Concerning pasting/spiking

[Richtee]

I was wondering about the physics of the paste/spike. Seems of course you want either to be "strong" in construction. But, what about a secondary layer that has a little "give" THEN before complete burst, tightens up?

 

For example a good tight spike, then a marginally looser one? Any thoughts?

[ExplosiveCoek]

Why would you do that?

 

Never seen that before.. Also I haven't read anything about that in Fulcanelli.

 

Just normal spiking + pasting should combined with the right breackcharge should be enough to get a nice break from a can shell.

[Pretty green flame]

Hmm, to be honest I can't really see how another more "loose" string wrap would be beneficial, though I understand what you're saying I doubt it would be any better. A nice and tight string wrap is more than sufficient in providing strong confinement. In regards to pasting shells, I like to use more layers of a thinner kind of paper (20lb-30lb), firstly it adheres better and provides a better seal around the spolette, it's quicker as it absorbs the paste more quickly, and it gives a better break in my opinion. I think the gigher ammount of paste used gives a more brittle casing, thus it shatters better, IMHO.

 

This goes for canisters though, pasting round shells with thin paper would drive me crazy, probably....

 

Another thing, using recycled paper (which has no grain) is better for small bombettes, I feel that they break more symetrically due to the weak (weaker compared to kraft) case.

[andyboy]

Another thing, using recycled paper (which has no grain) is better for small bombettes, I feel that they break more symetrically due to the weak (weaker compared to kraft) case.

 

I use recycled paper for almost everything. I bought a few rolls of paper used to protect your floors when painting and such. I find it soaks up paste more readily and it is easier since you don't have to "brake" the grain before pasting. Great to make your own tubes with as well since it stretches when wet and shrinks while drying, although some would disagree that this is a good thing.

 

But like you said, I use the thinner craft for the first layers, sometimes I will use silk paper: This kind when I want a really hard break. That and the fact that it is a lot easier to work with regarding paper that doesn't want to stick where I put it makes it the best choice sometimes. Especially as the final layer on shells that I want to show of before I set them of.

Edited February 5, 2009 by andyboy

[Mumbles]

I think you'd be surprised at how much give a traditionally made shell will have from just the string and paste. I've heard well respected people say that if one were to watch it in super slow motion it would balloon out to an almost spherical shape before giving way.

 

Maybe call up the Mythbusters with their super-slo-mo camera. They seem to like to blow stuff up for no reason. Although, there is no doubt they would make a shitty shell, using asinine info they find in 15 minutes on the internet, and make it from duct tape, polyester twine, and ballistics gelatin.

 

I agree with the thinner paper to a point. I use 30lb to paste in 3 and 4". I also tend to use an initial layer of 30lb on bigger shells as a fire seal. I take great effort to ensure that my shells are well sealed, and have never had a flower pot. I do use 70lb on the subsequent paste wraps though. With 5 and 6" shells, the 70lb lays down with no problems when properly broken in. I'm a bit worried about too many layers essentially causing a driven in shell, or spongey bottoms. I've heard others claim that many layers of thinner paper give more of a crown, which is not ideal for stacking multibreaks.

[tentacles]

Maybe call up the Mythbusters with their super-slo-mo camera. They seem to like to blow stuff up for no reason. Although, there is no doubt they would make a shitty shell, using asinine info they find in 15 minutes on the internet, and make it from duct tape, polyester twine, and ballistics gelatin.

 

And fill it full of KMnO4-Mg flash, no doubt.

[Richtee]

And fill it full of KMnO4-Mg flash, no doubt.

Ouch... Well that MIGHT be the end of our pain? ;{)

 

I'm going to consider a couple /few BP ground salutes. Minor sized it'll be all about the containment. I figger that would be the optimum arena for the demo eh? Any other suggestions?

[Pretty green flame]

A regular canister shell would give a more definitive result than a BP salute, a canister shell will provide visible results such as the spread in the sky and simetry of the break. In regards to salutes, i think it's generally accepted that a stronger case gives a more powerful report

[Richtee]

A regular canister shell would give a more definitive result than a BP salute, a canister shell will provide visible results such as the spread in the sky and simetry of the break. In regards to salutes, i think it's generally accepted that a stronger case gives a more powerful report

 

Hmmm... but small BP devices may be easily seen to improve as well, no? But I see your point. Well, I was just wondering if there was any experience with any of this out there. As I don't really build cannister shells yet I guess it'll have to wait.

 

Sometimes I think about silly things heh...

[Mumbles]

I guess you could compare traditionally built shells to pseudo-rinfasciature. Just use the second spiking as a bit looser. They're supposed to be somewhat equal, so I guess it could work. Therre is no pasting either.

[psyco_1322]

What about spiking ball shells? I know the Maltese do it, but they completely cover the shell in twin. I have plenty of room in a gun with these strangely undersized shells for some string. Post your thoughts.