NZ Battle #01: 04/10/2006

Topics about water war tactics, water war planning, and past water war stories.
Locked
Neongreen
Posts: 33
Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2005 5:32 am

NZ Battle #01: 04/10/2006

Post by Neongreen » Wed Oct 04, 2006 1:40 am

Note date is in DD/MM/YYYY format.

This was mostly just a test for my homemade water gun. I brought my Krypton, Argon, and the homemade for a quick amount of water fighting.

We had a small 1v2 game(Homemade + Argon vs Krypton). This was a good test, and showed that the MWC:S is not a proper gun; it's range(which is alright at peak) drops off wayy too fast, and it can't maintain enough pressure for more than 10 seconds of shot time. I am halting the design of that, and building a MWC:HW, which will feature RangeBoost level I tech - level II isn't able to be implemented yet, because it requires machine tooling.

The final score was 2-2. We were playing 1hk on a downhill slope. It had recently been raining, so the ground was incredibly slippery!

The main problem was, while I had the heavier gun, the air/water pressurization technique that the Krypton and Argon use yield the same range. This actually put me at a disadvantage, since mobility was a large key factor in this. I could not attack, because they would have greater range due to my running towards them. In addition, I don't think my gun was pressurized properly!(Darnit.)

I would post what happened, but it was a 10 minute match. After that, it devolved into a free for all soakfest.

Next match will have 6+ people.

User avatar
DX
Posts: 1780
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 1:00 pm

Post by DX » Wed Oct 04, 2006 3:12 am

and showed that the MWC:S is not a proper gun; it's range(which is alright at peak) drops off wayy too fast, and it can't maintain enough pressure for more than 10 seconds of shot time.
We were playing 1hk on a downhill slope
Shot time is not, or at least should not, be much of a factor in 1HK. 10 seconds is plenty. My average shot time in a typical 1HK game is a fraction of a second, regardless of the gun. That's all you need. Your gun is perfectly suited to the Tap/Pump strategy, that is, if it is reliable [noting the pressurization issue].

Your running toward them should have little, if any, impact on range. If anything, it should give you momentum. In water wars, the defense has the upper hand in ambushing, but the offense has the initiative. It doesn't sound like your enemies are making full use of the capabilities of the defense. The initiative can be of great help to you. Get a lead, then force your enemies to fight in areas which are favorable to you, such as an area where mobility doesn't matter, such as a group of cars, trees, or other close cover. Make them pay for the lead. If you refuse to attack and react to them, you are giving away the initiative and therefore shouldn't expect more than a tie. You can only win if you play to win, turning your problems into assets.
Mess With the Best, Get Soaked Like the Rest!

2004 Red Sox - World Series Champions
2007 Red Sox - World Series Champions!

Neongreen
Posts: 33
Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2005 5:32 am

Post by Neongreen » Wed Oct 04, 2006 3:48 am

Thanks for the tips;
However,
There was no way I could attack to defend(If you know what I mean). If I ran close enough to shoot, he just needed to stand there and press the trigger, which definitely outdistanced my Krypton(Argon Vs Krypton). I was experiencing extreme misting(Probably because of an improperly fulled tank), which killed the water flow completely, dropping my range to 10 feet. If only I had my old CPS 1500 >.<.

It also was not ambushing, we moved out into the open. However, my choice of clothing/shoes was inappropriate too, resulting in my attentions being divided between the fighting and trying not to slide. (Alas, I wasn't too successful! I'm still covered in some mud...)

New Zealand is chronic for having five seasons in one day. In the space of an hour, we had blinding sunlight, cold winds, cold winds + rain, sunlight + rain... When I say the ground was wet, I don't mean the grass was wet. The actual topsoil had been saturated and reduced to mud. Next waterfight will be in summer, so the ground should be dried.



Although, I did have great fun. There was a shelter nearby(With a single tap in one of the three enclosures). I didn't have a tap key thing to open the tap(It was a security tap), so we were using a spanner to open and close it. Since I was using my homemade at the time, I got the central enclosure. I didn't even bother with my homemade, and went straight to the waterballoons(Using several techniques/configurations I'd developed to make them more vicious).

Until I ran out. The tap was in a wide, open place, with the other two people fighting each other, I was busy fulling up a water balloon - when they decided to gang up against me. So what did I do? I grabbed the spanner, and ran into the enclosure, closing the inner door. Now, this is a shower/toliet style door, it's really vulnerable to fire from outside. I threw the spanner BEHIND the building - there was a gap between the wall and roof, and climbed my sorry self out of there.

They ganged up and prosued me for atleast 200m, but of course, I had the spanner, so it became a ceasefire and ended the game.

User avatar
SSCBen
Posts: 6449
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2003 1:00 pm

Post by SSCBen » Wed Oct 04, 2006 10:55 am

I am halting the design of that, and building a MWC:HW, which will feature RangeBoost level I tech - level II isn't able to be implemented yet, because it requires machine tooling.
What is RangeBoost technology? I don't care about the level. The way you present it is mysterious, but I really have doubts about simply because you don't say anything about how it works. I feel that we know essentially all that can be done in making a water gun shoot further. Does it work? How much does it increase range?

