[Lotus]

Diagrams obtained from http://www.zdspb.com...animations.html

This is an attempt to explain the different internals and also what differentiates the low-end, the mid-end, and the high-end markers. It can also help you understand exactly how your marker operates. Keep in mind this is going to be very technical, so be prepared.

Poppet Valve
Poppet Valves are basically a rubber seal held in place by a spring. They are opened by either a rammer striking it and opening it, or being pulled open. In paintball, we typically see the former. Most poppet valve designs are actually based off of the Spyder, seen below:

This basic design is typically referred to as a stacked tube "blowback" poppet. The bolt and ram are connected with a pin, and the ram is cycled backward and forward. At rest, the spring is compressed. When the trigger is pulled, a sear releases the rammer allowing the spring to move the rammer and bolt forward. At the end of the forward stroke, not only has the ball been sealed in the breech, but also the rammer strikes the poppet valve opening the airways not only to propel the ball forward, but also to push the rammer back to rest. While the rammer is returning to its resting position, it brings the bolt back with it. In this original Spyder design, the mechanisms used to cycle the rammer and hold it in place are 100% mechanical.

This changes in Dangerous Power's Fusion design, seen below:

Those moving red dots represent a spring in this diagram. You can see them being compressed to the right of the rammer (the rammer is green). This design is referred to as a FASOR design: forward air, spring operated return. Although this is still an electro, the solenoid only needs to direct air to one spot: behind the rammer. This air propels the rammer forward which then opens the poppet firing the ball. The spring which has been compressed during the forward movement then returns the rammer to its original position. Because air only needs to be directed to one spot, this marker makes use of a one-way solenoid. The use of a spring means a cheaper cost, but increased NVH (noise vibration harshness) and it can lead to more kick.

This is different from the Intimidator/Ego design seen below (note, this is an Ego. Intimidators are extremely similar but have one minor difference that I don't think is important enough to discuss)

As you can see, in this design the ram is cycled solely by air and there are no springs present. Also, the air is low pressured fed by an Low Pressure Regulator (LPR), making it smoother, gentler on paint, and more efficient. You'll also notice that the solenoid must direct air to two different locations in this design. First the air propels the rammer forward like the Fusion design, but there is no spring. Instead the return mechanism is air directed to the other side of the rammer. Because air needs to be directed to both sides of the rammer, a two-way solenoid is needed. This means this marker is going to be more expensive, but also higher performance since it will not require a spring and therefore has less NVH and kick than the Fusion design.

That's the basic hierarchy of the Stacked Tube Poppet. Next are two completely different and independent poppet designs. The first is the Marq series:

This is an in-line poppet, similar to the Intimidator/Ego design, except it has all been placed in the upper tube. This still requires a two-way solenoid and an LPR, and there are no return springs present. Also, since the rammer and bolt are in-line, there is greatly reduced kick to this marker because there is no off-axis forces (don't worry about that sentence if you didn't understand it. In short, in-line poppet = less kick). However, you can see that the compressed air used to fire the marker has area to expand before firing the ball, so this decreases efficiency. Maintenance is also more difficult, as you can imagine. However, the efficiency is still good and maintenance is very similar to a spool-valve, and it is also smooth.

Then we have the Invert Mini. I'm willing to bet that some of you will not be able to understand the following diagram, but I'll do my best to explain it:

Again, those red moving dots are a spring. This spring keeps the bolt held back in place. This uses a one-way solenoid to move the bolt forward against the spring. As you can see, when the bolt has moved forward all the way, there is an opening connecting the air pushing the bolt forward to the firing chamber. You'll see the purple air expand in both directions when this opens up, both towards the ball and towards the poppet. This opening I'm talking about is actually a spool-valve incorporated into the design. The air, after pushing the bolt forward, goes to the rear of the firing chamber, and then hits on the poppet. While this air strikes the poppet on one side, you can see that the pressure drops on the other side. This pull/push opens the poppet, thereby firing the ball. Yes, in this case the air is the rammer that opens the poppet. It's very strange, and I hope you can follow that because it's not the easiest to explain. This is also an in-line poppet. However, it uses a spring to return the marker to rest and uses a one-way solenoid. This means that it will have increased NVH and kick. Also, due to the way the air travels, it will not be as efficient as any other poppet since it is also a spool-valve. Worse even than the Marq. Also, maintenance is more difficult, however it's still not bad.



