How many times can an autococker cycle per second?

[Paladin]

Originally posted by nicad


Glenn- a little off topic (but hey.. did someone say something an autotocker cycling..?) , was wondering why yall didnt put filters in the necks of the Rock regs to reduce/eleiminate this sort of problem? I believe the Shocktech regs come with filters in them..
later-
Colin

Cintered metal filters present their own set of problems and our valving is not nearly as susceptable to the garbage that would quickly kill many other regs. The schrader style valve used in the Shocktech regs is extremely vulnerable to seal problems from debris.

[ES13Raven]

Originally posted by Paladin
Quite honestly, I can't address the recharge rate of the WDP mini because I haven't yet disected that particular model for analysis.

Glen...
Here is a diagram of the WDP/Govnair minireg. What can you tell us about the design?

[Paladin]

Originally posted by ES13Raven
Glen...
Here is a diagram of the WDP/Govnair minireg. What can you tell us about the design?

Pretty much the same layout as the rest of that style reg.
Regulated air pressure against the top side of the large piston overcomes the pressure between the two small seals and pushes the large piston back to close off the air thru the large pistion by pushing the tip of the large piston against the seal on the tip of the small piston. However, I can see details as to orofice sizes and shapes so I cannot offer an analysis of it's potential.

[Butterfingers]

Glenn what would be the effect of using compressed helium gas to power paintball guns. According to the Root Mean Square Equation (RMS) for ideal gasses gasses that are lower in molecular weight have a higher velocity and thus flow faster.

For example Diatomic Nitrogen (N2) has a molecular weight of 28 amu.

Compared to Co2 which has a molecular weight of 44 amu.

If you take the root mean square of the ratio of (28/44)^-1/2 you will find that the ratio corresponds to 5/7.

This means that co2 flows at 5/7ths the speed of N2.

This explains one reason why gaseous co2 is slower than gaseous N2. This data also seems to correlate with your experimental data.

Helium has a molecular weight of 2 amu

If you plugged helium into the RMS equation compared to compressed air (2/28)^-1/2

You will find that helium flows more than 5 times faster than nitrogen. This could prove useful in maxing the potential of the pnumataics.

[Paladin]

Good question !! May just have to get a tank of helium and see what it will do. I don't know how to calculate what the effects would be so I would have to experience what transpires in a given setup during direct comparisons.
Ceratilny, the internal balistics/acceleration process of the shot will be affected and I would guess that cycling speeds and recharge rates would be faster.

Originally posted by Butterfingers
Glenn what would be the effect of using compressed helium gas to power paintball guns. According to the Root Mean Square Equation (RMS) for ideal gasses gasses that are lower in molecular weight have a higher velocity and thus flow faster.

For example Diatomic Nitrogen (N2) has a molecular weight of 28 amu.

Compared to Co2 which has a molecular weight of 44 amu.

If you take the root mean square of the ratio of (28/44)^-1/2 you will find that the ratio corresponds to 5/7.

This means that co2 flows at 5/7ths the speed of N2.

This explains one reason why gaseous co2 is slower than gaseous N2. This data also seems to correlate with your experimental data.

Helium has a molecular weight of 2 amu

If you plugged helium into the RMS equation compared to compressed air (2/28)^-1/2

You will find that helium flows more than 5 times faster than nitrogen. This could prove useful in maxing the potential of the pnumataics.

[nicad]

{dumb}
..not to mention helium would make your tank lighter as you get an "air" fill! lol..
{/dumb}

[Paladin]

Originally posted by nicad
{dumb}
..not to mention helium would make your tank lighter as you get an "air" fill! lol..
{/dumb}

Ya, and everyone would be sounding like Donald Duck.

[DarkRipper]

Originally posted by Paladin


Ya, and everyone would be sounding like Donald Duck.

Especially indoors!! You beat me to it.


DR

[hitech]

Someone has tried it:

Originally posted by AGD
Our friend Ed Head did try helium. Didn't hardly shoot the ball but make big boom! Not enough gram moles to get the ball going and it leaked out of all the orings (really small molecules). Great discussion here guys.

AGD

[Paladin]

Originally posted by hitech
Someone has tried it:

Makes sense.I didn't think that the very low density of the gas would allow for propper acceleration.
Shows why I continue to prefer CO2 over compressed air/N2.

[nicad]

Guess what yall? I actually have something here that has something to do with the topic!
Jom (dunno if he posts here) over on the racegun fourm posted this clip of him with his Race cocker in full auto, equiped with an ACE, and fed by a Halo. my cheezy analysis of the audio track results in about 17 to 17.5 bps over most of the clip. the halo starts slowing down (low on paint) in the end and thus the fall off of speed.
http://www.compulsivepaintball.com/jom/racemovie3.avi
n'joy!

