So I was Thinking about a New Gun Design.....

[AGD]

All,

So I was sitting around the other day watching Top Gear and thinking how advanced the latest sports cars were. I think to myself, "they are advancing just like paintball guns" and then I had to stop a minute.... I was wrong. If a paintball gun was transformed into a sports car, you would have an electronic sensor on the gas pedal that opened the carberator, THAT'S ALL!!

That got me thinking about what it would take to make a marker as advanced as today's Ferrari's. First of all, to get advanced control, you need to know what the car or the marker is doing. For the marker this means it knows what the velocity is for every single shot. Once it knows the velocity, then you need a way to control the velocity on every shot regardless of other factors like tank pressure etc. Just like fuel injection, this would require direct injection of the gas into the bolt chamber behind the ball. You could then dynamically adjust the timing so no matter what the tank pressure was, you would get the same velocity out. No regulators in the gun, at all. Just the tank feeding high pressure into the computerized injection system and your good to go.

So that was a cool idea, and it got me thinking further. If you could control the gas injection directly into the chamber, you can control the profile of the power pulse to the ball. Longer-lower pressure or higher-shorter but for this you would need to control two injection ports. This would allow you to shoot really fragile paint and make the gun very quiet with a long pulse at the expense of efficiency. Conversely you could make it bark with stronger paint and get much better efficiency.

Then I thought about how you could combine those parameters to best suit your game. It suddenly made sense that if I had a marker that did that, I would program it to shoot the first couple shots very quietly but once I started jack hammering it would automatically go to the high efficiency mode. This would allow me to sneak in the first couple shots without alerting my opponent but still give me great efficiency!!

But that lead to more ideas..... If you can inject the air into the chamber, at a pre-determined time, you could do it WHEN THE BALL WAS ROLLING PAST THE PORT! If you did this, it would rub the ball against one side of the barrel and induce a spin. With three independently controlled ports, below and on each side, you could get the ball to float or hook left or right just with the press of a button! :)

This would be like stepping out from behind your bunker or tree about 10 feet to take the shot. I also will bet you that a ball spinning and hooking left or right will be more accurate (left and right but not up and down). This is because you are controlling where on the back of the ball the vortexes are being shed from. They are NOT random. Cockerpunk should test this.

So why would I mention really cool designs on a pubic forum? Because I don't think there are any companies left in this industry with the ability to conceive, design and then finance a truly revolutionary product at this time. There are some guys with the ability (Chris Goddard and Simon come to mind) but there are no companies that I would have confidence in that could do it.

Just thinking out loud.....

AGD

[cockerpunk]

watch out with the air-induced spin ideas. the high speed video shows that doesn't work too well. now you can use friction to induce spin, but pure air is difficult. quite frankly, it is really hard to beat out the apex for induction and control of spin. i would like an apex though that was smaller profile so i could actually aim my gun with one of those things.

a solenoid that is fast enough and resolute enough to control that much air would be a pretty sweet engineering feat! although your solution is pretty eligent and solves a multitude of other technical issues.




sorry to sound negative, i am actually not trying to shoot down your ideas in the least. im very pleased to hear that your thinking paintball again. we'd all love to have you back.

[AGD]

Cocker,

Its not air induced, the air pushes the ball against the opposite wall of the barrel to get it started.

AGD

[cockerpunk]

Cocker,

Its not air induced, the air pushes the ball against the opposite wall of the barrel to get it started.

AGD

thats how some people claimed backspin bolts work, push the ball up against the top of barrel to get them to spin. :p

just giving you a hard time tom, im very pleased to see you mulling these ideas around. i would love to dream that something was in the works ...

[wetwrks]

So when are you releasing this new gun? :D

Oh, and I want mine in a red to gold fade and serial #1. :ninja: :D

[Epic_Scotsman]

Its true especially with the state the economy is in.

However wouldn't this require a new regulator on your HA tank?


and in another note

OMG its TOM!! :hail:

[Enemy]

hey tom you think weve come far with todays tech in cars they are working on variable compression engines to go from regular ignition to auto ignition giving gas motors deisel like efficiency..

It is a very good idea though I think put to design, gremlins would start showing up everywhere, consistency of the injectors, actual ability of the injectors to control pressure and so fourth.

Though we could do one better with the use of piezioelectric sp? injectors perhaps using them to boost pressure and ultimately have a lp gun that fires hp amounts of air, for those that dont know those are the uber expensive injectors used in deisels and direct injection gas engines that put out about 20,000 psi fuel sprays.

[oldironmudder]

I would look into diesel injectors since they can handle the pressure, 60,000psi no problem & have the speed, 2000rpms is something like 33 cycle per second. The Cummins ISX injectors use fuel to adjust the timing.

I havent been around a diesel since Feb, job change, so Im a little rusty on the details but I have the info here.

[Shirow]

Interesting thoughts. I particularly like the silent 2 shot/efficient rapid fire idea. XXX-Mag? :)

[kruger]

The only true way to know how to shape the shot is to know the exact pressure in the tank. You could do that with a pressure transmitter. Also, with the miniaturization available today, this idea is not that far fetched. I could see this working with just two solenoids.

[jade_monkey07]

So why would I mention really cool designs on a pubic forum? Because I don't think there are any companies left in this industry with the ability to conceive, design and then finance a truly revolutionary product at this time. There are some guys with the ability (Chris Goddard and Simon come to mind) but there are no companies that I would have confidence in that could do it.

AGD

I think you just challenged yourself, along with the rest of the industry :ninja:

[oldironmudder]

Some time ago I had an idea that would help control a marker & give a much more consistent fps reading. You would need a chrono on the end of the barrel like the old PVI Shocker, a pressure sensor that would tell the controller what psi the ball will see & if its an ep marker need another sensor for the LP air that feeds the noid. A tank pressure sensor could also be used & be like the Angel Air & tell you how many shots are left in the tank. You could take it far enough to be crazy but could help, ball weight sensor. By knowing the weight of the ball you could lower the amount the controller would be guessing.

The first shot would always be the worst one since it would be used to start the base for the shooting session. The ball would sit in the breech & be weighed. The controller would take that info & compare it to a permanent chart & base the dwell of the noid on that. Which would give the controller its first chrono reading to adjust the fps on the next shot along with the pressure in the marker.

Just looking at current ECMs in cars & trucks, they take info from coolant temp, air temp, air pressure & more just to figure out how much fuel to inject to try & achieve the best fuel ratio for its current driving condition.

I did a search for injectors, diesel, & watched this video first. Liked it & didnt bother looking for anything else.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGwV9ueHcz4

The injector allows several injections to better the overall combustion cycle which would allow for a very very soft burst to get the ball moving. Then after that dump enough to get the ball up to speed. It would also let you get a few quite shots then ramp up like Tom said.


Ok, working thrid shift & thinking this hard is hurting my head.... time to cool down.

[nerobro]

Just to be sily, it would take a fairly large valve to do this with air. (at least the controlled profile valve chamber injection)

Maybe feed a diesel injector with liquid CO2? That would allow use of common parts for testing. IIRC, they've started using peizo technology in that sort of injector to allow them very precise timing. And a carefully controlled fuel curve.

Perhaps a simple/cheap solution would be to run two different valves, one for slow injection, one for fast injection. Or, with a $8 servo, you could potentially move a valvebody to switch between quiet pressure rise and fast pressure rise. that may be cheaper than going with a crazy injector capable of being driven with PWM and still give the same quiet-fast switch.

Aprillia has done high pressure air/fuel emulsion injection, that might have some relation to what we're looking at here.

Would a single port be enough to setup a consistant spin? Would a carefully designed groove do better?

The controllers to do this are out there... You'd need to step it up from the low end pics and avr's that are common now, and you'd probally need to revive the emag style battery pack. This could go places..

There we go, Tom's got me thinking again.

Excuse me while I go look at injectors...

EDIT: This would also allow for a player to "fix" paint breakage issues on the fly. If you're breaking paint, hit a button, goto delicate mode, and now you can shoot eggshells.

EDIT again: And why hasn't anyone introduced damping into guns? it seems that companies are finally starting to address how the guns "feel" to the user. the last time I saw anything that really addressed damping were the timing shocks on the tippman F/A.

[vf-xx]

Haven't we gone over this idea before in some bits?

We're talking about integrating a chrony into the gun again, which I think is a good thing, But that does give some technical issues.

Is there any way to do that and not have it integrated into the barrel?

Would you even still need a bolt, or would you go to a feedgate like an epic?

[nerobro]

Successful gun designs are always simple. Feedgates aren't easy to seal, and run into the mag problem of kicking the ball stack hard, and they're defininitely not simple. Bolts are better, especially once you get the rof up.

I wouldn't suggest integrating a chrony into a gun. There's to many potential ways for that to be a problem. It's a neat trick, but the ref at the chrony is the one that matters.

The spin idea would require some barrel integration. The machining necessary to make that work is pretty simple. Almost dremel simple.

We are looking at several technologies here. First is electronically controlled valving, this has never been done beyond a "digital" implmentation. Second adaptive firing profiles, this has been done in the past, but not always well implemented, and always only applied to maxrof. Third is electronically controlled spin. They should be treated separately for purposes of our discussion. Each technology could be game changing.

[vf-xx]

Ahh, but see, he's saying for an efficency point you'd have to integrate a chrony.

I'd pass on the spin thing for the inital generation of the gun. TBH, you could release a whole series of guns with this idea. Just implement /sell at each stage.

Stage 1 being an injection style firing system, then move on from there.

This gun is sounding very complex from the get go. I think it could be done and it does sound interesting.

As to the idea about weighing the balls: not sure you can really do that for the following reasons:
1) Forcefeed loaders
2) The gun isn't always going to be perfectly vertical.

[mostpeople]

Nice

Tom, I hope you do get back into the sport that you so obviously love/loved. I know if you do you will have the complete support of this community as you always have.

Oh and I'll take SN0002 in dust black kthx.

[nerobro]

To do the injection could be very simple. A nearly off the shelf injector, and some driver circuitry. Especially with using liquid co2 feeding a diesel injector. That's a junkyard solution and cheap.

it's also dead simple. The gun would need three moving parts at that point. The injector pintle, a solionins to move the bolt, and a ram to move the bolt.

I agree, weighing balls is a losing battle. It adds another layer of "easy to break" into the system. the gun orientation could be compensated for, as could gun movements. however it takes some time for the system to settle to get an accurate weight. you'd need to add a gyro and orentation sensors. A system to get accurate weights of paintballs at 20 rounds per second would be a heck of a project in and of itself. .... That said I can think of a couple ways to do it, reliably. none of them are small or simple.

Like "normal" paintball guns, I think the gun would need to operate blind. Use a programed amount of gas for all paintballs, instead of compensating for anything.

the only sensor I think would be "sane" to have that could tell us about ball acceleration would be a fast acting pressure transducer. And I say sane, only loosely. It's an expensive and large part. But it also means not putting eyes down the barrel.

[mostpeople]

My guess is that the ball would simply bounce off the other side of the barrel, and bounce back. Plus with everyone going slightly underbore for efficiency it kind of a moot point?

[nerobro]

That's why I suggested a groove. A groove could keep the ball against the fall wall long enough to be effective. Provided you could get even gas release along the groove. But..... that would require testing :-)

[Ratt]

So why would I mention really cool designs on a pubic forum? Because I don't think there are any companies left in this industry with the ability to conceive, design and then finance a truly revolutionary product at this time. There are some guys with the ability (Chris Goddard and Simon come to mind) but there are no companies that I would have confidence in that could do it.

Just thinking out loud.....

AGD

Honestly, Tom...why did you mention this stuff here? Why don't you just do it (we all know that you are the man to pull this off), patent the technology/designs, and let every other marker company use it without paying royalties...EXCEPT for SP...they would have to pay out the booty in royalties.

Seriously, Tom...when are you going to do it? Or...have you already done it... :ninja:

BTW...I'll take SN0003, in Tequila Fade...

[Chronobreak]

nero, see i TOLD you to visit the forums more often :p

AGD, Dont give up....we can almost see the light at the end of the tunnel

Glad to hear ideas flowing

[snoopay700]

thats how some people claimed backspin bolts work, push the ball up against the top of barrel to get them to spin. :p

just giving you a hard time tom, im very pleased to see you mulling these ideas around. i would love to dream that something was in the works ...
Well he was talking about a 3rd port in the breech to get this started i think, which could possibly work but it would only cause intense friction for the time that the port is pushing that against the side of the barrel and it would quickly diminish as the ball continued down the barrel. You could probably get some spin this way but i doubt it would be comparable to the apex.

Sorry for not reading the rest of this thread, i have diff. eq. homework i should be doing, but Tom i think i need to send you another email regarding my design, it has drastically changed since the last time i showed you. I definitely have some questions, so if you wouldn't mind if i email you to take a look at it let me know.

[Fred]

I think it's a pretty rad idea... I've done a bit of reading on the injectors my VW is running (direct injection piezo-electric doohickeys) and its a pretty amazing technology.... and I know they're running REALLY high pressure.

Cleaning up a marker by running just high pressure would be nice just by itself... reduce the number of moving parts, and potential leaks would be awesome too.

WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR TOM!?!

[temps]

I'm just thinking..
What affects the fps of a paintball? Air Pressure and Volume..
How do we control these variables? Regulators and Dwell..

I've always thought that inconstancy of a paintball gun was caused by two main issues, paint and the regulator supplying the dump chamber with either less or more pressure for each shot. Am I correct on this?

So if we put an electrical sensor in the dump chamber to measure the pressure right before a shot (and therefore calculate an estimated fps based on that pressure and volume).. couldn't we then automatically adjust the dwell to compensate for higher and lower pressures?

In the case of a matrix/intimidator where the lpr pressure also affects the fps that would be a good spot for a sensor also... In the case of the intimidator we have gauges to tell us what the lpr and hpr is set at.. so how hard would it be to replace those with electronic sensors??? after that its just a matter of coding... might be the easiest way to get a proof of concept..

[SN toter]

WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR TOM!?!

^^^What he said!

[Dend78]

hmm how did i miss this one :confused: i see one issue with this spin/chrony idea, wouldnt the friction and the fact that no paintabll is exactly the same cause some major issues? since the sensor would be trying to take into count the ball from the previous shot it would adjust to try to either compensate for that shot which would be different from the last shot causing inconsistency every shot. one would almost have to make a self sizing barrel :eek: or better yet more consistent paint :rolleyes:

other than that lil bit i catch there everything else seems like a great idea

[Schmitti]

Dend... depends who you ask.. some people say there is no friction relationship between the ball and barrel :rolleyes:

I'm digging the groove idea... even if it was a short section of straight rifling (your control bore) that allowed the air to be directed along the groove... with a rotating bolt (sorry I'm trying to concentrate on too many things.. with out enough sleep...zzz) that can direct that flow. If you slotted the bolt radially and the air came out of the slot from center to barrel id that would possibly help.

I need to sit and draw this out. An engineers nightmare is to start thinking it through with out pen and paper.. I always forget some factor or really important bit.

E

[Lohman446]

Tom, when you, Glenn Palmer, and various others revolutionized the industry you did not do so by depending on the big companies. You did so through your own brilliance, hard work, and perseverence. You risked your own money to do so, and considering the business you and others built it was not that much money. It was intelligence, hard work, and desire that drove you.

The next big thing like what you describe will not come from some 9-5 engineer at a company, but from someone who spends countless hours of there own blood, sweat, and tears likely in their own garage or moonlighting it as a secondary project (ala AKA) in an established busines that has nothing to do with paintball.

[vf-xx]

The next big thing like what you describe will not come from some 9-5 engineer at a company, but from someone who spends countless hours of there own blood, sweat, and tears likely in their own garage or moonlighting it as a secondary project (ala AKA) in an established busines that has nothing to do with paintball.

Which is why he released the idea here. So that someone who has the time and the drive will get started on it ;)

IIRC, Tom's big on progressing the industry / sport / whatever else you call it. I think it's more important that the idea is explored and possibly produced than a matter of who does it.

[snoopay700]

Haven't we gone over this idea before in some bits?

We're talking about integrating a chrony into the gun again, which I think is a good thing, But that does give some technical issues.

Is there any way to do that and not have it integrated into the barrel?

Would you even still need a bolt, or would you go to a feedgate like an epic?
For it to be reliable you would need 2 eyes at the end of the barrel, with a larger id than the normal barrel so it is not still being accelerated at that point.

[Dend78]

Dend... depends who you ask.. some people say there is no friction relationship between the ball and barrel :rolleyes:

I'm digging the groove idea... even if it was a short section of straight rifling (your control bore) that allowed the air to be directed along the groove... with a rotating bolt (sorry I'm trying to concentrate on too many things.. with out enough sleep...zzz) that can direct that flow. If you slotted the bolt radially and the air came out of the slot from center to barrel id that would possibly help.

I need to sit and draw this out. An engineers nightmare is to start thinking it through with out pen and paper.. I always forget some factor or really important bit.

