My .223 Takedown MonoCore

Yes, it can be legal to make a silencer. For everything Form-1, from silencer designs that are easily made, to filing forms with the BATF, to 3D modeling. Remember, you must have an approved BATF Form-1 to make a silencer. All NFA laws apply.

Moderators: mpallett, bakerjw

FastIndy
Silent Operator
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2009 4:04 pm

My .223 Takedown MonoCore

Post by FastIndy »

I know you guys see more CAD drawings than you can shake a stick at, but hopefully this is something that's a little bit different. And I'm ACTUALLY going to make it. And I've interspersed some links to hopefully make it a little educational. So here goes... :mrgreen:

About 2 years ago I learned about NFA items, and more specifically, the legality of a DIY suppressor. Last year I started designing a can that I could use on my AR. I tried to establish some guidelines for my design.

Here was my priority list:
1. Maximum internal volume
2. Minimal weight
3. Max lifetime
4. Max number of baffles
5. Max ease of manufacture

DESIGN

I don't shoot very often, and sometimes my cleaning habits are sloppy (oops), so #3 was a biggy. Because I'm fairly confident in my own machining ability I was able to put "manufacture" last on the list, with the stipulation that there not be any welding involved. I can TIG but don't do it regularly and don't trust myself enough to put a valuable body part like an eye on the line. My outer boundary ended up being about 1-7/8" OD, and 9.5" long. On a 10.5" barrel this would put the OAL length around 20". Anything larger than this I considered unacceptable. From that point I considered a variety of baffle designs. Because I mainly do CNC mill work and don't have access to that nice of a lathe, I determined fairly early on that I wanted a monolithic core. All of the parts besides the core would use a design that would minimize the number of turning operations.

I went through four or five baffle styles, ranging from more traditional milled offset bores, AAC Prodigy style angled/etc/etc. At that point I decided that I wanted symmetric baffles around at least 1 axis to least affect POI, and that's when I nailed down my final baffle shape. I realized that from a structural standpoint it was pretty sound; fairly well triangularized, not subject to excess deformation. By the time I started refining these baffles, I hadn't yet decided how to retain the outer tube. Any threaded joint I wanted to keep in pure shear, so that pretty much eliminated threading the tube itself. I also wanted something that was as far from the blast chamber as possible to reduce carbon fouling. So I sacrificed a little on the weight and location of the center of gravity, and added a retention nut to the loud(er) end.

Image

So this is what I ended up with. The tube is sandwiched between the core at the rear and the cap up front. The tube needs to be only close on the ID, moderately straight, and faced on both ends. For now the mount end is simple, 1/2x28 threaded. The cap gets threaded 1-5/8x18 and sees only shear from preloading the tube. The core is in tension and has a shoulder so that the end cap bottoms on the core up front before it overloads either the fairly thin core legs or buckles the tube. I was very happy with myself until I realized something...To reach the proper torque (about 20 ft-lb), I would have to hold the core on the mount end with a wrench because the tube would rotate. No problem...Or was it? I discovered that when the core was torqued up from one end to the other, I was surpassing the MAXIMUM shear strength of the material in several locations that had a factor of safety of 1.5 - 2 when loaded in tension. I would likely have broken my core either the first time I put it together or the first time I took it apart. To solve this I added a crescent pattern on the ID of the core end, so I can insert a milled wrench to hold the core when I tighten the cap up.

The tube being in compression is probably not ideal. Wall thickness is .055". However, when a round is actually fired and the tube is pressurized, thanks to the Poisson effect, the tube will actually shrink along its length up to .005" or .006", which will increase the buckling strength (or pressure capability) by decreasing the amount of preload that the end cap applies on it. I wish I could say this was my intent all along, but hey, I'll take it :D

The end cap was my final consideration. What I ended up with is something that I can make entirely on the CNC machine. My biggest problem here was coming up with a design that could take an O-ring (in case I wanted to prevent alot of carbon from getting into the threads) and keeping the weight down. My next biggest problem was making it not look like complete crap. That probably took the most work...But I'm happy with it now.

