Jump to content


Photo

Compression Testing Thread


  • Please log in to reply
174 replies to this topic

#51 Lord Odin

Lord Odin

    3 may keep a secret if 2 of them are dead

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,129 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oak Lawn, IL


Posted 18 January 2009 - 10:45 PM

Could be a good idea, time to microwave some paintballs? although it could boil the water in the fill and the vapor might blow up the paintball too. I still want to put one in the microwave haha.

I thought about that. First thing that comes to mind are grapes. They don't expand; they simply explode because of that very reason.

What about oil-based paintballs? Do they still have water in them?

#52 Leftystrikesback

Leftystrikesback

    Mech Master

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 529 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pasadena, CA

Posted 18 January 2009 - 10:51 PM

well that was entertaining! put it in for 35 seconds, it expanded to about 3 times its size but did not explode. When the microwave stopped it was clear that inside the ball there was about 50% liquid and 50% gas. It deflated quickly, I couldn't tell if the gas was air or water vapor, the ball was hot and I didn't want to burn myself popping it. My guess is that most of the gas was water vapor since it expanded so much and so quickly. Still fun though, I recommend it. Didn't even make a mess. Careful though the ball is hot.

I don't own any paintballs with an oil fill... do those exist, I'd think they would stain? or do you mean the ones that are super waxy when they dry? If they were really oil based then they wouldn't have any water in them but the shell still would.
<img src="http://img.photobuck...tball/Sig4.jpg" border="0" class="linked-sig-image" />
<!--sizeo:1--><span style="font-size:8pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo-->"do the math, save the world"<!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec-->

#53 Merc4Hire

Merc4Hire

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 69 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Washington USA

Posted 18 January 2009 - 11:59 PM

I thought the fill was supposed to be cornstarch, ground crayon wax and soybean oil, mostly, and that it is deliberately dried of water to avoid making the gelatin shell gooey.


My favorite style of play is whatever I haven't done in a while.

Autococker Owner's group #12

#54 Jack Wood

Jack Wood

    Sophomore Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 523 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Planet Eclipse UK

Posted 19 January 2009 - 08:56 AM

I thought the fill was supposed to be cornstarch, ground crayon wax and soybean oil, mostly, and that it is deliberately dried of water to avoid making the gelatin shell gooey.


Generally paintballs do have a little air bubble/pocket in them.

This can be seen on many paints that have a clear shell.

You most certainly could not rely on every ball having zero air-pockets in them.
I hereby declare that I work for Planet Eclipse Ltd
I live in England.
I work in England.
I am English.
Eclipse Owners Club V2

#55 TechPB-Mike

TechPB-Mike

    TechPB to the FRONT!!!

  • Root Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,496 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tampa FL


Posted 19 January 2009 - 09:25 AM

that is an awesome rig

I think I'd have too much getting drunk with you and Bryce, and seeing who can put their hand under it and take the most pain

Science can quickly turn to torture when alcohol is introduced

#56 Troy

Troy

    What... is the air-speed velocity of an unladen swallow?

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 896 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oklahoma City

Posted 19 January 2009 - 09:32 AM

I thought the fill was supposed to be cornstarch, ground crayon wax and soybean oil, mostly, and that it is deliberately dried of water to avoid making the gelatin shell gooey.

Some of that may be true, but the major component is PEG (polyethylene glycol). It has the uncanny ability to absorb water VERY well... its fun stuff.

well that was entertaining! put it in for 35 seconds, it expanded to about 3 times its size but did not explode. When the microwave stopped it was clear that inside the ball there was about 50% liquid and 50% gas. It deflated quickly, I couldn't tell if the gas was air or water vapor, the ball was hot and I didn't want to burn myself popping it. My guess is that most of the gas was water vapor since it expanded so much and so quickly. Still fun though, I recommend it. Didn't even make a mess. Careful though the ball is hot.


This could be easily tested by taking a paintball's fill and microwaving it by itself and seeing if lots of water boils off.
\m/

#57 Troy

Troy

    What... is the air-speed velocity of an unladen swallow?

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 896 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oklahoma City

Posted 19 January 2009 - 09:36 AM

I wish I had the money to put hydraulic disc brakes on my mountain bike... ah all the things I'll be able to do once I graduate...

I've worked at a bike shop for some time now... so I have a pretty sweet setup, that I got pretty cheap.

Edit: about the temperature dependence, I would imagine getting the gelatin to the right temp to create good bonds would also make them unable to hold their shape, so could be a trade off between well bonded halves and round balls with no dimples...

I think you are exactly right, by definition, at that point the material is pretty much at it's least rigid, because the molecules can move so much.
\m/

#58 sunshaker

sunshaker

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 228 posts

Posted 19 January 2009 - 11:31 AM

If you wanted to test a stack of paintballs to see the break value you could use a clear 10 round tube that has been cut down. You could easily set it up to test 1-9 or 10 paintballs (depending on if you cut the end off and the size of paintballs), you would be able to see which paintball(s) broke in the stack, they are cheap to buy (and you would probably want to have several set up as washing them out between tests would be a pain) and it would be fairly easy to set up (well getting the seem perfectly lined up might be a pain).

