View Full Version : Action Spring Analysis
I wanted to know the force for each common spring at the L1 length of an AR carbine, so I put a digital scale on my mill and adjusted it so that there would be 6.902 space between the scale and the head. I then inserted each spring between the scale and mill, inside a clear tube.
I measured the wire diameter of each and the OD. I counted the number of coils. I input them all into spring design software, and it estimated the stress as a percent of the material's tensile strength. I then sorted each spring from least to most stress while at full recoil. The lower the stress as a percent of MTS, the less likely it will be to fatigue (take a set). If you see any mistakes, please let me know.
http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/9269/scalem.jpg
http://img713.imageshack.us/img713/5796/416spring.jpg
http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/9593/screenshot20111209at836.png
Just to clarify, according to that data, there is no difference between the stress developed in 17-7 (Colt) springs and CS (Brownells) springs of the same geometry?
I've got to get my hands on that software :p
BufordTJustice
12-08-11, 20:32
Very interesting post.
How much real-wold data exists on these springs?
Reason I ask is that I've seen colt carbine action springs get noticeably weaker shooting a steady diet of M193 from a 6920 in as little as 3,000 rounds (A-B'd with a fresh spring and the 5-person group vote was unanimous that the new spring felt 'stronger').
I know Gunz has had very good luck using the Springco Blue, which I use currently as well. I think he's at or past 10K rounds on hs Springco Blue in an SBR.
I realize that the above are calculations and I'm not disputing them; I'm NOT an engineer. However, is there a source for real-world testing on this?
I'm not one of the fanboy's who thinks that he can get 100K or even 50K compression cycles from his action spring before replacement...but the CS springs from Springco do seem to last longer than the 17-7 Colt springs I and my fellow LEO's have used before.
I'm interested to hear what you have to say...and thanks for taking the time to compile all this data.
Just to clarify, according to that data, there is no difference between the stress developed in 17-7 (Colt) springs and CS (Brownells) springs of the same geometry?
I've got to get my hands on that software :p
That is pretty much what it is showing. It actually thinks CS and Music Wire are virtually identical, and 17-7 is a little better than either (if given the exact same inputs). I was not aware there was a case where 17-7 was better, but maybe it has to do with the Wahl stress correction calculation for this particular geometry. It sure seems like the original designers knew what they were doing.
Here is a good book on springs:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/29044778/Spring-Design-Handbook
I know Gunz has had very good luck using the Springco Blue, which I use currently as well. I think he's at or past 10K rounds on hs Springco Blue in an SBR.
Let's assume that is true (and I would not accept it as true without the spring going on a scale setup like mine every 500 rounds and then a curve plotted), then one of two things may be happening:
One - it has so much force that the recoil of the BCG is not able to compress it as much, and so it is not stressed as much. And if one liked that effect, they could just make a 17-7 spring with more force.
Or two - maybe there is something to CS, such as being more shock resistant than 17-7. I did read that music wire and CS are both the top choices for shock resistance.
Reason I ask is that I've seen colt carbine action springs get noticeably weaker shooting a steady diet of M193 from a 6920 in as little as 3,000 rounds (A-B'd with a fresh spring and the 5-person group vote was unanimous that the new spring felt 'stronger').
One would have to put it on a scale like I did when new, and then retire it when it reads 5.3 lbs - and then see how many lbs it dropped per 1000 rounds.
I actually do this to decide when to throw away a spring. I just threw away a CS one which was at 5.3 lbs. I am not sure what it started at though, so I have no proof it dropped a lot.
Don't forget to measure the rifle spring in the A5 configuration.
That is a real good one.
DiabhailGadhar
12-08-11, 22:02
Out of curiosity how is the machine not just reading force applied (weight) instead of stress? what formula is the software using to compute the percentage? when taking the OD and wire diameter did you take multiple measurements over the length of the coil and then average them when compiling inputs for the computer? I'm not knocking at all what you did here, just a curios calibrator. In fact more of these types of post would make a Physical/Dimensional Tech (nerd) very happy....:p As always thanks for your time....!
Reason I ask is that I've seen colt carbine action springs get noticeably weaker shooting a steady diet of M193 from a 6920 in as little as 3,000 rounds
From
http://www.spring-makers-resource.net/advanced-spring-design.html
Advanced Spring Design: Stranded Wire Springs
Long springs with many coils subjected to high rates of load applications, as in automatic weapons, encounter shock-wave motion or displacement of spring coils. The spring can be literally torn apart. Stranded wire springs are often the solution to such problems. This is because of the frictional resistance set up by the selective movement between strands.
I believe this is the cause of early spring set.
These shock waves would cause localized compression or stacking.
What is the calculated spring life is compressed down to solid height?
BufordTJustice
12-08-11, 23:54
Let's assume that is true (and I would not accept it as true without the spring going on a scale setup like mine every 500 rounds and then a curve plotted), then one of two things may be happening:
One - it has so much force that the recoil of the BCG is not able to compress it as much, and so it is not stressed as much. And if one liked that effect, they could just make a 17-7 spring with more force.