Spool Valves
A spool-valve is a valve design where the bolt opens up an air chamber when it moves forward. The basic spool-valve design is the ProtoMatrixRail/Ion/Vibe design. The Ion and Rail have virtually the same valve design, with the rail having a weird extra feature that vents some excess air out the back of the bolt while sealing the firing chamber (don't worry about that). Here is the diagram:

As you can see, there are no springs. Spool-valves are typically smoother than Poppets, but less efficient and arguably harder to maintain due to the increased amount of moving O-Rings. The air is constantly applied to the rear of the chamber, with a one-way solenoid directing air to the front. When firing, the solenoid cuts off air flow to the front of the bolt. The constant air supply to the rear propels the bolt forward, eventually opening up a passageway for the air in the rear to launch the ball. The solenoid then re-applies the air to the front of the bolt to return the marker to rest. There are three important aspects to this design. First, there is no LPR. Second, it only requires a one-way solenoid. Third, the air acting on the two sides of the bolt are different from one another, or in other words this is an unbalanced spool-valve. These are very cheap to produce due to the one-way solenoid and lack of an LPR, yet are still very smooth with little NVH because there are no springs present. However they aren't as efficient or as smooth as the following designs. Also, the increased amount of moving O-Rings in this design means that it is prone to bolt-stick, and will be a bit harder to maintain.

This is the Threshold/G3/Rev-I design:

This is very similar in principle to the Rail/Ion/Vibe design, but very different in practice. As you can see, it still uses a one-way solenoid holding the bolt back, there is no LPR, and the valve is still unbalanced. However, as you can also see, the bolt is very simple, much lighter, and it has fewer O-Rings. This means it is less prone to bolt stick, it can be more efficient, has less kick, and is also a bit easier to maintain. However, remember this is still cheap to produce and unbalanced so there's still room for improvement.

The Matrix Design (Proto Matrix and Dye Matrix, this is NOT the PMR design. the PMR's design is the same as the Ion's design):

This is similar to the Rail/Ion/Vibe design. However it has two major differences. First, the air cycling the bolt back and forth are applied to the exterior of the bolt in an even fashion by a two-way solenoid. This means that unlike the previous designs, the Matrix is actually balanced. It will be even smoother than the others. The second major difference is that the firing chamber seals itself when the marker fires. In all the previous designs, the firing chamber stayed open to the HPR the entire time. In this design you can clearly see how the air flow from the HPR is cut, or sealed during the firing cycle by those two rear-most o-rings. This seal means that the HPR's recharge rate does not effect the consistency of the marker at all. In other words, these markers are more consistent. The Matrix design also makes use of an LPR to cycle the bolt.

This is the Shocker/Luxe design:

As you can see, very similar to the Matrix design. The valve is balanced and fed by a two-way solenoid. However, where the Matrix's air was input near the rear, the Shocker is fed from near the feedneck. This does not use an LPR to cycle the bolt.


edit: I put "a" instead of "and" in the title and now I can't edit it. Woot for me. . Mod wanna fix that?

This post has been edited by Lotus: 04 September 2009 - 08:23 PM

[D.K.]

Good post Lotus excellent work...

This post has been edited by D.K.: 27 May 2009 - 10:57 AM

[Romeo]

nice lotus now people can refer to this instead of opening a new thread every time.

Sticky time mods!

[Deacon Doom]

Thanks for the Invert Mini. I was looking for one since they are very different.

[Lotus]

Deacon Doom, on May 27 2009, 12:05 PM, said:

Thanks for the Invert Mini. I was looking for one since they are very different.

No problem. Were you able to understand it from my explanation or just by looking at the diagram? Also, did you understand how I described it as a poppet valve with a spool-valve incorporated into the design? If you didn't, then tell me where you hang-up is so I can fix it.

[Deacon Doom]

Lotus, on May 27 2009, 10:11 AM, said:

Deacon Doom, on May 27 2009, 12:05 PM, said:

Thanks for the Invert Mini. I was looking for one since they are very different.

No problem. Were you able to understand it from my explanation or just by looking at the diagram? Also, did you understand how I described it as a poppet valve with a spool-valve incorporated into the design? If you didn't, then tell me where you hang-up is so I can fix it.

I read it but didn't get it. I stared at the CAD file for about 10 minutes. Read your explanation again and it makes sense. Its very hard to explain the in-line poppet since there is really nothing to compare it to. Props man.

[JMM]

Awesome!! This is the best across-the-board explanation I've ever read for how these guns operate and what makes an Ion different from a DM gun, and a Fusion different from an Ego, etc etc. Very well done! Thanks for this man.

[HeroForADay]

Thanks Lotus this was an interesting read. I remember how my Mini fired, for the longest time i had my Mini completely disassembled as i was trying to figure it out. This just proved i was right about it.