It might be interesting to see a comparison of oil-based vs water-based paintballs, or for that matter if you can find some of the old wax shelled ones.

#59 Jack Wood

Jack Wood

    Sophomore Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 523 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Planet Eclipse UK

Posted 19 January 2009 - 12:01 PM

Question for Gordon:

When the balls were loaded with Vertical seam, and you say the fracture originated at the seam, do you mean that the fracture started at the base, where the ball was up against the slab, on the seam, or could the fracture eminate from a failure anywhere around the seam?

Did the fracture always start at the bottom of the ball, is what I'm asking?

Jack

PS, there is (I think) an error in the data for the Silver. The VMean/Hmean isn't the correct value using the Vmean and Hmean figures in the table. I make it 0.273
I hereby declare that I work for Planet Eclipse Ltd
I live in England.
I work in England.
I am English.
Eclipse Owners Club V2

#60 cockerpunk

cockerpunk

    All the Dudes

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,105 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 19 January 2009 - 12:04 PM

Question for Gordon:

When the balls were loaded with Vertical seam, and you say the fracture originated at the seam, do you mean that the fracture started at the base, where the ball was up against the slab, on the seam, or could the fracture eminate from a failure anywhere around the seam?

Did the fracture always start at the bottom of the ball, is what I'm asking?

Jack

PS, there is (I think) an error in the data for the Silver. The VMean/Hmean isn't the correct value using the Vmean and Hmean figures in the table. I make it 0.273


ill check that math ...

without a camera watching the failures i dont know where it started, but in every break i remember (vertical or not) the failure was defiantly around or on the seam.

yup, fixed the value, when i added in the third data point i forgot to add those cells to the formula. thanks for the help there.

Edited by cockerpunk, 19 January 2009 - 12:07 PM.

The ultimate truth in paintball is that the interaction between the gun and the player is far and away the largest factor in accuracy, consistency, and reliability.

And yes, Gordon is the sexiest manifestation of "to the front."


#61 Jack Wood

Jack Wood

    Sophomore Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 523 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Planet Eclipse UK

Posted 19 January 2009 - 12:13 PM

I was just trying to get an idea of whether the failure was occuring on the seam as the seam "buckled" or kinked at the point the seam runs into the flat of the slab, or if the seam gave up under normal/tangential curvature.
I hereby declare that I work for Planet Eclipse Ltd
I live in England.
I work in England.
I am English.
Eclipse Owners Club V2

#62 Merc4Hire

Merc4Hire

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 69 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Washington USA

Posted 19 January 2009 - 02:08 PM

I thought the fill was supposed to be cornstarch, ground crayon wax and soybean oil, mostly, and that it is deliberately dried of water to avoid making the gelatin shell gooey.

Some of that may be true, but the major component is PEG (polyethylene glycol). It has the uncanny ability to absorb water VERY well... its fun stuff.

well that was entertaining! put it in for 35 seconds, it expanded to about 3 times its size but did not explode. When the microwave stopped it was clear that inside the ball there was about 50% liquid and 50% gas. It deflated quickly, I couldn't tell if the gas was air or water vapor, the ball was hot and I didn't want to burn myself popping it. My guess is that most of the gas was water vapor since it expanded so much and so quickly. Still fun though, I recommend it. Didn't even make a mess. Careful though the ball is hot.


This could be easily tested by taking a paintball's fill and microwaving it by itself and seeing if lots of water boils off.



I never questioned the presence of air bubbles, I agree completely about that part, I was addressing something someone said about water vs oil based fills. I don't think anyone uses water based, because it would always result in a gooey shell. Gelatin is not oil soluble.... I'm not saying that there isn't some water, but I don't think its there on purpose.

Troy, is the PEG thing just a guess, because I think everything in them has to be biodegradable and food grade? For the non-toxic label. I am pretty sure I have seen labels that say things like "made only from USDA approved ingredients" on cases of paint. If you watch that "how its made" video which you can see is at Procaps, they tumble dry the paintballs to take moisture out, harden the shells, and shrink them to size wouldn't putting a compound in there like PEG fight this?

Edited by Merc4Hire, 19 January 2009 - 02:17 PM.



My favorite style of play is whatever I haven't done in a while.

Autococker Owner's group #12

#63 Troy

Troy

    What... is the air-speed velocity of an unladen swallow?

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 896 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oklahoma City

Posted 19 January 2009 - 04:00 PM

I never questioned the presence of air bubbles, I agree completely about that part, I was addressing something someone said about water vs oil based fills. I don't think anyone uses water based, because it would always result in a gooey shell. Gelatin is not oil soluble.... I'm not saying that there isn't some water, but I don't think its there on purpose.

Troy, is the PEG thing just a guess, because I think everything in them has to be biodegradable and food grade? For the non-toxic label. I am pretty sure I have seen labels that say things like "made only from USDA approved ingredients" on cases of paint. If you watch that "how its made" video which you can see is at Procaps, they tumble dry the paintballs to take moisture out, harden the shells, and shrink them to size wouldn't putting a compound in there like PEG fight this?

