Page 1 of 1

Extreme PSI

Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 6:49 am
by Gorillajoe
Well basically 200 psi isn't enough for me so I'm gonna kick it up a notch with compressed Oxygen. This beast will be made of PG&E high-pressure gas pipe so it handle the extreme pressures. I will be using a high-pressure solenoid for quick opening, burst disks would not be economical seeing they need replacement after every shot. There will be a shut off ball valve between the supply tank and the solenoid. pressuring will be accomplished via Hydraulic air lines and an the oxygen tank regulator. The handle will not be pressurized it will be caped off at the T so it can contain the batteries & switch for the solenoid. The ammo will be marbles and AA batteries in the 1/2'' barrel. In the .177 barrel the ammo will be bb's and toothpicks.

I also plan on polishing the inside of the 1/2'' barrel so the objects move with less friction.

I do realize that there will be a significant time lapse during the release of pressure threw the .177 barrel i will be making it capable of multiple shots much like a BBMG.

YES, I KNOW THIS IS VERY DANGEROUS, DONT DO AS I DO!!!!

also: Noise is not a factor the louder the better.
Barrel length not set yet.

I Just picked up a 2000 psi regulator for my tank :D

The rendering:
I made this in cinema 4d, because I've seen way to many done in paint...(the gauge is not UV mapped)
I plan on building the the tank-less version because i don't have a paintball tank or a way to fill one.
They are not exactly to scale, nor will it be galvanised pipe.
This is simple model of the final product so you readers can get a feel for what I'm trying to create.

Tell me what you think?

Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 7:21 am
by joannaardway
I think it's dangerous and overkill.

You might well injure yourself - even Brian the Brain is hesistant about going with unregulated CO2 - and he's damned experienced, and regularly uses higher pressures than most of us will dare.

And probably not - CO2 won't be breaking the sound barrier anytime soon.

Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 10:43 am
by jrrdw
800 psi+, how are you getting that kind of pressure? What kind of pump?

Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 10:49 am
by Recruit
Dude dont pls we need people that are enthusiastic. But we need good publicity. The last thing we need is head line Man,Woman,Girl,boy whatever kills himself/herself with his/her spudgun, and have spud guns banned completely. Thus causing anyone that has one to get a hefty fine or jail sentence for having one.

So for your good and the good of the community DONT.
Edited for spelling Recruit.

Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 11:00 am
by CpTn_lAw
well actually...it might be possible if you do the things right. let me explain:
releasing the entire pressure chamber at 800 psi would result in a few-seconds-long blowing. you might probably not be able to handle it corrctly and you could loose the spudgun and make it fly backwards for several meters.
BUT: you could pump your canister up to 800 psi, like on paintball rifles, put a high pressure valve next to it, relied to a very small chamber, which one could then be filled . like that, you don't get the freakin' danger of the thing going backawards and killing someone or even yourself, and you get multiple shots. you should use 400 psi per shot instead of 800...since most materials are rated a little below 350 psi.
your CO2 canister can take 800 psi for a life-long time as it is ts primary utility. safety, control, insurance, fun.

Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 3:16 pm
by Gorillajoe
I plan on using 1'' high pressure gas pipe capable of 2000 psi. I wont be firing a hole tank full at a time, just the 5 to 6 inches of behind the solenoid will be pressurized. As for dump time with a 1/2'' barrel its gonna be pretty quick, but with the .177 rifled barrel i would have several seconds maybe long enough to squeeze out a few hundred bbs. The gun would have a small degree of psi regulation simply by using a ball valve between the pressurized chamber and the supply tank. For the guy asking me not to make this. You keep running your PVC @ 150 and stay happy with that, in fact more power to you. This is not my first gun, its my 10th and because I've used PVC over and over and had my share of problems. I'm taken it up a notch. This is just one design, I have another that uses oxygen from the welding tank @ 1200 psi, but ill save that for another time.
I've been searching online and have found several solenoids rated at 4000 psi for about 60 bucks. The problem is they seem to have very small inlets the largest so far is 1/4''.

Oh yeah, and by your conservative standards I am CRAZY.

Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 3:47 pm
by boilingleadbath
Nice rendering.

You might consider using a pilot-activated burst disk type valve - there's an artical describing it in the spudwiki.

Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 6:46 pm
by noname
No, you will not break the sound barrier. The barrel is too short, the chamber isn't big enough, even if you do have 800+ psi. And like others have said, this is a STUPID idea and could change firearms laws to include spudguns.

Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 8:32 pm
by Scope
And if you do decide to do it... I HIGHLY DONT RECOMEND CO2!!. Co2 has really bad abrasive qualities at times and all you need to do is screw up your soleniod and ur messed. Use High pressure air the tanks are a little more expenive but you can regulate the air pressure better and the tanks hold 4500 psi so the rating isnt a problem

Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 8:43 pm
by SpudStuff
Why don't you post some of your other cannons before this. There have been many people like you that come on here with all these cannons they claim to make. I am not canning you a liar, I just am hesitant to help you until I know your cannon history.

800 PSI is nothing to joke about.

Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 11:44 pm
by experament_u2
i think u need to be locked up

oh and very nice 3d render wat did you use rhino ?

Posted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 3:30 am
by Recruit
I believe that is real/\

Posted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 5:37 pm
by boilingleadbath
"I believe that is real"

People who can't/don't render arn't very good at:
1) Appreciating a good rendering
2) Discerning a good rendering from a photo.

To list some of the defects:
1) Note the lines on the pipe. When have you ever seen galvanized iron that looked like that?
2) Note the face on the dial. It's blured more than it should be given the focus of other parts of the picture, thus giving it away as a uv mapping.
3) Note the look of the blue tank. I mean, it could be real... but it's not terribly likely; real stuff is generaly not so clean.
4) Note the wood that it's resting on... it's blurry, and I don't think it's scaled properly.

That said, most of those are the type of things I could play around with for an hour and still not be happy with.