Suppressor building materials question...


PDA






Chopdoktor
January 8, 2011, 06:23 PM
Hey, shooters. I am planning on building my own suppressor on a form 1. I have access to a machine shop, and a gentleman who is willing to help me (I am aware of all the laws and regulations regarding this process). My plan is to build a longer style 9mm can, made up strong enough to withstand .223 centerfire pressures. A can that uses this concept is the 'Liberty Mystic', but is only rated to withstand limited, slow fire from a .223, yet is full-auto 9mm rated. If I wanted to copy this design concept, but build it up to handle rapid, semi-auto .223 use, what materials might I use, or what design considerations should I keep in mind?

p.s.-I wanna keep it under 8.5" inches, and narrow and light enough to reasonably use on a 9mm pistol that requires no recoil booster (i.e.-beretta 92)

If you enjoyed reading about "Suppressor building materials question..." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Zak Smith
January 10, 2011, 02:08 PM
A survey of what .223 silencers on the market are made of should give you your answer.

PTK
January 10, 2011, 02:14 PM
.223 rated for rapid semi-auto use that's light enough to cycle a 92? That'll be tough.

frankenstein406
January 10, 2011, 02:26 PM
How many psi will this be handling? Always was curious if 7075 aluminum would work.

Chopdoktor
January 10, 2011, 03:22 PM
Since the 92 is a fixed barrel style vs. the browning tilt-action of a Glock or such actions, cycling won't be too big of an issue, at least regarding the weight factor. I know that Glocks have to run a booster to be able to kick back the slide and tilt down the barrel for proper cycling. The 92 does not, thus making it a better suppressor candidate. Anyway, I'm not sure about using aluminum. I'm not a metallurgist or anything, but I think I have gathered that maybe aluminum isn't up to heavy abuse by centerfire rifle cartridges.

RhinoDefense
January 10, 2011, 04:39 PM
http://www.silencertalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=63889

Chopdoktor
January 10, 2011, 04:47 PM
Thanks, Rhino. I'll have to become a member of that forum. I had happened across it once or twice, but not the page that you listed. I appreciate all your help.

Ranb
January 11, 2011, 01:14 AM
Full auto anything or rapid 223 fire rules out aluminum as far I am concerned. 304 SS at a minimum, inconel or titanium if you can afford it. Check out the SilencerTalk forum for better advice.

Ranb

Chopdoktor
January 11, 2011, 11:25 AM
Thanks, Ranb. That's kinda what I was thinking. Like I said, weight isn't a big issue, so aluminum isn't super-desirable to my design plan, anyhow. I'll keep surfing SilencerTalk; I've found plenty of good stuff so far.

wannasupra
January 11, 2011, 02:04 PM
titanium's tough and light. a little more expensive than stainless. turns a really cool set of colors when you get it nice and hot.

Chopdoktor
January 11, 2011, 04:20 PM
I may consider that. I have access to a lot of metals, as I have a friend who works in custom trailer and cab fabrication/welding. Titanium would be good, probably, as long as I don't have several hundred dollars in a just a small quantity of it.

frankenstein406
January 11, 2011, 04:47 PM
Magnesium is light but Hell that burns threw concrete. Go to local machine shops and ask for chunks of titanium with a case of beer.

Chopdoktor
January 11, 2011, 06:14 PM
My buddy the welder takes beer as payment :-) I'll see what I can do.

wannasupra
January 11, 2011, 08:18 PM
i don't think i'd want to chance it with magnesium. if that decided to light off during firing, ugh, that wouldn't end well.

Chopdoktor
January 11, 2011, 11:07 PM
Yeah, I wouldn't use magnesium. I've used it to light Thermite before... I don't doubt a 800+ degree temperature inside a suppressor would set it ablaze; like you said- NO GOOD!

wannasupra
January 12, 2011, 09:14 AM
It'd make for a fantastic youtube video.

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk

metalman8600
January 14, 2011, 07:00 PM
Is there any advantage to coating the internals with a ceramic like Ceracote?

Eric Draven
January 17, 2011, 05:05 AM
What about using multiple metals? You know like Heat Treated 6061 ALum. for the can, and maybe Ti or HT'd 416 SS for the baffles?

Metalman, You might be onto something there...IIRC there are specific coatings that are geared toward heat dissipation and such. Couldn't hurt to look into it I bet.

RhinoDefense
January 17, 2011, 12:14 PM
With using different alloys you could get into corrosion issues and galling. My opinion is aluminum has no place in a suppressor, especially threaded parts. Titanium is more difficult to machine than others and stainless seems to be a good balance. We make our suppressors with 300 series or 17-4 PH stainless. If you're worried about erosion on the blast baffle from rapid fire rifle, I would use 17-4 PH over inconel. If you plan on welding, do not use 303 SS, use 304, 304, 304L, or 316L. Stainless steel is ideal for rapid fire weapons as it will handle heat better than titanium (notice there are very little to no FA rated Ti cans). Strength of titanium really drops off at high temperatures.

Owen
January 17, 2011, 12:29 PM
why 300 series instead of 400 series (410, 416, etc.)

RhinoDefense
January 17, 2011, 01:26 PM
300 series is more corrosion resistant than 400 series. That is why receivers and frames are 300 series and barrels are 400 series. 400 series is more machinable than 300 series but 300 series is not able to be hardened like 400 series, which makes 400 series great for hardened applications like barrels. 300 series is better at welds than 400 series. 303 is similar in strength to 304, but 303 is more machinable and 304 is better for welding. 316 is 20% stronger and retains good welding properties. 316L improves machinability with a very minimal loss in welding capability.

