Meat Target Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 (edited) 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. Edited November 9, 2014 by Meat Target Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonytheTiger Posted November 10, 2014 Share Posted November 10, 2014 Oh baby, your fancy graphs and videos are getting me all hot and bothered. Even if I'm not entirely sure how they correlate to what my shoulder feels while shooting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vlad Posted November 10, 2014 Share Posted November 10, 2014 I don't think anyone is bored of your videos. I think we would all rather see you crank out data for EVERY comp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Therealkoop Posted November 10, 2014 Share Posted November 10, 2014 With all that downforce its no wonder its called a corvette Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmiller Posted November 10, 2014 Share Posted November 10, 2014 Dammit, I want solidworks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonytheTiger Posted November 10, 2014 Share Posted November 10, 2014 Or should it be called the Exige? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonytheTiger Posted November 10, 2014 Share Posted November 10, 2014 Now do the Carbon Arms Gas Hog! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRUBL Posted November 10, 2014 Share Posted November 10, 2014 Those holes should be tapped Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenDragon64 Posted November 10, 2014 Share Posted November 10, 2014 Tapped? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonytheTiger Posted November 10, 2014 Share Posted November 10, 2014 Tapped, as in threaded to allow you to screw a plug in to adjust the downforce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenDragon64 Posted November 10, 2014 Share Posted November 10, 2014 Hmmm... I have this comp on my dissipator and haven't run it in a match. I'll have to see how it does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PacMan Posted November 10, 2014 Share Posted November 10, 2014 Those holes should be tapped +1 With the expansion chamber (vs brakes without) the top jet is much more efficient so 1 would probably be more than adequate. The rolling thunder is an example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
afletcher1965 Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 So I'm guessing that you want less forward force to reduce recoil and more downward force to reduce muzzle rise? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonytheTiger Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 More baffle surface perpendicular to the bore is where the recoil reduction comes from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Therealkoop Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Its cool to see how greater size doesn't always correlate to greater performance. Im sure you are probably at the point where you dont have to model stuff to guesstimate the results. Next time I see you around give me a rundown on the seekins Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OPENB Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Still amazed at what a good comp the Miculek is for $39. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonytheTiger Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Still amazed at what a good comp the Miculek is for $39. Yup, 90% of the performance for 40% of the price of the big names. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Therealkoop Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 I dont know how much it matters but the miculek is a lot "smoother" on those charts as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HotLoad Posted November 15, 2014 Share Posted November 15, 2014 +1 for the Miculek. I would also like to see the gas hog. I know Mark put a high priority on makin it efficient. J Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vespid_Wasp Posted November 15, 2014 Share Posted November 15, 2014 Those holes should be tapped I tapped the center hole and added a screw because I noticed my muzzle dipping. Smoothed it right out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC730 Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 Anyone know of any free open source software that is capable of creating these models? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkCO Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 No, and the output of even good programs is not exact, but an approximation that may, or may not transfer to the real world performance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meat Target Posted November 25, 2014 Author Share Posted November 25, 2014 Now do the Carbon Arms Gas Hog! Thats one of two comps that I don't think I would ever post the results of in this fourm for obvios reasons... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonytheTiger Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Hmm, you'll have to enlighten me as to what the obvious reasons are. If it's offending a particular forum contributor/muzzle brake designer, I'd like to think that any engineering type of guy would be open to seeing an honest analysis of a product, for better or worse. Although I could see any designer stepping in and stating that such an analysis doesn't necessarily equate to a whole lot in the real world and could vary greatly depending on the bio mechanics of the person using it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoganbillJ Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 (edited) Could be wrong but I believe Mark did a bunch of these tests himself before arriving at his final design. Personally, I would like to see both the Seekins ATC and Gas Hog in the line up. Edited November 25, 2014 by LoganbillJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now