It is not a guess, PEG is used in everything from toothpaste, to skin cream, to eye drops, to liquid capsule pills. PEG has been approved by the FDA and USDA for many different uses. I am not sure whether or not they use ground up crayons, or some of the other things you mentioned.

I realize that wikipedia isn't exactly the reference standard by which all things should be measured, but it says:
"Paintballs, also simply called "paint", are spherical gelatin capsules containing primarily polyethylene glycol, other non-toxic and water-soluble substances, and dye. Paintballs are made of materials found in food and are edible but taste inedible. [2] Early paintballs were made of glass and filled with indelible oil-based paint, since they were made for marking trees and cattle, but modern paintballs should easily wash out of most clothing."

While I am not familiar with the viscosity that oil and cornstarch produce, I am familiar with the effect that cornstarch and water have. They create a non-newtonian fluid... which is pretty much exactly what you do not want to be shooting at someone at a high speed. Non-newtonian fluids have the unique property of getting harder when impacted, which is certainly an undesirable trait for a paintball. For more info see the following video:


\m/

#64 cockerpunk

cockerpunk

    All the Dudes

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,105 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 19 January 2009 - 04:06 PM

eh, there are a couple of different non-newtonian fluids. i can say i know if vegetable oil is shear thinkening or shear thining.
The ultimate truth in paintball is that the interaction between the gun and the player is far and away the largest factor in accuracy, consistency, and reliability.

And yes, Gordon is the sexiest manifestation of "to the front."


#65 brycelarson

brycelarson

    Show me the Data!

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,586 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 19 January 2009 - 04:13 PM

maybe it is time for that high speed camera Gordon.....

#66 cockerpunk

cockerpunk

    All the Dudes

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,105 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 19 January 2009 - 11:27 PM

alright, since it seems we have looked at the basics of what is going on here, and poeple seem to understand the mechanics of it all, i have edited the spread sheet to include anotehr page.
The ultimate truth in paintball is that the interaction between the gun and the player is far and away the largest factor in accuracy, consistency, and reliability.

And yes, Gordon is the sexiest manifestation of "to the front."


#67 Leftystrikesback

Leftystrikesback

    Mech Master

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 529 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pasadena, CA

Posted 20 January 2009 - 01:14 AM

Can you explain the test set up for the distributed load compression test? Were the paint balls just squeezed in between two bolts instead of one bolt and a flat surface? or were they in some kind of tube to constrain bulging as well?

I find the aged paint test really interesting, it looks like storage conditions don't affect the strength of the paint much, only age. I would ask you to clarify what storing paint in the Sun and Hard Surface actually entailed (Open bag, closed bag etc), but it doesn't look like it matters!

Now, did you save any of those paint balls to test in another 2 months to see if they are even less brittle? It would be cool to know how age affects the compressive strength, like how long does it take to reach a maximum?

Edited by Leftystrikesback, 20 January 2009 - 01:15 AM.

<img src="http://img.photobuck...tball/Sig4.jpg" border="0" class="linked-sig-image" />
<!--sizeo:1--><span style="font-size:8pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo-->"do the math, save the world"<!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec-->

#68 Jack Wood

Jack Wood

    Sophomore Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 523 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Planet Eclipse UK

Posted 20 January 2009 - 05:51 AM

I was just trying to get an idea of whether the failure was occuring on the seam as the seam "buckled" or kinked at the point the seam runs into the flat of the slab, or if the seam gave up under normal/tangential curvature.


Any ideas on this Gordon?
I hereby declare that I work for Planet Eclipse Ltd
I live in England.
I work in England.
I am English.
Eclipse Owners Club V2

#69 Jack Wood

Jack Wood

    Sophomore Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 523 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Planet Eclipse UK

Posted 20 January 2009 - 05:58 AM

I don't really see the relevance of the aged test.

If it is not from the same batch, or evn same box, then it isn't a real comparison. Everyone knows that paint fluctuates massively from batch to batch, weekk to week. You can't compare paint that was made at a different time, and more importantly with the way MOST companies work these days, possibly from a different manufacturing facility!!

I think you can only do it the way Lefty suggests and re-test the same paint you tested this time around in 4 weeks or 2 months from now and see what you get.

And can you please put some nice boxes around the recent data to make it easier to read, pretty please?
I hereby declare that I work for Planet Eclipse Ltd
I live in England.
I work in England.
I am English.
Eclipse Owners Club V2

#70 cockerpunk

cockerpunk

    All the Dudes

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,105 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 20 January 2009 - 10:18 AM

Can you explain the test set up for the distributed load compression test? Were the paint balls just squeezed in between two bolts instead of one bolt and a flat surface? or were they in some kind of tube to constrain bulging as well?

I find the aged paint test really interesting, it looks like storage conditions don't affect the strength of the paint much, only age. I would ask you to clarify what storing paint in the Sun and Hard Surface actually entailed (Open bag, closed bag etc), but it doesn't look like it matters!