[Jake]

sweet explanation of each

[baseballz2433]

well i knew the vice and ego are pretty much the same design, but if you don't mind me asking what is the difference? You did say there was a small one

[Lotus]

You see, in the Ego the ram is operated on behind the link to the bolt. In the Intimidator, the ram is propelled from either end. At the rear of the ram air propels it forward like the Ego, but the return air is actually put in front of the ram, in between the ram and the poppet. It adds an extra o-ring, but that's about it. There's a diagram that I avoided posting because it's incorrect, but here it is:

Remember, this diagram is actually wrong. On the return stroke, the return air should only between the two o-rings. However this diagram incorrectly shows excess air going even further under the bolt. That shouldn't happen.

[baseballz2433]

o thanks, that was quick btw and great post, should definitely be stickied

[Paintballlover83]

very good detailed explanation but could someone pm with a more simpler explanation i read through it but still a litle confused

[Lotus]

Paintballlover83, on May 27 2009, 04:54 PM, said:

very good detailed explanation but could someone pm with a more simpler explanation i read through it but still a litle confused

Where are you still iffy? Post your questions here and I'll help you out. That way if someone has the same questions, the answers can help everyone.

[Lotus]

I just edited a few things to hopefully make this more clear. I think this deserves a bump now.

[SpyderNooblet]

very well explained!

[M01R]

Woah. That's way more in-depth than my stickied thread..

[Christopher]

There is no such thing as a one way solenoid. A one way valve is just a check valve. The Fusion and Mini use 3/way solenoids, the Ego and Intimidator use 4/way solenoids. The inline popet shown uses a 4/way solenoid, and the unbalanced spool design uses a 3/way. The Threshold uses a 3/way, The Matrix uses a 4/way, and the Luxe/Shocker use 4/ways. As far as use in paintball is concerned, 4/way valves and 5/way valves are usually interchangable.

Also note that pressure is not going to determine how gentle a gun will be on paint. The force of the bolt can be calculated from the pressure, flow rate, and bore size of the cylinder. For example, at 100 PSI, a 7/16" cylinder is going to have a force of 12lb, while a 5/8 cylinder will have a force of 28 lb at the same pressure. Basically you could have a bolt/cylinder operating at 800 PSI that couldn't brake paint if you had the proper bore size. This is relevent because a gun can be designed without an LPR and yet still have an equal or lower bolt force than a gun operating at the same or higher pressure.

The fact that a valve is balanced or unbalanced has very little to do with efficiency. The determining factor of efficiency is usually flow rate, regardless of the design. For example, the MQ valve is unbalanced, yet is extremley efficient due to it's high flow rate. Spool valves tend to have a low flow rate by nature due to the fact that the bolt tends to double as the valve, limiting the practical speed. For example, if you drilled out the flow restrictor in the Ion, the bolt would cylcle much, much faster, thus increasing efficiency (same idea behind using a QEV). However, the bolt would move so fast that it would anhiliate paint.

[Lotus]

I tried to make this readable to the average user and stick to common practices. Not all Autococker "3-ways" are technically 3-ways but they are referred to as such.

The LPR makes the Ego design more gentle on paint not due to the lower pressure directly, but because the lower pressure accelerates the bolt more gently. If you took the specifications of the Ego and removed the LPR, the bolt would cycle faster, thus being less gentle on paint.

I don't think I ever said that efficiency resulted from a balanced valve design, only smoothness. If you would point out where I said that I will correct it.

[Christopher]

Lotus, on 04 September 2009 - 08:02 PM, said:

I tried to make this readable to the average user and stick to common practices. Not all Autococker "3-ways" are technically 3-ways but they are referred to as such.

The LPR makes the Ego design more gentle on paint not due to the lower pressure directly, but because the lower pressure accelerates the bolt more gently. If you took the specifications of the Ego and removed the LPR, the bolt would cycle faster, thus being less gentle on paint.

I don't think I ever said that efficiency resulted from a balanced valve design, only smoothness. If you would point out where I said that I will correct it.

Technically, no Autococker valves are 3/ways. You could theoretically put a 3/way on a 'Cocker, but you would need a spring biased cylinder as well.

Quote

These are very cheap to produce due to the one-way solenoid and lack ofan LPR, yet are still very smooth with little NVH because there are nosprings present. However they aren't as efficient or as smooth as thefollowing designs because the valves are unbalanced and, to somedegree, there is no LPR. Also, the increased amount of moving O-Ringsin this design means that it is prone to bolt-stick, and will be a bitharder to maintain.