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 63 users online :: 5 registered, 0 hidden and 58 guests


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

Registered users: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot], MSNbot Media, Yahoo [Bot] based on users active over the past 5 minutes

The Team
Administrators
Global Moderators
global_moderators.png CS

What do you guys think of this?

Post questions and info about pneumatic (compressed gas) powered cannons here. This includes discussion about valves, pipe types, compressors, alternate gas setups, and anything else relevant.
Sponsored 
  • Author
    Message

What do you guys think of this?

Unread postAuthor: Brad1895 » Thu Sep 11, 2014 8:01 pm

So a while back I asked about a my bigger cannon plan. Since then I made something a bit overkill, but that's another can of worms. The idea I have now is simple, 10' 2inch barrel, 2in union, and a 24"x4" chamber. The only component I need to actually buy is the chamber portion because I can swap the barrel of my current gun. The plan is to use Co2 as a power source, regulated of course. After some GGDT work, I got some scary results. At only 15PSI in the chamber, GGDT predicted a 30g, .29CoD projectile to go 300'. :shock: That can't be right. If it is, well god help those down range with catching a nerf football. I did the math, and my flow coefficient is %70. Is that right?
  • 0


Brad1895
Private
Private
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 10:26 am
Country: United States (us)
Reputation: 0

Re: What do you guys think of this?

Unread postAuthor: Technician1002 » Thu Sep 11, 2014 11:21 pm

Your flow coefficient will depend heavily on your valve. How does the flow go through? The rate of flow will not exceed the capacity of your valve.
  • 0

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

Re: What do you guys think of this?

Unread postAuthor: Brad1895 » Fri Sep 12, 2014 7:38 am

As I said, it's a 2 inch union burst disk valve. So the math should look like this right?
CoF= 3*25.8
The other think is that I'll need to find a way to "trigger" the burst disk. I would use a small secondary chamber filled with more pressure than the main 4" chamber. Using boyle's law, I can solve for the pressure difference right? I'd preffer to use one union, and keep the assembly as simple as possible.
  • 0


Brad1895
Private
Private
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 10:26 am
Country: United States (us)
Reputation: 0

Re: What do you guys think of this?

Unread postAuthor: DYI » Fri Sep 12, 2014 3:02 pm

Simple and high performance tend to be enemies. If you can accept a small delay (on the order of tens to hundreds of milliseconds, depending on flow rate), you could simply open a ball valve that rapidly fills the chamber until the burst disc ruptures. This could also be automatically controlled to avoid unnecessary waste of gas.

You could use an internal or pass-through mechanical rupturing system, probably pneumatic powered, similar to Gort's QCTBDC. In this case, some sort of blade is driven into the diaphragm from the inside with minimal flow obstruction. This'll fire pretty much exactly when you tell it to, but requires a bit of creativity to implement.

Pressure-differential triggered burst disk setups are easier to build, but they're finicky and require loading two discs. I have quite a bit of experience with these setups, and they do not "keep the assembly as simple as possible", by any stretch of the phrase.

The range figures you quote don't seem unrealistic to me. What do you think the problem is with them? GGDT tends to be very close to reality in this performance regime.
  • 0

Spudfiles' resident expert on all things that sail through the air at improbable speeds, trailing an incandescent wake of ionized air, dissociated polymers and metal oxides.
User avatar
DYI
Lieutenant General
Lieutenant General
 
Posts: 2861
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2007 8:18 pm
Location: The People's Republic of Canuckistan
Country: Turks and Caicos Islands (tc)
Reputation: 9

Re: What do you guys think of this?

Unread postAuthor: Brad1895 » Fri Sep 12, 2014 4:04 pm

It just seems unreal the amount of power a home built cannon can have. My original thought with a fire mechanism was to have the main 4" chamber, and then a smaller 1 1/2" chamber connected with a ball valve. Once the pressure is close to rupture of the disk, I can close the ball valve, and continue to fill the smaller chamber. When it's ready to fire, open the ball valve. The other(more viable) option is to have a large ball valve just before the union. Reach desired pressure, then open the valve to burst the disk. And I misspoke about wanting it to be simple. What I should have said was that it needs to be made with few parts. I have plans to use this as artillery for airsoft/paintball games. By the way, are burst disk louder than a piston valve? It makes little difference to me, but I'm just curious as to what a burst disk sounds like. The videos seem to get their audio blown out though.
  • 0


Brad1895
Private
Private
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 10:26 am
Country: United States (us)
Reputation: 0

Re: What do you guys think of this?