Now, did you save any of those paint balls to test in another 2 months to see if they are even less brittle? It would be cool to know how age affects the compressive strength, like how long does it take to reach a maximum?



yup, i am re-aging some paint as we speech from the case we used. but probably wont be testing it the same why, its for something else.

the distributed load was only between the two bolts. the ventrui with plugged ports was cupped pretty well, and about a 1/3 of the ball fit inside it. the other was an open faced bolt with a thin wall and a nice internal taper. the original plan was a bit different, but due some some machining issues with the guy who was going to make it, we had to improvise.

the hard surface ones were open air, the humid ones were open air too, the sun was in 10 round tubes.

jack, i would describe the failure as a "blow out" out the side of the ball in most cases.

Jack, while they did not come from the same box of paint, or anything like that. all DXS branded paint is quality controlled to a reasonable level, hence why it gets its own box. while the numbers may not be perfect, i do think they are indicative of something.

Edited by cockerpunk, 20 January 2009 - 10:28 AM.

The ultimate truth in paintball is that the interaction between the gun and the player is far and away the largest factor in accuracy, consistency, and reliability.

And yes, Gordon is the sexiest manifestation of "to the front."


#71 cockerpunk

cockerpunk

    All the Dudes

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,105 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 23 January 2009 - 04:45 PM

gonna toss up more results here, the temp test some time tonight.
The ultimate truth in paintball is that the interaction between the gun and the player is far and away the largest factor in accuracy, consistency, and reliability.

And yes, Gordon is the sexiest manifestation of "to the front."


#72 cockerpunk

cockerpunk

    All the Dudes

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,105 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 23 January 2009 - 10:55 PM

new data sheet is up
The ultimate truth in paintball is that the interaction between the gun and the player is far and away the largest factor in accuracy, consistency, and reliability.

And yes, Gordon is the sexiest manifestation of "to the front."


#73 Leftystrikesback

Leftystrikesback

    Mech Master

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 529 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pasadena, CA

Posted 23 January 2009 - 11:44 PM

Ok, Let me sum up what I'm seeing:

Silver got much stronger in the cold. Oddly, it also was able to deflect more before failure in the cold.

It looks like Triumph kept it's strength constant, at least in the horizontal seam direction, it maybe deflected a little less before failure.

Frostbite's compressive strength stayed fairly constant, perhaps it got slightly stronger. It also looks like it deflected less before failure while cold than when room temp.

Frostbite showed that it doesn't change it's properties as much as other paints across various temperatures, that's a good result.
Odd that all the paints seemed to get stronger when they were cold, that doesn't seem to go with observation (paint drop test). Obviously compressive strength does not relate well to impact strength. Though I would expect that the deflection for failure to occur would be smaller at lower temperatures, essentially showing brittleness. Did you do a drop test on the paint to see if it was more or less likely to break in the cold?
<img src="http://img.photobuck...tball/Sig4.jpg" border="0" class="linked-sig-image" />
<!--sizeo:1--><span style="font-size:8pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo-->"do the math, save the world"<!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec-->

#74 Leftystrikesback

Leftystrikesback

    Mech Master

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 529 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pasadena, CA

Posted 24 January 2009 - 12:22 AM

Here are some graphs using the mean values.

Posted ImagePosted Image
Posted ImagePosted Image
<img src="http://img.photobuck...tball/Sig4.jpg" border="0" class="linked-sig-image" />
<!--sizeo:1--><span style="font-size:8pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo-->"do the math, save the world"<!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec-->

#75 A.E.D.paintballer

A.E.D.paintballer

    maritime baller!

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 99 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dieppe N.B.

Posted 24 January 2009 - 01:40 AM

it seems there is a pinnacle at 30f... interesting
08 slg, ul trigger and feedneck, hybrid push button asa and full freak kit


Got a SLG? Join the SLG Owners Group

#76 Lord Odin

Lord Odin

    3 may keep a secret if 2 of them are dead

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,129 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oak Lawn, IL


Posted 24 January 2009 - 08:32 AM

It's really hard to make conclusions based on the graphs because we're only looking at the averages for the balls, which is 3 numbers. The sample just isn't large enough. Lefty, could you redo the graphs using the raw numbers instead of the means? That would increase the sample size and perhaps we can see a trend that way.

#77 cockerpunk

cockerpunk

    All the Dudes

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,105 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 24 January 2009 - 01:06 PM

Ok, Let me sum up what I'm seeing:

Silver got much stronger in the cold. Oddly, it also was able to deflect more before failure in the cold.

It looks like Triumph kept it's strength constant, at least in the horizontal seam direction, it maybe deflected a little less before failure.

Frostbite's compressive strength stayed fairly constant, perhaps it got slightly stronger. It also looks like it deflected less before failure while cold than when room temp.

Frostbite showed that it doesn't change it's properties as much as other paints across various temperatures, that's a good result.
Odd that all the paints seemed to get stronger when they were cold, that doesn't seem to go with observation (paint drop test). Obviously compressive strength does not relate well to impact strength. Though I would expect that the deflection for failure to occur would be smaller at lower temperatures, essentially showing brittleness. Did you do a drop test on the paint to see if it was more or less likely to break in the cold?


i think we are on to something here ....

i think we need to examine what kind of things we are modeling with this test. where its true and why.

Edited by cockerpunk, 24 January 2009 - 01:09 PM.

The ultimate truth in paintball is that the interaction between the gun and the player is far and away the largest factor in accuracy, consistency, and reliability.

