Five Nights at Freddy's (Novel Trilogy) Wall shattering calculation revision

[Monstermadman]

My calc here

So I really didn't know whether or not to just have a calc blog or also do this, so I did both just to be safe. (First Timer here)

I redid a calc done by Arceus0x (<- his calc) on the values needed to burst through the concrete wall, and I tried to refine it down and found a couple of things that were different.

#1: Going off of the height of the man (Clay Burke) (I used 5 foot 9 as its the average in the United States) and the amount of pixels (I didn't include hair as that is not ever included in height), Twisted Freddy should be 8.4019396692 ft tall, and not the 295.70052356cm (9.7 ft) height as they concluded.

#2: It should probably be Violent Fragmentation instead of regular fragmentation. My reasoning for this is because in the image, the only big pieces look like that due to the effect of perspective. We don't see any other pieces with that level of detail and they all are much smaller, and even the big pieces aren't consistent in detail and size, with them being more detailed than the actual wall itself which implies perspective. On top of that, the size of the chunks that are closer to the wall are very small compared to the size of the hole. Due to this, I believe Violent Fragmentation is deserved here (20 J/cc as its concrete).

So with those out of the way here is the interesting bit.

I measured the volume and thickness (6.86 inches) and plugged in vio frag values.

21 339 495.1 joules, or Small Building Level (9-A)

This is a re-calc, so the calc group members will have to discuss which calculation is more reliable to use. This may be done in this discussion thread.

New calc should be used: Aguywhodoesthings, Mr. Bambu

Old calc should be used: (No votes as of now)

 

[Monstermadman]

Bump cuz an update to the calc happened.

 

[Ruby_R_Dracula]

awesome sauce


add tags

 

[Ruby_R_Dracula]

hmm also considering the calc is now accepted, I feel like you should just make a content revision on it to change the verse calc to the newer one

 

[Monstermadman]

hmm also considering the calc is now accepted, I feel like you should just make a content revision on it to change the verse calc to the newer one

I'll ask someone first just to be sure.

awesome sauce


add tags

So I would tag calc-group members here?

 

[Ruby_R_Dracula]

So I would tag calc-group members here?

can't tag people if your a regular member, best you can do is to go on their message walls, But DO NOT send a dm

 

[Monstermadman]

can't tag people if your a regular member, best you can do is to go on their message walls, But DO NOT send a dm

Alright I'll do that

 

[Ruby_R_Dracula]

bump

 

[Monstermadman]

Bump x2

 

[Mr. Bambu]

I've posted on the calc but I will also post here: could I have the raw images of the scene, so I could scale it myself? Your calc has some errors in this regard and I'd like to double check the measurements, but doing so with the images provided in the calc is essentially impossible due to your program's UI being in the way.

 

[Monstermadman]

I've posted on the calc but I will also post here: could I have the raw images of the scene, so I could scale it myself? Your calc has some errors in this regard and I'd like to double check the measurements, but doing so with the images provided in the calc is essentially impossible due to your program's UI being in the way.

Posted them both under the blog

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Alright. Having checked that to my relative satisfaction (the images are still at weird action angles, making it harder to be 100% certain, but there's nothing to be done for that):

this basically boils down to whether we call it frag or v. frag, this being the chief difference between the calcs resulting in a nearly 4x difference in destruction values used. Measurements aside, this is the main consideration.

My opinion is that some of those rocks look mighty large to be considered frag. There are small fragments, yes, but several are very large in comparison to the size of the thing destroyed. It seems to me about an even split, maybe, between "rocks small enough for v. frag" and "rocks large enough for frag", which leaves this in a weird state. I'm leaning vaguely in favor of v. frag, but it's a tenuous borderland, I think.

Arceus0x requested to be banned some time ago and thus I can't ask his opinion, nor did he mention if anyone requested the calc to begin with, so. I guess, since this inevitably requires two CGMs to look over it, I'll withhold final judgement until a second voice gives their opinion.

