Investigating BioVALs BB Claims

[Amoki]

Originally Posted by MikeG

Further, I have never heard of a polymer that has a Rockwell hardness anywhere near that of glass and similar ceramics. (I've seen a pane of window glass scratched by a shard of BBBMAX. Please tell me whether you've ever seen any type of polymer scratch glass!) I highly doubt that Bioval has invented some kind of super-material here that externally behaves entirely like glass yet is cheap enough to package and sell to people as bbs.

Since you seem to know a good deal about materials science (at least more than I do, I've taken only an introductory course on the subject), perhaps you could help me devise a few physical tests to determine the makeup of these BBs.

Without the proper lab equipment it's next to impossible though. BioVAL's MSDS sheet says the thing is very thermostable, completely inert, etc - so you can rule out trying to find out the component of the BB by playing around with chemicals. Since you have to start "blank", the only logical way I can think of to start determining what this thing is is to put it through and electron microscope and pray for the best - not something your ordinary joe would have access to without paying good money.

And while I did study material science much more in detail than the introductory level, my engineering major isn't materials engineering :-|.





I would suspect however that the hardening agent is silica flour and the resin is some form of high-temperature biodegradable resin that bonds well to silicon. Purely because silica flour/silicon dioxide, in it's natural form, is Quartz. You know, those clear-looking crystal that is tough as nuts?

And silica-dioxide is - surprise, surprise, a component of glass. And has a high MP overall. And is completely inert to chemicals. And when broken apart, forms essentially sand and dirt.

[Scarecrow]

DonP, I think you've summed it up with Brian better than I have so far. Thats pretty much it. Well done. Glad someone understands me.

EDIT:

5. Ouch Test

I am not concerned about 'ouch'. I am only concerned about penetration of safety equipment such as goggles or face shields.

[kullwarrior]

Once someone gets it can't one just find a school or University that has mass spec and run it? Its alot easier that way.

[Scarecrow]

Originally Posted by kullwarrior

Once someone gets it can't one just find a school or University that has mass spec and run it? Its alot easier that way.

I was just going to talk to MadMax, he's the resident Canadian engineering genius behind the Tornado grenade to see what he thinks. If anyone could crack this, it him. He was the guy who proved Green Gas and propane were the same thing back in the days when claims were made that Green Gas was some sort of magical special gas. He also invented the AI propane bottle adapter.

[Easy]

A little simplistic maybe ... Arnies forums are full of tests regarding materials and balistics. DIsprove/prove below experiment. Pictures attached.


Scientific Procedure for Mask Lens Penetration Test using the MAX Bio .27g
Vs TSD .28g & TSD .20g Plastic bb's


Problem:

Does the 0.27g MAX or 0.28g TSD bb inflict more damage to a JT Face Mask Lens; when shot 0.5" from muzzle by the same custom M4?

Hypotheses:

The MAX bb doesn't inflict enough damage to break/crack the JT lens and will not inflict more damage to the lens when compared to the damage inflicted by the TSD .28g when fired by the same gun.

Procedure:

The same Custom M4 was chroned with each weight/brand of bb. The (Zone 1) AEG was chroned at the Muzzle of its Inner Barrel w/0.27g MAX (Bio)@400FPS. The (Zone 2) AEG was Chroned at the Muzzle of its Inner Barrel w/0.28g TSD (plastic) @392FPS. The (Zone 3) AEG was Chroned at the Muzzle of its Inner Barrel w/0.20g TSD (plastic) @460FPS. A New JT Invader Mask (Features Elite™ 180° lens) was placed on a table & using white Tape the lens was divided into (3) zones. Five shots of each weight/brand bb's were fired into their respective zones at a distance of 0.5" from the muzzle.

Data:

Neither of the (5) shots fired into (Zone 1) using MAX bbs penetrated or cracked the JT Face Mask. Each shot of MAX left a small dent mark on the front of the lens.

Neither of the (5) shots fired into (Zone 2) using TSB .28g bbs penetrated or cracked the JT Face Mask. Each shot of TSD .28g left a small dent mark on the front of the lens almost identical to the dents on the (Zone 1) side of the lens.

Neither of the (5) shots fired into (Zone 3) using TSB .20g bbs penetrated or cracked the JT Face Mask. Each shot of TSD .20g left a small dent mark on the front of the lens when compared to the dents in (Zone 1 & 2) the marks in (Zone 3) are the smallest.

Conclusion:

The MAX bb doesn't inflict enough damage to break/crack the JT lens & doesn't inflict more damage to the JT lens when compared to the damage inflicted by the TSD .28g when fired by the same gun. The .20g as expected inflicted the smallest of all dents. Based on the above data I will continue to accept being shot by and shooting my friends with all of the above tested ammo including the Bioval MAX. Also if any of my friend were to shoot me with the above mentioned Custom M4 Test Gun with any weight bb at a distance close than 100'feet, I would be one ###### off dude!!!

