Leshiy 2 explodes

[M0ist0ne]

What it means is that those of us who fill our Leshiys to 300 bar have all died tragically with chunks of aluminum embedded deep in our brains. This discussion is just our group afterlife experience. None of it is actually real. Either that or the model that estimated the 0.7x safety factor is inaccurate.

My interpretation is it means that it's potentially causing the tube to start to flex/yield at that pressure. X number (Russian roulette style ) of fills later the repeated stress may cause the tube to fail in that section. And it looks like due to a lack in QC or behind the scenes time/cost savings, some tubes are fine, some are not.

Guess we, the peanut gallery, will all see a few hundred or thousand fills later.

 

[DonEnzone]

I don’t know about you guys, but I’m not shooting my L2 until I check to see if my tube has a conical end and even then I’m not filling over 250 BAR. If it has the square end it will not see pressure and quickly become an expensive ornament. I don’t even care what the lab says, this is a bad detail on a pressure vessel.

The L2 is a great gun to shoot with some very unique features but my mind cannot ignore this perception of an inherent safety issue. If Ed does not revise the design to the more conventional industry standard of a threaded end cap with O ring at this location I’m not sure I can ever accept the gun as safe? If Ed fails to do this and provide parts to existing owners, then hopefully a third party will rise to the occasion. I would buy an improved reservoir just for peace of mind.

Same.. if we don't get compensation, I would buy a solid 3rd party replacement in a heartbeat. Maybe from Huma air

 

[Nomadic Pirate 66]

Most of the energy would have dissipated in the first milliseconds. He seemed to have all the parts so it appears to me that if he had a thick hood, he got a helluva punch to the jaw.

Hmmmmmm, still the explosion while shooting story smells fishy to me

 

[boonez40]

I don’t know about you guys, but I’m not shooting my L2 until I check to see if my tube has a conical end and even then I’m not filling over 250 BAR. If it has the square end it will not see pressure and quickly become an expensive ornament. I don’t even care what the lab says, this is a bad detail on a pressure vessel.

The L2 is a great gun to shoot with some very unique features but my mind cannot ignore this perception of an inherent safety issue. If Ed does not revise the design to the more conventional industry standard of a threaded end cap with O ring at this location I’m not sure I can ever accept the gun as safe? If Ed fails to do this and provide parts to existing owners, then hopefully a third party will rise to the occasion. I would buy an improved reservoir just for peace of mind.

Can i have your L2.
You only live once but you cant add a secound to your life.
Imagine the story you could tell if you live through it.

 

[sb327]

I keep looking in the classifieds, hoping to snag a good deal….

Dave

 

[CsakEn]

will there be a recall for tubes what had a straight ended drill bit/flat bottom?

using the incorrect shape tool will put defects into the Aluminium wall during manufacturing. If you drill a deep hole the sharp tip in the middle should eat away the material first, drilling not milling or do you mill holes?

it is like when you put an unf thread for a silencer on a barrel you can see it sometimes inside in the bore, if the wall is thin enough. You get the idea

 

[peebrainz]

will there be a recall for tubes what had a straight ended drill bit/flat bottom?

using the incorrect shape tool will put defects into the Aluminium wall during manufacturing. If you drill a deep hole the sharp tip in the middle should eat away the material first, drilling not milling or do you mill holes?

it is like when you put an unf thread for a silencer on a barrel you can see it sometimes inside in the bore, if the wall is thin enough. You get the idea

Is that where we’re at? Conical tube is ok, flat bottom tube is not ok? I haven’t been keeping up.

 

[MJP]

It means that on that corner surface the safety margin is 0.79 and material at the surface is yielding. So it is a stress riser at the surface of the material, you can see it in the cutaway there is less stress under the surface but the surface is stretching and can be slowly developing a starting crack at the surface.
As there is more material there it shouldn't fail immediately.

And as my pressure test shows it can hold even twice the rated pressure for x amount of times.
But it's a start point of failure and given the nature of the use it's more of a gamble.
Expanding slightly in every fill, some corrosion and you just might have the failure.

I don't know the cyclic rating how long it will hold but knowing the design is in some of the guns and on the failed one it is very worrying.

Zero tolerance for failure on something that is next to my head, and seeing one failed, despite unknown circumstances and the corner having a stress riser it is not making me feel any better.
All of this is my observation on one cylinder and running simulations based on that cylinders dimensions.

