Which has better flow?

tatfree · Sat Mar 13, 2010 11:23 am

POLAND_SPUD wrote:
the fact that you can't slowly squeeze them open means that the gun "jumps" a little if it's not rested on something
yeah but every valve is like that... so that's why it might be a good idea to add a smaller QEV.. sure if you open the triggering valve slow it will open the smaller QEV slower than it can but that's going to be better than if it was attached directly to the main valve

Can this problem be solved with electric opening valves ?
You can use any switch you would want to complete a cercuit, even if it only takes 1 ounce of pressure from your finger.

POLAND_SPUD · Sat Mar 13, 2010 11:46 am

uhmm I hate such questions as they're very vague...

yes this problem can be solved with electric opening valves (solenoid valves)... but it can be solved with the use of small QEVs too... or with the use of piloted valves

most solenoid valves are in fact piloted (indirect acting) valves... though piloted valves are to some extent like small QEVs (as they have a small inbuilt valve that switches the main spool)... you can also buy manually actuated (for example a pushbutton valve) indirect acting valves...

though, most indirect acting valves do not handle high pressures well (due to the way they are built)

lol there are no simple answers...

tatfree · Sat Mar 13, 2010 1:14 pm

Would any of these be as good as a 1/4" Ball valve ?

I would think at least the 1/2 NPT would be, but again I am a newbie at this stuff.

http://www.valve-push-button.com/

Also how much finger pressure woud it take to push these down using 20 PSI up to 180PSI ? Also would it be the same applied pressure for either of those PSI's ?

Jack_Hogg · Sat Mar 13, 2010 1:16 pm

Ballvalve is the winner. Make it a spring assisted ballvalve, then you could make a trigger mechanism so you also have to pull 1 ounce to pilot the qev. I am planning to do it too.

tatfree · Sat Mar 13, 2010 1:30 pm

Jack_Hogg wrote:Ballvalve is the winner. Make it a spring assisted ballvalve, then you could make a trigger mechanism so you also have to pull 1 ounce to pilot the qev. I am planning to do it too.

There just has to be a better and cleaner looking way to do this. I refuse to think that these things are limited to a lame ball valve.

Heimo · Sat Mar 13, 2010 2:34 pm

tatfree wrote:
Jack_Hogg wrote:Ballvalve is the winner. Make it a spring assisted ballvalve, then you could make a trigger mechanism so you also have to pull 1 ounce to pilot the qev. I am planning to do it too.
There just has to be a better and cleaner looking way to do this. I refuse to think that these things are limited to a lame ball valve.

how about something like this
http://www.launchpotatoes.com/index.php ... oductId=53

FighterAce · Sat Mar 13, 2010 3:25 pm

tatfree wrote:
Jack_Hogg wrote:Ballvalve is the winner. Make it a spring assisted ballvalve, then you could make a trigger mechanism so you also have to pull 1 ounce to pilot the qev. I am planning to do it too.
There just has to be a better and cleaner looking way to do this. I refuse to think that these things are limited to a lame ball valve.

What about schrader valves? They can pilot piston valves too but I'm not sure if they are worse/better then blowguns.

Gun Freak · Sat Mar 13, 2010 5:20 pm

Schraders are only good if your pilot volume is really small. In my case, not so much. JSR has a very large piston cannon piloted by a schrader....

FighterAce · Sat Mar 13, 2010 6:15 pm

For my piston sniper rifle I had to place 2 schraders behind the piston. One is for filling and the other will be hooked up to a trigger system. In order to connect them I had to use a T piece and that makes a lot of dead space. To reduce it, I filled the entire T piece with rubber gaskets leaving a tiny hole in the center.
So far its working great, I just need some wood and start carving to finish the gun

jackssmirkingrevenge · Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:18 am

What about schrader valves? They can pilot piston valves too but I'm not sure if they are worse/better then blowguns.

Blowguns definitely have better flow, but not as much as ball valves.

Schraders are only good if your pilot volume is really small. In my case, not so much.

You don't say

JSR has a very large piston cannon piloted by a schrader...

Well, larg-ish

More important than pilot volume is piston fit, if more air can leak around the piston than can go through the schrader then it won't fire at all. In the case of a QEV which usually has a cup piston that doubles as a one way valve, this shouldn't be an issue.

Gun Freak · Sun Mar 14, 2010 10:08 am

Hah thanks for linking it, I was being lazy

tatfree · Sun Mar 14, 2010 11:58 am

On a seperate post earlier, I had asked why this valve wouldn't be as good as a manual ball valve when piloting a QEV and all I got was " IT WON'T BE AS GOOD". When asking for that person to explain why, I got no response. This makes me believe this poster either had no clue or was to lazy to respond back with details.
Can someone please explain to me why this would not be as good as a manual ball valve ? These are way faster than anything manual, and I thought that's what we wanted, RIGHT ?

http://www.ascovalvenet.com/pdf/Literat ... 7394R5.pdf

Thanks

jackssmirkingrevenge · Sun Mar 14, 2010 12:02 pm

The valves you linked to are essentially QEVs with a solenoid pilot, they should work very well as a pilot for a QEV or even used directly as main valve.

dewey-1 · Sun Mar 14, 2010 1:17 pm

tatfree wrote:On a seperate post earlier, I had asked why this valve wouldn't be as good as a manual ball valve when piloting a QEV and all I got was " IT WON'T BE AS GOOD". When asking for that person to explain why, I got no response. This makes me believe this poster either had no clue or was to lazy to respond back with details.
Can someone please explain to me why this would not be as good as a manual ball valve ? These are way faster than anything manual, and I thought that's what we wanted, RIGHT ?

http://www.ascovalvenet.com/pdf/Literat ... 7394R5.pdf

Thanks

Not knowing the specifics for your launcher, here is an alternative.

http://www.spudfiles.com/forums/asco-ne ... 17764.html

They are called pulse valves. AKA dust collector valve.
Several people have used them here on the forum..

A while back many members got them for $13 on e-ay. 8353H038 is the typical one used.

Hope this helps.

The series is ASCO 8353. You can pilot them remotely up to 10 feet away.

Here is a link to the spec sheet;
http://www.ascovalve.com/Common/PDFFile ... nPulse.pdf

tatfree · Sun Mar 14, 2010 1:51 pm

dewey-1 wrote:
tatfree wrote:On a seperate post earlier, I had asked why this valve wouldn't be as good as a manual ball valve when piloting a QEV and all I got was " IT WON'T BE AS GOOD". When asking for that person to explain why, I got no response. This makes me believe this poster either had no clue or was to lazy to respond back with details.
Can someone please explain to me why this would not be as good as a manual ball valve ? These are way faster than anything manual, and I thought that's what we wanted, RIGHT ?

http://www.ascovalvenet.com/pdf/Literat ... 7394R5.pdf

Thanks
Not knowing the specifics for your launcher, here is an alternative.

http://www.spudfiles.com/forums/asco-ne ... 17764.html

They are called pulse valves. AKA dust collector valve.
Several people have used them here on the forum..

A while back many members got them for $13 on e-ay. 8353H038 is the typical one used.

Hope this helps.

The series is ASCO 8353. You can pilot them remotely up to 10 feet away.

Here is a link to the spec sheet;
http://www.spudfiles.com/forums/asco-ne ... 17764.html

Your spec sheet link is the same as your heres the alternative sheet.

Which has better flow?

Donating Members

Donating Members