Super Soaker Central forums

Lt.Winters · 07-02-2006, 12:53 AM

I believe there's one aspect you all missed here that you should of thought of before conducting tests:

Safety tests or anything like that. I'm sure a super soaker (classified as a "toy") that could damage the eye at 20 feet wouldn't pass going through the safety tests.
If his story was plausible then this is how it could of went:

He fires a volley of water into her face, she whines because she feels to force of the stream and some water got in her eyes.

Or he did it point blank instead and the same thing happens but the girl cries instead.

Ben · 07-02-2006, 07:18 AM

Yes they do have safety tests. But in reality, they don't make the water guns dangerous to begin with. At 20 feet, most water guns couldn't do any damage. At 20 feet, a water jet cutter wouldn't cut anything. There's too much opportunity for the stream to break up. No water gun can hurt someone at 20 feet unless it is shooting a fire hose sized and powered stream, and at that point the damage is bruising, not cutting or bursting.

That's why these tests will be done point blank. I'll use one eye for a water gun about as powerful as the CPS 2000 with the same nozzle size. The other eye will get a higher pressure treatment with a much smaller nozzle size - essentially a low power water jet cutter. The problem with the CPS 2000 in this myth is that its nozzle is way too big to get the pressure necessary to harm someone's eye.

isoaker_com · 07-02-2006, 10:40 AM

As Ben noted, safety tests are done pretty much at blank ranges on cadavers to look at possible eye damage. Sure, this is an unlikely scenario is most common water wars, but being a toy, the safety commissions have to look at fairly uncommon, yet possible things kids may attempt with a toy. "Hey, Billy, you think you're strong enough to take this one in the face? Dare ya!"

"The problem with the CPS 2000 in this myth is that it's nozzle is way too big to get the pressure necessary to harm someone's eye."

As for the CPS2000 not being about to do eye damage, I'd lean towards more likely capable of doing damage at point blank range. The large nozzle will mean it won't cut, but the sheer force of water pushed out (~3/4 to 1L per second) is a lot more mass in motion than a person's eyeball. Maybe it wouldn't crush an eyeball, but it has a good possibility to displace it (something I'd rather not think about, though.)

Soaker Leader · 10-18-2006, 12:20 PM

Sure this thread is months old, but I think submitting it to mythbuster would be really cool. It has a great potenial and its possible they could take it =]. Maybe if the Cps 2000 coulden't knock out a pigs eye, then they would make there own homemade soaker to see if that would work=]. Thats usally how the mythbusters go about things... If one way doesn't work they try another!

Anybody willing to submit it to there forums?

-SL

Ben · 10-18-2006, 04:03 PM

The CPS 2000 myth was submitted to MythBusters three times:

http://community.discovery.com/eve/f...06?r=620101406
http://community.discovery.com/eve/f...06?r=844100306
http://community.discoverychannel.ca...31/m/934108141

None of the posts got much notice. There's much better and more credible myths as well. The simple fact of the matter is that the CPS 2000 myth is not true and is only the product of someone's overactive imagination and strange feeling that the CPS 2000's status needs further justification. People love to exaggerate the CPS 2000's statistics. If I exaggerate my homemade water guns' statistics on the level that most exaggerate the CPS 2000's, I would have over 100 feet of range and 20,000X output.

I doubt you would be able to blow someone's eye up with a CPS 2000. It will undoubtably be unpleasant. However, the nozzle is far too large to cause damage. The nozzle is about 5/16 inches in diameter from what I know. Far too large to cause any damage at at CPS 2000 level of power, which would be 300 - 400 pounds of force at most. Supercannon II on the other hand has over 1200 pounds of force on a nozzle only 3/16 inches wider. That's a velocity of over 30 m/s from a 1/2 inch wide nozzle.

The velocity is important to get the nozzle pressure and cutting ability. Pressure cuts. You want higher pressure for that reason. Smaller nozzles would be what would cause an eye to be cut for that reason. I've said this multiple times as well.

Of course, I'm quite sure that if I shot someone in the eye with Supercannon II, they probably wouldn't be living any longer from simple brain hemorrhage. Their eye won't stop over a gallon of water in a jet. Don't quote me on that though.