MATERIALS

After I finalized the style and was able to determine the loads that the structure would be seeing in each area, I spent some time nailing down the materials. I will be using 321 stainless for the core. It is not heat treatable, so what I started out with would be the best AND worst material strength I was going to get. It is highly resistant to heat, corrosion, and embrittlement(see #3 on my list). The tensile strength is okay. I also have a little bit of experience making exhaust flanges out of 321SS, so that's on my side.

The tube will be made (pending availability) from 6AL-4V titanium. It can easily take the loads and keeps the weight down. The tube shouldn't see extremely high temperatures, and blasted titanium looks awesome. Enough said.

The cap...I haven't decided yet. I'm a little apprehensive about also making it out of a stainless alloy, as it could cause thread galling. On the other hand, I'm not a huge fan of rust...Leaning heavily towards titanium right now for weight and corrosion reasons.

End specs:
OAL: 9.500"
OD: 1.875"
Weight: 1lb 12oz
Internal Volume: 16.1 in^3
Baffles: 7 x "FI" baffles + 1 flat one on the end

Criticism is quite welcome as this IS my first rodeo.

Manufacturing plan coming up next!

Image

Image
Last edited by FastIndy on Mon Jan 10, 2011 11:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Bendersquint
Industry Professional
Posts: 11357
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 7:19 pm
Location: North Carolina
Contact:

Re: My .223 Takedown MonoCore

Post by Bendersquint »

That core looks an awful lot like HP LLC's core and a couple other cans that I can't recall the names on right now.

I like the tube design however that is the same technology that SILENCERCO uses for their Sparrow can and I believe its patent pending as well.

Definitely do some research wouldn't want another lawsuit floating around.

Got a good thing going here and I think you are doing this the right way! Good job and look forward to following this posting.

-B
User avatar
jimmym40a2
Elite Member
Posts: 2745
Joined: Sun May 06, 2007 8:25 pm
Location: Colorado (for Mongo)

Re: My .223 Takedown MonoCore

Post by jimmym40a2 »

Looks great. You have a solid plan. Can'twait to see it completed!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEZJ_C4LwzA
User avatar
bikefreek
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 578
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 9:16 pm
Location: south-central..........Pa

Re: My .223 Takedown MonoCore

Post by bikefreek »

Bendersquint wrote:That core looks an awful lot like HP LLC's core and a couple other cans that I can't recall the names on right now.

I like the tube design however that is the same technology that SILENCERCO uses for their Sparrow can and I believe its patent pending as well.

Definitely do some research wouldn't want another lawsuit floating around.

Got a good thing going here and I think you are doing this the right way! Good job and look forward to following this posting.

-B
As long as he doesnt have any plans on profiting from the manufacturing of the can i dont think any company can say s--t about his design
User avatar
Bendersquint
Industry Professional
Posts: 11357
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 7:19 pm
Location: North Carolina
Contact:

Re: My .223 Takedown MonoCore

Post by Bendersquint »

bikefreek wrote:
Bendersquint wrote:That core looks an awful lot like HP LLC's core and a couple other cans that I can't recall the names on right now.

I like the tube design however that is the same technology that SILENCERCO uses for their Sparrow can and I believe its patent pending as well.

Definitely do some research wouldn't want another lawsuit floating around.

Got a good thing going here and I think you are doing this the right way! Good job and look forward to following this posting.

-B
As long as he doesnt have any plans on profiting from the manufacturing of the can i dont think any company can say s--t about his design
Unfortunately you are wrong, this has been a discussion here for years. Regardless as to whether or not there is anything intended beyond personal enjoyment it is still violating the patents. if I can find the thread I will post it here explaining what the law says but the bottom line is that a patent prevents ANYONE from making it so long as the patent is valid. Personal use or Commercial use. Anyone.

