Limits to maximum feed speed, and increasing?

[Lohman446]

Here's a thought, we have always said that we would limit markers by how fast we could feed them, and we have always come up with ideas to feed them faster (ok, not we... but someone).

It occured to me that there is a limit you can feed a paintball. Paintballs have to be reasonably fragile to break on target... how fast can we feed a paintball into a metal breech without it breaking when it feeds. We could feed marbles infinetely fast, because we wouldn't have this break issue - but we would either have to make paintballs thicker shelled and less fragile (hmm.. think of overshooting if we told everyone "you can shoot faster but there less likely to break). This does not seem like a good answer to me.

So it leaves us with an issue. I'm really not looking for a discussion on the advantages or disadvantages of high rates of fire, or the firing modes to attain them. Those are all discussions for elewhere. Assume, just for the interest of thi discussion, that the desire is to load more paint faster and there is a way to make use of it. There is a "terminal" velocity at which we can force feed paintballs without them becoming soup in the breech. Whats your opinion on what that is? What's your opinion on how we overcome this issue?

[trains are bad]

I already see this, people not wanting really brittle paint because it will break in thier halos. And the advantage of really brittle paint is not as great with the high ROF tradeoff.

Personally I think my warp and apache is easier on paint than a halo.

Plus I have eyes and LX.

[teufelhunden]

I already see this, people not wanting really brittle paint because it will break in thier halos. And the advantage of really brittle paint is not as great with the high ROF tradeoff.

Personally I think my warp and apache is easier on paint than a halo.

Plus I have eyes and LX.


..and you went ahead and answered a question that wasn't asked.

Lohman was not concerned with chopping, but paint breaking because of the force it hits the bottom of the breech with. Of course an Apache or an Evo will be easier on paint than a Halo.. because they both suck and feed 8 bps slower.

[SummaryJudgement]

Don't worry trains....I appreciated your input....

[Lohman446]

I appreciate all input, there thoughts... it just seems as of late if I don't specify questions and a line of discussion someone comes on and complains that were bashing Ions :D (sorry, couldn't resist). He's right though, I shot Kick'n paint for a long time, and when I switched to Halos I had to change grades of paint because it was too brittle.

[SlartyBartFast]

The ultimate limit is simple. The point at which paint usage becomes prohibitively expensive.

If paintball doesn't have retail outlets that allow occasional players to play for a reasonable cost, paintball will begin to die as a sport.

We've probably already crossed the cost line in many markets. We've also probably passed the tolerance of many new players on ROF.

But physical limitations? 'Pre-loaded' breech design could easily double the ROF. Chain feed could perhaps increase it further.

But to what end and why? Do you really want to spend more money playing the game? There is simply no valid reason for higher ROF. Certain tournaments have capped ROF, and in other play the devices/programming that allow for greater than 10-12 bps are not allowed.

[Lohman446]

But physical limitations? 'Pre-loaded' breech design could easily double the ROF.


Elaborate? I understand the concept of a chain system under gun, and even one that could work well with a pod style opening even... at least in concept. What about pre-loaded breeches? Prohibitvely expensive has already been passed for many people, the lesson learned is that for some others we are likely not near it... I don't think cost can be what we depend on to limit ROF - most of us will find ourselves costed out if this is the case.

[tyrion2323]

We could always re-design our breeches. The Omen uses a rubbery pad in the breech to stop balls from breaking. Perhaps this method could be adopted to other markers...

[Kevmaster]

as long as you have a bolt movng back and forth, you have a limit.

as long as you have to fill an air chamber and dump it (within reasonalbe constraints), you have a limit.


you've already got limiting factors.

[SlartyBartFast]

Elaborate? ... What about pre-loaded breeches?

Simply: More breeches than barrels. The loaders then only have to feed at a fraction of the firing rate. At least that's the idea.

Probably complex and expensive.

Honestly, if greater ROF is such a great thing, why isn't there more of a drive to use the various double barreled markers?

The really stupid thing about high ROF is that we've already surpassed the ROF of all but a few firearms.

[trains are bad]

..and you went ahead and answered a question that wasn't asked.

Lohman was not concerned with chopping, but paint breaking because of the force it hits the bottom of the breech with.

