Does anyone have ideas for radical designs?

[jgoertle]

new guy here. I'm having ideas about suppressors and would like some feed back.

The whole point of a suppressor device is to give the hot gasses time to normalize and exit in a more peaceful manner to prevent the excess sound... So, the questions becomes: How to make the hot gasses travel the longest distance inside whatever tube you decide to use to house whichever baffle design you prefer and then let said gasses exit slowly.

A few ideas come to mind. The longest route gas can take is going to be a spiral route in nature. It will already be traveling at several hundred feet a second from muzzle to the end of the device so we can already take that as a natural progression of direction. So! my thoughts are: in a K baffle, some builders have small vents to catch the expanding gasses, what if they were drilled at an angle to help produce a swirling effect to increase time and distance or travel? I've been looking around and understand that an expansion chamber is needed for the initial blast, except on 22lr silencers which don't seem to need them, so what mechanical device can be thought of to pick up the gasses a few inches from the muzzle and start spinning them and usher them out of the end of the suppressor? I had thought that baffles set up like turbine blades in alternating rotational directions would work but I have no basis, just random thoughts.

I can't imagine trying to machine it but if there was a set of fins set in a helical pattern, wouldn't they act like baffles? Is it more important to capture the gas in a chamber and stifle the direction of flow or can the speed and direction of the gasses be used to our advantage?

I also like the expanding silencer design but the springs would need to be on the outside and it would have to be cleaned a lot! I like the idea but I don't think it is practical.

[Dr.K]

new guy here. I'm having ideas about suppressors and would like some feed back.

The whole point of a suppressor device is to give the hot gasses time to normalize and exit in a more peaceful manner to prevent the excess sound... So, the questions becomes: How to make the hot gasses travel the longest distance inside whatever tube you decide to use to house whichever baffle design you prefer and then let said gasses exit slowly.

A few ideas come to mind. The longest route gas can take is going to be a spiral route in nature. It will already be traveling at several hundred feet a second from muzzle to the end of the device so we can already take that as a natural progression of direction. So! my thoughts are: in a K baffle, some builders have small vents to catch the expanding gasses, what if they were drilled at an angle to help produce a swirling effect to increase time and distance or travel? I've been looking around and understand that an expansion chamber is needed for the initial blast, except on 22lr silencers which don't seem to need them, so what mechanical device can be thought of to pick up the gasses a few inches from the muzzle and start spinning them and usher them out of the end of the suppressor? I had thought that baffles set up like turbine blades in alternating rotational directions would work but I have no basis, just random thoughts.

I can't imagine trying to machine it but if there was a set of fins set in a helical pattern, wouldn't they act like baffles? Is it more important to capture the gas in a chamber and stifle the direction of flow or can the speed and direction of the gasses be used to our advantage?

I also like the expanding silencer design but the springs would need to be on the outside and it would have to be cleaned a lot! I like the idea but I don't think it is practical.

It's been explored, and gasses don't spin like what you are thinking, the just deflect while contacting the fin, when past the gasses keep their forward motion. But, it's good to see you using your head organ! Welcome aboard!

[whiterussian1974]

The whole point of a suppressor device is to give the hot gasses time to normalize and exit in a more peaceful manner to prevent the excess sound... make the hot gasses travel the longest distance inside whatever tube you decide to use to house whichever baffle design you prefer.

...drilled at an angle to help produce a swirling effect to increase time and distance or travel? I had thought that baffles set up like turbine blades...

...if there was a set of fins set in a helical pattern, wouldn't they act like baffles? Is it more important to capture the gas in a chamber and stifle the direction of flow or can the speed and direction of the gasses be used to our advantage?

I also like the expanding silencer design but the springs would need to be on the outside...

You are correct about turbine blades and helical fins. Don't alternate the spin though, this works AGAINST the natural flow. The helical fins DO extend travel time, but you must inject them into the Normalization chamber or some point before the exit. There are several thoughts on how to accomplish this. Only continued testing will show which is workable. Perhaps blowing across boreline in chamber just prior to normalization?

You're also correct about the SMOOTH exit of gases. Turbulance is great w/i tube, yet smooth exit is critical to minimizing cavitation beyond endcap.

MG cans use spiral fins to compress the air and then return it back through the beginning of stack. There are theories that show why this isn't as helpful as competing designs.

