Vudoo V22S SS BR/F Class Action

[RAVAGE88]

Mike we have tried to communicate before without success. So I doubt we ever will.

You and I both understand exactly why you will not answer direct questions about your action design.

But as said before you don't need to. Let it go at that.

TKH

Tony, I’m trying very hard to communicate with you, and I want to communicate with you, but like I said, you’re not in a place to be open to understanding it. If you were, I’d type out every equation right here because I do like sharing this stuff. There’s a thread on SH with 127 or so pages that’s been running since Aug 2017 that says so.

Also, you claim to understand why I “won’t answer direct questions” about my action design and claim that I share the same understanding, but I have to ask, what is that alleged understanding? I’m not trying to fight, I’m just trying to understand how all these claims can be made about various things, to include what it is that I’m supposed to understand about not answering direct questions....I find all this very baffling because you conduct yourself differently over on SH. Maybe we should move this over there so whatever it is about BR forums won’t be looming over our heads....jus sayin.

MB

 

[Hozzie]

I will take a stab at this based on what little I understand, but looking at Hoop Stress (using stress because I found a calculation for it and it would seem that more stress is less desirable, but I could be wrong) if we do the calculations based on 15k of pressure (rimfire is probably less) we get:

From what I can gather:
Hoop Stress = (Pressure*radius (to half of wall thickness))/Wall Thickness
Axial Stress = (Pressure*radius (to half of wall thickness))/2*Wall Thickness

It would seem to me Axial stress is at least as important as it would seem to include a longitudinal aspect so I am including it. (Again may be way off base)

1.35" action with 1.062 tenon:
Hoop Stress: 31,406
(15000*(1.35/2-((1.35-1.062)/4))) / ((1.35-1.062)/2)
Axial Stress: 15,703
(15000*(1.35/2-((1.35-1.062)/4))) / 2 * ((1.35-1.062)/2)

1.35" action with .750 tenon:
Hoop Stress: 26,250
(15000*(1.35/2-((1.35-.750)/4))) / ((1.35-.750)/2)
Axial Stress: 13,125
(15000*(1.35/2-((1.35-.750)/4))) / 2 *((1.35-1.750)/2)

What doesn't necessarily make sense to me in this is that tenon length doesn't seem to come into play as this is more about a cylinder pressure. Hoop strength seems more to be about pressures exerted externally around a cylinder and doesn't take into account some of the static stresses from the barrel itself hanging out front. Maybe there is another hoop strength calculation that takes this into account?

Just trying to understand and put some real numbers into the equation to make sense of things. If I am way of base, please correct if you can. If it makes no sense whatsoever I will remove it all, but also would like to understand.

It may be that so long as the stress is not above the tolerance for the material it doesn't really matter. Or does it also have to do with having less chance to crush the chamber since there is more material on the tenon itself?

 

[RAVAGE88]

I will take a stab at this based on what little I understand, but looking at Hoop Stress (using stress because I found a calculation for it and it would seem that more stress is less desirable, but I could be wrong) if we do the calculations based on 15k of pressure (rimfire is probably less) we get:

From what I can gather:
Hoop Stress = (Pressure*radius (to half of wall thickness))/Wall Thickness
Axial Stress = (Pressure*radius (to half of wall thickness))/2*Wall Thickness

It would seem to me Axial stress is at least as important as it would seem to include a longitudinal aspect so I am including it. (Again may be way off base)

1.35" action with 1.062 tenon:
Hoop Stress: 31,406
(15000*(1.35/2-((1.35-1.062)/4))) / ((1.35-1.062)/2)
Axial Stress: 15,703
(15000*(1.35/2-((1.35-1.062)/4))) / 2 * ((1.35-1.062)/2)

1.35" action with .750 tenon:
Hoop Stress: 26,250
(15000*(1.35/2-((1.35-.750)/4))) / ((1.35-.750)/2)
Axial Stress: 13,125
(15000*(1.35/2-((1.35-.750)/4))) / 2 *((1.35-1.750)/2)

What doesn't necessarily make sense to me in this is that tenon length doesn't seem to come into play as this is more about a cylinder pressure. Hoop strength seems more to be about pressures exerted externally around a cylinder and doesn't take into account some of the static stresses from the barrel itself hanging out front. Maybe there is another hoop strength calculation that takes this into account?

Just trying to understand and put some real numbers into the equation to make sense of things. If I am way of base, please correct if you can. If it makes no sense whatsoever I will remove it all, but also would like to understand.

It may be that so long as the stress is not above the tolerance for the material it doesn't really matter. Or does it also have to do with having less chance to crush the chamber since there is more material on the tenon itself?

Finally! I could just hug your neck Jamie....the length of the tenon doesn’t matter as it relates to the yield of the hoop and there are also other factors at play here as well, but I really appreciate you using your noggin.

Primarily, what you see above is, the “argument“ about tenon diameter as it relates to “support” is unfounded, especially for rimfire. Also, these numbers, although they may not represent exactly the material yield, pressures, etc., are better coming from you as all that’s heard when I say these things is, “your baby is ugly.”

AWESOME post Hozzie....

MB

 

[Tony K Harper]

J2hoskins,

Thanks for going to the trouble of doing the math on hoop strength. But in all honesty hoop strength, strength of the action ring, or tenon thickness/length have nothing to do with the point I was trying to avoid making. We only got off on this because it is so absurd one would think thinner metal is stronger than thicker metal of the same type and shape. I just could not believe anyone would argue that point. Damn, one would think schedule 40 pipe should tell you something.

The point I was avoiding has been addressed elsewhere.

TKH

 

[RAVAGE88]

J2hoskins,

Thanks for going to the trouble of doing the math on hoop strength. But in all honesty hoop strength, strength of the action ring, or tenon thickness/length have nothing to do with the point I was trying to avoid making. We only got off on this because it is so absurd one would think thinner metal is stronger than thicker metal of the same type and shape. I just could not believe anyone would argue that point. Damn, one would think schedule 40 pipe should tell you something.

The point I was avoiding has been addressed elsewhere.

TKH

Tony, if you have a point, make it, especially if you can back it up with sound Engineering....otherwise, what you’re saying is just another specious argument. Like I said, you’re not open to facts as they were clearly laid out above. If you want to equate your point to something else and have a reasonable discussion about it without you presenting yourself as the voice of authority in a subject you know little to nothing about, I’ll crunch the numbers right here in front of you, so make the point or just stop posting in my thread.

MB

 

[Tim Slater]

Finally! I could just hug your neck Jamie....the length of the tenon doesn’t matter as it relates to the yield of the hoop and there are also other factors at play here as well, but I really appreciate you using your noggin.

MB

Does that mean the length of the tenon doesn't matter? I am an engineering ignoramus, so I have probably misunderstood.

 

[RAVAGE88]

Does that mean the length of the tenon doesn't matter? I am an engineering ignoramus, so I have probably misunderstood.

Only for the purposes of this discussion....

Thanks Tim,

MB

 

[Tony K Harper]

Tony, if you have a point, make it, especially if you can back it up with sound Engineering....otherwise, what you’re saying is just another specious argument. Like I said, you’re not open to facts as they were clearly laid out above. If you want to equate your point to something else and have a reasonable discussion about it without you presenting yourself as the voice of authority in a subject you know little to nothing about, I’ll crunch the numbers right here in front of you, so make the point or just stop posting in my thread.

MB

MB,

You have been in RFBR about a minute now, and I doubt you know anything about tuning a rimfire.

You say I present myself as a voice of authority. Well, I am the all time leader in the IR 50/50 Hall of Fame, with more than 900 points.

I also hold the Medal of Honor (indoor and outdoor) in the American Rimfire Association (ARA) Hall of fame.

I've won seven Professional Shooting League (PSL) events.

I've won four ARA Nationals.

I've won three IR 50/50 6 gun Nationals.

I've won four IR 50/50 Sporter Nationals, not to mention the Regional and state tournaments.

I don't know what engineering awards you have won but remember you are building these things for us to shoot not for your own amusement.

Do a little research, perhaps you will find the reason other popular custom RFBR action makers use a .750 tenon.

I've watched other action makers go through this same process, they started wrong and did not want to go back to the drawing board.

Eventually they came around, you will to, if you stay the course.

I will get off your thread so you can get back to your key board and redesign your action.

TKH

 

[Hozzie]

I realize the topic got off to Hoop Stress and I think I understand that is about internal force pushing out and around the cylinder, but I also think I understand what point Tony is getting at as well (don't want to speak for him so I will ask in my own way). I think we may be debating apples to oranges a bit, but also don't understand how the cylindrical stress impacts the vertical stress where the barrel meets the action.

If we ignore the pressure from the cartridge being ignited and pushing out against action (what I see as Hoop stress), there is certainly still a force being applied in an upward direction where the tenon meets the action. At it's simplest, its a an equal and opposite force calculation based on how long the barrel is, it's weight, etc.

To me there would be three main outside aspects that then would affect this joints rigidity (and ability to counteract this vertical stress). One is the type and number of threads per inch and how much force this counteracts. I suppose in a perfect fit, this is more about horizontal force as it pulls shoulder against the face of the action. 2nd would be how much of that force is managed by the shoulder against the face of the action. And third, how much of that force is then also spread to the walls of the action where it threads in. I suspect this force actually utilizes much more of the action length than just the joint length itself.

It would appear that all else being equal, and assuming for example the action is bolted into an immovable mount (just for arguments sake) that if one was to apply force on the end of the barrel in the vertical plane, then it would seem that an action with a thinner wall would not be able to counteract as much force as that with a thicker wall before some type of deformation would take place. I don't think this is really a big surprise.

Now, the question then becomes, is there ever enough force applied through gravity to a barrel to make this a real issue assuming proper fit of threading specs, tenon length, etc based on the material being used? I don't know the answer to that question, but it's clear that Mike doesn't think it does or I don't think he would have done what he did.

With that being said and I think the question some would like to understand is what Advantage does the larger tenon diameter provide that the smaller doesn't. I think that may be proprietary, but trying to get to the real root of the questions.

 

[VLNBYR]

It does make a difference...about 50 points total on a seasons worth of ARA targets. That shooter agging 1999.9 could have been a 2000.

 

[Tony K Harper]

I realize the topic got off to Hoop Stress and I think I understand that is about internal force pushing out and around the cylinder, but I also think I understand what point Tony is getting at as well (don't want to speak for him so I will ask in my own way). I think we may be debating apples to oranges a bit, but also don't understand how the cylindrical stress impacts the vertical stress where the barrel meets the action.

If we ignore the pressure from the cartridge being ignited and pushing out against action (what I see as Hoop stress), there is certainly still a force being applied in an upward direction where the tenon meets the action. At it's simplest, its a an equal and opposite force calculation based on how long the barrel is, it's weight, etc.

To me there would be three main outside aspects that then would affect this joints rigidity (and ability to counteract this vertical stress). One is the type and number of threads per inch and how much force this counteracts. I suppose in a perfect fit, this is more about horizontal force as it pulls shoulder against the face of the action. 2nd would be how much of that force is managed by the shoulder against the face of the action. And third, how much of that force is then also spread to the walls of the action where it threads in. I suspect this force actually utilizes much more of the action length than just the joint length itself.

It would appear that all else being equal, and assuming for example the action is bolted into an immovable mount (just for arguments sake) that if one was to apply force on the end of the barrel in the vertical plane, then it would seem that an action with a thinner wall would not be able to counteract as much force as that with a thicker wall before some type of deformation would take place. I don't think this is really a big surprise.

