RV1 (or Regulated Valve Mark 1) for AirForce Talon
Hello,
Looks like some of the discussion came here. So I hope I can get some feedback 🙂
I have been designing regulated valve for few days. It has evolved couple of steps but there is still some tweaking to be done. I do believe this version is already doable and should work.
The design is based for Steyr FT regulator which is propably one of the best regs there are currently. There are some good points and some bad points. It’s always a compromise between strength, efficiency, safety, number of shots, manufacturability (huh. is that correct word?) and few other points.
My main goal has been (in this order perhaps)…
1. Safety and strength (will compromise size and volume for extra material thickness).
2. Ease of manufacturing. If I have to make this myself with my limited lathe operating skills it should not have too difficult things or tolerances.
3. Simplicity. If it’s simple it usually works. This will however compromise some userfriendliness. Meaning that I had to leave regulator pressure adjustment inside the bottle so it’s not possible “on-the-fly” but rather ment to be “factory-setting”. You can use special chamber to setup the gun and leave it there.
Here’s the pics from 3D-cad. I will make 2D-blueprints after final tweaking and engineering. Do realize that this is just a hobby for me and I don’t plan to make this for sale – so don’t bother to ask. But if someone is interested in making them I can share the drawings ( let’s say that I would love to get free sample for that 😛 )
The construction may look more complicated than it actually is. I have tried to thought out all manufacturing aspects and avoid anything too complicated. The butt of gun will became little longer (less than inch though). There is still some room for tweaking the size. I believe that the volume could be half the size. For a prototype I wish to leave some room for testing.
Let’s start from bottle (left).
There is a bleeding-valve with tiny hole through it. With this valve you can adjust the regulated pressure up to 140 bar maybe more. (factory setting). The air comes from bottle and enters through the piston to regulator-chamber. When it reaches setpressure piston will close Rear sealing and airbleeding will stop. You fire the gun and valvestem moves backwards and air exhaust via highflow nozzle. Pressure will drop in regulator chamber and spring will move piston right opening bleeding valve again.
I used bellauville springdiscs so that the movement of piston is only approx. 0.2mm. This will save the O-rings. However the stacking of discs will provide more range for moveing. This is because we need some adjustment range for different pressure settings. There is also a venting hole behind spring. If there is small leak over some time period in O-ring the venting still keeps regulator operational.
The bearing ball in the end is one-way valve for standard refill. You refill the bottle through regulator just like normal bottle. Higher pressure in regchamber will open the valve and fill the bottle. When pressure in bottle raises to fillpressure (- something) it will close again. There is a huge force keeping it closed during normal operation so it will be stuckt in its place and not fiddle around.
-mcMike
All Replies
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Not to presume to know jack sh*t about anything but it would seem like there are at the very least several thousands of dollars worth of R&D and many many many many hours of testing and tweaking left on this concept.
There are a *lot* of assumptions made here that would need to be true/falsed, not to mention the thing would take some serious CNC work to put together at the tolerances required.
I would LOVE to see someone take the plunge and build v1, but I bet it would take LOTS of cash and time to push through to a usable (and cost-effective) end product.
(People sitting on this kind of CNC hardware usually don’t have the time, people with the time don’t have the access to the CNC hardware, etc, etc.)
Given that regs are already out there, the question is, would this thing provide more value than the cost of its development?
I only say this from my own experience: a (very) lovely CAD alone does not a working prototype make.