36 replies to this topic

[IamSparticus]

There have been many times I have found myself thinking, maybe long range, accurate shots would be possible if only one could discover how to rifle barrels.
An example of how this could be so extremely useful is a comparison between the Brown Bess musket and the Kentucky rifle, both of the same era.
The smooth-bore Brown Bess had an effective range of about three hundred feet, and a maximum range of about nine hundred. The Kentucky rifle, however, with the mere addition of spiraling grooves on the interior of the barrel, had an effective range of nine hundred feet, and a maximum range of two thousand, seven hundred feet, triple that of it's counterpart.
Obviously, rifling would dramatically increase the usefulness of such guns as singled titans and homemade air cannons. There are some technical issues with rifling, though. First, there is the self-apparent difficulty of boring the barrel. Most modern rifles have progressive rifling, where the grooves get steeper further in the barrel, starting at a very gentle slope. Doing this to material such as PVC with affordable tools would be very difficult at best, impossible at worst.
Another difficulty would lie in making darts expand to grip the rifling, a difficult feat of engineering to be sure.

If anyone has any insight into this, it would be greatly appreciated.

[MercenaryXero]

You can't rifle a nerf barrel effectively, the air will go through the grooves around the dart. I suppose one could make special darts, but that would be a pain in the ass.

[IamSparticus]

True, but think of the advantages of an effectively rifled barrel.
As for the darts, a sabot would possibly work for gripping the barrel, if anyone besides me knows what that is.

[jackster57]

Search.

Rifling Barrel Idea

Helix Barrel

Rifled Barrel

Rifled Barrels

rifled barrels, seems very possible

Barrel Rifling

Not A Rifled Barrel

As you can see, this topic has been discussed just a bit before. Next time please search. Welcome to NH.
Not trying to backseat mod, just trying to help out.

[madmax]

My friend and I rifled barrels a while ago using a piece of brass with the ends cut and splayed out. We heated it up, and pulled it while turning through a normal cpvc barrel, and it actually rifled nicely. This actually did spin the dart, even without a titan (we used a crossbow). Unfortunately, it really did not increase the range or accuracy in any noticeable way. We did use normal darts though, maybe if you created a more effective dart to grip the barrel it would do more, but it seems like it would take way to much time. Add that to the fact that we don't use sights or anything, so even if we were able to increase the effective range of a titan to 200 feet, we would never actually shoot anyone from that far away. Also, its easier to dodge a dart going in a laser straight line than a dart moving in a more unpredictable way.

[IamSparticus]

jackster57, on Aug 16 2009, 06:22 PM, said:

Search.

Rifling Barrel Idea

Helix Barrel

Rifled Barrel

Rifled Barrels

rifled barrels, seems very possible

Barrel Rifling

Not A Rifled Barrel

As you can see, this topic has been discussed just a bit before. Next time please search. Welcome to NH.
Not trying to backseat mod, just trying to help out.

Actually, I did search, and one of those links is broken, two others are alternatives to rifling, and one does not cover progressive rifling.
I appreciate your meticulousness. however, the thought of a sabot dart has not been discussed.

[cannotaim]

Nerf HQ

[IamSparticus]

madmax, on Aug 16 2009, 06:23 PM, said:

We did use normal darts though, maybe if you created a more effective dart to grip the barrel it would do more, but it seems like it would take way to much time.

That "more effective dart" would be a sabot. Not many people really Know what that is, so I will explain it.
A sabot is a larger lining to a bullet or shell that grips the rifling in a gun barrel. A sabot usually is discarded, either on impact or on leaving the barrel. It is well known for use in anti-tank rounds.

[IamSparticus]

cannotaim, on Aug 16 2009, 06:38 PM, said:

Nerf HQ

Again, the progressive rifling comes to mind.
In that particular case, the flimsy barrel could have been used as a liner for a larger barrel. This would end said flimsiness.

[cannotaim]

IamSparticus, on Aug 16 2009, 03:42 PM, said:

cannotaim, on Aug 16 2009, 06:38 PM, said:

Nerf HQ

Again, the progressive rifling comes to mind.
In that particular case, the flimsy barrel could have been used as a liner for a larger barrel. This would end said flimsiness.

Yup just put 1/2 in. pvc over it. Simple.

