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 42 users online :: 4 registered, 0 hidden and 38 guests


Most users ever online was 218 on Wed Dec 07, 2016 6:58 pm

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

The Team
Administrators
Global Moderators
global_moderators.png CS

New type of silencer

A place to ask general spud cannon related questions.
Sponsored 
  • Author
    Message

New type of silencer

Unread postAuthor: Insomniac » Fri Oct 12, 2007 6:13 am

I had this idea today, the pic pretty much explains it but I'll describe it anyway. Basically it works off the concept that a perfect cb ratio will be very quiet. But a perfect cb ratio will only work at a certain pressure. Any higher and it will make noise, any less and the vaccuum behind the projectile will slow it down significantly.

My idea is to have a barrel that is quite a bit longer than the idea cb ratio, with one way valves set up before the projectile. When the projectile reaches the point where the pressure in the barrel is at atmospheric pressure (ideal quiet cb ratio), instead of creating a vaccuum behind it and losing speed, the one way valves will open and allow air in behind the projectile. Now the only losses will be the friction against the barrel, and this would be fairly small with a low friction ammo (like a snooker ball). With this barrel even if the pressure varys, it will still work without becoming too innefficient.
The diagram for this is for a pneumatic, but it could easily apply to a combustion.

Does anyone think this would work???
  • 0

Attachments
silencer idea.JPG
I wonder how much deeper the ocean would be without sponges.
Right now I'm having amnesia and deja vu at the same time. I think I've forgotten this before.

Add me on msn!!! insomniac-55@hotmail.com
User avatar
Insomniac
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 1297
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 3:47 pm
Location: Australia
Country: Australia (au)
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: Novacastrian » Fri Oct 12, 2007 6:21 am

I think the idea of a longer barrel will work, as for your hop-ups i can only say try it, and good luck :)

Edit: if you can get the valves to work good it should be a good rig i think.
  • 0

America, the greatest gangster of all time. With 200 million odd foot soldiers at it's whim and call.
When you fill your car with refined oil remember that it has been paid for with blood and guts, some from your own countrymen, most not.

Novacastrian
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 1604
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2007 6:59 pm
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: jackssmirkingrevenge » Fri Oct 12, 2007 6:51 am

When the projectile reaches the point where the pressure in the barrel is at atmospheric pressure (ideal quiet cb ratio)


Let's assume you have a 1" pneumatic with a 1" x 24" chamber at 100 psi to give a decent amount of power, this gives us a chamber volume of around 19 cubic inches. This means that in order to achieve atmospheric pressure on muzzle exit, the total barrel+chamber volume should equal 1900 cubic inches, meaning the barrel has to be 2394 inches long :shock:

Hmm... I did the calculations twice but that's the figure I got.

It's a good idea but impractical unless you go for an extremely small chamber, in which case power would not be worthwhile.
  • 0

User avatar
jackssmirkingrevenge
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 24225
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:28 pm
Country: Holy See (Vatican City State) (va)
Reputation: 66

Unread postAuthor: Novacastrian » Fri Oct 12, 2007 6:54 am

2394, that's my lucky number :P
  • 0

America, the greatest gangster of all time. With 200 million odd foot soldiers at it's whim and call.
When you fill your car with refined oil remember that it has been paid for with blood and guts, some from your own countrymen, most not.

Novacastrian
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 1604
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2007 6:59 pm
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: Insomniac » Fri Oct 12, 2007 7:31 am

Aaah well, I never intended to actually build it but it was an interesting idea. It would be cool to see on a small scale though.
  • 0

I wonder how much deeper the ocean would be without sponges.
Right now I'm having amnesia and deja vu at the same time. I think I've forgotten this before.

Add me on msn!!! insomniac-55@hotmail.com
User avatar
Insomniac
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 1297
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 3:47 pm
Location: Australia
Country: Australia (au)
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: psycix » Fri Oct 12, 2007 8:30 am

Dont forget the gasses cool down too and thus shrink in again.
It will be less then 2394 inch.
  • 0

User avatar
psycix
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 3684
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 7:12 am
Location: The Netherlands
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: williamfeldmann » Fri Oct 12, 2007 8:43 am

Neat idea. However a 200 foot long barrel is a bit extreme, even for FEAR which is like 50 if I remember right.

What about using the check valves in the opposite direction, further up the barrel, to release excess pressure before the projectile leaves the barrel?

Sort of like a muzzle break.... yeah, sort of. You get the idea. It would work like a muzzle break at really high pressures.

Granted I don't think it would be able to "silence" the gun but it should allow for a quiter firing.
  • 0

Trying to figure out how to make a SCUBA first stage regulator work for portable charging station. If only that pesky job thing didn't keep eating up all my time...

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." - Albert Einstein
User avatar
williamfeldmann
2nd Lieutenant
2nd Lieutenant
 
Posts: 216
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2007 6:55 pm
Location: Ames. Iowa, middle of BFE
Reputation: 0

Sponsored

Sponsor
 


Unread postAuthor: jackssmirkingrevenge » Fri Oct 12, 2007 9:40 am

Dont forget the gasses cool down too and thus shrink in again.
It will be less then 2394 inch.


