Simulated Testing of a 3D Printed Revolver Cylinder
Oh la la
Your session has expired but don’t worry, your message
has been saved.Please log in and we’ll bring you back
to this page. You’ll just need to click “Send”.
Your evaluation is of great value to our authors and readers. Many thanks for your time.
When you're done, click "publish"
Only blue fields are mandatory.
Your mailing list is currently empty.
It will build up as you send messages
and links to your peers.
besides you has access to this list.
Enter the e-mail addresses of your recipients in the box below. Note: Peer Evaluation will NOT store these email addresses log in
Your message has been sent.
Full text for this article was not available? Send a request to the author(s)
: Simulated Testing of a 3D Printed Revolver Cylinder
: John LaRocco
Abstract : Additive manufacturing (AM) techniques have been utilized in firearms production. While 3D printing (3DP) has been previously utilized to fabricate firearms parts, fully 3D printed firearms have recently been demonstrated. A systemic shortcoming in many of these designs was a single shot limitation due to barrel deformation. A 3D printed ABS revolver chamber was designed to allow multiple shots without reloading. Simulated tests were performed upon it to evaluate the performance and durability of the cylinder with different ammunition, .22 LR and .22 Short. Deformations of up to .358 mm (from .22 LR) were observed. Structural weaknesses may degrade reliability as deformations accumulate. An ABS revolver cylinder is technically feasible, but significant constraints limit its functionality, such as ammunition capacity, reliability, and even ammunition selection. In addition, the volumetric displacement and sub-millimeter deformations induced by firing could assist in forensic investigations. For these reasons, it is unlikely that such designs will successfully compete with conventional firearms in the foreseeable future.
: Additive Manufacturing, 3d printing, firearms
||Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Canterbury, Christchurch|
Leave a comment
This contribution has been reviewed by 1 peer.