After watching MythBusters for several years, I'm convinced that they don't actually have any idea what they are doing on most myths. I don't think they'll be able to make any water cannon on par with anything most of us do. They'll probably simply by a high-flow water pump if they do try this myth.

Silence · 10-18-2006, 09:33 PM

Way too little credibility, just think about it. And once you accept that this is a lie and not a myth, then there's no hope. That said, there has been discussion concerning the potential damage of a homemade--such as the brain hemorrhage [really weird word] that Ben suggested could occur. Not because we don't know whether or not it is possible, but for popularity's sake.

Perhaps, just perhaps, they don't know what they're doing--but it's fun to watch, and it's rare show that many people I know have seen and like over other types of shows. I didn't realize it's been there for so long. But in general, the show is at least sometimes interesting--such as the newspaper crossbow. But other situations, such as the question of whether or not a passing truck can flip over a car, were just butchered. And then there was the lame attempt to get a human to go over the top of a swing. Just think!

joannaardway · 10-19-2006, 04:35 AM

Every myth/legend has an element of truth. If it doesn't then it's simply not a myth, it's a fallacy or a lie.

I could imagine that the CPS 2000 myth (which it probably is) originated with one kid getting hit in the face, and running to mummy (possibly with slightly blurred vision, maybe because of water in their eyes).

Mummy (not knowing the exact effects) goes and sees the other kid's parents using the line "could have taken his eye out".

That could easily result in a complaint, which like "chinese whispers" gets distorted down the line.

It's probably "slightly" true, but has been blown out of proportion.

The comments about mythbusters are mostly true. Being a spudder as well as a water warrior, I know how appalling some of their "cannons" are. I could probably easily out do some of their poor constructions and beat their sometimes edgy science.

Their method of experimentation is also sometimes annoying.

"Oh, look it didn't get destroyed - let's fill it to the brim with explosives!" - fun, but not scientific.

If it didn't get destroyed, then you should slowly experiment to find out when it fails. When it does crack, or whatever, then you can blast it to smithereens.

But, then again, it's still fun to watch.

Soaker Leader · 10-19-2006, 06:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joannaardway

Every myth/legend has an element of truth. If it doesn't then it's simply not a myth, it's a fallacy or a lie.

I could imagine that the CPS 2000 myth (which it probably is) originated with one kid getting hit in the face, and running to mummy (possibly with slightly blurred vision, maybe because of water in their eyes).

Mummy (not knowing the exact effects) goes and sees the other kid's parents using the line "could have taken his eye out".

That could easily result in a complaint, which like "chinese whispers" gets distorted down the line.

It's probably "slightly" true, but has been blown out of proportion.

The comments about mythbusters are mostly true. Being a spudder as well as a water warrior, I know how appalling some of their "cannons" are. I could probably easily out do some of their poor constructions and beat their sometimes edgy science.

Their method of experimentation is also sometimes annoying.

"Oh, look it didn't get destroyed - let's fill it to the brim with explosives!" - fun, but not scientific.

If it didn't get destroyed, then you should slowly experiment to find out when it fails. When it does crack, or whatever, then you can blast it to smithereens.

But, then again, it's still fun to watch.

Haha, that was with the big blowing up wood cannon right?

Hehehe

Sorry about that Ben, I didn't know it had already been submitted before =\. About your Supercannon, the videos and pictures were awesome =]. Its amazing we have finnaly hit the 70+ foot mark! Can't wait for a site update with instructions for something like the SuperCannon models =].

-SL

joannaardway · 10-20-2006, 04:27 AM

The wood cannon, the trombone mute thing, the cement trucks (that was totally awesome), etc.

If it didn't go wrong the first time, slowly increase the charge to find out where the line really is drawn. That way it's good experimentation, and it's more conclusive.

07-02-2006, 12:53 AM	#16
Lt.Winters Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 20 UserID: 460	I believe there's one aspect you all missed here that you should of thought of before conducting tests: Safety tests or anything like that. I'm sure a super soaker (classified as a "toy") that could damage the eye at 20 feet wouldn't pass going through the safety tests. If his story was plausible then this is how it could of went: He fires a volley of water into her face, she whines because she feels to force of the stream and some water got in her eyes. Or he did it point blank instead and the same thing happens but the girl cries instead. __________________ "In better days that lie ahead, men will speak with pride of our doings." --Gen. Monty

07-02-2006, 07:18 AM	#17
Ben Founder Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Maryland Posts: 5,974 UserID: 1	Yes they do have safety tests. But in reality, they don't make the water guns dangerous to begin with. At 20 feet, most water guns couldn't do any damage. At 20 feet, a water jet cutter wouldn't cut anything. There's too much opportunity for the stream to break up. No water gun can hurt someone at 20 feet unless it is shooting a fire hose sized and powered stream, and at that point the damage is bruising, not cutting or bursting. That's why these tests will be done point blank. I'll use one eye for a water gun about as powerful as the CPS 2000 with the same nozzle size. The other eye will get a higher pressure treatment with a much smaller nozzle size - essentially a low power water jet cutter. The problem with the CPS 2000 in this myth is that its nozzle is way too big to get the pressure necessary to harm someone's eye. __________________ email: ben at sscentral dot org / Forum rules Read this page before emailing me. Do not send me a PM or email with a water gun question if someone else could answer the question. Post at the forums. You will get a response from me along with others' views or ideas. Do not send me a PM or email about reading a certain post unless it's been a few days since you've posted. I try to read every post. Last edited by Ben : 07-02-2006 at 10:50 AM. Reason: Wrong use of its.

07-02-2006, 10:40 AM	#18
isoaker_com Super Moderator Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Somewhere Posts: 250 UserID: 301	As Ben noted, safety tests are done pretty much at blank ranges on cadavers to look at possible eye damage. Sure, this is an unlikely scenario is most common water wars, but being a toy, the safety commissions have to look at fairly uncommon, yet possible things kids may attempt with a toy. "Hey, Billy, you think you're strong enough to take this one in the face? Dare ya!" "The problem with the CPS 2000 in this myth is that it's nozzle is way too big to get the pressure necessary to harm someone's eye." As for the CPS2000 not being about to do eye damage, I'd lean towards more likely capable of doing damage at point blank range. The large nozzle will mean it won't cut, but the sheer force of water pushed out (~3/4 to 1L per second) is a lot more mass in motion than a person's eyeball. Maybe it wouldn't crush an eyeball, but it has a good possibility to displace it (something I'd rather not think about, though.) __________________ :: Leave NO one dry! :: iSoaker.com ::

10-18-2006, 04:03 PM	#20
Ben Founder Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Maryland Posts: 5,974 UserID: 1	The CPS 2000 myth was submitted to MythBusters three times: http://community.discovery.com/eve/f...06?r=620101406 http://community.discovery.com/eve/f...06?r=844100306 http://community.discoverychannel.ca...31/m/934108141 None of the posts got much notice. There's much better and more credible myths as well. The simple fact of the matter is that the CPS 2000 myth is not true and is only the product of someone's overactive imagination and strange feeling that the CPS 2000's status needs further justification. People love to exaggerate the CPS 2000's statistics. If I exaggerate my homemade water guns' statistics on the level that most exaggerate the CPS 2000's, I would have over 100 feet of range and 20,000X output. I doubt you would be able to blow someone's eye up with a CPS 2000. It will undoubtably be unpleasant. However, the nozzle is far too large to cause damage. The nozzle is about 5/16 inches in diameter from what I know. Far too large to cause any damage at at CPS 2000 level of power, which would be 300 - 400 pounds of force at most. Supercannon II on the other hand has over 1200 pounds of force on a nozzle only 3/16 inches wider. That's a velocity of over 30 m/s from a 1/2 inch wide nozzle. The velocity is important to get the nozzle pressure and cutting ability. Pressure cuts. You want higher pressure for that reason. Smaller nozzles would be what would cause an eye to be cut for that reason. I've said this multiple times as well. Of course, I'm quite sure that if I shot someone in the eye with Supercannon II, they probably wouldn't be living any longer from simple brain hemorrhage. Their eye won't stop over a gallon of water in a jet. Don't quote me on that though. After watching MythBusters for several years, I'm convinced that they don't actually have any idea what they are doing on most myths. I don't think they'll be able to make any water cannon on par with anything most of us do. They'll probably simply by a high-flow water pump if they do try this myth. __________________ email: ben at sscentral dot org / Forum rules Read this page before emailing me. Do not send me a PM or email with a water gun question if someone else could answer the question. Post at the forums. You will get a response from me along with others' views or ideas. Do not send me a PM or email about reading a certain post unless it's been a few days since you've posted. I try to read every post. Last edited by Ben : 10-19-2006 at 05:47 AM.

