
Magnetic Propulsion Pellet Gun Achieves 20km/s 66
"Researchers at Sandia National Laboratories have used their Z Accelerator, a magnetic accelerator used in equations of state research, to accelerate pellets to speeds of about 20 km/s (about twenty times faster than a high-powered rifle bullet). Full story is here." Uses projected for this technology include simulating the impact of space junk, and, Yes, as the core of a hyper-velocity weapon.
Re:Subsitute for satelite lasers? (Score:1)
Miltary equipment is EMP hardened. I don't think this would be an option. EMPs probably serve best as a strike against civilian life and "public order".
Re:Off the moon? To where? (Score:1)
I'm assuming you mean the Z-pinch machine, not magnetic launchers in general.
I mean magnetic launchers in general (actually, gun-like launchers in general; magnetic just happens to be one of the more convenient forms).
Re:Working principles? (Score:1)
Possibly. If I had a subscription
Re:The first "true" rail gun? (Score:1)
So, while the projectile is propelled by a magnetic field in both cases, a "rail" gun uses a specific method (rails+ conductive armature) to generate the field. For more information see railgun.org [railgun.org]
Re:The first "true" rail gun? (Score:1)
Re:What should I think when... (Score:1)
Re:Subsitute for satelite lasers? (Score:1)
Re:A benefit to any Covert Ops (Score:1)
I don't think this would make a very good Zero-G weapon. Momentum would have to be conserved in the firing of a pellet. If you fired a small pellet at 20 km/s the person firing it would feel a pretty big recoil.
If the pellet is 2 grams and the person firing it is about 100 kg (with equipment and the gun), then the person would have a velocity of 40 m/s in the direction opposite of the pellet. That's a heck of an acceleration for a person to undergo.
Perhaps you could mount it on a space station, but it would still probably give the space staton a pretty good jolt.
provolt
Re:This weapon to soon appear.... (Score:1)
Not really...it depends on what you are hunting. If you are going for a single large animal, this would take him down quickly before he could react to the sound. Just don't miss...and make sure of a couple things, 1) that you've got a mountain behind your shot to stop the projectile and 2) that some hunter isn't going to kick your butt for scaring all the other animals away.
TheGeek
A benefit to any Covert Ops (Score:1)
This would also make a good weapon in a Zero-G environment, again, no chemical reaction required.
-----
Usage for space applications (Score:1)
-Moondog
Re:Subsitute for satelite lasers? (Score:1)
Re:Usage for space applications (Score:1)
Re:A benefit to any Covert Ops (Score:1)
Actually, there was a handgun intended for use in space developed several years ago. The projectiles it fired were actually miniature rockets. The chemical reaction wasn't a problem. They were more concerned with recoil.
Great (Score:1)
--
Re:What about potatos? (Score:1)
African or European?
Re:Subsitute for satelite lasers? (Score:1)
Assuming the aiming problems can be overcome, yes. Sorta. The biggest problem with this is that if I'm going to nuke some city and I think they have anti-missile defenses, I will detonate a high altitude burst to generate an EMP, disabling most defenses you might have. Then (shortly) will follow the real attack. The EMP burst can be done in low orbit, putting it probably out of the reach of most anti-missile defenses.
There are a ton of other ways, most cheaper than that, for getting around or disabling anti-nuke defenses.
could this become a feasable way to get pico-satelites in orbit?
Well, maybe. Have you ever seen a meteor? That's what hapens when a gravel or sand sized particle hits the upper atmosphere at 20 - 70 km per sec. If you could shield it enough it might work. There are probably some serious engineering issues to overcome to make it practical, though.
The first "true" rail gun? (Score:1)
Re:Usage for space applications (Score:1)
I wonder what's the environmental impact of a stream of 20km/s heavy projectiles slamming into the ground under an ascending spacecraft?
Seriously, though, I suspect it wouldn't work. The mass of this particular electromagnetic device is horrendous (a large building) and it shoots small (a gram or two) slugs. And 20km/s is not all that high as exhaust velocities go. And, it almost certainly works by storing power off the grid in capacitors or other storage devices - the launch vehicle would have to carry some way to generate that electricity.
In rocketry you want to take the minimum weight of fuel+reaction mass to produce the maximum exhaust momentum. If you're going to do it with electricity, an ion engine is your best bet among existing technologies.
Re:A benefit to any Covert Ops (Score:1)
With no moving parts (other than the projectile) and not having to rely on a chemical reaction a magnetic weapon makes the perfect sniper weapon. Think about trying to fight in thick cover without being able to tell where shots are coming from (no audible sound), I shudder to think of the possibilities.
