Jump to content


Photo

Paintball Fill Viscosity....


  • Please log in to reply
55 replies to this topic

#1 David A.

David A.

    Sophomore Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 734 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Los Angeles Area

Posted 02 April 2012 - 11:24 AM

I was wondering if anyone, especially someone at Punkworks, has done any work on how the viscosity of the fill in a paintball may effect ball flight?

My Markers:

Polished Silver CCM T2, Polished Black CCM T2, Dust Black CCM T2, Black Bob Long MVP, Dust Back Sanchez Machine SM-1, Polished Silver CCI Phantom, Dust Black Empire AXE. 


#2 drg

drg

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 852 posts


Posted 02 April 2012 - 04:08 PM

I'm thinking thicker liquid = heavier liquid = heavier ball = truer flight and longer distance, potentially, all else being equal. Of course not all else is equal.

Edited by drg, 02 April 2012 - 04:12 PM.

Keep your pump hand strong!
PUMPPB.COM TIGHTSTICK - Custom LAPCO 1-piece underbore barrel! SALE!
PUMPPB.COM - Pump paintball forums
HawaiiPB.com - Paintball forums for the state of Hawaii
HawaiiPB/PumpPB - Our videos

#3 cockerpunk

cockerpunk

    All the Dudes

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,121 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 02 April 2012 - 05:16 PM

i think there will a correlation, but not a causation there. most quality paint has a thick fill, and will shot well. but i highly doubt the fills thickness is what is improving the accuracy.
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 Cookybiscuit

Cookybiscuit

    Schadenfreude Fanatic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,657 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Mexico


Posted 02 April 2012 - 06:06 PM

Thread hijack...

What about how much of the shell is filled? Maybe if a ball had less fill in it the mass moves around during flight.


Awarded: " the biggest dumbass on this forum" 2012


#5 David A.

David A.

    Sophomore Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 734 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Los Angeles Area

Posted 02 April 2012 - 07:05 PM

Thread hijack...

What about how much of the shell is filled? Maybe if a ball had less fill in it the mass moves around during flight.

That's my point, if the fill is thicker, it should move around less. Any work done on this?

My Markers:

Polished Silver CCM T2, Polished Black CCM T2, Dust Black CCM T2, Black Bob Long MVP, Dust Back Sanchez Machine SM-1, Polished Silver CCI Phantom, Dust Black Empire AXE. 


#6 David A.

David A.

    Sophomore Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 734 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Los Angeles Area

Posted 02 April 2012 - 07:30 PM

I'm thinking thicker liquid = heavier liquid = heavier ball = truer flight and longer distance, potentially, all else being equal. Of course not all else is equal.

Good thought - Thicker liquid does not always mean heavier liquid, the rest of the equation is right, it also means more energy, that is why there is a maximum allowable weight for Paintballs. My thoughts have more to do with stability.

My Markers:

Polished Silver CCM T2, Polished Black CCM T2, Dust Black CCM T2, Black Bob Long MVP, Dust Back Sanchez Machine SM-1, Polished Silver CCI Phantom, Dust Black Empire AXE. 


#7 Demon

Demon

    Master Tech

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,087 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Omaha Nebraska


Posted 02 April 2012 - 07:30 PM

well hydrotec's ball has a gel fill until it impacts so theoretically that would be the most accurate as far as movement inside the ball.

Mad Cow Paintball referee and tech
UNL Husker Paintball
"Let's play a game of go fuck yourself, you first..."

My Feedback

 


#8 drg

drg

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 852 posts


Posted 03 April 2012 - 12:15 AM


I'm thinking thicker liquid = heavier liquid = heavier ball = truer flight and longer distance, potentially, all else being equal. Of course not all else is equal.

Good thought - Thicker liquid does not always mean heavier liquid, the rest of the equation is right, it also means more energy, that is why there is a maximum allowable weight for Paintballs. My thoughts have more to do with stability.


I was trying to think how a thicker liquid could be lighter and couldn't come up with anything... Doesn't thicker mean heavier? There is no body enforcing weight afaik, astm standards are routinely violated in paintball, no?

And I believe weight does equal stability if the weight is evenly distributed.
Keep your pump hand strong!
PUMPPB.COM TIGHTSTICK - Custom LAPCO 1-piece underbore barrel! SALE!
PUMPPB.COM - Pump paintball forums
HawaiiPB.com - Paintball forums for the state of Hawaii
HawaiiPB/PumpPB - Our videos

#9 JGARRIGUES0001

JGARRIGUES0001

    idk

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,005 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florence, Ky

Posted 03 April 2012 - 03:19 AM

i think a big factor in a paintballs fill would be its ability to stay mixed evenly or remain a solution as apposed to being a mixture (i think those terms can be applied here...). think if it curdled like milk or acted like peanut butter when all of the oil rises to the top and the thick cream sits on bottom. you'd have a paintball in which the center of gravity would be skewed... that wouldn't fly straight at all. so the fill should be consistent and remain that way. things in the paintball's fill can't start to settle or rise.

#10 Troy

Troy

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

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

Posted 03 April 2012 - 06:56 AM

Have we noticed any significant accuracy differences between paintballs and reballs?
\m/

#11 Jaccen

Jaccen

    Sophomore Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 563 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SW Ontario

Posted 03 April 2012 - 07:44 AM

Have we noticed any significant accuracy differences between paintballs and reballs?


Excellent question. I guess one would need a high speed camera pointed at the target to note the impact position to define the vector? Or.........?




#12 brycelarson

brycelarson

    Show me the Data!

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


Posted 03 April 2012 - 07:49 AM

I was trying to think how a thicker liquid could be lighter and couldn't come up with anything... Doesn't thicker mean heavier? There is no body enforcing weight afaik, astm standards are routinely violated in paintball, no?

And I believe weight does equal stability if the weight is evenly distributed.


Chemstry is cool stuff. I have no idea what actual chemicals are used in paint - but here's an example from the kitchen - corn startch is a thickener, but it's light. mixing equal volumes of dirt and water or corn starch and water would end up with a situation where the mud is heavier but the corn starch mix is thicker.