[ujiro]

But you are not thinking the right way. How it reacts when it hits your hard paintball mask is different than how it would when you yourself are struck with it, or breakable glass, etc. The paintball goggles are essentially ballistics rated. So obviously none of the BBs will be able to crack or penetrate it. The only way it is going to is if your gun is hot enough, not what BB you use.

But, different BB materials can behave differently in a collision with your flesh. That is what the safety concern is. Nobody said that BBBMax magically impart your AEG with higher muzzle energy capable of penetrating/cracking paintball or ballistics goggles.

[Easy]

Pics of PLASTIC BB's Damage.

All bbs Break Airsoft Gear My $$$$ Lesson of the Day

EOtech Sights $450
Black Berry $375

Plastic BB's $17


Airsoft players all over the world realizing all plastic bbs break airsoft gear…..PRICELESS.

[MikeG]

It really shouldn't be a surprise to anyone that all BBs can cause damage. I'm sure everyone has seen bleeding wounds, shot out teeth, destroyed equipement, etc, etc... if they've been playing this sport for very long.

[Easy]

The formula for body injuries is based on the AMOUNT OF TIME A PROJECTILE stays on target.

Soft bbs will deform on impact and this will add to the time on target.

Hard bbs will not deform and will simply rebound off the target.

Penetration depends on a lot of things and mostly VELOCITY. At equal velocities the MASS of the bb is what counts. As can be seen from the pictures.

The heavier DIGICOMs (0.42g) and the G&G (0.28g) penetrated more than the BBBMAX (0.27g).

Ooooooo and like we didn't know this from simple basic PHYSICS and not some BBBMAX super powers.

[ujiro]

That doesn't make much sense. Considering the deformation of soft BBs is an energy-requiring process. Thus, a lot of the energy of the impact is transferred into deforming the BB. With hard BBs, the BB does not deform, and therefore a larger amount of the energy would be transferred into the flesh...

Also, please stop capitalizing things like that. Its a little annoying when reading it. You don't have to emphasize something every single sentence.

[MikeG]

Originally Posted by ujiro

Considering the deformation of soft BBs is an energy-requiring process. Thus, a lot of the energy of the impact is transferred into deforming the BB. With hard BBs, the BB does not deform, and therefore a larger amount of the energy would be transferred into the flesh...

This makes sense in my book. Further, if object A 'rebounds' in a elastic collision with object B, it will impart more momentum than if it were a inelastic collision. Even more, impulse varies inversely with contact time, so regular BBs would have a lesser impulse than the BBBMAX.

This is all basic physics, however, and we don't have a definitive equation for 'injury' as a function of any of these parameters. Easy, where is the equation you referenced in your post?

[ujiro]

Agreed, I thought of that as I was about to read your post :P. This is just all sounding like my physics course from last year..

[Easy]

Human skin (specific weight of 1.09) is considered very resistant to ballistic injury and has required a lot of research over many decades to establish a sound database of ballistic evidence. It must be noted that this study does not deal with penetration of the skin but only with surface injury. Generally, as the bb projectile begins to impact skin, the retarding force of the skin itself causes it to decelerate and lose kinetic energy. This rapid deceleration causes the bb to deform as it expands against the skin surface thus (a) increasing its cross-sectional area towards the impact axis and (b) transferring more of its kinetic energy into the HSST. Softer bbs will deform more readily and will therefore transfer more energy to the HSST and over a greater/deeper area than will harder bbs. An impacting bb causes crushing, laceration, stretching and contusion of the tissue in front and around it. There are many models used to represent the size of the wound, one of the simplest to understand is expressed as follows:

Ed = Cv*V

Where:
Ed - is dissipated energy
Cv – is a constant depending on the properties of the target material, in this case skin
V – wound size or total inflicted area

Therefore the size of the inflicted area is directly proportional to the dissipated energy Ed. The dissipated energy depends upon the time the bb remains in contact with the skin. We know from the laws of physics that (1) the result of any impact between two objects depends on the force and time during which the objects are in contact; (2) the time the two impacting objects remain in contact depends on the material properties of the two objects; (3) the softer the objects the more time they will remain in contact. Soft bbs impacting on HSST will remain on the impact zone for a longer period of time therefore dissipating more energy into the HSST and causing bigger and deeper wounds

[ujiro]

Well, for one we have no idea where that image came from.
And I would not simply trust one guy who shot his arm with each type of BB. If you want to use proof like that, then its gotta be a study with different people being shot multiple times. One guy one time does not prove anything.

And I do not agree with your simplified equation there. Where are you getting all of this, may I ask?

[Easy]

Impact deformed plastic G&G bb creates a larger hole than the BBBMAX.

Also it seems that the forces acting on the plastic G&G bb have caused it to lose some surface material.

BBBMAX is clean through. No deformation and small hole.