And yes, Gordon is the sexiest manifestation of "to the front."


#78 Leftystrikesback

Leftystrikesback

    Mech Master

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 529 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pasadena, CA

Posted 24 January 2009 - 01:26 PM

It's really hard to make conclusions based on the graphs because we're only looking at the averages for the balls, which is 3 numbers. The sample just isn't large enough. Lefty, could you redo the graphs using the raw numbers instead of the means? That would increase the sample size and perhaps we can see a trend that way.


Can you suggest good a way to add the raw data? It seems to like adding the raw data would just be more confusing. Then I would have 3 points stacked up on one another for each temperature, for each ball type. So at 0 degrees I would have 9 data points. Connecting individual dots then would show trends that aren't there. You would draw a best fit line though them but that's essentially the same as averaging them.

I agree that using a mean of 3 samples isn't great but its the best we've got to go on.

and cockerpunk; I am assuming the balls in the temperature test were tested the same way as in the first compression test, not in between two bolts or anything, is that correct?
And since the tests don't seem to relate well to impacts, this test only really relates to loading on balls in the stack and squeezing one into the barrel (maybe, that's still much faster loading that this). So a couple of conclusions about that would be that you can turn up the force on your loader in the cold, and underboring in the cold shouldn't break any more balls than underboring in general.
<img src="http://img.photobuck...tball/Sig4.jpg" border="0" class="linked-sig-image" />
<!--sizeo:1--><span style="font-size:8pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo-->"do the math, save the world"<!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec-->

#79 cockerpunk

cockerpunk

    All the Dudes

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,105 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 24 January 2009 - 01:59 PM

and cockerpunk; I am assuming the balls in the temperature test were tested the same way as in the first compression test, not in between two bolts or anything, is that correct?
And since the tests don't seem to relate well to impacts, this test only really relates to loading on balls in the stack and squeezing one into the barrel (maybe, that's still much faster loading that this). So a couple of conclusions about that would be that you can turn up the force on your loader in the cold, and underboring in the cold shouldn't break any more balls than underboring in general.


now we are on to something. yes, they were crushed in the same manner as the basic test.
The ultimate truth in paintball is that the interaction between the gun and the player is far and away the largest factor in accuracy, consistency, and reliability.

And yes, Gordon is the sexiest manifestation of "to the front."


#80 Cheap-o

Cheap-o

    THE neglected douche

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,410 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 24 January 2009 - 02:14 PM

try with some 2-3 month old paint... it will fail in accuracy... and will probably be more brittle in the cold, just something I would throw out there from personal experience....

damn gold.....

#81 brycelarson

brycelarson

    Show me the Data!

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,586 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 24 January 2009 - 06:57 PM

I think we all need to really examine the deflection before breaking - that, to me, is actually more interesting than the actual force needed.

Edited by brycelarson, 24 January 2009 - 06:57 PM.


#82 ktap

ktap

    You just got DUSTed.

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 646 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Killadelphia

Posted 24 January 2009 - 11:28 PM

i find lefty's graphs interesting. especially the difference between triumph vertical strength and horizontal strength. the graphs seem to be opposite of each other depending on seam orientation. it seems that somehow at 30* the bond at the seam gets stronger, but the overall shell gets more brittle. I'm not quite sure what this means or what its implications would be... however i still agree that there is insufficient data to make any concrete assumptions.

Posted Image


Drexel University Scenario Team
Sponsored by Valken

#83 cockerpunk

cockerpunk

    All the Dudes

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,105 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 25 January 2009 - 09:45 PM

well, at this point int he testing we kind of hit a snag. with the compression testing we are testing a steady state load (or close to), which is like the load applied in a barrel, esp in an underbored barrel. so judging from those results we can see that underboring by .005 really does not put very much force or stress on a paintball. thats all fine and dandy.

but when we start looking at cooling paintballs we are fundamentally changing the nature of what we are testing for. we are no longer really looking at a steady state issue, we are looking at impact loading. everyone says that cold paintballs are more brittle right? they dont say weaker, they say more brittle. the deflections are a bit interesting, but i dont think they tell the whole story.
The ultimate truth in paintball is that the interaction between the gun and the player is far and away the largest factor in accuracy, consistency, and reliability.

And yes, Gordon is the sexiest manifestation of "to the front."


#84 Snipez4664

Snipez4664

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 785 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 January 2009 - 11:18 PM

What you really need is a very carefully controlled drop test.
Posted Image

This post brought to you by: Lurker
Owner/Operator/Lead Engineer - Lurker Paintball
Check out our products at Lurker Paintball

#85 sibleywibbley

sibleywibbley

    Friend Approval - Disabled

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 232 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ashland, Ohio

Posted 25 January 2009 - 11:24 PM

hoy many different paint brands are you planning on testing?
I like to lurk in threads with no intent to post.
Posted Image
"True terror is to wake up one morning and to discover that your high chool class is running the country." -K. Vonnegut

#86 oerllikon

oerllikon

    Sober people R jerks

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,177 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 26 January 2009 - 01:34 AM

Even though im too drunk to read the sheet.. greatt test!!!!!
Ill look again later
My new signature is better than ever

#87 cockerpunk

cockerpunk

    All the Dudes

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,105 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 26 January 2009 - 10:37 AM

What you really need is a very carefully controlled drop test.


yup!

ill edit the video tonight i figure. i will also probably put up a conclusion video for part 1 of the compression testing.

this is what lead me to think of a way to build a break probability calculator as well.