I had similar thoughts about turbine blades. Yet gas only behaves as a fluid when under pressure. Once pressure drops it reverts to a chaotic particle system that no longer shows cohesion. Each molecule jumps in a random direction, breaking down flow properties.

One-way valves worked great on Argus 014 Pulsejets. (V1 Buzzbomb) Why are firearms designers so reluctant to embrace them? Small holes and slits are proven valves. Why not take advantage of advances in Materials Science to create flaps which PARTIALLY block openings?Once they fail, have 7/02 replace them. It would be a great part for Mfrs to replace during Customer Service. A part that can be injection molded w self-healing elastomers and easily replaced as needed.

The downside? Must have servicable endcap and stack. No welding which may be cheaper than threading tube and caps.

[whiterussian1974]

Also, there are different Degrees of Freedom that spin can use. Toroidal vs centripedal.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toroidal_and_poloidal Around vs folding back.

Monocores already take advantage of Toroidal. You and I are interested in Poloidal as well.

If this figure using hollow pockets within the box ring was used, the flat surfaces would redirect gas flow and small holes/slits would increase dwell rates.
I'm not suggesting that we use this shape, only contemplate it when dreaming up new concepts and uses for Ideal Gas functions.

GemTech G-series is using "talon" that fly in the face of annular concepts.

I can't find the thread now, but I think it was Gunny50 or Bender that posted links to a Russian site explaining the evolution of baffle designs. There were some really great drawings showing various concepts including blast-activated valves, bleed holes and cross-bore jets.
Hopefully someone will post a link to that page.

[whiterussian1974]

I found the Thread and Link. It turns out that Doubloon wins the Award for insights.
Turbine Blades?
viewtopic.php?f=10&t=123526
http://translate.google.com/translate?h ... ode%2F8909



And another Thread that may benefit your thoughts. Idea for blastchamber finned heatsink. viewtopic.php?f=10&t=123367
Just dont confuse the fins as providing the heatsink. They are only a small volume to area ratio surface for Lithium Grease.
I didn't lay out my thoughts very well. Hopefully the discussion will help stimulate your mind though jgoertle.

The top pic shows early German thought on convoluted shapes and surfaces. Later research has shown that simpler designs can perform even better. Modern monocore do an excellent job of utilizing the same principles, yet preserving more volume and being easier to mfr.

The bottom series of 4 pics shows a telescopic design. But don't vent gas before the endcap. Also, my telescopic design nearly doubles volume, while theirs just shifts baffle placement w/o increasing volume or harnessing compressibility.

[jgoertle]

holy cow whiterussian... mind blow

I have a good imagination but not the physics and or mechanical engineering to really grasp what the hell I just read. However, I believe that it is still possible to be a contributing member to this conversation through will power! HAHA!

Anyway, every problem I encounter just has to be well defined before it can be tackled and then picked apart into relevant sections and solved from there. If we were to define the parts of a current suppressor what would they be? blast chamber, baffles and bore? what do we want the gasses to do in each area? what crazy designs can we think of guide said gasses? Is turbulence what we want? or do we only want it half way down the tube when the blast starts to behave like a gas instead of fluid... if there were to be small ports, say in the 1/32 size or 3 to 5 hundredth size, would they help? where would they help if so and would that increase or decrease efficiency?

I like the Monocore designs, when I build one, that is what I'll do but need to get the machinery first. I should really read all the posts but it is really hard because of the tangents they go on and my ADD kicks in and I just want to watch Naruto and/or play with magnets... Please don't tell me to get my Form 1 first. I get it and don't want to embark on THAT specific tangent.

Thanks for the replies, I really appreciate an on topic and relevant discussion!

[jgoertle]

my mistake, it was SBD with the polodial comments. I have to strain my thinker but I see what you're getting at and looking at pictures of monocores, I understand. How do we make use of these forces?

[jgoertle]

I really wish I could just sit down with a silencer designer and come up with crazy designs.

The picture you posted with the can on two rods... was that manipulated by hand or moved by gasses and spring loaded or something? It appears to be moved by hand but I'm just guessing. Would it be crazy to have a gas piston move a can like a BCG? would it be fast enough? Or would that just be really annoying to have a reciprocating can? I propose it would create a larger blast chamber for a second and then squish out the remaining gasses when returning to home. It might bleed off too much gas if the weapon was also gas operated, especially DGI.

