Jump to content


Photo

tiberious rounds brittleness testing


  • Please log in to reply
29 replies to this topic

#1 cockerpunk

cockerpunk

    All the Dudes

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,119 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 14 February 2009 - 08:49 PM

same rig we used before, smaller sample size :(

dropped 8 rounds on to oak cutting board from 8 feet.

1 bounce

12.5% bounce rate

admittedly smaller sample size then i would have liked to use.

Edited by cockerpunk, 14 February 2009 - 08:50 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."


#2 panterajim

panterajim

    one bad mutha

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 340 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Frederick, MD

Posted 14 February 2009 - 08:55 PM

do u still have enough rounds to do the dual chrono test

#3 cockerpunk

cockerpunk

    All the Dudes

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,119 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 14 February 2009 - 09:04 PM

do u still have enough rounds to do the dual chrono test


not currently

this was my only tube. if i had more i would ahve done the full 20 ball sample size as the other brittleness testing.
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."


#4 Mr.Cool

Mr.Cool

    U mirin?

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,292 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Crystal Lake, IL

Posted 14 February 2009 - 09:26 PM

I'm kind of wondering if a rifled barrel would have any advanages with these over a regular paintball.

#5 Lucas

Lucas

    Elite Member

  • Retired Staff
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,342 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia, USA

Posted 14 February 2009 - 09:30 PM

I'm kind of wondering if a rifled barrel would have any advanages with these over a regular paintball.


I don't follow what your saying?

Well a rifled barrell and paintballs dont work.... tippmann rifled barrel (supposadly) I don't see a difference with them at the field

And if your talking about a rifled barrell with the tiberious arms it would probably not work as well but maybe....

#6 Mr.Cool

Mr.Cool

    U mirin?

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,292 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Crystal Lake, IL

Posted 14 February 2009 - 09:38 PM

well i was thinking that with the fins they would sort of spin like a football from the rifled barrel

#7 Snipez4664

Snipez4664

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 785 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 14 February 2009 - 11:05 PM

well i was thinking that with the fins they would sort of spin like a football from the rifled barrel


They already do. No advantage.
Posted Image

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

#8 MasterMind88

MasterMind88

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 162 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Livonia, MI

Posted 14 February 2009 - 11:45 PM

12.5% is rather dissapointing at only eight feet.
Michigan Member #10

Outsmarting oppenents on the field since September 1999.
Understanding the past can better prepair you for the future.

#9 Weigel21

Weigel21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,108 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hays, KS

Posted 14 February 2009 - 11:51 PM

1 bounce out of eight really isn't that bad.

MasterMind88, try this test with Monster paintballs and see if you get any breaks. If you get just one I'd be shocked.

#10 cockerpunk

cockerpunk

    All the Dudes

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,119 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 15 February 2009 - 03:38 AM

12.5% is rather dissapointing at only eight feet.


actually that is quite brittle, assuming that percent stays close at the desired sample size of 20. compare that to about cooled silver, or regular gold in terms of brittleness.

more then anything this test just shows that they will break at an acceptable rate and wont just bounce off everything.
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."


#11 Leafy

Leafy

    Uses the Man Pedal

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,836 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NH/MA

Posted 18 February 2009 - 12:37 PM

is anyone else already thinking of sanding the front for an even better bounce chance? if you had more cp I'd say try that and see if it improved the breakage.

#12 Evil Fingers

Evil Fingers

    Banned

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,835 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 20 February 2009 - 06:12 PM

Sanding the Front of what?

#13 Leafy

Leafy

    Uses the Man Pedal

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,836 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NH/MA

Posted 20 February 2009 - 06:13 PM

Sanding the Front of what?

of the round. like where the paint is. just to see how brittle you can actually get the front of one of them.

#14 warhawk224

warhawk224

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts

Posted 22 February 2009 - 06:58 PM

I worry that if you sanded the fronts your going to mess with the aerodynamic profile

#15 Leafy

Leafy

    Uses the Man Pedal

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,836 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NH/MA

Posted 22 February 2009 - 06:59 PM

I worry that if you sanded the fronts your going to mess with the aerodynamic profile


you're not gonna take off that much material, you'd use like 1500 grit and only take off a few thousandths.

