• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

A references for common feats page continuation

Status
Not open for further replies.
OK so I got some weights for furniture from the official weight estimator of the United States Government here. Here it says that a dining chair weighs in at 35 lbs, or 15.8757 kg.

Now, Oak's density is 600-900 kg/m^3, with 770 kg/m^3 coming out as average, or 0.77 g/cm^3.

Volume= 15875.7 grams / 0.77 = 20617.792207792207792207792207792 cm^3

Oak has a frag energy of 8.34 J/cc according to the Fluttershit page on NarutoForums.

20617.792207792207792207792207792*8.34= 171952.38701298701298701298701299 joules (Wall level), and it's higher than busting tables here. Or so we thought.

The same US Govt. site claims that dining tables weigh in at a hefty 210 lbs, or 95.2544 kg.

Volume= 95254.4 grams / 0.77 = 123707.01298701298701298701298701 cm^3

Frag energy in total= 123707.01298701298701298701298701*8.34= 1031716.4883116883116883116883117 joules (Wall level), and wow, twice as high as busting doors. Nice. Kingpin and Daredevil get a good upgrade from the busting doors thingamajig.
 
Yeah well, wasn't exactly planning on making splitting-in-half calcs. Too much effort anyway, so I'm sticking to easy frag calcs where possible.

I have done the calc part for the splitting-in-half calcs of some things already so tell me what else you want to slice thanks.
 
Does anyone have any formulas for Compressive/Grip Strength? Specifically Concrete.

I came up with another character, specifically a 11,760 foot tall colossal monster who can crush the Empire State Building within the grasp of its hand. (1250 ft, The Empire State Building's tip still exposed)

I don't mean flattening the building vertically, I mean crushing it from the sides.
 
For compressive strength we use pulverization values. Concrete has a value of 40 J/cc for pulverizing on our calc page.

Also, a lot other materials are missing from our page.
 
There's a problem with sourses we use. Apparantly snaping someone's neck requires more force that ripping a head of completely. 1250 lbf (5.5 kN) vs 4.8 kN.
 
Ugarik said:
There's a problem with sourses we use. Apparantly snaping someone's neck requires more force that ripping a head of completely. 1250 lbf (5.5 kN) vs 4.8 kN.
Click to expand...
I think you're referring to the mean failure load here, Ugarik. At times it leads to decapitations, at other times, it doesn't. I should also note that wikipedia also states that decapitations do happen at 5.5 kN as well if the guy is too heavy or the person's neck is too weak. Similar numbers are also found here.

Also, hanging is rapid, while ripping heads over time requires even more force. It's like crushing skulls.

And one article tells me you need 12 kN to rip heads off (Click on the pdf).
 
Bump

bump

Premise

Okay so the calc in the References for Common Feats page has a dead link, and I found a more accurate one.

This is just me redoing Bambu's door-busting calc with a new one with a proper link.

Calc
Standard size for a door is 80 inches/203.2 cm tall, 36 inches/91.44 cm wide and 1.75 inches/4.445 inches thick.

This calculator also shows your weight of the door, and plugging in those values with the average material being oak, we get 58.86 kilograms.

I found four types of oak here

Oak- 0.6-0.9 g/cm^3

Oak, American red- 0.74 g/cm^3

Oak, English brown- 0.74 g/cm^3

Oak, American white- 0.77 g/cm^3

Plugging in those values, the average density is a solid 0.75 g/cm^3.

Volume= weight in grams/density in g/cm^3

58860/0.75= 78,480 cm^3

Frag energy of some materials

Wood door
Frag (8.34 J/cc)= 654,523.2 joules (Wall level)

V. Frag (18.34 J/cc)= 1,445,925.6 joules (Wall level)

Pulverization (Avg. value is 46.935 J/cc)= 3,700,355.4 joules (Wall level)

Steel door
Frag (208 J/cc)= 16,398,720 (Wall level+)

V. Frag (568.5 J/cc)= 44,820,540 joules (Small Building level)

Pulverization (Avg. value is 655 J/cc)= 51,640,200 joules (Small Building level)

Final values
Wooden door busting (Frag)= 0.156434 kg of TNT (Wall level)

Wooden door busting (V. Frag)= 0.3456 kg of TNT (Wall level)

Wooden door busting (Pulverization)= 0.8844062 kg of TNT (Wall level)

Steel door busting (Frag)= 3.91939 kg of TNT (Wall level+)

Steel door busting (V. Frag)= 10.71237 kg of TNT (Small Building level)

Steel door busting (Pulverization)= 12.34230402 kg of TNT (Small Building level level)
 
KLOL506 said:
Bump
Click to expand...
Premise

Okay so the calc in the References for Common Feats page has a dead link, and I found a more accurate one.

This is just me redoing Bambu's door-busting calc with a new one with a proper link.

Calc
Standard size for a door is 80 inches/203.2 cm tall, 36 inches/91.44 cm wide and 1.75 inches/4.445 inches thick.

This calculator also shows your weight of the door, and plugging in those values with the average material being oak, we get 58.86 kilograms.

I found four types of oak here

Oak- 0.6-0.9 g/cm^3

Oak, American red- 0.74 g/cm^3

Oak, English brown- 0.74 g/cm^3

Oak, American white- 0.77 g/cm^3

Plugging in those values, the average density is a solid 0.75 g/cm^3.

