How much is enough? - Power, output, etc.

Discussions of all varieties of stock water guns and water blasters.
User avatar
isoaker
Posts: 7113
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2004 1:51 pm
Location: Elsewhere
Contact:

Post by isoaker » Sat Apr 08, 2006 9:42 pm

In light of the recent threads on more potent blasters, a question that's been asked arises again in my head: how much power would be enough to satisfy the general Soakerdom enthusiast?

The main reason I ask this is related to soaker game designs. Game rules depend in many ways on the types of equipment being used. I want to have a good idea on the upper and lower limits of potential 'regulation' use soakers for official battles. This is to prevent having people using soakers that vary too far from another. While equipment is important, I don't want to lose the skill aspect in a soaker tournament. Baseball games wouldn't be fun if batters used corked, laser-guided, gyroscope stabilized, motor enhanced bats such that every swing slugged the ball out of the park.

What limit would satisfy the 'hard core' players or is there even one?

:cool:
:: Leave NO one dry! :: iSoaker.com .:

DX
Posts: 3481
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2004 8:35 am
Contact:

Post by DX » Sat Apr 08, 2006 10:03 pm

In the upper echelons, the Douchenator appears to be near the limit. The 45 degree rule is the only existing one regarding power, and only says how we can use available artillery, not how powerful it can be.

As for regular water guns, practicality is the major limiting force. There are no rules limiting the power of mods/homemades, the battle conditions do that for us. If something is powerful, but is not practical to use in a heated battle, then it won't be used. Then again, I have yet to build a homemade that would replace my current primary guns, so we haven't dealt with them much in wars.

And rather than taking out skill, increased Tech actually requires more skill. You need to come up with whole new tactics and manuevers. It also changes what you used to be able to do, as well as requires you to have a well-trained, cohesive team and command system. Douchenators are not very effective for battle, but they are unequaled as a scare weapon in night battles. In that opening night battle, I showed no backbone, no offense whatsoever, since we ran out of artillery ammo.

So really, limits are unnecessary. That's what I love about our style of 1HK. You don't make the limits, the game makes its limits on YOU. :laugh: Same for some battlefields as well. They are in control, and its you against the battlefield as well as you against the enemy.
marauder wrote:You have to explain things in terms that kids will understand, like videogames^ That's how I got Sam to stop using piston pumpers

ZOCCOZ
Posts: 455
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 6:09 pm
Contact:

Post by ZOCCOZ » Sat Apr 08, 2006 10:04 pm

Personaly, I would be satisfied with a retail 25Xer shooting 45-50 feet. A 20xer shooting 39 feet would be somewhat ok also. Then again, thats"if" and "would"...

Now having said that, most in the soaker comunity would probably be satisfied, I assume, if there would be a 10X model reaching 35-40 feet. At least from what I read in the past.




Edited By ZOCCOZ on 1144553765

m15399
Posts: 220
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2005 6:51 pm
Contact:

Post by m15399 » Sat Apr 08, 2006 11:00 pm

I think as long as you don't get hurt and noone's soaker is way better than anyone else's, anything is ok. I'd be fine with anything that doesn't sting like heck (lots of power on small nozzle) and that can't knock me over or blow my eye out.

User avatar
isoaker
Posts: 7113
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2004 1:51 pm
Location: Elsewhere
Contact:

Post by isoaker » Sun Apr 09, 2006 8:07 am

Duxburian wrote:And rather than taking out skill, increased Tech actually requires more skill. You need to come up with whole new tactics and manuevers. It also changes what you used to be able to do, as well as requires you to have a well-trained, cohesive team and command system. Douchenators are not very effective for battle, but they are unequaled as a scare weapon in night battles. In that opening night battle, I showed no backbone, no offense whatsoever, since we ran out of artillery ammo.

So really, limits are unnecessary. That's what I love about our style of 1HK. You don't make the limits, the game makes its limits on YOU. :laugh: Same for some battlefields as well. They are in control, and its you against the battlefield as well as you against the enemy.

Thing is, you are talking from the standpoint of respectable water warriors who appreciate dangers and respect their opponents. Without a limit on power and with those lacking as much respect, someone during the heat of a battle will end up on the wrong side of a high-powered blaster stream or firing Douchenator+ and get more than just soaked.

(I also don't quite agree with the statement that increased tech means increased skill is required. The 'gatling gun' type paint ball guns were banned or seriously shunned on many fields since they were considered too powerful, reducing the need for someone to aim well.)

I can't speak for the rest of the community, but the water fights I still envision should occur without the need of additional safety equipment even in the case of a misfired stream. At most, the only safety equipment that could/should be considered would be a protective pair of goggles.

