Challenge: Achieve a distance of 70 ft.

[Silence]

I don't know how well my soon-to-come PreCharger will perform, but I'm hoping to reach 70 feet--is this too much for somebody with little experience?

Unfortunately, I won't be able to build this for a while, with SOLs, finals, etc.

[joannaardway]

I seriously doubt that your precharger will hit 70 ft.

It might come somewhereclose, but any weapon that is to achieve 70 ft would have to be specially made, and of little use on the battle field.

[Silence]

Well, I'm hoping to focus much of my attention on the nozzles that I'll use. I could use a distance one for my attempt at 70 feet and a less harmful one for wars. However, this also shows the beauty of PreCharging (I'll post it in this thread for now): because you're only doing the majority of pressurization before you fight, you have an opportunity to pump up the pressure quite a bit. Of course it will take quite a while, but I can get the pressure up as far as I want, at least for the range test. Before a battle, I won't pressurize it nearly as much, both because it will be an annoyance and because it will hurt.

Of course, I'm probably still too optimistic for my first "real" attempt at homemades...

[joannaardway]

Nozzles alone do not boost range that much - a practical soaker is not likely to be good for 70ft, even with temporary adjustments.

Good quote: "If a hole is in the wrong place, no amount of digging is going to put it in the right place" - Edward de Bono

There's no hidden meaning in putting that quote there - I've just wanted to say it somewhere.

[Silence]

Put that quote in your signature for a while if you really want to .

Well, maybe my pressure system can give me that range. As I said, the pressure can be as great as the PVC can withstand. I am going to add a cheap pressure gauge anyway to prevent cracking the PVC and losing my (future) masterpiece.

[Ben]

There are corrective design features and design features that promote distance. Using many corrective features will get nowhere near the potential of using good design in the first place. Of course, if you do design your water gun for distance and also to be a pre-charger (which is possible), you can achieve both.

The problem would be the pressure involved. While you can use very heavy pressure to attain a massive distance, that is, unsafe, and inefficient both in performance and in the amount of air used. I do not doubt at all that if you used pressure near the limits of the PVC that you will get good distance, but you can get better distance with less air and more safely. You'll appreciate pumping less as well - another advantage of efficient design.

I have been considering dividing design features in my water nozzle article into two categories, the categories of course being corrective features and utility features (if utility is the correct word). Corrective features can help, but they will be largely ineffective compared to utility features and should be avoided because their use promotes avoiding utility features.

[Silence]

I understand your point about corrective features, and I'm glad to know you continue to stand by it .

The point of PreCharging is to only require pressurization once; in a battle, that would be at any convenient time, but otherwise, it reduces annoyance at having to pump too much. Hopefully, I will only need to completely pump once, and before a battle, it won't be much harder than completely pumping a normal gun. For range purposes, it should be comparable to other pure performance guns.

Of course I plan to have a near perfect design for my PCgH, and that's why I posted the rough plans in its own thread. I appreciate all the support people have given me over there, and now, it is essentially the same as most good CPHs. It might even be better due to the slanted pump-PC connector.

[DX]

This is a question for Ben: would you consider a homemade that shoots a massive stream of water via pressurized air legal for this 70 ft contest? As in the old concept of filling a pc with water and using a schrader valve, with some design adjustments. Wouldn't this be between a gun and a launcher, since it is pressurized like a launcher, but shoots a stream like a soaker?

[Silence]

I don't care whether the soaker/launcher combo is legal; I'm just building a standard soaker. Besides, I want a battle practical weapon anyway.

Actually, a soaker/launcher combo might work wonderfully in battle... I doubt, however, that one can laminate the stream to any reasonable extent.

[DX]

There's no point in laminating the "stream" this beast produces. It is basically like shooting a fire hose for 1-3 seconds. The two new ones have not yet been completed, so I can't say what their range is, but if a regular pc got ~40ft at a negative 10 degree angle, they could get much more because they are designed just for this use.

These will not be battle practical as primaries, but they will be extremely effective side-arm/clutch situation guns. Such as a stand-off across a brook, that is when I would whip one out and send a massive stream, beyond the range of all water guns I've seen so far, into an enemy not expecting this tech. I started these just to make kills that are so complete that they could not possibly be disputed.

