Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Computerized Ballistic Solutions
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Blaine Fields" data-source="post: 29039" data-attributes="member: 183"><p>Brent, thanks for your thoughts.</p><p></p><p>With regard to the G1 function: I agree, it doesn't work well with small caliber bullets. However, the scaling factor associated with the G1 function is universal. All bullet makers publish coefficients using the G1 function as the baseline. If you want to use other functions, that's fine, but you will also have to derive appropriate scaling factors as well. So, realistically the approach that makes the most sense (to me at least) is to develop a drag function that uses G1 scaling factors.</p><p></p><p>For example, here is a graph showing the G1 (Meyevski-Ingalls) function plot for a .30 caliber, 150 gr. flat-based bullet. The drag function above the G1 is based upon a different function (derived by Prof. Arthur Pejsa) but uses G1 ballistic coefficients to scale the function. Note how this function tracks the actual data points extremely well.</p><p></p><p> <img src="http://techtrials.com/Embedded%20File_Page_1_Image_0001.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></p><p></p><p>[ 10-24-2003: Message edited by: Blaine Fields ]</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Blaine Fields, post: 29039, member: 183"] Brent, thanks for your thoughts. With regard to the G1 function: I agree, it doesn't work well with small caliber bullets. However, the scaling factor associated with the G1 function is universal. All bullet makers publish coefficients using the G1 function as the baseline. If you want to use other functions, that's fine, but you will also have to derive appropriate scaling factors as well. So, realistically the approach that makes the most sense (to me at least) is to develop a drag function that uses G1 scaling factors. For example, here is a graph showing the G1 (Meyevski-Ingalls) function plot for a .30 caliber, 150 gr. flat-based bullet. The drag function above the G1 is based upon a different function (derived by Prof. Arthur Pejsa) but uses G1 ballistic coefficients to scale the function. Note how this function tracks the actual data points extremely well. [img]http://techtrials.com/Embedded%20File_Page_1_Image_0001.jpg[/img] [ 10-24-2003: Message edited by: Blaine Fields ] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Computerized Ballistic Solutions
Top