Length: 10,12,14,16,18?

[bulldog2k]

Without wishing to perpetuate bull****, but just thinking aloud (oh, hey, if it helps i used to teach A level ballistics...)

Longer barrel = more friction = more energy behind the ball to achieve essentially the same result

This far seems obvious

But...

You know happens when you chrono a reball to 280 - it's like you're shooting them inside a tornado. This preumably can only be due to turbulence behind/in front of the ball when it's fired.

Presumably the same phenomena must exist for paint, albiet at a much higher gas consumtion. Question is, would that be so high as to just shatter the ball in the breech anyway in the first place..?

 

[Robbo]

Originally posted by bulldog2k
Without wishing to perpetuate bull****, but just thinking aloud (oh, hey, if it helps i used to teach A level ballistics...)

Longer barrel = more friction = more energy behind the ball to achieve essentially the same result

This far seems obvious

But...

You know happens when you chrono a reball to 280 - it's like you're shooting them inside a tornado. This preumably can only be due to turbulence behind/in front of the ball when it's fired.

Presumably the same phenomena must exist for paint, albiet at a much higher gas consumtion. Question is, would that be so high as to just shatter the ball in the breech anyway in the first place..?

Bulldog, as I think somebody mentioned, to try and evaluate the ballistics of paintballs in the same way as we look at real ballistics (bullets) is at times misleading and can cause real confusion.

I'm afraid the turbulence in front of the ball is limited to about only one tenth of an inch in width away from the front surface of the ball.
I know this because I saw high speed pics of paintballs with a candle stream smoking up in front of the barrel and watching the shockwave turbulence pattern as the balls parsed thru the smoke from the candle in various conditions when fired.
This was one the experiments Tom Kaye did that I mentioned earlier.

As for what you suggest, at some point there being enough energy in the gas to smash the ball, of course.
I have seen it many times where you can crank a marker up to where it blows the **** outa balls, I played on some American pro teams in the 90's so I can personally vouch for this

 

[John C]

Originally posted by bulldog2k
Without wishing to perpetuate bull****, but just thinking aloud (oh, hey, if it helps i used to teach A level ballistics...)

Longer barrel = more friction = more energy behind the ball to achieve essentially the same result

This far seems obvious

But...

You know happens when you chrono a reball to 280 - it's like you're shooting them inside a tornado. This preumably can only be due to turbulence behind/in front of the ball when it's fired.

Presumably the same phenomena must exist for paint, albiet at a much higher gas consumtion. Question is, would that be so high as to just shatter the ball in the breech anyway in the first place..?

A-Level ballistics cool, I wish I could have done that.


I guess the reason why reballs go so crazy is because of how they deform when fired. I think once they deform too much they lose alot of their aerodynamic properties.

Paintballs are harder,(and I think lighter?) they deform too under the forces of acceleration but I would guess to a lesser extent.

This phenomenon appears to be related to velocity the reball is shot at and not the type of gun or barrel used.

I think this substantiates the theory that the only significant factor affecting the force on the ball when it is launched, (not chambering the ball, that is another matter entirely) is the velocity you are shooting at.

 

[bulldog2k]

Cheers Robbo and John, that all sounds reasonable...

John, I believe Reballs are considerably lighter than paint and that is why they deform more, but I wouldn't bet my granny away on it...

 

[John C]

Originally posted by bulldog2k

John, I believe Reballs are considerably lighter than paint and that is why they deform more, but I wouldn't bet my granny away on it...

That's interesting, I was going to suggest that a heavier projectile requires more force to get the same velocity therefore would experience more deformation.

Of course if the reball is alot softer, this wouldnt matter.

 

[Skeet]

Woudl teh fact, that a paintball, "wobbles" being fluid filled, affect accuracy, once a ball has left teh control part of teh barrel...it will be inclined to bounce along the longer larger portion of the tube would it not?

 

[Robbo]

Originally posted by Skeet
Woudl teh fact, that a paintball, "wobbles" being fluid filled, affect accuracy, once a ball has left teh control part of teh barrel...it will be inclined to bounce along the longer larger portion of the tube would it not?

Tom Kaye set up an experiment where he had glass barrels and had a high speed cam take shots of a ball being fired and looked at the effects on the paintball as it was shot from the breach.

He was looking to see if there was any front ball deformation as the primary gas blast hit the paintball, there wasn't any.

The blast contacted the ball around half the ball's surface but failed to deform it to any degree whereby it could be seen with the naked eye.
This being the case, I doubt whether any significant 'wobbling' was gonna take place and therefore wouldn't significantly affect accuracy or range.

 

[Mario]

tom kaye sounds f*cking cool. a glass barrel? high speed cameras. Man i wish id seen that.

 

[Skeet]

Originally posted by Mario
tom kaye sounds f*cking cool. a glass barrel? high speed cameras. Man i wish id seen that.

Oh yeah..Tom's the man...he also investigated, whether or not Dimpled paintballs, would be better than smooth ones, as in Golf balls (they have dimples)...but he found that the size of teh dimples needed, would actually decrease effective range and accuracy...I think.

 

[Robbo]

Originally posted by Mario
tom kaye sounds f*cking cool. a glass barrel? high speed cameras. Man i wish id seen that.

Yeh, he is a cool guy and in the Automag, he created a monster because for its time, it just couldn't be bettered, it was a semi firing mechanical marker but was so simple in design that it took a frikkin genius like Tom to design it.

It hardly had any moving parts and was a mechanical masterpiece and I used that gun of his for nigh on 7 years.

When electros came along, he had a bit of a hard time keeping up but he without doubt was one of the giants of our game along with Budd Orr.
Some great, great people !