You'd have to have an extremely strong solenoid to hold back any significant amount of air pressure..
Saves gas, wastes batteries. Though, putting some type of mini pneumatic ram inside there might work(Like what's in pneumags).
It's an interesting idea though.
thats not how a mq valve works.
That's what the dark blue spring is for. It holds the noid open until you pull the trigger at which time the noid overcomes the spring and lets the air through.Originally Posted by Nick E
I'm glad this is an original idea lol. It's simplicity is what excites me about it.
Unless your going to use a noid that is strong enough to hold back the pressure of the spring....that design might end up acting more like a regulator.
Initially(your top pic) the gas pressure and spring pressure are conteracting each other....so the noid wont have to apply too much force to start to compress the spring. But as gas starts to escape....the balance is lost and the only thing holding back the spring is the noid. Unless the noid is powerful enough to hold back the spring it my close the dump chamber prematurely.
It may work, but it might end up having velocity changes based on the strenght of the noid(battery power) and ROF since slight pressure differences in the chamber my change the length of time the dump chamber is open(ie slightly underpressurized dump chamber=shorter dump......lower pressure+less volume=much lower velocity).
If you email the guy that has the web page still up about the history and creation of the original MQ,... you will find that they did have a patent issued on the "pneumatic ram" idea for actuating the valve (as someone pointed out)
Sorry,.. its late and I need some sleep.
I'll find the information in the morning and link you guys with what I got.
Some of its emails,.. so take it for what I post.
Jai "P8ntbal4me" Menard
Yea that's the problem. The noid has to be able to overcome the spring pressure that is keeping it open against the air pressure. Let's say you lower the input pressure though. You'd have to figure out the minimum pressure needed to fire a ball at whatever velocity. If you could get the operating pressure down enough the noid wouldn't have to work as hard.Originally Posted by Hilltop Customs
What about somethign like this... where the noid don't have to hold anything closed or open really... just the spring between the 2 sealing spots would control the size/pressure of the air pocket and would push the sealers apart when the pressure equalizes on one side of it...
Don't shoot me on this... just something I thought of and not sure if it's workable.. I'mthinking the input pressure would have to be controlled by an outside reg like an AC where the spring on the inside would be changed by disassembly and swap...
I think some of you will get it... and I don't know if it's already done... just something...
Originally Posted by DevilMan
I cant really follow the diagram too well. I can see the spring, and I assume th eblue lines are wiper seals, gaskets, or o-rings of some kind.
You should try using more colors and providing a key as well. Also, make SURE you add your name to the originals. If it hasnt been done, you would need to provide credit of your work.
On the note I left last night:
Here is a cut & paste from an email I got from Kerry Johnson.
"Do a search in the applications for inventor name johnson and city madison. The air hammer patent has been approved, but a number has not been issued yet. There never was a drop in kit for sale. We made a prototype and that was it. Once the MQ came along, we dropped it entirely."
If anyone was interested in the "air hammer" idea,.. there is some information on how to do it.
The number for the air hammer patent is 7,159,585. Enter it at http://www.pat2pdf.org or use this link:
Essentially an inside out FASOR like piston. Looks like it could be made into a much shorter overall valve system than most "traditional" FASOR layouts on the market (odyssey guns, legend, fusion).
is it me or wasnt there another post in here last night???
either way, P8nt Im not getting your drawing. Is there any way you could show it initally, be4 air is dumped. I'm guessing that the blue o-ring that is closer to the noid seals the powertube from the dump chamber. If thats the case the only thing I see to hold it in place is the noid? Maybe I'm just missing what you were setting up there.
Heres my idea..... Flip the noid around in the original picture. Replace the noid with a pneumatic ram. Move the dump chamber between the ram and the powertube. Have the ram seal at the base of the power tube. Use a 4 way to push and pull the ram so no spring is needed. Reduce the idiameter of the sealing area of ram to power tube to the minimum(required for needed velocity) to reduce the opperating pressure of the ram. The ram size can be up to the diameter of the valve if needed for added force.
Adjusting the output of the reg and the dwell of the ram adjusts velocity. If the reg is remote mounted this design is extermely simple and can be used as either mechanical or electronic, or quickly converted between both.
Might play around and make a model of it, but dont have time right now.
any way the valve redesigned will effect the the Lvl X opperation....so the bolt and spring will have to be redesigned also. Might be better off starting from square 1.
What I mean is if you reduce the opperating pressure of the valve, the force the bolt is being pushed forward with is reduced. Which would require a smaller spring.....but smaller spring = slower return. Effectively limiting the ROF.
Increasing the bore of the power tube would allow for a stonger spring, but my cause other problems.
Its not my drawing,.. it was a re-quote from aboveOriginally Posted by Hilltop Customs
More explaination with those drawings, please.
This a "new" design or a modification of the current AGD valve?
If it is the AGD mod, your missing an on/off system for your dump camber. One of the reasons the mag is so consistent is because the valve controls both the volume a pressure of air for each shot.
