What if you simplify to a further degree and say there are only 2 weights without an internal spring that have different masses and have space to travel in that buffer. Which could preferably be placed in what position?
What position would the weights be when in forward travel? They would be rearward, and have a time delay in collision to the front of the buffer to counter the inertia of the rebounding carrier. How much space is "needed"? It takes time to travel the distance. It does good to counter the rebound, it hurts it if it "chases" rebound forward in terms of "bounce".
So let's look at this further, we know that the lower mass items "bounce" more in displacement when compared to higher mass items in that collision. The BCG and buffer housing is a higher mass than the weights in the buffer. We know that energy is bled from the bounce in the system and we can't just counteract mass with that same mass. If we look at the combined mass with a solid system, as if it was just bar stock, then there is a definite bounce that we want to control or reduce. The magnitute of the bounce diminishes quickly as the energy gets used up, lets say 3-5 cycles. The first cycle has the highest magnitude and it falls off from there quickly.
If the higher mass is towards the muzzle, the inertia of that higher mass doesn't influence as much toward the BCG rebound. The reduced mass behind it has the additional collisions and rebounding.
If the higher mass is behind the lower mass in the buffer, if timed properly by provided displacement of them has a higher inertia to counteract the rebound of the carrier that combination can reduce it well, that's another timing issue. Remember that the net isn't zero, there are losses, and they come quick, 3-5 cycles of "bounce" is about it. In this example the lighter component inside the buffer runs out both ways, but can have the initial reduction in "bounce" by using that lower mass with a higher one as a whole.
While this doesn't sound cut and dry, it isn't, because it isn't.
There are ways to reduce the magnitude of the first "bounce" in the operation that further lessens the same as it cycles to zero.
The frequency, displacement and other items come into play in just buffers alone. Add in other items like internal springs, etc are other variables.
In general, more mass can be beneficial behind the lower mass, but there are examples when the opposite is true. Many things can be in play here.
An anvil doesn't respond differently if mounted to the ground or on a maintained velocity, neither does the swinging pendulum of ball peen hammers posted above. That's just the perspective it. The physics of it remains the same.
Sorry, but this has been a long post on counteracting mass in motion with mass in a different velocity. We know the "end goal" is to reduce the bounce in FA, some things hurt, some things help.
Bookmarks