That's what I was talking about. People talk about not being able to use brittle paint in their super cranked XYZ boarded halos on WFO. Because it breaks in the halo or breech from the force of the feeding. Or in thier qloaders because it will break in the breech if the ball tube is not all the way full when you put a new pod on. I wouldn't know because I refuse to run a hopper that weighs more than my marker.

I said nothing about chopping in my post. You should'nt put words in someone's mouth and then accuse them of answering the wrong question. It makes you look pretty dumb from any angle.

[paullus99]

If there was a way to articulate the firing mechanism so that the marker fires as soon as the ball reaches the middle of the breech (a millisecond or two before it hits the bottom), you could theorectically have an unlimited ROF.....the techinical limitations are pretty steep and being able to fire that quickly even using electronics would be pretty difficult.

I guess your real limitation would be how quickly the valve mechanism would be able to recycle....as long as the paint never touches the bottom of the breach, you don't need to worry about brittle paint. Of course, thinking about it, you'd need another mechanism to hold the ball above the breech until you were ready to fire, then stop the paint above the breech again once you stop firing.

[SlartyBartFast]

If there was a way to articulate the firing mechanism so that the marker fires as soon as the ball reaches the middle of the breech (a millisecond or two before it hits the bottom), you could theorectically have an unlimited ROF.....


While this would limit IMPACT forces, it would not eliminate ACCELERATION forces. So the top ROF would not be limitless.

There's only so much pressure you can put on a paintball befor it bursts. :D

I still want to hear why higher ROF would be good for the game. :rolleyes:

[KRAKMT]

as long as you have a bolt movng back and forth, you have a limit.

as long as you have to fill an air chamber and dump it (within reasonalbe constraints), you have a limit.


you've already got limiting factors.


but inovation is thinking outside the box-yes/no?

Instead of a bolt loading a ball into the breach(current design) The clip will be the chamber and hold the ball. The chamber will seal as the clip passes through- the valve releases to fire the ball. Like the old old Tippman full auto- was it the sl-68. Did the sl-68 use a bolt? I imagine it did.
Speed will be limited by the time it takes the ball to accelerate out of the clip.- We are headed somewhere in that direction with force feed loaders already.

As for limited by time it takes to fill and dump the valve- as the mag shows the less time to charge can be compensated by higherpressure. The only limit will be the energy necessary to operate. Might be electric completely.

Only limiting factor as has been mentioned is the strength of the paintball. A large amount of milliseconds are used by most markers waiting for the ball to be loaded. At about the rate of gravity. It theoretically should be possible reach those mythological numbers that dance around. as cycle per seconds.


Additionally, I think this is more academics then ethics.

"I'm really not looking for a discussion on the advantages or disadvantages of high rates of fire, or the firing modes to attain them. Those are all discussions for elewhere."

[TheTramp]

You'll still run into the main problems with using a clip/magazine/belt baced system in normal paintball applications: Number of balls held, ease of reloading, and cost of "magazines."

Sure a presorted magazine system can load extreamly quickly and if done correctly, be very soft on paint. Take a look at the Q Loader for example. It feeds more quickly than most tank valves can even recharge. You don't see to many people using them because they hold small amounts of paint, can't be reloaded on demand (without wasting paint), and have a high cost so you don't want to just toss them for later retreval.

I think we've already reached the "limit" of paint feeding speed because I really don't think people are going to give up the ease of a hopper style system. The trick now will be getting the top speed out of things like the Halo while at the same time somehow making it more gentle on paint.

[Jotsy]

what you can do to find out, is get an old warp, the hot wire the motor to a larger or more powerful battery/power source. when u prime it, chances are the balls are gonna shoot up into the breech and go mush. now all u gotta do is start turning the power down until it doesn't do that anymore...

thats my 2 cents anyways....

[CKY_Alliance]

What if there was a gun that had a padded breach?Then that would prolly prevent them from breaking. onlything is it would become a pain once the pad got wore out....well way im thinking is to have the body cut down like a centemeter and like an inch long and however wide the body is then place a pad so it flush with the body but once it got wore down you would prolly catch the edge and chop...Unless you were to just have a whole foam bottom body type thing.I dotn know idea poped in my head thought i'd share it.