As to the ASTM standards - it's 3.5 grams. I've never weighed balls heavier than 3.2g - so I don't know that there is a problem exceeding it. I have measured balls down to the mid 2-gram weight. That's a HUGE difference in mass - and the ones closer to the max ASTM weight will certainly shoot further and be deflected less by wind.

maybe UV Halo can chime in - I think he did some calcs on this.

#13 David A.

David A.

    Sophomore Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 734 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Los Angeles Area

Posted 03 April 2012 - 08:22 AM

i think a big factor in a paintballs fill would be its ability to stay mixed evenly or remain a solution as apposed to being a mixture (i think those terms can be applied here...). think if it curdled like milk or acted like peanut butter when all of the oil rises to the top and the thick cream sits on bottom. you'd have a paintball in which the center of gravity would be skewed... that wouldn't fly straight at all. so the fill should be consistent and remain that way. things in the paintball's fill can't start to settle or rise.

I agree, a stable, homogenous mixture would be very important, any settling of suspended materials or separation of in the fill would lead to a lop-sided sphere, with little chances of flying straight or far.

fixed typo

Edited by David A., 03 April 2012 - 04:05 PM.

My Markers:

Polished Silver CCM T2, Polished Black CCM T2, Dust Black CCM T2, Black Bob Long MVP, Dust Back Sanchez Machine SM-1, Polished Silver CCI Phantom, Dust Black Empire AXE. 


#14 David A.

David A.

    Sophomore Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 734 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Los Angeles Area

Posted 03 April 2012 - 08:54 AM


I was trying to think how a thicker liquid could be lighter and couldn't come up with anything... Doesn't thicker mean heavier? There is no body enforcing weight afaik, astm standards are routinely violated in paintball, no?

And I believe weight does equal stability if the weight is evenly distributed.


Chemstry is cool stuff. I have no idea what actual chemicals are used in paint - but here's an example from the kitchen - corn startch is a thickener, but it's light. mixing equal volumes of dirt and water or corn starch and water would end up with a situation where the mud is heavier but the corn starch mix is thicker.

As to the ASTM standards - it's 3.5 grams. I've never weighed balls heavier than 3.2g - so I don't know that there is a problem exceeding it. I have measured balls down to the mid 2-gram weight. That's a HUGE difference in mass - and the ones closer to the max ASTM weight will certainly shoot further and be deflected less by wind.

maybe UV Halo can chime in - I think he did some calcs on this.

Yes, the higher the weight, for the size does equal higher sectional density - that makes a very big difference, it may be why the better paintballs are smaller.

As for the chemistry of the fill most are filled with some kind of polyol, most often PEG-8 is the base. Each company puts some additives, like starch powders or talc for opacity then higher molecular weight PEGs, cellulosic polymers or other synthetic polymers, that give the fill some additional viscosity and of course some FD&C color. Other safe polyols could be used as well, as most anhydrous polyol fills are compatible with the gelatin used for the shell. I think the Daxxus ECO-FILL is likely glycerin. Of course with some of the newer shell materials, it looks like H2O will be an option...this will lead to a lot of new options for the fill.

If I have a chance, I will do the calculations to figure out the specific gravity need to get the weight nearer the limit. Since glycerin has a higher specific gravity than PEGs or H2O, that may be the best fill...

My Markers:

Polished Silver CCM T2, Polished Black CCM T2, Dust Black CCM T2, Black Bob Long MVP, Dust Back Sanchez Machine SM-1, Polished Silver CCI Phantom, Dust Black Empire AXE. 


#15 Troy

Troy

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

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

Posted 03 April 2012 - 10:46 AM

Yes, the higher the weight, for the size does equal higher sectional density - that makes a very big difference, it may be why the better paintballs are smaller.

As for the chemistry of the fill most are filled with some kind of polyol, most often PEG-8 is the base. Each company puts some additives, like starch powders or talc for opacity then higher molecular weight PEGs, cellulosic polymers or other synthetic polymers, that give the fill some additional viscosity and of course some FD&C color. Other safe polyols could be used as well, as most anhydrous polyol fills are compatible with the gelatin used for the shell. I think the Daxxus ECO-FILL is likely glycerin. Of course with some of the newer shell materials, it looks like H2O will be an option...this will lead to a lot of new options for the fill.

If I have a chance, I will do the calculations to figure out the specific gravity need to get the weight nearer the limit. Since glycerin has a higher specific gravity than PEGs or H2O, that may be the best fill...

I keep on telling people that PEG is the base, but no one listens :(

I think H20 is still an option especially since PEG is the main ingredient, since it will bind up the water pretty well and keep it from dissolving the shell. I might also mention that I have heard that vegetable oil is being used as well.

I would NOT like to get shot with glycerin... talk about a sticky mess.

What we REALLY need is for someone with access to an HPLC to run some fill, so we can figure out what's REALLY in there.


Have we noticed any significant accuracy differences between paintballs and reballs?


Excellent question. I guess one would need a high speed camera pointed at the target to note the impact position to define the vector? Or.........?


Carbon paper would probably be the best bet.
\m/

#16 Molybdenum

Molybdenum

    Aspiring Ninja

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,272 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:MN


Posted 03 April 2012 - 11:24 AM

I was trying to think how a thicker liquid could be lighter and couldn't come up with anything... Doesn't thicker mean heavier?


Viscosity versus density. The two are not necessarily correlated.

#17 brycelarson

brycelarson

    Show me the Data!

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


Posted 03 April 2012 - 12:20 PM

Viscosity versus density. The two are not necessarily correlated.


right. We know from basic ballistics calculations that density is your friend. We don't really have any info on viscosity and it's effect on the flight of paintballs.

#18 spqr-king

spqr-king

    Lead the way, all the way!

  • TechPB Players Club
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,102 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Shaw AFB, SC


Posted 03 April 2012 - 12:53 PM

Interesting ideas it would be nice to see it put into effect... I would think that the liquid fill is not a great thing for aerodynamics as far as drop considering a solid projectile flyes much better than paintballs which are by my knowledge the only type of projectiles like that... Also it would be interesting to see first strike rounds vs a regular paintball vs reball in terms of accuracy, just to see how things would play out?


