mcarterbrown.com  

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12-09-2018, 04:15 AM   #1 (permalink)
sex, pump and R'n'R
 
fouge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: landing beaches, Normandy

mech a1 fly?

Hi.

Angel a1 fly can run mech?
fouge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2018, 09:08 AM   #2 (permalink)
One Foot Less
 
punkncat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: ATL

There hasn't been a particularly successful and reliable way to do so.

The solenoid for Angel are placed on the top, away from the trigger mechanism. There are two offset tubes below that make it difficult to make anything that will work right.
Brad over at ECA did a "mech" project a while back on an A4 (?) I think it was...but I think even that was more of a 'stunt' than anything he expected to work long term. The solution on that one was a lever mechanism that was hitting the noid test button so far as I know.

In my opinion, the only thing that could be reliably done would be to come up with a pneumatic system using something along the lines of a "ram" in the frame that would then activate a "made up" solenoid/actuator up where the actual noid is now. I very WELL could be wrong.
__________________
feedback
punkncat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2018, 01:13 PM   #3 (permalink)
sex, pump and R'n'R
 
fouge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: landing beaches, Normandy

Okay. Thanks
fouge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2018, 01:25 PM   #4 (permalink)
Does anyone read this?
 
Jordan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Jordan Station, Ontario, Canada

It could be done with pneumatic components and a manifold that replaces the solenoid, but the length of hose required makes qev's a must, and there are no places to install those on an Angel.

Add in a LPR that is not easily adjustable, stock, and several other small issues with making a dedicated electro platform into mech... the Angel was an apex electronic device at its inception, let's leave it that way.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurtCow View Post
And God turned to Gabriel and said: “I shall create a land called Canada of outstanding natural beauty, with majestic mountains soaring with eagles, sparkling lakes abundant with bass and trout, forests full of elk and moose, and rivers stocked with salmon. I shall make the land rich in oil so the inhabitants prosper and call them Canadians, and they shall be praised as the friendliest of all people.”

“But Lord,” asked Gabriel, “Is this not too generous to these Canadians?”

And God replied, “Just wait and see the neighbors I shall inflict upon them.”

My Feedback

My Collection
Jordan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2018, 03:57 PM   #5 (permalink)
Rec Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2017

QEV's aren't a must. IMO, in a lot of cases, they are really 'oversold' anyways as far as how much good they do. They really don't speed up a cylinder at the start of an advance or return stroke so much for instance... with the way they work, they are actually another valve component that needs to 'switch' first so they technically add a bit of lag time at the start of a motion. What they really do is allow an actuator to move quicker once it is already in motion by allowing better airflow. Does this actually add up to anything? Well, if your solenoid valve has smaller ports or there is a good deal of hosing they help vent air faster... once they actually shift into correct position, which is based on pressure/flow buildup.

A far better solution to QEV's is to use valves with larger ports and/or larger pneumatic hose. Swap out that 1/16" ID hose for 3/32" even and nice things happen! Just sayin', lol.

I've been looking at an Angel conversion and tinkering with it on a beater A1 fly I have. They have the same problem as other actuator driven hammer poppets like Timmies and Ego's: the dwell time of the actuator is nearly impossible to keep consistent with a mechanical setup and really wasn't even possible until electronic controls provided a way to provide a fixed dwell time for the hammer to advance and hit the poppet. Without electronics, its back to spring and hammer setups so that once you pull the trigger sear, the spring extends and the hammer hits the poppet at the same velocity and for the same duration after every trigger pull.

Without this 'disconnect' between the trigger and the hammer, each time you pull the trigger you either need to pull the trigger just as fast and for just as long or else your velocity will vary. In effect, your finger becomes directly connected through the pneumatics to the hammer itself. On an autococker, it would be like bypassing the sear and trigger and just trying to fire the gun by pushing on the cocking rod.

If you pull the trigger and hold it, will your actuator stay advanced? Is the air pressure or force behind the ram actuator going to keep the poppet open as long as you hold the trigger, or will the pressure and spring behind the poppet be enough to counter this and close despite the trigger being held? Even if the poppet IS strong enough to close itself, the exact point that you let go of the trigger, how fast you pulled it (how far open you pushed the trigger valve is now a thing because its not a solenoid that is 100% off or 100% on). The flow from this valve if say, you didn't pull the valve as far open will affect the speed that the ram actuator accelerates and hits the poppet.