Fun fact for solenoids,
they are 'stronger' when used in short bursts with rest rather than continuous duty(being held on) The recover time of your solenoid could result unfavorable performance at high rates of because of electrico magnetic forces.
If you design this further, remember you have to conflicting goals:
1) a smaller air passage means less area for the gas to act against your seal, letting you use a smaller solenoid
2) a larger air passage gives you a faster release of gas, improving you consistency and efficiency.
hmm...take a look at the ULE trigger specs to solve that one
P8nt.....DOH lol missed that, sorry
Originally Posted by thejere
I believe warbreak was working on a "new" design, at least thats what I was doing. My idea in my previous post would remove the on/off and also the sear, since no pressure would be applied to the bolt until the firing sequence is started. It would rely on flow restrictions from the reg to the dump chamber along with precise dwell to control the velocity. But if you believe an on/off would help in consistancy, it could easliy be implemented in my idea also......I guess I would really need to draw it up for anyone to really know what im talking about though.
I'm liking your original idea, at least that's what my idea was. I don't think you'd need an on/off, the ram controls air flow through the valve, kinda like a reversed ram/poppit type valve. I think that relying on "airflow restrictions" to control the velocity would get aggravating and be a PITA to design, mainly because it could be changed by things like temperature, pressure, and the like.Originally Posted by Hilltop Customs
Well by airflow restrictions i just mean the port size going from the reg to the dump chamber. I didnt really mean to use the restrictions to control velocity, just the recharge of the dump chamber. Having a restricted port from the reg to the dump allows more control of the volume of air for each shot......but too restricted ends up with slow recharge and limited ROF.Originally Posted by Nick E
thejere I think I know what your getting at mentioning the ULE trigger design, but I'm not sure if it will work quite the way your thinking. The ULE trigger relys on equal pressure on both sides of the "head".... where here, the larger "head" would have to be used to seal the power tube, and be exposed to large pressure differentials. If you used a small head(where it seals to the powertube) would create flow problems. let us know what you were thinking.
Anyone happen to know the size of the stock AGD dump chamber and what pressure it opperates at? If possible it would be nice to keep it the same so the Lvl x bolt and springs would still opperate about the same.....although flows through the on/off(powertube seal or whatever you want to call it) could have a large impact.
I had another idea about the placement of the ram, and seal but thats going to have to wait till tonite. I think it will allow for a smaller ram, and maybe the use of a 3 way instead of a 4way....
As for a retrofit to standard mag valves.....i wonder if anyones ever removed the sear and on/off(i mean o-rings to allow for straight through flow) and used a ram to actuate a lvlX bolt. It would have to be a decent strenght ram, because with the constant flow through the on/off the bolt would still have force pushing it forward after the ball is fired. But, if the combination ram/spring pushed the bolt back onto the powertube, it could easily hold it back because of the lvlX low initial force. If set up properly the lvlX should still even be effective.....plus it would look cool having a ram on the side of a mag lol (really the ram could be built into the rail since there is no need for a sear or on/off anymore.....dunnoo if it could work around the grip scrwe tho)
someone stop me, I have work to do lol
i forgot to include.....for an easy switch between mechanical and electroic....an on/off assembly(for the filling of the dump chamber) is required. If its solely electronic, then the volume of the dump can be controlled by the dwell of the ram.
Really, if required, the ram that opens the dump chamber should also be able to shut off the flow from the reg to the dump chamber.
I more suggested the ule to look at ways of "cheating" the pressure forces.thejere I think I know what your getting at mentioning the ULE trigger design, but I'm not sure if it will work quite the way your thinking. The ULE trigger relys on equal pressure on both sides of the "head".... where here, the larger "head" would have to be used to seal the power tube, and be exposed to large pressure differentials. If you used a small head(where it seals to the powertube) would create flow problems. let us know what you were thinking.
One way would be to use the shaft of the pin to seal the o-rings rather than the end, as it is in the first diagram. If you put an o-ring on either end of the and have the air pressure act on the length of the pin there will be no net force on the pin. slide the pin out of one of the o-rings and the gas will vent through the vacated hole.
Shouldn't be too much work to close since the gas will be venting down the barrel
Originally Posted by thejere
ohh I see what you were trying to get at....heres what I was trying to explain earlier.....looks like it would have the same effect as you are explaining:
(i forgot to put the o-ring on the ram plunger)
heres something else that popped in my head when you mentioned the ULE
might cause some flow and o-ring wear problems tho.
Just have a spring to assist in closing the valve. If you make a small lip on the end of the piston the air would assist in closing.
If you did it right you could still use the level ten AND get eye's as well.
The biggest hurdle in a quick look at all those designs , basically, is the dynamic o-rings. If they are not completely captured , pressure will either blow them out as they pass passages and/or ramp significantly in pressure induced expansion.
Not an easy task when flow rate is at a premium.
You'd have to run the whole set up inline and end up with pretty much a Matrix or Promaster.
What'd I say ? Freestyle . . . sheesh.
It seems to me that a dual staged valve design would flow slightly slower but not eat orings due to lower immediate force. A rod within a rod. I'll have to get into MSpaint tonight.Originally Posted by RRfireblade