[Butterfingers]

The problem with helium is not that it does not provide enough energy to propell the ball.

The problem is that it flows too fast and the paintball does not adequately seal before it leaks between the irregularities in the breach bolt and paintball.

If you had a perfect seal it would propel the paintball with the same amount of force. 600psi equals 600psi no matter how we put it.

Pressure in a vessel or the pressure that propells a paintball is determined by the elastic collisions of gas molecules upon the walls of a container or paintball. In which kinetic energy is for the most part conserved.

To put this into perspective. A molecule of nitrogen is a dump truck. A molecule of helium is a car. The dump truck is moving at 10 mph the car is moving at 100 mph. They both have the same energy.

The car "stores" its energy as speed.

The truck "stores" its energy as mass.

If they both hit an object they will transfer the same amount of energy.

The Root Mean Square equation is derived from the kinetic energy of gasses. And assumed to be equal under a certain pressure.

It is assumed that the kinetic energy of gas particles under the same pressure have the same kinetic energy. 1/2mv^2=1/2mv^2. The Root Mean Squared equation is derived from this equation.

To simulate this situation put a .30 caliber paintball into the barrel of a .68 caliber paintball gun then fire the gun.

The ball will simply bloop out.

[Paladin]

Major confusion !!!
A car and a truck both have basically the same molecular density though 1 obviously has less mass.
Seems contrary to your conclusions as to cause.
With such low molecular density, it cannot impart the energy from it's high speed on the ball. Remember, it's density is only 1/14th that of air but it only moves about 5 times faster. Just doesn't add up.
If the low density gas could impart its will onto the ball effectively, simple acceleration will generate enough lineal upset of the ball to create the seal in the breach.
The "leaks" around the ball would be sealed if the gas was dense enough to impart its energy to the ball.

Originally posted by Butterfingers
The problem with helium is not that it does not provide enough energy to propell the ball.

The problem is that it flows too fast and the paintball does not adequately seal before it leaks between the irregularities in the breach bolt and paintball.

If you had a perfect seal it would propel the paintball with the same amount of force. 600psi equals 600psi no matter how we put it.

Pressure in a vessel or the pressure that propells a paintball is determined by the elastic collisions of gas molecules upon the walls of a container or paintball. In which kinetic energy is for the most part conserved.

To put this into perspective. A molecule of nitrogen is a dump truck. A molecule of helium is a car. The dump truck is moving at 10 mph the car is moving at 100 mph. They both have the same energy.

The car "stores" its energy as speed.

The truck "stores" its energy as mass.

If they both hit an object they will transfer the same amount of energy.

The Root Mean Square equation is derived from the kinetic energy of gasses. And assumed to be equal under a certain pressure.

It is assumed that the kinetic energy of gas particles under the same pressure have the same kinetic energy. 1/2mv^2=1/2mv^2. The Root Mean Squared equation is derived from this equation.

To simulate this situation put a .30 caliber paintball into the barrel of a .68 caliber paintball gun then fire the gun.

The ball will simply bloop out.

[pbjosh]

Uhm,

So, if we found a Gas that had a molecular density higher than CO2 how might that affect the action of the paintball gun and the efficentcy?

Josh

[Butterfingers]

Originally posted by Paladin
Major confusion !!!
A car and a truck both have basically the same molecular density though 1 obviously has less mass.
Seems contrary to your conclusions as to cause.
With such low molecular density, it cannot impart the energy from it's high speed on the ball. Remember, it's density is only 1/14th that of air but it only moves about 5 times faster. Just doesn't add up.
If the low density gas could impart its will onto the ball effectively, simple acceleration will generate enough lineal upset of the ball to create the seal in the breach.
The "leaks" around the ball would be sealed if the gas was dense enough to impart its energy to the ball.

Kinetic energy of a particle quadruples as speed doubles.

its a expotential relationship.

To put this into perspective...

A 53 grain .223 Remington (1200 ft/lbs) at 3300 fps has more muzzle energy that a 230 Grain .45 (356 ft/lbs) at 835 fps.

The .45 weighs about 4 times as much and is about 4 times slower. If speed and mass were proportional the muzzle energies would be the same.

As you can see the muzzle energy of the smaller .223 is over 3 times greater.

As a side note this is why velocities must be kept under 300 fps.

Doubling the velocity quadruples the energy!

[Paladin]

Originally posted by pbjosh
Uhm,

So, if we found a Gas that had a molecular density higher than CO2 how might that affect the action of the paintball gun and the efficentcy?

Josh

Might be interesting to try it and see what the effects would be and what changes to the equipment would be needed for accurate comparisons. Does such a "gas" even exist ?

