Designing my own recoil booster,any experience in this area?

[ChimeraPrecision]

whats up gents? I'm new to the forum, I've been stalking for some time.

Here's the premise, I have a design I'm currently working on for what I am calling RRAD (Racheting Recoil Assisting Device)

It's a recoil booster that has an internal (proprietary) mechanism to orient the suppressor attached in 18 degree increments (allowing for funtionality with offset chamber suppressors)

I ran a search on recoil boosters here but didn't come up with any good threads. Does anyone have any experience in this arena??

[ChimeraPrecision]

Here is a really, really general sketch of what it may look like.

[ChimeraPrecision]

nobody?

[LavaRed]

I designed my own recoil booster for both my .45ACP suppressors. It has performed flawlessly.

As to recoil boosters for vertically-asymmetrical suppressors, I have not yet manufactured one, anthough I have toyed with the idea. Your design looks rather versatile and efficient to produce. Have you checked that it would not recoil past the point of alignment, where the indexing stud might jam the booster open or cause suppressor dis-alignment?

Also, have you thought of placing the alignment stud and grooves on the rear endcap instead?

Have you studied SilencerCo's Osprey booster system?

This is what I can suggest so far. But like I said, I quite like your design and would like to see it produced.

Thanks,
LavaRed

[ChimeraPrecision]

Lava,

Thanks for the reply. I will address as many of your concerns as i can.

1) I have NOT studied Silenerco's Design just for the simple fact that i one day may produce and sell this item.

2) The current drawing you see shouldn't recoil past the point of alignment. With that being said I have designed the current generation of RRAD's such that the axial movement is limited so the Internal camming mechanism will always be engaged on the "gear." As the piston recoils (aided by properly sized spring rate) the camming lever slides axial on the gear.

3) I plan on making this part and then testing it with dummy suppressors (because I have not applied for form 1 yet) to see how heavy the suppressor can be and still allow function of the action.

4) The new generation has the 1/2-28 tpi threading internally on the piston BUT ALSO has an external threading of 1/2-28tpi so that this booster can be attached to just about any can on the market.

5) Material Selection. I was planning to do 17-4 precipitation hardened stainless steel for the piston and the rest 316 stainless (or titanium someday)

6) I will upload the newest model when i finish it.

[Shift1]

What does exposing the spring to the combustion heat do for the spring? I would guess it is not a good thing, Just asking.....

[ChimeraPrecision]

What does exposing the spring to the combustion heat do for the spring? I would guess it is not a good thing, Just asking.....

I have considered that actually, I believe most neilson devices are open to the combustion heat buut, i planned on using a stainless spring, should handle the temperature (mostly because its not continuous, thereby eliminating the possibility of high temp creep) without losing spring rate

[PaulNoiseLess]

Hi,

I’m not going to judge the design shown because looks like a very preliminary one. Beside the plain ones, sophisticated good working RB/ND are based and relay on small details.

The first one I did was based on Lavared’s piston design he kindly posted in here. Plain but effective. 25 pounds spring, 4 coils spring if I recall well.

Then I did move on, wanted zero POI and incremental spring tension. I’m now in version, let’s say, 2.5 (7 different ones). The production one now is just zero POI shift.

These are the main designs criteria I’ve taken into account during the 2.5:

1) Can be made: Yes, it’s not a silly to guess we can design fancy internal rails and guides that we can’t build
2) Smooth operation: Yes, the Piston moving forward/backward is not a constraint for the whole system to work.
3) Turning: Yes, we can’t afford to have the Tube (or whatever) turning around.
4) Easy to change POI shift: Yes, I want something more than pull/turn/push …
5) Short & lightweight: Obvious.
6) Volume: I want to use those 2/3 inches for more than helping the Gun to cycle.
7) Assembly and Usability: Easy.
Integration: With the Can, you know … beside 1/2 – 28 or whatever on the clean side …
9) Sealing: Yes, I don’t want my face or hand to get s--t …
10) …

Those are 9 but there are another 2 or more to take into account. Spring being exposed to heat is not an issue as long as you have the right material.

Hope it helps.

Best,

Paul

[delta9mda]

copy the tirant or the octane booster and you are good to go.

[PaulNoiseLess]

Hi,

Or, just buy one at Gemtech ...

Best,

Paul

[ChimeraPrecision]

copy the tirant or the octane booster and you are good to go.

Ummmm NO! thanks though man.

i don't want to take someone elses intellectual property. Plus they don't provide the functionality im looking for.

[ChimeraPrecision]

Hi,

I’m not going to judge the design shown because looks like a very preliminary one. Beside the plain ones, sophisticated good working RB/ND are based and relay on small details.

The first one I did was based on Lavared’s piston design he kindly posted in here. Plain but effective. 25 pounds spring, 4 coils spring if I recall well.

Then I did move on, wanted zero POI and incremental spring tension. I’m now in version, let’s say, 2.5 (7 different ones). The production one now is just zero POI shift.

These are the main designs criteria I’ve taken into account during the 2.5:

1) Can be made: Yes, it’s not a silly to guess we can design fancy internal rails and guides that we can’t build
2) Smooth operation: Yes, the Piston moving forward/backward is not a constraint for the whole system to work.
3) Turning: Yes, we can’t afford to have the Tube (or whatever) turning around.
4) Easy to change POI shift: Yes, I want something more than pull/turn/push …
5) Short & lightweight: Obvious.
6) Volume: I want to use those 2/3 inches for more than helping the Gun to cycle.
7) Assembly and Usability: Easy.
Integration: With the Can, you know … beside 1/2 – 28 or whatever on the clean side …
9) Sealing: Yes, I don’t want my face or hand to get s--t …
10) …

Those are 9 but there are another 2 or more to take into account. Spring being exposed to heat is not an issue as long as you have the right material.

