Polygonal Barrel Theory. Respomses welcome

[Carbon]

SOme where in the tech threads there was something about the ideal barrell to ball fit, it involves two points of contact of the ball and barrel (figure A). The theory is... would not a triagular barrell or a polygonal with multiple contact points be a more ideal paint to barrel match (Figure B & C)? Mind you these pictures are exagerrated.

Would it not be more gas eficient? I know HK and Glock uses polygonal barrells in order to produce higher bullet velocity as well as a tighter gas seal. Has anyone built barrels like this, i know Armson rifles AND TWISTS their rifling, i was wondering if a 8" to 10" Polygonal "controll back" with STRAIGHT rifling could provide more accurate shots. I suppose the "lands and Grooves" of these barrel would have to be done in thousand maybe hundreds.
Im no machinist, but i wonder the degree of difficulty and cost effectiveness in fabricating such a barrel. In anycase, yall techheads fell free to drop in anything i missed in regards.

[Miscue]

Won't help. The ball is inaccurate to begin with... rifling does nothing.

[darklord]

I see your point, but, as miscue pointed out, not all paintballs are the same size, even in the same bag.

[MarkM]

I understand what you are trying to say aswell, but even if you were to get "perfect" balls then your design would be super inefficient due to large amount of wasted air over the current barrel types on sale. Oh and straight rifling has been done by J&J many years ago...got a couple of those brass tubes lying around somewhere

[Smokee_2_7]

someone please correct me if im wrong, but wasnt tom using perfect circle balls when he noted the 2 contact points inside the barrel? If so, I can definitly see where Carbon is comming from.


Micsue, Are you not thinking of 'rifiling' in the "traditiona" sense? With the channels and grooves cut in a spiral pattern to induce spin?

This theory would has nothing to due with 'spinning' the ball- - which we know not to work. IF increased contact area does increase gas efficiency, then I think there is somthing that could come from this design. I would like to see this threory tested, for sure.

Carl

[thevilduk]

1) the gas efficency would be terrible due to the open space for gas to flow around the ball

2)paintballs suck tons for projectiles

3)it would take many hours to machine a barrel out like that, the only real good way to do it is to e.d.m. it out, or i think you can use a broach.

[Miscue]

Originally posted by Smokee_2_7
someone please correct me if im wrong, but wasnt tom using perfect circle balls when he noted the 2 contact points inside the barrel? If so, I can definitly see where Carbon is comming from.


Micsue, Are you not thinking of 'rifiling' in the "traditiona" sense? With the channels and grooves cut in a spiral pattern to induce spin?

This theory would has nothing to due with 'spinning' the ball- - which we know not to work. IF increased contact area does increase gas efficiency, then I think there is somthing that could come from this design. I would like to see this threory tested, for sure.

Carl

Straight, Spiraled, Polygon... whatever... don't matter.

[P8ntballerAK]

wow, did you guys even read the post?

he said his pics were exaggerated, what he is talking about would nt make it less efficient but more efficient and it would make for better accuracy since the ball would be con more than 2 sides of the barrel. the gaps he posted are to big but again he said it was exaggerated, I will try to make a more realistic perspective. The sides where its touching would have more contact and the area where you see spaces would be really minute.

[Aliens-8-MyDad]

we should make barrels out of jello so it conforms to the balls curves and gives u a perfect shot no matter what shape the ball is :)

[joeyjoe367]

Originally posted by Aliens-8-MyDad
we should make barrels out of jello so it conforms to the balls curves and gives u a perfect shot no matter what shape the ball is :)

Just use a garden hose :)

[joeyjoe367]

Originally posted by P8ntballerAK
wow, did you guys even read the post?

he said his pics were exaggerated, what he is talking about would nt make it less efficient but more efficient and it would make for better accuracy since the ball would be con more than 2 sides of the barrel. the gaps he posted are to big but again he said it was exaggerated, I will try to make a more realistic perspective. The sides where its touching would have more contact and the area where you see spaces would be really minute.

Check out "Deep-Blue" and the "paintball spin physics" thread. What makes a paintball innaccurate is another force that has nothing to do with barrel geometry; it's aerodynamics of a sphere.

[cledford]

The point that Miscue is trying to make is that no matter how you make the barrels, once the ball enters the atmosphere IT becomes inaccurate due to it's nature. Nothing, short of changing the shape of the paintball to something other then a ball, will EVER affect the accuracy of one. This is due to what happens to the ball in flight based on the laws of nature that dictate what happens to air flowing around an inperfect sphere.

It can never be changed no matter what. Tom just made a big post about this after a discussion in deep blue. It is not the barrel or guns fault.

-Calvin

[cledford]

Oh, and Armson already makes a polygonal rifled barrel...

[Miscue]

Yep... and it doesn't work any better than the other fancy hollow tubes. :)

[P8ntballerAK]

here is a barrel with ten sides un rounded