[IamSparticus]

cannotaim, on Aug 16 2009, 06:51 PM, said:

IamSparticus, on Aug 16 2009, 03:42 PM, said:

cannotaim, on Aug 16 2009, 06:38 PM, said:

Nerf HQ

Again, the progressive rifling comes to mind.
In that particular case, the flimsy barrel could have been used as a liner for a larger barrel. This would end said flimsiness.

Yup just put 1/2 in. pvc over it. Simple.

See? This is what I was looking for.

[alextwin007]

Using a sabot you have the same problems as using shells, you have to load the dart into them.

[bpso86]

Every time this question comes up someone doesn't think it all the way through.

There are two types of stabilization of a projectile in motion... spin stabilization and mass stabilization. For example, the muskets that were first rifled to increase accuracy were firing round spheres of lead, which had terrible stabilization, so they needed to spin them in order to stabilize them in flight. On the other hand, a bow and arrow works by firing a very long, very front heavy projectile with a force at the rear end. This type of projectile doesn't need spin stabilization, and frankly it would be a waste of time, resources and energy. We properly weight our darts with 90% of the weight in front to naturally stabilize them in flight, since an object with weight near the front and a force at the back will be stable in flight.

There is absolutely no point in rifling a nerf barrel. PERIOD.

[IamSparticus]

bpso86, on Aug 16 2009, 07:11 PM, said:

Every time this question comes up someone doesn't think it all the way through.

There are two types of stabilization of a projectile in motion... spin stabilization and mass stabilization. For example, the muskets that were first rifled to increase accuracy were firing round spheres of lead, which had terrible stabilization, so they needed to spin them in order to stabilize them in flight. On the other hand, a bow and arrow works by firing a very long, very front heavy projectile with a force at the rear end. This type of projectile doesn't need spin stabilization, and frankly it would be a waste of time, resources and energy. We properly weight our darts with 90% of the weight in front to naturally stabilize them in flight, since an object with weight near the front and a force at the back will be stable in flight.

There is absolutely no point in rifling a nerf barrel. PERIOD.

Actually, the bows were spin-stabilized. The fletching made it spin in flight. And mass stabilization only increases the range, not accuracy. Tiny imperfections in the darts could have them going all over the place.

[IamSparticus]

alextwin007, on Aug 16 2009, 07:09 PM, said:

Using a sabot you have the same problems as using shells, you have to load the dart into them.

If you have just a square piece of larger foam behind the dart, that won't be a problem.

[TantumBull]

You're wasting energy used to propel the dart if part of that energy is being used to spin the dart rather than propel it forward. Nerf blasters have a very limited amount of air supply, so this might only be useful on very, very few blasters. And the blasters that it would be useful on all take ridiculously long to prime. So all you're getting is a little bit more accuracy. Whoopdy frickin' doo when the projectile is so slow that accuracy better than it already is is pointless.

[bpso86]

IamSparticus, on Aug 16 2009, 07:16 PM, said:

bpso86, on Aug 16 2009, 07:11 PM, said:

Every time this question comes up someone doesn't think it all the way through.

There are two types of stabilization of a projectile in motion... spin stabilization and mass stabilization. For example, the muskets that were first rifled to increase accuracy were firing round spheres of lead, which had terrible stabilization, so they needed to spin them in order to stabilize them in flight. On the other hand, a bow and arrow works by firing a very long, very front heavy projectile with a force at the rear end. This type of projectile doesn't need spin stabilization, and frankly it would be a waste of time, resources and energy. We properly weight our darts with 90% of the weight in front to naturally stabilize them in flight, since an object with weight near the front and a force at the back will be stable in flight.

There is absolutely no point in rifling a nerf barrel. PERIOD.

Actually, the bows were spin-stabilized. The fletching made it spin in flight. And mass stabilization only increases the range, not accuracy. Tiny imperfections in the darts could have them going all over the place.

It's okay, I don't expect a 13 year old to understand the laws of physics. When you've actually studied the concepts you're talking about, get back to us. How about you try to fire an arrow out of a bow with the same weight as that of a normal arrow on the back and still have it "spin", like you say. Let me know how well your accuracy is with that setup.

You see, I've actually tried these concepts. I've built rockets with no weight on the tip and they just spun on ignition, and then when we added weight to the nose they flew straight. Even with spin added, you still need your C.G. in the correct position for stable flight. I can also say that I fire nerf darts with insignificant changes in accuracy that were the ugliest darts I've ever seen, but they had the right weight in the front. You can use your "theories" all you want, but when some of us here have actually done the things that we discuss, you'd better believe us.