 

[Lilybitdun]

I think using a mixture of both frag and v.frag would be best instead of only one or the other, what percentage of each is up to question though. Maybe a 50/50 split?

Is there any panels of the aftermath to work with or is that single panel the only shot of the hole?

 

[Monstermadman]

I think using a mixture of both frag and v.frag would be best instead of only one or the other, what percentage of each is up to question though. Maybe a 50/50 split?

Is there any panels of the aftermath to work with or is that single panel the only shot of the hole?

There is only 1 image of the hole after checking vigorously, unfortunately.

That said, I am slightly leaning towards simply using Vio Frag due to the fact that he did it rather quickly and that he seems unphased, and the wall being in that "tenious borderland" that Mr. Bambu described.

On top of that, we see him make what should be similar holes in nearby concrete walls with smaller fragments:

 

[Monstermadman]

bump x3

 

[Monstermadman]

Bump²

 

[Monstermadman]

Bump³

 

[Monstermadman]

Alright. Having checked that to my relative satisfaction (the images are still at weird action angles, making it harder to be 100% certain, but there's nothing to be done for that):

this basically boils down to whether we call it frag or v. frag, this being the chief difference between the calcs resulting in a nearly 4x difference in destruction values used. Measurements aside, this is the main consideration.

My opinion is that some of those rocks look mighty large to be considered frag. There are small fragments, yes, but several are very large in comparison to the size of the thing destroyed. It seems to me about an even split, maybe, between "rocks small enough for v. frag" and "rocks large enough for frag", which leaves this in a weird state. I'm leaning vaguely in favor of v. frag, but it's a tenuous borderland, I think.

Arceus0x requested to be banned some time ago and thus I can't ask his opinion, nor did he mention if anyone requested the calc to begin with, so. I guess, since this inevitably requires two CGMs to look over it, I'll withhold final judgement until a second voice gives their opinion.

I have a question, if that's alright with you atleast.

May you please ping a CGM? I don't know if I am being impatient (I probably am, but figured it might be worth asking), but it's been a while since i originally posted this and since it was accepted (Back in mid December this was posted, and not too pong later it was accepted by a CGM). The reason I am asking is simply bevause I have seen others do something similar on here regarding CRTs and stuff so I figured it may be worth it to ask.

If yes, then I thank you so much and greatly appriciate it.

If no, I am very sorry to waste your time.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Calc group roulette

@Aguywhodoesthings

 

[Monstermadman]

Calc group roulette

@Aguywhodoesthings

The roulette part caught me off guard for some reason lol.

Also, thank you very much!

 

[Aguywhodoesthings]

Calc group roulette

@Aguywhodoesthings

Aye

 

[Monstermadman]

Bump

 

[Monstermadman]

Bumpity Bump

 

[Monstermadman]

Bump

 

[Monstermadman]

Bumpx2

 

[Monstermadman]

Calc group roulette

@Aguywhodoesthings

Since he has also commented on the blog, would that be a vote or not? Just curious and figured asking was the right thing to do before I assume.

Edit: He voted!

 

[Aguywhodoesthings]

You could count it as a vote

 

[Monstermadman]

You could count it as a vote

Alright! Counted!

 

[Monstermadman]

I'll withhold final judgement until a second voice gives their opinion.

Figured I'd alert you as a vote has happened.

That being said, you don't need to respond immediately. You can when you are ready, I just figured that I should alert you to this. I sincerely am grateful for you helping with calling another CGM and looking into this. I hope you've been doing well, and I hope you have a great day!

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Well. The vote came, but not with any insights I was hoping for. Failing that, I suppose I would oblige and sign off on the new calc. I think there's an argument to be had for splitting it between Frag and V. Frag, I think some of the displayed destruction is above V. Frag, but. For now. I sign off on it.

 

[Monstermadman]

Well. The vote came, but not with any insights I was hoping for. Failing that, I suppose I would oblige and sign off on the new calc. I think there's an argument to be had for splitting it between Frag and V. Frag, I think some of the displayed destruction is above V. Frag, but. For now. I sign off on it.

Vote counted!