See through silencer w/slow motion silencer testing

[John A.]

Some really good video that was put online a few days ago. I didn't see it listed here yet, but wanted to share because I liked it.

Though I don't know how to embed it here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pOXunRYJIw

[garredondojr]

I posted it in the silencer talk forum.

I think that will open a whole new can o' worms as far as R&D is concerned. was too bad they didn't do any pistol cans. would have been nice to see the difference in gas velocities and how they acted.

[John A.]

My apologies, I didn't mean to make a duplicate thread.

[Rustys0702Services]

..

[Fulmen]

I think that will open a whole new can o' worms as far as R&D is concerned

Nah, I doubt it. You can't really see the flow, all you see is the flash filling the can. Secondly it doesn't matter how it looks, only how it meters.

It would probably be useful for "calibrating" CFD simulations, but I don't expect this to revolutionize anything. Cool though.

[garredondojr]

I think that will open a whole new can o' worms as far as R&D is concerned

Nah, I doubt it. You can't really see the flow, all you see is the flash filling the can. Secondly it doesn't matter how it looks, only how it meters.

It would probably be useful for "calibrating" CFD simulations, but I don't expect this to revolutionize anything. Cool though.

i'll be honest I don't know much about suppressors and I'm still learning but your comment about the "flash filling the can" just doesn't seem right to me. here's my thinking behind it. the reason their is a flash is the presence of O2 in the can (ie the first round pop phenomenon) and the "flash" is actually the superheated gasses igniting within the O2 rich environment, so that very much would be the gas flow were seeing.

however since those gasses are being ignited they could very well burn at a faster rate than say the following shot. it would have been nice if they continued to fire more shots on the one's that didn't fail to see if the flash dissipated or in essence ceased to be without the presence of O2 within the can.

[John A.]

Whether you would've actually been able to see much going on for the smoke and residual fouling from previous shots, I don't know, but I would've been interested in follow up shots too.

I was most intrigued seeing the one monocore where the fire/flash sort of lingered and danced back and forth in the last baffle for ~ 10 milliseconds.

Time stamp for that one was 4:23-4:35

[Paco664]

well... i though that was cool as hell... thanks for posting it...

[garredondojr]

Whether you would've actually been able to see much going on for the smoke and residual fouling from previous shots, I don't know, but I would've been interested in follow up shots too.

I was most intrigued seeing the one monocore where the fire/flash sort of lingered and danced back and forth in the last baffle for ~ 10 milliseconds.

Time stamp for that one was 4:23-4:35

I don't have access to the video here at work but I think I know which one your speaking of. it was the one fired on the AR correct? if so I thought that was the coolest as well and makes you wonder if doing that style baffle say post blast chamber then have a secondary expansion chamber and a second one in the end of the can like it was would do a great job of trapping and cooling the gasses.

The only potential byproduct I could see is it could superheat the can in those spots which could lead to a failure dependent on material composition/ thickness.

[Fulmen]

the reason their is a flash is the presence of O2 in the can

The flash is due to the temperature of the gas exiting the barrel. Or to be more precise, it's glowing particles of soot within that gas. Want proof?
https://imgur.com/gallery/OX84RQV

No atmosphere and a huge fireball.

[Rustys0702Services]

11

[John A.]

Another important factor when working on a baffle design is Studying the blast pattern on the baffles so you can tell exactly where and how the blast bubble is moving through the can. Just my $.02.

Exactly.

I think many of us here have done the exact same thing to see where a baffle is effective. Or not.

Especially with porting and clipping and stuff.

I would also like to see some low pressure cans being tested because it's common knowledge that handgun rounds and 22's and the likes react and behave differently than higher pressure rounds like the 308 and other rifle calibers.

That's why certain baffles sound better with certain hosts, or longer barrels, or with pistol calibers than other baffle types.

[1rosta]

I have never heard of this company, has anyone owned one of these cans that can give first hand experience about them?

[Fulmen]

Studying the blast bubble movement can very be very beneficial on how the pressure is moving and reacting to different baffle styles.

The problem as I see it is that it's a high pressure front moving quickly through the can while the internal pressure is low. What's important is how the gases flow once the pressure builds.

Take a simple washer style can, initially the gas will expand out, filling all the chambers. But as pressure builds in the chambers the flow will be channeled straight through the bore with little resistance. That's why these cans needs to be large in order to work.