Check us out at Retribution Sports!
 


#19 UV Halo

UV Halo

    Bringing the Big Guns to LLVI

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

Posted 03 April 2012 - 01:12 PM


Chemstry is cool stuff. I have no idea what actual chemicals are used in paint - but here's an example from the kitchen - corn startch is a thickener, but it's light. mixing equal volumes of dirt and water or corn starch and water would end up with a situation where the mud is heavier but the corn starch mix is thicker.

As to the ASTM standards - it's 3.5 grams. I've never weighed balls heavier than 3.2g - so I don't know that there is a problem exceeding it. I have measured balls down to the mid 2-gram weight. That's a HUGE difference in mass - and the ones closer to the max ASTM weight will certainly shoot further and be deflected less by wind.

maybe UV Halo can chime in - I think he did some calcs on this.

Yes, the higher the weight, for the size does equal higher sectional density - that makes a very big difference, it may be why the better paintballs are smaller...


I just conducted some analysis of rntlee's paintball data. Here's the processed data (sorted by sectional density):

Brand Avg Diam / Weight / SD / 'eccentricity'
Visible Impact .670 / 3.40g / .0167 / .030
DXS Triumph .665 / 3.32g / .0166 / .030
Xball .678 / 3.44g / .0165 / .015
DXS Field .670 / 3.36g / .0165 / .030
Marbs .670 / 3.08g / .0151 / .030
Evil .679 / 3.08g / .0147 / .010

SD = Sectional Density, higher numbers are better
eccentricity = difference between the cross seam diameter and the seam diameter, smaller numbers are better.

I find it a bit interesting that the least dense paint in the roundup was the roundest. I also found it interesting that the heaviest paint was second largest.

I strongly suspect that shrinking paint sizes have little if nothing to do with trying to improve things for us.

#20 David A.

David A.

    Sophomore Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 734 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Los Angeles Area

Posted 03 April 2012 - 05:15 PM



Chemstry is cool stuff. I have no idea what actual chemicals are used in paint - but here's an example from the kitchen - corn startch is a thickener, but it's light. mixing equal volumes of dirt and water or corn starch and water would end up with a situation where the mud is heavier but the corn starch mix is thicker.

As to the ASTM standards - it's 3.5 grams. I've never weighed balls heavier than 3.2g - so I don't know that there is a problem exceeding it. I have measured balls down to the mid 2-gram weight. That's a HUGE difference in mass - and the ones closer to the max ASTM weight will certainly shoot further and be deflected less by wind.

maybe UV Halo can chime in - I think he did some calcs on this.

Yes, the higher the weight, for the size does equal higher sectional density - that makes a very big difference, it may be why the better paintballs are smaller...


I just conducted some analysis of rntlee's paintball data. Here's the processed data (sorted by sectional density):

Brand Avg Diam / Weight / SD / 'eccentricity'
Visible Impact .670 / 3.40g / .0167 / .030
DXS Triumph .665 / 3.32g / .0166 / .030
Xball .678 / 3.44g / .0165 / .015
DXS Field .670 / 3.36g / .0165 / .030
Marbs .670 / 3.08g / .0151 / .030
Evil .679 / 3.08g / .0147 / .010

SD = Sectional Density, higher numbers are better
eccentricity = difference between the cross seam diameter and the seam diameter, smaller numbers are better.

I find it a bit interesting that the least dense paint in the roundup was the roundest. I also found it interesting that the heaviest paint was second largest.

I strongly suspect that shrinking paint sizes have little if nothing to do with trying to improve things for us.

^^^ Thank you for this great data....I need to spend some time thinking about it before I comment

My Markers:

Polished Silver CCM T2, Polished Black CCM T2, Dust Black CCM T2, Black Bob Long MVP, Dust Back Sanchez Machine SM-1, Polished Silver CCI Phantom, Dust Black Empire AXE. 


#21 rntlee

rntlee

    Sophomore Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 402 posts

Posted 03 April 2012 - 07:40 PM

I just conducted some analysis of rntlee's paintball data. Here's the processed data (sorted by sectional density):

Brand Avg Diam / Weight / SD / 'eccentricity'
Visible Impact .670 / 3.40g / .0167 / .030
DXS Triumph .665 / 3.32g / .0166 / .030
Xball .678 / 3.44g / .0165 / .015
DXS Field .670 / 3.36g / .0165 / .030
Marbs .670 / 3.08g / .0151 / .030
Evil .679 / 3.08g / .0147 / .010

SD = Sectional Density, higher numbers are better


It's interesting that the list is coincidentally also ordered by performance, with worst at the top....




#22 UV Halo

UV Halo

    Bringing the Big Guns to LLVI

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

Posted 03 April 2012 - 09:25 PM



I just conducted some analysis of rntlee's paintball data. Here's the processed data (sorted by sectional density):

Brand Avg Diam / Weight / SD / 'eccentricity'
Visible Impact .670 / 3.40g / .0167 / .030
DXS Triumph .665 / 3.32g / .0166 / .030
Xball .678 / 3.44g / .0165 / .015
DXS Field .670 / 3.36g / .0165 / .030
Marbs .670 / 3.08g / .0151 / .030
Evil .679 / 3.08g / .0147 / .010

SD = Sectional Density, higher numbers are better


It's interesting that the list is coincidentally also ordered by performance, with worst at the top....


I suspected as much given the roundness of the Evil. How did the X-ball perform? How were the seams?

#23 drg

drg

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 852 posts


Posted 04 April 2012 - 05:42 AM

Chemstry is cool stuff. I have no idea what actual chemicals are used in paint - but here's an example from the kitchen - corn startch is a thickener, but it's light. mixing equal volumes of dirt and water or corn starch and water would end up with a situation where the mud is heavier but the corn starch mix is thicker.

As to the ASTM standards - it's 3.5 grams. I've never weighed balls heavier than 3.2g - so I don't know that there is a problem exceeding it. I have measured balls down to the mid 2-gram weight. That's a HUGE difference in mass - and the ones closer to the max ASTM weight will certainly shoot further and be deflected less by wind.

maybe UV Halo can chime in - I think he did some calcs on this.



