IDAHOCTD MUZZLE BRAKES!!!!!!!!!!

FOTIS · May 5, 2012

Nathan. I finally had a chance to try out your brake!

For those who do not know Nathan made a brake for my 30-378. I can say his work is truly impeccable. This thing is a work of art!
Anyway I tried it this week side by side with the WBY accubrake.

I can say that your brake actually reduced recoil better than the Accubrake! Noise levels were pretty much on par.

Excellent work and thank you!

Here is a picture though a crummy one.

BK · May 5, 2012

I guess I wasn't paying attention! I didn't realize you picked up a .30-378.

That looks like fine work. I'm not a fan of brakes as a rule, but I may fire off a PM when I get around to getting a .338 Edge built.

DrMike · May 5, 2012

It does look as if the project is well executed. It is a great fit for the rifle.

FOTIS · May 5, 2012

viewtopic.php?f=9&t=18378

better pix on this thread

FOTIS · May 5, 2012

BK":4kmqqjv7 said:
I guess I wasn't paying attention! I didn't realize you picked up a .30-378.

That looks like fine work. I'm not a fan of brakes as a rule, but I may fire off a PM when I get around to getting a .338 Edge built.

I have had 2 for a while

An accumark and a Sako TRG-s currently for sale

IdahoCTD · May 5, 2012

Glad you like it Fotis.

SJB358 · May 5, 2012

Nice work Nathan. I might have to look you up when I get to building my big 35!

FOTIS · May 5, 2012

If I do decide to keep the TRG-S then yes for sure it will get a Nathan-brake!

russ808 · May 5, 2012

Nice...Put this in the remember-good stuff file.
Russ

IdahoCTD · May 5, 2012

FOTIS":1abquj46 said:
If I do decide to keep the TRG-S then yes for sure it will get a Nathan-brake!

What is this all about? Did I miss something?

FOTIS · May 5, 2012

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=19007

IdahoCTD · May 5, 2012

Oh I thought you bought a TRG .338 Lapua sniper rifle and didn't tell anyone.

FOTIS · May 5, 2012

Me a Lapua? Heaven's no! :lol:

IdahoCTD · May 5, 2012

FOTIS":3ayixote said:
Me a Lapua? Heaven's no! :lol:

The brass is better than Weatherby though.

FOTIS · May 5, 2012

Ain't that the truth!

JD338 · May 5, 2012

That is a nice looking brake.

Nathan,
Any difference between holes and shark fins on brakes?
Specifically on a 338 RUM?

JD338

IdahoCTD · May 5, 2012

Jim,

The ported brakes (shark fins) are way more effective at reducing recoil over the drilled hole brakes. A large portion of the gases hit the wall in the first few ports and it has a tendency to reverse the rearward thrust of the rifle. Drilled brakes just try to slow the rearward thrust.

Oldtrader3 · May 5, 2012

I did some applications engineering project work on directing the flow of and applying supersonic. boundary, laminar flow air in an industrial use to do work, in this case. I have the (correspondent) patent which is now expired.

Anyhow, what I found was that trying to redirect or even bend Mach 1+ air more than a few degrees, once it has formed a boundary layer with a metal tube or hard substrate. At this point, Mach 1+ air is very difficult to bend, achieve laminarity and control. In effect, you are increasing the boundary air limits by forcing supersonic air into a space between the brake wall and the small clearances left between the wall and the bullet surface itself. This could in effect, add additional noise to the system by increasing the air velocity even more than the eject speed. I suspect that these bending and additive noise factors are why many brake designs are not more efficient then they are and are not using more than the first few port rows effectively.

My work was done several years ago and may not mean much anymore with modern instrumentation available to actually measure DbA, secondary harmonics and air velocities. Plus some of the secondary harmonics were out of the audible range altogether. Our objective in this project was to use the air to propel a plastic part and not reduce noise. We were in effect trying to control a plastic cap down to ounce inches of applied screen force torque by controlling speed and attack angle of the air on the verticle OD straitions of the cap, creating speed and there by torque.

Any way, the project was interesting because I learned a great deal about air boundary effects and their uses in order to solve gas flow, boundary layer and directional problems.

IdahoCTD · May 5, 2012

The boundary layer goes away (well not totally but it changes shape rapidly) once the gases leave the restriction of the barrel. There is a sizable jump from the end of the barrel to the first baffle. Because of the void the gases flare out from the crown on to the first baffle and a large portion are sheared off at the first port.

The down side to ported brakes is they tend to carbon up the crown much more rapidly.

Oldtrader3 · May 6, 2012

It sounds as though you are having the same problem that I did, years ago, with the boundary layer falling into disarray soon after losing the molecular coherency of a boundary support wall and being sheared into the initial vent holes. Simple device, complex problem.

The literature shows that the German's finally (after WWI) adopted the open, double (through) baffle design. This open baffle design, although certainly not optimal in handling the gas nor as efficient as some other brake designs, did the job relatively well with fewer mechanical challenges in fabrication. Interesting.