Moreover, I'm trying to figure out whether it's possible to make some types of water war tournaments a spectator sport. Thus, must have it safe for those on the sidelines to view (though they may get wet by stray streams :goofy: ).

For homegrown water warfare, there is no limit since, well, it's only up to the local group. I'm trying to think on a larger scale with a wide variety of users of more varied responsibility levels getting their hands on these things. If a soaker isn't safe in the hands of the average user, there's no way a manufacturer would put themselves at risk for being sued or even just having their name tarnished by a misused product.

:cool:
:: Leave NO one dry! :: iSoaker.com .:

User avatar
Adrian
Posts: 1387
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2004 6:05 pm
Location: WI, USA
Contact:

Post by Adrian » Sun Apr 09, 2006 9:08 am

From a wouldn't-that-be-cool perspective, I'd like to see ranges around 100 feet. Probably not likely though, 60 is more down-to-earth.

I don't really care about the size of the blast. I usually turn my guns' nozzles down to their lowest setting anyway.

Adrian
“To achieve a World Government it is necessary to remove from their minds their individualism, their loyalty to family traditions, national patriotism and religious dogma.”…..Brock Adams, Director, United Nations Health Organisation.

Dacca
Posts: 238
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 7:48 pm
Location: Boston

Post by Dacca » Sun Apr 09, 2006 10:17 am

isoaker_com wrote:I can't speak for the rest of the community, but the water fights I still envision should occur without the need of additional safety equipment even in the case of a misfired stream. At most, the only safety equipment that could/should be considered would be a protective pair of goggles.

isoaker, you just answered your own question. if a blaster ventures into the realm inwhich it could lead to someone getting hurt (by the blaster itself), then thats when it becomes to much. btw, i always play with a pair of tinted swim goggles or sunglasses. they're not for safety, but for looking cool and avoiding the sun.

:flashflood:




Edited By Dacca on 1144595896
more reliable then a max-D trigger

Image

DX
Posts: 3481
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2004 8:35 am
Contact:

Post by DX » Sun Apr 09, 2006 10:27 am

Due to the amount of power required to reach 100, I would be quite satisfied with a lower amount such as 75 or 80 if it could be used in battle. The best range seems to come from streams between 4x and 10x, but then again, remember that output is not always relative to range like that. Stream velocity has a lot more of an effect on other stats than I originally thought. You could have a 10x stream with a small amount of water, but with really fast speed. That changes the old perceptions of how much water a certain output produces. Including the velocity with the output gives a better outline of what the stream is like. I realized that the exact same sized stream will be a different output if you increase or decrease its velocity!

With water gun tech, you still need to be able to move, to dodge, and to aim. The old tactics won't work as well, so you have to make new ones. This also increases the amount of stealth and ambushes used in a given fight. The enemy adapts to a Tech disadvantage with better tactics. It's kinda hard to explain out of "context."

Oh, we rarely ever use any kind of "safety equipment" [the word itself is a turnoff from the game]. Goggles are somewhat recommended, but nobody really uses them. I've seen sunglasses and a paintball mask, but those were mainly for show. I myself have eyeglasses, so am not all that concerned with shots there.




Edited By Duxburian on 1144596580
marauder wrote:You have to explain things in terms that kids will understand, like videogames^ That's how I got Sam to stop using piston pumpers

User avatar
isoaker
Posts: 7113
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2004 1:51 pm
Location: Elsewhere
Contact:

Post by isoaker » Sun Apr 09, 2006 3:31 pm

Dacca wrote:isoaker, you just answered your own question. if a blaster ventures into the realm inwhich it could lead to someone getting hurt (by the blaster itself), then thats when it becomes to much. btw, i always play with a pair of tinted swim goggles or sunglasses. they're not for safety, but for looking cool and avoiding the sun.

Not really.. while that would be my personal limit, it doesn't mean that that reflects what others on the board might think. That said, no one really has ever stated what they'd consider too dangerous. Fact is, from what I know, safety testing done using the Monster XL concluded that the maximum power of the streams pushed out by it were just within safety limits if shot at someone in the eye such that it shouldn't do permanent damage (on average). However, based on how most members talk, the Monster XL's power is not considered enough.

:cool:
:: Leave NO one dry! :: iSoaker.com .:

ZOCCOZ
Posts: 455
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 6:09 pm
Contact:

Post by ZOCCOZ » Sun Apr 09, 2006 5:34 pm

isoaker_com wrote:
Dacca wrote:isoaker, you just answered your own question. if a blaster ventures into the realm inwhich it could lead to someone getting hurt (by the blaster itself), then thats when it becomes to much. btw, i always play with a pair of tinted swim goggles or sunglasses. they're not for safety, but for looking cool and avoiding the sun.