Quite frankly, I tend to believe that there is just no better way to propell a paintball for our needs than with good ole CO2. Based only on the long established safe speed limit of 300 fps at the muzzle. If the pellets and/or speed limits change significantly, it may be a benifit to seek alternative propellants.
In my view, compressed air/N2 seems more a benifit to the functionality of some of the the equipment rather than the performance of the shot. Even then, if properly controlled, CO2 generally iss not a detriment to most of the equipment out there.

[Butterfingers]

Pretty much all noble gasses would suffice.

Krypton and Xenon both weigh more than compressed air.

There are also synthetic organic gasses such as tetrafluoroethane and R-134 "ozone safe freon". Which have molecular weights well into the 100's. Analouges to these substances may be found in cans of "dust off" computer spray duster or as a propelant for aeresol products.

The problem is that the heavier you go the lower the pressure equalibrium will be. These gasses may boil at sub 100 psi whereas co2 boils off at around 800 psi.

Heavier gasses tend to have more london dispersion forces which tend to hold molecules together.

[Paladin]

Originally posted by Butterfingers
Pretty much all noble gasses would suffice.

The problem is that the heavier you go the lower the pressure equalibrium will be. These gasses may boil at sub 100 psi whereas co2 boils off at around 800 psi.

Heavier gasses tend to have more london dispersion forces which tend to hold molecules together.

Can we also expect to see large variables in pressures in relation to temperature is such "heavy" gases.

It is my understanding that CO2 looses ability to sustain liquid saturation at about 550 psi.

[Butterfingers]

yes, the pressure equalibriums of these gasses like co2 tend to vary greatly with temprature also.

If you chill a can of "dust off" in the freezer you could hack the can open and see the liquid sloshing around on the bottom. At this temprature "dust off" exerts 0 psi.

[pbjosh]

Oh well, back to the original thread, I shot my Half-Block at 15+ today. Yippie!

Josh

[SSMercury]

Originally posted by Butterfingers


As you can see the muzzle energy of the smaller .223 is over 3 times greater.

As a side note this is why velocities must be kept under 300 fps.

Doubling the velocity quadruples the energy!

So this means it takes approximately 4 times the gas to make a paintball travel from 150 fps to 300 fps?

[Butterfingers]

It may vary... depending on how efficent the gun is at 150 fps compared to 300 fps.

[the electrician]

like tom and Doc said, cycle rate , and fire rate are two different things.with stiff springs, high cocking psi and other modifications a cocker could be made to cycle extremely fast. but I wouldn't want to try and shoot it like that.
I've done some feed tests of my own with my homemade electro cocker.the ram stroke was modified, an exhaust valve was added to one side of the ram and many other mods were done to the gun.
cocking solenoid valve "on times" were measured along with sear solenoid "on times", "delay recock times" and "bolt close times"
I came up with 4 msec for "sear solenoid on time"
7 msec for "delay recock time"
61 msec for "recock solenoid valve on time"
and 8 msec for "bolt close time"
now the " sear solenoid on time" is not added into to the total because both it and the recock delay timer start at the same time.
so this leaves 76 msec. approx. 13.15 balls per second
this is on a right hand feed cocker.
other tests showed that vertical feed, fed faster by about 10 msec. also a larger stack of balls between hopper and breech would increase the feed rate also.
All in all, I beleive that an autococker could be heavily modified, and force fed to shoot 17 bps.
I beleive it is much easier to get an automag to shoot at this rate.

[nicad]

the electrician-
your very close. my post farther up somewhere had this link in it. its of an electronic (race) autococker going 17.5bps vert feed with halo..

http://www.compulsivepaintball.com/jom/racemovie3.avi

out!

[pbjosh]

Hello,

Now that we are back on the subject,

Jom's merlin is using these settings:

7 for Shot
7 for Dwell
14 for Open
1 for Load
12 for Close

Now, this allows for a potential 29.4 bps. But a ball would have to load in 1 ms. I have timed HALO and Warps at about an 8-10 ms load time. So, a faster 12v Warp fed by a HALO might be able to feed Jom's Merlin with a Load set to 10. With a load of 10 the gun should be able to shoot at 23.3 bps. If we force fed it even faster, say with a stick feed that was 'Air Assist' like the RT was tested with it might be able to hit 25+.

Josh

[the electrician]

you are definitely in the right area for shaving time.
I don't quite understand why the race grip uses two clocks to control the recock solenoid valve on time. they have "open time" and "load time" in series with each other. they essential do the same thing.
the cycle rate of a cocker could be very high with higher operating psi, higher cocking psi, stiffer springs and a larger valve.with light springs the valve would eventually begin to "float".I beleive you could reach 33 cycles per sec before the valve began to float in a cocker. but it damn well wouldn't shoot any paint with current loaders.

I believe that the only electro cocker capable of really high ROF is the sandridge.it is able to use stiffer hammer and valve springs because of the use of a ram instead of a solenoid.
heavy hammers are essentially detrimental to cycle speed, but they are helpful for direct solenoid actuation of the sear.