At what part of a can would gas stop behaving as a fluid? A purpose built design would say to make turbulence more pronounced there but cater to the fluid nature of the blast at first.

[whiterussian1974]

holy cow whiterussian... mind blow

I have a good imagination but not the physics and or mechanical engineering to really grasp what the hell I just read. However, I believe that it is still possible to be a contributing member to this conversation through will power! HAHA!

Please don't tell me to get my Form 1 first. I get it and don't want to embark on THAT specific tangent.

The Forum Rules state that each of us are to follow the Laws of our own areas. So, I always presume that the person is unless they specifically state otherwise.

Instead of investigating each suppressor part, concentrate on functions. Improving parts can only result in minute improvement. Yet attacking sound sources through innovative functions and structures might lead to substantive improvement. (-3dB is 50% reduction in SPL)

Please read the links in this thread. Then you will be up to date on this discussion. We don't want to duplicate those discussions here.

While I applaud your enthusiasm, a lack of understanding the underlying physics will stifle your ability to engage in future design innovations. Read up on the info, then we'll be happy to discuss any ideas.

Telescopic Suppressor! viewtopic.php?f=10&t=121297 should answer your ?s about that topic. The Russian pic doesn't show whether it has an auto return mechanism. There are a variety of possible methods. For rapid fire, leave the can extended until you manually reset it.

[Rob1928]

Interesting thread.

Decades ago I recall seeing an 1800s British gatling gun advertisement that offered round barrels (bores that is) and ammo "for use against Christians" and SQUARE bores and bullets "for use against Turks", that is, Muslims. I surely do not understand the reasoning for the difference and wouldn't look kindly at being shot with either regardless of my religious preference.

Since one of the functions of a baffle is to strip away and then redirect high pressure gas from the stream, how about a non-round bore and projectile like mentioned above? A square or even star shaped bore would give more contact area between the baffle and gas stream for a given cross section area. No idea how you'd machine such a can (precisely indexed mono-core reamed with the same twist as the barrel? 3D printing?). I'd imagine expansion of the gas between baffles would also be increased due to the extra cross section perimeter length.

Is THAT radical enough for ya? Totally impractical but an interesting thought exercise. Cheers.

[doubloon]

Had to look that one up ... good stuff.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puckle_gun

The square bullets were considered to be more damaging. They would, according to the patent, convince the Turks of the "benefits of Christian civilization." The square bullets, however, were discontinued due to their unpredictable flight pattern.

Maybe we'll see it soon on an episode of Sons of Guns

[shockbottle]

Load your bullets backwards so the ogive helps direct the gas stream into the baffles?

[whiterussian1974]

Load your bullets backwards so the ogive helps direct the gas stream into the baffles?

That would actually give opposite result.

Flat base causes perpendicular redirection and acts like brick wall.

Smooth nosecone will let air slip around it just like downrange.

---Does anyone have ideas to cause the endcap's mouth to bend inward under pressure after bullet has passed? This seems extremely doable.
Elastomer wipes that partially block the can exit should work great and may offer the next step in design improvement. Yet by not touching the projectile, not bother bullet stability.

Something like one of these.

[shockbottle]

Load your bullets backwards so the ogive helps direct the gas stream into the baffles?

That would actually give opposite result.

Flat base causes perpendicular redirection and acts like brick wall.

And that is why plain flat baffles work so well that there's no need to try anything else.

[whiterussian1974]

Flat base causes perpendicular redirection and acts like brick wall.

And that is why plain flat baffles work so well that there's no need to try anything else.

You're absolutely right. Cones, K's, porting... they're all just marketing gimmicks.
The greatest advance to suppressor science is and always will be, Flat Fender washers.

And in a fix when I don't have flat washers, I just hold a piece of paper over the muzzle. Works great!

Have you tried holding your hand over the Muzzle? The seal makes it work even better than paper.

(I wanted to keep this Thread civil and classy. But how should one respond to such a comment?
I apologize to all readers for my lack of ability to bite my tongue. Or is it Thumb?)

Perhaps a better response would be: "Movable projectile travelling along borepath doesn't react the same as projections situated along the periphery adjacent to boreline."