Viscosity versus density. The two are not necessarily correlated.


I submit that when it comes to what is commonly referred to as paint's "thickness," density is part of the definition. It's unlikely that an extremely low-density (airy) but high-viscosity liquid would be called a "thick" paintball fill.
Keep your pump hand strong!
PUMPPB.COM TIGHTSTICK - Custom LAPCO 1-piece underbore barrel! SALE!
PUMPPB.COM - Pump paintball forums
HawaiiPB.com - Paintball forums for the state of Hawaii
HawaiiPB/PumpPB - Our videos

#24 brycelarson

brycelarson

    Show me the Data!

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


Posted 04 April 2012 - 08:03 AM

I submit that when it comes to what is commonly referred to as paint's "thickness," density is part of the definition. It's unlikely that an extremely low-density (airy) but high-viscosity liquid would be called a "thick" paintball fill.


low density doesn't mean airy.

take a look at UV's chart:

Brand Avg Diam / Weight / SD / 'eccentricity'
Visible Impact .670 / 3.40g / .0167 / .030
DXS Triumph .665 / 3.32g / .0166 / .030
Xball .678 / 3.44g / .0165 / .015
DXS Field .670 / 3.36g / .0165 / .030
Marbs .670 / 3.08g / .0151 / .030
Evil .679 / 3.08g / .0147 / .010

Evil is often considered one of the thickest, gummiest fills around - but the actual fill density is lower than other paints. DXS field often has a fill that's not much thicker than water once it's sat at a pro-shop for a while.

#25 rntlee

rntlee

    Sophomore Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 402 posts

Posted 04 April 2012 - 09:15 AM

I suspected as much given the roundness of the Evil. How did the X-ball perform? How were the seams?


Here's a few comparison pics of the groups for reference.

Worst to best as in your list:

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image



I was able to bring the poor performers up to roughly the same performance as Evil by scraping their seams smooth...so the fill itself doesn't seem to contribute much spread at the distance I was shooting here (75').

Edited by rntlee, 04 April 2012 - 09:18 AM.


#26 MagHead

MagHead

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 254 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nauvoo IL

Posted 04 April 2012 - 10:56 AM

note; never use Visible Impact paint

great info !

#27 rntlee

rntlee

    Sophomore Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 402 posts

Posted 04 April 2012 - 11:10 AM

One other thing to note:
These pics were all taken with roughly the same time interval after shooting. You can see that the Evil fill does not flow like the others, even though it's the least dense.

Edit: I should also add that the new Visible Impact with the striped shell is not as poor as this older type (orange shell), probably closer to the Xball now. These pics are a few years old.

Edited by rntlee, 04 April 2012 - 11:22 AM.


#28 drg

drg

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 852 posts


Posted 04 April 2012 - 01:21 PM

low density doesn't mean airy.

take a look at UV's chart:

Brand Avg Diam / Weight / SD / 'eccentricity'
Visible Impact .670 / 3.40g / .0167 / .030
DXS Triumph .665 / 3.32g / .0166 / .030
Xball .678 / 3.44g / .0165 / .015
DXS Field .670 / 3.36g / .0165 / .030
Marbs .670 / 3.08g / .0151 / .030
Evil .679 / 3.08g / .0147 / .010

Evil is often considered one of the thickest, gummiest fills around - but the actual fill density is lower than other paints. DXS field often has a fill that's not much thicker than water once it's sat at a pro-shop for a while.


"Extremely low density" could. That was an example to illustrate the point; if you had a super airy fill that was very viscous, one would not call it thick. As someone who shoots ultra Evil a lot, I know that Evil is not an especially thick or gummy fill. It is a quite opaque fill but is thinner than many lower quality balls that have waxy or oily fills -- this is why it marks so well with large splats.

BTW I'm not sold on the math in that chart, how was the average diameter determined vis a vis the eccentricity?

One other thing to note:
These pics were all taken with roughly the same time interval after shooting. You can see that the Evil fill does not flow like the others, even though it's the least dense.

Edit: I should also add that the new Visible Impact with the striped shell is not as poor as this older type (orange shell), probably closer to the Xball now. These pics are a few years old.


In those images, you can see how the denser paints sit "thicker" on the surface, which may contribute to their tendency to run. The Evil has spread thinner and there simply appears to be less paint on the board; the thinner paint has had more simply fly off.

In any event, I submit that visually, the first two paints would be considered the "thicker" paints, and not coincidentally they are the denser paints as well.

Edited by drg, 04 April 2012 - 01:46 PM.

Keep your pump hand strong!
PUMPPB.COM TIGHTSTICK - Custom LAPCO 1-piece underbore barrel! SALE!
PUMPPB.COM - Pump paintball forums
HawaiiPB.com - Paintball forums for the state of Hawaii
HawaiiPB/PumpPB - Our videos

#29 Troy

Troy

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

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

Posted 04 April 2012 - 01:43 PM

"Extremely low density" could. That was an example to illustrate the point; if you had a super airy fill that was very viscous, one would call it thick. As someone who shoots ultra Evil a lot, I know that Evil is not an especially thick or gummy fill. It is a quite opaque fill but is thinner than many lower quality balls that have waxy or oily fills -- this is why it marks so well with large splats.

BTW I'm not sold on the math in that chart, how was the average diameter determined vis a vis the eccentricity?


"Airy" is an epically bad word to describe a liquid's properties.
\m/

#30 drg

drg

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 852 posts


Posted 04 April 2012 - 01:48 PM


"Extremely low density" could. That was an example to illustrate the point; if you had a super airy fill that was very viscous, one would call it thick. As someone who shoots ultra Evil a lot, I know that Evil is not an especially thick or gummy fill. It is a quite opaque fill but is thinner than many lower quality balls that have waxy or oily fills -- this is why it marks so well with large splats.

BTW I'm not sold on the math in that chart, how was the average diameter determined vis a vis the eccentricity?


"Airy" is an epically bad word to describe a liquid's properties.