[nicad]

electrician- ya seem vey knowledgable in the area.. its always good to see that there is hope out there.

The dual times for open and load are a little overkill in my opinion.. but it is nice to visulize the times in a chronological timeframe..

The race's "direct" solenoid ,as opposed to the F5's solenoid/vavle/ram for acutating the sear, can easly trip the sear on any of the heaviest spring setups out there (when setup properly). I can push on my recocking knob about as hard i can and the grip will still trip the sear.
its not actually direct acting.. it trips a sub-sear in which gives way to the main sear. mucho-amplification of holding power..
So really, the race should be capable of going faster than an F5 because it eleimates the pneumatic delay in tripping the sear.

out!

[the electrician]

I have never taken one apart. I've seen some close-up pics, but that's it.I know is uses a horizontal mounted solenoid with what looks like a small roller on it that moves out of the way of the sear to let it come down.Very cool design.

I personaly, prefer the solenoid actuated sear instead of a ram for the simple fact of eliminating the "pneumatic" element from the grip frame. it's just a simpler design with out it.
My electro is a homemade one. I use a direct solenoid acuated, stock sear. and yes you are right, the reaction time is much better than using a ram.I use a MAC valve to control the recock.the gun is also modified in other ways to improve performance. It shoots plenty fast for my old fingers.

But, I have a homemade e-mag mod that shoots real fast, real easy. I remember people talking about having velocity drop off in thier mags and needing some aftermarket parts to fix it. HA! a standard mag valve, all stock, can shoot extremely fast with no drop off at all. full auto tests have shown that it easily out shoots my 12v Rev.

well I seem to have gotten off track, my apologies.

[314159]

Originally posted by nicad

So really, the race should be capable of going faster than an F5 because it eleimates the pneumatic delay in tripping the sear.

if the delay of the mac valve turning on, and the air moving along about 6 in of hose, and activating the ram is consistant (which i beleve it is) then the delay factor is only a issue for the first shot. and if you judge rate of fire by balls that come out the barrel per second, it is not an issue at all. if the gun can hold one shot in it's firing que (trigger event while the gun is currently firing), for the 2nd and following firing cycles, you can just send the signal (the amount of time of the delay) before you want the sear pull, and thus you eliminate form the firing cycles 2+.

[pbjosh]

The Racegun/F5 debate about which is faster has a couple of things people don't realize involved.

I do not know how the Sandy is timed for dwell. I know it is easy to time in the dwell to match the what the gun does on the Racegun setup. This might allow for a faster gun, but also the Sandy can be timed just as close.

The Shot setting can be turned down to 3ms or less on the Racegun setup. I have no clue how long the Sandy takes. Now, on both the Sandy and the Race all you are doing is dropping the hammer, so the hammer still needs to move forward, hit a valve, air gets released, etc. So, the time for the MAC to turn on and drop the sear will add to the time. I have no clue though how long that is. In another project I used a Solenoid Valve to active a piston, and it took 3-4 ms for the piston to activate. That is close to the same length of time.

The Sandy has a VERY nice SMC ram. But, it is not quite as fast as most Palmer QuikRams. So, by having a great ram on a Racegun, you can increase the ROF past the Sandy.

Since you time the Solenoidvalve on to match the actual time it takes to open, you can time it within 1-2 ms of the true Open Time. I am not sure, but the time the curcuit takes to register the Hall Effect sensors and wait to double check you might lose a couple millisec.

The speed of the Racegun setup with an ACE is FAST. Alot faster than I would have thought. It might be faster than the Sandy. Again, I have no clue. Some reflective ACE's are alot slower, and have a send/receive lag time of 5ms.

In all of these setups we can see the little differences a couple millisecs here or there can affect the total time. I think both the Sandy and Racegun are hella fast.

Electrician-

I have a couple questions and thoughts for ya-

The Open/Load on the Racegun program is total on time for the 5-way Solenoidvalve. But the Open setting is to test how long the Ram takes to really open. By setting the Load to 1ms you can see if the solenoidvalve is open long enough. If it isn't, then the bolt won't open long enough for the sear to be connected. After you have the Open figured out, then you can tune in the Load to match the loader, and test. If your gun is chopping, you just up the load. But you don't change to Open time. That is set.

And, by setting the Open to match your gun, you can then figure out the Close time.

Now, if you test the Open time on your gun by setting the 2nd Solenoid On time down to the point that the guns just cycles, and not 1 ms more, then you figure out the true Open time. Then depending on your loader you can figure the load time and set the total solenoid On time to match what your gun really does. I understand just one setting is easier, but for testing rams/loaders and stuff the two settings are kinda slick.

You close time seems really short. Just from my testing. Can you try the Open testing and let me know what you get, plus maybe the Ram you are using? Thanks!

Josh