Unread postAuthor: DYI » Fri Sep 12, 2014 5:15 pm

I recommend against a ball valve directly behind the union, as it may fire when the valve is not fully open. This will reduce performance, and could introduce large shot-to-shot variability. Your other idea is better. Any burst disk system is not ideal for use in games. Something using a cam lock fitting might be your best bet, if you can get it to seal. If you're willing to hire out some machining, it wouldn't be too hard to design a pneumatically operated custom disk holder with integral sealing faces that would be just as fast as a conventional bolt-action rifle. Otherwise, you may want to investigate your piston valve options, as performance will be nearly as good with much greater usability.

I've never actually built a piston valve myself, but burst disk valves tend to be louder and sharper sounding.
  • 0

Spudfiles' resident expert on all things that sail through the air at improbable speeds, trailing an incandescent wake of ionized air, dissociated polymers and metal oxides.
User avatar
DYI
Lieutenant General
Lieutenant General
 
Posts: 2861
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2007 8:18 pm
Location: The People's Republic of Canuckistan
Country: Turks and Caicos Islands (tc)
Reputation: 9

Re: What do you guys think of this?

Unread postAuthor: Brad1895 » Fri Sep 12, 2014 5:29 pm

I have built a piston valve, although it's not that great... Anyways, I do have a piston valve already made, and it can be swapped gun to gun. I just need to use a slightly smaller chamber. 4.5 gallons of air doesn't make for fast filling. I do however already have a union at my disposal.
  • 0


Brad1895
Private
Private
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 10:26 am
Country: United States (us)
Reputation: 0

Re: What do you guys think of this?

Sponsored

Sponsor
 


Re: What do you guys think of this?

Unread postAuthor: Technician1002 » Sat Sep 13, 2014 10:42 pm

Brad1895 wrote:As I said, it's a 2 inch union burst disk valve. So the math should look like this right?
CoF= 3*25.8
The other think is that I'll need to find a way to "trigger" the burst disk. I would use a small secondary chamber filled with more pressure than the main 4" chamber. Using boyle's law, I can solve for the pressure difference right? I'd preffer to use one union, and keep the assembly as simple as possible.


A common way to trigger a dual disk burst disk is to fill the chamber and space between disks to about 3/4 the burst pressure and seal the space between disks. Then fill the chamber to 1.5 times the single disk burst pressure. This places about 3/4 burst pressure on each disk. To fire, vent the pressure between the disks. This overloads the first disk blowing it, then cascading through the second. Only a small trigger valve is needed to vent the small space between disks.
  • 0

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

Re: What do you guys think of this?

Unread postAuthor: Brad1895 » Sun Sep 14, 2014 10:01 am

Not a bad idea for what I'd need. Here's my thought process. My current cannon has a 76" by 4" chamber, and a 12" by 2" barrel. I'm using a 2" piston valve piloted by a 1 inch sprinkler valve, and my god, this thing has some kick. What I'm thinking of doing is cutting down the chamber significantly, probably down to about 18" or so. Then use the cut off piece in a mortar of sorts. Split the section left over in two for two pieces of 29" 4" pvc, one for the barrel, and one for the chamber. Place a 2" union in between, and one softball mortar ready to go. The trigger method will be a 1/4" piece of conduit pipe resting on the burst disk. When a softball is dropped in the barrel, it pushes the conduit through the burst disk. Two guns from one.
  • 0


Brad1895
Private
Private
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 10:26 am
Country: United States (us)
Reputation: 0

Re: What do you guys think of this?

Unread postAuthor: velocity3x » Sun Sep 14, 2014 12:45 pm

Brad1895 wrote: The plan is to use Co2 as a power source, regulated of course.


Only a suggestion....but if you intend to keep your hands and fingers in their original, factory configuration, you might want to think again about using CO2 with plastic components.
  • 0

User avatar
velocity3x
Brigadier General
Brigadier General
 
Posts: 827
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 3:09 pm
Location: Yuma, Arizona
Country: United States (us)
Reputation: 7

Re: What do you guys think of this?

Unread postAuthor: Brad1895 » Sun Sep 14, 2014 12:53 pm

Probably a good idea. If we can keep the chamber volume down, I have no complaints.
  • 0


Brad1895
Private
Private
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 10:26 am
Country: United States (us)
Reputation: 0

Return to Pneumatic Cannon Discussion

Who is online

Registered users: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot], MSNbot Media, Yahoo [Bot]

Reputation System ©'