NB that I was missing a word in what you quoted, it should say "one would not call it thick". Airy is a fine conceptual term for describing an emulsion. Whipped cream is considered a good example of a low density, high viscosity emulsion; no one would call paint like that thick.

Edited by drg, 04 April 2012 - 01:52 PM.

Keep your pump hand strong!
PUMPPB.COM TIGHTSTICK - Custom LAPCO 1-piece underbore barrel! SALE!
PUMPPB.COM - Pump paintball forums
HawaiiPB.com - Paintball forums for the state of Hawaii
HawaiiPB/PumpPB - Our videos

#31 MagHead

MagHead

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 254 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nauvoo IL

Posted 04 April 2012 - 02:50 PM

^^

Whipped cream filled paintballs!

supper light I know but still wouldn't mind a gog hit from that

Edited by MagHead, 04 April 2012 - 02:51 PM.


#32 UV Halo

UV Halo

    Bringing the Big Guns to LLVI

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

Posted 04 April 2012 - 03:56 PM

BTW I'm not sold on the math in that chart, how was the average diameter determined vis a vis the eccentricity?


Average Diameter was determined by taking the average between the dual axis measurements (one axis was perpendicular to the seams, the other was parallel to the seam). The eccentricity is the difference between the two measurements. A spherical paintball would have a score of zero.

#33 Troy

Troy

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

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

Posted 04 April 2012 - 04:41 PM

NB that I was missing a word in what you quoted, it should say "one would not call it thick". Airy is a fine conceptual term for describing an emulsion. Whipped cream is considered a good example of a low density, high viscosity emulsion; no one would call paint like that thick.


For someone that is such a stickler for details, you're really striking out. Do you even know what an emulsion is? What you are describing is a foam (which is relevant how...?). Whipped cream's CHEMICAL properties are not changed by aeration.
\m/

#34 UV Halo

UV Halo

    Bringing the Big Guns to LLVI

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

Posted 04 April 2012 - 05:09 PM

To illustrate the earlier question of equally sized projectiles with a varying density, here's some graphs as a result of my comparison between two .686 sized paintballs, one with a 2.62grams weight(the hypothetical Hydrotec) and one at the max ASTM of 3.5grams.

Enjoy.

Note: All numbers based on 300FPS

Drop Vs Range:
Posted Image

Energy Vs Range:
Posted Image

3mph Wind Drift Vs Range:
Posted Image

Also, here's the ultimate numbers:
.686 2.62gram Ball:
Maximum Range: 86yards
Angle for Max Range: 25deg
Terminal Energy: 0.348FtLb

.686 3.5gram Ball:
Maximum Range: 104yards
Angle for Max Range: 27deg
Terminal Energy: 0.613FtLb

EDIT: Note for clarification, and added performance metrics

Edited by UV Halo, 04 April 2012 - 05:13 PM.


#35 drg

drg

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 852 posts


Posted 04 April 2012 - 05:40 PM



BTW I'm not sold on the math in that chart, how was the average diameter determined vis a vis the eccentricity?


Average Diameter was determined by taking the average between the dual axis measurements (one axis was perpendicular to the seams, the other was parallel to the seam). The eccentricity is the difference between the two measurements. A spherical paintball would have a score of zero.


Can you really just average the two to get an accurate average diameter? Also, why not use maximum & minimum axes? I've found that the max and min are usually offset a little from the seam and perpendicular to seam axis.
Keep your pump hand strong!
PUMPPB.COM TIGHTSTICK - Custom LAPCO 1-piece underbore barrel! SALE!
PUMPPB.COM - Pump paintball forums
HawaiiPB.com - Paintball forums for the state of Hawaii
HawaiiPB/PumpPB - Our videos

#36 UV Halo

UV Halo

    Bringing the Big Guns to LLVI

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

Posted 04 April 2012 - 05:47 PM

Can you really just average the two to get an accurate average diameter? Also, why not use maximum & minimum axes? I've found that the max and min are usually offset a little from the seam and perpendicular to seam axis.


I went with the data that was available. rntlee will have to answer why he took those measurements.

#37 drg

drg

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 852 posts


Posted 04 April 2012 - 05:48 PM


NB that I was missing a word in what you quoted, it should say "one would not call it thick". Airy is a fine conceptual term for describing an emulsion. Whipped cream is considered a good example of a low density, high viscosity emulsion; no one would call paint like that thick.


For someone that is such a stickler for details, you're really striking out. Do you even know what an emulsion is? What you are describing is a foam (which is relevant how...?). Whipped cream's CHEMICAL properties are not changed by aeration.


Do you? Exactly what are you trying to call me on? The chemical properties are irrelevant, we're talking about what constitutes a "thick" paint. I say it's not simply viscosity and this is an example. All paintball paints are emulsions, and air can be part of an emulsion. Though air is not usually found in emulsion in paintball paint in a significant amount, the concept is used to illustrate the flaws of the viscosity-only thinking.
Keep your pump hand strong!
PUMPPB.COM TIGHTSTICK - Custom LAPCO 1-piece underbore barrel! SALE!
PUMPPB.COM - Pump paintball forums
HawaiiPB.com - Paintball forums for the state of Hawaii
HawaiiPB/PumpPB - Our videos

#38 rntlee

rntlee

    Sophomore Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 402 posts

Posted 04 April 2012 - 07:56 PM

Can you really just average the two to get an accurate average diameter? Also, why not use maximum & minimum axes? I've found that the max and min are usually offset a little from the seam and perpendicular to seam axis.


Well, since a paintball is usually technically an oblate ellipsoid, the volume should probably be calculated via V=4/3 x pi x a^2 x c , rather than averaging the diameters. The measurements I took were the average min/max diam. of three samples of each paint. Minimum and maximum diameters are not necessarily as you describe. For instance, the Worr paint I tested was smaller at the equator (seam) than the poles.

Honestly man, you're splitting hairs over something which is meaningless anyway. We already know that heavier paint will fly further and suffer less from deflection.

We don't need to determine whether thicker = heavier or thicker = more viscous, we can just weigh the ball!