I shouldn't have snapped at "shockbottle." New members posting rejuvenates our minds and helps us revisit past ideas. Hopefully he won't give up and quit posting. Which educational/professional backgrounds do you come from? Machining, Physics, Sound Engineer, Auto mechanics?

[556hollowtip]

I had a thought along the lines of posted earlier. Of using your normal K baffle or whatever, but having two tubes opposite of each other on the outside of the baffles, and drill varying size holes in them to control gasses going in, and at the last baffle have one large opening for gas to recirculate to the muzzle end.
On the muzzle end have a spring steel flap that would open from gasses coming back, but enough tension to keep it closed from the initial shot.
Kinda like a flap you would see on a front end loader or any diesel tractor.
Could be a problem with back pressure going back down the barrel...., but would keep gasses in and circulating, before exiting the can.

[shockbottle]

Flat base causes perpendicular redirection and acts like brick wall.
Perhaps a better response would be: "Movable projectile travelling along borepath doesn't react the same as projections situated along the periphery adjacent to boreline."

I shouldn't have snapped at "shockbottle." New members posting rejuvenates our minds and helps us revisit past ideas. Hopefully he won't give up and quit posting. Which educational/professional backgrounds do you come from? Machining, Physics, Sound Engineer, Auto mechanics?

R&D. 07/02 SOT. 22 US Patents.

If you want 'radical', you can't afford not to look at the base of the bullet.

[whiterussian1974]

Perhaps you can explain the Theory and a diagram of how this works? It seems counter-intuitive.
People have loaded subsonics backward, but for stability and knockdown power. No increase in dB reduction in suppressors has ever been mentioned.

Can you list some of your 22 Patents? What 7/02 R&D you worked for?
Your post count was 5, so it was easy to presume that you were new to this topic. Not an Industry Insider.

[shockbottle]

Perhaps you can explain the Theory and a diagram of how this works? It seems counter-intuitive.
People have loaded subsonics backward, but for stability and knockdown power. No increase in dB reduction in suppressors has ever been mentioned.

Can you list some of your 22 Patents? What 7/02 R&D you worked for?
Your post count was 5, so it was easy to presume that you were new to this topic. Not an Industry Insider.

To be clear not all of our (or my) R&D and patents are on firearms or suppressors and we are far from big-name Industry Insiders. Patents are a quick way to show we know our way around engineering and R&D. However commercial interests and IP agreements are such that we avoid highlighting the individuals unnecessarily, even though they are public. Should one of our customers choose to do so they are welcome.

But, in the interest of teaching fishing versus supplying fish, there wouldn't be interest in closing off the bore after bullet passage if that annoying tendency of the gas to follow along in a fairly straight line could be modified. The guys that use the word 'caliber' to tell you how long the gun barrel is have done a number of experiments on projectile base shapes and gas flow both internal and external. Much of that work is targeted at recoil control and muzzle brakes as there's not much funding for artillery suppressor research, so typically dealing with shorter distances to work, but the papers are out there.

For those that haven't run across him, you might get some value out of the works of Lester Pelton. He worked in incompressible fluid with a great deal more mass mostly, but some of his work turns out to have interesting applications elsewhere.

[a_canadian]

Is it just me, or does this shockbottle fellow seem to be portraying himself as an international man of mystery? If you're going to post in a forum where people actually HELP each other with suppressor design and manufacture, why not help a little? Otherwise, why participate? Some sort of glory in teasing? Your posts haven't exactly been something I'd call trolling... but it's in that neighbourhood.

[whiterussian1974]

Is it just me, or does this shockbottle fellow seem to be portraying himself as an international man of mystery? If you're going to post in a forum where people actually HELP each other with suppressor design and manufacture, why not help a little?

He uses phrases such as "my/our" but doesn't reference a Company where "Customers" can verify his background/bonefides.
A new member w a post count of 5 has Zero/Null credibility until they either: Introduce themself w verifiable expertise, or offer links to Academic Papers and great info on novel Theory. (Like the Sound Engineer Joker31D who brought up Thiele Space.)

I'll research "Lester Pelton's" papers/research. But it sure would have been nice if he posted Patent #s and links to specific pages where we could view the referenced work.