That's true of a combustion but not a pneumatic.

Even with one of my mini pneumatics with a 0.79 cubic inch chamber starting at 300 psi, the barrel length needed is over 300 inches :shock: a 25 foot long "mini" :D Another solution would be to have holes in the barrel to send all that air into an exterior container of equivalent volume - hmmm, wait, that's what a silencer is ;)
  • 0

User avatar
jackssmirkingrevenge
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 24225
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:28 pm
Country: Holy See (Vatican City State) (va)
Reputation: 66

Unread postAuthor: goose_man » Fri Oct 12, 2007 10:09 am

williamfeldmann wrote:What about using the check valves in the opposite direction, further up the barrel, to release excess pressure before the projectile leaves the barrel?

Sort of like a muzzle break.... yeah, sort of. You get the idea. It would work like a muzzle break at really high pressures.


Ummm, wouldn't that be the same as just holes in the end of the barrel?

-goose_man
  • 0

User avatar
goose_man
Sergeant First Class
Sergeant First Class
 
Posts: 134
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 6:37 am
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: psycix » Fri Oct 12, 2007 4:48 pm

Another idea: Make a HUGE chamber thats sucked vacuum and opened a split second after the main chamber is opened.
The projectile will get high pressure from the main chamber, then the vacuum chamber opens and sucks out (most of) the air.
Calculate this right and you will have zero pressure difference between the barrel and the outside air when the projectile leaves the barrel.
  • 0

User avatar
psycix
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 3684
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 7:12 am
Location: The Netherlands
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: clide » Sat Oct 13, 2007 12:26 am

jackssmirkingrevenge wrote:Let's assume you have a 1" pneumatic with a 1" x 24" chamber at 100 psi to give a decent amount of power, this gives us a chamber volume of around 19 cubic inches. This means that in order to achieve atmospheric pressure on muzzle exit, the total barrel+chamber volume should equal 1900 cubic inches, meaning the barrel has to be 2394 inches long :shock:

Hmm... I did the calculations twice but that's the figure I got.


I think something is wrong. Using P1V1=P2V2 (must use absolute pressures) I get :
(19 * 114.7) / 14.7 = 148 cubic inches
Subtract the 19 cubic inches of the chamber since V2 is total volume
Which means the barrel needs to be 164 inches.

Still longer than practical, but not completely insane.

I think the check valves are a bit overkill. Having the barrel longer than needed wont significantly decrease performance unless it is a lot longer than necessary. Plus you could always just build it longer on purpose and cut it down slowly until you stop hearing a thwump from a vacuum forming when you shoot.
  • 0


clide
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 785
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 3:06 am
Location: Oklahoma, USA
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: benstern » Sat Oct 13, 2007 2:33 am

First, what causes the sound in pneumatics?
The Valve?
Barrel?

Like all problems, don't attack the result. Fix the source.
  • 0

User avatar
benstern
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 909
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2005 8:24 pm
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: Marco321 » Sat Oct 13, 2007 2:39 am

benstern wrote:First, what causes the sound in pneumatics?
The Valve?
Barrel?

Like all problems, don't attack the result. Fix the source.


The sound comes from the air escaping from the barrel. Same principal as a balloon popping. The source has already been attacked, in the form of a silencer. They simply slow down the air and let it expand into a separate chamber and it is then let out slowly. Once again a balloon analogy is used, if you pop a balloon it goes bang, if you slowly release the air it doesn't go bang.

EDIT: The problem is also the barrel, too short and the air is under more pressure, creating a louder report. The longer the barre, the less pressure the air is under as it escapes the barrel, creating a softer report.

The problem is also the valve, a better valve will make a louder noise because it dumps more air faster. But thats what you want....
  • 0

Failure to plan is planning to fail.

The 7 P's - Proper Prior Preparation Prevents Piss Poor Performance
User avatar
Marco321
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 540
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 2:56 am
Location: Sydney, Australia
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: benstern » Sat Oct 13, 2007 2:51 pm

Well then i would prefer a shrouded barrel. IE: a barrel witrh some holes in it inside a larger pipe. Then you don't need to increase barrel length and thus sacrifice performance.
  • 0

User avatar
benstern
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 909
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2005 8:24 pm
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: clide » Sat Oct 13, 2007 3:57 pm

benstern wrote:Well then i would prefer a shrouded barrel. IE: a barrel witrh some holes in it inside a larger pipe. Then you don't need to increase barrel length and thus sacrifice performance.


Increasing the barrel length won't sacrifice performance...cutting holes in the barrel would.
  • 0


clide
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 785
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 3:06 am
Location: Oklahoma, USA
Reputation: 0

Next

Return to General Spud Cannon Related

Who is online

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

Reputation System ©'