I mistakenly typed BPS, the shotgun is a good design and not one requiring much in the way of repair. What I meant to post was the BBR the replacement for the Safari/Medallion/Olympian.
I agree with you.
Mark Begich, Joaquin Jackson, and Heller resistance... Three huge reasons to worry about the NRA.
I mistakenly typed BPS, the shotgun is a good design and not one requiring much in the way of repair. What I meant to post was the BBR the replacement for the Safari/Medallion/Olympian.
the hollow form has more surface area ,+ that makes it stiffer
Not in any engineering that I have seen...
In general, stiffness increases in wood as a function of the width multiplied by the square of the depth and all calculations flow from the cross sectional area of the "beam."
It is true you can lighten a structure a great deal by coring it... provided you increase the depth of the beam enough to make up the losses in cross sectional area.
I would love to see an example of a homogeneous beam less stiff then a cored beam of identical material and external dimension.
Mark Begich, Joaquin Jackson, and Heller resistance... Three huge reasons to worry about the NRA.
Yeah, the solid would be stronger but not by much. The outside edge of the beam, furthest from the neutral point is where tension and compression are the highest (and where spreading over area comes in). Tension and compression diminish the closer to the neutral axis. I would guess by square law but I don't know.
Anyway the gory details don't make much difference in strengthening a forearm beyond a solid beam will add a lot of weight with little gain in stiffness.
The key elements in human thinking are not numbers but labels of fuzzy sets. -- L. Zadeh
Yeah, the solid would be stronger but not by much. The outside edge of the beam, furthest from the neutral point is where tension and compression are the highest (and where spreading over area comes in). Tension and compression diminish the closer to the neutral axis. I would guess by square law but I don't know.
Anyway the gory details don't make much difference in strengthening a forearm beyond a solid beam will add a lot of weight with little gain in stiffness.
Sorry, but your answer proves you do not understand how it works... My previous post should give you an idea, but if you do not understand it instantly there is an issue with your background and you might need some help figuring it out. You are WAY off base with what you propose. The solid would be MUCH stiffer. You have to take advantage of a cube function to gain much by coring and that requires an increase in depth externally.
A solid beam fore end cannot be matched by a hollow beam unless you add significant depth.
Mark Begich, Joaquin Jackson, and Heller resistance... Three huge reasons to worry about the NRA.
If you'd actually paid attention to what I wrote you would see that I'm agreeing with you and saying the same thing except in a more generalized way. We don't all work with just wood. As far as weight and balance goes, my closing sentence is a pretty clear hint that it is a major consideration.
The key elements in human thinking are not numbers but labels of fuzzy sets. -- L. Zadeh
If you'd actually paid attention to what I wrote you would see that I'm agreeing with you and saying the same thing except in a more generalized way. We don't all work with just wood. As far as weight and balance goes, my closing sentence is a pretty clear hint that it is a major consideration.
Okay, starting with the start and working down the line...
The solid would be stronger... but by a LOT... not the "little" you suggest. Would be happy to play the math for you to understand...
You do not understand the concept of squares versus simple multiplication... period. It is huge.
Bullshit! A solid bean can add little weight, might even lose significant weight, but solids do not mean an increase.
Looking at the "Range" in math terms shows your statement is so far out there it is beneath ridiculous.
So, please, carry on!
Mark Begich, Joaquin Jackson, and Heller resistance... Three huge reasons to worry about the NRA.
...The outside edge of the beam, furthest from the neutral point is where tension and compression are the highest...
This part of your statement is correct. It is the extreme fibers that take most of the load. Hence the thicker the beam, the stiffer it gets.
A hollow form OF THE SAME WEIGHT will be stiffer because the extreme fibers will be farther apart. However the inner fibers, the "core" keep the extreme fibers from collapsing.
"There's more to optics than meets the eye."--anon
"...most of us would be better off losing half a pound around the waist than half a pound on our rifle."--dhg
pal, added a link to my last post which makes for a nice explanation of what's going on. Not sure if we're on the same page but the material on one side of the beam is all in tension and the material on the opposite side is all in compression. How much is a function of distance from the neutral axis. (an exponential)
The key elements in human thinking are not numbers but labels of fuzzy sets. -- L. Zadeh
I understand EXACTLY what you wrote and the pdf you posted.
What I wrote explains why your answer is a goofball answer in the situation of a rifle fore end. Got it?
With the same weight in the same material you can make a tube stiffer than a solid rod. You will notice I stated that is a function of the fact deflection in the same material is a function of the depth of a beam squared multiplied by the width. The deflection resistance is higher in a tube of equal weight because its depth is greater...
Now, to do that the tube has to be significantly larger in diameter. A fore end is only so large. In the same outside dimension ( the ONLY valid case in a fore end) the more carbon fiber you put in there the stiffer the fore end will be, period!
If you engineered an intricate web of carbon in the fore end you can save weight and it will be stiff enough... but voids will make it less stiff, period.
Mark Begich, Joaquin Jackson, and Heller resistance... Three huge reasons to worry about the NRA.
...The outside edge of the beam, furthest from the neutral point is where tension and compression are the highest...
This part of your statement is correct. It is the extreme fibers that take most of the load. Hence the thicker the beam, the stiffer it gets.
A hollow form OF THE SAME WEIGHT will be stiffer because the extreme fibers will be farther apart. However the inner fibers, the "core" keep the extreme fibers from collapsing.
I know you understand...
Mark Begich, Joaquin Jackson, and Heller resistance... Three huge reasons to worry about the NRA.
some one said a fluted rifle barrel is stiffer than no flutes? more surface ? it would surely be lighter how can lighter be stronger I don't know makes my head hurt to think about such things.
some one said a fluted rifle barrel is stiffer than no flutes? more surface ? it would surely be lighter how can lighter be stronger I don't know makes my head hurt to think about such things.
If a fluted barrel is the same weight as a non-fluted barrel and the same bore diameter and length it will have a larger diameter and will be stiffer.
Mark Begich, Joaquin Jackson, and Heller resistance... Three huge reasons to worry about the NRA.
As we get close to solid, we gain very little.... that is why birds have hollow bones. That is why your fishing pole is hollow.
There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self. -Ernest Hemingway The man who makes no mistakes does not usually make anything.-- Edward John Phelps
![[Linked Image]](http://www.homemetalshopclub.org/news/jan03/tube_drawing.gif)
![[Linked Image]](http://www.homemetalshopclub.org/news/jan03/deflection_thickness_weight.gif)