[cockerpunk]

its not a matter of lining up its spoolness vs is poppetness. its a pressure controlled poppet, IE pressure changes open and close the poppet valve, and it does this by increasing the force on one side - ergo increasing force pressure controlled poppet.

[oldnewb]

UV Halo, on 16 January 2012 - 01:26 PM, said:

In any case, it's a brilliant design.

Okay, putting aside the debate on how to catagorize this marker, can someone explain (in average Joe terms and language) what makes this marker's design "brilliant"? I mean, why did PE go with this design, rather than a dumbed down version of one of their other markers? To the average paintballer, what makes this design better / worse in their hands, as opposed to admiring it from a pure engineering point of view?

Apologies if this has already been explained somewhere before. I missed that part.

This post has been edited by oldnewb: 16 January 2012 - 06:41 PM

[brycelarson]

The benefit of a poppet is excellent valve resolution - in other words it's really easy to meter how much air you're using. The benefit of a spool is a slower, longer power stroke of the valve. This uses a short throw, high resolution valve to trigger the larger spool valve - so it's a simple yet well controlled design.

[oldnewb]

brycelarson, on 16 January 2012 - 06:50 PM, said:

The benefit of a poppet is excellent valve resolution - in other words it's really easy to meter how much air you're using. The benefit of a spool is a slower, longer power stroke of the valve. This uses a short throw, high resolution valve to trigger the larger spool valve - so it's a simple yet well controlled design.

So, theoretically this could be more air efficient and consistent than some spoolies, yet retain some of the firing (feel) characteristics of a spool over a poppet?

[brycelarson]

oldnewb, on 16 January 2012 - 06:56 PM, said:

brycelarson, on 16 January 2012 - 06:50 PM, said:

The benefit of a poppet is excellent valve resolution - in other words it's really easy to meter how much air you're using. The benefit of a spool is a slower, longer power stroke of the valve. This uses a short throw, high resolution valve to trigger the larger spool valve - so it's a simple yet well controlled design.

So, theoretically this could be more air efficient and consistent than some spoolies, yet retain some of the firing (feel) characteristics of a spool over a poppet?

that's the general idea, yeah.

[andrewthewookie]

Because it's a closed firing chamber, and the fact that the poppet valve is separate from the bolt, doesn't that sort of render what kind of valve it is pointless? Once the firing chamber is open to the bolt, it's the opening of the bolt that determines how the firing chamber empties, so isn't the poppet only good for starting the cycle, but not the actual efficiency?

[Danny D]

Troy, on 16 January 2012 - 08:02 AM, said:

We are starting to tread pretty heavily on my home turf now (at least my area of training, taxonomy is a long ways away from computer programming). What we have here is a, classic problem of natural kinds. The real problem is how much of a subjective weight we put on which specific attributes of the valve to determine it's kind. Anytime you create a definition, if it's too broad, it's not useful, if it's too narrow, it's not useful either. No matter what the criteria is, the underlining flaw in a definition is that it's based in some kind of subjective quality assessment (unless you are a Platonist though, and you think the perfect spool valve is running around in the realm of forms).

My specialization is in plant taxonomy, which is, pretty much, the oldest science around. We were classifying plants into groups before we had language. The kicker is, that it's barely a science at all. Plant groups are divided into groups on pretty much purely subjective differences (classifying things genetically is not an answer btw, I'm not going to go into that, so I don't derail the thread).

When I first got into an immunology lab (believe it or not plant tax isn't, exactly, one of those "in demand" job fields, and I had a bio-chem degree after all...), the primary investigator explained the purpose of his research, what he was doing, and his goals in pure metaphor. I responded "I don't like to talk in metaphors" he said "well then, I can't talk to you about science."

The point of this long rant is that whenever you are doing something cool and "scientific," you need to man up and rise to the challenge. Not everything is precise, not everything is black and white... IN FACT, in my experience, if you are doing something cool, you're working in shades of grey.

