Build Log: MFIC
- wyz2285
- First Sergeant 2
- Posts: 2385
- Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2010 7:50 am
- Location: Porto, Portugal
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 3 times
- Contact:
4 relatively small rails should work, mount the cannon on a platform with 4 rails under it then mount all on your base. A tiny rail (30cm long 1cm wide worked for my hybrid)
CpTn_lAw wrote: "yay, me wanna make big multishot pnoob with 1000 psi foot pump compressor using diamond as main material. Do you think wet bread make good sealant? "
- Blitz
- Corporal 2
- Posts: 627
- Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 1:48 am
- Location: Illinois
- Been thanked: 3 times
But then the point of motion is way beneath the cannon's center of gravity. I'm trying to minimize any bucking from the recoil, to minimize the amount of stress on the plastic fittings. I also feel using two rails instead of four ensures more parallel sliding and smoother construction.
- jackssmirkingrevenge
- Five Star General
- Posts: 26183
- Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:28 pm
- Has thanked: 547 times
- Been thanked: 326 times
Here's a possible alternative, using a coaxial ring mount in the same way most tank guns work: http://www.inetres.com/gp/military/cv/weapon/M256.html
Here's how it looks in my mind, bungee chord is the easiest but pistons would be cooler:
Here's how it looks in my mind, bungee chord is the easiest but pistons would be cooler:
- Attachments
-
- recoiloption.PNG (8.11 KiB) Viewed 12673 times
hectmarr wrote:You have to make many weapons, because this field is long and short life
- Blitz
- Corporal 2
- Posts: 627
- Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 1:48 am
- Location: Illinois
- Been thanked: 3 times
That may seem more feasible. I don't think I'd do that around the barrel though. There's plenty of great methods to handle recoil, the problem with my design is it's over/under. This would have been done already otherwise.
- velocity3x
- Corporal 4
- Posts: 828
- Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 3:09 pm
- Location: Yuma, Arizona
- Contact:
6in is certainly a large bore...... especially for a non-metallic barrel. What is the general weight range of the projectiles you intend to launch?
- jackssmirkingrevenge
- Five Star General
- Posts: 26183
- Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:28 pm
- Has thanked: 547 times
- Been thanked: 326 times
Blimey, that's more than 2 kg... you're definitely going to need that recoil system!
hectmarr wrote:You have to make many weapons, because this field is long and short life
- Blitz
- Corporal 2
- Posts: 627
- Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 1:48 am
- Location: Illinois
- Been thanked: 3 times
Yup!
10-11k ft-lbs muzzle energy, nearly 700lbs of recoil force, launcher would recoil at a speed of 9.4ft/s, 80-100ft-lbs of free recoil... if I did my math right. I based the calculations on a launcher weight of 180lbs.
10-11k ft-lbs muzzle energy, nearly 700lbs of recoil force, launcher would recoil at a speed of 9.4ft/s, 80-100ft-lbs of free recoil... if I did my math right. I based the calculations on a launcher weight of 180lbs.
- jackssmirkingrevenge
- Five Star General
- Posts: 26183
- Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:28 pm
- Has thanked: 547 times
- Been thanked: 326 times
Are you planning to mount it on a wheeled carriage?
If left free it will act as a dual recoil system, a la 21 cm Mörser 18:
[youtube][/youtube]
If left free it will act as a dual recoil system, a la 21 cm Mörser 18:
[youtube][/youtube]
hectmarr wrote:You have to make many weapons, because this field is long and short life
- Blitz
- Corporal 2
- Posts: 627
- Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 1:48 am
- Location: Illinois
- Been thanked: 3 times
The carriage will be wheeled, but I will be securing it to the ground when in use. I don't want it to move when fired, honestly (though seeing you post that video countless times before, it was a design consideration)
- Blitz
- Corporal 2
- Posts: 627
- Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 1:48 am
- Location: Illinois
- Been thanked: 3 times
Gotta hand it to the Germans for utilizing such great technology. Especially using a horizontal sliding breech in a class of artillery that pretty much universally uses an interrupted-screw style, even though it also uses caseless ammunition.
- jackssmirkingrevenge
- Five Star General
- Posts: 26183
- Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:28 pm
- Has thanked: 547 times
- Been thanked: 326 times
EvenDora used a sliding breechBlitz wrote:Especially using a horizontal sliding breech in a class of artillery that pretty much universally uses an interrupted-screw style
hectmarr wrote:You have to make many weapons, because this field is long and short life
- Blitz
- Corporal 2
- Posts: 627
- Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 1:48 am
- Location: Illinois
- Been thanked: 3 times
Feature of the day - I received my conduit carrier kit. It's cast aluminum, has a nice finish though and feels well-constructed. It also came with four u-bolts with brackets intended to mount your pipe to your vehicle's roof rack cross-members at two points.
It has a nice thin foam layer on the inside of the lid. The two things that I am the most concerned about are how it mounts (four self-tapping screws or rivets to the pipe) and the strength of the hinge mounts (being that it's cast aluminum). The hinge mounts are reasonably thick. I'm also not a big fan of the slotted spring pins used for the door hinges. I may end up replacing them with a stronger, more secure locking pin, like a clevis pin that uses a retainer ring.
The locking mechanism is a single curved bolt held in with a compression spring and washer on the other side, pulling the bolt in. Naturally the curved part of the bolt is what secures the door, but it's rather difficult to consistently pull to release the door because there's a lot of play, and friction binds it up sometimes. I'm tempted not only to replace the entire bolt with a custom one, but also to insert a bearing or bushing to keep that thing centered all the time. Again, I think I want a more robust mechanism. I'll play around with a few ideas.
It has a nice thin foam layer on the inside of the lid. The two things that I am the most concerned about are how it mounts (four self-tapping screws or rivets to the pipe) and the strength of the hinge mounts (being that it's cast aluminum). The hinge mounts are reasonably thick. I'm also not a big fan of the slotted spring pins used for the door hinges. I may end up replacing them with a stronger, more secure locking pin, like a clevis pin that uses a retainer ring.
The locking mechanism is a single curved bolt held in with a compression spring and washer on the other side, pulling the bolt in. Naturally the curved part of the bolt is what secures the door, but it's rather difficult to consistently pull to release the door because there's a lot of play, and friction binds it up sometimes. I'm tempted not only to replace the entire bolt with a custom one, but also to insert a bearing or bushing to keep that thing centered all the time. Again, I think I want a more robust mechanism. I'll play around with a few ideas.