#39 drg

drg

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 852 posts


Posted 04 April 2012 - 09:39 PM

Well, since a paintball is usually technically an oblate ellipsoid, the volume should probably be calculated via V=4/3 x pi x a^2 x c , rather than averaging the diameters. The measurements I took were the average min/max diam. of three samples of each paint. Minimum and maximum diameters are not necessarily as you describe. For instance, the Worr paint I tested was smaller at the equator (seam) than the poles.


How are they "not necessarily as I describe"? I said the max and min poles are usually offset from the equator and perpendicular axis to the equator.

Honestly man, you're splitting hairs over something which is meaningless anyway. We already know that heavier paint will fly further and suffer less from deflection.

We don't need to determine whether thicker = heavier or thicker = more viscous, we can just weigh the ball!


Sooo then why does the heavier paint perform poorer? Will out-of-round heavier paint fly further than round lighter paint? To what degree and where is the break point? What, if any, effect does viscosity per se have?

The OP is talking about the viscosity or thickness of the paint so ignoring the concept of paint thickness is kind of defeating the point of the thread.

Edited by drg, 04 April 2012 - 09:41 PM.

Keep your pump hand strong!
PUMPPB.COM TIGHTSTICK - Custom LAPCO 1-piece underbore barrel! SALE!
PUMPPB.COM - Pump paintball forums
HawaiiPB.com - Paintball forums for the state of Hawaii
HawaiiPB/PumpPB - Our videos

#40 rntlee

rntlee

    Sophomore Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 402 posts

Posted 04 April 2012 - 10:18 PM

Sooo then why does the heavier paint perform poorer?


There are other, larger factors at play in actual shot spread...my own testing showed the seam height to be the largest.


Will out-of-round heavier paint fly further than round lighter paint?


Yes. I have found no measurable correlation between "roundness" and shot spread. Not saying it isn't a factor, only that it's too small to be measured via any apparatus I have available to me and so isn't significant.

What, if any, effect does viscosity per se have?

The OP is talking about the viscosity or thickness of the paint so ignoring the concept of paint thickness is kind of defeating the point of the thread.


I haven't seen a measurable correlation between fill viscosity and shot spread, and paintball manufacturing is consistent enough as far filling the balls to capacity that I doubt there is anything significant to find. Any partially filled balls are almost certainly culled during processing.

#41 drg

drg

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 852 posts


Posted 04 April 2012 - 11:59 PM



Sooo then why does the heavier paint perform poorer?


There are other, larger factors at play in actual shot spread...my own testing showed the seam height to be the largest.


So then which testing showed the heavier paint performing better?


Will out-of-round heavier paint fly further than round lighter paint?


Yes. I have found no measurable correlation between "roundness" and shot spread. Not saying it isn't a factor, only that it's too small to be measured via any apparatus I have available to me and so isn't significant.


Is shot spread a proxy for shot drop/range?



What, if any, effect does viscosity per se have?

The OP is talking about the viscosity or thickness of the paint so ignoring the concept of paint thickness is kind of defeating the point of the thread.


I haven't seen a measurable correlation between fill viscosity and shot spread, and paintball manufacturing is consistent enough as far filling the balls to capacity that I doubt there is anything significant to find. Any partially filled balls are almost certainly culled during processing.


How did you measure and classify paint thickness?

Edited by drg, 05 April 2012 - 12:00 AM.

Keep your pump hand strong!
PUMPPB.COM TIGHTSTICK - Custom LAPCO 1-piece underbore barrel! SALE!
PUMPPB.COM - Pump paintball forums
HawaiiPB.com - Paintball forums for the state of Hawaii
HawaiiPB/PumpPB - Our videos

#42 Troy

Troy

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

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

Posted 05 April 2012 - 12:34 AM

Do you?


A minor in chemistry with, specifically, two semesters of organic and analytical chem tend to indicate that I at least have some idea of what I'm talking about.

Exactly what are you trying to call me on?


This is a moving target, you keep on adding things to the list... but the thing that is pissing me off the most is the use of the word "airy." Just stop. You're a smart person, so act like it and listen to me.

The chemical properties are irrelevant, we're talking about what constitutes a "thick" paint. I say it's not simply viscosity and this is an example.


This is an important sticking point. The chemical properties of the liquid dictate the physical ones. For example forming hydrogen bonds between molecules can increase a molecule's shear force and make it more "viscous," the polarity of certain molecules can also cause an increase in shear forces as well. Unless you change the way molecules interact (like by adding a surfactant) you don't change a given emulsion's physical properties.

Your example was of whipped cream, which is a foam, and therefore irrelevant to our current discussion. We don't shoot paintballs filled with foam.

There may be DISSOLVED air (as in O2, N2, O3, CO2 etc...) in the liquid, but that doesn't make it any more a foam then dissolving salt in water makes it a foam. Unlike a foam, when you disolve a material into another one, you add weight, but no volume. The dissolved molecules exist in what would otherwise be unoccupied space in the liquid. This is a sharp contrast to a foam where bubbles do add volume to to the material, and therefore, decrease it's density.

When you talk about "thickness" in relationship to a liquid, you are, in fact, talking about "viscosity." Wikipedia even goes so far to say: "In everyday terms (and for fluids only), viscosity is 'thickness' or 'internal friction.'"

All paintball paints are emulsions, and air can be part of an emulsion.


An emulsion is a mixture of two or more liquids that are normally immiscible (un-blendable).


Though air is not usually found in emulsion in paintball paint in a significant amount, the concept is used to illustrate the flaws of the viscosity-only thinking.


Air is in the liquid fill, and temperature largely effects whether it stays DISSOLVED in the liquid or not.
\m/

#43 drg

drg

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 852 posts


Posted 05 April 2012 - 02:08 AM

This is a moving target, you keep on adding things to the list... but the thing that is pissing me off the most is the use of the word "airy."


Am I adding anything to the list? The two properties we are discussing are viscosity and density. Exactly what is the problem with the term "airy"? Is a foam not airy? Is foam not a kind of emulsion? Are you just being unnecessarily anal?