[yakitori]

the padded breech idea was nice, but wont work. Eventually the force of the loader will leave an indention in the padding and the balls will not be aligned w/ the breach and it will lead to chopping.

The only way it would work is if paintball shells were made of something that could withstand the pressures, but still break on contact w/ out increasing impact force all that much.

And I think that there is a feeding maximum although I dont know what it is or could be, because paint varies. Eventually the force of the loader would lead to breaking paint, etc.


Lohman, do you have some kinda fortune cookie machine that keeps popping out these kinds of questions? :p Every time I sign on, there is a new question on the board that you are encouraging discussion on. Sometimes 2 a day. You have to have a fortune cookie machine. :bounce:

[mark_1791]

..and you went ahead and answered a question that wasn't asked.

Lohman was not concerned with chopping, but paint breaking because of the force it hits the bottom of the breech with. Of course an Apache or an Evo will be easier on paint than a Halo.. because they both suck and feed 8 bps slower.No, Apaches and Evos don't suck, and who the hell actually uses that 8 extra bps? (except for people like Zak Vetter, but he even outshoots Halos when he does that testing) Who actually shoots faster than 20 bps during a game?

[warbeak2099]

It occured to me that there is a limit you can feed a paintball. Paintballs have to be reasonably fragile to break on target... how fast can we feed a paintball into a metal breech without it breaking when it feeds. We could feed marbles infinetely fast, because we wouldn't have this break issue - but we would either have to make paintballs thicker shelled and less fragile (hmm.. think of overshooting if we told everyone "you can shoot faster but there less likely to break). This does not seem like a good answer to me.


I would say that the danger point for paint becoming soup in the breach is ~40bps. Abnd I disagree about thicker paint encouraging overshooting. If you make the shell thick enough to withstand being fed at 40+bps, it doesn't mean you're making the shell indestructable. Here's an example. Let's say manufactorer x makes paint that's rated at 40bps. To be safe they make the breaking point at 44bps. If you're feeding this paint that can handle 44bp at 40bps, it will probably have had enough stress put on it to break whe it hits the target.

Of course, there will still be people using gravity fed loaders su8ch as revys and slower or quasi force feeders like eggos. I guess you'd just have to discourage using that paint in loaders that don't feed fast enough to justify using it. Make it more expensie, like specialty paint.

[teufelhunden]

No, Apaches and Evos don't suck, and who the hell actually uses that 8 extra bps? (except for people like Zak Vetter, but he even outshoots Halos when he does that testing) Who actually shoots faster than 20 bps during a game?


When you get down to the nitty gritty, neither of those loaders will feed consistently faster than 15-16 bps. So a lot of people. Even you slow fingered guys can probably get off 15bps between two shots.. and that's where choppy choppy comes in.

[quik]

just play with marbles then.

[AGD]

Not even close to a problem feeding balls faster than 30-40 bps. Balls dont break at 10 fps but at that speed you could feed over 100 balls in a second.

AGD

[teufelhunden]

Not even close to a problem feeding balls faster than 30-40 bps. Balls dont break at 10 fps but at that speed you could feed over 100 balls in a second.

AGD


At 10fps you could feed 81.6 balls per second, assuming we've got perfect .68 cal balls that are perfectly round. However, this also assumes there is no stop and go, which we know can not be the case, seeing as our guns must have some way to prevent double feeds and stop feeding when we aren't shooting 81.6bps.

But I don't know enough physics or engineering to go further, so maybe someone else does.. or we can sit here and pontificate because this is AO.

[Jotsy]

u know what? it occured to me there's another way to find out (also since it seemed everybody just went an ignored my first post hahah).... plug your barrel with a barrel plug (the plug kind, not the condom/sock kind) then turn your velocity waaaaay down to the point where it won't break when hitting the plug anymore (if it'll even go that far down). you have then found the velocity at which it won't break when hitting a hard object. (like the breech wall)

if u wanna talk "future innovations" sci-fi talk, then how about they come up frozen (like "dry" frozen) paintballs, and then have the gun have some kinda super microwave in the breech to "cook" them so the insides turn liquid again. basically, the balls need to be hard so they don't break in the loader/gun, but they need to be soft so they break on target... sounds like they need to change in form at some point during firing

hahah, wheee i'm having fun

[TheTramp]

Not even close to a problem feeding balls faster than 30-40 bps. Balls dont break at 10 fps but at that speed you could feed over 100 balls in a second.

