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 69 users online :: 3 registered, 0 hidden and 66 guests


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

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

The Team
Administrators
Global Moderators
global_moderators.png CS

Supah And Mauler Pressure Limits

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

Supah And Mauler Pressure Limits

Unread postAuthor: Gepard » Tue Jun 26, 2007 12:18 pm

Hi,

Why do both the Supah and Mauler valves have pressure limits? Is it to do with how they're put together (the bolts) or is that the rating of the components (T/reducers etc)?

Cheers,

Michael
  • 0


Gepard
Captain
Captain
 
Posts: 342
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 11:12 am
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: Flying_Salt » Tue Jun 26, 2007 12:44 pm

Methinks it's only as good as the weakest component, which is probably the pressure rating on the tee.
  • 0

sgort87 wrote:I hereby present Flying_Salt with The one and only <a href="http://www.geocities.com/sgort87/ghetto">Ghetto Award!</a>
User avatar
Flying_Salt
Brigadier General
Brigadier General
 
Posts: 779
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 4:57 pm
Location: Texas
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: hi » Tue Jun 26, 2007 12:57 pm

it wouldnt make much sence tto fill plastic with 300 psi now would it? flying salt is right.



edit- the more pressure you put in it, the faster the piston comes back.
  • 0

"physics, gravity, and law enforcement are the only things that prevent me from operating at my full potential" - not sure, but i like the quote

you know you are not an engineer if you have to remind yourself "left loosy righty tighty"
User avatar
hi
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 1619
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:28 pm
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: Gepard » Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:01 pm

I'm just wondering why they are given ratings when no other components are.....That's why I think it has more to do with the construction of them then the materials....

Michael
  • 0


Gepard
Captain
Captain
 
Posts: 342
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 11:12 am
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: joannaardway » Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:39 pm

Gepard wrote:I'm just wondering why they are given ratings when no other components are.....That's why I think it has more to do with the construction of them then the materials....

Piston valves were never on the minds of any engineer when they designed the pipe.
The valve exerts huge compressive forces on the sealing face (of the order of thousands of newtons), which was never intended. Pipe was designed to take tension forces, rather than compressive ones, so there are risks involved.

The other problem would lie in the piston coming back too violently at higher pressures, and potentially endangering the rear of the valves.

Too much pressure, and either problem could arise, potentially fatally.
  • 0

Novacastrian: How about use whatever the heck you can get your hands on?
frankrede: Well then I guess it won't matter when you decide to drink bleach because your out of kool-aid.
...I'm sorry, but that made my year.
User avatar
joannaardway
Brigadier General
Brigadier General
 
Posts: 949
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 4:57 pm
Location: SW Hertfordshire, England, UK.
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: Gepard » Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:50 pm

I'm not sure I'd agree that they were designed to take purely tension forces....

Assuming longitudinal tension:
The only conditions I'd imagine where they'd be present is in an unsupported section where it sags and then you have both tension and compression on opposite sides of the pipe.....

Assuming radial tension:
You have the weight of the soil or surrounding material that exerts a compressive force on the pipe which yes may be nothing compared to the 10-16Bar internal pressure but at some point they have to be turned off....

But the extreme forces would certainly make sense....Anyone care to share some light of where the 125psi limit comes from? Seems too rounded to be a result from trail and error....

Michael
  • 0


Gepard
Captain
Captain
 
Posts: 342
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 11:12 am
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: praetorian91 » Tue Jun 26, 2007 3:45 pm

Thats probably because it is not from trial and error, but rather, as you stated, is a nice round number. What is the maximum pressure most people take their cannons (sch. 40 PVC mind you)? 120-125 PSI. Therefore, because it is a nice, round, and common pressure, both Maulers and Supahs are rated at 125 PSI.

I'm still not about to take one over 125, however, in case I am completely off base with this and extensive testing has been performed.
  • 0

User avatar
praetorian91
Specialist
Specialist
 
Posts: 50
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2007 12:47 pm
Reputation: 0

Sponsored

Sponsor
 


Unread postAuthor: hi » Tue Jun 26, 2007 3:56 pm

also the maker of the valve doesnt want to be sued when it gets taken to 150 psi. its safe to use at what its rated at and nothing more.
  • 0

"physics, gravity, and law enforcement are the only things that prevent me from operating at my full potential" - not sure, but i like the quote

you know you are not an engineer if you have to remind yourself "left loosy righty tighty"
User avatar
hi
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 1619
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:28 pm
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: turbohacker » Tue Jun 26, 2007 4:13 pm

And becides, the mauler or supuh has to be acuated with a sprinkler valve ussually, thairfore the highest pressure is 120psi. I know you could acuate it with a ball valve too but why would you want to?
  • 0

<-- This is not a cat avatar

If it walks like a dog, sratches like a dog, and barks like a dog, than its probobly a...-TURTLE, it's a TURTLE!!! Cant you see?!!!

frankrede wrote:Great googlay mooglay!
Thats a beast!
User avatar
turbohacker
Major
Major
 
Posts: 393
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2006 12:34 am
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: spanerman » Tue Jun 26, 2007 4:17 pm

you can actuate it with a smaller piston valve!! like a 3/4 QEV for proper openign times!
  • 0

Image

spanerman
Lieutenant Colonel
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Posts: 438
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2006 2:54 pm
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: Gepard » Tue Jun 26, 2007 4:28 pm

Praetorian91, I don't know - purely 'cos if you make something you want to make it seem like the best out there. And so dumbing down the spec doesn't do you any favours. Though I must admit the fact that people run at 125psi I guess it a bit too much of a coinsidence....Is Gort still a member here? I'd like to hear it direct from him.....

Hi, I agree that something is safe to use at what it is rated at, I've never denied that - but I want to know where that rating comes from....

Turbohacker, surely you've answered that question yourself? You want to use a BV so then you can go with higher pressures.

Do I take it then Sch40 is rated at 125psi then? (I'm UK so I'm not familar with it)

Michael
  • 0


Gepard
Captain
Captain
 
Posts: 342
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 11:12 am
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: MisterSteve124 » Tue Jun 26, 2007 4:38 pm

Because they don't want you to hook it up to a c02 tank and fill it with as much pressure as you can and have it explode in your face. Thats why. If you put too much air pressure in it it will burst. As with steel and any other materials.
  • 0

User avatar
MisterSteve124
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 702
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2006 10:11 pm
Location: West Chester, PA
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: hi » Tue Jun 26, 2007 4:48 pm

it depends on the pipe size. sch40 2.5'' is rated at 250 psi i think, but because there is a piston slamming into it the ratting is less.
  • 0

"physics, gravity, and law enforcement are the only things that prevent me from operating at my full potential" - not sure, but i like the quote

you know you are not an engineer if you have to remind yourself "left loosy righty tighty"
User avatar
hi
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 1619
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:28 pm
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: Gepard » Tue Jun 26, 2007 4:54 pm

MisterSteve124, I realise that it has to have a rating but as I said before I'm trying to work out where it comes from.....

I've email Gort, so I'll post what he replies.....

Michael
  • 0


Gepard
Captain
Captain
 
Posts: 342
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 11:12 am
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: praetorian91 » Tue Jun 26, 2007 5:40 pm

Lets get this one cleared up! Straight from the Gort's mouth!

The real question may be, however, which is more powerful? Both have two inch porting.

Argue away.
  • 0

User avatar
praetorian91
Specialist
Specialist
 
Posts: 50
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2007 12:47 pm
Reputation: 0

Next

Return to Pneumatic Cannon Discussion

Who is online

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

Reputation System ©'