E


very true but here is what im pointing to bore size = .689 (a good normal size) ball 1) .686 ball 2) .690 ball 3) .689 ball 4) oblong .680 ball 5) .693 ball 6) .690

each ball will have a different flight path and speed due to size in ball compared to size in bore obviously there is going to be considerable drag on the ball 5 and who knows what ball 4 is gonna do.

then with that same lil idea there that ball 4 is gonna do weird things with the slots, thats what im seeing as an issue. i do agree that a ball can run down a super smooth barrel of the right size with very little friction loss but when you are looking at spinning and such and even trying to get a sensor to adjust chamber dump each shot it only has the ability to use if last shot = (x) fps dump into chamber = (y) on shot 2 just like a computer on a car less air being sensed on last check = less fuel . pretty much what im getting at with that a person would have to have a perfect paintball to get the type of action im thinking Tom is talking about.

here is what im thinking since im already babbeling :rolleyes: a circular circuit board with several break beam eyes on it to sense size of the ball, then overall weight will have some issue but basically it could do the math to determine (x) size = approx weight (y) it will vary some but not nearly as much as trying to let just the bore and a set velocity try to adjust for it.

then it could be set like boards of today with different modes based on rules depending on whos still around but like PSP rules it would cap rate of fire and an standard FPS value say of 270. then it would just have to do some math size (x) = weight of (y) = this much air required to attain 270FPS

ok my brain is going into overload mode right now ill stop there :tard:

[Lohman446]

very true but here is what im pointing to bore size = .689 (a good normal size) ball 1) .686 ball 2) .690 ball 3) .689 ball 4) oblong .680 ball 5) .693 ball 6) .690

each ball will have a different flight path and speed due to size in ball compared to size in bore obviously there is going to be considerable drag on the ball 5 and who knows what ball 4 is gonna do.

then with that same lil idea there that ball 4 is gonna do weird things with the slots, thats what im seeing as an issue. i do agree that a ball can run down a super smooth barrel of the right size with very little friction loss but when you are looking at spinning and such and even trying to get a sensor to adjust chamber dump each shot it only has the ability to use if last shot = (x) fps dump into chamber = (y) on shot 2 just like a computer on a car less air being sensed on last check = less fuel . pretty much what im getting at with that a person would have to have a perfect paintball to get the type of action im thinking Tom is talking about.

here is what im thinking since im already babbeling :rolleyes: a circular circuit board with several break beam eyes on it to sense size of the ball, then overall weight will have some issue but basically it could do the math to determine (x) size = approx weight (y) it will vary some but not nearly as much as trying to let just the bore and a set velocity try to adjust for it.

then it could be set like boards of today with different modes based on rules depending on whos still around but like PSP rules it would cap rate of fire and an standard FPS value say of 270. then it would just have to do some math size (x) = weight of (y) = this much air required to attain 270FPS

ok my brain is going into overload mode right now ill stop there :tard:

Remember though - if the need for Perfect Circle paintballs exist TK has a great source. :D If consistancy from ball to ball mattered to make it work it could be done. We have dealt with imperfect manufacture because the company capable of making them better has been honest in telling us it would make no difference.

[koleah]

I'd like to help with the testing :rolleyes:

[drg]

Active velocity control would be a huge ethical and safety concern. That's a Pandora's box best left unopened.

[Sumthinwicked]

i just wanna seee another agd marker booyea

[Beemer]

Active velocity control would be a huge ethical and safety concern. That's a Pandora's box best left unopened.

You kid me right? That box was opened LOOOOOOOONG ago on all concerns. Nobody CARED. Controll set with a limit would be a good thing. :clap:

[nerobro]

Active velocity control would be a huge ethical and safety concern. That's a Pandora's box best left unopened.
Well, that's not entirely true. It's already open. With any fast cycling dump chamber gun, varying dwell varies velocity. As does altering the timing on a cocker. And on a linked hammer gun, dwell has a strong effect on velocity too.

It's a box that's been opened, but largely ignored. There was a flash in the pan when people discovered that the clearing button on Matrices would give a single hot shot.

Moving on to the subject of velocity compensation, I don't think that's a viable option. There was mention of a circuit board to try to determine the shape of a paintball and then guess the weight. The concept is good, but the suggested implementation is pretty poor. A few LED's wouldn't come anywhere near an effective resolution for a situation like this.

Effective would need two, or three laser rangefinders, or other 3 scanning device. Even then, you'd only get "relative" changes. That information might be nice, but in the end you'd only be throwing more variables into the equation.

You'd then need to guess at how that ball was going to land in the breach. And or hope that the ball would settle out in your favor, after determining the long axis, and calculating which diameter the ball will settle on in the barrel.

The computing power for that isnt' something you could easily package on a paintball gun. I'd be surprised if a desktop computer could handle that at 10 balls a second, much less 20, and by a micro-controller. It's not crazy, just not something that's even vaguely necessary on a paintball gun. ..... I'd like to see it done though. :-)

With good paint, and a consistent gun. (not one that tries to compensate) +-1 fps is achievable with careful setup. (good barrel choice, ballancing the valve on blowbacks, keeping consistant lube on ram driven guns, a good reg and consistant lube on dump chamber guns...) +-5 is "normal" on a cheap gun. I don't see where there's a hug amount of improvement to be made there. Even with +-5, fps you're only talking a 4% change in ball velocity from peak to valley. I'd be willing to bet (though this would need testing) that the accuracy improvement that comes with ROF would compensate for a 2% velocity change either way. And that's just talking cheap guns. Those numbers get cut by 80% with a good gun, and paint match.

I don't think rotating the bolt would be a good method for distributing air to the sides of the barrel. The timing would be wrong. Unless.... we used a buffer chamber to delay the impulse of air. but that would still be unpredictable. I think a second air valve would be the proper way to take care of that. Air is springy, and we'd end up having to make different size chambers for different velocity ranges, and even different paint fits. :-/ It would a similar relationship to the RT effect on the mags. Hmm...

I like this.. it's been to long since I considered crazy paintball technology.

[minimag03]

Would it not be very very easy you ramp up velocity with a setup like this?

[cockerpunk]

error point detection is gonna be your biggest problem with active velocity control. esp with such a large standard deviation in your shot FPS. +/- 5 FPS is total :cuss: over any length or percentage of shots. even high end guns with a Confidence interval of 90 percent are gonna only be consistent within +/- 10 or 13 fps.

[snoopay700]

Would it not be very very easy you ramp up velocity with a setup like this?
Not if the board was programmed to turn down the velocity if it got above 300 fps. But like cockerpunk said there would be other issues with active velocity control. The program would essentially have to change the dwell when the velocity got a good amount lower than the standard deviation. I have never had a low end gun that fired +/- 5, even my mag is lucky to get that over more than a few shots, i have had instances where i have gotten a few right on in a row, and i've had times where it differs more than 5 fps. Cockerpunk is right on that point.

[GoatBoy]

Something funny which I read from a Montneel website due to some discussions elsewhere:


Unfortunetly, these prototypes had a serious problem: Every shot fired curved to the right! The source of the problem was discovered to be the side-mounted FPS adjuster. Somehow it was adding a lateral spin that produced the curve.

That would be an interesting thing to check into.

I also wanted to nitpick... hooking left or right might make the paint more precise, but not more accurate. The operator now has two curves to calculate against an estimated distance instead of just one.

And of course, the whole point about the gun not always being tilted the same way. But hey, since everything is pie in the sky, I guess the relevant parts of the gun could be gyro stabilized to always orient itself correctly.



The on-field repercussions of a digitally controlled hook are actually interesting. I always tell the newbies "it doesn't matter how fast the guy is shooting because he can only shoot in one direction at one time." Basically, if they're shooting at someone else, they're not shooting at you, so you should advance on them. Because at the very least, it will take them time to reset and point at you.

However, if you were to set the gun in a mode that alternated left hook and right hook, you could actually hold down two (or more!) bunkers simultaneously without moving. Actually a back/top spin would also help compensate if the two bunkers were at different distances from you. Say you could sit at God and hold down left snake and back right simultaneously.

Of course, then you're screwed if someone decides to run up the middle in between the left/right streams. Unless you configure every third ball to have no hook.

By this point, you'd better be rocking the Pinokio hopper though.

[nerobro]

Cockerpunki:
First, i'm not a statistician. I know enough to get by, and I can understand datasets.

Just so our terms are right here. when I say +-5fps, I'm talking a 10fps range. +-2.5fps, would be a 5fps range. I've seen guns that shot within the same three digits for appreciably long strings. I figure it's not "luck" anymore when you're on shot 10 or 12. I have seen guns that shot the same fps 3 times in a row.

I'm also not about to say these are typical results. I've had experiences where the paint looked more like dice than balls, and to get down to a 20fps was hard, and you'd still have some fun outliers. (like a sub 250fps ball and a 310 ball)

Goatboy:
You could essentially have spread shot from contra or something :-) but with predictable results instead of the cone of paint that's typical of shooting knuckeballs. now... the question is, will the drafting effects be enough to overcome the spin? It would take testing to find out.

[cockerpunk]

Cockerpunki:
First, i'm not a statistician. I know enough to get by, and I can understand datasets.

Just so our terms are right here. when I say +-5fps, I'm talking a 10fps range. +-2.5fps, would be a 5fps range. I've seen guns that shot within the same three digits for appreciably long strings. I figure it's not "luck" anymore when you're on shot 10 or 12. I have seen guns that shot the same fps 3 times in a row.

I'm also not about to say these are typical results. I've had experiences where the paint looked more like dice than balls, and to get down to a 20fps was hard, and you'd still have some fun outliers. (like a sub 250fps ball and a 310 ball)


i know what you mean when you give out intervals.

over a string of 20 shots, the most consistent i have ever seen a gun shoot is a Standard Divation of 1.75 FPS.

that gives you a confidence interval at 90% (means 90% of all shots fired are within that range) - of about +/- 6 FPS. the only way we could get that was with a serious underbore of at least .004 and shooting at a near perfect interval.

otherwise, i have shot it all, driods, mags, AKAs, angels, what have you, but getting +/- 5 fps out of a gun is damn amazing. most guns (yes even the high ends) are in the +/- 10 or more FPS range under operational conditions.




if you think otherwise, just try it, you will be shocked. just shoot a 20 shot string and record each FPS reading. its really quite astounding. its really quite an eye opener.

[Beemer]

error point detection is gonna be your biggest problem with active velocity control. esp with such a large standard deviation in your shot FPS. +/- 5 FPS is total :cuss: over any length or percentage of shots. even high end guns with a Confidence interval of 90 percent are gonna only be consistent within +/- 10 or 13 fps.

I fixed it, please dont SWEAR ******, thankyou.

Plus, minus ten to thirteen you sure. For a HIGH END.

What if you fix the variables. Size and weight of ball and bore of barrel. Still got some First Strike rounds? Did you do a weigh out on all you had?? Can you say perfect circle, as has been mentioned? What is the most consistant gun out there now and at what ROF?

So you have the gun but I have to use YOUR BALLS. AS long as EVERY shot IS Three Hundred feet Per second, sign me up.

[Gunga]

Might as well design it to use the uh...'civilian' FN303 round. I forget the name right now.

Have the bolt push up against the outer 'ring' on the back end of the round and the air blast into the little hollow where the payload was on the FN rounds. Figure you'd get some sort of efficiency boost there as the air would be somewhat contained within the hollow rather than flowing over and around a standard paintball.

Could use a radial magazine like the FN303 or a stick magazine ala the SMG-60/68. Or a spring magazine as in pistols and rifles.

[drg]

Well, that's not entirely true. It's already open. With any fast cycling dump chamber gun, varying dwell varies velocity. As does altering the timing on a cocker. And on a linked hammer gun, dwell has a strong effect on velocity too.

It's a box that's been opened, but largely ignored. There was a flash in the pan when people discovered that the clearing button on Matrices would give a single hot shot.

It was cracked open in the context of true cheater boards, but active dwell modification -- changing the dwell during the normal operation of the paingun, PARTICULARLY in a user-selectable manner -- is not an open box currently and we would do better to keep that box closed. Sorry, but this is just a bad idea. This is essentially dwell ramping which is a HUGE no-no in paintgun electronics.

Now FSDO compensation is a form of active dwell modification, but it is not user-selectable on the fly and is a relatively small concern compared to a system that modifies dwell as part of the routine firing of the marker and not as compensation for a quirk of marker operation. All of the above also applies for active pressure modification.

Paintguns are set up for steady-state firing, which is also the reason why active control via telemetric feedback loops are not useful in the context of paintball guns. By and large inconsistency in paintgun shot to shot performance is caused by random variances, which cannot be compensated for proactively.


Would it not be very very easy you ramp up velocity with a setup like this?

In not so many words, this is exactly what I meant.

[Newt]

Tom, the things that design would do is more than a guy could want from a marker. Watching you think is amazing. It makes me laugh like a child.

The only thing I can contribute to the thinking is: drop the velocity adjustment as linked to distance sensor. Yes, it would be an ideal to have every paintball impact the target at 280 fps regardless of distance, but I wouldn't want to be the guy who sticks his head in the way after a paintball is fired when the marker thought it would be a longball. I've been marked out that way.

Other than that, I love the simplicity of design. Particularly the idea of dynamically switching from HP to LP. That's a true killer. :clap:

As far as the dynamic dwell adjustment goes: Didn't AGD already wade it's way through the same genre of muck with the tourney world not accepting the RT at first? When you have a trusted manufacturer producing a marker of a known design with the intent of making the sport better (not breaking people's goggles), it will be accepted, and for good reason.

If this turns into an open source marker or somebody with connections makes it or whatever, this will be a requirement for the design to leave the hanger without exploding.

[mostpeople]

Anyone see the new smart parts patent?

[Newt]

No. Perhaps it could be showcased in it's own topic (assuming that's not covered in the patent)?

[Ratt]

very true but here is what im pointing to bore size = .689 (a good normal size) ball 1) .686 ball 2) .690 ball 3) .689 ball 4) oblong .680 ball 5) .693 ball 6) .690

each ball will have a different flight path and speed due to size in ball compared to size in bore obviously there is going to be considerable drag on the ball 5 and who knows what ball 4 is gonna do.

then with that same lil idea there that ball 4 is gonna do weird things with the slots, thats what im seeing as an issue. i do agree that a ball can run down a super smooth barrel of the right size with very little friction loss but when you are looking at spinning and such and even trying to get a sensor to adjust chamber dump each shot it only has the ability to use if last shot = (x) fps dump into chamber = (y) on shot 2 just like a computer on a car less air being sensed on last check = less fuel . pretty much what im getting at with that a person would have to have a perfect paintball to get the type of action im thinking Tom is talking about.

So...let's make the perfect paintball. Hear me out on this one: The problem with paintballs is that there is not in existence a process that can make a perfectly round paintball each and every time. So, say you take that imperfectly round paintball, and place it inside a sabot. The sabot could be made out of some thin, yet strong material. It would be made at what ever circumference you want (.689, etc.). Depending on the thickness of the material of the sabot, the paintball itself would have to be made smaller. Something tells me that with the right processes, the right tools, and the right material, a perfectly round sabot can be rapidly massed-produced. And since it is perfectly round, and at the correct bore, there would not be any need for a special loading system. You pour them into your hopper and fire away...just like a normal paintball.
Once you have that perfectly rounded paintball, you can make adjustments to you marker or your barrel which would allow you to get a near-perfect consistancy.
I just came up with this idea, so I haven't had time to fully think it through. That being said, I am sure there may be some flaw(s) that I didn't think of. Feel free to point them out.

[om3n]

So...let's make the perfect paintball. Hear me out on this one: The problem with paintballs is that there is not in existence a process that can make a perfectly round paintball each and every time. So, say you take that imperfectly round paintball, and place it inside a sabot. The sabot could be made out of some thin, yet strong material. It would be made at what ever circumference you want (.689, etc.). Depending on the thickness of the material of the sabot, the paintball itself would have to be made smaller. Something tells me that with the right processes, the right tools, and the right material, a perfectly round sabot can be rapidly massed-produced. And since it is perfectly round, and at the correct bore, there would not be any need for a special loading system. You pour them into your hopper and fire away...just like a normal paintball.
Once you have that perfectly rounded paintball, you can make adjustments to you marker or your barrel which would allow you to get a near-perfect consistancy.
I just came up with this idea, so I haven't had time to fully think it through. That being said, I am sure there may be some flaw(s) that I didn't think of. Feel free to point them out.


Well how could you design a sabot that could withstand being dumped into a loader, being knocked by a bolt, being accelerated extremely rapidly with the seams at any odd angle down a barrel, and then survive being intact through all this to be separated in mid flight by the force of the wind?

I like the idea of a sabot (not that I have any authority in this area) but I just don't think it would be possible with a modern loader. It would have to be clip style I think... that way you could control how the sabot loads into the gun, so that the seams line up in such a way so that they won't be separated by the force of the bolt, or by being dropped into a loader, etc.

[drg]

Is it even still "accepted" (if it ever was) that "HP" is more efficient than "LP"?
When I think of the most efficient markers, not a single one is "HP."

[nerobro]

i know what you mean when you give out intervals.
*standards of velocity consistancy*
if you think otherwise, just try it, you will be shocked. just shoot a 20 shot string and record each FPS reading. its really quite astounding. its really quite an eye opener.
Perhaps our standards of high end is different. :-) Up to about 2004? I had shot everything on the market. But that doesn't mean anything.

This is about to turn into a contest of egos. No need for that. I knew my equipment well, I knew where I could set it and be confident that if chronoed the gun would not shoot hot.

I've also sat down with peoples guns and tried to figure out how the heck they play with the equipment they do.... I don't consider a 12fps range good.

When I started caring about velocity trends on guns, I did write them down, and average them. extended numbers of shots even. I was obsessed... absolutely obsessed with being able to turn my gun up to the highest velocity and not break the field limit.

I do not believe ram driven guns are better velocity wise than springs, and sears are. Dump chamber guns are dependent BOTH on a good regulator and a good way of actuating the bolt. That can throw ram consistency on top of regulator consistency. Going with the technology we have, has reduced the velocity consistency of todays guns.

A electronically controlled valve, such as we have been discussing in this thread would bring back that consistency. We might see +-3fps be a sanely achievable number again. Provided the yahoos don't run .710 barrels and dice shaped paint *grins*


Paintguns are set up for steady-state firing, which is also the reason why active control via telemetric feedback loops are not useful in the context of paintball guns. By and large inconsistency in paintgun shot to shot performance is caused by random variances, which cannot be compensated for proactively. This is the responsibility of the people making the gun, and programming the boards. (note, AGD did not support the aftermarket e-mag software...) And definitely not within the scope of this discussion. :-) That said, when you start introducing other gas inputs there may need to be compensation done at the valve level. The bleed slots to give the ball spin would likely change signifigantly the velocity of the ball. I don't know which way it would go though. That sort of thing would need to be hard coded, and conservatively so.

[cockerpunk]

Perhaps our standards of high end is different. :-) Up to about 2004? I had shot everything on the market. But that doesn't mean anything.

This is about to turn into a contest of egos. No need for that.
.

its not a contest of egos, its just a matter of the interwebs vs reality. its pretty easy to claim on the web that your gun gets +/- 1 all day long ... but it doesn't. it doesn't even come close. to make that a legitimate claim you'd need to shoot probably 18 out of 20 shots at identical velocity, and those two would have to be within 1 of that average. not to mention you need something other then a red box chrono, they are plus or minus 3 percent.

again, if you want to claim otherwise, make a video. i have never seen it, and i have been playing for 9 years now.

protip - best way to increase consistency - smaller barrel ;)

[nerobro]

its not a contest of egos, its just a matter of the interwebs vs reality. its pretty easy to claim on the web that your gun gets +/- 1 all day long ... but it doesn't. it doesn't even come close. to make that a legitimate claim you'd need to shoot probably 18 out of 20 shots at identical velocity, and those two would have to be within 1 of that average. not to mention you need something other then a red box chrono, they are plus or minus 3 percent.

again, if you want to claim otherwise, make a video. i have never seen it, and i have been playing for 9 years now.

protip - best way to increase consistency - smaller barrel ;)Yup, it is pretty easy to claim guns are X Y and Z. I've gone through the rigamarole of "show me, show me, show me" here before. The whole fastest cycling gun thing took a lot of time and effort.

I've never claimed that I have a gun that shots +-1. Just +-2.5 :-) And that's now a long "had" ago. (around 1996...) I'm not very comfortable shooting a gun that's not consistently in a +-5fps range. I have stacks of barrels laying around, and good air systems to ensure that. Just to blow your mind, that gun that got +-2.5fps, also got 1300+ shots per 20oz.

You haven't been around long enough to know I'm not some kind of internet blowhard. ;-) I'm ok with that. But if you're interested, check some of my post history, and my reg date.

Are you saying red radarchonys chrono's are +-3% shot to shot? or day to day? or unit to unit? If they're 3% shot to shot, that in itself would build in a 9fps variance at 300fps. Day to day, over the life of a battery, changes in temperature... I could believe that.

Back on topic
TDI injectors are $645 a set. Eeep.

Who's got other ideas? Who's got a common rail diesel that's blown up? Or will we have to build our own injector to do this? ...... I wonder if the injector from like a MS3/MS6 would do.


* Applications: Passenger cars, light-duty commercial vehicles

* Power output: 30 kW/cylinder

* No. of cylinders: 3...8

* Control: Electronic, electrical, solenoid valve, or piezo actors

* Injection pressure: 1350 bar (1st gen.), 1600 bar (2nd gen.), 1800 bar (3rd generation with piezo injectors)

* Injected fuel quantity: up to 90 mm3 per stroke

http://rb-kwin.bosch.com/us/en/powerconsumptionemissions/dieselsysteme/dieselsystem/passenger-car/technology/injection_systems/commonrailsystem/crs_pkw_types.html
Per stroke, lets say that's limited to 4000rpm to be safe. That gives us a flow rate of 90mm3 * 4000... or 360cc/min of liquid at 1800bar.

I wonder what the volume of liquid co2 is to propel a paintball. say.. a 12gm lasts 20 shots. So that's 0.6g of co2 per shot...

from air liquide : * Liquid density (at -20 °C (or -4 °F) and 19.7 bar) : 1032 kg/m3.

So, 1032 kg per cubic meter. Or, 1.032g per cc.

So for each shot, we'd need 0.6192 cc's of co2. Looks like that car injector is overkill for our application. But if we stuck with co2 pressures, we'd be flowing what, 1/4 the fluid because we'd be at half the pressure? I don't remember what the pressure to flow relationship is, and I don't have my books handy.

Even with that assumption, that puts us in good shape to be able to fire a paintball using a diesel peizo injector.

[gunangel]

that's pretty funny, i compare cars and paintball markers all the time.
spyders are civics, e-frames are turbochargers, solenoids and electronics are superchargers, angels are lambos, egos are ferraris, mags are old school muscle cars


onto topic

for the spin couldn't you just make a barrel with a groove cut along the side with the spin material (most likely rubber or polyurethane) inserted in and use a twistlock type barrel to control the the locking points? i know I have a barrel that has one main grove with 3 lock points on it so i can go from right to center to left feed with a quick twist. that would make the barrel maybe a smidge thicker than a normal barrel but would allow spin and the ability to control which direction

and for the chrono barrel idea, which i've given much thought (most likely two or more break beam eyes spaced an exact distance apart that could be used to extrapolate within a reasonable degree the suspected velocity based on acceleration), if the marker used an electronic solenoid you would have electronically controlled dwell which could easily control the velocity to a given degree, granted the parameters would have to be fairly loose, say a 10 fps interval, and one wrong shot (a partial roll out, a small round, some other miscelaneous problem) would shift the dwell which could offset a the rest of the shots. granted some good parameters like an absolute cap on the dwell and the ability to adjust dwells in smaller increments than ms would probably help.

the injector idea sounds very interesting, but i wonder how the ball would sit in the chamber, would the injector move forward to seal the ball in the chamber? would it be an open chamber? would there be a hollow bolt that would move forward to seal the chamber?


some issues i've run into while thinking of the chrono barrel. so we all know a ball leaves the barrel with a given velocity, say 280 fps, but does how it gets there affect the acceleration in the barrel? like if the low long pulse vs a short powerful burst was used would different programming have to be used to calculate the acceleration inside the barrel? or is it possible to calculate the distance where the ball has finished accelerating and take measurements beyond that point to get an accurate reading? i've always wondered if how the ball accelerated played a role, for example does the flight path change if the ball finishes accelerating before it leaves the barrel or at the tip?

well forgive my ramblings, this thread has brought out the curious cat in me. i'm very interested in what will come of this :D

[druid]

All,

So I was sitting around the other day watching Top Gear and thinking how advanced the latest sports cars were. I think to myself, "they are advancing just like paintball guns" and then I had to stop a minute.... I was wrong. If a paintball gun was transformed into a sports car, you would have an electronic sensor on the gas pedal that opened the carberator, THAT'S ALL!!

That got me thinking about what it would take to make a marker as advanced as today's Ferrari's. First of all, to get advanced control, you need to know what the car or the marker is doing. For the marker this means it knows what the velocity is for every single shot. Once it knows the velocity, then you need a way to control the velocity on every shot regardless of other factors like tank pressure etc. Just like fuel injection, this would require direct injection of the gas into the bolt chamber behind the ball. You could then dynamically adjust the timing so no matter what the tank pressure was, you would get the same velocity out. No regulators in the gun, at all. Just the tank feeding high pressure into the computerized injection system and your good to go.

So that was a cool idea, and it got me thinking further. If you could control the gas injection directly into the chamber, you can control the profile of the power pulse to the ball. Longer-lower pressure or higher-shorter but for this you would need to control two injection ports. This would allow you to shoot really fragile paint and make the gun very quiet with a long pulse at the expense of efficiency. Conversely you could make it bark with stronger paint and get much better efficiency.

Then I thought about how you could combine those parameters to best suit your game. It suddenly made sense that if I had a marker that did that, I would program it to shoot the first couple shots very quietly but once I started jack hammering it would automatically go to the high efficiency mode. This would allow me to sneak in the first couple shots without alerting my opponent but still give me great efficiency!!

But that lead to more ideas..... If you can inject the air into the chamber, at a pre-determined time, you could do it WHEN THE BALL WAS ROLLING PAST THE PORT! If you did this, it would rub the ball against one side of the barrel and induce a spin. With three independently controlled ports, below and on each side, you could get the ball to float or hook left or right just with the press of a button! :)

This would be like stepping out from behind your bunker or tree about 10 feet to take the shot. I also will bet you that a ball spinning and hooking left or right will be more accurate (left and right but not up and down). This is because you are controlling where on the back of the ball the vortexes are being shed from. They are NOT random. Cockerpunk should test this.

So why would I mention really cool designs on a pubic forum? Because I don't think there are any companies left in this industry with the ability to conceive, design and then finance a truly revolutionary product at this time. There are some guys with the ability (Chris Goddard and Simon come to mind) but there are no companies that I would have confidence in that could do it.

Just thinking out loud.....

AGD

Tom...this is great thinking and all but I'd like you to ponder this thought for a minute...

After creating ^^ that marker...are people going to pay what it will end up costing?

Don't get me wrong, I love AGD stuff. Have a PrClassic but would LOVE an X-Mag. I'd SETTLE for an E-Mag.
You know why I don't have one?
1. Cost.
2. parts unavailability.

,,,and it's not like I can't afford things...I work for the County for over 12 years...

It's simply the thought that "knowing engineers and how they think" ....[you, example] tend to over-complicate things.

I've defended AGD on other forums, using "perfection has a cost" and that's worked only so far...but really, when you stop to think about it....how well has AGD managed over the years?
Started out as the cock-of-the-walk.
Then -
Slowed sales, Patent wars, boards/wiring setups that take insanely huge battery packs....something that now has to be custom made or ordered.......ultimately leading to the "Star" program being discontinued....

Kids don't want stainless steel. They want "light, fast, common upgrades" and the ability to anodize it to their liking.

You really want to go through all that again?

Some advice? It's no disrespect to you man, but K.I.S.S. is the approach here.

Recreate the E-Mag or X-Mag but with better battery and board programming....smaller and more common batteries, dude. Scenario Dreams has their UTB. Work out a deal with them to provide/produce those boards for you.

The Mag itself is as close to 'perfection' in the realm of valve performance...but this new generation of paintballer isn't going to accept something they don't like. The painful truth is, they don't like the old Mag set up. WE do....but they don't.

But you are an engineer...the K.I.S.S. method isn't usually well liked...lol.

Now if you want to "quiet" the marker...the ATF has changed its ruling on paintball silencers BUT IT HAS TO BE A PERMANENT FIXTURE TO THE BARREL and permanently affixed to the marker.

Make a marker that incorporates that silencer, that opens [somehow] like an Angel, so we can slide bore inserts into the breech pf a .691/.693 bored barrel of 10", 12" and 14" offerings.

Redesign the frame and electronics to accept one (or two...say via 12V mod) 9.6V NiMh batteries with on-board recharging plug (like a Spyder or a cell phone).

Make it ALL out of aluminum.

Normal detents...like on the ULE.

But the thing is...doing all this isn't going to end up at a reasonable cost to the consumer....the "end-all" of what makes a business. You have to make it affordable or it won't sell.

[Dend78]

So...let's make the perfect paintball. Hear me out on this one: The problem with paintballs is that there is not in existence a process that can make a perfectly round paintball each and every time. So, say you take that imperfectly round paintball, and place it inside a sabot. The sabot could be made out of some thin, yet strong material. It would be made at what ever circumference you want (.689, etc.). Depending on the thickness of the material of the sabot, the paintball itself would have to be made smaller. Something tells me that with the right processes, the right tools, and the right material, a perfectly round sabot can be rapidly massed-produced. And since it is perfectly round, and at the correct bore, there would not be any need for a special loading system. You pour them into your hopper and fire away...just like a normal paintball.
Once you have that perfectly rounded paintball, you can make adjustments to you marker or your barrel which would allow you to get a near-perfect consistancy.
I just came up with this idea, so I haven't had time to fully think it through. That being said, I am sure there may be some flaw(s) that I didn't think of. Feel free to point them out.


great idea but as om3n pointed out you gotta load those suckers correctly each shot or your up the creek, so you would have to go to something mag fed, which the way paintball seems to be heading thats not a bad thing. if that were the case i would say oblong the balls make them more like a round nose bullet rather than a ball but then you are still dealing with a liquid filled oval in a sabot. then again once you start making these rounds your adding in an extra step or 12 to making a paintball which goes back to the time is money thing, and where i see it if i wanna spend 4 dollars a round and have a great time ill get a 50 bmg and shoot stuff a mile away :D

also a problem with doing it this way it will kill the ablity to throw out some hook shots you can only shoot straight sabots and backspin dont go together well :tard:

[nerobro]

to go regless, like was proposed earlier, we'd need a pressure transducer that's cheap, and accurate enough to mount ongun. Think of the weight savings if you can ditch the whole regulator assembly?

You'd still need a LPR and a ram to actuate the bolt. I don't see that as a huge issue . The bolt could be a very, very small thing. I already have a layout in mind... and I think that using modern casting techniques this could be a very, very cheap gun to mfg. (provided the only special feature we're looking at is the use of an injector instead of regulators and metering devices)

And I think I may have figured out a way around needing a LPR and second solinoid...

[vf-xx]

You'd still need a LPR and a ram to actuate the bolt. I don't see that as a huge issue . The bolt could be a very, very small thing. I already have a layout in mind... and I think that using modern casting techniques this could be a very, very cheap gun to mfg. (provided the only special feature we're looking at is the use of an injector instead of regulators and metering devices)

And I think I may have figured out a way around needing a LPR and second solinoid...

Why would you need a ram to actuate the bolt? Why not just go blow forward like the Mag?

[tasker89]

Is it even still "accepted" (if it ever was) that "HP" is more efficient than "LP"? When I think of the most efficient markers, not a single one is "HP." Reply With Quote

Once "LP" became canon I don't think anyone even tried to go the other direction. Perhaps Tom would like to weigh in on this?

[Lohman446]

To the "it can't be done because we don't have this" such as consistant paintballs (though it has been pointed out we do have them).

Remember the Automag came out and was embraced before we had a good power source for it.

[nerobro]

To the "it can't be done because we don't have this" such as consistant paintballs (though it has been pointed out we do have them).

Remember the Automag came out and was embraced before we had a good power source for it.
I don't think anything here has been a "can't." There's been a couple "not a good plan" or "insanely hard to implement" ideas. Anything that's been insanely hard to implment is stuff that would make good study material anyway. Even if it's a poor idea to have ongun.

If I only had a lathe.....

[Chronobreak]

Tom,

I have thought about this for a bit now. Why do we need all these do dads? is it really going to make the game better? Is it going to mean a simple elegant design like the classic mag where it is idiot proof and there is nothing that needs to be adjusted or any unnecessary things that can go wrong? A gun that anyone can pick up and go shoot without having any prior knowledge of the inner workings, adjustments, settings and things that just seem to cause problems for so many users of current equipment. If it cant do all that i feel its not even worth discussing.

I got off the phone with an old friend of yours, you might know him, his name is Tim Schloss.
He recommends that you make a nice vertical feed, double triggered classic mag with a modern style at a price point that fits its quality and capabilities.

so Tom, lets get back to the basics and stop messing around. :D

[nerobro]

This touches on a big advantage of electronic guns. They don't need to be made anywhere near as accurately as mechanical guns. an Ion is more or less just a drilled tube with a barrel on the front.

With the mag you had several, stacked, critical tolerances. The valve body fit inside the body, the body fit to the rail. The on/off height within the body... and this was reflected in different length on/offs.

That's actually a "failure" of the e-mag. It was still dependant on all the tight tolerances of the mag. (also it's advantage, as it had a manual mode if the gun failed)

Say this design ends up blowforward, that means you have a tube, that you screw a barrel on the end of... and that's it. You hook up two wires to the back of the valve body and an air source and you're done.

The injector design could be DEAD cheap to make. Excepting the cost of hte injector itself, which I think runs ~100. In fact, this sort of design leads itself to being installed in all sorts of bodies. Anything from a pistol to a bullpup to a turret. :-)

Something tells me the injector design would be cheaper than making a mag.

[snoopay700]

that's pretty funny, i compare cars and paintball markers all the time.
spyders are civics, e-frames are turbochargers, solenoids and electronics are superchargers, angels are lambos, egos are ferraris, mags are old school muscle cars
Gah no, tippmanns maybe, but mags handle much better than muscle cars do. ;)

I think of them more like old Porches, or maybe Lotuses because it was a smaller company making a great product, although the whole crapload of engineering going into the gun goes along with Porsche.

As for the whole chrono barrel thing, i touched on that, it would have to be at the end of the barrel and the shroud it's in could not be the same size as the bore, it would have to be larger. The way a gun operates does not affect how it is accelerated. For a given barrel length, whether it be low pressure or high pressure, the ball should still be accelerated at the same rate since it's on a given distance. That is unless i'm thinking about it wrong, but i'm fairly certain that that is true.

[AGD]

For everyone that says "go back to basics and make it cheap" my response is that I don't do that. China, Tippmann and everyone else does that just fine. There is no possible way to make a marker in this country that is any where near good value for the money.

Carburetors are much simpler and cheaper than fuel injection, how did we ever get cars with computers? Perhaps the age of paintball innovation is over with, are we now in the twilight years?

AGD

[Ratt]

For everyone that says "go back to basics and make it cheap" my response is that I don't do that. China, Tippmann and everyone else does that just fine. There is no possible way to make a marker in this country that is any where near good value for the money.

Carburetors are much simpler and cheaper than fuel injection, how did we ever get cars with computers? Perhaps the age of paintball innovation is over with, are we now in the twilight years?

AGD

...I don't buy it.

[tasker89]

Perhaps the age of paintball innovation is over with, are we now in the twilight years?

One could argue that most of what is pitched by the industry as "innovative" and "ground breaking" is nothing more than refinement of established technology. It seems to me that the only remaining paradigm shifting opportunities rest in the projectile itself and feed mechanisms. The tech is already out there...but it hasn't been widely adopted.

At what point do the guns become a bit Rube Goldbergish to be slinging little malformed blobs of goop and gelatin?

[LK-13]

Tom, thanks for giving us some hope that something may one day jump to mind and may in fact lead to a build.

the only thing i have issue with is the blasted electronics needed for something like this.

"the more you over rout the plumbing the easier it is to stop up a drain..."
Montgomery Scot Chief Engineer USS Enterprise.

I refuse to accept that the limits of mechanical systems have been reached given the rules, guidelines and parameters of paintball.

easy to service/maintain/repair built for longevity and versatility.

and compatible with both co2 and hpa.

[druid]

For everyone that says "go back to basics and make it cheap" my response is that I don't do that.

China, Tippmann and everyone else does that just fine. There is no possible way to make a marker in this country that is any where near good value for the money.

Carburetors are much simpler and cheaper than fuel injection, how did we ever get cars with computers? Perhaps the age of paintball innovation is over with, are we now in the twilight years?

AGD

I'm not quite sure how to interpret that tone ::shrugs:: but it seems a bit snide for the fact you are asking for "our opinions" and this ^^ is the type of response we get [??]

That being said and with all due respect...

Then I hope your governmental contracts continue to fill your belly for you. This economy might be good for some but it's horrible for the rest of us and taking "the hard line" isn't going to sell many markers until it clears up [if it even does].

