Would this kind of design be suitable for a pneumatic? Its going to be for a 13mm ID barrel, approx muzzle velocity of 222m/s, shooting drag stabilized ammunition.
Also, how much clearance do I need between the projectile and baffle walls?
Suppressor baffle design - single assembly
-
FighterAce
- Specialist 2
- Posts: 295
- Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 1:28 pm
- Location: Croatia/Zagreb
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 4 times
- Contact:
I'm thinking about building a suppressor with this kind of internals...
Would this kind of design be suitable for a pneumatic? Its going to be for a 13mm ID barrel, approx muzzle velocity of 222m/s, shooting drag stabilized ammunition.
Also, how much clearance do I need between the projectile and baffle walls?
Would this kind of design be suitable for a pneumatic? Its going to be for a 13mm ID barrel, approx muzzle velocity of 222m/s, shooting drag stabilized ammunition.
Also, how much clearance do I need between the projectile and baffle walls?
“The combined synergy of a man and rifle is matchless.
The steadiness of hand, the acuity of vision and finally
the art of knowing how to make the rifle an extension of the
body all equate to the ultimate synthesis of man and machine.”
The steadiness of hand, the acuity of vision and finally
the art of knowing how to make the rifle an extension of the
body all equate to the ultimate synthesis of man and machine.”
-
linuxexorcist
- Private 4
- Posts: 61
- Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2008 7:52 pm
Some experimentation would have to be done to figure out clearance for the projectile, though i think ~10-15% of the diameter would be fine. It would also depend on the stability of the projectile.
I think you could make this with a drill press, epoxy and some patience, hold on, i'm gonna sketchup this
UPDATE
I'm back:
You could probably do that, the hole down the middle would be a barrel piece, with epoxy cast around it, then some holes drilled, and the whole thing sleeved and sealed
I'm thinking that, while this design looks interesting, it's not worth the work compared to a regular-style suppressor
I think you could make this with a drill press, epoxy and some patience, hold on, i'm gonna sketchup this
UPDATE
I'm back:
You could probably do that, the hole down the middle would be a barrel piece, with epoxy cast around it, then some holes drilled, and the whole thing sleeved and sealed
I'm thinking that, while this design looks interesting, it's not worth the work compared to a regular-style suppressor
-
jackssmirkingrevenge
- Five Star General
- Posts: 26203
- Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:28 pm
- Has thanked: 569 times
- Been thanked: 345 times
Ah, the making-propelling-gasses-think-"where-the-heck-do-have-to-go-now" baffle design 
There are a lot of complex arrangements out there, even the original Maxim design did offer a veritable assault course for the gasses to travel - but don't forget that there's no substitute for cubic capacity, make it as big as you can.
Less clearance = more likelyhood the projectile will strike the baffles and be deflected.
It's therefore a compromise between noise and accuracy, depends what's most important to you. I think for spudguns the best solution is to avoid this possibility completely by making a ported tube design as used in shotgun suppressors to make sure the wad doesn't interfere with the baffles:
There are a lot of complex arrangements out there, even the original Maxim design did offer a veritable assault course for the gasses to travel - but don't forget that there's no substitute for cubic capacity, make it as big as you can.More clearance = less effective sound suppressionhow much clearance do I need between the projectile and baffle walls?
Less clearance = more likelyhood the projectile will strike the baffles and be deflected.
It's therefore a compromise between noise and accuracy, depends what's most important to you. I think for spudguns the best solution is to avoid this possibility completely by making a ported tube design as used in shotgun suppressors to make sure the wad doesn't interfere with the baffles:
hectmarr wrote:You have to make many weapons, because this field is long and short life
-
FighterAce
- Specialist 2
- Posts: 295
- Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 1:28 pm
- Location: Croatia/Zagreb
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 4 times
- Contact:
I've been using the ported tube design for a couple of years actually and I'm not impressed by it. Thanks for the drawing linuxexorcist but I could easily mill out any kind of design... whatever is most effective.
“The combined synergy of a man and rifle is matchless.
The steadiness of hand, the acuity of vision and finally
the art of knowing how to make the rifle an extension of the
body all equate to the ultimate synthesis of man and machine.”
The steadiness of hand, the acuity of vision and finally
the art of knowing how to make the rifle an extension of the
body all equate to the ultimate synthesis of man and machine.”
