NightHawkInLight Posted February 25, 2011 Posted February 25, 2011 Yeah I agree there. It's a pain to feed blackmatch through longer than 3'. Unless it was wound into it along side the dowel. As I said though, you can roll an infinite length if you use two strips, the same way spiral wound tubes are made commercially. The only thing to overcome is designing something to glue the strips as you pull on them.
xBangergoosEx Posted February 25, 2011 Author Posted February 25, 2011 Thanks for the input guys. Some of you need to stop being so sensitive. Everyone has a different way of doing things, and just because someone's method is different from yours means that its right. Just saying.
NightHawkInLight Posted February 25, 2011 Posted February 25, 2011 Alright Dagabu, here's your tube: 1/4" ID x 4' with no growth. Two strips, one paper, the other tape so I wouldn't have to mess with adhesive. Both were rolled around a 1/4"x6" steel rod which was pulled forward as the tube advanced. Neither strip ever lays on itself so the tube never grows in diameter. This is exactly how spiral wound tubes are made commercially in potentially unending lengths, and why they are cheaper than parallel wound. If I were to guess why they are not used for quickmatch commercially it is because of their lack of tensile strength. They may unravel when pulled from the ends. Besides that, there are ways to make an unending single wall parallel tube with simple machinery as well, so there is no reason to use the weaker variety. Looks like I'm going to have to make a demonstration of such a machine if it's as desired as this thread seems to indicate.
dagabu Posted February 25, 2011 Posted February 25, 2011 NHIL, It looks like you have the mid layer down nicely but underneath that second layer is a overlapped layer that creates a 'bump' that the mid layer covers. This is the method I was explaining, thanks for the picture. To further explain what happens when you make a spiral tube with one layer without pressure, heat or water, think of taking a roll of paper and pulling the core in one direction and the outer portion in another direction. You will get a cone every time. Algenco, I agree that one doesn't need a section longer then 4' most of the time but there are times where it is necessary to have longer runs or where splicing ruins the integrity of the QM or changes the speed so that all parts will not light at the same time. In this case, BM is fed into a convolute tube made as the paper is pulled through a folding shoe. The reason this method is used and not spiral winding is because spiral tubes tend to break when bent or folded. When I attach leaders to my shells, I fold the QM up and put a rubber band or a piece of paper tape over it to hold it in a nice compact package. That is difficult to do with spiral wound tubes due to the thickness needed to contain the fire long enough to propagate the flame front at a consistent speed. If you all disagree with me that is fine, I dont mind at all. If it ticks you off, lets sit down at PGI and make QM using both methods and then we will test them on site. It will become clear very quickly why it is made commercially using convolute pipe.
xBangergoosEx Posted February 27, 2011 Author Posted February 27, 2011 I personally use the method that Dag uses because i dont need 10'+ of quickmatch pipe
davis050594 Posted March 1, 2011 Posted March 1, 2011 I find it rather humorous that the two arguing about the methods can easily attain commercial qm
Richtee Posted March 1, 2011 Posted March 1, 2011 Hmm, I heard last year it had been changed to 1.1 glad to hear I'm wrong on thatI dunno WHICH it is, but they confiscated all my pre-made QM back in the day. Sooo...it's SOMETHING you can't have sitting on a workbench.
Recommended Posts