Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 22 of 22

Thread: Barrel length-Velocity-Pressure & Suppressors

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    110
    Feedback Score
    0
    Dater knows more about suppression than anyone alive most likely. This group of guys from Small Arms Review, LMO, Dan Shae really have been around and thoroughly know their stuff.

    SAR just went to quarterly publications, both SAR is available online now and is a great investment, you can go and get the Sullivan AR articles now, I copy and paste them into a doc on my pc for future preservation.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    1,728
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)
    what i took away from the article is that they ascertained the empiracle value (the theoretical values were available from software simulations) for which you must design a suppressor to be capable of withstanding for various barrel legnths.

    for the purpose of finding the upper bound of this desired value it would make sense for them to exclude the gas port and the other parts of the gas system. it was already mentioned that it can be inferred what the pressures are at the different gas ports by just looking at what their results are at those lengths.

    the other takeaway is that in the opinion of the authors, sub 10" barrels suck.

    i think overall the intro addresses the interest by saying the shorter your barrel is the fatter your can has to be. it appears the opinion of the authors is that cans need to be built safely and the most important value as far as safe can manufacturing goes, is the pressure value at the uncorking. once that data is attained you can have a sure lower bound on how light/fat/cheap you can go on the can's material and geometry.
    Last edited by trinydex; 03-08-12 at 17:48.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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