Hope it helps.

Best,

Paul

Believe me the above sketch was literally thrown together in about 20minutes. I'm doing a proper model (assembly) with the appropriate geometric dimensioning and tolerancing. It looks completely, different that this one. many of your concerns were already dealt with. I will upload it with the camming mechanism obscured attached to the monocore im doing for my form 1

[PaulNoiseLess]

Hi,

Monkeys are food finders and thieves, never bring you out new stuff. Don’t’ feed them at all, they are worse than Trolls & Gremlins.

You don’t really have/need to show the whole thing, just highlights that shows where you are now. Then, we can help.

Best,

Paul

[ChimeraPrecision]

Hi,

Monkeys are food finders and thieves, never bring you out new stuff. Don’t’ feed them at all, they are worse than Trolls & Gremlins.

You don’t really have/need to show the whole thing, just highlights that shows where you are now. Then, we can help.

Best,

Paul

Right on. Will do as time allows

[LavaRed]

I can't post the final captive-piston design prints from my last .45 can because that now belongs to Aaron from Delta. But I will post the extremely simple, yet effective and rugged, Mk.45 design, which I have posted countless times over:









Spring is 25lbs, 2.063" Free length, 5 coils total, 3 active coils, Stainless 302 0.1 Diameter wire, ends closed and squared. Outside diameter 1.075", Inside diameter 0.875".

The booster rides on the two rods that hold the whole welded stainless monocore baffle stack together. Can be indexed by the simple expedient of rotating the piston bushing, which offers 4 possible orientations.

My new design offers up to 16 possible different combinations and holds the piston entirely captive and attached to the rear endcap, however, I can only post prints with Aaron's permission.

I will post a picture, however, as I had already posted one before:







Thanks,
LavaRed

[ChimeraPrecision]

Thanks lava, im glad to see mine has some similarities.

Calling all big name companies, this technology is for sale for a reasonable amount

[Mongo]

I think you find high wear on the end of the teeth or inside the booster housing since they do not offer much bearing surface.

[ChimeraPrecision]

I think you find high wear on the end of the teeth or inside the booster housing since they do not offer much bearing surface.

The new design address this issue with more contact are, also the parts are coated with molybdenum disulphide solid lubricant for decreased friction and wear

[delta9mda]

copy the tirant or the octane booster and you are good to go.

Ummmm NO! thanks though man.

i don't want to take someone elses intellectual property. Plus they don't provide the functionality im looking for.

i understand, add the tuning tabs and you are done.

[Mongo]

I would not count on any lubricant. You have to assume the inside of the suppressor is a very hot gritty, abrasive place and design for it.

[ChimeraPrecision]

I would not count on any lubricant. You have to assume the inside of the suppressor is a very hot gritty, abrasive place and design for it.

thank you, I understand your point here sir. I am not planning to rely on the coating its just a bonus. I have designed in such fashion that no lubricant is needed.

Another booster style I'm looking at puts the primary orientation mechanism out of the bullet path and to a different location. we shal see which proves more manufacturable

[LavaRed]

I would not count on any lubricant. You have to assume the inside of the suppressor is a very hot gritty, abrasive place and design for it.

thank you, I understand your point here sir. I am not planning to rely on the coating its just a bonus. I have designed in such fashion that no lubricant is needed.

Another booster style I'm looking at puts the primary orientation mechanism out of the bullet path and to a different location. we shal see which proves more manufacturable

Another thing I forgot to say. I prefer large, easily manageable, non-fragile parts in a heavy duty suppressor. I recommend doing this. Small parts and springs and pins are a bit uncomfortable, harder to produce, and fragile. I suspect many people think like me. So I recommend designing large, tough, hard-to-lose and mess up parts in your design.

[PaulNoiseLess]

Hi,

I mostly agree and would like to add: No screws at all and no mix on Lathe/Mill for the same part.

Of course, no system turning while/after shooting and being able to tune up POI shift and Spring Pressure as well …

Best,

Paul

[ChimeraPrecision]

Hi,

I mostly agree and would like to add: No screws at all and no mix on Lathe/Mill for the same part.

Of course, no system turning while/after shooting and being able to tune up POI shift and Spring Pressure as well …

Best,

Paul

I don't understand what you are tryin to say with the second line (please try and help me understand if you will). however i am more than comfortable doing lathe and mill operations of the same part. I have extensive (albeit non suppressor related) design experience, so the parts may need multiple operations but they will be easily producable

[PaulNoiseLess]

Hi,

OK, one of the issues you might have is that after shooting your Can doesn’t come back to the same axial radius. Consequently, next shot is not going to have the same POI. In other words, you have to keep the Gun having the same POI shot after shot.

Due to bullet spin, can will trend to rotate unless you have constant rails. Like Lavared is doing on his design.

Not screws inside ?, easy to figure out.

Mill/Lathe parts versus parts Lathe and parts Mill: What I’m trying to say is that stay away of complex parts. Expensive.

Now, it’s your call: You just posted a NO, NO, NO way design and now it’s time for you post something better. Work on it and come back for more.

Best,

Paul