Marko

 

[dan_house]

one thing havent seen anyone talk about.... the pic shows the other part of the upper tube with the EAR adjustment.... My L2 is pre-EAR....
is the part that failed unique to the EAR models? or is that same tube on ALL L2's?

 

[Pariah]

You analyze not the real cut, but the screenshot of the part, made not perpendicular. Look, I just open it in the editor and make the horizontal line, you see it doesn't match the corners. Now have a look at the "steps" and just imagine (in case the shape is really like that) what tool and by what process it could be made, taking into consideration that it is the revolving detail. That is just artefact of the image. You can ask Marko to make a normal picture of it. Plus to it, there are, looks like, burrs on the part, he didn't remove them by polishing as I did and as you can see at the bottom screenshot.

View attachment 353378

For flat bottom we use that kind of drill.

View attachment 353398


Have I ignored it? Well, I am sorry if I gave you a chance to think that I ignore the "unakward" questoins. I just, really, didn't see it. Anyhow, as I've just said -- imagine if it is a real geometry, how revolving part could be made with such steps, moved in one side, though they should be simmetry from the center of the revolving. Do you get what I mean?



You are absolutely right and that is what I've tried to bring to The different high pressure revervoirs have different requirements for calculation and design and different requirement for safety, including the coeficient. And for the reservoirs with the volume less than 1 liter they are different rather than to huge tubes. The same with the standard 6.8 liter tanks, the working pressure 300 bar, test pressure 450 bar, the same as for any air reservoirs for PCP guns. And asking why not 3.5 coeficient that is just... Well, you got it. As we joke here, all those profeccional virusologyst now turned to be the war profeccioanls...



Nobody knows, the expertise is ordered (by they way it cost me 200'000 roubles, about 2'500 USD) and it will be made by the special criminal experts in Moscow, State experts, not the private ones. I do hope they will answer all the questions.



You are asking about the 3D models and don't say what programm are you going to use and what math model for simulatoin? Are proffecional in what you are asking?


OK, guys, I am about to leave for goose hunting, then to abroad trip and in the best case will come back towards the end of May. So, having not hearing me here for next couple weeks or more don't think I am hiding Nobody can force me to avoid fight, I just love it! When I get the experts' conclusions I will share it with you.

Hey Ed, you have really gone above and beyond to respond to a lot of inquiries. I understand that some of the naysayers choose to only see what they want to see regardless of what data you provide. I just wanted to say I appreciate your willingness to be present in this sort of impromptu court of public opinion and respond to this new scrutiny. Personally I feel that if someone was ever guilty of some sort of engineering safety negligence, and that individual was offered the opportunity to be questioned by the masses, or just stay home and remain unresponsive, anyone guilty of such negligence isn’t going to bother to be as responsive as you have to such a large volume of inquiries.
I hope the trolls of this site do not discourage your from being as responsive in the future, in the event a circumstance presents itself where your attention might be desired again. Thanks.

 

[Trucker3573]

This thread be like

 

[Glem.Chally]

This thread be like

View attachment 354709

Yeah its going to go until we find out wtf happened. And why there's several different styles of those tubes. Some with more material some with less. Kind of an important detail to those that value their face and neck.

 

[Trucker3573]

Yeah its going to go until we find out wtf happened. And why there's several different styles of those tubes. Some with more material some with less. Kind of an important detail to those that value their face and neck.

Easy easy…just a little light hearted humor.

 

[MJP]

Ok first of all credit where credit is due, (I hope I got it correct as English is not my native tongue. )
Ed said that he would send me new cylinders to replace the ones I destroyed during testing.
And he is true to his words, the cylinders arrived couple of days ago.
One set with conical bottom, and straight bottom one.

He is asking nothing from me but I want to test rerun the pressure test to 450bar, and see that I have not made an error during testing.
Just to be fair to all parties involved.

This doesn't negate the straight bottom cylinders design problem for the stress riser in the corner. But I can see if the testing was or was the first pressure test inconclusive.

If the cylinder doesn't yield at 450bar I will push it to 500 and stop the testing there and if no yield then I might have made an error.

So that's the next step on this from me.