Not really.. while that would be my personal limit, it doesn't mean that that reflects what others on the board might think. That said, no one really has ever stated what they'd consider too dangerous. Fact is, from what I know, safety testing done using the Monster XL concluded that the maximum power of the streams pushed out by it were just within safety limits if shot at someone in the eye such that it shouldn't do permanent damage (on average). However, based on how most members talk, the Monster XL's power is not considered enough.

:cool:
Interesting, if the power of the MXL is generaly the limit in retail according to sfatety regulations, then a CPS2500 typ weapon is more than likely a thing of he past with no expectation to see any of those types again new in retail.
But then again, its also interesting that contemporary soakers are even weaker than the MXL.

User avatar
Hannibal
Posts: 510
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 5:05 pm
Location: Silicon Valley

Post by Hannibal » Sun Apr 09, 2006 5:40 pm

I'd like to see guns shooting 50 to 60 feet. I don't really want any more range than that. I'd be happy with 50 feet average, 40 feet below average, and 60 feet above average.

And I'd like to see nozzles in the 4x-10x range. While large nozzles are fun, the real drenching is done on a 10x nozzle, where you can actually spread out the water over the target but still unload fast. Not meaning that I don't like large nozzles. Small nozzles are near useless, because they don't get your target wet, and they break up too easily, reducing range.
EV Nova - Space action/RPG, for Windows and Mac!
http://www.ambrosiasw.com/games/evn/

"Look! a CPS 2000 10th anniversary edition! I'll buy two, one to keep, and one to use!"
*Takes them home, opens one, fills it, and pumps it up.*

"snap!"

"Oops, I guess it had a Max-D trigger."

Dacca
Posts: 238
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 7:48 pm
Location: Boston

Post by Dacca » Sun Apr 09, 2006 8:21 pm

i think alot of people confuse range over force. ever player wants the most range they can get with a soaker, yet enough force from a blast could injure someone. force, (F=m*A) is dependant on how fast the amount of water exits the blaster. Force=mass(1ml^3 water = about 1 gram) times acceleration (in this case exit velocity). while range is not dependant on force alone. a mixture of nozzle size and shape, exit velocity, turbulance, wind speed, viscosity, yadda yadda yadda. sorry about the big words, but to much physics does that to ya. anyways, what im getting at is that the main issue of safety is the force of the water. a fast moving stream, even from a 1x could in theory do some major damage. other aspects of the blaster can be changed to reduce with without lowering the max range to badly.

edit: well, seeing as how the speed of the water makes a huge impact on range then yeah, it does hurt the range to lower the force of the water. so to restate the original topic: how can we make soakers safer while still makeing them shoot really far?




Edited By Dacca on 1144632210
more reliable then a max-D trigger

Image

User avatar
isoaker
Posts: 7113
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2004 1:51 pm
Location: Elsewhere
Contact:

Post by isoaker » Sun Apr 09, 2006 8:42 pm

Dacca wrote:how can we make soakers safer while still makeing them shoot really far?
Yup.. that is one of the major problems when it comes to water blasters.

I believe for a given range, there will be some optimal stream that'll be able to achieve it. I suppose it ends up boiling down to what distances members really want to be able to hit targets at. From there, what is the least forceful stream needed to achieve this distance and how potentially hazardous that stream is if used at close/point-blank ranges.

Either that or make a set force/pressure and nozzle size limitation (set at the safety limit) and see just how far an optimally laminated stream can hurl the water.

The 11.5x setting on the Monster XL has a nozzle aperture ~1/4" diameter.

:cool:
:: Leave NO one dry! :: iSoaker.com .:

User avatar
LIGHT ANNIHILATOR
Posts: 322
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 10:13 am
Location: Northern Virginia
Contact:

Post by LIGHT ANNIHILATOR » Sun Apr 09, 2006 10:11 pm

Duxburian wrote: Douchenators are not very effective for battle, but they are unequaled as a scare weapon in night battles.
Agreed. The problem with the douche of any wbl for that matter is that they aren't good for ranges less than 100' and therfore make them impractical for most wars.
You don't make the limits, the game makes its limits on YOU. :laugh:



Image
E3:2006: Tune to G4 for live E3 coverage in May for info on the hottest new consoles and games.

Some Guy
Posts: 54
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 11:02 pm
Location: DC suburbs

Post by Some Guy » Sun Apr 09, 2006 10:35 pm

how can we make soakers safer while still makeing them shoot really far?