This is an important sticking point. The chemical properties of the liquid dictate the physical ones. For example forming hydrogen bonds between molecules can increase a molecule's shear force and make it more "viscous," the polarity of certain molecules can also cause an increase in shear forces as well. Unless you change the way molecules interact (like by adding a surfactant) you don't change a given emulsion's physical properties.

Your example was of whipped cream, which is a foam, and therefore irrelevant to our current discussion. We don't shoot paintballs filled with foam.


Actually in some cases we shoot "paintballs" entirely made of foam. But obviously the point of the example was to illustrate the flawed thinking of equating viscosity with the colloquial term "thickness" as regards paintball paint.

There may be DISSOLVED air (as in O2, N2, O3, CO2 etc...) in the liquid, but that doesn't make it any more a foam then dissolving salt in water makes it a foam. Unlike a foam, when you disolve a material into another one, you add weight, but no volume. The dissolved molecules exist in what would otherwise be unoccupied space in the liquid. This is a sharp contrast to a foam where bubbles do add volume to to the material, and therefore, decrease it's density.

When you talk about "thickness" in relationship to a liquid, you are, in fact, talking about "viscosity." Wikipedia even goes so far to say: "In everyday terms (and for fluids only), viscosity is 'thickness' or 'internal friction.'"


Wikipedia definitions are not really relevant here, we're talking about the general understanding of "thickness" in paintball.


Though air is not usually found in emulsion in paintball paint in a significant amount, the concept is used to illustrate the flaws of the viscosity-only thinking.


Air is in the liquid fill, and temperature largely effects whether it stays DISSOLVED in the liquid or not.


Dissolved gases are not "in emulsion."

Edited by drg, 05 April 2012 - 02:39 AM.

Keep your pump hand strong!
PUMPPB.COM TIGHTSTICK - Custom LAPCO 1-piece underbore barrel! SALE!
PUMPPB.COM - Pump paintball forums
HawaiiPB.com - Paintball forums for the state of Hawaii
HawaiiPB/PumpPB - Our videos

#44 Troy

Troy

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

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

Posted 05 April 2012 - 06:29 AM

This is ridiculous. You have every right to be wrong, and you're exercising your said right. I can, clearly, not help you. I'll just ignore your comments about viscosity from here on out, just as everyone else should.
\m/

#45 David A.

David A.

    Sophomore Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 734 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Los Angeles Area

Posted 05 April 2012 - 08:48 AM

UV- Halo, Thank You for the is great ballistic data, obviously a superior brain - As is shown in these physics calculations, sectional density make an enormous difference. Drop difference of about 2 feet @ a range of 150 ft. Wind deflection difference of 8 inches @ a range of 150 feet, with a very light wind....WOW.
These are giant differences in the field.

MTLEE - thank you for the target data, great work - I agree with your assessment, what is clear from the targets, the quality of the seam far out weights the the difference of the fill viscosities when it come to the size of the groups.

It seems to me getting the fill nearer the maximum weight and maintaing the roundness and smoothness (as defined as an absence of a pronounced seam), would seem to give us the best performance. So the manufacturer that wants to make a better paintball, need to find a fill that is heavier(denser) than PEG-8, and still has the other characteristics needed; safe, inexpensive, non-solvating to gelatin, easy to clean off, available, etc.. and put it in a good quality shell. Looks like RPS still has some room for improvement and can make Evil even better. This answers another thread is saw, "have we reached the technological limits of paintball?" - the answer is "NO".

Edited by David A., 05 April 2012 - 11:09 PM.

My Markers:

Polished Silver CCM T2, Polished Black CCM T2, Dust Black CCM T2, Black Bob Long MVP, Dust Back Sanchez Machine SM-1, Polished Silver CCI Phantom, Dust Black Empire AXE. 


#46 brycelarson

brycelarson

    Show me the Data!

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


Posted 05 April 2012 - 11:30 AM

read carefully - the x-axis on UV's graphs are in yards.

#47 David A.

David A.

    Sophomore Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 734 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Los Angeles Area

Posted 05 April 2012 - 03:28 PM

read carefully - the x-axis on UV's graphs are in yards.

Thank you, I have adjusted (edited) my remarks.

My Markers:

Polished Silver CCM T2, Polished Black CCM T2, Dust Black CCM T2, Black Bob Long MVP, Dust Back Sanchez Machine SM-1, Polished Silver CCI Phantom, Dust Black Empire AXE. 


#48 drg

drg

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 852 posts


Posted 05 April 2012 - 06:05 PM

UV- Halo, Thank You for the is great ballistic data, obviously a superior brain - As is shown in these physics calculations, sectional density make an enormous difference. Drop difference of about 10 feet @ a range of 75 ft. Wind deflection difference of several feet @ a range of 60 feet, with a very light wind....WOW.
These are giant differences in the field.

MTLEE - thank you for the target data, great work - I agree with your assessment, what is clear from the targets, the quality of the seam far out weights the the difference of the fill viscosities when it come to the size of the groups.

It seems to me getting the fill nearer the maximum weight and maintaing the roundness and smoothness (as defined as an absence of a pronounced seam), would seem to give us the best performance. So the manufacturer that wants to make a better paintball, need to find a fill that is heavier(denser) than PEG-8, and still has the other characteristics needed; safe, inexpensive, non-solvating to gelatin, easy to clean off, available, etc.. and put it in a good quality shell. Looks like RPS still has some room for improvement and can make Evil even better. This answers another thread is saw, "have we reached the technological limits of paintball?" - the answer is "NO".


It may be worth noting that Ultra evil is heavier. The batch I have on hand is coming in around 3.2g at a .6775" median axis, and this is the scented one which appears to have more oil than the unscented.

However none of this takes into account a very important aspect of paintball performance: marking ability. An extremely viscous, heavy paint may not mark very well. Splat size will be restricted and you may actually get "fly off" problems. The best ballistics is meaningless if you don't get a mark on your target.

