Recent thoughts on water gun design
Posted: Sat Jan 17, 2009 4:53 am
I've been thinking a bit over the past few months about water gun design. This year I will have access to rapid prototyping equipment, be able to use engineering analysis and CAD effectively, and have a more real job so I can afford more, so I'm rather excited. What was unachievable before is very achievable now. I'll explain some of my thoughts on my next water gun concept. Any comments would be appreciated.
Range: Capable of at least 65 feet. Typically gets about 60 feet without issue.
Nozzles: Rotating nozzle assembly made with rapid prototyping equipment.
Water reservoir: Polycarbonate water jug--strong, light, clear, available in reasonable sizes, and not too expensive.
Pressure chamber: LPD with a pressure ratio of at least 70%. Water pipe is 3 inch clear PVC. Air chamber is 4 inch normal PVC. Will have pressure gauge and schrader valve for bike pump.
Valve and trigger: At the moment I'm thinking of using an air cylinder to open a ball valve like 6061's water gun. This has some advantages and some disadvantages. The biggest disadvantages would be cost and that using the trigger would use air. But, the trigger always would be easy to operate and the valve would open very quickly. With a pressure regulator the air usage can be minimized, but that adds more cost to an already costly system. I'm still thinking about this. If I can make some sort of trigger actuated gate valve with rapid prototyping equipment that would be ideal.
Frame: Will be made of polycarbonate pieces cut somewhat like THR (which still hasn't been completed), and 6061's water gun. This basically would be slices like THR with a solid bar at the bottom to attach a handle and the pump.
Pump: The seal assembly will be made with rapid prototyping equipment. I'd like to experiment with some atypical pumps like dual-action pumps but that might not happen.
The main problem with what I've described is that it'll be expensive as hell. This might be a $300 water gun. But it'd be an extremely good water gun, which is all that matters (other than having fun building it of course).
I'd like to investigate water gun efficiency so I have to pump less to get a certain level of performance. Simply energy efficiency might not make too much sense because the vast majority of the input energy would be returned. Or maybe not. I haven't looked into it yet.
Range: Capable of at least 65 feet. Typically gets about 60 feet without issue.
Nozzles: Rotating nozzle assembly made with rapid prototyping equipment.
Water reservoir: Polycarbonate water jug--strong, light, clear, available in reasonable sizes, and not too expensive.
Pressure chamber: LPD with a pressure ratio of at least 70%. Water pipe is 3 inch clear PVC. Air chamber is 4 inch normal PVC. Will have pressure gauge and schrader valve for bike pump.
Valve and trigger: At the moment I'm thinking of using an air cylinder to open a ball valve like 6061's water gun. This has some advantages and some disadvantages. The biggest disadvantages would be cost and that using the trigger would use air. But, the trigger always would be easy to operate and the valve would open very quickly. With a pressure regulator the air usage can be minimized, but that adds more cost to an already costly system. I'm still thinking about this. If I can make some sort of trigger actuated gate valve with rapid prototyping equipment that would be ideal.
Frame: Will be made of polycarbonate pieces cut somewhat like THR (which still hasn't been completed), and 6061's water gun. This basically would be slices like THR with a solid bar at the bottom to attach a handle and the pump.
Pump: The seal assembly will be made with rapid prototyping equipment. I'd like to experiment with some atypical pumps like dual-action pumps but that might not happen.
The main problem with what I've described is that it'll be expensive as hell. This might be a $300 water gun. But it'd be an extremely good water gun, which is all that matters (other than having fun building it of course).
I'd like to investigate water gun efficiency so I have to pump less to get a certain level of performance. Simply energy efficiency might not make too much sense because the vast majority of the input energy would be returned. Or maybe not. I haven't looked into it yet.