[cockerpunk]

xincognitopbx, on 17 January 2012 - 04:36 PM, said:

but the spool/poppet 'stick' if you will doesn't move. The legion shocker resembles the etha much better in my view

its also not attached to the bolt, and thus doesn't have to have a long throw, so the fact its a radial seal really makes no difference.

[drg]

xincognitopbx, on 17 January 2012 - 04:36 PM, said:

but the spool/poppet 'stick' if you will doesn't move. The legion shocker resembles the etha much better in my view

Which portion of the valve moves does not affect what kind of valve it is. There is no poppet structure on the Etha spool.
The legion shocker does resemble the Etha very closely, however note that the drawing is incorrect and it is supposed to have a POPPET valve between the power tube and the firing chamber. That's what makes it a pressure-controlled poppet, NOT the operation. "Pressure controlled" in many examples including the Legion Shocker is effectively a different way of saying "spool." So the poppet part has to refer to a poppet valve structure, because the actuation is via spool.

The real distinction is not between valve action and bolt action, but between valve actuation and valve (sealing) design.

cockerpunk, on 17 January 2012 - 04:41 PM, said:

its also not attached to the bolt, and thus doesn't have to have a long throw, so the fact its a radial seal really makes no difference.

Of course it makes a difference. It changes what type of valve it is for one thing, and it also changes the design requirements.

This post has been edited by drg: 17 January 2012 - 05:06 PM

[xincognitopbx]

design requirements? elaborate

[drg]

Might be outside the scope of this thread, but a spool needs some kind of means to locate it axially within its bore, while a poppet is self-locating in one direction. The forces on a poppet are also different.

This post has been edited by drg: 17 January 2012 - 05:31 PM

[betasniper]

Typical Spools generally cannot utilize a face seal. Since this design had the ability to use a face seal instead of an oring, The firing piston is a pressure controlled poppet where as the actual bolt is a forward air spring returned spool (FASR). Lets look at another design, The Invert Mini or Axe, They are unarguably PCP's. They are also FASR bolts. If we made ONE change and swapped the face seal for an oring, The Mini or Axe would still be a Pressure Controlled Poppet. In this case, The seal type has made no difference in the operation of the marker (except maybe efficiency). Lets try to put a face seal on an Ion. Lets change out the ID oring for a face seal. With only this single change, The Traditional Spool Valve marker Will Not Function. As soon as the bolt moves forward, the dump chamber is venting. This design can be fixed but by that time you have a completely different marker. In Ethas case, swapping the face seal in favor of an oring doesn't affect the operation where as this same replacement in a traditional spool will cause the marker to cease functioning.

That said, It doesn't really matter to me what its called. Call it a Panda Bear for all I care.

I like it.

[drg]

betasniper, on 26 January 2012 - 02:41 PM, said:

Typical Spools generally cannot utilize a face seal. Since this design had the ability to use a face seal instead of an oring, The firing piston is a pressure controlled poppet where as the actual bolt is a forward air spring returned spool (FASR). Lets look at another design, The Invert Mini or Axe, They are unarguably PCP's. They are also FASR bolts. If we made ONE change and swapped the face seal for an oring, The Mini or Axe would still be a Pressure Controlled Poppet. In this case, The seal type has made no difference in the operation of the marker (except maybe efficiency). Lets try to put a face seal on an Ion. Lets change out the ID oring for a face seal. With only this single change, The Traditional Spool Valve marker Will Not Function. As soon as the bolt moves forward, the dump chamber is venting. This design can be fixed but by that time you have a completely different marker. In Ethas case, swapping the face seal in favor of an oring doesn't affect the operation where as this same replacement in a traditional spool will cause the marker to cease functioning.

That said, It doesn't really matter to me what its called. Call it a Panda Bear for all I care.

I like it.

Not true, the ion could well have a poppet as long as the bolt was moved to a separate system. The actuation of the bolt has no bearing on the description of the firing valve.