-
jackssmirkingrevenge
- Five Star General
- Posts: 26203
- Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:28 pm
- Has thanked: 569 times
- Been thanked: 345 times
Nothing wrong with it as long as you have multiple baffles and a large tube.FighterAce wrote:I've been using the ported tube design for a couple of years actually and I'm not impressed by it.
The first design you posted looks more like "I have a CNC milling machine and I'm showing off" as opposed to "I've done my research on the best possible way to deflect gasses".I could easily mill out any kind of design... whatever is most effective.
There are many baffle stack designs out there, from what I've seen you can't really point at one being dramatically more effective that any other.
hectmarr wrote:You have to make many weapons, because this field is long and short life
-
FighterAce
- Specialist 2
- Posts: 295
- Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 1:28 pm
- Location: Croatia/Zagreb
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 4 times
- Contact:
Does it really sound like that?? I don't have a CNC but I want something as effective as possible. That picture is just one example of many...jackssmirkingrevenge wrote: The first design you posted looks more like "I have a CNC milling machine and I'm showing off" as opposed to "I've done my research on the best possible way to deflect gasses".
And you really don't need a CNC... heck even a drill press would do... all you need is a length of aluminum bar. One hole down the center for the projectile and a series of drilled out "triangles" down the entire length of the baffle.
Actually you can... maybe not dramatically, but certainly more effective.jackssmirkingrevenge wrote: you can't really point at one being dramatically more effective that any other.
You're right, I haven't done my homework... I can't do so many things at once... but I do know a lot from all those years watching nutnfancy's videos
“The combined synergy of a man and rifle is matchless.
The steadiness of hand, the acuity of vision and finally
the art of knowing how to make the rifle an extension of the
body all equate to the ultimate synthesis of man and machine.”
The steadiness of hand, the acuity of vision and finally
the art of knowing how to make the rifle an extension of the
body all equate to the ultimate synthesis of man and machine.”
-
jackssmirkingrevenge
- Five Star General
- Posts: 26203
- Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:28 pm
- Has thanked: 569 times
- Been thanked: 345 times
http://www.silencertests.com/
Remember though that what works for firearms doesn't necessarily work for pneumatics. I've seen rimfires and high powered commerial airguns in 0.22" (Daystate Air Ranger, Shinsung Career that sort of thing) fired with the same suppressors, and I can tell you that the powder burners were much quieter.
Remember though that what works for firearms doesn't necessarily work for pneumatics. I've seen rimfires and high powered commerial airguns in 0.22" (Daystate Air Ranger, Shinsung Career that sort of thing) fired with the same suppressors, and I can tell you that the powder burners were much quieter.
hectmarr wrote:You have to make many weapons, because this field is long and short life
-
FighterAce
- Specialist 2
- Posts: 295
- Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 1:28 pm
- Location: Croatia/Zagreb
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 4 times
- Contact:
Hence my question...jackssmirkingrevenge wrote: Remember though that what works for firearms doesn't necessarily work for pneumatics.
Would this kind of design be suitable for a pneumatic?
“The combined synergy of a man and rifle is matchless.
The steadiness of hand, the acuity of vision and finally
the art of knowing how to make the rifle an extension of the
body all equate to the ultimate synthesis of man and machine.”
The steadiness of hand, the acuity of vision and finally
the art of knowing how to make the rifle an extension of the
body all equate to the ultimate synthesis of man and machine.”
-
Crna Legija
- First Sergeant 2
- Posts: 2333
- Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 5:14 am
- Location: australia
for a pneumatic you cant beat volume just make it BIG
'' To alcohol... The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems.”
--Homer Simpson
Add me on ps3: wannafuk, 8/11/11 cant wait
--Homer Simpson
Add me on ps3: wannafuk, 8/11/11 cant wait
What works for firearms will work for hybrids much better than pneumatics.
Firearms are using a small volume of hot high pressure gas, the gas loses pressure simply by being allowed into an expansion chamber but then loses pressure again because its being cooled at the same time.
With pneumatics in the spudding category you're screwed on all points because the gases are in fact really cold already - as it expands down the barrel the temperature drops through the floor.
The other thing is pneumatics round here tend to use a MASSIVE volume of air (small ones are usually several hundred CCs, large ones several litres) and dump it all in one go. There is no subtle solution to muffling a large quantity of cold gas which is leaving your barrel at significant pressure.
