🚀 go-pugleaf

In article < weed@sweetpea.jsc.nasa.gov> daniel weed wrote:

# 
# You'll probably get a bunch of different ways to measure recoil.
# I think the best mathematical way is this:
# 
# Take the muzzle velocity of the bullet times the bullet weight, then
# divide that by the weight of the gun.  Be sure the weight of the gun
# and of the bullet are in the same units, either pounds or grains
# (7000 grains = 1 pound).
# 
# The result is a velocity, in feet per second, called the Recoil Velocity.
# If you were to suspend your rifle on the end of a long wire, like a
# pendulum, then remotely fired the gun, the bullet would go one way, the
# rifle would go the other, and what you have calculated is the velocity the
# rifle would attain. (this has actually been done).
# 
# This of course, ignores many factors that affect _perceived_ recoil, such
# as moving internal parts, the length of time over which the impulse
# occurs, butt padding, sound, etc.  But it does provide a fairly good
# relative measure of recoil.  It takes into account both the bullet
# energy and the weight of the gun.
# 
# -- Dan

     Not a bad way to approximate the effect of the recoil, but you really
 should include the mass/weight of the powder charge.  It adds a significant
 effect to the recoil (more powder, even at the same muzzle velocity, means
 more recoil _usually_).

     This approximation does ignore the "jet effect" of the propellent gases
 squirting out of the end of the barrel (and the counter-effect of a muzzle
 brake or compensator).

    And the perceived recoil can vary quite a bit!!


       ***** These are my opinions.  Get your own. :-) *****
      Michael Folenta          | U.S. Army ARDEC
   Future Weapons Branch       | Picatinny Arsenal, NJ 07806-5000
  email mfolenta@pica.army.mil | (201) 724-3880  [AV 880-3880]