Now if noone was aware of the design and you kept it to yourself then who would ever know? That is the most common advice you will hear in regards to this. Keep your design to yourself unless its that unique, someone will get their panties in a wad and legal crap will start flying. If noone knows you violated a patent then how can they come after you?

I wish it were otherwise, there are a bunch of designs I would love to do F1's on but don't have a legal department behind me to fend off the wolves.

Regardless of all this, the model looks good and I am looking forward to hearing how it turns out.

-B
User avatar
Bowen1911
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1644
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 3:31 pm
Location: Idaho

Re: My .223 Takedown MonoCore

Post by Bowen1911 »

Bendersquint wrote:
bikefreek wrote:
Bendersquint wrote:That core looks an awful lot like HP LLC's core and a couple other cans that I can't recall the names on right now.

I like the tube design however that is the same technology that SILENCERCO uses for their Sparrow can and I believe its patent pending as well.

Definitely do some research wouldn't want another lawsuit floating around.

Got a good thing going here and I think you are doing this the right way! Good job and look forward to following this posting.

-B
As long as he doesnt have any plans on profiting from the manufacturing of the can i dont think any company can say s--t about his design
Unfortunately you are wrong, this has been a discussion here for years. Regardless as to whether or not there is anything intended beyond personal enjoyment it is still violating the patents. if I can find the thread I will post it here explaining what the law says but the bottom line is that a patent prevents ANYONE from making it so long as the patent is valid. Personal use or Commercial use. Anyone.

Now if noone was aware of the design and you kept it to yourself then who would ever know? That is the most common advice you will hear in regards to this. Keep your design to yourself unless its that unique, someone will get their panties in a wad and legal crap will start flying. If noone knows you violated a patent then how can they come after you?

I wish it were otherwise, there are a bunch of designs I would love to do F1's on but don't have a legal department behind me to fend off the wolves.

Regardless of all this, the model looks good and I am looking forward to hearing how it turns out.

-B
what he said
"I notice that everybody that is pro-abortion already has been born."
--Ronald Reagan

Form 1 .22 can
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mq-XG3tn7s0
User avatar
RavenArmament
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 583
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 8:28 am
Location: Michigan
Contact:

Re: My .223 Takedown MonoCore

Post by RavenArmament »

Bendersquint wrote:That core looks an awful lot like HP LLC's core and a couple other cans that I can't recall the names on right now.
Lots of monos are similar in design.
I like the tube design however that is the same technology that SILENCERCO uses for their Sparrow can and I believe its patent pending as well.

Definitely do some research wouldn't want another lawsuit floating around.

Got a good thing going here and I think you are doing this the right way! Good job and look forward to following this posting.

-B
I think one of the claims of the SilencerCo patent deals with the assembly fitting inside the outer tube, not being the outer tube itself as in the OP's concept.

Being said, I would call SilencerCo and ask to speak with Josh regarding that specific detail.

Also, I know for a fact that silencer patent holders have granted individuals written permission to make exactly one single silencer with their patented baffle technology. Sometimes it's as easy as just asking politely.
Manufacturer of the best subsonic 9mm ammunition.
User avatar
S.Fisher#040147
Silent Operator
Posts: 81
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2009 7:22 pm

Re: My .223 Takedown MonoCore

Post by S.Fisher#040147 »

Bowen, I remember you copied a Spectre with a form 1. How did you avoid getting sued, did you get written permission first?
cyclone72 wrote:
but this is your design and theres a saying"Who's fuckin this chicken, me or you"
User avatar
bikefreek
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 578
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 9:16 pm
Location: south-central..........Pa

Re: My .223 Takedown MonoCore

Post by bikefreek »

Bendersquint wrote:
bikefreek wrote:
Bendersquint wrote:That core looks an awful lot like HP LLC's core and a couple other cans that I can't recall the names on right now.

I like the tube design however that is the same technology that SILENCERCO uses for their Sparrow can and I believe its patent pending as well.

Definitely do some research wouldn't want another lawsuit floating around.

Got a good thing going here and I think you are doing this the right way! Good job and look forward to following this posting.