AGD

So that's why the Q loader feeds faster than the HAlo but is more gentle on paint? It's not about how fast the paint goes throught the gun but how much pressure in put on the stack?

[hitech]

At 10fps you could feed 81.6 balls per second, assuming we've got perfect .68 cal balls that are perfectly round.

I believe your math is off. As I calculate it, 17.64 paintballs fit in a foot. Times 10 feet is 176.4 balls per second.

Think about it this way, a paintball is less than 1 inch in diameter. Since there are 12 inches in a foot, more than 12 paintballs must fit in a foot. ;)

[teufelhunden]

Hm. Yes, you are correct. My [flawed] method was 120*.68.. why I came to that is beyond me.

[Lurker27]

You could actually decrease impact speed and feeding times by not letting the ball stack stop with each actuation of the bolt. Revviues, even VL200s have been seen burst fiing over the 16.8bps theoretical limit of gravity.

Of course, to do this consistently, you'd need to have a series of gates and eyes in the feedneck to synchronize the feeding of paint to the bolt's motion, allowing it to accrue more velocity before entering the breech.

[frontrunner]

Isn't time the X factor, there has to be a speed at witch the breach is not open long enough to lat the ball in. now since the makers can already cycle faster then possible to feed(54 cps from that STO) when do we finaly say after XXbps the breah is not open long enough to let anything in so your gun is now a blender. but then i assume after a while there will be a new bolt system to fix that when does it end is 25-30bps not enough

[Jotsy]

in the name of science, innovation and development, nothing is ever enough ;)

[TheTramp]

54 cps from that STO

I don't believe for a second that that STO was doing complete cycles such that if a ball was fed it would leave the barrel at 300fps. You can move the bolt back and forth as fast as you want but it has to stay forward long and hard enough to open the valve fully or it's worthless. Less than worthless in fact because it makes people think that 54 "shots" per second is possible with present technology.

[shartley]

Remove any bolt system and simply blast balls into a blast of air. You have fewer moving parts, and nothing to “wait on” to cycle.

Of course we will all need scuba tanks and a cart to wheel around our boxes of paintballs though.

Seriously, discussions like this may be “fun” but they are also silly. The military has similar discussions about real firearms and when the end of the day comes it depends on how much any given soldier can carry and use in a realistic situation. It is not technology which limits ROF but the human who has to carry it all down the field.

And then we have the COST to operate at those speeds…. Not to mention safety issues.

In my opinion the real question should be: What is the highest affective ROF given the needs of paintball players? And I think those speeds are already here, and surpassed.

And then follow it up with: Who can provide that while also providing consistency and efficiency in a marker that is both reliable and visually appealing given the demographic it is intended to be sold to?

In short, I think folks are looking in the wrong direction with their questions. While maximum ROF discussions get a lot of attention, I don’t see them realistically helping players, nor the sport or industry. It is like strapping a rocket to a minivan….. you can go real fast, but you can’t take it to the store for milk.. let alone turn corners.

[Lohman446]

Remove any bolt system and simply blast balls into a blast of air. You have fewer moving parts, and nothing to “wait on” to cycle.

Of course we will all need scuba tanks and a cart to wheel around our boxes of paintballs though.

Seriously, discussions like this may be “fun” but they are also silly. The military has similar discussions about real firearms and when the end of the day comes it depends on how much any given soldier can carry and use in a realistic situation. It is not technology which limits ROF but the human who has to carry it all down the field.

And then we have the COST to operate at those speeds…. Not to mention safety issues.

In my opinion the real question should be: What is the highest affective ROF given the needs of paintball players? And I think those speeds are already here, and surpassed.

And then follow it up with: Who can provide that while also providing consistency and efficiency in a marker that is both reliable and visually appealing given the demographic it is intended to be sold to?