Edited by cockerpunk, 26 January 2009 - 10:44 AM.

The ultimate truth in paintball is that the interaction between the gun and the player is far and away the largest factor in accuracy, consistency, and reliability.

And yes, Gordon is the sexiest manifestation of "to the front."


#88 Jack Wood

Jack Wood

    Sophomore Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 523 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Planet Eclipse UK

Posted 26 January 2009 - 12:43 PM

And since the tests don't seem to relate well to impacts, this test only really relates to loading on balls in the stack and squeezing one into the barrel (maybe, that's still much faster loading that this). So a couple of conclusions about that would be that you can turn up the force on your loader in the cold, and underboring in the cold shouldn't break any more balls than underboring in general.


The problem is that this is completely counterintuitive to every test we have ever carried out here.

If we want to induce breaks in guns/loader we will chill the paint down.

Just because it appears a cold ball can withstand higher steady state compressive forces does NOT mean that you can increase your loader force with that paint. I think we need to make that very clear.
I hereby declare that I work for Planet Eclipse Ltd
I live in England.
I work in England.
I am English.
Eclipse Owners Club V2

#89 brycelarson

brycelarson

    Show me the Data!

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,586 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 26 January 2009 - 02:02 PM

exactly Jack - which is why I pointed to the deflection before break number. Harder but more brittle may very well be more likely to incur a fracture during loading, firing or dropping.

#90 swift

swift

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 38 posts

Posted 26 January 2009 - 04:05 PM

is this it for the compression testing or will you be comparing different brands of paint in the future?


there are 5 different grades compared.

Very cool stuff. B)

According to ProCaps' website, there are only 3 grades; Tourney, Value, and Winter. I'm quite surprised that the Triumph (value) is stronger than the Frostbite (winter).

Can you guys now measure the thickness of the shells to see if there is a relationship between shell thickness and compression strength?


i believe they also have "rec" as a fourth

#91 Lord Odin

Lord Odin

    3 may keep a secret if 2 of them are dead

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,129 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oak Lawn, IL


Posted 26 January 2009 - 04:19 PM

i believe they also have "rec" as a fourth

Not according to this:

http://www.procapsdi...1-rec-ball.aspx

#92 cockerpunk

cockerpunk

    All the Dudes

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,105 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 26 January 2009 - 04:21 PM

talking to joey she specifically told me that each brand is a different formulation. thus, "grade" is an arbitrary line drawn, what matters more is brand. this is why we used five different brands of paintball, from the "best" to the "worst" in order to examine across a range of conditions how paintballs respond to loading.
The ultimate truth in paintball is that the interaction between the gun and the player is far and away the largest factor in accuracy, consistency, and reliability.

And yes, Gordon is the sexiest manifestation of "to the front."


#93 Lord Odin

Lord Odin

    3 may keep a secret if 2 of them are dead

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,129 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oak Lawn, IL


Posted 26 January 2009 - 04:26 PM

talking to joey she specifically told me that each brand is a different formulation. thus, "grade" is an arbitrary line drawn, what matters more is brand. this is why we used five different brands of paintball, from the "best" to the "worst" in order to examine across a range of conditions how paintballs respond to loading.

I think brand isn't best word to use. That would imply Procaps vs RPS vs etc. Instead, grade is much more suitable based on its purpose.

You say that each has a different formulation. Would that imply that characteristics such as shell thickness can't be compared because its comparing apples to oranges (ie - different balls have different chemical makeups)? Or are they all part of the same material and just applied differently to create a different grade?

#94 cockerpunk

cockerpunk

    All the Dudes

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,105 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 26 January 2009 - 04:42 PM

talking to joey she specifically told me that each brand is a different formulation. thus, "grade" is an arbitrary line drawn, what matters more is brand. this is why we used five different brands of paintball, from the "best" to the "worst" in order to examine across a range of conditions how paintballs respond to loading.

I think brand isn't best word to use. That would imply Procaps vs RPS vs etc. Instead, grade is much more suitable based on its purpose.

You say that each has a different formulation. Would that imply that characteristics such as shell thickness can't be compared because its comparing apples to oranges (ie - different balls have different chemical makeups)? Or are they all part of the same material and just applied differently to create a different grade?


based on the evidence at hand, i think its pretty safe to say that in some cases the shell and fill are formulated differently.
The ultimate truth in paintball is that the interaction between the gun and the player is far and away the largest factor in accuracy, consistency, and reliability.

And yes, Gordon is the sexiest manifestation of "to the front."


#95 cockerpunk

cockerpunk

    All the Dudes

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,105 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 26 January 2009 - 07:20 PM

video will be done processing pretty quick -
The ultimate truth in paintball is that the interaction between the gun and the player is far and away the largest factor in accuracy, consistency, and reliability.