You can increase a gun's range by using methods other than just increasing the power. For example if you use a nozzle that increases stream lamination and reduces wind resistance you can get increased range without more force.

sbell25
Posts: 82
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2004 1:45 am

Post by sbell25 » Mon Apr 10, 2006 12:50 am

Me, I'd be happy enough with another gun like the 1000, but with a few changes. Give it the same strength rubber as the original, but with the design improvements that have come in over the years (conical nozzles, ball valve triggers etc.). I reckon it'd shoot 50-55 feet easily without being dangerous at all. Give it 2x, 5x and 10x nozzles, and all in the compact frame of the 1000, you'd have the perfect gun.

User avatar
Hannibal
Posts: 510
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 5:05 pm
Location: Silicon Valley

Post by Hannibal » Mon Apr 10, 2006 10:28 am

sbell25 wrote:Me, I'd be happy enough with another gun like the 1000, but with a few changes. Give it the same strength rubber as the original, but with the design improvements that have come in over the years (conical nozzles, ball valve triggers etc.). I reckon it'd shoot 50-55 feet easily without being dangerous at all. Give it 2x, 5x and 10x nozzles, and all in the compact frame of the 1000, you'd have the perfect gun.

Yeah, that is basicly what ZOCCOZ was suggesting in that other thread. I couldn't ask for more than that. Give it a 600ml PC, a 2L water tank, 2x, 5x, and 10z nozzles, and the option to add on an aquapack. That would be most everything we could want. BB could make a similar gun, with the same specs, and I'd buy it as well.

EDIT: iSoaker, what would be your perfect gun?




Edited By Hannibal on 1144682994
EV Nova - Space action/RPG, for Windows and Mac!
http://www.ambrosiasw.com/games/evn/

"Look! a CPS 2000 10th anniversary edition! I'll buy two, one to keep, and one to use!"
*Takes them home, opens one, fills it, and pumps it up.*

"snap!"

"Oops, I guess it had a Max-D trigger."

SSCBen
Posts: 1479
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2004 4:15 pm
Contact:

Post by SSCBen » Mon Apr 10, 2006 5:13 pm

How much is enough for me? Only more than what the competition has. :;):

Sarcasm aside, I'd like to see (and have seen) water guns that shoot over 60 feet. Output doesn't matter too me, in fact, I would prefer lower outputs for the shot time benefits. A flinch still will happen with 2X. Will we see 60 feet with 2X? No, but that's beside the point.

Dacca wrote:i think alot of people confuse range over force. ever player wants the most range they can get with a soaker, yet enough force from a blast could injure someone. force, (F=m*A) is dependant on how fast the amount of water exits the blaster. Force=mass(1ml^3 water = about 1 gram) times acceleration (in this case exit velocity). while range is not dependant on force alone. a mixture of nozzle size and shape, exit velocity, turbulance, wind speed, viscosity, yadda yadda yadda. sorry about the big words, but to much physics does that to ya. anyways, what im getting at is that the main issue of safety is the force of the water. a fast moving stream, even from a 1x could in theory do some major damage. other aspects of the blaster can be changed to reduce with without lowering the max range to badly.


This analysis is flawed. You use F=m*a incorrectly in two ways. You did get the mass of pure water correct, but acceleration is not velocity and they should not be confused. The stream will have a negative velocity in the x component of the shot anyway, which would mean negative force. Also, we all know that you don't need acceleration to get hurt by something. Try standing stationary in front of a car moving at a constant velocity and tell me that you don't feel it just because F=0.

Personally, the limit for myself is when water guns get dangerous. I think that the "dangerous" argument is mostly hype against homemade water guns and water gun modifications. I am yet to see an actual dangerous water gun. The cutting ability of a water stream is determined by a few things: the stream's velocity (determined by pressure and nozzle orifice diameter), the pressure at the nozzle (controlled largely by the nozzle orifice diameter), the power of the pressure chamber, the distance from the nozzle the target is, and the viscosity of the stream, among many other variables. For these reasons, it is more likely that you will be hurt by a smaller stream on a more powerful water gun than a larger stream on a more powerful water gun.

From my experience, a water gun that shoots 60 feet is not dangerous. A distance of 65 feet will not be considerably more dangerous. A distance of 70 feet probably won't be too dangerous either. However, as we approach the realm of fire trucks and such, we must realize that damage can be done. Fire-hoses used in riot control can cause bruises and I'm sure wouldn't be pleasant up close. We're not even close to that yet. They are using streams larger than most of our internal diameters.