Or two - maybe there is something to CS, such as being more shock resistant than 17-7. I did read that music wire and CS are both the top choices for shock resistance.
More questions! :D
I've read about 'shock loading' and 'shock resistance' with regard to springs. Can you explain that phenomenon to me in a way that I can understand?
Don't forget to measure the rifle spring in the A5 configuration.
That is a real good one.
Good idea. I updated the chart.
According to the software, the Colt rifle spring is 26.3 %MTS in a rifle - slightly better than a Colt carbine spring in a carbine (which was 27.9).
In an A5, the Colt rifle spring is reported as 28.4.
Out of curiosity how is the machine not just reading force applied (weight) instead of stress?
It is just reading force. The force at a certain length is one of the inputs the software uses.
Failure2Stop
12-09-11, 11:12
Interesting info, thanks for posting.
Great work, rsilvers. Were the springs generally linear, or was there any surprise in spring force vs. length?
It's kind of neat to see the SpringCo blue and red springs exerting ~7.5 and ~8.0 pounds of force, respectively, when compressed. I've always liked how pistol spring manufacturers will straight up sell you a "16 pound spring" without resorting to goofy color codes. Now we finally know what "red" and "blue" mean in this particular context.
Suwannee Tim
12-09-11, 19:14
What have you been cutting on that mill? Looks like sawdust all over the place.
Good idea. I updated the chart.
According to the software, the Colt rifle spring is 26.3 %MTS in a rifle - slightly better than a Colt carbine spring in a carbine (which was 27.9).
In an A5, the Colt rifle spring is reported as 28.4.
Double check those lengths and forces on the A5.
Looks like a dup.
Also it would be good to verify the force at the recoil length compared to what the software says the force is.
If they agree, then the stress number is supported.
Also with both forces and the stroke you can show the work / energy that the spring can store.
I wanted to know the force for each common spring at the L1 length of an AR carbine, so I put a digital scale on my mill and adjusted it so that there would be 6.902 space between the scale and the head. I then inserted each spring between the scale and mill, inside a clear tube.
I measured the wire diameter of each and the OD. I counted the number of coils. I input them all into spring design software, and it estimated the stress as a percent of the material's tensile strength. I then sorted each spring from least to most stress while at full recoil. The lower the stress as a percent of MTS, the less likely it will be to fatigue (take a set). If you see any mistakes, please let me know.
http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/9269/scalem.jpg
http://img713.imageshack.us/img713/5796/416spring.jpg
http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/9593/screenshot20111209at836.png
So reading your data, I see that the Tubbs flatwire CS spring is stressed the most, but even at mid 40%, it still has a significant margin.
For comparison, what other stressed parts exists on an AR, and what are their stress levels as a percentage of tensile strength? For example, the lugs on a bolt? The pins in a FCG or the bolt overrun stop? the buffer retainer pin? The barrel at MAP? What are their margins?
Regarding buffer springs specifically, if you were to conduct these tests after 5,000 rounds after spring-set set in, would the resultant stress level percentages be the same, or less, or more?
The chart is interesting, but I have no idea if best engineering practices suggest you should to design in a margin factor of 2X or 3X or more for "stressed" parts.
this is really cool, I like here!
http://www.primeaffiliate.com/track/images/22.gif
Double check those lengths and forces on the A5.
Looks like a dup.
For the Colt rifle spring, I used the force and L1 length from the drawing, not measured. For the Colt A5 spring, I used the measured force and L1 length from the carbine L1. For the Tubb spring, in the rifle and A5, I used the measured force and L1 length from the carbine L1.
So reading your data, I see that the Tubbs flatwire CS spring is stressed the most, but even at mid 40%, it still has a significant margin.
Springs cycle and don't have to get to 100% to fail. Anything up to about 45% is generally considered a reasonable spring design.
For the Colt rifle spring, I used the force and L1 length from the drawing, not measured. For the Colt A5 spring, I used the measured force and L1 length from the carbine L1. For the Tubb spring, in the rifle and A5, I used the measured force and L1 length from the carbine L1.
Is the fourth column "lbs @ 6.902" the force at the installed length or just an arbitrary reference length?
6.902 inches is the length of the spring when installed in a carbine stock.
6.902 inches is the length of the spring when installed in a carbine stock.
Yes, but the A5 installed length is .75" longer.
That does not matter. The stress is determined at the full recoil position. You can establish the spring rate at any value of L1.
true, if you're only interested in %MTS.
The chart also appears to show the useful in-battery/L1 force that many are interested in.
If a person were to read it this way, the A5 values would be misleading.
That is right - the installed force of the springs in the A5 section are not the actual force in an A5, and so one could not use them to help pick a spring based on your desired force by looking at the indicated force. All I was trying to show was the % of MTS at full recoil, which is an predictor of fatigue and spring life.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.