And yes, Gordon is the sexiest manifestation of "to the front."


#96 Spitlebug

Spitlebug

    Canadian Cross Dressing, Bull ball Toucher.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,044 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Campbell River, B.C.

Posted 27 January 2009 - 10:44 PM

Jesus fuck Gordon.

"Right here onto the cutting board and it's about, it's probably about, eight or nine feet. Which is a little bit higher than we uh, then just you know dropping them from the hip or whatever... and actually this is perfect because off of twenty samples we're getting the exact, exactly perfect, amazingly perfect values for number of bounces. Um, so what I am doing is counting the number of bounces versus the number of breaks. Um, heh, and literally like if this was three feet higher we would be getting shit for values and if this was three feet lower we would be getting shit for values, but it's like perfect. You couldn't even design a better test than this."


How about some control? Perfect test? Sounds to me like the proper scientific method was not employed here.

If you are only wasting one hundred paintballs in this test, go back to the drawing board and do it right now that you believe such a method would work.

Gordon, you know that I am intrinsically interested in scientific study of paintball, but this doesn't cut it at all.

What-the-fuck.

So tempted to suspend Kitty just so I can say I have....
Okay, fuck it....I just banned Kitty, that's going in the sig.

Administrator - ICD Owner's Group

Posted Image


#97 cockerpunk

cockerpunk

    All the Dudes

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,105 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 28 January 2009 - 12:00 AM

Jesus fuck Gordon.

"Right here onto the cutting board and it's about, it's probably about, eight or nine feet. Which is a little bit higher than we uh, then just you know dropping them from the hip or whatever... and actually this is perfect because off of twenty samples we're getting the exact, exactly perfect, amazingly perfect values for number of bounces. Um, so what I am doing is counting the number of bounces versus the number of breaks. Um, heh, and literally like if this was three feet higher we would be getting shit for values and if this was three feet lower we would be getting shit for values, but it's like perfect. You couldn't even design a better test than this."


How about some control? Perfect test? Sounds to me like the proper scientific method was not employed here.

If you are only wasting one hundred paintballs in this test, go back to the drawing board and do it right now that you believe such a method would work.

Gordon, you know that I am intrinsically interested in scientific study of paintball, but this doesn't cut it at all.

What-the-fuck.


the spread sheet includes all the important data including drop height and impact surface. i did not have that in front of me for the video, but it is recorded for easy repeating and understanding.

prefect control - whats more prefect the gravity?

perfect test - the results are wonderfully consistent, and with reasonable sample sizes easy to compare. what more can you ask for?

just because the best piece of oak i could find is a cutting board your gonna toss the results? would you rather i went to the store, buy a 20 buck chunk of oak and shape it the same size and drop paintballs on it to make it better?

i have no idea what grounds you are trying to attack this test on, literally, i stand by this test more then any other i have done so far, its perfect. its simple, its easy to understand, to provides consistent, measurable results without hundreds of samples, and i can use the rig whenever i need to. easy cleanup is another huge bonus.

what more do you want? you want a machine to drop them? you want a non-cutting board piece of oak at the bottom? what do you want?

Edited by cockerpunk, 28 January 2009 - 12:02 AM.

The ultimate truth in paintball is that the interaction between the gun and the player is far and away the largest factor in accuracy, consistency, and reliability.

And yes, Gordon is the sexiest manifestation of "to the front."


#98 Spitlebug

Spitlebug

    Canadian Cross Dressing, Bull ball Toucher.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,044 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Campbell River, B.C.

Posted 28 January 2009 - 12:13 AM

Jesus fuck Gordon.

"Right here onto the cutting board and it's about, it's probably about, eight or nine feet. Which is a little bit higher than we uh, then just you know dropping them from the hip or whatever... and actually this is perfect because off of twenty samples we're getting the exact, exactly perfect, amazingly perfect values for number of bounces. Um, so what I am doing is counting the number of bounces versus the number of breaks. Um, heh, and literally like if this was three feet higher we would be getting shit for values and if this was three feet lower we would be getting shit for values, but it's like perfect. You couldn't even design a better test than this."


How about some control? Perfect test? Sounds to me like the proper scientific method was not employed here.

If you are only wasting one hundred paintballs in this test, go back to the drawing board and do it right now that you believe such a method would work.

Gordon, you know that I am intrinsically interested in scientific study of paintball, but this doesn't cut it at all.

What-the-fuck.


the spread sheet includes all the important data including drop height and impact surface. i did not have that in front of me for the video, but it is recorded for easy repeating and understanding.

prefect control - whats more prefect the gravity?

perfect test - the results are wonderfully consistent, and with reasonable sample sizes easy to compare. what more can you ask for?

just because the best piece of oak i could find is a cutting board your gonna toss the results? would you rather i went to the store, buy a 20 buck chunk of oak and shape it the same size and drop paintballs on it to make it better?

i have no idea what grounds you are trying to attack this test on, literally, i stand by this test more then any other i have done so far, its perfect. its simple, its easy to understand, to provides consistent, measurable results without hundreds of samples, and i can use the rig whenever i need to. easy cleanup is another huge bonus.

what more do you want? you want a machine to drop them? you want a non-cutting board piece of oak at the bottom? what do you want?


