Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

Meat Target

Classified
  • Posts

    57
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Meat Target's Achievements

Looks for Range

Looks for Range (1/11)

  1. Yes its a USAS-12. The AA-12 pretty much copied the action/gas system other than using a square tube and open bolt. The USAS-12 does cycles much quicker, as it doesn't recoil quite as far into the stock. I have gotten 0.16 splits with mine but I am also running a modded lightweight carrier. Here is a good video of how the action works.
  2. You can make an effective shotgun brake but it needs to be designed for the lower pressures. I call this my Flash Gordon muzzle break its made out of anodized 7068 aluminum. I have been using it for a few years, it's held up better than I expected. It just clamps on and I made an extension for my choke tube wrench to change the chokes.
  3. Is there a way to get practiscore to calculate match results in percentage points when running a time plus match? We are doing 3GN matches at our club and the results need to be in percentage point instead of combined times.
  4. My intent of posting the results of the computer simulations is to characterize the different compensators in respect to recoil reduction and downforce generated and not rank them as in which one is the best. But there are some that appear to think I am trying to do more than that so I really don’t want to start down that road. A computer simulation could never predict how flat it will hold you barrel, there are too many variables including the fact that everyone holds the gun differently. What I believe that computer simulations do very well is predict how the compensator will react, that by its self isn’t much but when you combine it with building and testing changes to the compensator in the real world its very useful. For example a compensator that works really well on a 18” barrel may have too much down force on a 16” barrel because the muzzle gas pressures are higher. From real world testing and comparing it to the simulation results I have been able to get a fairly good idea on how much down force would probably be too much for any load and barrel length combination.
  5. Thats one of two comps that I don't think I would ever post the results of in this fourm for obvios reasons...
  6. I know everyone is probably tired of seeing posts on compensator lately, but I finally got around to putting together the data on the CFD simulation of the Nordic Corvette comp I did awhile ago. The video is kind of boring compared to the ones with multiple chambers. Here is how it stacks up with the other simulation that I have posted previously. Not much on recoil reduction but because of its three top ports and high pressure chamber it generates a lot of down force. From shooting it my personal opinion is that it has too much down force and makes the barrel jump down. I tried to come up with a better way to display the information on the characteristics of how each of the different comps perform. Here is a graph of the combination of forces 200usec after the bullet has left the barrel. At 200usec the bullet has exited the comp and the gas flows have stabilized. This is basically a vector plot of the forces generated by the compensators showing the direction and magnitude of the force that will be applied to the end of the barrel. Another bit of information you can get from this graph is the longer the line the more "efficient" the comp is in using the available gas energy.
  7. From running a bunch of different CFD analysis on different comp here would be my 2 cents on your design. 1) Your going to have way too much down force, reduce the area of the flats on the bottom of the ports. 2) Ditch the holes in the top, not need. 3) Increase the opening area in the sides of the ports. 4) Make the second port spacing larger (as the pressure drops the gas expands less) 5) As long as you port openings are fairly large there is no need to have more two sets of ports.
  8. I believe he is talking about removing the last baffle on the Rolling Thunder comp shown in this graph. As you can see baffle 3 doesn't contribute very much. There are a few people that have cut off the last port to drop some weight.
  9. I did tweak the design some to add in a little more down force to get it closer the the JP numbers. I have a blank already made up and should have the new version finished in the next few weeks.
  10. Actually I have a Nordic corvette comp on hand that I will eventually get around to modeling and posting the data. But it may be a month or so before I have time to work on it.
  11. Thanks Vanniek71. Knew it had to be easy since so many people are doing it and there wasn't any posts on it, but I didn't think it was going to be that easy.
  12. I have been playing around with this and haven't found any information on it. I am trying to embed a youtube window into a post by selecting the code icon "<>" and then pasting the information from the youtube video: <iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/ZcINxtHe9II?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> I have tried selecting the different "PHP/Generic/Auto Detect" options but I just get this text field in the post: <iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/ZcINxtHe9II?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> Would somebody please tell me how its done, Thanks.
  13. Finally got around to running a simulation on the JP "Tank" brake to add to the collection of other simulations that I have done. Video Link Actually I was a little surprised that it didn't do better in the simulation when compared to the others just because of its size. The people that use them say they work very well. The JP Brake did generate the highest amount of down force in the simulations, which may be the key to why it seems to work well to the shoots perspective. So its starting to look like down force is more important than overall recoil reduction which would explain why the Rolling Thunder comp is very popular even though its has the lowest recoil reduction numbers. I may need to do some tweaking on my comp to add some more down force and try it out.
  14. One of the first designs I started on had conical surfaces for a full 360deg with stand-off posts keeping the spacing between the baffles. Its about the most efficient design you can do but I scrapped it because of the need to shoot prone. The amount of dirt it would kick up would suck big time so I went to the more conventional design. Using curved surfaces would make it a little more efficient but probably not to the extent that you would notice the difference. I did look at ways to machine it using a rotary table but its just way easier to make with flat baffles. If I ever get a CNC mill it would be much easier to try out the more complex designs.
×
×
  • Create New...