Pressurization Methods - ^

Discussions of all varieties of stock water guns and water blasters.
Post Reply
User avatar
isoaker
Posts: 7115
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2004 1:51 pm
Location: Elsewhere
Contact:

Post by isoaker » Wed Feb 01, 2006 3:56 pm

Ok, instead of filling up other threads, I figured I'd make a thread about various pressurization systems, their advantages and limitations.

I'll start this thread off by listing the pressurization systems/pumping systems I can currently think of:
i) piston pressure
ii) air pressure
iii) CPS/bladder/diaphagm pressure
iv) spring pressure
v) compressed gas (well, it's technically the same idea as air pressure systems, just usually operating with a higher reserve pressure)
vi) peristaltic pump (in a weird way, it's similar to having a modified piston.. sorta... but it's not a piston)
vii) motorized (ok, this one can be a combination of the above)
viii) hybrid systems (combining attributes from a few things)

In terms of sheer absolute potential power, compressed air/gas systems have the highest possible. CPS/diaphagm and spring systems are limited by the strength of the rubber or spring used. One can achieve a lot more pressure using gas.

In terms of pumping, the problem becomes a balance of how many pumps, how hard are the pumps, and how much of a shot do you get after all the pumping.

In 2005, the Water Warriors line introduced the Pre-Charger system. The idea behind it was to increase the available upper air pressure limit while keeping the air and water apart. While the streams behaved similar to a CPS-based stream, a major problem was pumping. The pre-pressurized rear chamber made the blasters too hard to pump. With some adjustment, the Pre-Charge system has the potential to rival or even out-perform the CPS-system, but it needs to be tweaked so that the pumping isn't rock hard.

While one can make larger or thicker CPS-chambers, there is a thickness limit in that a strong chamber needs to have stronger elasticity (which usually means thicker), but thicker rubber chambers have a greater chance of uneven power distribution and tearing. This can be overcome to some degree by using layering (as people do when K-modding soakers), but there, too, there's the physical limit of just how much can be stretched onto the bladder.

One can remove the pumping problem by using machine-compressed air/CO2 canisters like those used in paintball guns. However, to be safe, the blaster would then need to be fitted with a proper pressure regulator and much more durable parts which would drive up the price of a soaker.

I'd babble more, but have work to do... I'm sure others can fill in more info as well.

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

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

Post by m15399 » Wed Feb 01, 2006 6:10 pm

Does Constant Air Pressure get a category? If you're splitting pressurized air and pressurized gas, then you might as well add that (after all, air is made of gasses).

User avatar
isoaker
Posts: 7115
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2004 1:51 pm
Location: Elsewhere
Contact:

Post by isoaker » Wed Feb 01, 2006 8:08 pm

Constant air pressure would use either a small compressed gas canister or a motor/compressor to maintain the pressure. Perhaps it should be split from hand-pumped gas pressure to machine-pumped gas pressure.

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

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

Post by ZOCCOZ » Wed Feb 01, 2006 8:32 pm

Out of curiosity, where would squirt pistols fit? Are they part of the piston, peristalic or the spring category(I assume you mean spring as in waterball launcher)? Or is it a hybred of those three?



Edited By ZOCCOZ on 1138844398

User avatar
isoaker
Posts: 7115
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2004 1:51 pm
Location: Elsewhere
Contact:

Post by isoaker » Wed Feb 01, 2006 8:54 pm

Squirt pistols usually fit under piston. Spring is as in the Water Ball launcher, but also in some rare and theoretical soakers that use a compressed spring to give force to the PC. Squirt pistols usually involve squeezing the trigger (a small piston) to force water out of the nozzle (gated before and after the trigger by mini ball-bearing valves). Usually the spring found in squirt pistols is used to push the trigger back out and have nothing to do with the water movement through the tubes.

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

User avatar
cooldood31
Posts: 232
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2004 9:02 am
Contact:

Post by cooldood31 » Wed Feb 01, 2006 11:37 pm

Oh my. I thought we were done with this. Why can't you people just let an issue die?

Anyways, I like seperate pc air pressure, because of moddability and potential for power. I prefer using a medium-light air pressure soaker as my main weapon, and a pistol for emergancy situations. Oh, and precharge is sweet too (I'm pretty sure it classifies as air pressure, but it has cps like characteristics.

Max d triggers are the result of mentally challenged psycho murderers in labcoats.

I like piston powered soakers (such as the helix or vaporizer) as backups, due to having no parts that just wear away or break down (such as cps bladders, maxd triggers, any triggers), making them the most reliable soakers on the market. This year though, I will probably switch from my helix, to a Splat Blaster (not sure on the workings yet). It's just one of the pride of aiding in development things, that and shotguns rule. I'm betting on the Splat Blaster for best in it's class for 2006.

CPS soakers make great cover fire, due to having constant streams and good range. Soakers such as the Blazer and Splashzooka are some of the best mid-sized cover fire soakers ever. Also, the power out of the box, for those who kill more soakers than they successfully mod, is a great plus.

Motorized soakers, are underpowered, and constantly need new batteries. There are none used in any of my wars, and that's for a reason.

Hybrid: Precharge/Diaphram would be amazing.

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

Post by ZOCCOZ » Thu Feb 02, 2006 3:22 am

cooldood31 wrote:Oh my. I thought we were done with this. Why can't you people just let an issue die?
Could you elaborate on that stament to clarify it more, since this topic was just posted yesterday, nor could I detect an argument/debate in the previous posts?

DX
Posts: 3495
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2004 8:35 am
Contact:

Post by DX » Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:32 am

I think he sees part of it as a spillover from the other thread, which turned into a strong gun vs weaker gun debate.

I prefer air pressure in [a] seperate pc, but only in homemades for an obvious reason.

My 2nd choice is CPS for the constant streams achieved with low pressure, and pressure not even being necessary at all.

for those who kill more soakers than they successfully mod, is a great plus.


The risk of breaking a soaker during modding is grossly, grossly exaggerated. The actual chance of permanent failure is like 1/10. Of the guns I have broken, none were from doing the actual mod itself.
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
cooldood31
Posts: 232
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2004 9:02 am
Contact:

Post by cooldood31 » Thu Feb 02, 2006 11:09 am

Zoccoz: recently I made a statement saying that the 55mls/s from the overload was decent. That led to others asking why anyone would want a less powerfull/smaller soaker, which led to people saying there was no point in any soakers other than cps. Shortly after, isoaker put that thread back on track, I continued the converstion through personal messages, and just when I thought this was over, a new thread pops up about it. BTW, you're Dark Annihilater (spelling?) right?

Duxburian: Not if you're me, then it's about 6/10.

User avatar
isoaker
Posts: 7115
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2004 1:51 pm
Location: Elsewhere
Contact:

Post by isoaker » Thu Feb 02, 2006 11:13 am

Oh my. I thought we were done with this. Why can't you people just let an issue die?

Uh, this is not an issue thread; this is an explanation/clarification thread and discussion thread for the capabilities of different pressurization systems, both known and theoretical. Some parts have been discussed in other threads, but there is no current thread that goes into more detail on things regarding WHY a particular system appears better.

Stronger, motor-based soakers haven't really been made on a larger scale since motors and batteries cost more to build and operate. However, the potential power using a motor definitely exceeds any hand-pumped system.

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

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

Post by ZOCCOZ » Thu Feb 02, 2006 4:39 pm

cooldood31 wrote:BTW, you're Dark Annihilater (spelling?) right?
Yep. That was me. ZOCCOZ has more of a ring to it I think, plus its spells backwards just the same.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 61 guests