There's a big difference between "making it cheap" and "making it affordable." I don't believe I've seen anyone suggest outsourcing to China...although I might have missed that and I completely agree that you shouldn't do it. However there are alternatives to manufacturing processes and techniques that are just as good as another. Handgun manufacturers use Titanium wrapped around steel sleeves. I hardly call that "cheap manufacturing" and they aren't that dissimilar in cost to an all-steel firearm.

I don't think we are in the "twilight years" and there is ALWAYS room for improvement...but the idea is to make what the customer base wants...not necessarily what the designers want. What do the customers want Tom? I believe we've made that abundantly clear....

[snoopay700]

I'm not quite sure how to interpret that tone ::shrugs:: but it seems a bit snide for the fact you are asking for "our opinions" and this ^^ is the type of response we get [??]

That being said and with all due respect...

Then I hope your governmental contracts continue to fill your belly for you. This economy might be good for some but it's horrible for the rest of us and taking "the hard line" isn't going to sell many markers until it clears up [if it even does].

There's a big difference between "making it cheap" and "making it affordable." I don't believe I've seen anyone suggest outsourcing to China...although I might have missed that and I completely agree that you shouldn't do it. However there are alternatives to manufacturing processes and techniques that are just as good as another. Handgun manufacturers use Titanium wrapped around steel sleeves. I hardly call that "cheap manufacturing" and they aren't that dissimilar in cost to an all-steel firearm.

I don't think we are in the "twilight years" and there is ALWAYS room for improvement...but the idea is to make what the customer base wants...not necessarily what the designers want. What do the customers want Tom? I believe we've made that abundantly clear....
The problem is that Tom is much like other people who like designing things, especially now that he's not actively in the business and doesn't need to think about what the consumer wants.

He is thinking of a design he would want to use, something incredible, rather than something that will appeal to the masses. Tom looks at a problem and wants to fix it. I'm much the same way with the marker i'm designing, i'm designing it for me, and if i can sell it and people like it then all the better. I mainly just want a paintball gun i would want to use and has all of the features i want than make something that would sell easily.

[Newt]

Last I checked, national unemployment was almost 10%. Higher in some states. I know nobody wants to say the "D" word, but if you go back and look at the numbers from the late 1920's and early 30's, you might not be surprised a luxury sport like paintball is reverting back to pump.

Honestly, I'm very pessimistic about how soon the economic sunshine is going to peek over the horizon, but I am optimistic that the sport will make it through.

[Dend78]

you are correct Newt there are a lot of pumpers but there are also a lot of woodsballers. its cheaper and eaiser to go out and play in your buddies woods than it is to pay a field fee, paint fee, air and any other fee that the field has...im not slamming on the field owners cause hey you gotta make a buck or its not worth paying the insurance to keep it open.

i believe what Tom is saying with that comment is that rather than revert back to the basics and old technology why not bring something new. which i totally understand the old stuff works great and the new stuff works great but the new stuff this year looks alot like the new stuff from last year and the year before that and so on. it all has the same basic function only the programing on the boards changed but nothing truly innovative has really hit the table. take for instance the mag and the cocker when those hit the market you were shooting a mag or a cocker anything else was a toy pretty much....then out came an Angel and wow look what happened to the sport once electronics hit.

Tom is also correct in saying you cant make something worth the money here anymore, i mean look we are spending 200+ for body's for our mags thats just a body then you gotta get a rail which hey nice body better have a nice rail milled for that there is extra added cost. Basically if you want a cheap marker that can fling paint consistently go buy and ion, but if you want something that is built to last and its made here in America there is a price tag that comes with it.

What Tom is talking about here is a big step ahead of what we already have especially if it can be made to work as well as he said. will it shed new light on the sport who knows but it will truly be something new which we really haven't seen in this sport for a while.

[om3n]

For everyone that says "go back to basics and make it cheap" my response is that I don't do that.
AGD



?!
Why is Tom talking about this in terms of HIM making this gun??

Please mean what I think it means.... :D

[nerobro]

For everyone that says "go back to basics and make it cheap" my response is that I don't do that. China, Tippmann and everyone else does that just fine. There is no possible way to make a marker in this country that is any where near good value for the money. But a midrange, or high end gun? I'm not even entirely sure if that's possable. The financial realities of production are something you're a lot better at than I am.


Carburetors are much simpler and cheaper than fuel injection, how did we ever get cars with computers? Perhaps the age of paintball innovation is over with, are we now in the twilight years?
This is a sad state. :-/ Nearly everything went to two designs by the time I stopped really following paintball. Spool valves, and linked hammer guns.

I do think the electronic regulator concept can work. And it would be a uniquely AGD thing. I think it could be done at a competitive price. Though in this case, the hardware is the easy part, (I think... ) the software is going to be where all the magic happens. With a gun that more or less has it's operating method defined by software, a "lets get it to market" software could be released, and as new features came up, the gun could be brought up to the new standards either by flashing, or new chips.

getting technical again
Anyone know what sort of electrical requirements injectors have?

[cockerpunk]

no doubt the rise in electrical control systems in both cars and paintball guns can be paralleled. we used to live in a world where engineers knew there was a dynamic range of conditions and then made some assumptions and picked an average value that would work in the vast variety of systems. now we live in a world where you can stick a sensor on it, measure it, optimize it, then change it to get an ideal all the time (or damn close).

but i wonder why the closed loop systems that are so common in modern vehicles and other appliances (washing machines, blenders ... god you name it) have not taken off in paintball. my initial thoughts are that no one in the industry is any good at programing. it would be a pity if that were true. a closed loop system could be made idiot proof very easily. combining a few sets of sensors (eyes or pizeo-electrics) and a barrel tip chrono, you would never have to adjust your gun for any reason, the gun would be self-setting up. much like how car today optimize there timing and such for performance, or fuel economy.

idk what the next revolution in gun design will be. my thoughts are a gun and loader that are integrated to truly stop all possible barrel breaks, but we will see if that is the case. there are a few reasons why i think that, but i want to know what tom thinks. the industry is certainly positioned for the next breakthrough, nothing new or revolutionary has come out since the Mini, which wasn't that big of deal.

idk Tom, what do you think is the next revolution?

[nerobro]

*feedback systems*Sensors are expensive. And running blind works really well for applications like this. As much as cars have sensors out the wazoo, at full throttle, say.. half the sensors are ignored. Or the car runs off of a reading that was taken at startup, not something that's constantly updated.

An all singing all dancing gun was tried in the past. It didn't get far. For a lot of reasons... I don't think the market could support a gun like the cyber9000. Features that would allow for self velocity regulation would require ugly add ons, They also couldn't be trusted to work consistantly. A gun with a built in chrono, is a gun with just one more part to have fail. Guns need to be sexy to sell.

With an injector, and either a nice input tranducer (like the angel airs had..) or feeding it with a "decent" n2 system, we could precisely meter out air. Precisely enough that most of the velocity variation would come from things that we can't really control.

Because it's worth mentioning, current motorcycle EFI runs blind, or nearly so. That's not far from what we'd be doing.

I hate to say it, but I agree that the quality of programming in paintball guns usually leaves something to be desired. So does the engineering (or complete lack thereof...)

Still I think we're to the point where acutally "doing" something would be the next step. Either call up siemens or bosch, and see what they have to say about injectors, or go scrounge one and throw it on a barrel, see if we can get sufficent velocity.

[cockerpunk]

Sensors are expensive. And running blind works really well for applications like this. As much as cars have sensors out the wazoo, at full throttle, say.. half the sensors are ignored. Or the car runs off of a reading that was taken at startup, not something that's constantly updated.

An all singing all dancing gun was tried in the past. It didn't get far. For a lot of reasons... I don't think the market could support a gun like the cyber9000. Features that would allow for self velocity regulation would require ugly add ons, They also couldn't be trusted to work consistantly. A gun with a built in chrono, is a gun with just one more part to have fail. Guns need to be sexy to sell.

With an injector, and either a nice input tranducer (like the angel airs had..) or feeding it with a "decent" n2 system, we could precisely meter out air. Precisely enough that most of the velocity variation would come from things that we can't really control.

Because it's worth mentioning, current motorcycle EFI runs blind, or nearly so. That's not far from what we'd be doing.

I hate to say it, but I agree that the quality of programming in paintball guns usually leaves something to be desired. So does the engineering (or complete lack thereof...)

Still I think we're to the point where acutally "doing" something would be the next step. Either call up siemens or bosch, and see what they have to say about injectors, or go scrounge one and throw it on a barrel, see if we can get sufficent velocity.

sensors used to be expensive.

they are not anymore.

the accelerometer that makes the wii system (littereally without the wii wouldn't work) is less then a 2 dollar part. you can buy them on any electronics site for cheap cheap cheap. pizeo-electriccs are even cheaper, and eyes are also VERY cheap. if you didn't know, most encoders use break beam eyes like in out guns, and encoders are SUPER cheap. stepper motors on the output side are easy to get a hold of today too, up to relatively large torques even. we arn't talking about CnC hyper accurate sensors here.

that is a key reason why control systems have taken over our daily lives so much, because they are cheap and effective. its the reason why electronics have taken off in paintball so much too. you used to have to spend hours with an expert to fine tune your trigger, now your trigger control system comes from china for 5 bucks (PCBs are super cheap), and is better then any expert can tune a mech.

while clumsyness might be an issue, that does not seem like a reason to not attempt a fully electronically controlled gun. as i said before, the payoffs would be awesome. i for one, hate having to setup and tune guns, you would not have to do any of that. not to mention reliability in this game is a huge marketing position.



the only reason i can think of that anyone wouldn't attempt to have more electronic control on there guns is that the current people writing the code are not talented enough to control those types of things. or they do not realize the goal in and of itself.

[luke]

For everyone that says "go back to basics and make it cheap" my response is that I don't do that. China, Tippmann and everyone else does that just fine. There is no possible way to make a marker in this country that is any where near good value for the money.

AGDWouldn’t that depend on the approach to the project? Why would it not be feasible if it were approached from a “non corporate” direction, i.e. the “garage shop? (I was surprised to see the AGDE’s shop out fitted with a HAAS Mini mill ;) )

[luke]

Perhaps the age of paintball innovation is over with, are we now in the twilight years?

AGD

Hopefully it’s the fall of “corporate paintball”, perhaps big money will lose interest and leave it alone. A pipe dream yes, but still one can hope. There might be hope for small companies at the end of the recession, time will tell.

[snoopay700]

sensors.
I agree, although i do love tinkering and stuff it would be nice to just be able to go out to the chrono range, shoot off a few shots, shoot a few over the chrono to be sure your chrono is accurate, and then go play. The only thing you would ever have to do is change modes, and that can be done fairly easily.

[cockerpunk]

I agree, although i do love tinkering and stuff it would be nice to just be able to go out to the chrono range, shoot off a few shots, shoot a few over the chrono to be sure your chrono is accurate, and then go play. The only thing you would ever have to do is change modes, and that can be done fairly easily.

i keep a couple of mech cockers on hand whenever i get the urge.

sometimes though, you just want your damn gun to work so you can freakin play the game.

[nerobro]

sensors used to be expensive.

they are not anymore. *snip*

that is a key reason why control systems have taken over our daily lives so much, because they are cheap and effective.*snip*
while clumsyness might be an issue, that does not seem like a reason to not attempt a fully electronically controlled gun. as i said before, the payoffs would be awesome. i for one, hate having to setup and tune guns, you would not have to do any of that. not to mention reliability in this game is a huge marketing position.

the only reason i can think of that anyone wouldn't attempt to have more electronic control on there guns is that the current people writing the code are not talented enough to control those types of things. or they do not realize the goal in and of itself.

Your point stands up to an extent. The IS board was $10 in parts, including the PCB, at 20 count quantities. Lots of sensors are cheap now. Lots of sensors were always cheap. Eyes are cheap (photoresistors/transistors/whatever) are less than a nickel each, leds are a few pennies so long as you don't want them to be "laser". (that term makes me ill...) Now, mounting those sensors, and putting them in useful places, is a lot more difficult.

Also a lot of the "sensors" used today aren't serious sensors. More often than they'd like to admit they're just resistors placed so the microcontroller can sense the current being used. I think that hits upon why things have gotten cheap. Processing power is now at nickel or quarter cost, instead of dollars. You can take advantage of cheap sensors due to cheap microcontrollers. This is a leap that the paintball industry has already made.

A collar that had two gates in it to measure paintball velocity would cost very little electrically. But you'd need to have parts machined, or plastic molded. Those things aren't cheap to start doing . And if you're really smart you'd have some fancy way of protecting hte wires going from said collar back to the gun. Maybe it could be sold as an accessory? I don't see it needing to be intergal to the design.

I think the goal of production for a "completely self compensating" gun would not be hard to achieve. We're talking cheap parts, obviously. However trying to sell said gun... that would be a lot harder.

As for deeper electronic control of the guns... most of the designs out there are quite brute force. They are consistent because the inputs to them are large, and robust. like 7-10ms on times for solenoids.

With the injector design, we could be playing with outputs that are in the khz range, rather than hz range. :-) I want to see a data sheet for the peizo injectors.

A gun with the injector would be quite consistent. It would only need once a day velocity setup, and that would be the end of it.

When developing a product, one needs to keep their mind open to futher expansion, but not get caught up in feature creep.

[cockerpunk]

thats exactly what i mean. the issue isn't that sensors are expensive, its that writing the code to control them is far more complex then we seen in most paintball guns today.

thats the only reason i can think of why they arn't more prevent.

[oldironmudder]

Found this video that shows an injector working.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-ZC1FaNDh0





http://www.etas.com/data/RealTimes_2006/rt_2006_01_28_en.pdf

For this reason, the actuator of a
piezo injector consists of 350 stacked
layers of piezo crystals whose combined
expansion at 150 volts adds
up to roughly 40 μm. This is sufficient
to effect reliable injector valve
switching


Compared to conventional electromagnetic
injectors, the piezo injector
is four to five times faster.

Because the fuel injector's opening
or closing interval has shrunk to a
mere 100 μs, up to seven injections
per cycle are feasible at an injection
pressure of 1800 bar (26,107 psi)
(planning for 2000 bar is underway).
Even very small fuel volumes of only
1 mm3 per lift are easily accomplished
with piezo injectors.



Im still looking for better specs.



Oh ya, found this picture of a 6.4L Powerstroke injector.

http://i728.photobucket.com/albums/ww287/Philkp/Diesel%20pump-ford%20f250%202008/S5002886.jpg

[Psi]

Perhaps the age of paintball innovation is over with, are we now in the twilight years? AGD

I seriously doubt you believe that Tom. I believe that innovation in respect to rate of fire has gone as far as it needs to, but some people just can't help themselves and will push it further. Lets hope they are as wise as you and find other markets for it.

Where innovations need to continue is in accuracy and range. But look who I'm talking too :) Which brings me to the alternating vortices in your first post. How can they not be random? I understand they are alternating. But with a trip boundary layer caused by the seam and the inability to control the orientation of the seam, it would seem that the vortices would always be random.

Have you seen something with all your super duper gadgets? I would go look with my own super duper gadgets but Fairbanks spent all my super duper gadget money rolling BMWs into little balls of aluminum. I come seeking knowledge all masterful and all knowing Tom. :hail:

[vf-xx]

Im still looking for better specs.

Oh ya, found this picture of a 6.4L Powerstroke injector.


Hrm. That's going to make for a long gun....

[Dend78]

this is a walk in the park fit for an AK-47, M-15 ...

what the heck is an M-15 :spit_take

[snoopay700]

i keep a couple of mech cockers on hand whenever i get the urge.

sometimes though, you just want your damn gun to work so you can freakin play the game.
Yeah that's why i want to get a few cockers. Luckily i've been lucky enough to only have my gun go down a few times in the 5 years i've been playing. One of those times that i actually remember was caused by the power tube tip being loose and letting the power tube o-ring go too far forward.

I agree with nerobro, a gun like that would be hard to market, that's why i'm not 100% sure i can market my gun i'm designing successfully. For a while now i've been thinking about implementing a few different features into the marker that i would love to have, but many other people would likely hate. One of the said features is a chronograph on the gun, it would make for a safer gun because it would make it so that people couldn't set their guns into the goggle busting range.

Oh, and psi, there isn't a ton that we can do to increase accuracy or range. The first strike does it well but that can't be dumped into a hopper and is expensive. If you want to increase accuracy and range look at the projectile rather than the gun.

[vf-xx]

not to long if you are in the MilSim mind set :D this is a walk in the park fit for an AK-47, M-15 and anything larger military type rifle :shooting:

Hrm. Liquid CO2 Bullpup design....

[Dend78]

Hrm. Liquid CO2 Bullpup design....


wow i typed M-15 :rofl:

i dunno about the liquid CO2 part but i like the bullpup idea :dance:

[nerobro]

something tells me a lot of the length of that injector can be cut off. So i'm not so worried about that. They're designed with length in mind. Lots of length. they need to have the injector assembly reach down between camshafts, past valves, and intakes, and through the cylinder head. that's DEEP. I'd be apt to guess that the tips could lose 2" and the tails could lose 2" too. Their current design has fluid going down the sides and into the injector pintle. We could be happy with fluid input that's near the injector, making the device slimmer too.

We need to talk to the inejctor mfgs. I don't see this being something we can whip up without an electronics fab.

I wonder if the peizo stack returns power back to the system as the pile collapses. I'd bet it does.... Scary as 150v sounds, generating 150v off a small battery pack isn't a big deal, and I think peizo is pretty highly resistive, meaning a little current at high voltage will get us the motion we need.

I really want to do this.

[snoopay700]

Hrm. Liquid CO2 Bullpup design....
That would make it even longer, unless you put the back of the valve right at the back of the stock.

[vf-xx]

That would make it even longer, unless you put the back of the valve right at the back of the stock.

That's what I was thinking.

I don't know that would make it even longer really.

I figure, for the first proof of concept design, you're best off using off the shelf parts if possible. Make it work, and prove it to people before you go all out building a bunch of custom stuff.

[nerobro]

Okey, we're at the point where we should just "do it." mag breach, manually cycle the bolt, a rubber stopper and the injector placed in the back of the mag body? We'd need a pic or avr setup to fire with an incresing pulsewidth, and give us some kind of feedback.