Neongreen
Posts: 33
Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2005 5:32 am

Post by Neongreen » Wed Oct 04, 2006 8:18 pm

RangeBoost I involves using air pressure & LRT. Air is compressed, and water is pumped into LRT. Then, air is released while the water is being shot out the nozzle. The LRT/PC must be mounted at a slight downwards angle.

This will either:
1. Fail completely, letting the air flow out the nozzle and therefore KILLING the range.
2. Work like a charm, providing additional push on the water.

You can see why I wanted to test it first >.<

User avatar
SSCBen
Posts: 6449
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2003 1:00 pm

Post by SSCBen » Wed Oct 04, 2006 9:59 pm

That shouldn't have much of an effect, and it if does, it won't have a good one. That will at worst disrupt the stream completely. At best it will just expand the LRT further which means no performance increase, just an increase in stress on the tubing. The additional air pressure will just expand the rubber. Rubber based CPS systems operate on the elasticity of the rubber, not pressure.

To go off on a big tangent...

You're on the right track. What will increase range is increasing the force on the water. You can add additional layers of rubber and get more force. You can use more pressure over a larger surface area and get more force. My approximation for range based upon force in an efficient design is the equation range = 8.3 * force ^ 0.3 . That equation is fairly accurate for ranges of 0 to 70 feet. I intend to do thorough testing to make a more accurate equation soon, but given the temperature that will have to be put on the back-burner.

Next comes forming a good stream. You can't get good range without a nicely formed stream.

Ideally the flow from the pressure chamber to the nozzle will be in a straight, unobstructed line. Ball valves are good for straight and unobstructed. Air pressure isn't perfect for straight flow, but with a piston it is. Rubber tubing is great for straight flow.

Nozzles are important too. The orifice must be the correct size for the force at the nozzle. Too large a nozzle and the velocity will be too slow to get good range. Too small a nozzle and the stream will be affected by drag much more, for both the reason that the stream is traveling faster and that there is less water in the stream. The nozzle also ideally will slowly reduce to the size of the orifice to prevent force lost to turbulent flow.

After that is the experimental stuff or expensive stuff. Shielding the stream from drag is a rarely discussed idea, but it is possible with either a puff or air or a vacuum around the stream. How effective any shielding will be is debatable without any tests. Glycerin and other additives can increase the viscosity of the water (how well it sticks together), but is relatively expensive compared to tap water gun. Other nozzle features such as straighteners might obstruct the stream in a high-performance water gun.

I could keep going, but I'm already slated to write a 10,000 word section on increasing range anyway. You can look at my most powerful water gun too (not on SSC yet). I'm also working on Supercannon III now that should have at least 85 feet of range given that my conservative estimation for force vs. range is not too high (and I do consider that a problem because I honestly have no idea how much more force is necessary for 10 more feet of range).

What's Rangeboost II?

Neongreen
Posts: 33
Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2005 5:32 am

Post by Neongreen » Wed Oct 04, 2006 10:08 pm

Ahh, you see? Why I wanted to test :) Would've cost me nothing.

RBII involves having a object inside of the LRT which is some sort of very stretchy material, possibly a single layer of innertube. This is then inflated with said air.

RBI & RBII are really meant to work together, but unfortunately, this isn't too possible atm.

User avatar
SSCBen
Posts: 6449
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2003 1:00 pm

Post by SSCBen » Wed Oct 04, 2006 11:06 pm

RangeBoost II wouldn't work either. It just would cause the LRT to expand more. Again, that is due to the fact that nothing in the LRT really pressurizes because any pressure created expands due to the elasticity of the rubber.

It would be much better to use more layers. Keep thinking of ideas though.

Neongreen
Posts: 33
Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2005 5:32 am

Post by Neongreen » Wed Oct 04, 2006 11:08 pm

Did I forget to mention it would have a PVC covering over the main body?

User avatar
Silence
Posts: 3825
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2006 9:01 pm

Post by Silence » Thu Oct 05, 2006 2:08 am

Sounds like an interesting battle, and RangeBoost seems at the least very creative. As Ben says, though, you can't go wrong with more layers. If I ever get the chance to make a CPH, it would have as many layers as possible, and perhaps with a 3/8" pump.

User avatar
SSCBen
Posts: 6449
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2003 1:00 pm

Post by SSCBen » Thu Oct 05, 2006 10:37 am

Neongreen wrote:Did I forget to mention it would have a PVC covering over the main body?
That wouldn't make a difference really. That and RangeBoost II by it's nature is going to be hard to make and even harder to repair. You will need to eventually switch the rubber. You also won't get substantially more force from either proposition. Containing the chamber would get more force, but that's like squeezing a balloon and I wouldn't recommend it.

User avatar
Silence
Posts: 3825
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2006 9:01 pm

Post by Silence » Thu Oct 05, 2006 11:08 pm

Plus you'd lose the lack of dropoff found in CPS-type guns. And anyway, if you did want "RangeBoost", I'd suggest a regular CPH with a sealed-but-removable case, into which a Schrader valve and bike pump could add high-pressured air. That would be easier, and like a Semi PreCharger Homemade/PostCharger Homemade.

EDIT: Hmm...I was under the impression that the gun couldn't be used for tap/pump at all. I thought it fills using the hose.
Last edited by Silence on Thu Oct 05, 2006 11:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Locked