-B
As long as he doesnt have any plans on profiting from the manufacturing of the can i dont think any company can say s--t about his design
Unfortunately you are wrong, this has been a discussion here for years. Regardless as to whether or not there is anything intended beyond personal enjoyment it is still violating the patents. if I can find the thread I will post it here explaining what the law says but the bottom line is that a patent prevents ANYONE from making it so long as the patent is valid. Personal use or Commercial use. Anyone.

Now if noone was aware of the design and you kept it to yourself then who would ever know? That is the most common advice you will hear in regards to this. Keep your design to yourself unless its that unique, someone will get their panties in a wad and legal crap will start flying. If noone knows you violated a patent then how can they come after you?

I wish it were otherwise, there are a bunch of designs I would love to do F1's on but don't have a legal department behind me to fend off the wolves.

Regardless of all this, the model looks good and I am looking forward to hearing how it turns out.

-B
wow ok i stand corrected...one thing to think about is that just because a patent is pending doesnt mean it will ever get approved. And if a silencer company will sue an individual for making ONE can then why do they not get a bunch of s--t like they were gemtech or something?
FastIndy
Silent Operator
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2009 4:04 pm

Re: My .223 Takedown MonoCore

Post by FastIndy »

Bendersquint wrote:That core looks an awful lot like HP LLC's core and a couple other cans that I can't recall the names on right now.

I like the tube design however that is the same technology that SILENCERCO uses for their Sparrow can and I believe its patent pending as well.

Definitely do some research wouldn't want another lawsuit floating around.

Got a good thing going here and I think you are doing this the right way! Good job and look forward to following this posting.

-B
Thanks for reminding me about that and informing me of the SilcencerCo. At least now I know why they use that design, it's a keeper...lol. It didn't really occur to me that I could be infringing upon patents.

I found an application last night made by one of SilcencerCo's owners, Jonathon Shults. I spent most of last night and this morning looking at it, and on close examination it looks like I'm well clear of any patent infringement. The basis of that patent is a suppressor having "at least two elongate substantially monolithic body shells, each elongate body having a first longitudinal edge and a second, opposed longitudinal edge, where the at least two elongate body shells are configured to selectively substantially envelop the elongate body and substantially enclose each of the adjacent chambers" US Patent Application US20100126334 §[0034], claim 1. In other words, there are two or more shells that don't slide on along the axis of the suppressor. This is also the basis of all the other claims in the patent, and is something I'm definitely not using.

http://data.ipthoughts.com/publication/ ... 126334.pdf

As far as the baffles go...The SilencerCo Sparrow is probably the most similar that I've seen so far. I tried looking up the HP LLC that Bender mentioned, I think you might mean the Checkmate? I was only able to find one picture. Looks kinda similar, I guess.
User avatar
Bowen1911
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1644
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 3:31 pm
Location: Idaho

Re: My .223 Takedown MonoCore

Post by Bowen1911 »

S.Fisher#040147 wrote:Bowen, I remember you copied a Spectre with a form 1. How did you avoid getting sued, did you get written permission first?
I played kiss ass for a very long time. I'm kidding. i asked. sometimes people say no, sometimes they say yes. it doesn't hurt to ask.

and i am not sure about this, but i have been told that if your item varies 17% (not sure how to come up with that) it is not along the lines of the patent, and therefore not infringement.
"I notice that everybody that is pro-abortion already has been born."
--Ronald Reagan

Form 1 .22 can
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mq-XG3tn7s0
User avatar
Bendersquint
Industry Professional
Posts: 11357
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 7:19 pm
Location: North Carolina
Contact:

Re: My .223 Takedown MonoCore

Post by Bendersquint »

FastIndy wrote:
Bendersquint wrote:That core looks an awful lot like HP LLC's core and a couple other cans that I can't recall the names on right now.

I like the tube design however that is the same technology that SILENCERCO uses for their Sparrow can and I believe its patent pending as well.

Definitely do some research wouldn't want another lawsuit floating around.