Changing the seal on an axe or mini to a spool type would in fact make it no longer a pressure controlled poppet because there would be no poppet. You would not be able to simply swap that seal btw,you would have to redesign some parts to ensure axial location of the spool.

[Jack Wood]

drg, on 26 January 2012 - 04:43 PM, said:

betasniper, on 26 January 2012 - 02:41 PM, said:

Typical Spools generally cannot utilize a face seal. Since this design had the ability to use a face seal instead of an oring, The firing piston is a pressure controlled poppet where as the actual bolt is a forward air spring returned spool (FASR). Lets look at another design, The Invert Mini or Axe, They are unarguably PCP's. They are also FASR bolts. If we made ONE change and swapped the face seal for an oring, The Mini or Axe would still be a Pressure Controlled Poppet. In this case, The seal type has made no difference in the operation of the marker (except maybe efficiency). Lets try to put a face seal on an Ion. Lets change out the ID oring for a face seal. With only this single change, The Traditional Spool Valve marker Will Not Function. As soon as the bolt moves forward, the dump chamber is venting. This design can be fixed but by that time you have a completely different marker. In Ethas case, swapping the face seal in favor of an oring doesn't affect the operation where as this same replacement in a traditional spool will cause the marker to cease functioning.

That said, It doesn't really matter to me what its called. Call it a Panda Bear for all I care.

I like it.

Not true, the ion could well have a poppet as long as the bolt was moved to a separate system. The actuation of the bolt has no bearing on the description of the firing valve.

Changing the seal on an axe or mini to a spool type would in fact make it no longer a pressure controlled poppet because there would be no poppet. You would not be able to simply swap that seal btw,you would have to redesign some parts to ensure axial location of the spool.

He said that you could have a poppet in a Ion if you seperated it from the bolt. And like he also said, it would then be a completely different gun. Just because it's in an Ion body doesn't make it an Ion.

You wouldn't need to change anything to ensure axial location. The front of the spool on the Etha is floating, just the same as the front of the spool would be on a Mini if you changed it to a radial seal.

Regarding your penultimate post, the balancing/drive forces on a poppet and a spool can be made to be the same.

How about we call it a pressure controlled valve. As Betasniper said, whether it has a radial or face seal is almost irrelevent when trying to describe the operation of the mechanism. It is more to do with what actuates the seal/valve rather than the actual construction of the seal interface itself.

[Cable]

I don't care what it's called I just want to know how good it is. I haven't seen a lot of people using it but can't wait to get a hold of one.

This post has been edited by Cable: 31 January 2012 - 06:22 AM

[Troy]

Jack Wood, on 31 January 2012 - 05:09 AM, said:

How about we call it a pressure controlled valve. As Betasniper said, whether it has a radial or face seal is almost irrelevent when trying to describe the operation of the mechanism. It is more to do with what actuates the seal/valve rather than the actual construction of the seal interface itself.

We can't do that Jack... if we did, then we wouldn't be able to argue anymore.

[Jack Wood]

Damn! I knew there was a reason.....<br>

[H all day]

first after jack woods:)

[Jack Wood]

It's Jack Wood, no "s"..... That, there can be no argument over.....<br>

[xincognitopbx]

Who's this Jack Wood that thinks he works at Eclipse?

Anyways I'll be first after him now .

@Jack Wood, why don't you just recall all of them, and put a face seal in it with your amazing CS. (I expect to see a challenge accepted face when I return to this thread.)

Edit: Also you could call it pressure valve controlled so its acronym is PVC (pipe).

This post has been edited by xincognitopbx: 31 January 2012 - 02:56 PM

[cockerpunk]

well, i follow the ZDSPB system because it seems to fit everything currently being done in guns, without having to make lots of little specific changes. according to that, its a pressure controlled poppet, increasing force. makes sense to me, is an easy description that doesnt need any modifyers or specific rules. only reason anyone is making a stink is because its a radial seal instead of face seal, but that has nothing to do with how th gun works in this case, and is thus irreverent. i mean we even have the designer of the gun in here saying its irrelevant, so you dont even have to take my word on it.

its an increasing force pressure controlled poppet.

pressure controlled valve is to general, as any spool system could be called the same thing.

