Testing new discovery

[grand-galop]

Since the ideas are throw and evaluate ,  may I just throw why I taught about rubber washer…....
The FX impact is what I was referring to with their TINNY THIN BARREL LINER ..
Their liners have the oscillations CONTAINED OR DAMPEN with rubber support within the otter barrel support liner..
The FX being in the upper echelon of the precision rifle on the market cannot be disregard as EFFECTIVENESS.
The variety of power levels and the range of caliber they are shooting within the same platform is somewhat good consideration for the precision they achieve..

I would say that rubber in their case prove my point..

All the VARIABLES THAT WE'RE including as having an effect on the projectiles are taking care of within the same platform..

[Nomadic Pirate]

Ho boy, trying to read this thread makes my head hurt, badly 

[Nvreloader]

Taso

This could be a possible way to tune for each individual gun, ie,

Have a basic damper, weigh it with clamp mount included etc,
find a pellet/slug that doesn't show any accuracy etc.

Attach the damper and shoot the ammo, see the results,
then fill the damper with a know amount of what ever fluid/shot/sand/mercury etc, 1 oz at a time,
re shoot for accuracy etc, keeping adding weight (1 oz)?  until you find the results that work or doesn't,
while keeping notes as to psi/fps range, type of rifle etc, etc.

Try a second bad pellet/slug, repeat the above test until you get results,
note the info, repeat with other pellets/slugs.

After several tests, you should be able to say that, xyz amount of filler for this pellet gave these results,
if all the testers followed the same operation, then a possible scale should show up to give a pattern to follow, etc.

Just some random ramblings from my end.  Your thoughts or suggestions, 

Tia,
Don

I haven't looked in a couple days, but when I did I couldn't find a general conclusion online on how our experimental damper can be tuned to each individual gun. Taso

[Taso1000]

Taso

This could be a possible way to tune for each individual gun, ie,

Have a basic damper, weigh it with clamp mount included etc,
find a pellet/slug that doesn't show any accuracy etc.

Attach the damper and shoot the ammo, see the results,
then fill the damper with a know amount of what ever fluid/shot/sand/mercury etc, 1 oz at a time,
re shoot for accuracy etc, keeping adding weight (1 oz)?  until you find the results that work or doesn't,
while keeping notes as to psi/fps range, type of rifle etc, etc.

Try a second bad pellet/slug, repeat the above test until you get results,
note the info, repeat with other pellets/slugs.

After several tests, you should be able to say that, xyz amount of filler for this pellet gave these results,
if all the testers followed the same operation, then a possible scale should show up to give a pattern to follow, etc.

Just some random ramblings from my end.  Your thoughts or suggestions, 

Tia,
Don

I haven't looked in a couple days, but when I did I couldn't find a general conclusion online on how our experimental damper can be tuned to each individual gun. Taso

I agree 100%.   

When my barrels get back I will first try out the two archery dampers I bought off ebay clamped onto the barrel in different positions from about 1/3rd the distance from the muzzle and move toward the muzzle.  I know with barrel tuner weights, very small increments are necessary.  But I'm thinking if moving in 1/2" increments I can see a pattern or sweet spot.  Then I could work around that spot in smaller increments to fine tune.

If that doesn't produce results I would move on to the home made pvc tubes with a plug to try the different weights and fillers.  I'll most like try sand first and record the weight of the device when I make changes. 

I hope I find something that works great!  If I don't, no biggie.  Nothing ventured, nothing gained! 

But I'll be outside shooting my rifle.  What beats that?   

Thanks!

Taso

[Taso1000]

I forgot to add.  I also did a quick search on any kind of formula or recommendation chart on what archery damper model works on what bow. 

No results so far.  It also seems like trial and error is inferred.

So we're in the same boat I guess.   

Taso

[Lefusil]

Here's a data point. 
.22 cal AT44
14.3 grain pellets
860 fps
40ish yards
So at 23.5 ft-lbs I would lump this in the light FPE group.
I tried wedging some foam rubber between the air tube and the shroud to see if it had any damping effect. 
I'll let you judge the results for yourself.  The rubber pad (group 2) jacked up the POI a lot, I was actually aiming at the lower right tgt when I shot this group.   
Then I tried taping an oil & lead shot filled bottle to the end of the shroud.  To me the oil shot damper felt like it might be doing something.  The group result though is not an obvious improvement.
It weighs 4.5 oz. and has about 3 oz. of #7.5 shot in it.  The oil is actually olive oil  , its in an old pill bottle and because of the shape of the cap, there's a fair amount of air in it.

[Nvreloader]

Taso
You are correct, it is trail and error on the archery end, as just like air guns, everyone has a different set up,
our archery club would have a "try it swap" after every shoot,
we would try different weights/lengths while flinging sharp pointy sticks etc.

I am going to continue on with my setup using mercury,
just waiting on the shipment of questionable accuracy pellets to test etc.

I'll report the results, good, bad or otherwise.   

Don

[Taso1000]

Rich,

Where is the end of your barrel in relation to the shroud?  Do you know if there is an air stripper type end to locate the muzzle in the shroud?  Like in a Marauder?

Maybe try moving the bottle so that it is at the muzzle of the barrel?  Maybe the barrel isn't transferring all it's energy to the shroud via the stripper/locator?

Just ideas to try, not criticisms.   

Thanks,

Taso

[Nvreloader]

Rich
Thanks for the info,

I can see 2 different group of shots in each group, I know nothing about a AT 44,
you can try adding 1 oz of shot more, not changing anything, just adding more shot, and re shot for results.