Got a good thing going here and I think you are doing this the right way! Good job and look forward to following this posting.

-B
Thanks for reminding me about that and informing me of the SilcencerCo. At least now I know why they use that design, it's a keeper...lol. It didn't really occur to me that I could be infringing upon patents.

I found an application last night made by one of SilcencerCo's owners, Jonathon Shults. I spent most of last night and this morning looking at it, and on close examination it looks like I'm well clear of any patent infringement. The basis of that patent is a suppressor having "at least two elongate substantially monolithic body shells, each elongate body having a first longitudinal edge and a second, opposed longitudinal edge, where the at least two elongate body shells are configured to selectively substantially envelop the elongate body and substantially enclose each of the adjacent chambers" US Patent Application US20100126334 §[0034], claim 1. In other words, there are two or more shells that don't slide on along the axis of the suppressor. This is also the basis of all the other claims in the patent, and is something I'm definitely not using.

http://data.ipthoughts.com/publication/ ... 126334.pdf

As far as the baffles go...The SilencerCo Sparrow is probably the most similar that I've seen so far. I tried looking up the HP LLC that Bender mentioned, I think you might mean the Checkmate? I was only able to find one picture. Looks kinda similar, I guess.
Yeah HP LLC is the company is the company that makes the Checkmate, I have the can and the name even eluded me.

I read the patent that you linked and it DOES appear that they are emphasizing the clamshell design over the baffle design. However reading the claims of the invention does clearly speak of the baffle shapes and design as well. Just to be sure give Josh a call he's easy to talk to and will be straight with you, and if it is covered just ask him if you can make 1 form1 can with it........then buy a t-shirt ;)

DID YOU GET MY PM?


BIKEFREEK-------- quote.....wow ok i stand corrected...one thing to think about is that just because a patent is pending doesnt mean it will ever get approved. And if a silencer company will sue an individual for making ONE can then why do they not get a bunch of s--t like they were gemtech or something?

The PATENT PENDING claim protects the apllied entity while the patent is pending. You don't get a patent pending label if it won't get approved, means its waiting to be entered into the system(what my patent attorney told me), its as good as approved.

Companies have sued individuals for infringement, but part of the lawsuit is a gag order and noone finds out about it. I read an article years ago about it happening with regards to a pistol booster, the individual was sued and a gag order was placed, when the gag order expired he brought it up and by then the company could care less they enjoyed their success. I am pretty certain the company name but not 100% certain but it was in a legal journal talking about the flaws within the system with regards to the firearms industry and why if it was not made public what prevented others from doing it. The whole wolves head on a post will keep the others away versus the wolves just noticing one disappeared.


-B
User avatar
mx201er
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 382
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 3:24 pm
Location: NM, MT

Re: My .223 Takedown MonoCore

Post by mx201er »

the one comment I would have on your design is you said that you would like to put an o-ring on the end by the tube cap threads.. I know a .22lr is a lot dirtier than a .223 would be, but with my .22 can I first had an o-ring on the far end and the problem with that is that your o-ring will have to scrape all the fouling off the inside of the tube on the way off, I had to beat the core out with a hammer lol.. I decided mine didn't need it, especially just being a .22lr; If you really want one think about instead of putting it in a groove, make it so the o-ring can roll off the end of the core as you take the tube off so it isn't acting like a squeegee

I like the design! great thinking :)
"If you are mad as hell and aren't going to take it anymore, grab your rifle and head outside.
If you're the only dumbass with a rifle screaming like a maniac, go back inside. It isn't time yet."
User avatar
bikefreek
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 578
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 9:16 pm
Location: south-central..........Pa

Re: My .223 Takedown MonoCore

Post by bikefreek »

Bendersquint wrote:
FastIndy wrote:
Bendersquint wrote:That core looks an awful lot like HP LLC's core and a couple other cans that I can't recall the names on right now.

I like the tube design however that is the same technology that SILENCERCO uses for their Sparrow can and I believe its patent pending as well.