So you need a mechanical system that will mitigate these things. Assuming that the valve you use has enough flow with a minimal pull force to open, and the 'dwell' of the time it takes to open and close the trigger is going to be slower than an electronic counterpart or at least slower than the system it is running, there are some things we can do to mitigate dwell problems:

Use a pulse valve to limit the trigger pull to a maximum value. I would shoot for something in the 50ms range. The Clippard PV-1 is the closest thing in miniature pneumatics and starts out with a 200ms 'on dwell'. If you want MORE dwell you can add volume cylinders to this valve to extend its 'pulse'. Well, we want less time, so we need to take away volume in the valve or increase the flow of air between its chambers so that is pulses faster. If you open up a PV-1 you will see where the volume goes, and you can stack (#8?) O-rings on the spool in this chamber to take up volume to speed up the valve. It's not an exact science but you sure can shorten its pulse. You could also bore out the diameter of the hole for air passing behind the valve after each pulse starts that allows it to shift back to closed position, but this is more permanent. If anything, a slight bore to get a ballpark reduction in pulse time and then filling the volume chamber with o-rings will allow for better adjust-ability, so that is how I do my PV-1 valves.

Now, for the trigger, the commonly used 'pneumatic assist' Fabco MSV-2 valve is just fine. The problem is that a 3-way valve will not run a double acting cylinder. Well, okay, there is a way where the cylinder gets constant pressure to the return port from the LPR and the 3-way valve only provides pressure to the advance port when the trigger is pulled, but you will have to jack up the LPR pressure to compensate AND it will slow down the ram considerably because the return port is always under pressure. It's just that if you provide the same pressure to both the advance and return ports on a cylinder, the advance port will generate more force because it doesn't have the rod bore taking away from the surface area of the 'stopper' in the cylinder on the advance side.

Okay, so you really want a 4/5 way valve. The problem is that these tend to be a lot bigger and bulkier. Clippard MAV-4's are about the smallest and still are huge bricks compared to the MSV-2.

There is another way though: keep the Fabco, but if you add a reasonably small air-piloted Clippard PAVO valve in, you end up turning two 3-way valves into a 5-way valve. Actually, since they are two separate valves, you would run each off separate regulators and they technically combine to make a 6/2 valve. Plumb like so: LPR-->Fabco MSV-2 in --> Fabco MSV-2 NC port (opens when trigger pulled, leave the exhaust open like normal) --> 'T' --> one port from 'T' goes to the advance port of the cylinder, other port from 'T' goes into the air pilot of the PAVO valve. Then the PAVO valve's 'NO' output goes to the return port of the cylinder/ram actuator. When the trigger is not pulled, the Fabco MSV-2 'NC' port is shut, which also means that there is no pressure on the air pilot of the PAVO valve, and the PAVO is 'normally open' so it will be providing air to the return port of the actuator when the trigger isn't pulled.

Then we go to when the trigger is pulled, where the Fabco provides air to both the advance port of the cylinder AND the air pilot of the PAVO valve. The PAVO shifts to be closed then... the return port of the cylinder vents, cylinder advances. The PAVO valve is the inverted logic of the Fabco MSV-2, and by using a NC and an NO 3-way valve you can create a 4-way valve (or more). This might seem 'bulkier' but other than the hosing these two valves are considerably smaller than a single large 4 or 5-way valve. Plus, because they are two-halves you get more flexibility with mounting... and you get to keep that Fabco MSV-2 as the primary valve that the trigger is moving, which is really the best valve available for this application.

The only other option would be to use the so-called '3-way' valve from an autococker behind the trigger. Here's an important fact: even though they are called '3-way' valves by the autococker people, its a total misnomer. Those are actually 4/5-way valves. It was some stupid thing that happened and WGP probably called them '3-way' valves because they have 3 ports you can attach to, but its a totally incorrect term. AC so called '3-way' valves are 4-way spool valves. They could work for this application instead of the Fabco MSV-2 but you you would need to add some sort of 'return' to the valve... either a small cylinder or a small spring that would push the valve back against the trigger because these AC valves don't have that built in.

