Page 238 of 418 FirstFirst ... 138188228236237238239240248288338 ... LastLast
Results 2,371 to 2,380 of 4172

Thread: The OT thread V1

  1. #2371
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,581
    Quote Originally Posted by Lurker27 View Post
    a face seat could be actuated by sliding, which would not constitute a poppet (nor spool) valve - as the linear motion normal to the valve surface wouldn't be present.
    You mean a gate valve? (Planar motion)

    @ Simon - my answer is "yes." Plot the valve rate (% flow and distance) and look at look at the really low-lift attributes. They're different and the compromise is distance to max flow. I have a hard time believing that you can change the seal geometry of any poppet gun design and not affect the perfomance without adjusting throw to accomodate the additional cross-sectional distance you have to overcome with a radial seal. Almost the entire firing characteristic of the gun boils down to how this single valve performs. All supporting sub-systems converge here as well.
    Last edited by ironyusa; 10-04-2017 at 04:33 PM.

  2. #2372
    Insider PBSteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    3,084
    Quote Originally Posted by Simon View Post
    Thinking that just one seal in a whole system defines the system... seems to be an injustice to the system.
    I believe that was John's point, that we call a gun a "spool gun" or a "poppet gun" based only on the valve. Using the main valve to characterize the rest of the marker doesn't get you very far.

    Buuut that said, I also feel that the difference in the fluid dynamics between how a radial seal and a face seal flow, especially at low lifts, are significant enough to warrant the distinction between spool type valve and poppet type valve. Characterizing the flow through the primary valve is what's what's important for us in paintball anyway.

    Definitions of spool vs. poppet that don't account for the type of seal at the primary valve miss the point in my view.
    Last edited by PBSteve; 10-04-2017 at 04:20 PM.
    Ever so many citizens of this republic think they ought to believe that the Universe is a monarchy, and therefore they are always at odds with the republic. -Alan Watts

    I work for the company building the Paragon

  3. #2373
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,581
    Quote Originally Posted by PBSteve View Post
    I believe that was John's point, that we call a gun a "spool gun" or a "poppet gun" based only on the valve. Using the main valve to characterize the rest of the marker doesn't get you very far.

    Buuut that said, I also feel that the difference in the fluid dynamics between how a radial seal and a face seal flow, especially at low lifts, are significant enough to warrant the distinction between spool type valve and poppet type valve. Characterizing the flow through the primary valve is what's what's important for us in paintball anyway.

    Definitions of spool vs. poppet that don't account for the type of seal at the primary valve miss the point in my view.
    This.

    This conversation is like arguing religion and has such deeply rooted traditions it's hard to imagine we'll all ever agree.

  4. #2374
    So if the motion of a spool makes a face seal release it's a poppet gun (Axe and Mike Woods)? And if a hammer impact were to make a spool move out of a bore it would be a spool gun (Alien morph valve)?

    So if we put a Morph valve into an Autococker does it become a spool valve gun? So we could start doing that and selling Autocockers as the latest and greatest spool valve guns?

  5. #2375
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,581
    Quote Originally Posted by Simon View Post
    So if we put a Morph valve into an Autococker does it become a spool valve gun? So we could start doing that and selling Autocockers as the latest and greatest spool valve guns?
    No, because the morph valve is an idiotic application for a radial seal in the first place. It has NO practical benefit over a balanced poppet (lurker control freak). The rest of the autococker system doesn't constitute "greatest" by any definition either.

    The ego also uses a spool to make the face seal release. The parts are decoupled...

  6. #2376
    Insider
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Knoxville, TN
    Posts
    2,303
    a face seat could be actuated by sliding, which would not constitute a poppet (nor spool) valve - as the linear motion normal to the valve surface wouldn't be present.
    Oh, yes. No disagreement there.

    However, your claim that a poppet valve constitutes a multitude of components is, per my reading of the ISO spec incorrect.
    Ah...but:

    Take apart the definition of a valve again.

    "An artefact class that contains classes of artefacts"
    A human made type of part that contains types of parts made by humans.

    It is a series of man made parts connected into one object. Not just one part, an assembly, hence, 2 parts or more. And 2 is a multitude. So read this again:

    ...claim that a poppet valve constitutes a multitude of components is
    Correct.

    Because a valve isn't one part. It can't be.

    The opposite of Multitude is Single. A single part.

    A physical object that is the part of a valve
    Would mean that.... the valve constitute more than one feature, or dare I quote it "Part"

    Note this also:

    disc type plug closure member
    would be, a separate part.

    I would counter and say, with ISO definitions, that it is very clear that a valve constitutes more than 1 part.

    Here is the part that ruins the logic though. You quoted, from ISO:

    "....intended to be used to control, i.e. permit, obstruct or regulate a fluid stream."

    Now - if there is only 1 Part.... that means it can not move, or change. It is static. It is solid. Unless something like magic suddenly became the new controller for automation. You might argue a valve has features, yet is a singular part. BUT:

    You would actually have to have more than 1 part to do any sort of control. It has to move or adjust. Something has to open or close. And you can't do that with just one part... which is your claim.

    So.... why take the position that a valve is only a singular part? That is illogical. It is obvious from both ISO and from simple deduction that a single part component would not constitute a valve.

