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 59 users online :: 5 registered, 0 hidden and 54 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

spudgun range, are we falling short?

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

Unread postAuthor: jackssmirkingrevenge » Wed Mar 30, 2011 8:28 am

Labtecpower wrote:GGDT predicts a 200 J increase in power, with the same projectile weight and a barrel of 230 cm.


If you're going to shoot the same projectile though, you're going to need to have a sabot, whose weight should also be included in the calculation.

First try using only projectile weight in the smaller barrel, see what velocity that gives you.

Then try the larger barrel this time putting projectile weight and sabot weight, and check the velocity. Imput this velocity and projectile weight (without sabot) into this calculator and see how the energy compares with your first value for the smaller barrel.
  • 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: mark.f » Wed Mar 30, 2011 8:29 am

So,

Who wants to be the guy to make a sine bar rifling machine with cutter heads for various types of pipe and tubing? :roll:

I have found that 12 gauge piston wads, when loaded piston side forward, make the best blowgun darts for a 3/4" copper tube I have ever used.

Basically, any kind of shuttlecock-type shape will work well for drag stabilization, but doesn't that drag slow down the projectile more over a distance?

Hence my comment on the rifling.
  • 0

User avatar
mark.f
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 3464
Joined: Sat May 06, 2006 11:18 am
Country: United States (us)
Reputation: 21

Unread postAuthor: jackssmirkingrevenge » Wed Mar 30, 2011 8:42 am

mark.f wrote:Basically, any kind of shuttlecock-type shape will work well for drag stabilization, but doesn't that drag slow down the projectile more over a distance?

Hence my comment on the rifling.


Rifling = barrel drag = lower muzzle velocity.

I think the fact that APFSDS fired from a smoothbore barrel remains the premier kinetic armour penetrator on the modern battlefield means that drag/fin stabilisation isn't hurting performance enough.
  • 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: POLAND_SPUD » Wed Mar 30, 2011 9:04 am

Basically, any kind of shuttlecock-type shape will work well for drag stabilization, but doesn't that drag slow down the projectile more over a distance?

Hence my comment on the rifling
shuttlecocks are designed to be slow... their base drag is huge and their mass is low - you need exactly the opposite thing



What you really need is a simple to produce, cheap and relatively low drag projectile design...

Check what I posted on the first page of this thread - it can't get any simpler than that...
  • 0

Children are the future

unless we stop them now
User avatar
POLAND_SPUD
Chief of Staff
Chief of Staff
 
Posts: 5405
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2007 4:43 pm
Country: Israel (il)
Reputation: 10

Unread postAuthor: jackssmirkingrevenge » Wed Mar 30, 2011 9:25 am

POLAND_SPUD wrote:Check what I posted on the first page of this thread - it can't get any simpler than that...


Don't you think it would benefit greatly from a lightweight boat tail though?
  • 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: POLAND_SPUD » Wed Mar 30, 2011 9:35 am

well it's not that the two designs are that much different... if the round works as expected then you might as well add a foam boat tail (or a PVC bell reducer) and see what happends
  • 0

Children are the future

unless we stop them now
User avatar
POLAND_SPUD
Chief of Staff
Chief of Staff
 
Posts: 5405
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2007 4:43 pm
Country: Israel (il)
Reputation: 10

Unread postAuthor: Technician1002 » Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:17 am

Would increasing the bore diameter increase the muzzle velocity?


The correct answer is "It Depends".

If the bore is larger than the valve can supply, then it will launch SLOWER.

If the projectile is larger and heavier to fit the larger bore, then it will be SLOWER. Power falls off when the bore is larger than the valve orifice in most situations. Sometimes a slightly larger barrel is better. A barrel twice the diameter of the valve is very limited in power. My best power was with the 2.5 inch barrel on the high CV 2 inch valve and the GB barrel on the Marshmallow cannon with the 1 inch valve. A lower CV valve won't do as well with a larger barrel.

If the projectile is the same as you would have used in a smaller bore, but used a sabot to increase the area for pressure AND the valve can supply the volume needed to keep up, then YES.. Much faster.

For reference on my experiments on the subject, smashing AA batteries was the test projectile. In a 1/2 inch barrel the result was OK but nothing to brag about. In a 2.5 inch bore with a sabot, and the larger valve to feed it, the battery because a dust cloud.

Oh. References.. You bet..
http://www.spudfiles.com/forums/flat-aa-battery-i-challenge-some1-to-replicate-this-video-t21827.html

2.5 inch barrel
Image

1/2 inch barrel
Image
  • 0

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

Sponsored

Sponsor
 


Unread postAuthor: jor2daje » Wed Mar 30, 2011 1:14 pm

Hey guys its been a while but now that theres a break in FIRST robotics I decided to break out the old golfball gun and log back onto spudfiles.

This is a really interesting discussion and it prompted me to make a projectile based on some of the ideas, its 5/8" steel turned down to a teardrop type shape, its about 4" long and weighs 100 grams. I still need to design and make a sabot to fire this from my GB bore cannon, my valve seats directly to the barrel so i shouldnt be losing any power.


I think I can probably figure out the sabot but Im wondering whether you guys think welding small fins to the back would be a good idea. My plan is to take some highspeed footage and see if it tumbles, but I think some discussion would be interesting.
Image
  • 0

Patience is a virtue, get it if you can, seldom in a women, never in a man.
User avatar
jor2daje
Lieutenant Colonel
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Posts: 418
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 9:41 pm
Location: Southern California
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: Labtecpower » Wed Mar 30, 2011 1:23 pm

I would first try it this way. It would be great if it works this way without tumbling.
  • 0

"ñøw mÿ šįg šüçkś!"
User avatar
Labtecpower
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 1267
Joined: Sat Feb 20, 2010 6:38 am
Location: Herb Island
Reputation: 7

Unread postAuthor: jackssmirkingrevenge » Wed Mar 30, 2011 1:29 pm

jor2daje, good to see you here again :)

Labtecpower wrote:It would be great if it works this way without tumbling.


I doubt it will, as it's made of the same material and the CG would not be forward enough. The Tallboy needed fins and it had a heavy steel warhead coupled with a lightweight alumnium tail.

Image
  • 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: Labtecpower » Wed Mar 30, 2011 1:35 pm

It would be cool to see some high speed footage of the tumbling :D
  • 0

"ñøw mÿ šįg šüçkś!"
User avatar
Labtecpower
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 1267
Joined: Sat Feb 20, 2010 6:38 am
Location: Herb Island
Reputation: 7

Unread postAuthor: jackssmirkingrevenge » Wed Mar 30, 2011 1:40 pm

You need to track the projectile over a significant distance to see it tumble so it won't look anything likethis...
  • 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: Mr.michael.2468 » Wed Mar 30, 2011 8:34 pm

sorry didn't keep up with this, but what the one guy said about using a sabot on the AA batteries is really surprising, i cant believe that simply increasing the diameter of the barrel and using like a pool floaty as a sabot to shoot a double A battery will go from a squashed battery to a pancake. now i look at my 1/2in barreled sniper cannon with a sigh...
  • 0

User avatar
Mr.michael.2468
Specialist
Specialist
 
Posts: 48
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2011 11:33 am
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: Lockednloaded » Wed Mar 30, 2011 9:34 pm

The second one also uses a much bigger valve and air chamber, and don't use pool floaties alone as sabots, tech used it in conjunction with half a water bottle
  • 0

User avatar
Lockednloaded
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 1558
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:38 pm
Location: Texas, USA
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: Technician1002 » Wed Mar 30, 2011 9:37 pm

The pool noodle was just to orient the battery in the sabot. The real sabot was the water bottle. The foam has a hole all the way through it. It did not push the battery at all. A larger barrel does require more air, so yes, a larger chamber and valve was used. This resulted in more energy used to push the battery.
  • 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 General Spud Cannon Related

Who is online

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

Reputation System ©'