Then there is the final addition: the Pulse valve. So far, I can't think of a way to make this work with a 4-way valve. You CAN however, easily plumb it between the Fabco MSV-2 and the Clippard PAVO valve. You put the pulse valve onto the outlet of the Fabco that feeds both the actuator/cylinder AND the PAVO. Now, every time you pull the trigger on the Fabco MSV-2, the actuator will get a consistent burst of air no more than ~50ms long. At this point the air to the pilot on the PAVO also gets pulsed... turning off its outlet for ~50ms and then turning back on to return the actuator.

Now, its still possible to 'short stroke' this system. The idea here so far is that its waaaay more likely that the valve opens quickly and remains open longer than the gind needs to fire. You would have to have some pretty fast and strong fingers to short-stroke an Angel, right? The pulse valve prevents TOO HIGH of a dwell, but we technically still could say... pull the trigger really slowly and end up with a slowly opening valve, slower pressure buildup and velocity in the actuator. Well, so we do technically have this possibility, yes. We have a regulated maximum but not minimum. Also, this system sort of self-compensates: if you pull the Fabco MSV-2 slower, technically the PV-1 pulse valve also doesn't pulse as fast, so you may have a slower ram, but it will also have a longer mechanical dwell.

What I'm getting at is that since we have a regulated maximum but not minimum, the air pressure and timing of the system should be set up to really press the marker against that regulated maximum. The LPR should be set on the high end so that even a slow trigger pull still makes for a lot of air flow once the valve opens. If this puts more force on the poppet which can hold it open slightly more or longer (or at all), so be it. We want the actuator to move as fast as possible so that the 'dwell' of the gun's internals is much less than what the dwell of the pneumatic logic that we added is. Basically, we want the gun to be faster than even the fastest trigger pull could be (within reason) so that the overlap in timing gives us a consistent shot from the poppet valve. Higher pressure here becomes more of your friend.

Another mechanical trick would be to mill up hammers that float for their last 1/4" of travel on the actuator rather than be fixed. This would allow the actuator to advance but stop short of being able to hold the poppet/exhaust valve open. The actuator would stop just short and the hammer would continue to slide under its own inertia/momentum to hit and open the poppet valve. The poppet wouldn't be acted on directly by the actuator at all, just the mass of the hammer. The hammer would be captured though on the actuator though still so that when it retracts the hammer would be pulled back also for the next shot. This requires milling and a redo of the hammer though... not so easy.

Or, find a hammer and sear spring and basically convert the Angel back into an E-Spyder, lol... ?!?
Marker Engineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2019, 05:03 PM   #6 (permalink)
Active Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012

@ Marker Engineer

You and I think alike haha. I have been toying with a mech evil pimp for a while now. The real trick is figuring out how the hell to cram all that stuff into trigger frame. I found that getting a vfa1120-m5-p valve from smc helped me get a nicely compact 5 way. And m5 barbs that take 3/32 amd 1/16 hose arent hard to find. I so far still plan to use a clippard pavo3, msv-2a, and a 1 way flow controller. Hopefully the vfa1120 will get everything small enough I can fit it all in the frame. I am also planning on doing a strange sft shocker the same way as long as I can get the OP down to 150psi.

The secret Ive been using is the 1 way flow controller into the pilot of the pavo3. The msv when opened lets air flow through the normally open pavo to the 5way which fires the marker. The msv also sends air to a flow restrictor which lets you control the duration that the pavo3 is open. giving you a dwell. It is VERY hard to tune but I managed to get into the 20ms range which works pretty good in my pimp at about 280 psi hpr and 100 psi lpr. I picked a metered input flow controller so it has a check valve for quick exhausting.
The_Hyren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2019, 11:30 PM   #7 (permalink)
Active Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006

its impossible to control dwell on a mechanical pnuematic poppet. its impossible.
dsxz is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

  mcarterbrown.com » Paintball » The Armory » WDP

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:28 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO
© MCB Network LLC