#16 Toriphilewill

Toriphilewill

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 69 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Rockland County, NY

Posted 22 February 2009 - 11:27 PM

is anyone else already thinking of sanding the front for an even better bounce chance? if you had more cp I'd say try that and see if it improved the breakage.


87.5% of the dropped rounds broke. This is not bad considering the sampling size was only 8. But you want to sand the round to INCREASE the bounce chance? Maybe it is just the way you worded it. I think your idea would work, but the number of possible failures would outweigh the benefits. Especially at the cost ($1/round) of testing the breakage, as well as the flight after sanding, sanding inconsistencies, etc.

After dropping the round, was it possible to measure the shell thickness? Is the shell the same thickness in the front, as well as the back? This could give some hard #'s, without paying alot for these rounds.

#17 Leafy

Leafy

    Uses the Man Pedal

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,836 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NH/MA

Posted 22 February 2009 - 11:32 PM

yeah I mean break chance.

#18 Leftystrikesback

Leftystrikesback

    Mech Master

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

Posted 23 February 2009 - 12:54 AM

12.5% is rather dissapointing at only eight feet.


This is better breakage results than any of the DXS paint cockerpunk tested at room temp:
http://spreadsheets....HdSU9LwXkxMkESA

I assume this test was also done at room temp, I can't imagine you putting these great rounds in the fridge, or standing outside and dropping all these :) Smaller sample, but still great news.

Edited by Leftystrikesback, 23 February 2009 - 12:59 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-->

#19 cockerpunk

cockerpunk

    All the Dudes

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,119 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 23 February 2009 - 01:16 PM

yeah, the sample size is not comparable in terms of the standard test we did, but it shows that they will break under normal circumstances.

when we get more ill complete the full test for true comparison.
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."


#20 Toriphilewill

Toriphilewill

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 69 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Rockland County, NY

Posted 24 February 2009 - 03:31 PM

yeah, the sample size is not comparable in terms of the standard test we did, but it shows that they will break under normal circumstances.

when we get more ill complete the full test for true comparison.


I've searched the forums, but couldn't find the brittleness tests you are referring to. *Edit: I passed leftystrikesback's post, and missed the google doc. Any reference to the google docs in a punkworks sticky?* Maybe I am just searching in the wrong places/words.

Anyway, aside from measuring the number of bounces out of X balls, have you tried to establish a correlation with shell thickness to your tests. I just wonder if a micrometer measurement of the thickness would provide another level of data. I know the formulation/materials of the p-balls should have some say as far as brittleness, but these are company secrets. I only ask BC those tiberius rounds are expensive, and to do a large sample might be a waste of money.

Edited by Toriphilewill, 24 February 2009 - 03:35 PM.


#21 Leftystrikesback

Leftystrikesback

    Mech Master

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

Posted 26 February 2009 - 10:57 PM

Actually I linked the google doc in my post specifically because it doesn't show up on this site as far as I know, it was linked in the description section of one of CP's youtube videos.

I don't believe that shell thickness has been measured in conjunction with a drop test. It would be easy enough to do and would tell an interesting story, however if you've never measured shell thickness before you may be in for a surprise: it is not at all constant. The shell can be almost twice as thick around the seam as it is around the poles of the ball, so when you report a thickness you need to come up with some standard for reporting. For example one person might report the thinnest part of the shell (where it might be weakest) whereas another might report the average thickness.
<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-->

#22 cockerpunk

cockerpunk

    All the Dudes

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,119 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 26 February 2009 - 11:15 PM

also the shell thinkness is pretty moot and not comparable to anything else because these rounds are not made of gelatin, they are made of a plastic.
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."


#23 brycelarson

brycelarson

    Show me the Data!

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,590 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 27 February 2009 - 09:33 AM

yeah, I didn't crush one by hand - but there was no give on these rounds. Most paintballs will let you dent them in a bit with your thumbnail - these were rock solid.

#24 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 01 February 2010 - 04:21 PM

I have a few questions now that we can look back on this test with new knowledge.