[Ben]

Originally Posted by Duxburian

This is a question for Ben: would you consider a homemade that shoots a massive stream of water via pressurized air legal for this 70 ft contest? As in the old concept of filling a pc with water and using a schrader valve, with some design adjustments. Wouldn't this be between a gun and a launcher, since it is pressurized like a launcher, but shoots a stream like a soaker?

If it shoots a stream of water then it's legal as far as I'm concerned. I mainly don't want to see something shooting ice or water in a container. What you've described is much like my Supercannon designs, which is exactly why I choose them. A single pressure chamber with linear flow is the way to go.

[Silence]

Duxburian (Post #24)

a regular pc got ~40ft at a negative 10 degree angle

At a negative 10 degree angle? That doesn't seem right . In addition, you could say this is more of a backup weapon, as sidearms are generally weapons that go in your weak hand and that can be accessed and shot easily. A backup is what you would normally use for specific situations, but that's me being picky again .

Ben is right: you need to make sure that this, at least, has linear flow. I know most WBLs, at least, have a 180 degree turn for compactness, but in a water launcher (WL? We need a new name!), that's only going to be harmful.

I don't think a Schrader valve is neccessary. A ball valve might do, because there isn't a need for fast opening--I'm pretty sure that's only neccessary in WBLs. Feel free to tell me if I'm wrong .

[joannaardway]

Schrader valve is the most common term used for "bike valve" in general it is only used on launchers, but things like your PCgH could use one if you wanted.

[DX]

At a negative 10 degree angle? That doesn't seem right . In addition, you could say this is more of a backup weapon, as sidearms are generally weapons that go in your weak hand and that can be accessed and shot easily. A backup is what you would normally use for specific situations, but that's me being picky again .

Ben is right: you need to make sure that this, at least, has linear flow. I know most water balloon launchers, at least, have a 180 degree turn for compactness, but in a water launcher (WL? We need a new name!), that's only going to be harmful.

I don't think a Schrader valve is neccessary. A ball valve might do, because there isn't a need for fast opening--I'm pretty sure that's only neccessary in water balloon launchers. Feel free to tell me if I'm wrong .

Yup, -10 degree angle. I used an actual pc to test my idea, and as you know, you will shoot mist if the air can't rise to the top. And since the pc was totally linear, I had to aim at a negative angle in order to have it shoot. My two in progress ones are built for this, so that is no problem and they will be fire-able from normal angles.

I would describe these more as "special use" weapons, as that is truly what they are. Backups, according to Duxburian theory, are there to replace your main gun if it should run out of water in a bad time. [Running out of pressure used to be included, but no longer should be, since with tap/pump you should never run out of pressure ever again in a non-soakfest].

This has total linear flow. With the exception of the tiny amount of water, in the upper portion of the inverted T. However, the optimal air/water ratio calls for not the whole chamber filled, so the top area should be mostly empty except for the air. Some people have asked why not use an L instead of a T. Well, the inverted T allows for more water to be shot in linear fashion. I would never use an over-under design here, that would not make any sense. You have to go in-line if you are using air pressure since you are firing a stream, not a solid projectile. The air must exit last.

A schrader valve is where you hook up a bike pump, not what you use as a trigger. It's like calling a pump and a trigger the same thing, if you go by the functions of the two items. I use screw-in metal ball valves for triggers, since they open much faster than PVC ball valves [ditch those slow things if you haven't already]. The metal valves allow for trigger-like tap shots, wheras the PVC ones are too slow for that.

[Silence]

Well, I did the trigonometry for a soaker elevation of 5 feet (shoulder-mounted?), and it actually is possible to shoot 40 feet at a negative 10 degree angle--in fact, given a straight line for the stream, you can shoot 40 feet at a negative 14 degree angle. My apologies--but you must have a pretty wicked soaker/launcher to do this with. I can't wait to hear about your versions that you can fire at 45 degrees.

Thanks for pointing out my delusion about Schrader valves (both joannaardway and Duxburian). I'll have to do some more research on that. As you can probably tell, I'm a WBL newbie. I'll also look at the metal valves you suggested. It might be just the thing I was looking for.