In short, I think folks are looking in the wrong direction with their questions. While maximum ROF discussions get a lot of attention, I don’t see them realistically helping players, nor the sport or industry. It is like strapping a rocket to a minivan….. you can go real fast, but you can’t take it to the store for milk.. let alone turn corners.

:( You like taking little kids balloons and putting a pin through them because they don't serve any real world "useful" purpose too don't you :(

All in fun, all in fun

[SlartyBartFast]

How long till the thread ending realisation that if your loader could feed that fast, why do you need a marker?

Just put a 90degree bend on the bottom of a supped-up HALO and you're good to go.

Or, crank those Qpods and just point the output at your opponents.

:rofl:

[SlartyBartFast]

It is like strapping a rocket to a minivan….. you can go real fast, but you can’t take it to the store for milk.. let alone turn corners.

:nono:

You stick jet engines on bicycles.

http://www.amtjets.com/gallery_jetbike_md.htm
:clap:

:rofl:

[TheTramp]

:( You like taking little kids balloons and putting a pin through them because they don't serve any real world "useful" purpose too don't you :(


:spit_take Now that's the funniest thing I've read in a good long time.

[AGD202]

u know what? it occured to me there's another way to find out (also since it seemed everybody just went an ignored my first post hahah).... plug your barrel with a barrel plug (the plug kind, not the condom/sock kind) then turn your velocity waaaaay down to the point where it won't break when hitting the plug anymore (if it'll even go that far down). you have then found the velocity at which it won't break when hitting a hard object. (like the breech wall)

if u wanna talk "future innovations" sci-fi talk, then how about they come up frozen (like "dry" frozen) paintballs, and then have the gun have some kinda super microwave in the breech to "cook" them so the insides turn liquid again. basically, the balls need to be hard so they don't break in the loader/gun, but they need to be soft so they break on target... sounds like they need to change in form at some point during firing

hahah, wheee i'm having fun


and when they unfreeze it will turn the shell into jello.... u ever stick frozen pizza rolls in the microwave?? the crusts on them are really soft and thats what would hapen to the paintball shells... so therefore they would not break, or shoot right let alone go down the barrel.

[AGD202]

Remove any bolt system and simply blast balls into a blast of air. You have fewer moving parts, and nothing to “wait on” to cycle.

Of course we will all need scuba tanks and a cart to wheel around our boxes of paintballs though.

Seriously, discussions like this may be “fun” but they are also silly. The military has similar discussions about real firearms and when the end of the day comes it depends on how much any given soldier can carry and use in a realistic situation. It is not technology which limits ROF but the human who has to carry it all down the field.

And then we have the COST to operate at those speeds…. Not to mention safety issues.

In my opinion the real question should be: What is the highest affective ROF given the needs of paintball players? And I think those speeds are already here, and surpassed.

And then follow it up with: Who can provide that while also providing consistency and efficiency in a marker that is both reliable and visually appealing given the demographic it is intended to be sold to?

In short, I think folks are looking in the wrong direction with their questions. While maximum ROF discussions get a lot of attention, I don’t see them realistically helping players, nor the sport or industry. It is like strapping a rocket to a minivan….. you can go real fast, but you can’t take it to the store for milk.. let alone turn corners.


Lol, and anymore... if the gun doesnt weight .0000000000000000000009oz nobody will even consider looking at it cuz its "too heavy" so therefore even a single paintball is getting too heavy, u can just forget about a 50lb scuba tank.


We should start making a ULE paintball, make them out of some super light liquid and shell so they can weight .000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000009o z and people can once again carry more than just 1 ball.

[personman]

We should start making a ULE paintball, make them out of some super light liquid and shell so they can weight .000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000009o z
You realise a ball like that would go like 2 feet dont you? ;)

[shartley]

:( You like taking little kids balloons and putting a pin through them because they don't serve any real world "useful" purpose too don't you :(

All in fun, all in fun
Well I DID let it go for two pages before I posted.... ;) And I thought you would take what I said and run with it by making a new thread. LOL

:nono:

You stick jet engines on bicycles.

http://www.amtjets.com/gallery_jetbike_md.htm
:clap:

:rofl:
Doah! :eek:

Of course if he really wanted speed he might want to turn the engine around so that he has to try to pedal away from the blast of hot air hitting his rear.... ;)