Now, the question then becomes, is there ever enough force applied through gravity to a barrel to make this a real issue assuming proper fit of threading specs, tenon length, etc based on the material being used? I don't know the answer to that question, but it's clear that Mike doesn't think it does or I don't think he would have done what he did.

With that being said and I think the question some would like to understand is what Advantage does the larger tenon diameter provide that the smaller doesn't. I think that may be proprietary, but trying to get to the real root of the questions.

Jamie,

I tried to avoid all this in many of my post. In post #88 I asked your question. To date I've got no answers to any direct questions.

TKH

 

[Tony K Harper]

It does make a difference...about 50 points total on a seasons worth of ARA targets. That shooter agging 1999.9 could have been a 2000.

John,

I don't know where you came up with that but whatever the right number is, I still believe if it is worth doing it is worth doing right.

I've been beat by less than 50 points.

TKH

 

[group therapy]

!! WHERE IS MY POPCORN?!!!!!!!

 

[Tony K Harper]

During the 25 years I was in the USAF we told a lot of engineers their designs did not meet our requirements. You really don't understand the way the world works do you?

Let's stop the back and forth and when you come out with your next generation action we will take another look.
TKH

 

[Dub]

!! WHERE IS MY POPCORN?!!!!!!!

I ate it already....

 

[gkgeiger]

I hope this thread doesn’t disappear.

 

[Tony K Harper]

Tony, you’ve somehow mistaken me for someone that gives a rats ass about your accomplishments and anytime you may have spent in the air force. You somehow seem to think that what you have to say will affect any direction I’ll go in what I do, but to me, you’re that guy with the broom that brushes the ice in front of the big rock in the curling event at the Winter Olympics....truth of the matter is, I didn’t design this action for you, you never crossed my mind. And you’re showing everyone here why that is; you simply have no clue how this really works and that’s the reason I will never entertain any direct questions from you....sound familiar?

Hozzie is the only one that’s thinking about what’s being said here with some really good input from John, so, get over yourself Tony....


MB

That is pretty rich coming from someone with no accomplishments. I am quite sure you don't care about anything but your own ego.
You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink.

TKH

 

[VLNBYR]

Tony...MB...& All...I pulled those 50 points out of my you know where. I figure my numbers are as good as anyone else's since I don't see anything better. Until I see definitive data I'll have to go by what my holes in the paper tell me.

 

[Tony K Harper]

Tony...MB...& All...I pulled those 50 points out of my you know where. I figure my numbers are as good as anyone else's since I don't see anything better. Until I see definitive data I'll have to go by what my holes in the paper tell me.

John,

Since we often don't have definitive data I agree those holes in the paper are about the best place to look.

I have one question. Of the rifles you currently use to compete, how many of them have a 1.062 hole in the front ring?

TKH

 

[Jefferson]

Oh, now I get it, you’re using skewed logic to discuss the merits of proper engineering....got it. So, using the Harper logic, I should be able to get out of the seat of a Bell 412EP and go tell the engineers that designed it that they know not what they’re doing. You also seem to believe that the world of “RFBR” has the ability to defy all the laws of physics, etc., because Harper said a piece of 40 schedule pipe is how he relates proper engineering to his receiver. What a joke, Tony.

It must be really dark where your head has been stuck all these years.

MB

sir I own a voodoo right now and it is pretty nice

Mr. Harper is one of the few (dozen or so) folks (non calfee term as being used here) I would trust to know how to get features that work in a design of a RIMFIRE ACTION and possibly a stock or tuner, trigger not sure

you would be well advised to ask his opinion in a phone call or personal attendance to see what has worked over the last decade and more importantly,

perhaps what has not worked

also Landry is pretty bright as well, and Landry might remember me as buying the Robertson stocked tuner gun from him a decade ago or more

jefferson in canada