Nothing to hard. but first.. we need an injector. is the powerstroke peizo? that could be easier to find than the gas injectors I was pondering.

[oldironmudder]

Nerobro, are you willing to drop $800 on ONE injector? Cause thats what one fella paid for one of those in the picture. I think it would be easier to make the valve & use what off the shelf parts you can to get a very rough draft prototype. Either that or send me some money & I will pull an injector out of the first 6.4 I run into. :tard:

[turbo chicken]

a whole lot to take in...

ill take fule trim as an example for a modern computer controlled engine

over time stuff wears, filters get clogged, stuff gets dirty and your engine performs differently

so your fuel trim needs (lets call this idle adjustment) to be adjusted ... but this is done over time after feedback from lots of sensors.

lets say you replace the filters, rebuild, or clean (make a change to the configuration) of your electronic controlled engine.

you drive it and the compouter basically decides... the car needs this much fuel to run efficiently and adjust accordingly based on the feedback from all the sensors...


now... imagine adjustments being made after so many cycles or blank and blank feedback has been recieved from the many sensors on the gun ... this would handle any electronic "tuning" taht you wanted... but would require the user to set the parameters taht they want the gun to shoot at.

and further... what Tom was getting at... couldn't you just have some kind of electronic controlled regulator... behind your "injector" that pulses to shoot the ball. So a 2 stage process.

-computer will know that at a psi of X at a pulse of Y = Z fps

im thinking a mag with no dump chamber... but a super awesome reg that will regulate (electronically adjusted) but still allow the volume of air needed to get the fps you need ...

of course you'd need some kind of purge valve to switch from super awesome loud and efficient to super quiet sucky efficiency...

the problem with the current mag setup is that the dump chamber is constantly the same zise... thus necessitating a specific range of PSI to get the FPS you desire...

now a chanber whose size can change on the fly ... would also work but add a level of more sensors and feedback needed before the board decides to fire...

looks like what previous poster have said... 2 stages ... electronically regulate psi stright into something that will electronically controll flow...

too friggin cool... how is that opensource pbgun thing doing?

and yes i made this post without reading everyone elses ...

[nerobro]

Nerobro, are you willing to drop $800 on ONE injector? Cause thats what one fella paid for one of those in the picture. I think it would be easier to make the valve & use what off the shelf parts you can to get a very rough draft prototype. Either that or send me some money & I will pull an injector out of the first 6.4 I run into. :tard:I thought using the inejctor WAS an off the helf solution. cobbling togother our own rig would be the custom route ;-)

I was looking at ebay, seems to be <200 for a powerstroke injector. But I can't be sure they're the peizo kind.

To be really silly, you could advertize the gun with some "crystal" refrences and not be kidding. Call it something like the "power crystal" which enables electronic control of the valve body.

Do you work somewhere that you could get your hands on diesel injectors? If that's the case, i'm completely willing to work with you on that.

[oldironmudder]

I thought using the inejctor WAS an off the helf solution. cobbling togother our own rig would be the custom route ;-)

I was looking at ebay, seems to be <200 for a powerstroke injector. But I can't be sure they're the peizo kind.

To be really silly, you could advertize the gun with some "crystal" refrences and not be kidding. Call it something like the "power crystal" which enables electronic control of the valve body.

Do you work somewhere that you could get your hands on diesel injectors? If that's the case, i'm completely willing to work with you on that.


The joke about me getting an injector was a big joke & im not going to jail over this, to much to be separated from.

The 6.4L uses the piezo & the older 7.3L PS uses a HUEI. It involves oil from a high pressure pump. I dont recall what the 6.0Ls use, 6.0 is between 7.3 & 6.4 in age plus I never liked them so I know less about the 6.0.

I went to college for Diesel & my last job was a shop foreman/mechanic with class 8 trucks.

IDEA.... gotta go dig out my books.

I could try to make a few calls & find an injector but the price will probably still be up there since the 6.4 is still new.

[oldironmudder]

Just searched ebay. Damn near everything is for a 7.3 & a few 6.0 injectors.

[drg]

the only reason i can think of that anyone wouldn't attempt to have more electronic control on there guns is that the current people writing the code are not talented enough to control those types of things. or they do not realize the goal in and of itself.

More like the goal is being met and these suggestions are reinventions of the goal which are frankly not based on the reality of the sport today. What the sport asks is a gun that operates efficiently and consistently; we are currently meeting that need. There is only so much further complication left to do, and then you have to ask yourself, why would you do it?

What would additional sensors do in a paintball gun? Is measuring velocity on-gun that much of an important goal that it justifies the placing of sensors and windows into the barrel and creating that many more points of possible failure? What would you do with the feedback?

With all this talk of injectors, it would be instructive to realize why injectors are used in cars in the first place -- for consistent and controllable atomization of fuel. With a combustion engine you are dealing with a whole different ball of wax compared to a paintball gun -- you are concerned with the fuel-air emulsion, which is a complete non-issue in paintball. With paintball, all you need is consistent metering and good flow; that can be achieved even mechanically just as well as electronically.

If AGD wanted to come back on the scene a good place to start might be re-engineering the pump mag.

[tasker89]

Frankly if AGD wanted to come back on the scene a good place to start would be re-engineering the pump mag.

Possibly built around a tiny all aluminum classic valve ???

[vf-xx]

Hrm. Just thought of a good use for an on gun chrony:

Wouldn't take too much more to hook it up to a transmitter of some sort (bluetooth, RFID, wifi) and have chrony speeds instantly reported to judges and/or refs. That has some interesting possibilities.

Eh, what's wrong with Pipe dreams?

Besides while we 'might' be meeting all the use needs currently, companies have to keep selling stuff to stay in business. If you build something that performs substantially similar or only marginally better, but in a vastly different way you can really market that.

Besides, from an engineering perspective, I can see the appeal of this method.

[nerobro]

*complications*
*sensors*

With all this talk of injectors, it would be instructive to realize why injectors are used in cars in the first place -- for consistent and controllable atomization of fuel. With a combustion engine you are dealing with a whole different ball of wax compared to a paintball gun -- you are concerned with the fuel-air emulsion, which is a complete non-issue in paintball. With paintball, all you need is consistent metering and good flow; that can be achieved even mechanically just as well as electronically.
Off the top, the injector method would reduce parts count. Active seals in the gun would drop from anywhere from two, to a dozen, down to one. The need for good lubrication would diminsh, if not vanish entirely. Using an electronically controlled valve is simpler.

The sensors... well.. I don't think they're needed, marketable, or even a good idea. Rigs like that are good for development, not for pushing bunkers aside or diving through underbrush.

Cars went to fuel injection not for the reasons you mention. Carburators are magical devices when it comes to getting good fuel distribution. A properly setup carb, and efi both have the same horsepower potential. Due to how they're built, carbs, quite nearly by defualt, have wonderful emulsion properties. EFI needs a lot of enginering to get there.

Paintball, as an industry, has figured out how to make mechanical systems that meter high pressure air with remarkable repeatability. However, being static valve designs, they can only meter air one way. A vector, or rainmaker, will always be loud. A mag, will always have it's distinctive pop. Now, if you want to think about what an electronically controlled valve can do, think about the different sound signatures that cockers have. Some bang, others whisper. This valve could do both, on demand. With less complication. With as few as two moving parts.

In the end, this would be a uniquely AGD thing. Hah, A Crystal AIR valve. :-) Something that would require even less maintenance than the original one.

If AGD wanted to come back on the scene a good place to start might be re-engineering the pump mag.

Possibly built around a tiny all aluminum classic valve ???
This defeats the purpose of retaining the AIR in the first place. If it's tiny, it's not compatible with the rest of the mag family. At that point, why bother with the AIR, when todays machining techniques could allow you to just make the whole gun in one lump?

I "get" the pumpmag. The pumpmag isn't a great pumpgun. It's consistent, but it's loud, and not terribly good on gas, it's heavy (for a pumpgun), and it could fail in some interesting ways. It was a very, very neat trick that took advantage of a problem the mag had. I've always kinda seen the pumpmag as a very cool parlor trick.

The injector design could do the pump thing with even less effort.

EDIT:
anyone else ponder the resemblance of those diesel injectors with the AIR valve? not saying anything beyond that... just... conversion kits? ;-)

[AGD]

Without feedback electronic control is useless in my opinion. I have come up with an idea to measure the velocity WITHOUT using eyes, sensors on the barrel or anything ugly. I would envision that you push the "reset velocity" button and start firing the gun over a crono. The velocity will go up with every shot and when you hit 280 or 300 FPS you stop firing and now the gun has the info it needs to adjust for velocity.

If you change barrels or paint, you do the same thing and your good to go. Continue the discussion with the idea that you know what the balls velocity is every shot.

AGD

[drg]

Off the top, the injector method would reduce parts count. Active seals in the gun would drop from anywhere from two, to a dozen, down to one. The need for good lubrication would diminsh, if not vanish entirely. Using an electronically controlled valve is simpler.

Is this a significant issue? Not really. First off it's unlikely that there would be only one active seal in the final design. The balls have to load somehow. Second, active seals at several times have been marketing points for paintball guns but in the end number of active seals has not necessarily amounted to a significant advantage of one design over another. Miniaturized solenoids have become reliable enough to not be issues, and most poppet design guns have 2 required active seals other than the solenoid. A sniper has 1.

Is an electronically controlled valve simpler than mechanical control? Arguably not.


Cars went to fuel injection not for the reasons you mention. Carburators are magical devices when it comes to getting good fuel distribution. A properly setup carb, and efi both have the same horsepower potential. Due to how they're built, carbs, quite nearly by defualt, have wonderful emulsion properties. EFI needs a lot of enginering to get there.

Read what I wrote again. I said nothing about the quality of the emulsion. But you've successfully missed the point. Emulsions are NOT paintball issues. This is a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.


Paintball, as an industry, has figured out how to make mechanical systems that meter high pressure air with remarkable repeatability. However, being static valve designs, they can only meter air one way. A vector, or rainmaker, will always be loud. A mag, will always have it's distinctive pop. Now, if you want to think about what an electronically controlled valve can do, think about the different sound signatures that cockers have. Some bang, others whisper. This valve could do both, on demand. With less complication. With as few as two moving parts.

Is selectable sound signature a reason to do this? No. One would be more than a little silly to reinvent the wheel to do this. Variable normal operating pressure has no inherent point. One no longer has to trade off between pressure/sound signature and efficiency, so this ship has long sailed.


In the end, this would be a uniquely AGD thing. Hah, A Crystal AIR valve. :-) Something that would require even less maintenance than the original one.

I daresay that uniqueness for its own sake is antithetical to what has made AGD products successful and long-lived.

[drg]

Without feedback electronic control is useless in my opinion. I have come up with an idea to measure the velocity WITHOUT using eyes, sensors on the barrel or anything ugly. I would envision that you push the "reset velocity" button and start firing the gun over a crono. The velocity will go up with every shot and when you hit 280 or 300 FPS you stop firing and now the gun has the info it needs to adjust for velocity.

If you change barrels or paint, you do the same thing and your good to go. Continue the discussion with the idea that you know what the balls velocity is every shot.

AGD

So, in other words you chrono the gun to set the velocity? How is that different from, let alone better than, the way any other gun works?

What would be the point of this? And again, what would the feedback loop do? In a normal paintgun setup, the variance between shots is not sourced to any actively controllable parameter ... guns are set up for consistent pressure and dwell. If you get a low shot it's due to either fluctuation in one of those parameters or a ball inconsistency, or other random factor. Trying to actively compensate for that would be introducing inconsistency.

[snoopay700]

Without feedback electronic control is useless in my opinion. I have come up with an idea to measure the velocity WITHOUT using eyes, sensors on the barrel or anything ugly. I would envision that you push the "reset velocity" button and start firing the gun over a crono. The velocity will go up with every shot and when you hit 280 or 300 FPS you stop firing and now the gun has the info it needs to adjust for velocity.

If you change barrels or paint, you do the same thing and your good to go. Continue the discussion with the idea that you know what the balls velocity is every shot.

AGD
The problem i foresee is that the gun will be estimating how much air needs to be let through to truly shoot to the bottom of the tank, ad having a board that varies the dwell as it is working is dangerous because if the algorithm is off at all then the marker could very well start shooting hot and there would be no way to know. Having a pressure sensor inside could effectively let you know how much pressure you have but again, you run into a lot of variables that would be very hard to account for. I'm not saying it couldn't be done, it's just very dangerous. If you had a set dwell that didn't change that would be one thing, but for a changing dwell i wouldn't feel good marketing something like that as the marker will be guessing more or less. I would prefer to have a way to check that the marker is still shooting at a safe velocity, it would be ugly but it would be a lot safer.

[nerobro]

Chrono ProceedureI'm sure it would mess with people over the chronograph. The "increase every shot till you hit the set button" method seems good. it would definitely discourage on field velocity adjustments. You'd need to make sure the velocity starts way low every time you reset, assuring that one couldn't just "guess" on field.

The current peizo valves run to roughly 25,000psi. To bad fields can't fill that high ;-)

I wonder how badly the flow rate tapers off as tank pressures drop. I wonder how high flow the valve could be modified to run at, for lower pressures. I'm sure there's plenty of room to make the tips larger to get a bigger seat diameter so flow rates would be reasonable at the 1000-4500psi range that we could expect...


Is this a significant issue? Not really. First off it's unlikely that there would be only one active seal in the final design. The balls have to load somehow. Second, active seals at several times have been marketing points for paintball guns but in the end number of active seals has not necessarily amounted to a significant advantage of one design over another. Miniaturized solenoids have become reliable enough to not be issues, and most poppet design guns have 2 required active seals other than the solenoid. A sniper has 1I dunno. Early ions and the like had/have solinoid life problems. So did impulses. Pneumatic solinoids are quite reliable, but the sort of designs that you find in fuel injectors are more reliable by magnitudes. Think millions of cycles instead of tens of thousands. With a small number of active seals, making reliability claims is easy. It's not a big issue, but it's one that can differentiate a gun from another.


Is an electronically controlled valve simpler than mechanical control? Arguably not. An electronically controlled valve will ALWAYS give the same valve duration. This can not be said about most of the pneumatically operated, and even some of the spring operated guns out there. Dirt, lube issues, stiction... all add up to inconsistencies in operation. This would not be true for a peizo operated valve. This leads onto the next jewel...

Read what I wrote again. I said nothing about the quality of the emulsion. But you've successfully missed the point. Emulsions are NOT paintball issues. This is a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. You seem concerned that the technology was designed for one specific fluid. I don't think that matters. I will drop the terminology of "injector" if that bothers you.

I've gone back and re-read what you said. I think you missed the point behind efi. I was pointing out that efi didn't do a better job than mechanical control in certain applications. You did make that point as well. I assumed you gathered the rest. But to detail it... EFI has it's advantages because you know exactly how much fuel you're dispensing.

This is exactly the advantage an electronic valve system would have. The AIR valve was designed based on repeatability. Fill a given chamber to X pressure, and you will get X velocity. An electronically controlled valve body could potentially give even better performance.


Is selectable sound signature a reason to do this? No. One would be more than a little silly to reinvent the wheel to do this. Variable normal operating pressure has no inherent point. One no longer has to trade off between pressure/sound signature and efficiency, so this ship has long sailed.Actually, that's something that TK brought up in his initial post. I wouldn't see it as a vital feature, it's just something that could be fairly easily done. I don't understand where you're reaching for with the operating pressure statement. Operating pressure really didn't have a whole lot of bearing on how much noise a gun made.


I daresay that uniqueness for its own sake is antithetical to what has made AGD products successful and long-lived.And... we can point at the pumpmag. But in this case, the electronic valve would provide a more reliable way of providing what the AIR always gave us.

*grumbles about not having the toold on hand to build this now* I've got the electronics, just no test barrel or injector. :-/


The problem i foresee is that the gun will be estimating how much air needs to be let through to truly shoot to the bottom of the tank, ad having a board that varies the dwell as it is working is dangerous because if the algorithm is off at all then the marker could very well start shooting hot and there would be no way to know. Having a pressure sensor inside could effectively let you know how much pressure you have but again, you run into a lot of variables that would be very hard to account for. I'm not saying it couldn't be done, it's just very dangerous. If you had a set dwell that didn't change that would be one thing, but for a changing dwell i wouldn't feel good marketing something like that as the marker will be guessing more or less. I would prefer to have a way to check that the marker is still shooting at a safe velocity, it would be ugly but it would be a lot safer.This is where science is our friends. And more importantly, good testing and data collection. The valve will flow differently at all input pressures. I'd hope that the flow rates would be same enough over say.. 10's of psi that we could use cheap sensors, and inexpensive AD inputs. Once you've set the velocity, the gun would know the input pressure, and valve duration to make the ball go X fps. Knowing the flow rate of the valve, we could make the ball go X fps for essentially any input pressure. If the math is wrong, yes, it could be dangerous. However, the same could happen with a matrix, angel, or timmy. If the dwell is to long, you end up with higher velocities. This guns valve design can't have FSDO.

I wouldn't be so worried about the board, as I would be the sensors. If those drifted, that would upset me. How would we handle that? How would we calibrate them? How

Thankfully air is predictable. Now, it's flow is fairly linear over high pressure differentials, say from 2100 to 2200 psi you'd get a fairly straight curve. Flow rate from 100psi to 200psi is going to be exponentially slower. This would make knowing what the absolute input pressure is pretty important. .... Maybe just writing the tables to be a little conservative would account for being 50-100psi off of PSIg. And say.. have the gun shutdown at 500 or 700 psi, instead of running into the "our math doesn't work so well here" reigons.

[drg]

I dunno. Early ions and the like had/have solinoid life problems. So did impulses. Pneumatic solinoids are quite reliable, but the sort of designs that you find in fuel injectors are more reliable by magnitudes. With a small number of active seals, making reliability claims is easy. It's not a big issue, but it's one that can differentiate a gun from another.

The Ion was a budget marker, and the impulse's problems date back almost a decade. Both were resolved. These are not things that support shying away from pneumatic solenoids. Today's solenoids are fine.


