I really think that Richard Vance has the correct angle on the
Pistonola design. I just couldn't visualize it, but I am pretty sure
that what he suggests is correct. I went over the flow characteristics
and have to admit that's pretty darn clever. :-) Nice going, Richard!
I hope that more brainstorming will be tried here. This is really a
friendly, thoughtful forum of ideas and nobody has them all. Also, we
often would like to contribute more but just don't have the time. But
if we were to just provoke thought, and toss out a few impossibilities
as we see them, somebody might fill in the missing pieces to the puzzle.
I am frankly grateful to see this kind of creativity and realize that
when friends put their heads together, there's no limit to what can be
I knew that I was missing something in the mix, but could not visualize
it. That's why I wrote why such trackerbar pressure would never work.
Obviously, I was wrong, and I love it when Richard picks up my slack!
The only question I still have is about the 3.5" diam. pump pistons.
Now maybe I figured it wrong. I discovered that my calculator changes
its numbers when I squeeze the upper right hand corner of the case (?)
and that's where I always hold it. So let's say I goofed. Here's my
numbers again, this time in detail:
If we were pumping 250 in. WC (as Richard designates it) with a 3.5"
diam. piston, that's about 9.62 sq. in. Now 250 in. WC equates to
9 lbs/sq.in. So 9 x 9.62 = 86.58 lbs.
I still don't see anything wrong with that. Players can't regulate
_up_. They can only regulate _down_. And the best way to go down is
to bleed down (I know there's another way, but it's complicated).
So if we have 2 pressures -- a trackerbar pressure and a play-piston
pressure -- my main objection is answered, and now we need to find out
exactly what pressure these things really operated at.
Meanwhile, I still wonder about the pumping pressures(?) That poor