First, when I viewed the GoogleDocs there was no mention of distance traveled. Did you even measure the distance? Did you alter the GoogleDoc afterward?

Good, excellent, stellar - yes. Perfect - No.

Would you say that you could actually repeat this test if you needed to? What about altering the variables such as height? It seems to me that you cannot definitively say that at 8' or whatever the actual measured distance would be is the best distance to get an accurate cross section of bounces and breaks.

I'm not convinced. This Gordon, is one test I will reproduce myself on the weekend. I have a case of Zap Rec. Series and JT Tactical here.

Edited by Spitlebug, 28 January 2009 - 12:14 AM.

So tempted to suspend Kitty just so I can say I have....
Okay, fuck it....I just banned Kitty, that's going in the sig.

Administrator - ICD Owner's Group

Posted Image


#99 cockerpunk

cockerpunk

    All the Dudes

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,105 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 28 January 2009 - 12:21 AM

Jesus fuck Gordon.

"Right here onto the cutting board and it's about, it's probably about, eight or nine feet. Which is a little bit higher than we uh, then just you know dropping them from the hip or whatever... and actually this is perfect because off of twenty samples we're getting the exact, exactly perfect, amazingly perfect values for number of bounces. Um, so what I am doing is counting the number of bounces versus the number of breaks. Um, heh, and literally like if this was three feet higher we would be getting shit for values and if this was three feet lower we would be getting shit for values, but it's like perfect. You couldn't even design a better test than this."


How about some control? Perfect test? Sounds to me like the proper scientific method was not employed here.

If you are only wasting one hundred paintballs in this test, go back to the drawing board and do it right now that you believe such a method would work.

Gordon, you know that I am intrinsically interested in scientific study of paintball, but this doesn't cut it at all.

What-the-fuck.


the spread sheet includes all the important data including drop height and impact surface. i did not have that in front of me for the video, but it is recorded for easy repeating and understanding.

prefect control - whats more prefect the gravity?

perfect test - the results are wonderfully consistent, and with reasonable sample sizes easy to compare. what more can you ask for?

just because the best piece of oak i could find is a cutting board your gonna toss the results? would you rather i went to the store, buy a 20 buck chunk of oak and shape it the same size and drop paintballs on it to make it better?

i have no idea what grounds you are trying to attack this test on, literally, i stand by this test more then any other i have done so far, its perfect. its simple, its easy to understand, to provides consistent, measurable results without hundreds of samples, and i can use the rig whenever i need to. easy cleanup is another huge bonus.

what more do you want? you want a machine to drop them? you want a non-cutting board piece of oak at the bottom? what do you want?


First, when I viewed the GoogleDocs there was no mention of distance traveled. Did you even measure the distance? Did you alter the GoogleDoc afterward?

Good, excellent, stellar - yes. Perfect - No.

Would you say that you could actually repeat this test if you needed to? What about altering the variables such as height. it seems to me that you cannot definitively say that at 8' or whatever the actual measured distance would be is the best distance to get an accurate cross section of bounces and breaks.

I'm not convinced. This Gordon, is one test I will reproduce myself on the weekend. I have a case of Zap Rec. Series and JT Tactical here.


check the title of the google doc, its there. i measured it, and i actually tried to chronograph the balls mid drop, but i was not able to with my chrono. that would have been very interesting to know, but without something else to measure it, it would work. i tried timing it and then using the gravitational constant, but it was too short a time, and my stop watch skills are less then perfect. but due to construction of my house, it was actually 8 feet right on the money after i put some stuff under the cutting board to eliminate a couple of inches.

im glad you have changed to "good" thats better then "WTF"

the reason why i love the rig is that it is perfectly calibrated. 3 feet higher and almost everything would have broken on impact, and 3 feet lower and we would have had way to many bounces with the tougher paints. we want some amount of both bounces and breaks to make sure we know the comparative differences in there brittleness. this is something you would design a rigs height for, but it turns out that with the paint we tested, it was already perfectly calibrated. this is why i love the rig, its simple, repeatable and already calibrated. this something a worried about, but it turns out that the height was pretty much ideal for this kind of testing. our minimum bounces was 2, and our max was 13, out of 20 samples, thats a great cross section. ideal? idk, what is ideal? but it works fine for making comparative assessments of what is going on.

i guess i dont know what you are "not convinced" about. what is there to not be convinced by? if you have a chance to drop some paint, i do recommend it, its kinda fun. dropping and breaking things is always fun.

Edited by cockerpunk, 28 January 2009 - 12:28 AM.

The ultimate truth in paintball is that the interaction between the gun and the player is far and away the largest factor in accuracy, consistency, and reliability.

And yes, Gordon is the sexiest manifestation of "to the front."


#100 Lord Odin

Lord Odin

    3 may keep a secret if 2 of them are dead

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,129 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oak Lawn, IL


Posted 28 January 2009 - 12:26 AM

CP, was this something that you tried out and it happened to be the right height or did you have a particular height in mind? If the latter, why?

Edited by Lord Odin, 28 January 2009 - 12:26 AM.





2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users