Did shock appear on Sons of Guns? If he has credibility, why hide behind Austin Powers' persona?
I can only hope that he proves us wrong after reading our ?s. Maybe he has great info. Only time will tell.
And if he's SilencerKidd under a new Profile. I always liked your posts and wish that you would have seen from prior Newbies (like me) that it takes a thick skin and smooth back to post here. Just contribute substantive info and theory and you'll be judged by your fruit, rather than rough exterior.

[whiterussian1974]

It looks like Shockbottle's post refers to Pelton Wheels. Similar to my Turbine Blade Thread.
Here are some links to Physics background for those interessted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_tur ... pplication
http://www.phy6.org/stargaze/Spelton.htm
http://mve.energetika.cz/primotlaketurbiny/turgo.htm (in Czech) and http://mysite.du.edu/~jcalvert/tech/fluids/turbine.htm

D = 1,2 x d
d1 = 1,42 až 1,62 x d
d2 = 0,58 až 0.7 x d
L = 3,25 až 3,66 x d
světlost potrubí = 2,5 až 3 x d
plný zdvih jehly = max. 1,16 x d
alfa = 42 až 50o
beta = 60 až 90o

Great potential for assymetric bore alignment to divert gas for dispersion toward coaxial volumes.
How would you modify the slantbaffle to improve efficiency? Or were you going down a different track?

There seem to be many designs already using these equations in their builds. Especially for monocores. How would bullet base benefit? An inverted lower-Omega shaped base? Have the spike nearly touch the primer? Yes, I've seen laser reflection propulsion systems use this design. Light strikes bottom of capsule, it lowers frequency to heat the boundry layer air surface and sometimes ablate the base sourrounding the spike. (for when capsule reaches low air density) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightcraft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beam-powered_propulsion

Was this what you were suggesting. Or am I just way ahead?

[whiterussian1974]

Squid and Leaf Spring Wipe Concepts.

I don't think that there has been adaquate critique of my ideas for an elastic wipe/valve in posts:
-Posted: Sat Mar 22, 2014 1:47 pm
-Posted: Sat Mar 22, 2014 3:58 pm
-Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2014 9:31 am
-Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2014 1:31 pm

Are there any experiences with this concept? Failures? Reasons it is doomed to fail?

Or are people just bored of this Brainstorming Session?

[Dr.K]

Squid and Leaf Spring Wipe Concepts.

Are there any experiences with this concept? Failures? Reasons it is doomed to fail?

Or are people just bored of this Brainstorming Session?

I think it boils down to the fact that the people here mainly constitute 3 types:

-simple law abiding form one builders
This is where I fit in. I have considered most of the concepts discussed here, however, time, $$$$$, and machining limitations have prohibited me from doing proper R&D for radical type stuff. I have skirted the issue on minor things such as baffle spacing, volume adjustment, and scoop sizes by simply filing multiple form1s for the same caliber. The rest is quite simply beyond my means and efforts.

-Felons
You know, the guys who are here looking for ways to cook up a can with a stick welder, duct tape, and some crap at the local parts store. A subgroup are folks who have access and machinery for proper silencer construction. Neither one has intention of filing proper papers or paying taxes on their can. And no one in this group frankly gives a shot about radical designs.

-Industry professionals and insiders.
These people give a s--t about the topic, but won't share winning designs due to theft of said winning idea. I can't blame them, but it is what it is.

I guess there are other subgroups here such as pure intellectuals who just want to study about gun suppression, children, video gamers, ATF, FBI, etc.

I didn't include our overseas brethren who could very much contribute, but because there are like 2 of them who contribute on the regular (gunny and Enfield) It's hard to say group.lol. Besides, with silencers in the hardware store and in every gas station candy isle, why would anyone invest in R&D heavily if the market is saturated. Likely a poor return on investment.


Just my opinion, but I think that is why.

[gunny50]

I didn't include our overseas brethren who could very much contribute, but because there are like 2 of them who contribute on the regular (gunny and Enfield) It's hard to say group.lol. Besides, with silencers in the hardware store and in every gas station candy isle, why would anyone invest in R&D heavily if the market is saturated. Likely a poor return on investment.

THANK you Dr.K.

I'm proud to be a member of the overseas group even if its small, I do however invite more overseas enthusiasts to become members of the brotherhood of two. so we can make a a brotherhood of euhhh 4 ore more?

Gunny