Only if they slowed it down by a factor of 100. The sound of a bullet travelling at 20km/sec would most definitely make a very loud noise. Now the fact that it travels that fast means if you have good enough scopes, you could hit someone from 10 miles away without having to worry too much about gravity drop. That, and the fact that it would be a molten chunk of metal by the time it actually hit.
Re:Subsitute for satelite lasers? (Score:1)
Re:Mars Mission (Score:1)
Re:It's about time some money got spent on defense (Score:1)
Re:20 million amps? (Score:1)
Re:Subsitute for satelite lasers? (Score:1)
Re:Subsitute for satelite lasers? (Score:1)
This weapon to soon appear.... (Score:1)
Seriously, at 20000m/s, that would probably sound-off like a siren. Probably not suitable for hunting.
Thus sprach DrQu+xum.
Re:Working principles? (Score:1)
Re:Working principles? (Score:1)
What about potatos? (Score:1)
Real railgun (Score:1)
Shop smart. Shop S-Mart. (Score:1)
IR Goggles? Sunglasses? (Score:1)
Re:The first "true" rail gun? (Score:1)
Re:20 million amps? (Score:1)
- dave f.
Re:We need to amend the Constitution (Score:1)
Re:Subsitute for satelite lasers? (Score:1)
Mars Mission (Score:1)
Shoot Cans from Venus to Mars (Score:1)
BTW, to put something orbit, you wouldn't necessarily have to get the mass all the way there in one shot - just give it a boost. If we could develop a large magentic gun to boost the rocket on its way, we use less chemical fuel and hence can carry a larger actual payload.
Re:Subsitute for satelite lasers? (Score:1)
Re:What about potatos? (Score:1)
Re:new use for this.. (Score:1)
Re:Subsitute for satelite lasers? (Score:1)
I'm not sure I understand the physics of that. We cool off in air (on a hot day, or in the breeze) because the sweat evaporates from our skin, carrying off heat. Bullets don't sweat, and aren't moist. The moving air itself could carry off heat, but a normal bullet is hot because the air is moving past it fast enough to heat it by friction. I would guess then that the air in the cavity isn't leaving the cavity, and moving "slowley" inside, or vibrating (sound wave). Was that the idea?
Subsitute for satelite lasers? (Score:1)
could this become a feasable way to get pico-satelites in orbit? It sounds like, with further testing, they can get even acceleration that doesn't do too much damage to the pellet.
oh, one more thing, where can I get one? :)
Re:It's about time some money got spent on defense (Score:1)
one more thing: technilogical superiority because you've got the fastest gun? there are many other things to consider, most of which the US does have, but this gun isn't THAT significant, I don't think.
Off the moon? To where? (Score:1)
--
spam spam spam spam spam spam
No one expects the Spammish Repetition!
new use for this.. (Score:1)
MIB (Score:1)
We need to amend the Constitution (Score:2)
Re:Launching things into orbit. (Score:2)
It seemed a completely plausible design, although the failure mode analysis was likely to be tricky.
Re:Working principles? (Score:2)
Sent a day ago, and still waiting. Was it eaten by the 'net daemons?
If necessary, you can find my email address in the Linux Media Labs web-board (http://www.linuxmedialabs.com and hunt around).
Working principles? (Score:2)
Before I get six different descriptions of how railguns work - I already know how most varieties of magnetic gun work. I want to know *which* this uses.
My best guess is something that uses the same principles as a coilgun (conducting object is repelled by the rapidly changing magnetic field), but the article still doesn't go into enough detail to confirm this.
Re:What should I think when... (Score:2)
Perhaps they meant the velocity required to attain orbit; this is about 8 km/sec.
No need (Score:2)
LK
Size.. (Score:2)
Re:Subsitute for satelite lasers? (Score:2)
They're not so much trying to dump heat as they are decrease the ablative forces on the tip of the projectile, and prevent the tip from heating up so much in the first place. Heat can be dumped into the body of the projectile much more rapidly than it could be dumped back into the air, but they were discovering that the heat built up so quickly in the tip, that they'd have to play some interesting games to keep the thing at a reasonable temperature.
Replace the Space Shuttle!! (Score:2)
Re:A benefit to any Covert Ops (Score:2)
No it wouldn't. You ever hear of a guy called Newton? You'd still go backwards with the equivalent force you sent the shell out with.
Newton's third law.
Re:A benefit to any Covert Ops (Score:2)
In fact, I wouldn't be suprised if surface of the projectile got hot enough to boil off and leave a residue of buring gas behind it. I doubt you'd be able to see this in the daytime...