Btw, I'm going to call this a spool as well, for more pragmatic reasons rather than operational reasons. It uses grease instead of oil... it's a spool

Yay! A fellow plant taxonomist! You sir, have a pm your way!

Now back on topic...
There is both a spool valve and a poppet in there. The poppet controls the rest, so i think "I.F. Pressure controlled poppet" is a good description.

Oldnewb: Yes, the design is more efficient. Yoda on MCB makes conversion kits for the vibe/ion etc. that are similar design to the legion. They are more efficient. Im not sure about noise or smoothness.

[drg]

Danny D, on 16 January 2012 - 06:59 PM, said:

Now back on topic...
There is both a spool valve and a poppet in there. The poppet controls the rest, so i think "I.F. Pressure controlled poppet" is a good description.

So where's the poppet?

[Molybdenum]

Wiki says a poppet valve "consists of a hole, usually round or oval, and a tapered plug, usually a disk shape on the end of a shaft also called a valve stem. The shaft guides the plug portion by sliding through a valve guide. In most applications a pressure differential helps to seal the valve and in some applications also open it."

That and (at least I'm under the impression that) a "spool valve" normally refers to something like a 3-way due to the spool shape of the valve rod.

So my question is, why are we even classifying it? Normally a classification would help to make rapid generalizations about the subject, but in this case the subject seems to defy that.

[drg]

I really don't think this case is one of the closer cases. This thing is very much a spool. The idea of calling it a poppet in any way, shape, or form smacks of marketing. There are much more arguable designs out there.

This post has been edited by drg: 16 January 2012 - 07:14 PM

[Danny D]

drg, on 16 January 2012 - 07:02 PM, said:

Danny D, on 16 January 2012 - 06:59 PM, said:

Now back on topic...
There is both a spool valve and a poppet in there. The poppet controls the rest, so i think "I.F. Pressure controlled poppet" is a good description.

So where's the poppet?

Same place as this one:

This post has been edited by cockerpunk: 16 January 2012 - 07:30 PM

[oldnewb]

Bryce, Danny, thanks for your replies (although now I'm confused why this design isn't on "higher-end" markers if it's that much better).

The reason why I asked is that an average paintballer doesn't care what's going on internally with their marker. The reason why they want to know if the marker is a poppet or a spool is because people have been telling them for years, if you want an air efficient marker with low maintenance, go with a poppet. If you want a smooth shooting, quieter marker and are willing to give up a little air efficiency and do a bit more maintenance, go with a spool. The average (ie no engineering background) guy just wants to know how to catagorize this marker because they want it to know what it'll be like to own... not because they want to understand how it works.

In any case, this seems like a promising design for those who want something that does a little bit of everything. That's the overall impression I'm getting.

Oh, and I'm just starting to follow what going on with those crazy Ions over at MCB. Those mechanical Ions look especially promising and fun to play with. (Sorry, off topic a bit).

[andrewthewookie]

oldnewb, on 16 January 2012 - 07:27 PM, said:

Oh, and I'm just starting to follow what going on with those crazy Ions over at MCB. Those mechanical Ions look especially promising and fun to play with. (Sorry, off topic a bit).

Still off topic, but they absolutely are. It's made me love Ions all over again.


Back on topic: I'm just going to call it a fully electropneumatic automag.

[brycelarson]

I assume that they put this in the mid price bracket because it's easy to manufacture. My guess (although I don't have numbers to back it up) is that it prob feels mostly like a classic spool valve when shooting - but that it will get less efficiency than a poppet.

It's possible that with the sealed dump chamber and dual stage action they might be able to save some cash on the solenoid and the electronic side - I'm not sure.

I wouldn't say that it's better than either the classic poppet or classic spool design - it's just different.

And yes, I need to get my mech in up and running - it's a fun shooter.

[Cookybiscuit]

...So PE have made a good gun finally? Looking at how it works, we can assume what characteristics?