Dainty little tubes as on a small calibre rifle are not going to do much.
I did have some success (as long as a slug was being fired) in changing the rather loud fairly sharp report from my cannon to a loud dampened "thump" with a heavily padded and externally as well as internally ported suppressor.
Depends on the effect you're after. Really quiet means a really large volume expansion chamber though.
*edited: completely mangled section, seemed to have started a sentence halfway through another sentence.
Firearms are using a small volume of hot high pressure gas, the gas loses pressure simply by being allowed into an expansion chamber but then loses pressure again because its being cooled at the same time.
With pneumatics in the spudding category you're screwed on all points because the gases are in fact really cold already - as it expands down the barrel the temperature drops through the floor.
The other thing is pneumatics round here tend to use a MASSIVE volume of air (small ones are usually several hundred CCs, large ones several litres) and dump it all in one go. There is no subtle solution to muffling a large quantity of cold gas which is leaving your barrel at significant pressure.
Dainty little tubes as on a small calibre rifle are not going to do much.
I did have some success (as long as a slug was being fired) in changing the rather loud fairly sharp report from my cannon to a loud dampened "thump" with a heavily padded and externally as well as internally ported suppressor.
Depends on the effect you're after. Really quiet means a really large volume expansion chamber though.
*edited: completely mangled section, seemed to have started a sentence halfway through another sentence.
Last edited by Hotwired on Sun Jan 30, 2011 6:16 pm, edited 2 times in total.
-
FighterAce
- Specialist 2
- Posts: 295
- Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 1:28 pm
- Location: Croatia/Zagreb
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 4 times
- Contact:
I have about 30cc of chamber volume and 130cc of barrel volume.... the chamber is pressurized to 50 bar, how many cubic centimeters do I have in the chamber at atmospheric pressure?
Just to get a rough idea how much volume I need for the suppressor...
Just to get a rough idea how much volume I need for the suppressor...
“The combined synergy of a man and rifle is matchless.
The steadiness of hand, the acuity of vision and finally
the art of knowing how to make the rifle an extension of the
body all equate to the ultimate synthesis of man and machine.”
The steadiness of hand, the acuity of vision and finally
the art of knowing how to make the rifle an extension of the
body all equate to the ultimate synthesis of man and machine.”
Well 1 bar is roughly 1 atmosphere of pressure.
So multiply by 50 = 1500 cc / 1.5 litres
So multiply by 50 = 1500 cc / 1.5 litres
-
velocity3x
- Corporal 4
- Posts: 828
- Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 3:09 pm
- Location: Yuma, Arizona
- Contact:
Yes.auspud wrote:have any of you guy's used a muzzle brake ?
Yes......Huge reduction in recoil!if so did it reduce the recoil ????
Suppressors ARE for noise reduction. They are not muzzle brakes.does the supresser's work for noise reduction ????
-
linuxexorcist
- Private 4
- Posts: 61
- Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2008 7:52 pm
Quick question: has anyone tried using wipes in an air rifle suppressor?
i know firearm suppressors don't use them to reduce maintanence requirements, but they could be helpful in a less wear-and-tear situation like an airgun
Wipes are inner dividers intended to touch the bullet as it passes through the suppressor, and are typically made of rubber, plastic or foam. Each wipe may either have a hole drilled in it before use, a pattern stamped into its surface at the point where the bullet will strike it, or it may simply be punched through by the bullet. Wipes typically last for a small number of firings (perhaps no more than five) before their performance is significantly degraded. While many suppressors used wipes in the Vietnam War era, most modern suppressors do not use them to minimize disassembly and parts replacement.
i know firearm suppressors don't use them to reduce maintanence requirements, but they could be helpful in a less wear-and-tear situation like an airgun
Wipes are inner dividers intended to touch the bullet as it passes through the suppressor, and are typically made of rubber, plastic or foam. Each wipe may either have a hole drilled in it before use, a pattern stamped into its surface at the point where the bullet will strike it, or it may simply be punched through by the bullet. Wipes typically last for a small number of firings (perhaps no more than five) before their performance is significantly degraded. While many suppressors used wipes in the Vietnam War era, most modern suppressors do not use them to minimize disassembly and parts replacement.