I just carry one of those Air Dusters with the small attachable tube. You know, the ones that you get in Computer Shops and so on.
Not that I've ever had to use it, mind you.... But it's there, just in case.
Why does everyone take it out on WDP
- Thread starter Jimmothy
- Start date
Not that I've ever had to use it, mind you.... But it's there, just in case.
I am going to keep this simple, I now realise I shouldnt have bothered correcting frontmandan in the first place.
A paintball, under its own weight can accelerate enough to clear its own diameter in around 1/9 seconds.
So, if we want to feed 25bps, then we must put additional tension on the ball so that it can travel this distance in 1/25 of a second.
Speed and EDITforceEDIT are linked by a square law.
Rather than bothering with the maths I hope it is obvious that if a paintball can do 9bps under its own weight, then it doesnt take much more force to get 25bps, probably a few grammes more.
Nowhere near enough to break a ball.
Nowhere near as much force as it is subjected to all day long when sitting in a box or in a pot.
Nowhere near as much as is needed to load a ball into the breach in a matter of microseconds.
Not even slightly close to the amount of force a paintball sees when we accelerate it to near 300fps in several inches.
So if the force needed to get 25 bps is so low, why does rollback cause chops??
The goal of any halo board is to replace the tension on the spring that is lost after each shot, keeping the constant force on the ball stack needed to get 25bps (this is a simple tradeoff between rate of fire, and force on the paintballs, I just chose 25 as an example).
Roll back can cause such a problem because of the way older halo boards work.
The reflective sensor looks at balls, and because the voltage is lower when we are looking at a gap between balls as opposed to the face of a ball, we can detect when the stack is moving.
Now imagine an old halo on a gun with rollback.
The gun fires, the halo sees the balls moving and replaces the wind on the spring. All is fine.
But sometimes (depending if the gun is tilted back or whatever) the gun fires, the ball falls in, one shots worth of tension is added to the spring. Now (either under this tension, or just by chance) the ball rolls back, the halo board sees a change in voltage and adds another shots worth of tension to the spring, but we have only fired 1 shot!
Oh Noes!!11one111!!!
Now the ball stack has twice the tension on it (enough to load the ball in under 1/40th of a second).
When the bolt goes forward now, we have to force the top ball back up against two balls worth of tension in order to get the bottom ball to exit the barrel.
So how can you cure this problem?
Any non eye activated halo will work fine on a gun with rollback, as long as it is calibrated correctly(see the manual).
Most newer halo boards use ADCs instead of comparators.
Without getting too nerdy this just means not only can we see a change in voltage, we can also see the amplitude of the change, meaning we can differentiate between a regular ball being fed and a rollback event.
And what if you have a non adjustable old halo board?
Just add a small amount of grease to the belt. The grease will not do anything at low tension (ie under normal operation, so it wont be any slower under normal conditions).
What it does is reduce the amount of force needed before the drivebelt slips, so that if a rollback event happens as described above, the additional tension is allowed to unwind.
OK Gyro I sincerely hope you wish you hadnt asked
So that's why Cockers shoot further and flatter than other guns...Originally posted by John C
I am going to keep this simple, I now realise I shouldnt have bothered correcting frontmandan in the first place.
A paintball, under its own weight can accelerate enough to clear its own diameter in around 1/9 seconds.
So, if we want to feed 25bps, then we must put additional tension on the ball so that it can travel this distance in 1/25 of a second.
Speed and acceleration are linked by a square law.
Rather than bothering with the maths I hope it is obvious that if a paintball can do 9bps under its own weight, then it doesnt take much more force to get 25bps, probably a few grammes more.
Nowhere near enough to break a ball.
Nowhere near as much force as it is subjected to all day long when sitting in a box or in a pot.
Nowhere near as much as is needed to load a ball into the breach in a matter of microseconds.
Not even slightly close to the amount of force a paintball sees when we accelerate it to near 300fps in several inches.
So if the force needed to get 25 bps is so low, why does rollback cause chops??
The goal of any halo board is to replace the tension on the spring that is lost after each shot, keeping the constant force on the ball stack needed to get 25bps (this is a simple tradeoff between rate of fire, and force on the paintballs, I just chose 25 as an example).
Roll back can cause such a problem because of the way older halo boards work.
The reflective sensor looks at balls, and because the voltage is lower when we are looking at a gap between balls as opposed to the face of a ball, we can detect when the stack is moving.
Now imagine an old halo on a gun with rollback.
The gun fires, the halo sees the balls moving and replaces the wind on the spring. All is fine.