I'm not saying that these videos are completely useless, but the amount of information you can extract is limited in my opinion. Perhaps you could see more with higher resolution and much higher frame rates.

[garredondojr]

ok well I get the flame now. I assume there will always be a flash as the powder it's self has oxidizers in it.

now I'm not trying to say your wrong just asking this more to learn and grasp whats going on.

you state that the flash is glowing particles within the gas, if that were the case wouldn't that illustrate what the gasses are doing and how they are expanding?

also as the flash dissipates you can distinctly see the flame temps change and it's not a constant within the different styles of cans. wouldn't this show how the can is cooling the gasses which is a big part of suppression no?

like rusty and john mentioned reading the soot on the baffles also show's whats going on. I'd venture to guess (and again this is just an assumption) that where there is more soot means more of those gasses were trapped and cooling in those spots.

Some of the suppressors reflected the flame front once it filled and reached the end of the suppressor, now wouldn't this "work" the gasses more forcing them to change direction, fight against each other and ultimately slow and cool. or would like in the example with the .223 suppressor that was fired on the AR where the gasses lingered in the labyrinth at the end of the suppressor until they cooled be more effective? this can which I know may be a bad example as your talking about two different cartridges and one that uses almost double the powder (roughly 20gr more powder).

[Fulmen]

The particles are extremely small, far too small to be seen. The physics is basically the same as in a burning candle.

The problem is that the flash pretty much obscures everything behind it, so you're only seeing the outside of this bubble. And the most interesting physics happens on the inside. I'm not saying it's useless, but nor do I think it's going to revolutionize the industry. Perhaps one would see more with 10x the frame rate and better light control?

[Holescreek]

I watched the videos almost frame by frame looking for anything that stood out. The first thing I noticed was that there is black smoke coming out of the barrel in front of the bullet. It's very visible long before any flash gets to the can. My WAG is it's the pressure that bypassed the bullet before it got seated in the barrel.

[Capt. Link.]

I think we are witness to some disinformation with these videos.These also may be proof of concept but not complete effective designs. I say this because, construction and the effect on the blast is counter intuitive to traditional sequencing for effective suppression according to traditional knowledge. Either I'm right or the book has been re-written and we are seeing progress.

Still very cool videos that add to the ballistic library.

-CL

I have a few ideas on how some of this can be utilized in a practical design.....

[Holescreek]

IMO the video wasn't about suppression, even their numbers on the proper can at the start of the video weren't impressive compared to widely available commercial units. The video only put a literal window on containment and allowed us to see how the fire and smoke act under pressure. I hope more youtube entrepreneurs jump on the bandwagon and do the same thing with standard designs.

[Rustys0702Services]

I 1

[fishman]

There is so much Internet myth ... don't clip the first and last baffle

It actually does make sense to leave the blast baffle alone when using an asymmetrical baffle deign.

[Rustys0702Services]

11

[propeine]

I personally applaud the makers of the video. While this iteration was not successful in suppressor performance they probably learned some things. There is so much Internet myth and misinformation floating around now like double clips cancel each out, don't clip the first and last baffle, one of the biggest is most commercial manufactures claim their can is the best. My all time favorite is again from the commercial guys "repeatable poi shift", when no poi shift is better. Just my take on it.

New ideas are born from challenging the tradition, after all that is how the USA was born.

No POI shift is an interesting concept. You're hanging weight at the end of a cantilevered beam. The barrel will move to some degree and the harmonics will change. You can minimize shift caused by interaction with the baffles themselves but to say none would be defeating the laws of physics unless you're intentionally inducing a shift to cancel the sag of the barrel which means timing the suppressor most likely.

[yondering]

What propeine said.

I encountered the same claim from a commercial suppressor company last year (I forget the name, but they claimed they are the only one certified for use on the Tavor X95, that might narrow it down). They claimed "no poi shift", and when questioned, repeated "none at all, ever". It was almost comical, since they'd brought suppressors to demo on our rifles, and we all noticed poi shift from the weight. It was funny because they were some of the heaviest suppressors I've ever seen, and not very quiet.

Maybe no shift from gas interaction between the baffles and bullet, but there's no avoiding the effect of weight on the end of the barrel.

[Rustys0702Services]

..