Definitely do some research wouldn't want another lawsuit floating around.

Got a good thing going here and I think you are doing this the right way! Good job and look forward to following this posting.

-B
Thanks for reminding me about that and informing me of the SilcencerCo. At least now I know why they use that design, it's a keeper...lol. It didn't really occur to me that I could be infringing upon patents.

I found an application last night made by one of SilcencerCo's owners, Jonathon Shults. I spent most of last night and this morning looking at it, and on close examination it looks like I'm well clear of any patent infringement. The basis of that patent is a suppressor having "at least two elongate substantially monolithic body shells, each elongate body having a first longitudinal edge and a second, opposed longitudinal edge, where the at least two elongate body shells are configured to selectively substantially envelop the elongate body and substantially enclose each of the adjacent chambers" US Patent Application US20100126334 §[0034], claim 1. In other words, there are two or more shells that don't slide on along the axis of the suppressor. This is also the basis of all the other claims in the patent, and is something I'm definitely not using.

http://data.ipthoughts.com/publication/ ... 126334.pdf

As far as the baffles go...The SilencerCo Sparrow is probably the most similar that I've seen so far. I tried looking up the HP LLC that Bender mentioned, I think you might mean the Checkmate? I was only able to find one picture. Looks kinda similar, I guess.
Yeah HP LLC is the company is the company that makes the Checkmate, I have the can and the name even eluded me.

I read the patent that you linked and it DOES appear that they are emphasizing the clamshell design over the baffle design. However reading the claims of the invention does clearly speak of the baffle shapes and design as well. Just to be sure give Josh a call he's easy to talk to and will be straight with you, and if it is covered just ask him if you can make 1 form1 can with it........then buy a t-shirt ;)

DID YOU GET MY PM?


BIKEFREEK-------- quote.....wow ok i stand corrected...one thing to think about is that just because a patent is pending doesnt mean it will ever get approved. And if a silencer company will sue an individual for making ONE can then why do they not get a bunch of s--t like they were gemtech or something?

The PATENT PENDING claim protects the apllied entity while the patent is pending. You don't get a patent pending label if it won't get approved, means its waiting to be entered into the system(what my patent attorney told me), its as good as approved.

Companies have sued individuals for infringement, but part of the lawsuit is a gag order and noone finds out about it. I read an article years ago about it happening with regards to a pistol booster, the individual was sued and a gag order was placed, when the gag order expired he brought it up and by then the company could care less they enjoyed their success. I am pretty certain the company name but not 100% certain but it was in a legal journal talking about the flaws within the system with regards to the firearms industry and why if it was not made public what prevented others from doing it. The whole wolves head on a post will keep the others away versus the wolves just noticing one disappeared.


-B
These links tend to dissagree http://www.uspto.gov/faq/patents.jsp#a1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_pending http://www.wisegeek.com/what-does-paten ... g-mean.htm http://forum.freeadvice.com/patents-104 ... 94721.html
User avatar
kingjamez
Senior Silent Operator
Posts: 133
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2009 7:49 am

Re: My .223 Takedown MonoCore

Post by kingjamez »

I really like this design. I hope that you'll take some photos as you machine this thing out, I'd love to see how you setup your material holding devices.

You said you don't have a good lathe. How do you plan on doing the OD threading? Steady rest and fervent prayer?

Does your mill have enough Z axis travel to do the ridges for the crescent pattern?

-Jim
My Form 1 Monocore build on YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLH37sv2ySHmB1tTivFYIF8y2CW8rmiZRi
User avatar
daviscustom
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 925
Joined: Mon May 26, 2008 4:40 pm
Location: Fly-over Country

Re: My .223 Takedown MonoCore

Post by daviscustom »

Design it so the o-ring groove is part of the cap. When you remove the cap...the front o-ring is out of the way. You may want to consider an internal o-ring just behind the threads as well to keep the threads clean. .....Not my original idea, but I'm surprised it hasn't been suggested yet.