And as Taso states,
find the end of the bbl, and start there, after you see positive results when adding shot etc,
then move your damper forward/backward to find the sweet spot.

I had very good results with mine, when it was under the bbl/airstripper end etc.

Thanks,
Don

[KnifeMaker]

I believe Ive come up with a way to make a unit that should work with any power plant I talked with Michael about it in detail and will start construction as soon as I can, it will be somewhat elaborate to produce so give me some time but i think it should work with about anything its attached to.

Now this is more like it!


Donny made me wait weeks, and I had to call him to find that he was not going to try it.


Travis on the other hand, ask I not let the cat out of the bag. That was late yesterday. Woo-Hoo!


Nobody had time to even begin to get mad. LOL  


Thanks much Travis. This is much easier to live with.


On a side note, I sent pic's as per our conversation. 


MIke/Knife

[darkcharisma]

it looks like the T&E way is the best. and i don't doubt the one "weight" dampener exists. so there is probably no point in trying to mathematically figure out the best weight.

i was only pushing to find FPE vs Weight but seems like a lot a variables can't be simplified.

if my build works ill let yall know.

[rsterne]

A controlled experiment like Don suggested is a good way to go for a given gun.... and with a bit of luck may find you a "best" weight that works over several pellets.... Whether or not that same damper works on a different gun will be the key to a commercially viable version, IMO.... I wish Travis the best of luck, it would be great to be able to purchase a "bolt-on" accurizer/damper that works with any gun.... How cool would that be.... 

I did have one other thought.... Mike's original device weighed 14.3 oz. and was attached to the LDC, giving it even more leverage (effect) than if it was at the muzzle.... I wonder if that had any connection with it working for him with such a large variety of bullets?.... My larger damper may have only been about half as effective as one 40% heavier and 6" beyond the muzzle....

Bob

[robertr]

 Pic of my crude test rig, maybe get some slow mo video of it in action just for kicks.
 More or less a visible version of what I tested last. A couple cabinet door dampers I had left over instead of oil and a ball bearing instead of a socket.

[HunterWhite]

Okay Rich, I really like the pill bottle on the rifle, you can point it and say
"Okay Mr squirrel, it's time for you to take your medicine!"   L.O. L.

I was thinking about the limbsaver using sand. That's a dry powder, so I ordered two 8 ounce jars of tungsten powder to try. I will check to see if I have any empty medicine bottles.
I will just fill half full to start.
My thinking is that tungsten is heavier than lead, and the size of the powder is much smaller than lead shot, so it should flow more quickly.  I.d.k.

I went to the Texas Airgun show today and I won a Hatsan Flash QE with an Optima 3-9 x 40 A.O. Now I have to read up on those things.

What do you guys think about the tungsten powder? After I ordered it I discovered that spherical tungsten powder is available.  I just have to go with what I've got.

[Nvreloader]

Hunter

Raid the better half's spice shelf,
all kinds of small glass bottles in lots of different sizes etc.
Don't let her catch you, unless you replace what you borrow...........Lol

There is also tungsten bird shot now................

IMHO,
I would start with 1 oz first test, then add another 1/2 to 1 oz for the next test,
keep upping the powder amount until you see results or not.
Then test with another pellet for results.........

Tia,
Don

[KnifeMaker]

tungsten. Hummm--Now than has possibilities!

[Lefusil]

Okay Rich, I really like the pill bottle on the rifle, you can point it and say
"Okay Mr squirrel, it's time for you to take your medicine!"   L.O. L.

LOL.  Here's the best part the bottle originally had oxycodone pills in it (from a recent surgery).  I figured it was appropriate for calming down the barrel vibrations  .

[rsterne]

Tungsten bird shot ranges from less dense than lead shot to fractionally more dense (but less dense than liquid Mercury)…. This refers to the metal itself, and is a result of the tungsten being alloyed with other metals, or bound together in a polymer matrix.... Pure tungsten is quite another matter, and is about 70% denser than pure lead, but of course very hard.... I have not been able to find a density on tungsten powder, but if the particles are a sphere they cannot pack tighter than 74% of the density of the pure metal, and 64% is more likely.... As an example, lead shot has a density of 7.0, compared to pure lead metal at 11.3.... The difference is due to the spaces between the spheres.... Interestingly, if the spheres are small relative to the dimensions of the container, the diameter of the shot makes little if any difference to the "packing density".... However, the finer the powder (smaller the particles/spheres) the less it tends to displace when shaken (eg.used as a damper).... This is because the smaller the particles the greater the surface area to volume ratio, and the greater the friction between the particles....

Bob

[BackStop]

Okay Rich, I really like the pill bottle on the rifle, you can point it and say
"Okay Mr squirrel, it's time for you to take your medicine!"   L.O. L.

LOL.  Here's the best part the bottle originally had oxycodone pills in it (from a recent surgery).  I figured it was appropriate for calming down the barrel vibrations  .

If you can find one, try a Valium bottle next... 

Oh, and was that EVOO or just plain old olive oil? (ducking and running)

 

[anti-squirrel]

There's certain things that are a given, such as a shorter/stiffer/thicker barrel will oscillate at a higher frequency  Why?  Stick a ruler over the end of the desk and smack it. 

A longer/softer/thinner barrel will oscillate more and likely has a lower resonant frequency.

Adding weight to the end changes things, of course, and adding more barrel clamps will "shorten" the end that oscillates.  Adding more mass to the end (not an adjustable weight) will likely drop the frequency/increase the oscillation if I remember my wave theory, but at this point, I'm perfectly happy to sit back and read.