This post has been edited by cockerpunk: 31 January 2012 - 03:03 PM

[H all day]

Jack Wood, on 31 January 2012 - 11:30 AM, said:

It's Jack Wood, no "s"..... That, there can be no argument over.....<br>

I knowbmy keyboard is messedf up

[drg]

Jack Wood, on 31 January 2012 - 05:09 AM, said:

He said that you could have a poppet in a Ion if you seperated it from the bolt. And like he also said, it would then be a completely different gun. Just because it's in an Ion body doesn't make it an Ion.

Whether or not it would be a completely different gun doesn't have anything to do with the description of the valve, does it? And what does "completely different gun" mean? If the bolt were separated in the first place as it is on this marker, then ostensibly you could have a hammer-driven poppet behind it and it would still be the "same" gun.

Jack Wood, on 31 January 2012 - 05:09 AM, said:

You wouldn't need to change anything to ensure axial location. The front of the spool on the Etha is floating, just the same as the front of the spool would be on a Mini if you changed it to a radial seal.

You don't need to because the Etha is already a spool. It has a locating stop at the back of the spool. If it were a poppet like the mini, changing to a radial seal would require changes to address seal location. If the Ego's poppet had a radial seal it would require design changes.

Jack Wood, on 31 January 2012 - 05:09 AM, said:

Regarding your penultimate post, the balancing/drive forces on a poppet and a spool can be made to be the same.

Can they? The sealing force on a poppet valve/occlusive seal is distinctly different from a spool/radial seal. The radial seal seals independently of the pressure acting on it; in a poppet valve that pressure makes the seal.

Jack Wood, on 31 January 2012 - 05:09 AM, said:

How about we call it a pressure controlled valve. As Betasniper said, whether it has a radial or face seal is almost irrelevent when trying to describe the operation of the mechanism. It is more to do with what actuates the seal/valve rather than the actual construction of the seal interface itself.

Well the point of distinct descriptions is to discriminate (in the scientific sense) between designs. As I noted earlier, "pressure controlled" in firing valve operation descriptions is pretty much effectively a way to say spool-controlled, so by nature the action of a pressure-controlled valve is that of a spool valve.

Please note that I have acknowledged that there is a difference in marketing but this forum's stated goal is FOR the attacking of marketing distortions, and calling the Etha a poppet in any way is frankly a marketing distortion. I'm pretty sure you know full well the Etha is a spool through and through and have stated as much in other threads.

This post has been edited by drg: 02 February 2012 - 02:24 AM

[Troy]

It seems to me that the biggest point in favor of this marker being called a poppet, is that you can take out the spool valve out, and replace it with a poppet, therefore, it's a poppet based marker. That line of logic just seems silly to me... oh well. Taking the valve description out of the group of similarly functioning markers seems to be the right thing to do.

[cockerpunk]

Troy, on 01 February 2012 - 02:42 PM, said:

It seems to me that the biggest point in favor of this marker being called a poppet, is that you can take out the spool valve out, and replace it with a poppet, therefore, it's a poppet based marker. That line of logic just seems silly to me... oh well. Taking the valve description out of the group of similarly functioning markers seems to be the right thing to do.

pressure controlled poppet =/= poppet

[drg]

cockerpunk, on 01 February 2012 - 02:56 PM, said:

Troy, on 01 February 2012 - 02:42 PM, said:

It seems to me that the biggest point in favor of this marker being called a poppet, is that you can take out the spool valve out, and replace it with a poppet, therefore, it's a poppet based marker. That line of logic just seems silly to me... oh well. Taking the valve description out of the group of similarly functioning markers seems to be the right thing to do.

pressure controlled poppet =/= poppet

[Jack Wood]

drg, on 01 February 2012 - 02:23 PM, said:

Jack Wood, on 31 January 2012 - 05:09 AM, said:

He said that you could have a poppet in a Ion if you seperated it from the bolt. And like he also said, it would then be a completely different gun. Just because it's in an Ion body doesn't make it an Ion.