I assume you plan some sort of mouse hole to the small outer chambers? Might be just as good or better making each "V" a little deeper and do away with the extra work of the outside chambers. Might wring a little more volume out of the design and it would increase the distance the gasses have to travel backwards to get back to the bore.
The myopic majority will be our republic's undoing.
Historian
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 3503
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2010 10:37 pm

Re: My .223 Takedown MonoCore

Post by Historian »

Bowen1911 wrote:
S.Fisher#040147 wrote:Bowen, I remember you copied a Spectre with a form 1. How did you avoid getting sued, did you get written permission first?
I played kiss ass for a very long time. I'm kidding. i asked. sometimes people say no, sometimes they say yes. it doesn't hurt to ask.

and i am not sure about this, but i have been told that if your item varies 17% (not sure how to come up with that) it is not along the lines of the patent, and therefore not infringement.
In this thread's context, where is Bill Clinton's policy of 'DON'T ASK, DON'T TELL', and add 'DON'T SELL'? :) :)

Simple minded me.
User avatar
Bowen1911
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1644
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 3:31 pm
Location: Idaho

Re: My .223 Takedown MonoCore

Post by Bowen1911 »

Historian wrote:
Bowen1911 wrote:
S.Fisher#040147 wrote:Bowen, I remember you copied a Spectre with a form 1. How did you avoid getting sued, did you get written permission first?
I played kiss ass for a very long time. I'm kidding. i asked. sometimes people say no, sometimes they say yes. it doesn't hurt to ask.

and i am not sure about this, but i have been told that if your item varies 17% (not sure how to come up with that) it is not along the lines of the patent, and therefore not infringement.
In this thread's context, where is Bill Clinton's policy of 'DON'T ASK, DON'T TELL', and add 'DON'T SELL'? :) :)

Simple minded me.
exactly
"I notice that everybody that is pro-abortion already has been born."
--Ronald Reagan

Form 1 .22 can
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mq-XG3tn7s0
User avatar
Wicked
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1438
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 1:15 am
Location: Dayton, OH
Contact:

Re: My .223 Takedown MonoCore

Post by Wicked »

Do you have access to a Wire EDM?

It's screamin' for you to let it cut this core.
https://www.facebook.com/wickedweapons
tmix
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1778
Joined: Wed May 04, 2005 8:57 am
Location: The Lone Star State

Re: My .223 Takedown MonoCore

Post by tmix »

Please take the following as constructive criticism.
It looks really cool, but I think the front of stack is way too thin.(particularly, the apex of each baffle.) I foresee the core collapsing prematurely when exposed to operating temperature and pressure.

Please note that most centerfire rifle cans utilize a cone type baffle, or other symmetrical, load bearing shapes. The exception to the rule being AAC's monolithic, big-bore, rifle cans, but they are not meant for sustained fire.
[size=150]Machine gun snob by proxy. [/size]
[img]http://i182.photobucket.com/albums/x190/tmixon762/Colt_Automatic_Rifle_01.jpg[/img]
FastIndy
Silent Operator
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2009 4:04 pm

Re: My .223 Takedown MonoCore

Post by FastIndy »

daviscustom wrote:Design it so the o-ring groove is part of the cap. When you remove the cap...the front o-ring is out of the way. You may want to consider an internal o-ring just behind the threads as well to keep the threads clean. .....Not my original idea, but I'm surprised it hasn't been suggested yet.

I assume you plan some sort of mouse hole to the small outer chambers? Might be just as good or better making each "V" a little deeper and do away with the extra work of the outside chambers. Might wring a little more volume out of the design and it would increase the distance the gasses have to travel backwards to get back to the bore.
If you look at closely at the back of the cap there is actually a recess where the O-ring will sit and be sandwiched, isolating those threads from any gunk. It's also smaller than the ID of the outer tube, so the O-ring shouldn't have to move at all for disassembly.