There are some brands going around with the consistency of snot, and paints like Infinity are extremely waxy. They don't mark anywhere near as well as higher-quality, better-flowing, lighter paints.
Keep your pump hand strong!
PUMPPB.COM TIGHTSTICK - Custom LAPCO 1-piece underbore barrel! SALE!
PUMPPB.COM - Pump paintball forums
HawaiiPB.com - Paintball forums for the state of Hawaii
HawaiiPB/PumpPB - Our videos

#49 UV Halo

UV Halo

    Bringing the Big Guns to LLVI

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

Posted 05 April 2012 - 07:10 PM

UV- Halo, Thank You for the is great ballistic data, obviously a superior brain - As is shown in these physics calculations, sectional density make an enormous difference. Drop difference of about 10 feet @ a range of 75 ft. Wind deflection difference of several feet @ a range of 60 feet, with a very light wind....WOW.
These are giant differences in the field.

MTLEE - thank you for the target data, great work - I agree with your assessment, what is clear from the targets, the quality of the seam far out weights the the difference of the fill viscosities when it come to the size of the groups.

It seems to me getting the fill nearer the maximum weight and maintaing the roundness and smoothness (as defined as an absence of a pronounced seam), would seem to give us the best performance. So the manufacturer that wants to make a better paintball, need to find a fill that is heavier(denser) than PEG-8, and still has the other characteristics needed; safe, inexpensive, non-solvating to gelatin, easy to clean off, available, etc.. and put it in a good quality shell. Looks like RPS still has some room for improvement and can make Evil even better. This answers another thread is saw, "have we reached the technological limits of paintball?" - the answer is "NO".



No problem! I wouldn't say I have a superior brain, I just had the right know-how and data at the right time. However I must inform you that there's one more correction to your remarks :)

On my charts, vertical columns (Y-axis) are in inches, while the horizontal scale is in yards. So, at 75ft (25yds), there is a drop difference close to 10".

#50 David A.

David A.

    Sophomore Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 734 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Los Angeles Area

Posted 05 April 2012 - 07:23 PM


UV- Halo, Thank You for the is great ballistic data, obviously a superior brain - As is shown in these physics calculations, sectional density make an enormous difference. Drop difference of about 10 feet @ a range of 75 ft. Wind deflection difference of several feet @ a range of 60 feet, with a very light wind....WOW.
These are giant differences in the field.

MTLEE - thank you for the target data, great work - I agree with your assessment, what is clear from the targets, the quality of the seam far out weights the the difference of the fill viscosities when it come to the size of the groups.

It seems to me getting the fill nearer the maximum weight and maintaing the roundness and smoothness (as defined as an absence of a pronounced seam), would seem to give us the best performance. So the manufacturer that wants to make a better paintball, need to find a fill that is heavier(denser) than PEG-8, and still has the other characteristics needed; safe, inexpensive, non-solvating to gelatin, easy to clean off, available, etc.. and put it in a good quality shell. Looks like RPS still has some room for improvement and can make Evil even better. This answers another thread is saw, "have we reached the technological limits of paintball?" - the answer is "NO".


It may be worth noting that Ultra evil is heavier. The batch I have on hand is coming in around 3.2g at a .6775" median axis, and this is the scented one which appears to have more oil than the unscented.

However none of this takes into account a very important aspect of paintball performance: marking ability. An extremely viscous, heavy paint may not mark very well. Splat size will be restricted and you may actually get "fly off" problems. The best ballistics is meaningless if you don't get a mark on your target.

There are some brands going around with the consistency of snot, and paints like Infinity are extremely waxy. They don't mark anywhere near as well as higher-quality, better-flowing, lighter paints.


Interesting that Ultra-Evil is so much heavier. Assuming it has the same quality of seams and roundness; it looks like it could be a real upgrade from Evil. May be the best paint available?

As for the marking abilities of thickened paint, it has more to do with the rheology that just viscosity. Something waxy has a more Newtonian rheology, what you want in a paintball fill is something that is thixotropic and pseudoplastic

If something has Newtonian rheology, it will maintain its viscosity regardless of the shear applied to it. If something is thixotropic, it is thick as rest, and then thins out when energy is applied. Pseudoplastic means that when the energy is removed, the viscosity recovers.

Think of this as Honey and Mayonnaise; The Honey is pourable (lower viscosity), but hard to spread and stir, a capsule filled with honey would leave a small mark. At a given temperature, Honey exhibits Newtonian properties. Mayonaise is not pourable (higher viscosity), yet easy to spread and stir (thixotropic), but recovers to it resting viscosity quickly (pseudoplastic) - a capsule filled with mayonnaise would leave a bigger mark.


UV- Halo, Thank You for the is great ballistic data, obviously a superior brain - As is shown in these physics calculations, sectional density make an enormous difference. Drop difference of about 10 feet @ a range of 75 ft. Wind deflection difference of several feet @ a range of 60 feet, with a very light wind....WOW.
These are giant differences in the field.

MTLEE - thank you for the target data, great work - I agree with your assessment, what is clear from the targets, the quality of the seam far out weights the the difference of the fill viscosities when it come to the size of the groups.

It seems to me getting the fill nearer the maximum weight and maintaing the roundness and smoothness (as defined as an absence of a pronounced seam), would seem to give us the best performance. So the manufacturer that wants to make a better paintball, need to find a fill that is heavier(denser) than PEG-8, and still has the other characteristics needed; safe, inexpensive, non-solvating to gelatin, easy to clean off, available, etc.. and put it in a good quality shell. Looks like RPS still has some room for improvement and can make Evil even better. This answers another thread is saw, "have we reached the technological limits of paintball?" - the answer is "NO".



No problem! I wouldn't say I have a superior brain, I just had the right know-how and data at the right time. However I must inform you that there's one more correction to your remarks :)

On my charts, vertical columns (Y-axis) are in inches, while the horizontal scale is in yards. So, at 75ft (25yds), there is a drop difference close to 10".

I need some new glasses...Thank you.

Edited by David A., 05 April 2012 - 07:37 PM.

My Markers:

Polished Silver CCM T2, Polished Black CCM T2, Dust Black CCM T2, Black Bob Long MVP, Dust Back Sanchez Machine SM-1, Polished Silver CCI Phantom, Dust Black Empire AXE. 





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users