An electronically controlled valve will ALWAYS give the same valve duration. This can not be said about most of the pneumatically operated, and even some of the spring operated guns out there. Dirt, lube issues, stiction... all add up to inconsistencies in operation. This would not be true for a peizo operated valve.

Not always ... lose power stability (or lose power entirely) and you lose consistent operation. This is the most basic complication of electronic operation of any marker. In practice mechanical inconsistencies are not problematic enough (on good markers) to warrant any concern whatsoever.


You seem concerned that the technology was designed for one specific fluid. I don't think that matters. I will drop the terminology of "injector" if that bothers you.

You can drop the terminology if you like, but you're best off dropping the misconceptions. Injectors are not just fluid metering devices. Fuel injectors for example atomize fuel upon delivery. That is why they are designed and employed the way they are. There are far more considerations than a paintball firing valve, which IS largely just a fluid metering device.


I've gone back and re-read what you said. I think you missed the point behind efi. I was pointing out that efi didn't do a better job than mechanical control in certain applications. You did make that point as well. I assumed you gathered the rest. But to detail it... EFI has it's advantages because you know exactly how much fuel you're dispensing.

Fuel injection's primary advantage was the divorcement of atomization/emulsification from airflow. Further refinements such as port or direct injection improved upon that by delivering emulsion directly to the ports or combustion chambers, avoiding inefficiencies such as pooling. None of this has any analogue in paintball.


This is exactly the advantage an electronic valve system would have. The AIR valve was designed based on repeatability. Fill a given chamber to X pressure, and you will get X velocity. An electronically controlled valve body could potentially give even better performance.

Simple electronic fluid metering does not require anything resembling an injector structure. We already have such a device in the mQ valve or other electronically controlled firing valves.


Actually, that's something that TK brought up in his initial post. I wouldn't see it as a vital feature, it's just something that could be fairly easily done. I don't understand where you're reaching for with the operating pressure statement. Operating pressure really didn't have a whole lot of bearing on how much noise a gun made.

The OP asserted a linkage between operating pressure and both efficiency and sound signature. It is exactly my point that while that was conventional wisdom years ago, there is no such linkage today.

[nerobro]

You're right, fuel injectors are designed with squirting fuel in mind. Definitely the valve design isn't ideal for "fueling" a paintball gun. But it should be adequate for proof of concept. I've grabbed onto these peizo injectors for a reason, they're fast enough for us to pull some really fancy tricks with their flow rate.

The MQ valve I had forgotten about. And that is a good design too. As I recall it is dependent on good regulation to feed it. An injector wouldn't need that. (it would just need a good sensor to tell it input pressure..)

The injector design could also be used as a regulator that could retrofit on n2 tanks.... That would be interesting. Now if we could only power it without a big battery pack ;-)

[oldironmudder]

The injector design could also be used as a regulator that could retrofit on n2 tanks.... That would be interesting. Now if we could only power it without a big battery pack ;-)

Now I would like to see this.

[snoopay700]

This is where science is our friends. And more importantly, good testing and data collection. The valve will flow differently at all input pressures. I'd hope that the flow rates would be same enough over say.. 10's of psi that we could use cheap sensors, and inexpensive AD inputs. Once you've set the velocity, the gun would know the input pressure, and valve duration to make the ball go X fps. Knowing the flow rate of the valve, we could make the ball go X fps for essentially any input pressure. If the math is wrong, yes, it could be dangerous. However, the same could happen with a matrix, angel, or timmy. If the dwell is to long, you end up with higher velocities. This guns valve design can't have FSDO.

I wouldn't be so worried about the board, as I would be the sensors. If those drifted, that would upset me. How would we handle that? How would we calibrate them? How

Thankfully air is predictable. Now, it's flow is fairly linear over high pressure differentials, say from 2100 to 2200 psi you'd get a fairly straight curve. Flow rate from 100psi to 200psi is going to be exponentially slower. This would make knowing what the absolute input pressure is pretty important. .... Maybe just writing the tables to be a little conservative would account for being 50-100psi off of PSIg. And say.. have the gun shutdown at 500 or 700 psi, instead of running into the "our math doesn't work so well here" reigons.
Yes, i know it can be done, but i question both how long the code will be for that sort of operation and if that will fit on a standard board. The other thing is that with angels and timmies and such, the dwell isn't varying from shot to shot. That means that you set the dwell and then you can adjust the input pressure and therefore can easily control the velocity. The dwell will never change, so it's not dangerous. Even with a lot of research and everything you could theoretically figure out how long to keep the valve open, but my worry is the huge number of variables that would need to be accounted for. I'm not saying it can't be done, just that putting out a product like that would make me worry, i would have to do a ton of extensive testing until i would be happy with it, and even then the variables would make me worry. Running only 2-400 psi below the output of most tanks doesn't seem all that worth the bother to me, going down into the ranges where the math wouldn't work well would,b ut that would also greatly increase the risk. I for one would feel much safer knowing that each shot is being measured and ensuring it is below 300fps, and with that it would make the program much shorter to write so it would fit, and the gun wouldn't be guessing.

[vf-xx]

Actually an Injector designed for atomization could be very VERY useful, if you're designing one to use liquid CO2.....

[Newt]

Propane? :ninja: :mad: :eek: :D :cool:

[nerobro]

I don't understand the failure modes.
That's the thing, the dwell on those guns IS NOT static. Among other things that aren't static. such as input pressures, or even set pressures.

First off, regulators aren't perfect. And they have a curve to their recharge. As soon as those guns start firing, their valve chamber, and ram pressures start dropping. Sometimes precipitously. Some of the guns even have some dwell compensation built in, iirc.

Angels dropped their snap ring, and I think they've even dropped the spring. Timmys had no ram retention, still have none. These guns often have FSDO problems, and the "fix" for this is longer dwell on the first shot after a certain amount of time. FSDO, is effectively the same as varying valve open time on the inejctor design. That could not happen.

Now there are other things that vary the dwell on those guns. Stiction in the valve itself, as well as the ram. If the LPR creeps, that could cause a hot shot, or many hot shots. A failing reg seat could cause consistantly hot shots. A failing reg could do the same from the valve chamber side.

None of this could happen with an injector type gun. The "only" failure point that could cause that sort of thing, is the board locking up in such a way as to have the HV power supply turned on, and the fet connecting that to the injector turned on at the same time. It wouldn't take much magic to prevent that from ever happening. (such as using a software SMPS driver from the controller chip. if that locked up, the HV power supply would go away, and the gun would be incapable of actuating the valve)

I understand what you're saying, but what i'm hearing is FUD. You're not familiar with it, so you're fearful of the failure modes. Short of the device actually coming apart at the seams, it would be safer for other players than regulators and solenoid valves.

Something else to keep in mind, the electronic setup would have the same velocity untill it reached the "shutdown" pressure. On guns that use regulators, the velocity varies as the input pressure changes. Regulators have that whole pressure ratio thing. While having two regulators in line does help that, you're still looking at a several psi change over the course of a tank of air.

[drg]

Sometimes precipitously. Some of the guns even have some dwell compensation built in, iirc.

NO, HUGE NO. Pressure-related dwell compensation is strictly verboten. Regulators are selected to avoid recharge issues.

The rest of the stuff is simply non-issues. The reliability of current setups is simply not a concern.

[snoopay700]

That's the thing, the dwell on those guns IS NOT static. Among other things that aren't static. such as input pressures, or even set pressures.

First off, regulators aren't perfect. And they have a curve to their recharge. As soon as those guns start firing, their valve chamber, and ram pressures start dropping. Sometimes precipitously. Some of the guns even have some dwell compensation built in, iirc.

Angels dropped their snap ring, and I think they've even dropped the spring. Timmys had no ram retention, still have none. These guns often have FSDO problems, and the "fix" for this is longer dwell on the first shot after a certain amount of time. FSDO, is effectively the same as varying valve open time on the inejctor design. That could not happen.

Now there are other things that vary the dwell on those guns. Stiction in the valve itself, as well as the ram. If the LPR creeps, that could cause a hot shot, or many hot shots. A failing reg seat could cause consistantly hot shots. A failing reg could do the same from the valve chamber side.

None of this could happen with an injector type gun. The "only" failure point that could cause that sort of thing, is the board locking up in such a way as to have the HV power supply turned on, and the fet connecting that to the injector turned on at the same time. It wouldn't take much magic to prevent that from ever happening. (such as using a software SMPS driver from the controller chip. if that locked up, the HV power supply would go away, and the gun would be incapable of actuating the valve)

I understand what you're saying, but what i'm hearing is FUD. You're not familiar with it, so you're fearful of the failure modes. Short of the device actually coming apart at the seams, it would be safer for other players than regulators and solenoid valves.

Something else to keep in mind, the electronic setup would have the same velocity untill it reached the "shutdown" pressure. On guns that use regulators, the velocity varies as the input pressure changes. Regulators have that whole pressure ratio thing. While having two regulators in line does help that, you're still looking at a several psi change over the course of a tank of air.
I didn't know that about the boards, i knew that regs aren't perfectly consistent or static, but i didn't know the boards compensated. I've never owned an electronic marker and have never really looked at the programming on the boards, i figured the LPRs used were consistent enough at the speeds needed that the dwell would not vary much. I was talking with everything in working order in mind though, the failing valve seats and such are just that, failures. If something fails it is never safe, and i would put sticking of any kind going on in the same category.

I know there are many things that can vary the velocity, but the ones that aren't failures will not likely change it into the goggle busting range. Like i said, i know it can be done, but with all of the variables that would have to be dealt with it could be a huge risk, and not one worth the small number of shots you would get for that few hundred psi i think. Who knows, i may end up doing something like this on my marker. However, like i said i would have to do extensive testing to ensure it wouldn't miscalculate and go into the goggle busting range. However a chrono on the front of the gun would make the whole set up much safer because then you could definitely stop the marker from ever firing over 300 fps. I may just put one on the prototype of my marker in conjunction with the varied timing to record each shot and ensure none of them are going to a dangerous range, however i still like the idea of being able to fire a few shots and then fire a few over the chrono and be all set to go.

[nerobro]

NO, HUGE NO. Pressure-related dwell compensation is strictly verboten. Regulators are selected to avoid recharge issues.

The rest of the stuff is simply non-issues. The reliability of current setups is simply not a concern.
Yes, huge yes. First, i'm not taking pot shots at random here. Every design has it's problems. Despite all the potential pitfalls of most modern guns they run remarkably well.

With poppet valve guns. The poppet valve itself is a regulator. The valve on most of the guns is not balanced, and changes in input pressure will change lift and duration. That is not up for debate. That would be pressure related dwell compensation.....

In a large part regulators are not selected, they're built on the cheap, using whatever design fits the appearance that the company would like. Or more commonly, whatever they can produce easily. It is uncommon that a company will design around a good regulator. This particular forum is hosted by one of those companies. SP hung onto their regs for a long time, I think they knew what they had, and wouldn't give it up easily. The other brand that did so is no longer producing guns. Though they're still selling regs ;-)

I was making my example to point out that guns are complex, and have a huge number of failure modes, many of which could cause harm to other players. Yet, despite all these problems, the guns are relatively trouble free. You're right, the reliability is not a concern. I have a LED dark angel that still shoots like it should. And I have a cheap descendant, and it too works as it should. An electronically controlled valve would have even fewer places to fail.

[drg]

You're missing what I was saying, I quoted the part I did for a reason. Dwell compensation for possible dropoff is unheard of and undesirable. Such dwell modification is currently only associated with cheater boards. If one finds reg recharge speed or consistency an issue, one fixes it with a better regulator.

[Coralis]

Well I was wondering (perhaps I read it wrong) are you going to control the velocity of each and every ball ? How do you plan to account for the varying size of paintballs ? (or is it something that you don't want to discuss in a public forum at this stage of possible development). Any way I had a thought on it , what if you have something installed in the breach that would act like a ball detent but also sealed all the way around the ball. Would that then help shoot a more consistent velocity at a constant pressure and volume?

[Newt]

As I understood it, AGD is not producing this as a new marker. That's why the concept is being put into public domain: on the chance that a motivated entity would take the idea and do something with it.

As fr the concept, unless someone finds a way to measure velocity on the shot while it's being fired, or predict the velocity for the ball by measuring it's characteristics as it's loaded (minute shape and mass differences etc), it's impossible. Rather, you'd have the board record velocity of previous shots and keep a moving average. That way it would have a feel for how the current hopperful of paint is firing and how best to react to it.

[Miltonyz]

You're missing what I was saying, I quoted the part I did for a reason. Dwell compensation for possible dropoff is unheard of and undesirable. Such dwell modification is currently only associated with cheater boards. If one finds reg recharge speed or consistency an issue, one fixes it with a better regulator.

That's like your opinion man. I see no moral or ethical difference between adjusting velocity through regulators or electronics.

[drg]

That's like your opinion man. I see no moral or ethical difference between adjusting velocity through regulators or electronics.

It's not an opinion that it is currently not used in marker electronics except for cheater boards.

[nerobro]

First off, FSDO compensation is something that's used on tourney legal boards. If those are cheater, then you don't agree with the governing bodies. FSDO compensation IS dwell adjustment.

So where are you going with this? It seems like you just don't like the idea of an electronically controlled valve. That's ok. Do you have anything constructive to say? That doesn't imply what you have to say is for, or against it, just something useful.

The argument that dwell does not change (weather as part of the software or not) is not correct. As there are many, many factors that lead to differing dwell on a poppet, or dump chamber gun. I'm not attacking them as a whole, as I've said before, they work remarkably well. Heck, short of the one mag i have left, (Oh how i miss my micromag....), everything I own is poppet valve. With various modes of hammer actuation.

A gun with a peizo operated valve, would have valve duration repeatable to the nearest 100us every single shot. There would be no valve bounce. There would be no concern of residual pressure in the chamber, as there would be no chamber.

If we used a blow-forward configuration with this, we could use several short pulses of air to actuate the bolt softly, which took all the complication of the LX to do. With precise air metering, we could get around the touchy adjustable PT o-ring situation. Since we're not sealing a chamber, we could even drop the PT o-ring entirely.

[drg]

First off, FSDO compensation is something that's used on tourney legal boards. If those are cheater, then you don't agree with the governing bodies. FSDO compensation IS dwell adjustment.

I already addressed FSDO compensation, in fact I was the first person to do so in this thread. Equating FSDO compensation to active dwell control, particularly as you described it, in response to regulator recharge issues, is disingenuous at best.


So where are you going with this? It seems like you just don't like the idea of an electronically controlled valve.

All of my play guns, both semi and pumps, use electronically controlled valves. So maybe I know a thing or two about them and their implications.


The argument that dwell does not change (weather as part of the software or not) is not correct. As there are many, many factors that lead to differing dwell on a poppet, or dump chamber gun. I'm not attacking them as a whole, as I've said before, they work remarkably well. Heck, short of the one mag i have left, (Oh how i miss my micromag....), everything I own is poppet valve. With various modes of hammer actuation.

We're not talking about dwell fluctuation in normal operation, we're talking about actively compensating for that fluctuation. In a properly set up gun, there is no way to actively compensate for dwell fluctuation in normal cyclic operation, thus active dwell compensation is used solely for cheating today.


A gun with a peizo operated valve, would have valve duration repeatable to the nearest 100us every single shot. There would be no valve bounce. There would be no concern of residual pressure in the chamber, as there would be no chamber.

Such control precision is unnecessary. We already have reached a point at which added valve control precision yields no better consistency. The largest single cause of inconsistency is the paintball itself. Its tolerances are simply too low for gas system precision beyond a certain point to matter.

[Beemer]

So where are you going with this? It seems like you just don't like the idea of an electronically controlled valve. That's ok. Do you have anything constructive to say? That doesn't imply what you have to say is for, or against it, just something useful.

It wouldnt appear that he does. Well done on not biting on the trolling and Welcome back. :cheers:



It's not an opinion that it is currently not used in marker electronics except for cheater boards.

:confused: Ya we all know its already used.


All of my play guns, both semi and pumps, use electronically controlled valves. So maybe I know a thing or two about them and their implications.

If this is true then why dont you contribute in a useful way to this NEW idea??



The largest single cause of inconsistency is the paintball itself.

You got any proof or data to back that up?

Read the title again. Its a NEW idea. I dont think these guys need to waste their time with your trolling posts. If I am wrong I am sure I will hear about it. I get the feeling you just like to read yourself post.

Nothing is broke nothing to fix. Nothing here for you to see, move along. Go play with what you have and stay out of this thread if you cant be constructive or useful, if not from here on I will just remove your useless posts or take other action if I have to. :(

Back to the Thread at hand guys. :clap:

[nerobro]

I already addressed FSDO compensation, in fact I was the first person to do so in this thread. Equating FSDO compensation to active dwell control, particularly as you described it, in response to regulator recharge issues, is disingenuous at best. Dwell compensation to cover regulator design issues was something I stopped talking about after I first posted about it. FSDO compensation is changing dwell. And it's changing dwell blindly.

Speaking of cheating, did you know that savvy players would use regulator lag to their advantage? I'm using the word savvy to not kick up to much of a fuss. People who take the time to balance the input pressures on their guns also have the option of setting up their gun on the falling side of the pressure-velocity curve. So that their guns would gain velocity as their regulators lagged.


All of my play guns, both semi and pumps, use electronically controlled valves. So maybe I know a thing or two about them and their implications. This is picking a fight. Owning the guns says nothing about knowing how they operate. I'm not necessarily saying you don't, but this sort of thing is a logical fallacy.


We're not talking about dwell fluctuation in normal operation, we're talking about actively compensating for that fluctuation. In a properly set up gun, there is no way to actively compensate for dwell fluctuation in normal cyclic operation, thus active dwell compensation is used solely for cheating today. I threw out the idea of an on-gun chronograph more or less from the first post I made. And i've defended that position several times. AGD also didn't suggest having an on-gun chronograph. Without that sort of feedback there's no reliable way to measure velocity, and then compensate for it. As you'll say later, the biggest problem with velocity consistancy are the paintballs themselves.

The reason for changing valve dwell is to compensate for input pressure. This is something that can be accurately measured, and there's solid gas law to back up varying valve duration for input pressure.

Or as suggested in the OP, you can change the valve flow charcteristics to make the gun sound different. Or just shoot really brittle paint.