We do know that water can cause considerable damage, but that is unlikely compared to what else can happen. There are several things I believe are more likely to happen than someone being hurt by a water stream. Among them are over-pressurization, building accidents, and accidents involving the use of the water gun as a weapon.

Over-pressurization is a real problem that I have experienced before. I always use pressure-rated pipe well within the limits of the pipe (in fact, I never once pressurized a pipe over 100 PSI!), so I am yet to see pipe fractures of any sort. I have seen LRT burst, once intentionally and once at the hands of an inexperienced friend (the LRT was damaged in both cases). However, the LRT bursting issues are not bad if you put the LRT into a strong case while still allowing for checking the status of the chamber and replacement of the chamber.

While making my first backpack modification in 2002, I cut my hand badly. In fact, the only reason I was fairly absent from Aquatica after my initial first few posts was because I couldn't type very well. Always use safety while building. That doesn't only mean use eye-protection while drilling or cutting. That means use your head because it's only your fault if you hurt yourself.

The final way you can hurt yourself or others always has existed. You can smack someone with a water gun. You can modify it into a flamethrower or long-range "sniper gun." No one is going to suggest these things, but they really are quite common in my experience. I get lots of emails every summer about converting water guns into flamethrowers, and the reply each time is the same: "Super Soaker Central will never suggest the use of a water gun as a weapon."

Essentially, what I am saying can be summed up like this: All water guns are as safe as the person using them. Just because some aren't responsible doesn't mean that water guns are dangerous.

well, seeing as how the speed of the water makes a huge impact on range then yeah, it does hurt the range to lower the force of the water. so to restate the original topic: how can we make soakers safer while still makeing them shoot really far?


As Some Guy mentioned, there are plenty of things you can do! So many in fact that my incomplete article that is already 5000 words long doesn't even begin to describe all that can be done. Design practices such as ideal nozzle orifice diameter, linear design, conical nozzles, and such are not as popular as I would like.

Efficient design in water guns is design where power as defined by distance is not created mainly by power (pressure or thickness). This does not only increase distance, but it also extends shot time.

Buzz Bee Toys is beginning to take efficiency to heart now. They're experimenting with a nozzle by an inventor named Chris Bloch that should increase total distance by a few feet without any other modification. Of course, they also could design their water guns to be made completely for performance, but no one does that aside from a select few homemade water gun builders.

User avatar
isoaker
Posts: 7113
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2004 1:51 pm
Location: Elsewhere
Contact:

Post by isoaker » Mon Apr 10, 2006 5:47 pm

The stream will have a negative velocity in the x component of the shot anyway, which would mean negative force. Also, we all know that you don't need acceleration to get hurt by something. Try standing stationary in front of a car moving at a constant velocity and tell me that you don't feel it just because F=0.

Uh, sorry, Doom, but you're making a few physics flaws, too. Velocity of a stream leaving a soaker is positive (unless the wind blows it backwards), but acceleration is negative. Also, the car example isn't right since force does not equal zero. If you are hit by a car, your mass ends up accelerated from zero velocity to the car's velocity, thus meaning positive acceleration, thus positive force. Injury arises from forces playing on the body.

As for the whole dangerous issue, sadly, manufacturers are forced to tailor soakers to the lowest common denominator of the public since it is still too easy for companies to be sued despite it being apparent that the user was far from being responsible. Safety for typical water guns means a close shot in the face or even eye without permanent damage. As 'Big Bee' once mentioned, if some soakers could be classified as sports equipment, some of these restrictive safety requirements would be removed. However, as soakers still fall under 'toys', that is the crux of the problem.

I do hope better design results in better performance, but only time will tell. Presently, the main problem is the force limitation. Without enough force, you can only make a stream go so far even with perfect lamination.

As for my perfect soaker... hmmm.. that'd take awhile to describe. :goofy:

:cool:
:: Leave NO one dry! :: iSoaker.com .:

User avatar
SharpObjects
Posts: 176
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2005 8:17 pm
Location: Look in your food.

Post by SharpObjects » Mon Apr 10, 2006 5:56 pm

Isoaker, I thought your perfect soaker was the 1500? I think that would be enough, with the backpack. Just a 1500 something, at or close to the power/range/soakage.

Sorry, I think I got off topic a little.
~SO
(woah, it is the most active I've ever seen here, like 13 people at once. Not a lot, but still)




Edited By SharpObjects on 1144709906
CPS 1000 (Now K-modded into a CPS 10000)
CPS 4100 *in repair*
MI Flash Flood w/Aqua Pak
SC Big Trouble
Blazer
Xenon
Splat Blast
STE Arctic Shock
Vaporizer
Max-D 3000

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests