Shooting a suppressor 'wet'

[TattooedGun]

First round pop- this may or not not have much to do with 'burning oxygen',though it's not implausible that any oxygen would be burned;( maybe more accurate than 'oxygen ignites the burning powder passing through' ). But it would also be replaced from the atmosphere,as gasses exit the mod.

 

So,unless someone has done a James Bond test,and blown the gases out immediately after the non verterinary shot,and then fired again (should be another pop?), what is the interval normally between first 'pop' shot,and a subsequent second 'pop' shot...presumably it is more than the typical 8-10 seconds between shots....is it slowed by quickly taping up the muzzle to retard replacement oxygen entering...etc....

 

Puzzling too,why a film of water would prevent the pop-I can see if the moderator is (fairly) full of water/gel etcor replaced by an inert gas,oxygen will be reduced-but if it's just 'wetted"..which I take to mean the surfaces are 'sprayed' but not immersed....won't there be enough oxygen to still 'pop'..on that theory...

Well considering that when oxygen and fuel burns it creates carbon dioxide, and since the bolt is closed making the barrel and moderator closed at one end so there is no airflow, it's a fair assumption to make that it does not get oxygenated all too quickly from the atmosphere.

 

I believe that the film of water is to cool the gasses that come through making it a much less energetic ignition of oxygen that is in the moderator, converting a lot of the energy into making steam, and filling the chamber with steam as opposed to burning gasses, or at least less burning gasses (that make the bang).

 

Although that's just a theory with my admittedly basic understanding of physics.

[TattooedGun]

Matt,if having some anti pop gel presquirted into the taped up mod is unappealing,have you thought of fitting conveyor belt material instead of metal baffles with holes....self healing,though the terminal effect outside would not be...in veterinary applications,of course.....

 

I'm sure I'd seen some mod designs that utilised some vulcanised rubber in their design as you have mentioned.

 

The major issue I see with this is from an accuracy point of view. If you're firing bullets into something that is touching the bullet, especially something that will wear out, then at some point the contact points of the membrane on the bullet wil change and the point of impact will change on target. Of course, on "veterinary applications" I'd suggest that the distance between the shooter and the target would make any effect on accuracy of this type of moderator a moot point...

[gbal]

Well considering that when oxygen and fuel burns it creates carbon dioxide, and since the bolt is closed making the barrel and moderator closed at one end so there is no airflow, it's a fair assumption to make that it does not get oxygenated all too quickly from the atmosphere.

 

I believe that the film of water is to cool the gasses that come through making it a much less energetic ignition of oxygen that is in the moderator, converting a lot of the energy into making steam, and filling the chamber with steam as opposed to burning gasses, or at least less burning gasses (that make the bang).

 

Although that's just a theory with my admittedly basic understanding of physics.

 

My point was more that the burning fuel (powder) was already ignited ('burning"),but that it may well consume/burn any normal atmospheric oxygen in the mod.But it's a very minor point-the mod gas (oxygen) is burned,and contributes to the already considerable amount of 'exhaust gasses' from the burned 'Fuel'. There isn't that much oxygen in a cartridge on ignition,but a lot of gas is created.

If the waterin the mod slows this,any minor extra 'gas' effect will be reduced.

But the main point is that the atmosphere will soon replace the escaping gases,even without the movie hero's puff-so there will be another 'pop' fairly soon-but how soon....not within a very few seconds....and if not,that would support a gas 'burning' explanation,....as would replacing oxygen with CO2,or indeed displacing it with gel etc...so IF the idea has any credence,less oxygen,less 'pop'.

Main point is that it's testable,just a pity the Bond movie didn't finish the experiment properly-I would not have thought Bond liked pop ! (not that the movies are much of an alternative to the lab). :-)

 

gbal

[Grum87]

By the by, thinking about this, the pop must be a manifestation of secondary flash.

I'd be interested to learn if all suppressor designs experience 'first round pop'; or just some of them.

I'd suspect that first round pop will be a feature of designs that don't diffuse the intitial gases quickly enough and provide a good resevoir of air in the initial spaces - I'd hazard a guess that such suppressors have a large empty first compartment and symmetrical baffle stacks. In contrast, I'd suspect that suppressors with small compartments and asymmetric internals designed to maximise turbulent flow will be less likely to 'pop'.

 

 

My ASE NS3 goes with an audible pop on the first shot. Time, and time again. I often shoot 2x 5 shot groups and walk down range, taking the moderator with me to run air through it to cool it a little faster between strings. Obviously, this purges it of exhaust gasses and fills the moderator up with air again. Sure enough, first round of the string, pop goes the erm, moderator. It'll do it running .308 or .223 through it.