Such control precision is unnecessary. We already have reached a point at which added valve control precision yields no better consistency. The largest single cause of inconsistency is the paintball itself. Its tolerances are simply too low for gas system precision beyond a certain point to matter.This was never a questoin of necessity. If necessity was the only reason for anything in paintball, we would have stopped at the blowback semi. Just because it's going to bother you... did you know blowbacks are all guns with active dwell compensation? Properly setup sheriden style guns are much the same.

Just to reiterate the benifits of this sort of valve:
If used with a blowforward style bolt, you could have LX performance without LX, and without the heavy springs. Peak ball pressures could be tailored for paint strength. Both on tank, and secondary regulators could be eliminated. The gun could be run on liquid co2, compressed air, or gas co2. If engineered to the same standards, the valve would have a cycle life 100-10000 times longer than conventional valves. The guns maintenance would be frighteningly simple. With as few as two moving parts, and potentially no active o-rings.

You're concerned about cheating. The sort of control necessary to make the gun work at all, would inhibit aftermarket board/software makers. That just means the maker of the gun in the first place has to be ethical, and setup the software right.

The closest thing I was able to decipher as your point, was that you think this would be more complex, and because we already have working gun designs, something like this isn't necessary. Is that the point you were trying to make?

Something new..
This gun/reg design would require signifigant battery power. LiPo batteries are now cheap enough that we could get the capacity of battery we'd need without the foregrip.

[Beemer]

I have come up with an idea to measure the velocity WITHOUT using eyes, sensors on the barrel or anything ugly. I would envision that you push the "reset velocity" button and start firing the gun over a crono. The velocity will go up with every shot and when you hit 280 or 300 FPS you stop firing and now the gun has the info it needs to adjust for velocity.

If you change barrels or paint, you do the same thing and your good to go. Continue the discussion with the idea that you know what the balls velocity is every shot.AGD


Care to give us some hints here?

[Lohman446]

Patent the idea, make the crudest possible prototype of it, put it in the market. Let others spend years refining and perfecting it and then move on the patent and demand royalties :).


I'm curious, are we operating under the idea that we are going to need / have reasonable access to perfect(er than now) paintballs?

[nerobro]

I don't think we'll get better velocity consistency from this. We'll obviously be eliminating yet another factor, which can't hurt.

[Lohman446]

Care to give us some hints here?

Random guess. If you are measuring input pressure and have good control over pressure in the chamber you can set velocity electronically. Rather than turning a screw the computer controls how much air goes into the chamber to propel the ball. As the tank pressure lowers the program can compensate to allow more air into the chamber, allowing you to shoot to virtually empty on the tank. When you are setting the velocity to the chrono you are simply giving hte baseline number for the program to work from.

Advantage: Allows you to use a high pressure gun (which should be more efficient from previous discussions) while still allowing you to go deep into the tank.

[nerobro]

The problem with this is flow rate. A valve that can easily and predictably meter air at 4500psi is very different from a valve that can flow enough gas at 500psi. The peizo valves only open like .004 of an inch. There are ways to make even .004 flow a lot ;-) so we'd likely be ok.

[Newt]

Care to give us some hints here?
Yamaha uses a system where a transparent to opaque greyscale tab is attached to moving parts on the Disklavier player acoustic piano systems. A laser eye is used to record how fast it moves from trans to opaq, so the CPU always knows how fast each mechanical part is moving and where it is. Those parts are easily accelerated to 300 fps as quickly as a paintball would be.

Very cool.

In a paintball application, you could have a detent function something like this, maybe similar to Tippmann's "flap". The system measures the speed the ball leaves the breech, throws how much gas was applied to the shot (for acceleration on the ball after the detent), runs that through a simple equation, and gets the velocity.

Just a theory.

[Newt]

Addressing the ZOMG IS IT ETHICAL discussion:

I don't think AGD would have posted this if the issue weren't already considered, addressed, and a way to design the system so it won't be an issue was decided on. At all. Few care more about the sport and have more respect in the paintball community.

The design would not even sell if this were not fixed. Can we continue the discussion assuming this is the case?

[Newt]

Got another theory. This one's probably more likely:

Per AGD's specs, we don't have crazy trash strapped to the barrel, eyes (which my prior theory was dangerously close to), or similar garbage. So your injector/bolt/paint loading mechanism coming from behind the paintball has flowports around a laser sensor. It shines on the paintball and takes (what three, two if it's using the "in breach" measurement as zero?) good range measurements over the time the ball would take to leave the barrel and get a maybe a couple inches from the muzzle. Data goes to the board, averaged, and bam, we know velocity.

No chance of shining your friend in the eye and blinding him, the laser is pointed directly at the ball. It's probably infrared anyway, so no worries there.

The neatest part of the whole "dynamic velocity measurement" is that it can display the actual velocity on the fly. Makes it real easy for refs or gun techs.

Again, just a theory.

[pepper]

Perhaps the age of paintball innovation is over with, are we now in the twilight years?

AGD

Innovation is not dead. I think the concept of innovation is being reborn and handed out to the masses. Think about how many individuals have figured out how to make a part or a marker, and have had it made in mass quantities and sold on paintball forums world wide. You need to broaden your vision again sir, look beyond boxed markers at the retail stores.. look for the innovators on this forum. Combine their talents into a think tank and build a new marker.

Back in the day you had to figure out what tools to use to blaze that new trail, today is no different. Good Ideas and Bad Ideas lead to Better ideas.
The corporate mind set is what almost killed innovation. When $$ or the voting board is put first, Oops and mistakes are few and far between. There's no room left for chance. You have to search for the chance takers, the people that say why not.

[nerobro]

Cheating is a matter of the player. If they are determiend enough, any gun can be made to cheat. Via software, new boards, or just some monkey with a wrench.

Software for this would be easy. Go with TK's plan, fire over the chrono till it hits the right velocity. Make sure the chono setup/procedure takes at least 30 seconds. That means if a player wants to mess with his velocity during a game, he's down for at least 30 seconds, if not more.

The software should have static tables for pressure/velocity relations. Or at least it should not be user tunable. Perhaps there should be three tables? CO2, Liquid CO2, HPA/N2. To account for the different masses of the air used. Again, that's a setting that should take a long time to set. Or... even could be set via the velocity setup procedure. The differences in gas mass should need radically different valve dwells ;-)

I'm still stuck on the "lets prove that this works" thing.

Has anyone seen what the current draw is on one of the peizo injectors? Maybe it's time I write an e-mail or make a couple phone calls to the mfgs. Something tells me they'd be at least moderately friendly to this sort of thing.

[nerobro]

called bosch today, got the phone numbers to their R&D department. ;-) "I'm looking for the engineering specs for the peizo injectors. Power requirements, etc. We are looking to do high pressure air injection and your product seemed to be the closest thing to comercial soltuion to this."

[Newt]

...aaand?

[athomas]

There are ways to control this. Right now we use a metered amount of regulated air to achieve our desired velocity. Even with limitations of mechanical devices, most guns are pretty darned accurate in their consistency. Essentially, Tom is suggesting the same metering concept only not using regulated air or a preset amount. If you allow the air to flow at available pressure for a calculated amount of time it contains an amount of energy. If the pressure goes down, the time needs to go up to achieve the same amount of energy as previously used. The valve would have a calibration curve. You would set the velocity by a calibration number as well so that the gun knows its starting condition. I'm pretty sure that is where Tom's idea of hitting a calibration button and firing over a chrono until the proper speed is coming from.

[Lohman446]

Come on, cheating is not new to cheater boards. I can distinctly remember holding my entire set-up upside down in order to get some liquid into the marker and achieve a shot to reach across distances it should not have.

[nerobro]

There are ways to control this. Right now we use a metered amount of regulated air to achieve our desired velocity. Even with limitations of mechanical devices, most guns are pretty darned accurate in their consistency. Essentially, Tom is suggesting the same metering concept only not using regulated air or a preset amount. If you allow the air to flow at available pressure for a calculated amount of time it contains an amount of energy. If the pressure goes down, the time needs to go up to achieve the same amount of energy as previously used. The valve would have a calibration curve. You would set the velocity by a calibration number as well so that the gun knows its starting condition. I'm pretty sure that is where Tom's idea of hitting a calibration button and firing over a chrono until the proper speed is coming from.
The curve wouldn't need to be re-calibrated. That's something that would be constant.

The gun knows how much pressure it's getting. when you set the velocity, it then knows what duration at what pressure makes the ball go the velocity you want. It would also have a chart that would allow it to lookup the proper valve duration for other pressures. That wouldn't change. :-)

So... I got a call back from bosch. Wrong freaking department. I left another voicemail with the diesel fuel systems.

[vf-xx]

The curve wouldn't need to be re-calibrated. That's something that would be constant.

The gun knows how much pressure it's getting. when you set the velocity, it then knows what duration at what pressure makes the ball go the velocity you want. It would also have a chart that would allow it to lookup the proper valve duration for other pressures. That wouldn't change. :-)

So... I got a call back from bosch. Wrong freaking department. I left another voicemail with the diesel fuel systems.

No no, liquid CO2 runs into some interesting issues. I don't know how it' would know if it's getting gas or liquid CO2.

(If it's air only, well that's something else)

[nerobro]

No no, liquid CO2 runs into some interesting issues. I don't know how it' would know if it's getting gas or liquid CO2.

(If it's air only, well that's something else)
Well, if we were to change air systems, we'd need to use a different curve. when I suggested co2, tha twas because we'd be injecting a liquid with a liquid injector. forcing liquid to the valve isn't "that" hard.

[Lohman446]

http://automags.org/forums/showthread.php?t=169209&highlight=fuel

This is some old discussion in regards to some of the issues that may occur. Done with a bit less enthusiasm but it does bring up some points that will have to be addressed

[Lohman446]

While we are discussing this "ultimate gun". Some of us recall the design ideas on the second generation warp feed. Do your thoughts include its use?

[Sumthinwicked]

you suck

corey s

[nerobro]

Short of breach design, adding a warpfeed is unrelated to gun development.

I wish bosch would call me back.

[vf-xx]

While we are discussing this "ultimate gun". Some of us recall the design ideas on the second generation warp feed. Do your thoughts include its use?

Some of us do not recall such discussions. Any pointers to said discussions?

[Lohman446]

search it, I am sure it will come up, I beleive the search term would be second warp or some such. (home computer slow, Ill search it tomorrow if noone finds it)

Actually I bring it up because sealing off the breech became a point of contention if using a fuel injector as a power source, and I still maintain it could be done with a good pressure feed system, why not integrate it?

[nerobro]

Actually I bring it up because sealing off the breech became a point of contention if using a fuel injector as a power source, and I still maintain it could be done with a good pressure feed system, why not integrate it?
That adds a whole new layer of complexity. For that to work you'd need to depend on the power feed system to provide adequate breach sealing. I.. think it would. I think it would work. I do not think it would lead to great consistency. You'd need to have a gate of some sort on the feed side to stop the post ball vacuum, or the good 'ol bernuli from sucking the next ball into the breach.

I don't see how the gun being fed by an injector setup would make a difference one way or another in this case. it would work no matter how air was delivered to the breach.

[druid]

so what are we talking about here......an "ultimate gun" to actually market?

...or just something to appease someone's intellectual prowess-slash-ego, just so they can say "I did it!!....hrm?

...because in all honesty......everything that simply blurs together ^^up there^^ isn't going to be made or sold cheaply at all......IF it can even be done at all.

And even if they are sold.......imagine that dude being totally peeved off when someone splats them with a PGP or something. Epic failure...his 'perfect gun' didn't help him much at all, did it?

[Lohman446]

That adds a whole new layer of complexity. For that to work you'd need to depend on the power feed system to provide adequate breach sealing. I.. think it would. I think it would work. I do not think it would lead to great consistency. You'd need to have a gate of some sort on the feed side to stop the post ball vacuum, or the good 'ol bernuli from sucking the next ball into the breach.

I don't see how the gun being fed by an injector setup would make a difference one way or another in this case. it would work no matter how air was delivered to the breach.

You have to seal off the breech one way or another though. It became a serious sticking point on the old discussion. One of the purposes of the bolt is to seal off the breech. A trapdoor discussion was part of it. A modified gated feed system was part of the discussion - like the Omen used but obviously a bit more, well sealing.

When you use an injector based system though you are getting rid of the bolt (I assume) so a method of sealing the chamber has to be devised. The Warp (and Halo etc.) all provide pretty good pressure. A ball will travel down the path of least resistance, I think it would be the barrel, and I think it might be able to seal off the breech. But, somewhere we have to figure out how exactly we are going to do it. Or at least address the issue in concept.

Using an injector concept may not be as expensive as you are thinking DRG. I am sure price point on this would be in the $1500 to $2000 area...

[sig11]

I don't see why there is any talk about loaders or feeding. You don't build a gun you build a test system. In my head it's a pipe mounted on a bench to see if the fuel injector concept will work.

This also makes talk about the impact on the game irrelevant. Most of the posts are thinking way way too far ahead.

[nerobro]

You have to seal off the breech one way or another though. It became a serious sticking point on the old discussion. One of the purposes of the bolt is to seal off the breech. A trapdoor discussion was part of it. A modified gated feed system was part of the discussion - like the Omen used but obviously a bit more, well sealing. If you held the ball stack firmly, and used say.. a .710 feed pipe, I don't see why you'd need to actively seal the breach. You'd just need to make sure nothing overfed. Think halo-a detent. Trapdoors suck, becusae they require room to seal, and therefore disturb the ball stack more than a bolt does. Distrubing the ball stack was why mags broke paint for years. The omen uses a bolt, just with an indexed feeder. If you used an indexed feed, you wouldn't need to seriously seal the breach, so long as the whole feeder can take some pulsing.

Now imagine the mess if you have a breach break.....


When you use an injector based system though you are getting rid of the bolt (I assume) so a method of sealing the chamber has to be devised. The Warp (and Halo etc.) all provide pretty good pressure. A ball will travel down the path of least resistance, I think it would be the barrel, and I think it might be able to seal off the breech. But, somewhere we have to figure out how exactly we are going to do it. Or at least address the issue in concept. There's been no serious dicussion of not using a bolt.


Using an injector concept may not be as expensive as you are thinking DRG. I am sure price point on this would be in the $1500 to $2000 area... If the inejctors cost what I think they will... this could be a "quite cheap" design to market. However sig11 has a better point.


I don't see why there is any talk about loaders or feeding. You don't build a gun you build a test system. In my head it's a pipe mounted on a bench to see if the fuel injector concept will work.

This also makes talk about the impact on the game irrelevant. Most of the posts are thinking way way too far ahead.And this is exactly why I need a lathe. Just cut a breach, stuff balls down the barrel, and see what we get with different injector timings. However, even before that, we need an injector. And that's why I keep calling bosch. :-)

[athomas]

The curve wouldn't need to be re-calibrated. That's something that would be constant.

... It would also have a chart that would allow it to lookup the proper valve duration for other pressures. That wouldn't change. :-)
That is the calibration curve. :)

I have actually been pondering this idea myself for a couple of years. I hope one of you makes a prototype that works. I certainly don't have the time to work on it myself right now.

[Newt]

All I can see when reading the last post or two is that scene from Ironman when he tries out the suit for the first time.

"10% flow...that should be about in the ballpark with a 200 psi flow rate equivalent..."
BOOM - 800 FPS :wow:

[nerobro]

All I can see when reading the last post or two is that scene from Ironman when he tries out the suit for the first time.

"10% flow...that should be about in the ballpark with a 200 psi flow rate equivalent..."
BOOM - 800 FPS :wow:
I fully expect to make paint feel pain many times before this is over. Many a breach will be splattered. Many a tank of air will be emptied. Spreadsheets will be filled. Databases populated.

[FinchMan]

I like this idea of replacing a mechanical valve with a piezoelectric valve. Would off the shelf fuel injectors have enough flow rate to run on other inputs besides liquid co2?

Perhaps you could make a piezoelectric regulator using an input and output pressure transducer, it may even actively compensate the flow rate based on the fire input from the trigger pulses.

Isn't it possible to affect the spin of a paintball by covering the porting on one side of a barrel? It must cause at least some asymmetry. It would be fun to pair it with motion tracking software to make a self aiming gun. :D

[nerobro]

I like this idea of replacing a mechanical valve with a piezoelectric valve. Would off the shelf fuel injectors have enough flow rate to run on other inputs besides liquid co2?
There's math a couple pages back. Yes. they flow enough for liquid co2. And likely enough for air too.

[Ninjeff]

Its sad hat i ref so much, and play so little, that my excitement is derived not from Tom's idea of new gun tech, but from the fact that he watches Top gear as well. 'Cause its the best show ever.




Man....i need to play more.

[nerobro]

why, why is it so hard to get responses? I've been trying with bosch for a week. I got one call back "hey, I can't help you." Which is really handy.

So, I moved on to the next mfg. Siemens. Directory assistance there gave me the number of contintnetal/vdo automotive. ..... so I call there. "I can't connect you with anybody if you don't have their name." They transfered me to sales, low and behold, voicemail as well.

What's a guy got to do to talk to someone? :-)

[vf-xx]

Nero,

PM me the info you have to give the Siemens guy. I have some contacts with Siemens Motors. They might be able to direct me to the right person.

The Siemens phone system is TERRIBLE. And even the sales offices agree. 0_0

[snoopay700]

Its sad hat i ref so much, and play so little, that my excitement is derived not from Tom's idea of new gun tech, but from the fact that he watches Top gear as well. 'Cause its the best show ever.




Man....i need to play more.
I thought that as well, i need to play more too. I miss top gear at school.

[RavishingEddie]

Dear Tom,

Thank you so much for starting the spark to these flame of ideas. I haven't been this exited since my inception of my integrated AK -47/Emag idea that I finished successfully. (EMAG-9)

I think your idea of a fuel injector type application makes sense and is a great place to start. That said I have also been quite worried of all the other ideas about ball spin and velocity control. All this just over complicates things and may lead to failure in the inception of your design.
What we should focus on first is to create a platform thats it! I am not trying to tell you how to do things and I sincerely apologize for any misunderstanding, but if you simply created an air injection platform that achieved great consistency and no regulator needed, this would be a historic evolution in itself and a great platform to build all the other ideas on top of.