Volume= weight in grams/density in g/cm^3

58860/0.75= 78,480 cm^3

Frag energy of some materials

Wood door
Frag (8.34 J/cc)= 654,523.2 joules (Wall level)

V. Frag (18.34 J/cc)= 1,445,925.6 joules (Wall level)

Pulverization (Avg. value is 46.935 J/cc)= 3,700,355.4 joules (Wall level)

Steel door
Frag (208 J/cc)= 16,398,720 (Wall level+)

V. Frag (568.5 J/cc)= 44,820,540 joules (Small Building level)

Pulverization (Avg. value is 655 J/cc)= 51,640,200 joules (Small Building level)

Final values
Wooden door busting (Frag)= 0.156434 kg of TNT (Wall level)

Wooden door busting (V. Frag)= 0.3456 kg of TNT (Wall level)

Wooden door busting (Pulverization)= 0.8844062 kg of TNT (Wall level)

Steel door busting (Frag)= 3.91939 kg of TNT (Wall level+)

Steel door busting (V. Frag)= 10.71237 kg of TNT (Small Building level)

Steel door busting (Pulverization)= 12.34230402 kg of TNT (Small Building level level)

Why still use the virtual destruction energy level for virtual wood when you have the exact wood material.

We have a more precise value for wood destruction values here for confirmed wood materials.
 
Jasonsith said:
Why still use the virtual destruction energy level for virtual wood when you have the exact wood material.

We have a more precise value for wood destruction values here for confirmed wood materials.
Click to expand...
Well I'm still new with the tabber feature and ATM I find it complicated to use. so some help would be appreciated.

Also the virtual wood's material is actually White Oak, which surprisingly, is missing from your table of values. Here it is. That's what we usually use due to it being common.
 
KLOL506 said:
Jasonsith said:
Why still use the virtual destruction energy level for virtual wood when you have the exact wood material.

We have a more precise value for wood destruction values here for confirmed wood materials.
Click to expand...
Well I'm still new with the tabber feature and ATM I find it complicated to use. so some help would be appreciated.
Also the virtual wood's material is actually White Oak, which surprisingly, is missing from your table of values. Here it is. That's what we usually use due to it being common.
Click to expand...
My findings are a bit different from yours.

And again, my source remains the same as I use for the other types of wood.

Please check again as I just add the column - as "Oak, white" instead of "white oak".
 
It depends on context; not familiar with that type of calc for producing fires out of thin air. But they usually don't get that impressive results.
 
Quentin Pimienta said:
Out of curiosity, How exactly do you calculate setting things on fire? What kind of calcs or values do you guys use?
Click to expand...
This is how I was instructed to calc setting a mountain on fire.
 
This is how I was instructed to calc setting a mountain on fire.

Energy = change in temperature to the level combustion can exist x heat capacity of the object x mass of the object affected
 
feel like that's already been done
 
NVM found it but it seems to account for only the steel portion and not the ceramics of the armor itself, and armored steel apparently has a yield strength of 1000 MPa or J/cc and a tensile strength of 1250 J/cc according to this link. That's just the armor plating tho, ceramics combined and the tank already gets more dura than RHA, which has a yield strength of 2210 MPa or J/cc, with RHa being used on an older tank, the M60 Patton.
 
KLOL506 said:
NVM found it but it seems to account for only the steel portion and not the ceramics of the armor itself, and armored steel apparently has a yield strength of 1000 MPa or J/cc and a tensile strength of 1250 J/cc according to this link. That's just the armor plating tho, ceramics combined and the tank already gets more dura than RHA, which has a yield strength of 2210 MPa or J/cc, with RHa being used on an older tank, the M60 Patton.
Click to expand...
Try at the weekend
 
Jasonsith said:
KLOL506 said:
NVM found it but it seems to account for only the steel portion and not the ceramics of the armor itself, and armored steel apparently has a yield strength of 1000 MPa or J/cc and a tensile strength of 1250 J/cc according to this link. That's just the armor plating tho, ceramics combined and the tank already gets more dura than RHA, which has a yield strength of 2210 MPa or J/cc, with RHa being used on an older tank, the M60 Patton.
Click to expand...
Try at the weekend
Click to expand...
no prob
 
By the way we can not calculate the energy to destroy a particulas object from its volume like we do on this wiki. Only pulverization feats are correct
 
So what about most of the calcs that get a volume by pixel-scaling and use frag and v. frag values? Or are you just referring to everyday objects like doors and such?
 
Ugarik said:
By the way we can not calculate the energy to destroy a particulas object from its volume like we do on this wiki. Only pulverization feats are correct
Click to expand...
Link to support your claim? Like there are a lot of feats whose feat yields are calculated by this way.
 
Jasonsith said:
Link to support your claim? Like there are a lot of feats whose feat yields are calculated by this way.
Click to expand...
I don't have a link. How can I have it if this method is not used by anyone outside versus community. Why would I link it if this method has never been verified by anyone?

Can anyone expain me why tensile strength of a material is its v. frag value? And unlike compression, shearing or tension can not be aplied on the total volume of an object because they are always applied on its cross-sectional area.

The closest method for frag. and v.frag I can think of is Young's modulus of the material * surface area of the derbise * tension of the material. Because once again you can not apply tention or shearing to the full volume of an object
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Fallen_Angelicx
  • Locked
About Crushing Skulls
Replies
10
Views
3K
KingTempest
KingTempest
GoldenScorpions
Freezing the Earth question
Replies
2
Views
1K
GoldenScorpions
GoldenScorpions
DemiiPowa
References For Common Feats (Flooding The Earth)
Replies
5
Views
2K
Flashlight237
Flashlight237
Armorchompy
  • Locked
Possible revision of our vision range/"twinkle in the sky" feats
2 3
Replies
87
Views
7K
Antvasima
Antvasima
SamanPatou
Small update to the Calculations Introduction and References page
Replies
5
Views
990
SamanPatou
SamanPatou
Back
Top