303 use for threaded end cap designs
304 use for welded end cap designs
316 use for welded end caps +20% stronger than 303 or 304 designs
17-4 PH blast baffles where you don't want the expense or aggravation of Inconel 718

Most flash suppressors and muzzle brakes use 17-4 PH due to its properties being ideal at blast resistance. Unburnt gunpowder racing a full speed acts like a high velocity sand blast, causing erosion. 17-4 PH will laugh a lot of it off.

Look at what material the commercial manufacturers are using and ask yourself "why".

Owen
January 17, 2011, 01:28 PM
Look at what material the commercial manufacturers are using and ask yourself "why".

I think i just did.

Chopdoktor
January 17, 2011, 02:26 PM
Great info, guys. My machinist has access to Titanium, but from what I gather here, stainless is probably the way I'll go. Big thanks to RhinoDefense for the detailed analysis of materials.

RhinoDefense
January 18, 2011, 01:33 AM
Your welcome.

Harve Curry
February 17, 2011, 04:50 PM
I have seen titanium burn.

CYANIDEGENOCIDE
February 17, 2011, 09:03 PM
Any of the super alloys would be great for a can. They are on the spendy side but have fantastic mechanic properties. They can also be a real pain to machine unless you use an EDM. Waspalloy, any of the Hastelloy family would be awesome, the afore mentioned Inconel, Rene Alloys, Titanium, some grades of stainless are up to the task. Best bet would be to check out what the big boys use in their cans.

Keith@Liberty
February 21, 2011, 02:14 PM
After talking it over with David we decided that if we were going to rate something for a higher rate of fire than what our Mystic is we would have to choose 316 stainless. Mainly because its easier to machine than some of the "super alloys" and in the right design will provide plenty of strength to get the job done.

Chopdoktor
February 21, 2011, 04:34 PM
Thanks, Keith. I may go with that. I'd probably buy your company's "Mystic", if only it could withstand a bit heavier centerfire use. You guys are definitely on to something great, there, but if you could come out with one that can function boosted on a 9mm AND suppress medium to heavy semi-auto centerfire usage, you'd have one hell of a product.

Keith@Liberty
February 21, 2011, 06:24 PM
Well unless you're just dead set on doing a form 1, which is nice to be able to say you've done, give us a call or shoot me an email. Our Mystic is our production can but we do a lot of custom work. If you've got something specific in mind I'm more than likely sure David can make it a reality. We love working with our customers to produce a product that they are 100% satisfied with. I promise we'll do you right.

Chopdoktor
February 21, 2011, 06:33 PM
Excellent! I've heard only good things about Liberty. I'll pm you, thanks.

rjrivero
February 21, 2011, 11:45 PM
Kieth,

Good to see you on this forum. We have a Mystic on order from your shop, just waiting on a Form 3.

Looking forward to trying it out on the 300 AAC BLACKOUT with Cast Boolits, and my 9's, and my .22's and my.............;)

Tell Dave and Teresa I say "HI." ;)

Keith@Liberty
February 23, 2011, 07:52 PM
RJ,
I believe yours may be finished up. If not its only a step or 2 away. Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't we fit yours up to a Trident 9 booster? Can't wait to hear your AAR, we know you'll love it!
Keith

rjrivero
February 24, 2011, 10:42 PM
You are absolutely correct. It has the Trident 9 booster included with the order, since I already have a bunch of adapters for it, we can do side by side type comparisons in our monthly shoots.

I'm hoping the Mystic will fill a nice niche for those who want "one can to fit most" applications.

Thanks for the heads up Keith. I'll be looking for the Email!

rjrivero
March 19, 2011, 05:20 PM
Kieth,

I got the Mystic in the shop today. Great looking suppressor!! Looks like the Trident Adapters were MADE for this thing. It's clean, and light and well made. Congrats on a fantastic product!!! We will be shooting the can on just about everything in the shop in the next few weeks. Range reports forth coming!!

rjrivero

kingcheese
April 3, 2011, 11:05 PM
i dont know exactly how heavy it would be, but maybe you could make the sleeve part that holds everything by milling out a piece of solid aluminum, and then having a steel insert heat pressed into it, that would basically give you something like what they use in most car engines, but a car engine is a lot less powerfull

i dont know anything about makeing a silencer, but in most aplications if you want light and tough you mix aluminum and steel

if you use one of thoose designs that stacks baffle on top of baffle, instead of one large core, you should be able to decreas the preasure in the silencer, by adding more ports and larger ports to each of the baffles and get low enough presure to use aluminum for that

i also have never heard of anyone adding a port that allows the gas to bleed out into the air straight off the baffles( like porting through that sleeve part) i dont know how much it would affect performance, but it should effectivly allow the silencer to depresurise in between shots

hope this helps, if not, sorry i wasted your time

Zak Smith
April 3, 2011, 11:26 PM
Just a few comments-

On the tube and construction, think about why there is a tube.

Ports to the atmosphere through the tube will drastically reduce the effectiveness of the suppressor. Pressure in the suppressor drops to near atmospheric levels within fractions of a second normally anyway. The Sionics M14 suppressor did have a "bleed valve", but its overall design was really different than modern suppressors (ie, nobody uses its design elements for good reasons).

kingcheese
April 4, 2011, 03:22 AM
like i said, i dont know much, but i figured that maybe you can sacrafice some performance to keep the tube from blowing up do to holding to much presure, but if it doesnt need to drop presure any quicker, then i would say forget the porting idea i brought up

If you enjoyed reading about "Suppressor building materials question..." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!