When I was building my Emag 9, the biggest problems I encountered were not ball spin or velocity fluctuations. The problems were weight and efficiency, sure it was an awesome looking gun, but a Marq or Ego would out value it with half the cost, weight and double the efficiency.
If the new platform allows for lighter weight, consistency, and no regulator needed it would be killer. I have also heard many people including myself complain about how the new guns all looking the same with swooping lines and bodies and how resemble toys more than guns. If your design looked anything similar to your Xmag bodies or the Karta body, it would seriously put a death grip on the market.

Just my 2 cents

[nerobro]

I got a call back from sales at siemens. they're doing some legwork for me. I should be getting a call from an engineer.

All of this work "just" to find out if we can conceivably power this with reasonable batteries..

[nerobro]

SCORE!!

I got through to someone useful at Bosch. Apperantly there's a lot of quite proprietary things that go with the peizo systems. Their driver circuitry is "near and dear" to their hearts. I took some wild stabs in the dark regarding what the problems could be, and it would seem that hitting the injectors to hard (electrically) can cause the crystals to fracture themselves.

I described the duration, and precision to which we needed to run our injection system, and the engineer agreed that the peizo system was pretty ideal for that. (I said 3-5ms duration, with repeatabilty down to less than half a percent)

It was suggested that we pick up an injector and give it a shot. The SAE's book "Diesel Engine Management", the 4th edition should have a chapter on peizo injection.

Of concern, were heating and lubrication of the injector. Something tells me that the sort of duty cycle that would be seen in a paintball gun, and the fact our guns are constantly decompressing air would both work in our favor, in regards to heating. Lubrication, could be a problem...

The injectors we're looking for are in both Audis and Daimler engines (read: Mercedes)

It was indicated that once we had something together, we could bring the proposal to Bosch, and they'd see what they could do to help.

So, next on the agenda:
Find "Diesel Engine Mangement, 4th ed"

Ugh. can't afford the book till Thursday. But, the book is available.

[RavishingEddie]

So, next on the agenda:
Find "Diesel Engine Mangement, 4th ed"

Ugh. can't afford the book till Thursday. But, the book is available.

Hey man I appreciate the research you are doing. Maybe we could all pitch in or something.

Are you trying to have Bosch design a fuel injection system specifically for this project or will you be using Daimler and Audi injectors?

Do you know the dimensions and weight?

Sorry for all the question, just a bit curious and would like to help with this as much as I can.

[nerobro]

well, right now the devices are designed for metering of fluids at 20,000psi. We'd be running air at a much lower pressure. So, that alone will let us make the housings smaller. I think the peizo stack itself is only a few inches. Since we don't need to isolate it from engine heat, there's a lot of shrinkage that can happen.

Now, this means re-engineering the whole thing for our purpose.

As it stands, I think we can "test" the design using stock diesel injectors. Which we should do! If that works... bosch just might be interested in producing the special injector design.

I do think we're getting ahead of ourselves again though. We need to get a testbed built and some sane driver ciruitry going so we can give this a whirl.

Anybody have a blown up diesel audi or TDI VW?

[Fred]

I don't, but the best place I can think of to look would be on vwvortex.com, or fourtitude.com (biggest vw and audi enthusiast sites with HUGE forum populations).

[om3n]

This is so exciting. It's awesome that Tom Kaye posts an idea on the internet about a theoretical paintball gun design, and then normal people take his idea and run with it. I really hope this concept works :p

[vf-xx]

Nero, how old do you think we can go for first stage poof of concept. Quick search yeilds some very inexpensive options if we look back into the late 80's early 90's...

[nerobro]

Well that's the kicker. It needs to be the Peizo acutated valves. They did electronic injection for years, but only recently did they go peizo. :-/ We'd need to do research to figure out more.

[vf-xx]

Ask your contact at Bosch?

Heck, for that matter, ask them if it would be possible to get one or two for proof of concept testing.

Never hurts to ask.

Edit: Found a 2004 Golf Injector for sub $300

[DevilMan]

Hey Nero... just found this online... may be another avenue of contact to get a free sample to try out.

http://www.blogcdn.com/green.autoblog.com/media/2008/05/conti-piezo-injector.jpg

It don't look that large at all, though I could be mistaken.

The rest of the info can be found here ~> http://green.autoblog.com/2008/05/05/continental-announces-new-piezo-injector-that-makes-diesels-even/

I'm watching and hoping I can find something to help make this a reality. We'll see.

DM

[RavishingEddie]

Without feedback electronic control is useless in my opinion. I have come up with an idea to measure the velocity WITHOUT using eyes, sensors on the barrel or anything ugly. I would envision that you push the "reset velocity" button and start firing the gun over a crono. The velocity will go up with every shot and when you hit 280 or 300 FPS you stop firing and now the gun has the info it needs to adjust for velocity.

I was reading through the posts and I found this sentence from Mr. Kaye to be very satisfying. The reason is because if he actually knows a way to adjust the velocity, then
it is one road block out of the way for this project. It isn't about how differen't it is from
current marker velocity adjustment, but more like a problem out of the way for this project.
Thank you Tom!

First question is how will the bolt action work? If the air shoots out of the Injector, which I believe is substitute for the valve then would we even need a bolt? Could the ball just load into the chamber and be shot?

How much voltage does the injector require?

[vf-xx]

First question is how will the bolt action work? If the air shoots out of the Injector, which I believe is substitute for the valve then would we even need a bolt? Could the ball just load into the chamber and be shot?

you'd get alot of air blowing out the feedneck if you don't have a bolt or a gate of some-sort.

Inital thoughts were to use a mag bolt. Mostly cause it's AGD, and there's no reason it wouldn't work. On the plus side, this set up would remove the sear.


How much voltage does the injector require?

I believe that's one of the bigger questions we still don't know.

[DevilMan]

Well the ultimate would be bolt-less design. A way to seal the breach to allow the injector to pulse the air into it and then open to allow ball feed.

If you used an injector to replace the area of the regulator on the valve that would be one step in the right direction as it's pulse a set PSI or for a set time (MS) and that would force the bolt forward same as the mag works currently. I really don't think that'd be too difficult to incorporate and test. Now PRODUCING it is another can of worms.

To me the ideal way though would be to have the balls feed straight into the breach, have the injector pulse, and have the next ball feed in. How to keep blow back/by to a minimum I'm not sure just yet, unless you simply used a side chamber of sorts to allow the air to blow by the ball but still down the barrel. Maybe like a grove around the breach area that acts as a gas blow by but still puts the air down the barrel. That would help with efficiency a tad, though the blow by itself wouldn't be great.

It should certainly help with popcorning, but then again with the advent of force feed hoppers or the incorporation again of powerfeed that's a moot point.

I would like to see someone take the injector, mount it to the bact of the power tube and see what happens.

DM

[skanksanddank]

I am sure this has been said before but I didnt see it. An integrated chrono is quite easy, add another eye and some nice software to go with it. Adding this feature could branch to an autotune mode, just fire iff a hopper for an quick learn of your style, the gun adjusts for your shooting style. A pintle valve as everyone suggested would do nicely for air delivery, and I have seen some very efficient regs, so it can't be far off to have one as close to perfect as possible.

[nerobro]

Hey Nero... just found this online... may be another avenue of contact to get a free sample to try out. *snip*

The rest of the info can be found here ~> http://green.autoblog.com/2008/05/05/continental-announces-new-piezo-injector-that-makes-diesels-even/
Continental is Siemens US fuel systems group. they never called me back. Speaking of which, I should give them another try.


First question is how will the bolt action work? If the air shoots out of the Injector, which I believe is substitute for the valve then would we even need a bolt? Could the ball just load into the chamber and be shot?

How much voltage does the injector require?
Though we aren't there yet... This valve could just be put behind the powertube and bolt assembly on an automag, and it would function. There are other ways of actuating the bolt too.

Voltage is easy, they use ~150v. It's been mentioned before. That's an achievable voltage, a smps, some caps, and a fet that can handle blocking 300v or so, and we're set. the real problem is we don't know how much current it takes. that's potentially a deal breaker.


I am sure this has been said before but I didnt see it. An integrated chrono is quite easy, add another eye and some nice software to go with it. Adding this feature could branch to an autotune mode, just fire iff a hopper for an quick learn of your style, the gun adjusts for your shooting style.
There's a lot of ways to do it. The reliable methods all require wires that go to the front of the gun. That's a dealbreaker.

Now what do you mean by the gun "adjusting to your shooting style" Pull trigger, ball shoots....

[RavishingEddie]

Originally posted by Devilman
To me the ideal way though would be to have the balls feed straight into the breach, have the injector pulse, and have the next ball feed in. How to keep blow back/by to a minimum I'm not sure just yet, unless you simply used a side chamber of sorts to allow the air to blow by the ball but still down the barrel. Maybe like a grove around the breach area that acts as a gas blow by but still puts the air down the barrel. That would help with efficiency a tad, though the blow by itself wouldn't be great.

I was thinking about what you said and remembered the AK-47 mechanism. Maybe we could use a gate of some sort to prevent blowback to the ball stack and use your air chamber idea to recycle the excess air to open the gate and let the next ball in. Here is my reference.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQe864rGLyk&NR=1&feature=fvwp

This ofcourse would require a closed bolt design, a very light gate or bolt and spring, but since we aren't dealing with sears, why would we need to use the decade old bolts or limit ourselves to the automag platform?

Just and idea. :dance:

[DevilMan]

I was thinking about what you said and remembered the AK-47 mechanism. Maybe we could use a gate of some sort to prevent blowback to the ball stack and use your air chamber idea to recycle the excess air to open the gate and let the next ball in. Here is my reference.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQe864rGLyk&NR=1&feature=fvwp

This ofcourse would require a closed bolt design, a very light gate or bolt and spring, but since we aren't dealing with sears, why would we need to use the decade old bolts or limit ourselves to the automag platform?

Just and idea. :dance:

Having a physical gate though will slow the cycle times and increase the complexity as well as allow for more "chopping" All in all, a well placed burst of air from the injector with the right placement should not only eliminate ALL blow back, but actually induce SUCTION into the chamber, sucking the next ball into the chamber almost instantly behind the one that was just fired. That would only require a small manifold of sorts on the end of the injector to diffuse the air the proper way.

DM

[DevilMan]

OH and while we are wishing and dreaming..... CAN WE PLEASE USE TWISTLOCK BARRELS AGAIN!!!!!!!

I soooooooo much prefer the TL's over the other options the market has.

DM

[RavishingEddie]

Having a physical gate though will slow the cycle times and increase the complexity as well as allow for more "chopping" All in all, a well placed burst of air from the injector with the right placement should not only eliminate ALL blow back, but actually induce SUCTION into the chamber, sucking the next ball into the chamber almost instantly behind the one that was just fired. That would only require a small manifold of sorts on the end of the injector to diffuse the air the proper way.

DM

Yeah you are right more complexity is not our friend :tard:

A boltless design is a good concept and if it would at all work, it would make for a strong selling point and eliminate weight. :clap: You are right about the suction, I forgot about that.

[nerobro]

If you're using a force feed hopper, you can't go boltless. YOu do need a retention system to manage boltless cycling. Why depend on a loose stack of balls to seal your breach when a bolt will seal it for you? That said, we could shorten the bolt travel a lot as we don't need to account for acceleration time of a hammer, or making sure things move far enough to make and break good seals like on the mag.

You could use a gate of some sort in the feed neck, that would only need to move a fraction of the width of a paintball. But you'd still be depending on the balls in the neck to do your sealing, I don't like that.

[RavishingEddie]

Hey Nero,

I work for a manufacturer that sends Demo units out to potential inquiries and our devices are worth anywhere between 10K to 30K a piece. Could you contact Bosch and see if they
will let you borrow a demo unit of the fuel injector? I could ask them as well if you give me their number.

What type of testing tools were you planning on using wiith the spark plug?
Right now i'm living across the country in a small apartment and don't have much, but a soldering iron and a laptop and a electronics store close by. :( I will try to help as much as I can :cheers:

[halB]

If you're using a force feed hopper, you can't go boltless. YOu do need a retention system to manage boltless cycling. Why depend on a loose stack of balls to seal your breach when a bolt will seal it for you? That said, we could shorten the bolt travel a lot as we don't need to account for acceleration time of a hammer, or making sure things move far enough to make and break good seals like on the mag.

You could use a gate of some sort in the feed neck, that would only need to move a fraction of the width of a paintball. But you'd still be depending on the balls in the neck to do your sealing, I don't like that.


Ya, I invented a method that cut the distance of bolt travel by a significant fraction.

If I get a good summer internship next year I'll have the money to patent it.

[vf-xx]

I forget if this was linked to before in the thread, but thought it was interesting:

Cyber 9000 (http://www.vintagerex.com/cgi-bin/index.cgi?action=viewmarker&marker=Cyber9000&man=PVI%20-%20PneuVentures%20Inc)

[nerobro]

I remember when the cyber 9000 was a pipe dream, and when it was new, and when it failed. .... i've been doing this to long. :-)

and just to be clear. the cyber 9000 is a PVI shocker, with new electronics. so as a gun, it still sucks.

[vf-xx]

Yeah, but I do find it interesting that they were trying an on barrel chrono

[nerobro]

well, in discussions with another friend of mine. He suggested a laser rangefinder. I dismissed my inital idea of using one mounted in the bolt. (a idea he suggested later in the conversation as well) due to misting and fog when the gun fires.

Okey, so we can't do it in the gun. How about.. beside the gun. Say a camera mounted over and under the barrel. Stereoscopic cameras can determine range. Sadly that sort of processing power takes a lot of battery. ... but you'd also have in game video! :-)

So... my next thought was to put a simple laser rangefinder under the barrel. Aim it some 20-25" out, and it might catch 60-80% of the balls shot over it and get velocity that way.

Hey? Look.. I was talking ongun chronos. :-) I feel dirty now.

Hmm.. Perhaps it would be a good sellign point to sell each gun with a little clamp on the muzzle type chrono. Tom would know best what a little plastic shell would cost to have produces. Put it on to chrono the gun, take it off to play.

[athomas]

Hmm.. Perhaps it would be a good sellign point to sell each gun with a little clamp on the muzzle type chrono. ... Put it on to chrono the gun, take it off to play.Isn't that what we have now with the little hand held chronos. Hold it under the barrel to chrono, take it away to play. Just make one that doesn't have to be manually reset and you have the same idea.

[vf-xx]

Wouldn't the easiest way to do an on gun chrony be a pair of breakbeam eyes with a set seperation?

They're readily available in the paintball world and the calculation should be simple / easy enough.

[RavishingEddie]

How come there is so much talk about chrono on a gun. I haven't ever heard of such a demand in the paintball field. You chrono once and then forget about it. Also many fields require that you get chrono'd by a field rep so he can tag your gun. So even if you had such a device why would you need it since you are forced to use the fields chrono anyway?

[usagi_tetsu]

How come there is so much talk about chrono on a gun. I haven't ever heard of such a demand in the paintball field. You chrono once and then forget about it. Also many fields require that you get chrono'd by a field rep so he can tag your gun. So even if you had such a device why would you need it since you are forced to use the fields chrono anyway?

Where it started in this particular discussion was that it was believed that the gun would need to know, constantly, what velocity it is producing so that it could adjust its flow rate, on the fly. This would keep the marker more consistant, shot to shot, and also, coupled with info being streamed from the tank on how much volume remains and what pressure the reg is giving, let the marker dip deeper into the tank by adjusting dump chamber volume, dwell, and whatnot.

Now, outside of this discussion, I could see having on-gun chronies being useful to the major tournament leagues. Couple each marker's chrony with a wireless transmitter, and the referees can get a constant stream of info. Yes, spikes do happen, but if someone is shooting consistantly hot, the closest on-field ref can be alerted and pull the player.

Would an on-marker chrony be useful to us rec-ballers? Not particularly, aside from my first point about the gun design needing it.

[DevilMan]

How come there is so much talk about chrono on a gun. I haven't ever heard of such a demand in the paintball field. You chrono once and then forget about it. Also many fields require that you get chrono'd by a field rep so he can tag your gun. So even if you had such a device why would you need it since you are forced to use the fields chrono anyway?

As Usagi states. It started as a way for the markers components to know how much air at what pressure and for how long. It wasn't a matter of being field legal, but a gauge as to how much work for the marker to do.

The issue I have with that is, an on board chrono would measure the speed of the ball JUST shot. And we all know how much flux there is in balls out there. So if you shot a small bore ball that sealed the barrel poorly and it went to 275FPS when the limit is 285 the gun would compensate and maybe keep the dwell up a notch to speed the next shot up. The next one could be a nice fat sealing type ball that the extra time would cause you to shoot 305. The next shot would be pulled WAYYYYYY down because you'd be shooting hot. I think you can grasp the idea...

That's the only thing I see wrong with the idea.

DM

[Lohman446]

http://www.mcarterbrown.com/forums/dead-zone/75513-phantom-revolution-they-do-exist.html

This might be somewhat pertinent, at least some of the thoughts to the discussion

[Rooster]

It seems as if the high tech answer may be no answer at all. What is all goes back to is that you are using a very imperfect power source. Find a way to lose the gas, and a paintball gun becomes as accurate as any other gun. (That was shooting a round projectile without the benifit of rifling)

[vf-xx]

Everybody looks at me like I'm crazy when I tell them I'd like to make a coil gun style paintball gun....

[Ratt]

Everybody looks at me like I'm crazy when I tell them I'd like to make a coil gun style paintball gun....

What do you mean by a 'coil' style gun?

[vf-xx]

Coil Gun (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coilgun)

Basically that design, but since the paint is obviously non metallic, you'd have to put a carriage that has some sort of return or safety stop so it doesn't fly out too.

[CatoRockwell]

I'll take mine in a railed body like the Tac-One. I'm thinking a Tan & darkbrown swirl.
:cheers:
How much is this going to run me?
I'll start saving now

[sig11]

I'll take mine in a railed body like the Tac-One. I'm thinking a Tan & darkbrown swirl.
:cheers:
How much is this going to run me?
I'll start saving now

Send Nerobro a piezoelectric fuel injector and you never know...

[PaintballEngineer]

Any developments?