Is the purpose of the bounce test to compare paintballs/FS at similar velocities or similar heights? Now that we know that FSR doesn't slow down as fast as paintballs, then we might want to double check what speed the FSR are hitting at 8 ft.

It really depends on how we look at it. In one sense, it could serve as a direct comparison of brittleness at the same speed. On the other hand, it could be used as a "real-world" test in that the FSR are always going to hit at a faster velocity than PB's and the drop test velocity difference is irrelevant.

#25 UV Halo

UV Halo

    Bringing the Big Guns to LLVI

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,631 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fairfax, VA

Posted 03 February 2010 - 05:07 PM

From my recollection of sidebar discussions, the idea was to subject them to the same conditions as paintballs. Meaning, the same impact force. However, the impact testing occured well before the dual chrono test so nobody knew how much faster they would be going.

So, was this an accurate means to test this? This requires some thought and some math to definitively answer.

They are both subjected to the same acceleration (gravity).
They have a different drag profile but, drag is a coefficient and it gets to be a stronger 'force' the faster the projectile moves. This is what allows for 'terminal velocity' The point at which gravity's acceleration is equal and in opposition to the drag force.

The max speed any projectile can reach in 8ft is roughly 16FPS.

The question remaining is how different is the drag force at velocities less than 16FPS? My intuition tells me not very much.

Finally! this might be something I can test myself. I can do a drop test on my balcony or even in my bathroom and even better- my cellphone has a 'Highspeed' Video Capability (120Frames/Sec) maybe it will help?

#26 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 03 February 2010 - 07:52 PM

From my recollection of sidebar discussions, the idea was to subject them to the same conditions as paintballs. Meaning, the same impact force. However, the impact testing occured well before the dual chrono test so nobody knew how much faster they would be going.

So, was this an accurate means to test this? This requires some thought and some math to definitively answer.

They are both subjected to the same acceleration (gravity).
They have a different drag profile but, drag is a coefficient and it gets to be a stronger 'force' the faster the projectile moves. This is what allows for 'terminal velocity' The point at which gravity's acceleration is equal and in opposition to the drag force.

The max speed any projectile can reach in 8ft is roughly 16FPS.

The question remaining is how different is the drag force at velocities less than 16FPS? My intuition tells me not very much.

Finally! this might be something I can test myself. I can do a drop test on my balcony or even in my bathroom and even better- my cellphone has a 'Highspeed' Video Capability (120Frames/Sec) maybe it will help?


That sounds like a good idea. If you can, also make a grid of squares on a sheet of paper to serve as a backdrop. That way, we won't need a chrono to calculate the velocity.

#27 UV Halo

UV Halo

    Bringing the Big Guns to LLVI

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,631 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fairfax, VA

Posted 03 February 2010 - 08:13 PM

Since this weekend is looking to be a snow weekend, I'll try and get it done then.

#28 UV Halo

UV Halo

    Bringing the Big Guns to LLVI

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,631 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fairfax, VA

Posted 07 February 2010 - 12:54 AM

Testing complete.

Video (taken with my cell phone at 120 frames per second played in slow mo at 15frames per second):


Lines are space 1" apart and are .25" wide. Top line in video, to floor is 17.5"

Pulling distance marks from the video is very tricky. As each projectile is blurred over two lines, in any given frame.

Each projectile crosses the grid in 9 frames (.6 seconds video time, .075seconds real time) . That clocks out to 19.6feet per second.

Unfortunately, this is the best I can do and I cannot say for certain but, on the surface it appears that they are moving at comparable speeds.

#29 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 07 February 2010 - 05:19 PM

Nice job.

Are the lines 1" apart from centerline or is the spacing 1" apart? Just a curiosity question that is irrelevant from the results.

It certainly seems that they do fall at the same rate in that given distance. The drag must not be a major factor until at higher velocities.

#30 UV Halo

UV Halo

    Bringing the Big Guns to LLVI

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,631 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fairfax, VA

Posted 07 February 2010 - 08:09 PM

There is 1" between every 1/4" thick line.

I agree that the difference between in drag between these two projectiles probably really shows up at higher velocities and where it is the only force acting on the projectile.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users