I've been thinking about the mouse holes. Whether they get put in will depend on how impatient I will be by the time I get my approved form back and how antsy I'll be getting in taking it off of the mill :) Right now they're in there for lightening only.
kingjamez wrote:I really like this design. I hope that you'll take some photos as you machine this thing out, I'd love to see how you setup your material holding devices.

You said you don't have a good lathe. How do you plan on doing the OD threading? Steady rest and fervent prayer?

Does your mill have enough Z axis travel to do the ridges for the crescent pattern?

-Jim
Okay...Here's the plan for constructing the tube...The trickiest or most expensive (one or the other) are the first steps:

Step 1:
Have the central bore wire EDM'd. There are a couple of places I've talked to locally that can do this while I watch. Or I could just START making my suppressor with a piece that's already been wire EDM'd somewhere else...

Step 2:
Rough turn the OD between centers for concentricity. At this point I have a choice to make. I have enough travel that I COULD technically put this up on the mill, indicate it in perfectly straight, and thread mill the incoming end of the core, and mill the OD contour. I'm not sure I feel comfortable doing this. I'll probably have the entire OD and mount turned by one of the many competent and decently priced shops in town. I guess it depends on how tricky and $$$'lry I'm feeling on that day.

Step 3:
The mount is threaded and the OD is finish turned. I'll mill out some split clamps or a simple fixture made out of plate to securely hold the core vertically on a right angle block, loud end up. I'll indicate in the OD where the threads will be. Then I'll do some endmilling for the recessed area and the crescent shaped wrench "flats". To finish it off I will threadmill the OD.

Step 4:
It's all down hill from here. Just time spent milling fixtures. What I'm planning is like a half moon cradle clamping the ends outside of the baffles. I'll also drill starter holes through the baffle cavities. Those holes will have bolts passed through them and threaded into the cradle, so I'll be supporting from the chambers next to the ones I'll be machining. I'll start in the middle chamber, mill down half way with a 3/8" end mill, and mill all of the lightening holes on the outside. Take it out, flip it over, indicate it straight up and down off of the outside cuts, and finish the opposite side of the chamber I'm working on. Then I'll move out to the next chambers (bolts removed there), same process.

End Cap:
Everything on this will be helically bored and thread milled. Easy peasy, 2 setups max. I may change my spanner wrench cuts so I can mill those from the top too, but I really like the way they look and it's worth the time spent on the rotary head.
User avatar
daviscustom
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 925
Joined: Mon May 26, 2008 4:40 pm
Location: Fly-over Country

Re: My .223 Takedown MonoCore

Post by daviscustom »

I was referring to an o-ring to seal the front end of the tube (built into the cap) as well as the seal to protect the threads. Just proposing a solution to the problem of sliding the tube over an o-ring the full length of the tube. May not be a big deal for .223 since it isn't as dirty as 22lr.

If you aren't using the outside chambers then by all means eliminate them and extend the length of your V chambers. I would also tend to be concerned about the wall thickness between the chambers.
The myopic majority will be our republic's undoing.
FastIndy
Silent Operator
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2009 4:04 pm

Re: My .223 Takedown MonoCore

Post by FastIndy »

The baffles don't look very thick on the drawing but the first one is .060". The others are .050", and I may make the following baffles even thinner. I'll post some more detailed pics tomorrow, as well as how I came up with the baffle wall thickness.
User avatar
daviscustom
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 925
Joined: Mon May 26, 2008 4:40 pm
Location: Fly-over Country

Re: My .223 Takedown MonoCore

Post by daviscustom »

I'm sure someone here can tell you the magnitude of the initial pressure pulse that will momentarily pressurize the chambers. I think it would be good food for thought....maybe you already know....I just like to err on the side of over-engineering. Over time it's something to consider, especially if you are paying for others to do some of the work.
The myopic majority will be our republic's undoing.
SRM
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1825
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 7:20 pm
Location: wyoming

Re: My .223 Takedown MonoCore

Post by SRM »

The blast baffle takes a pounding. I`d go .150" and thin it later if need to. JMHO
Post Reply