But sometimes (depending if the gun is tilted back or whatever) the gun fires, the ball falls in, one shots worth of tension is added to the spring. Now (either under this tension, or just by chance) the ball rolls back, the halo board sees a change in voltage and adds another shots worth of tension to the spring, but we have only fired 1 shot!
Oh Noes!!11one111!!!
Now the ball stack has twice the tension on it (enough to load the ball in under 1/40th of a second).
When the bolt goes forward now, we have to force the top ball back up against two balls worth of tension in order to get the bottom ball to exit the barrel.
So how can you cure this problem?
Any non eye activated halo will work fine on a gun with rollback, as long as it is calibrated correctly(see the manual).
Most newer halo boards use ADCs instead of comparators.
Without getting too nerdy this just means not only can we see a change in voltage, we can also see the amplitude of the change, meaning we can differentiate between a regular ball being fed and a rollback event.
And what if you have a non adjustable old halo board?
Just add a small amount of grease to the belt. The grease will not do anything at low tension (ie under normal operation, so it wont be any slower under normal conditions).
What it does is reduce the amount of force needed before the drivebelt slips, so that if a rollback event happens as described above, the additional tension is allowed to unwind.
OK Gyro I sincerely hope you wish you hadnt asked
Thought id recap, i was pointing out that WDP take to long to fix know faults such as role back.
john is now trying to prove that roll back is not a problem. even though WDP changed it in the G7 and we all no the old saying "Dont fix it if it aint broke" which proves that WDP did reconize it as a problem eventually or they wouldnt have bothered changing it.
john your wrong about the halo adding another shots worth of spin when the ball sits in the wrong place in the breach and even if it did (which it doesnt) it would enter jam mode because the stack would be fully wound up and the motor would then try to spin.
The second ball can be held in the breach with enough force to cause a break purely by the force in the stack, i have proved this by turning my halo off and getting it to break on the next shot
As you may not know a halo will actually feed 16-17 bps consistantly i.e you stick your gun on full auto over a chrono after 2-3 seconds thats how fast it will be shooting.
But for the first second (guestimate) you will actually be feeding 21 ish until the drive cone is fully unwound.
so by greasing the belt you are stopping the drive cone from becoming totally wound, which basically means there isnt enough pressure to hold that second ball in the breach which would leed to a chop. a side effect of this is that you will loose some of that intial burst of speed................
john is now trying to prove that roll back is not a problem. even though WDP changed it in the G7 and we all no the old saying "Dont fix it if it aint broke" which proves that WDP did reconize it as a problem eventually or they wouldnt have bothered changing it.
john your wrong about the halo adding another shots worth of spin when the ball sits in the wrong place in the breach and even if it did (which it doesnt) it would enter jam mode because the stack would be fully wound up and the motor would then try to spin.
The second ball can be held in the breach with enough force to cause a break purely by the force in the stack, i have proved this by turning my halo off and getting it to break on the next shot
As you may not know a halo will actually feed 16-17 bps consistantly i.e you stick your gun on full auto over a chrono after 2-3 seconds thats how fast it will be shooting.
But for the first second (guestimate) you will actually be feeding 21 ish until the drive cone is fully unwound.
so by greasing the belt you are stopping the drive cone from becoming totally wound, which basically means there isnt enough pressure to hold that second ball in the breach which would leed to a chop. a side effect of this is that you will loose some of that intial burst of speed................
where the ball in the breech rolls back into the face of the bolt to enough of a degree that the second ball in the stack can poke down into the breech, and when the bolt comes forward it can get sliced / broken
Your explanation is pretty lucid, but I don't see that it is necessary that the ball stack move twice during one shot to bring about breaks. As I understand it, the chopping occurs when the bolt sort of slices off the bottom of the next ball above the breech. This is possible because that ball is allowed to rest with a bit of it in the path of the bolt, due to the ball that is in the breech resting behind the stack above it. The ball could come immediately to rest a bit back of the feedneck, no?
It seems to me that if the bolt were moving forward slowly enough, the ball resting with a bit hanging down into the bolt's path might not get chopped. If it is moving more quickly, though, it seems that it will still chop, rather than get pushed back up out of the way.
I am not trying to be argumentative for the sake of it; there are at least a couple of solutions to this problem (if it really is a problem). It still seems to me that not having room for roll back is a better situation than governing the tension on a ball stack so judiciously.
It seems to me that if the bolt were moving forward slowly enough, the ball resting with a bit hanging down into the bolt's path might not get chopped. If it is moving more quickly, though, it seems that it will still chop, rather than get pushed back up out of the way.
I am not trying to be argumentative for the sake of it; there are at least a couple of solutions to this problem (if it really is a problem). It still seems to me that not having room for roll back is a better situation than governing the tension on a ball stack so judiciously.