[MoonMaster]

As long as the center of gravity is ahead of the center of pressure, the dart will be stable. Rifling nerf darts is a pointless waste of the gun's energy, as the darts are already as stable as they can be, and rifling will sap energy from the dart. This is not a useful endeavor for anything but evenly weighted darts, and I don't see why you would want to do that.

[SchizophrenicMC]

Might I just add my two cents?

This is NERF, not Airsoft. We do not need spin-stabilization, primarily due to range limitations, secondarily due to mass-stabilization. To keep a BB or Pellet stable in the air, you must give it backspin, which is within the capabilities of a larger gun firing a smaller projectile. In nerf, you're firing an elongated projectile, which has a center of gravity far forward. In rifles, the barrel is such for accuracy at very long range. Nerf doesn't even come close, further lowering its necessity.

All arguments previously raised, I know, but it's to add strength to the argument.

Welcome to NH, but realize that NH is not short for NHQ.

[VelveetaAvenger]

bpso86, on Aug 16 2009, 06:11 PM, said:

Every time this question comes up someone doesn't think it all the way through.

There are two types of stabilization of a projectile in motion... spin stabilization and mass stabilization. For example, the muskets that were first rifled to increase accuracy were firing round spheres of lead, which had terrible stabilization, so they needed to spin them in order to stabilize them in flight.

Has anybody attempted rifling for Nerf balls? I vaguely remember a thread about attempting to put backspin on them, but it might have been mostly just a theory post.

↓ Ah, I remember now, thanks.

Edited by VelveetaAvenger, 16 August 2009 - 09:55 PM.

[ggk]

VelveetaAvenger they were talking about if you put tape on the top of the end of the barrel it would cause the ball to grip and give it backspin. But I had never heard if that helped at all.

[alextwin007]

IamSparticus, on Aug 16 2009, 07:18 PM, said:

alextwin007, on Aug 16 2009, 07:09 PM, said:

Using a sabot you have the same problems as using shells, you have to load the dart into them.

If you have just a square piece of larger foam behind the dart, that won't be a problem.

A square piece of foam will not have a good seal in a riffled barrel. Also then your incresing the friction needed to propel the dart. The sabot would have to be shaped like the ammunition for early rifled cannons in the civl war.

[IamSparticus]

alextwin007, on Aug 17 2009, 12:09 AM, said:

IamSparticus, on Aug 16 2009, 07:18 PM, said:

alextwin007, on Aug 16 2009, 07:09 PM, said:

Using a sabot you have the same problems as using shells, you have to load the dart into them.

If you have just a square piece of larger foam behind the dart, that won't be a problem.

A square piece of foam will not have a good seal in a riffled barrel. Also then your incresing the friction needed to propel the dart. The sabot would have to be shaped like the ammunition for early rifled cannons in the civl war.

by "Square" I mean a piece of foam as ling as it is wide. And yes, that shape would do it.

[alextwin007]

IamSparticus, on Aug 17 2009, 02:50 PM, said:

alextwin007, on Aug 17 2009, 12:09 AM, said:

IamSparticus, on Aug 16 2009, 07:18 PM, said:

alextwin007, on Aug 16 2009, 07:09 PM, said:

Using a sabot you have the same problems as using shells, you have to load the dart into them.

If you have just a square piece of larger foam behind the dart, that won't be a problem.

A square piece of foam will not have a good seal in a riffled barrel. Also then your incresing the friction needed to propel the dart. The sabot would have to be shaped like the ammunition for early rifled cannons in the civl war.

by "Square" I mean a piece of foam as ling as it is wide. And yes, that shape would do it.

Even a cylindrical piece of FBR won’t have a good seal in a rifled barrel you’d need a foam that is less dense. In addition if the small piece of foam is propelling the dart then how will you get the dart to spin?

[VelveetaAvenger]

Since trying to get a dart to spin inside a barrel seems impossible, what would happen if you hooked up a motor and had the entire barrel spinning with the dart inside it? If the barrel is spinning when the dart leaves it, the dart should continue spinning as it flies, right?

↓@Split: Ah, cool. I figured that somebody had thought about it before. I've got an Axe-Man down the street, so next time I'm bored I might try to make one, despite the general consensus that it is pointless.

Edited by VelveetaAvenger, 17 August 2009 - 08:12 PM.