Effects of Sound Suppressors on Muzzle Velocity, Bullet Yaw, and Drag

TripleBull

This one goes to 11
Feb 13, 2017
2,191
3,629
113
#2
Thank you, Theis. It would be interesting to see the results with solids as a function of spin rate.
 
Last edited:
Likes: THEIS

lash

Swamp Rat
Sep 28, 2012
3,072
771
113
59
Central Florida
#3
This ties into Jim Boatright's writing about barrel and brake induced yaw. But it also seems to indicate that the proper suppressor could be combined with a faster twist rate when shooting solids to further enhance initial yaw reduction. The paper and study is food for thought but leaves a lot wanting in my estimation. First there needs to be more studies of larger samplings to reproduce the results. Second, this study seems very much like it was done largely to promote the two-stage symmetric suppressor design by some of the authors vs. another (well recognized) name brand suppressor of the mouse hole/K-baffle design. The suppressor manufacturer sponsored, set-up and supported the whole study resulting in this paper.

Please don't get me wrong by thinking that I am calling into question the results of the study. I have not seen any of the data nor the raw results, nor do I wish to call into question the integrity of the authors. I do not know them nor have I honestly heard of them. I am nobody as far as that goes. I am just saying that further independent substantiation and more in-depth studies could help to solidify this as science.

I am well aware that studies funded, conducted, sponsored or otherwise driven by industry are the beginning of many good things and very much the drivers of our current knowledge on many, many subjects (if not most). So I hope that my tone doesn't come off wrong. Anecdotally, I've found my .260 to shoot much tighter at all distances with my 9" can on it than without. After reading this, I feel that I need to hurry up and complete my paperwork to get my .338 can out from purgatory so that I can see about reducing the short range yaw I experience using my solids. If it holds true, It should also improve things at all distances.
 
Likes: THEIS
Jul 11, 2010
105
17
18
35
#5
I was initially suspect as well, when I saw the unknown suppressor manufacturer was part of the test, but the testing parameters seem to fairly sound.

I've never developed suppressed and unsuppressed loads in a rifle accurate enough to tell the difference, but this has me thinking about doing it just for the sake of data collection. My 77gr .223 AR loads hold the same .8 groups with or without the can, but environmentals make it hard to do a suppressed/unsuppressed test with the same conditions at distance to see if the can is inducing yaw. I also have a FH suppressor mount on the upper, so the test wouldn't be as useful as suppressor on vs a bare muzzle.
 
Likes: THEIS

THEIS

Sergeant of the Hide
Nov 27, 2017
749
1,090
93
#6
Hi,

Here is entity that conducted test. Might want to check their resume and current projects 😊

http://www.btgresearch.org

Edited to add: Additional and further testing does need to be done and I will be contacting them to team with me on some testing I have in the works...now if stock that was 2 weeks out 3.5 months ago would ever arrive lol.

Sincerely,
Theis
 
Last edited:
Likes: lash

THEIS

Sergeant of the Hide
Nov 27, 2017
749
1,090
93
#8
LOLOLOLOL,

I hadn't seen that one.... o_O

I am waiting to hear back from the in regards to the acoustic methods developed and utilized in their external ballistics testing.
 

lash

Swamp Rat
Sep 28, 2012
3,072
771
113
59
Central Florida
#9
Hi,

Here is entity that conducted test. Might want to check their resume and current projects 😊

http://www.btgresearch.org

Edited to add: Additional and further testing does need to be done and I will be contacting them to team with me on some testing I have in the works...now if stock that was 2 weeks out 3.5 months ago would ever arrive lol.

Sincerely,
Theis
Thanks for the info. I did look into the testers and the authors a bit and restate that I do not really question their accuracy nor test results. I merely just wanted to point out the obvious questions anyone serious would ask after reading the white paper.

I appreciate the information that you, THEIS, have been providing for the consumption of some of us that find this very educational. In addition, I look forward to the testing that you will be doing and the resultant additional data you will provide for the community. 👍👍
 
Likes: THEIS

THEIS

Sergeant of the Hide
Nov 27, 2017
749
1,090
93
#10
Hi,

So Roy has updated his website quiet a bit. He has some high speed pics and various videos showing and highlighting his suppressor designs.
I recommend digging through his site, if for nothing more than reading for sake of researching data :)

https://www.acadianarmament.com/predator-tss-two-stage-silencer

I talked with him at length today in regards specifically to his design on the big boomers such as the BMG, BMG Wildcats, Cheytacs and CT wildcat cartridges.
I am going to meet with him in a few weeks to put pen to pad on some things.

Sincerely,
Theis
 
Jul 10, 2017
21
6
3
#12
Very interesting thread Theis, Thank you for the info. I have been working on suppressor research that addresses some of the same problems with suppressors and have talked with the guys at navel surface warfare on these issues as well. About 5 years ago I was tasked by them to build a 300 win mag suppressed using some new tuning technology which has do do more with weight on the muzzle,I said no problem. Shortly after another gentleman came up to me and gave me a list of things they wanted corrected to do with suppression,so I set out to work on a suppressor that will first tune for weight ,second will direct turbulent gasses away from the bullets flight path ,third will force the laminar air through a venturi which will straighten out a bullet in flight just as it leaves the muzzle, the pitch and yaw that is produced in a jacketed bullet is not from gasses hitting the bullet as much as the center of gravity offset and center of pressure change as the bullet has been reshaped from the trip down the barrel and the pressure behind it bulging the ogive of the bullet. Seating depth initially is the culprit as to the change at the muzzle. There may be suppressors that do not exacerbate the pitch and yawing but there are none that can straighten a wobbly bullet in flight that i am aware of except the venturi design I am working with.sound reduction suffers a few decibels but ultimately the rifle can shoot any seating depth now to extreme ranges with little no change in grouping. The patents are done and ready to go and hopefully the military will take a good look now. The sad part is the rifle I built for the navel surface warfare was tested ,calibrated and ready on time to the day,when I contacted them I was informed the project had been cancelled. It made me sick.
 
Last edited:

THEIS

Sergeant of the Hide
Nov 27, 2017
749
1,090
93
#14
Hi Tim,

I am looking forward to seeing how your technology scales up to the big bore systems. The success you have had with your WM cannot be discounted.

Sincerely,
Theis
 
Likes: timintx
Mar 17, 2017
46
5
8
50
#16
Stay tuned we will know in a few weeks at the king of two miles,the 375 should be done in two weeks which only gives me a week or so to get it tuned and ready ,it is going to be close.
Tim
It better be ready. If you need help motivating our buddy .... let me know and I will, with enjoyment, give him a swift kick in the ass with my size 12’s. Look forward to seeing you soon.
Chris
 
Top Bottom