Whether or not it would be a completely different gun doesn't have anything to do with the description of the valve, does it? And what does "completely different gun" mean? If the bolt were separated in the first place as it is on this marker, then ostensibly you could have a hammer-driven poppet behind it and it would still be the "same" gun.

I'm not quite sure whether you are being serious here. You are here arguing the semantics of a radial seal v face seal in the context of a system/application that most think the difference irrelevent, and yet you say that disconnecting the valve from the bolt or switching between a hammer-driven poppet and pressure controlled valve doesn't ostensibly alter the function of a gun? Which is it? Surely if you change the way the internals of a gun fundementally function then you change the gun itself? To a "different" type of gun.

Jack Wood, on 31 January 2012 - 05:09 AM, said:

You wouldn't need to change anything to ensure axial location. The front of the spool on the Etha is floating, just the same as the front of the spool would be on a Mini if you changed it to a radial seal.

drg, on 01 February 2012 - 02:23 PM, said:

You don't need to because the Etha is already a spool. It has a locating stop at the back of the spool. If it were a poppet like the mini, changing to a radial seal would require changes to address seal location. If the Ego's poppet had a radial seal it would require design changes.

Sorry, you are correct. I thought you were refering to axial alignment of the spool and body. It would be very easy to create a solid stop for a modified Mini spool.

Jack Wood, on 31 January 2012 - 05:09 AM, said:

Regarding your penultimate post, the balancing/drive forces on a poppet and a spool can be made to be the same.

drg, on 01 February 2012 - 02:23 PM, said:

Can they? The sealing force on a poppet valve/occlusive seal is distinctly different from a spool/radial seal. The radial seal seals independently of the pressure acting on it; in a poppet valve that pressure makes the seal.

My comment stands. The balancing and drive forces acting on a spool and a poppet can designed to be the same. I don't think I mentioned sealing forces. Regardless, the gas pressure doesn't have to make the seal in a poppet valve. A poppet can be pressure balanced, as long as it has some closing force, such as a spring. How well it seals across a range of gas pressures will depend on the construction of the seal and seat, of course.

Jack Wood, on 31 January 2012 - 05:09 AM, said:

How about we call it a pressure controlled valve. As Betasniper said, whether it has a radial or face seal is almost irrelevent when trying to describe the operation of the mechanism. It is more to do with what actuates the seal/valve rather than the actual construction of the seal interface itself.

drg, on 01 February 2012 - 02:23 PM, said:

Well the point of distinct descriptions is to discriminate (in the scientific sense) between designs. As I noted earlier, "pressure controlled" in firing valve operation descriptions is pretty much effectively a way to say spool-controlled, so by nature the action of a pressure-controlled valve is that of a spool valve. Please note that I have acknowledged that there is a difference in marketing but this forum's stated goal is FOR the attacking of marketing distortions, and calling the Etha a poppet in any way is frankly a marketing distortion. I'm pretty sure you know full well the Etha is a spool through and through and have stated as much in other threads.

I too have stated (I think, somewhere) that I agree that technically the gas release mechanism of the Etha is a spool valve. However I struggled with my concience to openly call it a "spool valve gun". Given the general publics current understnding of how a "spool valve gun" operates I think it would be far more misleading, to the consumer, to call this a "spool valve gun". Doing so, to me at least, would have been a far greater "marketing distortion" as viewed by the consumer than what we came up with. I have openly said that we didn't know what to call this gun. I still don;t think it should be refered to as simply a "sppol valve" gun. In my "marketing" description there is reference to a spool. We also wanted to imply that this isn't a traditional "spool valve marker" and that the spools throw was short, hence the poppet reference. And around the circle we go......