    But hey, let's look on ISO.org for a (quick google) Piloted Pressure Safety Valve?
    #Ithinkyoulostthisargument
    "main valve - parts of a pilot operated safety valve, through which the discharge capacity is achieved"

    https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:...:-4:ed-2:v1:en

    Oh, look at of those Artefacts... together in an assembly to make a whole valve. This one has a pilot even (3), as outside control. Note it isn't part of the Main Valve.

    I really don't know why you tried to make that point. I mean, I love to argue, that is obvious, and so do you and Steve. Even if I don't believe the BS out of my mouth.

    But you should have at least realized that you were taking the position that the valve is only a singular piece that can't move. (shakes head)

    It was fun, but you kinda ruined it - have to agree with Steve-o on that one.

    Josh Coray
    J4 Paintball
    Lead Design
    www.j4paintball.com

  7. #2377
    Insider PBSteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    3,084
    Weeeeeell I don't know about latest and greatest :P

    But yeah, I mean it's like saying a gun runs on a 9V or a LiPo or AA's. It's just one aspect of the marker but there's a difference. If we could get the market on board with characterizing the actuation/operator type along with the valve we'd really be in business. Doesn't seem so far out of the question, you already started that with the PCP.

    Morph Valve'd cocker: "hammer driven spool"
    Gen4'd cocker (superior implementation): "hammer driven poppet"
    Axe: "pressure controlled poppet"
    Matrix/shocker/clone: "ram driven spool"
    Timmy: "ram driven poppet"
    Ego: I don't want to know what Jack does with his "rammer" when he's alone
    Ever so many citizens of this republic think they ought to believe that the Universe is a monarchy, and therefore they are always at odds with the republic. -Alan Watts

    I work for the company building the Paragon

  8. #2378
    Insider
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,182
    A way more interesting conversation: What IS the "soul" of the gun (or car)?

    I think the short answer is that soul happens in the s-plane. How user inputs translate into outputs (response) is the real meat of experience. Certainly, something like efficiency (air for paintball, gas for cars) is almost entirely absent from the "soul".

    Functionally for a gun designer, soul is the combination of the ergonomics with the engine.

    I'm not sure how to weight things like:


    Ball acceleration profile (largely a function of valve flow rates)

    Internal component momentum

    Lock time

    Axis of rotation

    If you've read any Douglas Hofstadter, you'd know that soul's all about recursion - it lives in the feedback loop between gun and gunner, car and driver. . .
    "So you've done this before?"
    "Oh, hell no. But I think it's gonna work."

  9. #2379
    Insider
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,182
    Josh, did you really just move the goalposts from:

    Quote Originally Posted by pbjosh View Post
    (shakes head) I realize this is an old debate - but the seal isn't really a definition of a valve. It is the whole assembly. The basic poppet valve is the seal, the valve stem, the valve body, the actuator, etc. The action is as defining as the components, and is a valve in whole.
    To:

    Quote Originally Posted by pbjosh
    But you should have at least realized that you were taking the position that the valve is only a singular piece that can't move. (shakes head)
    The ISO definition calls out the action (linear, normal to load bearing face) AND the seal type (face) as the DEFINITION of the poppet valve. Nothing about a stem or actuation method (can be by air, or a physical ram with or without impact). The motion is necessary to split the class of face seals into gate valves and globe valves. I honestly don't know how there can be a debate around semantics after seeing how nicely defined "poppet valve" is by the ISO standard.

    "So you've done this before?"
    "Oh, hell no. But I think it's gonna work."

  10. #2380
    Insider
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Knoxville, TN
    Posts
    2,303
    (Face Palm Gif Link)

    Like Irony said - and I said, the Morph is NOT a spool valve. In my latest round with Griff on the subject I pointed out to him the reason you don't see those types of seals (o-ring on a poppet) is because it is an
    idiotic application for a radial seal in the first place.
    It just is so much worse than a solid face seal that is makes so sense in an industrial application. I have had this conversation with valve manufacturers before, on this exact topic. Covering all sorts of ball, globe, butterfly and related valve seats. It is kinda clever science, but o-rings are nowhere near as good as a face seal for long term sealing.

    So if the motion of a spool makes a face seal release it's a poppet gun (Axe and Mike Woods)? And if a hammer impact were to make a spool move out of a bore it would be a spool gun (Alien morph valve)?
    Exactly the opposite. That is why I mentioned the valve is the embodiment of components.

    The seat or seal is just a feature of the valve, and doesn't define the type - Like Irony said, it would be like calling a Circuit a Diode Circuit. The valve seat is a feature or component of a valve. The way the valve operates, and certain parts define it. A Butterfly and a globe valve work the same way. They spin in a valve body and open, and the central part, the ball or the plate, defines the valve.

    They both use the same seating type though when they are designed for the same process material. Say a high tolerance metal on metal seat, just like in a car engine. But a car engine valve seat is... a poppet valve. You don't call it a ball valve. It is lacking basic components and operates in a different manner all together.

    3 different valves, two different operations (rotary vs linear), yet exactly the same type of seat.

    A simple ball valve you might get for low pressure gas might also use an o-ring seal. Same with some (rare) butterfly valves. They seat in the same manner as a Morph valve. Exactly the same. O-ring sliding to seat on a tight surface

    But that doesn't make them a spool valve. They are still a ball, butterfly, or poppet valve.
    Josh Coray
    J4 Paintball
    Lead Design
    www.j4paintball.com

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •