
  • 0

User avatar
Technician1002
Chief of Staff
Chief of Staff
 
Posts: 5190
Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2009 11:10 am
Reputation: 14

Unread postAuthor: Ragnarok » Tue Sep 07, 2010 9:53 am

Technician1002 wrote:One of the reasons besides muzzle velocity is impact forces. A steel piston has about 8X the mass of a HDPE piston. consider the bumper requirements.

Actually, I have to disagree with you here. It might be intuitive to think "Heavier objects hit harder", but that's learned from gravity - where the forces scale in proportion with the mass involved. That isn't the case with valve pistons.

Think about the energy stored in the piston. Force x distance. Force will be pretty much the same either way (pressure x area, of course). Distance is also going to be the same. So, a heavier piston has no more energy than a lightweight one.
However, it will be moving more slowly, which gives any bumper more time to deform and absorb the impact - rather than the shorter, sharper shock of being hit by a faster piston.

Heavier pistons are actually easier to stop!

Now, before you start arguing with me over the same not necessarily holding true for spudgun projectiles, there's two reasons for this.
a) Lighter projectiles are usually less strong. As a result, they're far more likely to disintegrate on hitting a target. As pistons preferably stay intact, energy lost in permanent deformation or destruction of the piston is not a factor.
b) Transonic losses. As projectile mach number goes up, the force on the projectile falls. As pistons are relatively slow compared to most projectiles (with a speed maybe in the tens of metres per second, not hundreds), these losses are fairly irrelevant.

~~~~~

Also, when I talk about reductions in opening time being moot past a certain limit, it's because they are. I threw some numbers at the problem here to show that "faster than fast" doesn't really do much.
What that valve speed usually means is: No noticeable improvements in velocity, but increased demands of the piston bumper. I'd actually usually recommend a bit of weight in any piston for that reason.

Sure, if you're using really really light projectiles in a very short barrel, then super fast opening times may become a slightly more valid concern, but to be honest, that's not really a launcher you build if you're looking for maximum performance.
  • 0

Does that thing kinda look like a big cat to you?
User avatar
Ragnarok
Chief of Staff
Chief of Staff
 
Posts: 5339
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 8:23 am
Location: The UK
Reputation: 8

Unread postAuthor: saefroch » Thu Oct 21, 2010 6:18 pm

If I am to trust GGDT on this, at my new capable pressure of 600 psi, I will see a total of 1 fps muzzle velocity increase if I replace my piston with UHMWPE. I can see how this could be either right or wrong, but am hoping somebody can give me a little more clarity.

Image

Image
  • 0

User avatar
saefroch
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 1679
Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2009 8:47 am
Location: U.S.A.- See Map
Country: United States (us)
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: Gun Freak » Thu Oct 21, 2010 6:59 pm

Most of the time for me, changing the piston mass has little or no change in performance at all, even with the bigger valves.
  • 0

OG Anti-Hybrid
One man's trash is a true Spudder's treasure!
Golf Ball Cannon "Superna"M16 BBMGPengunHammer Valve Airsoft SniperHigh Pressure .22 Coax
Holy Shat!
User avatar
Gun Freak
Lieutenant General
Lieutenant General
 
Posts: 4969
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 4:38 pm
Location: Florida
Country: United States (us)
Reputation: 11

Sponsored

Sponsor
 


Unread postAuthor: lozz08 » Thu Oct 21, 2010 7:47 pm

How loud is that thing at 600 PSI? The pressure drop is only around 150 PSI, so you've got four and a half cubic inches of 450 PSI air blasting out the barrel behind the projectile.
  • 0

User avatar
lozz08
2nd Lieutenant
2nd Lieutenant
 
Posts: 239
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 7:33 am
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: saefroch » Thu Oct 21, 2010 8:19 pm

I really can't say. One, I had it poked out a door, so most of the sound was prevented from coming back at me. Two, no projectile. I can say however that when I used to operate it at 250psi, I was disappointed by the lack of a condensation cloud. Now I get one about 1.5 or 2 feet long. :D

I plan on finding out this weekend when I have oodles of free time, heck I might even make a video..
  • 0

User avatar
saefroch
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 1679
Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2009 8:47 am
Location: U.S.A.- See Map
Country: United States (us)
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: Crna Legija » Thu Oct 21, 2010 10:02 pm

its not a colax so you dont need to put anything in the ''inner dia'' spot it should be 0
  • 0

'' To alcohol... The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems.”
--Homer Simpson

Add me on ps3: wannafuk, 8/11/11 cant wait
User avatar
Crna Legija
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 2333
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 5:14 am
Location: australia
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: saefroch » Thu Oct 21, 2010 10:20 pm

Thanks! Didn't know that's what it was for... :roll:

Well unfortunately that still doesn't address the lack of change in muzzle velocity... I guess I'll just assume GGDT is right.
  • 0

User avatar
saefroch
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 1679
Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2009 8:47 am
Location: U.S.A.- See Map
Country: United States (us)
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: saefroch » Fri Oct 29, 2010 6:43 am

Bumping for another damage pic, more to come soon. Read the descriptions... :roll:
  • 0

User avatar
saefroch
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 1679
Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2009 8:47 am
Location: U.S.A.- See Map
Country: United States (us)
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: saefroch » Fri Oct 29, 2010 4:36 pm

Well my piston was getting stuck in the returned position a lot, and just now it got stuck in the returned position so bad I couldn't force it out by air pressure just taking off the valve housing. So I decided to open it up and have a look.

Image

Will be replacing that brass bushing with steel.

In addition, this proved the effectiveness of my o-ring piston attachment, as the greater diameter of the o-ring was slamming into the nipple the rest of the piston sits in. O-ring still happily seated. :D
  • 0

User avatar
saefroch
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 1679
Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2009 8:47 am
Location: U.S.A.- See Map
Country: United States (us)
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: Selador » Fri Nov 19, 2010 1:52 am

Could you explain what we are seeing, there ?

Thank you.
  • 0

If you can't fix it, you don't own it.

Selador
2nd Lieutenant
2nd Lieutenant
 
Posts: 213
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 9:44 pm
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: Technician1002 » Fri Nov 19, 2010 2:08 am

I think you are looking into the pilot valve which has had a few too many energetic piston collisions due to the lack of a proper bumper.

The piston in the T has hit the ball valve behind it very hard.

Image
  • 0

User avatar
Technician1002
Chief of Staff
Chief of Staff
 
Posts: 5190
Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2009 11:10 am
Reputation: 14

PreviousNext

Return to Pneumatic Cannon Database

Who is online

Registered users: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Yahoo [Bot]

Reputation System ©'