SpudFiles

Just a thought here about removing the human error factor from pneumatics, since with all current valve designs, the valve efficiency is somewhat affected by how well the valve is triggered: Use a burst disc to release the pressure, but trigger the burst disc with an electric current of some sort, as in running a high-voltage arc through the chamber to boost pressure, or actually through the disc itself to weaken it.

And this is a THEORY, I'm not sure if it would show any improvement over current designs, but just a thought that might be developed and applied.

this isn't any better than using a solenoid valve

Oh? Solenoids still have a pilot volume and error when opening the pilot valve, no? Or has there been extensive testing on my proposed methods as compared to a solenoid already?

well if you are talking about using the burst disk as the main valve then it isn't such a bad idea... but the topic

Removing human error from pneumatics...

suggests you are talking about piloting valves


ohh BTW have you edited the first post ?? I could swear there was something about piloting valves there... or maybe I've been drinking too much (possible)

I guess you have been drinking a wee too much. The intention of the title was to discuss a few ideas I had about creating a release system for an air chamber into a barrel that is completely independent of human error. No, no edit was ever made to the first post, and there was never anything about pilots... sorry.

ohh damn so I drink too much... sorry

how well the valve is triggered

since most guns are either piston or QEV valves the term 'human error' refers mostly to piloting valves...

anyway.... I still think that burst disks are not very practical.. sure they offer better flow but most people don't want to replace them after each shot

if you are looking for something practical then consider teh idea that JSR has proposed - the valveless launcher (or in other words a detent with an oring)

that's something that has great potential... develop one that works right and you'll be famous

Exactly... I was talking about removing all human error which is usually expressed in a pilot valve. Yeah, swapping out a burst disc is a serious issue. Guess I'll be forum trawling again for JSR's brilliance.

I'm sure ideas on this theme are commonly thought of.

While back when I was musing over burst disks I was thinking about embedded wires to heat up and weaken a disk to fire it. Also again embedded wires but somehow explosive in nature to shatter a disk.

All far too much effort and uncertainty for me to go beyond considering it.

Vaguely recall some forum posts about triggering burst disks similarly.

I just thought of something...

What if you just made a pneumatic with cartridges that hold the ammo and a burst disc at the back... (I know the exact thing has probably been discussed before.) If one could simply be designed, that could be cool...

Technically, It's impossible to remove human error from anything man made.

Lets get philosophical.


As far as piloting valves go, I would figure that burst disks would be just as good as any other high flow, quick opening valve. The main factor is the valve that is being piloted. There will always exist a certain amount of human error in a valve (hence my opening words).

However, think of a burst disk cartridge design. With the burst disk being the closest valve to the ammunition, it's opening speed will have the greatest effect, rather than a burst disk piloting a slower valve.

EDIT* My browser froze and posted my comment twice. Unintentional.

I intend to discuss the effectiveness, and increase thereof of using a burst disc as the only valve in a pneumatic, and triggering it in a way almost completely free of human error. Basically removing the slow-opening deficiencies in other types of pneumatic valves, but in a theoretical sense for now. After seeing the type of burst disc used on the LGG, I am also wondering if anyone has tried implementing a similar design in a pneumatic gun.

I get roughly 10-15 fps differences in velocity when firing my 3" porter i think a 2-3% error is something i am willing to deal with lol, i can only think of a few applications where human error is a problem in pneumatics: such as high accuracy *cough* rag *cough*, and high repeatability/precision both of which are not really needed unless you are designing a platform specifically built for the purpose.

Here is another possible air launcher solution.
[youtube][/youtube]

These guys were a competitor in my original T shirt launcher competition. They are getting better.

Tech's valve doesn't depend on human speed, so maybe look at something like that. I guess you could make an error by pushing the rod in the wrong direction however. This would have a negative effect on performance.

Jeez, there's something I don't like about muzzle loading t-shirts with a big stick on a robotic cannon