Marko

 

[MicrosoftChad]

Ok first of all credit where credit is due, (I hope I got it correct as English is not my native tongue. )
Ed said that he would send me new cylinders to replace the ones I destroyed during testing.
And he is true to his words, the cylinders arrived couple of days ago.
One set with conical bottom, and straight bottom one.

He is asking nothing from me but I want to test rerun the pressure test to 450bar, and see that I have not made an error during testing.
Just to be fair to all parties involved.

This doesn't negate the straight bottom cylinders design problem for the stress riser in the corner. But I can see if the testing was or was the first pressure test inconclusive.

If the cylinder doesn't yield at 450bar I will push it to 500 and stop the testing there and if no yield then I might have made an error.

So that's the next step on this from me.

Marko

Thank you for the update, look forward to the results. Glad he sent you both designs.

 

[Lars47]

Hello everyone,
Just registered to join in on this topic because it worries me a bit. Does it matter if the leshiy 2 was made in Russia or the USA regarding the flat vs conical shape of the bottom of the cylinder?

Mine is the German 7.5 joule version which says Made in Russia. I have not checked yet which shape it got because I only have a handpump and believe me, it took some effort to fill the 470cc bottle to 200 bars I will check as soon as I shot the bottle empty.

My leshiy 2 is fairly new, so I will take that risk. Nonetheless, deep down I am a 'safety first' person as most are I guess, that's why I'm asking. Thanks for any input on this matter and big thanks to the guy who is researching on this!

 

[DonEnzone]

Ed is making a point, lol:

I'm still hesitant, since once again... this resevoir has the conical bottom, not straight like the one I have. The sharp corners still don't sit entirely well with me. But perhaps the lab tests as well as Marko's contributions will put my mind at ease.

 

[Noob_to_this]

Ok first of all credit where credit is due, (I hope I got it correct as English is not my native tongue. )
Ed said that he would send me new cylinders to replace the ones I destroyed during testing.
And he is true to his words, the cylinders arrived couple of days ago.
One set with conical bottom, and straight bottom one.

He is asking nothing from me but I want to test rerun the pressure test to 450bar, and see that I have not made an error during testing.
Just to be fair to all parties involved.

This doesn't negate the straight bottom cylinders design problem for the stress riser in the corner. But I can see if the testing was or was the first pressure test inconclusive.

If the cylinder doesn't yield at 450bar I will push it to 500 and stop the testing there and if no yield then I might have made an error.

So that's the next step on this from me.

Marko

My question is why do any of us have the straight bottom version? We all can agree the conical bottom has far more meat and is the safer version of the tubes. We're all paying the same amount, so why are we getting parts built at a lower standard?

 

[bigHUN]

I've been in and out of this thread at least 3-4 times and always left because - my mechanical engineering mind just cannot stand that some folks clearly pushing a narrative ,,, a drama. And a proof is that you got to a page #29 with the theatre.

Not adding anything else to my comment above but just a quick story from yeaterday, what happened to my Impact MK2 it was in LEGO blocks again. For a ~~ reason I had to take off the 720 plenum from the power block, and ones there I look inside. And guess what?
The bottom of a hole is a sharp corner.
Then I look at the original plenum which I upgraded last winter after some 25K shots - same sharp corner.
I am not expecting "FEA experts" to chew again what the sharp corner does, it is way more complicated.
Leave it alone, time to move on.
Just my 2c.

 

[Stubbers]

I've been in and out of this thread at least 3-4 times and always left because - my mechanical engineering mind just cannot stand that some folks clearly pushing a narrative ,,, a drama. And a proof is that you got to a page #29 with the theatre.

Not adding anything else to my comment above but just a quick story from yeaterday, what happened to my Impact MK2 it was in LEGO blocks again. For a ~~ reason I had to take off the 720 plenum from the power block, and ones there I look inside. And guess what?
The bottom of a hole is a sharp corner.
Then I look at the original plenum which I upgraded last winter after some 25K shots - same sharp corner.
I am not expecting "FEA experts" to chew again what the sharp corner does, it is way more complicated.
Leave it alone, time to move on.
Just my 2c.

How much does the sharp corner / stress riser marginalize the safety factor of the plenum? Perhaps you should start another thread to vent because here we are trying to be constructive as to how much it does for the L2, not other guns...

And excuse me? Pushing narratives? Tin foil hat anyone? I have found most everyone here level headed, except a few extremists, and guess which side those extremists reside?