Of course, if I wasn't such a lazy ass I'd do some math, and find out...
Quake 4 : Microsoft vs DoJ (Score:2)
What should I think when... (Score:2)
Earth escape velocity is ~7 MILES/second or ~ 11.3 KILOMETERS/second. But the officials at our national lab says in the article that it is 7 KILOMETERS/second and then goes on to use that to show just how fast this thing is...
Maybe I'm being too picky but it does make them look like idiots when they don't do trivial fact checking.
Working principles. (Score:3)
Ok. The Journal of Applied Physics article (Feb. 2001) does not describe this as a "gun" at all.
The device uses the Z-machine current source to send a large amount of current through two concentric pipes that are connected at one end. Current goes up the outer pipe and down the inner one.
This sets up a very strong magnetic field between the pipes, which pushes the two pipes apart (crushing the inner one and pushing outwards on the outer one). This is the same kind of effect that you get in a loop of wire that carries current (motor principle).
Samples on plates are stuck to the sides of the outer pipe. Magnetic forces accelerate these plates outwards rapidly, and the samples deform. This deformation is measured, giving a lot of useful materials information (the purpose of the experiment).
It's unclear from the article whether the plates, the samples, or neither go flying. The velocity quote is probably just the maximum velocity achieved while the pipe is expanding outwards under pressure. Letting the plates fly would give a somewhat better experiment, but would cause practical problems (they'd destroy whatever part of the machine they finally smacked into).
Physics-wise, this works on exactly the same principles as a railgun (motor principle with DC current). It's optimized for pressure experiments, not for firing projectiles; you could probably build a railgun that was more efficient at the second task.
Inductive effects do occur (this is a short current pulse), but are considered a source of error in the experiment, and so presumably aren't the dominant effect.
Launching things into orbit. (Score:3)
This or any of a number of other magnetic cannon techniques could work, or even a compressed gas gun (like the "Super Gun" from years ago).
The problems are twofold:
To reach orbit, you need an energy of about 30 MJ/kg (for a velocity of about 8 km/sec). Energy is force (mass times acceleration) times distance, so for a given acceleration, you can calculate the barrel length of the gun required. For a 3g accelerator for humans, you get a gun 1000 km long. If you can overcome the engineering problems and build a gun that accelerates cargo at *3000* gravities... you still have a gun 1 km long (about 0.62 miles, if you were wondering).
This can be built, but it's *expensive*. There would have to be a very strong incentive to build it, and amortizing the cost of the gun will raise your launch costs by quite a bit.
You'll notice that the experiment discussed in the article was done in vacuum.
Your gun will have to have an enclosed barrel (even if it's a magnetic gun). Otherwise, the mach-16 sonic boom will tear the firing coils off their mountings or otherwise harm the gun's structure.
Your gun (and anything near it!) is still going to have a lot of wear from the effects of a hypersonic projectile smacking into the atmosphere on leaving its muzzle.
Lastly, your projectile is going to have to have shielding around it to keep it from burning up while leaving the atmosphere. This will add weight to the projectile, and require a higher muzzle velocity (because the projectile will slow down).
All of these problems are manageable, but they increase the cost of the gun and the cost per kilogram of payload even more.
In summary, yes, we can scale up this and other guns like it; however, they're a royal pain to build and use, and there isn't enough demand at present to make them practical.
OTOH, this is one of the best ways known to get material off the moon. Required energy (and hence barrel length) is much lower, and there's no atmosphere to cause problems.
Re:Subsitute for satelite lasers? (Score:3)
My aerodynamics prof at UT Austin was working on a railgun project for the Army at Balcones a couple years ago. He brought in some videos of the experiments they did with projectile shaping. Basically, the idea was to make a circular indentation in the front of the projectile (think like a hollow-point bullet) whose depth was tuned to the expected velocity of the projectile. (insert obscenely complex mathematics here) The idea was to set up a standing pressure wave in the nose cavity, so the moving air would cool the projectile. The tests I saw were with a plastic blank, but the full-on projectiles were going to be 2" diameter tungsten rods. I can't even really imagine enough heat to ablate a tungsten rod, but damn if that's not just what happens at those velocities.
The computer models I watched of these rods impacting armor plate were amazing. It looks just like those slo-mo milk drop photos, except instead of milk it's molten steel. Wow.
Re:It's about time some money got spent on defense (Score:3)
What percent of the federal budget do you think is spent on 'defense'?
--
20 million amps? (Score:4)
BTW, this DOESN'T sound like a rail gun. A rail gun uses a series of magnets to propel a projectile. This sounds like it uses one rapidly expanding magnetic field.