10-18-2006, 09:33 PM	#21
Silence Administrator Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Virginia Posts: 3,246 UserID: 576	Way too little credibility, just think about it. And once you accept that this is a lie and not a myth, then there's no hope. That said, there has been discussion concerning the potential damage of a homemade--such as the brain hemorrhage [really weird word] that Ben suggested could occur. Not because we don't know whether or not it is possible, but for popularity's sake. Perhaps, just perhaps, they don't know what they're doing--but it's fun to watch, and it's rare show that many people I know have seen and like over other types of shows. I didn't realize it's been there for so long. But in general, the show is at least sometimes interesting--such as the newspaper crossbow. But other situations, such as the question of whether or not a passing truck can flip over a car, were just butchered. And then there was the lame attempt to get a human to go over the top of a swing. Just think! __________________ Forum Rules

10-18-2006, 12:20 PM	#19
Soaker Leader He who comes back... Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Apple Vally, Minnesota Posts: 228 UserID: 290	Sure this thread is months old, but I think submitting it to mythbuster would be really cool. It has a great potenial and its possible they could take it =]. Maybe if the Cps 2000 coulden't knock out a pigs eye, then they would make there own homemade soaker to see if that would work=]. Thats usally how the mythbusters go about things... If one way doesn't work they try another! Anybody willing to submit it to there forums? -SL

10-19-2006, 04:35 AM	#22
joannaardway Do not adjust your TV set Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: SW Hertfordshire, England Posts: 875 UserID: 549	Every myth/legend has an element of truth. If it doesn't then it's simply not a myth, it's a fallacy or a lie. I could imagine that the CPS 2000 myth (which it probably is) originated with one kid getting hit in the face, and running to mummy (possibly with slightly blurred vision, maybe because of water in their eyes). Mummy (not knowing the exact effects) goes and sees the other kid's parents using the line "could have taken his eye out". That could easily result in a complaint, which like "chinese whispers" gets distorted down the line. It's probably "slightly" true, but has been blown out of proportion. The comments about mythbusters are mostly true. Being a spudder as well as a water warrior, I know how appalling some of their "cannons" are. I could probably easily out do some of their poor constructions and beat their sometimes edgy science. Their method of experimentation is also sometimes annoying. "Oh, look it didn't get destroyed - let's fill it to the brim with explosives!" - fun, but not scientific. If it didn't get destroyed, then you should slowly experiment to find out when it fails. When it does crack, or whatever, then you can blast it to smithereens. But, then again, it's still fun to watch. __________________ "Over the hills and far away, she prays he will return one day. As sure as the rivers reach the seas, back in his arms again she'll be." - Over the Hills and far away, Gary Moore "So many people have come and gone, their faces fade as the years go by. Yet I still recall as I wander on, as clear as the sun in the summer sky" - More than a feeling, Boston

10-20-2006, 04:27 AM	#24
joannaardway Do not adjust your TV set Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: SW Hertfordshire, England Posts: 875 UserID: 549	The wood cannon, the trombone mute thing, the cement trucks (that was totally awesome), etc. If it didn't go wrong the first time, slowly increase the charge to find out where the line really is drawn. That way it's good experimentation, and it's more conclusive. __________________ "Over the hills and far away, she prays he will return one day. As sure as the rivers reach the seas, back in his arms again she'll be." - Over the Hills and far away, Gary Moore "So many people have come and gone, their faces fade as the years go by. Yet I still recall as I wander on, as clear as the sun in the summer sky" - More than a feeling, Boston

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)