On Apr 12, 11:46=A0am, missmonkeysh...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> I have seen all kinds of stuff inside small Chinese shells, but
> probably the oddest was in some 1.75" 'festival balls'. They broke
> really hard, and upon examination I found the break to be a wad of
> tissue paper with bright aluminum flash on it. Very cheap and very
> effective.
>
> Also, the notion that shell wall thickness being pro****tionally
> relative to larger shells is bunk. The size of the shell has nothing
> to do with the interaction of gas pressure with containment strength
> over time. We could get off onto the topic of dwell time (containment
> duration) and the effective relation****p of break brissance on casing
> strength, but for lack of a lengthy explanation, just accept that gas
> pressure/gas volume /time/containment have nothing to do with shell
> size. Shell size has an effect on each of those (except time)
> independently, but size and wall thickness ratios are not
> interdependent. Shell size is not in the formula for relative
> potential energy all other things being equally upscaled.
>
> Regards,
>
> Regina
I was talking about how to get a good burst out of 1.4g shells. Im
not getting into all the other stuff, that would be a better topic on
a physics board. A RAP 1.75 inch plastic canister will simply dump the
material with some of the less energetic bursts used in 1.4g shells as
long as they are adhering to the cpsc qualifications found here for
burst http://www.cpsc.gov/businfo/testfireworks.pdf
.If they are not
adhering to those references than of course they could get a good
burst with a RAP or very thin walled shell. Just use some fast 70/30
whistle or flash in amounts that will not blow the stars blind. No, im
not talking about size, it just happens that in the 1.75 range most
shells are chinese made and use a variety of burst some a lot less
energetic than class B shells. The wall thickness was an observation.
|