[drg]

Danny D, on 16 January 2012 - 07:21 PM, said:

drg, on 16 January 2012 - 07:02 PM, said:

Danny D, on 16 January 2012 - 06:59 PM, said:

Now back on topic...
There is both a spool valve and a poppet in there. The poppet controls the rest, so i think "I.F. Pressure controlled poppet" is a good description.

So where's the poppet?

Same place as this one:

Yeah, there is no poppet in that one either. That one, as I said earlier, is miscategorized by ZDSPB. That is not a poppet, that is a spool.

[y0da900]

drg, on 16 January 2012 - 08:20 PM, said:

Yeah, there is no poppet in that one either. That one, as I said earlier, is miscategorized by ZDSPB. That is not a poppet, that is a spool.

I believe that falls into the artistic license category on Andy's part - not a miscategorization. The patent for the Legion Shocker clearly shows an identical valve layout that has a tapered step around the o-ring at the tip that makes a face seal, not an axial seal as shown in the animation. Identical action, very minor variation in how the actual seal is made. And valve resolution and minimized pre-expansion volume helping efficiency aside, the Etha could be configured so that the firing piston (what I've been calling it in my closed bolt Ion configurations just to avoid arguments over the semantics involved) shifts forward before the dump chamber vents completely, trapping residual pressure within to further boost efficiencies.

I'm looking forward to someone devolumizing the piss out of one of these, cranking the pressures, and running a very low dwell.&nbsp; Probably not so nice on paint, but I would guess a nice efficiency boost as well.<br>

This post has been edited by y0da900: 16 January 2012 - 09:30 PM

[drg]

I would submit that the "variation" is not so minor after all, seeing as how it changes what type of valve it is. Fairly or not the nomenclature has acquired connotations in paintball that may make a manufacturer or other interested party want to call a valve one thing or another, but one would think that in a forum ostensibly for cutting through the BS, we should not muddy the waters by buying into just that kind of perceptional bias.

[cockerpunk]

drg, on 16 January 2012 - 09:47 PM, said:

I would submit that the "variation" is not so minor after all, seeing as how it changes what type of valve it is. Fairly or not the nomenclature has acquired connotations in paintball that may make a manufacturer or other interested party want to call a valve one thing or another, but one would think that in a forum ostensibly for cutting through the BS, we should not muddy the waters by buying into just that kind of perceptional bias.

but it doesn't change how the gun works, so its dumb to categorize a gun based on that. your the only one muddying the waters by talking about one minor thing not how the entire system functions. its an increasing force pressure controlled poppet.

y0da900, on 16 January 2012 - 09:29 PM, said:

I'm looking forward to someone devolumizing the piss out of one of these, cranking the pressures, and running a very low dwell.&nbsp; Probably not so nice on paint, but I would guess a nice efficiency boost as well.<br>

if you were able to redesign the bolt system for those higher pressures, it wouldn't be hard on paint. reduced diameter = reduced bolt forward force.

This post has been edited by cockerpunk: 16 January 2012 - 10:18 PM

[drg]

cockerpunk, on 16 January 2012 - 10:16 PM, said:

but it doesn't change how the gun works, so its dumb to categorize a gun based on that. your the only one muddying the waters by talking about one minor thing not how the entire system functions. its an increasing force pressure controlled poppet.

Well, the operation of this gun is spool valve, so that doesn't make any point in your favor. The structure in the middle of the gun is a spool. It works pretty much like a classic spool valve design. I don't see how you can look at the animations and not see that. It's as plain as day and acknowledged by the designers. The only thing that would make it a poppet is a poppet-type structure controlling the firing pulse.

Yoda already cleared up the issue with the Legion Shocker as it being misdrawn. The Etha originally had a poppet seal for the front of the spool, which is where that terminology originated from, and it was carried through the process for pragmatic reasons. It made it into marketing copy for marketing reasons.

This post has been edited by drg: 16 January 2012 - 11:02 PM