[Lohman446]

Well I DID let it go for two pages before I posted.... ;) And I thought you would take what I said and run with it by making a new thread. LOL

;)

Actually I earmarked it in my mind for tomorrows thread - people think these questions are easy to come up with, Im still working on the wording :D

[ScatterPlot]

To you who are saying use "souped up warps or halos"- do you realize the amount of power you would need to get a HOPPER to shoot paintballs? If they could do that, we wouldn't need guns. :rolleyes:

You'd need like 120v wall outlets and a 5hp motor to do that




(yes I was exagerating, but my point was that you can't just add batteries to a halo and make it go fast enough to shoot a ball)





Find out the minimum speed a paintball will break at, with that you can determine how fast they must come down the stack.

[SlartyBartFast]

Find out the minimum speed a paintball will break at, with that you can determine how fast they must come down the stack.

The speed at which they will break doesn't give you much. It's IMPOSSIBLE to continuously feed balls. They MUST be stop and go unless you design some complicated oneway hermetic feed system. Takes a ball 5ms to accelerate to 300fps and leave the barrel. Therefor the paintball stack MUST be at rest for 5ms minimum. So, that's 200bps if the paintballs could magically "appear" in the breech instantaneously.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/mot.html
0-10fps(0-3m/s) in .68"(0.017272m) >> 260.53728578045394m/s^2 >> 26.5g

From that you could calculate the required force from the loader.

But, to get max possible ROF you can calculate the time the ball takes to load.

1s / (time to load + time to clear barrel) = max ROF.

The same calulator gives 0.011514666666666666s to load a ball with a final velocity of 3m/s.

1/0.0165

So, 60bps MAX ROF when bolt/action return time is ZERO.

But I'm lazy, so my calculations might be way off.....

Now if you could accelerate the ball and then decelerate in a controled manner the theoretical limit may go way high. The maximum to determine would be the maximum acceleration a painball can withstand.

But all this complexity, for what advantage?

[Lohman446]

The speed at which they will break doesn't give you much. It's IMPOSSIBLE to continuously feed balls. They MUST be stop and go unless you design some complicated oneway hermetic feed system. Takes a ball 5ms to accelerate to 300fps and leave the barrel. Therefor the paintball stack MUST be at rest for 5ms minimum. So, that's 200bps if the paintballs could magically "appear" in the breech instantaneously.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/mot.html
0-10fps(0-3m/s) in .68"(0.017272m) >> 260.53728578045394m/s^2 >> 26.5g

From that you could calculate the required force from the loader.

But, to get max possible ROF you can calculate the time the ball takes to load.

1s / (time to load + time to clear barrel) = max ROF.

The same calulator gives 0.011514666666666666s to load a ball with a final velocity of 3m/s.

1/0.0165

So, 60bps MAX ROF when bolt/action return time is ZERO.

But I'm lazy, so my calculations might be way off.....

Now if you could accelerate the ball and then decelerate in a controled manner the theoretical limit may go way high. The maximum to determine would be the maximum acceleration a painball can withstand.

But all this complexity, for what advantage?

I'm not going to question the calculations, you know the math as well, frankly better, than I do. Let me ask this - why does the ball have to be at 300FPS and out of the barrel before the next one is fired. It already has its "air charge" that is bringing it up to speed, if the bolt/valve was closed couldn't another ball be dropped and fired without effecting it?

[SlartyBartFast]

I'm not going to question the calculations, you know the math as well, frankly better, than I do. Let me ask this - why does the ball have to be at 300FPS and out of the barrel before the next one is fired. It already has its "air charge" that is bringing it up to speed, if the bolt/valve was closed couldn't another ball be dropped and fired without effecting it?

The ball is accelerating as long as the air pressure behind it is greater than the air pressure infront of it.

Opening the breach would release all pressure behind the ball being shot.

So, you can't open the breach to feed the next ball until the prior ball has reached it's final velocity.

Unless, you've dsigned some pressurized/hermetic feed system, which probably wouldn't be able to work unless you were doing the equivalent of sending pressure into the loader to propell the ball out the barrel. And people think Mags have bad efficiency. :p