About calculations

[Tinodesu]

Because KE is about finding an energy from mass and stated speed? What you're talking about is not KE but energy in general. Stop being a ******* smartass and act like you know everything and start some ******* reading, at least. You're just embarassing yourself at this point.

"Kinetic energy is a form of energy that an object or a particle has by reason of its motion "

 

[Tinodesu]

Because KE is about finding an energy from mass and stated speed? What you're talking about is not KE but energy in general. Stop being a ******* smartass and act like you know everything and start some ******* reading, at least. You're just embarassing yourself at this point.

So you mean the energy that come from a kick is not Kinetic Energy ?,you should learn what is KE first,you just make a fool of yourself here.

 

[Ian2296]

So you mean the energy that come from a kick is not Kinetic Energy ?,you should learn what is KE first,you just make a fool of yourself here.

Bro, I get that all energy from motion is KE.


But the thing is you're not calculating KE right now (Mass × ½ × Velocity²). You're just calculating the energy from the value destruction times the volume, not actually calculating using the KE formula.

 

[Ian2296]

Anyway, this is getting out of topic. The concrete doesn't even look like a reinforced concrete. It's just a normal concrete

 

[Tinodesu]

You're just calculating the energy from the value destruction times the volume

And what kind of energy is it ?

 

[DenLitz]

Anyway, this is getting out of topic. The concrete doesn't even look like a reinforced concrete. It's just a normal concrete

Make Sense

 

[Tinodesu]

Anyway, this is getting out of topic. The concrete doesn't even look like a reinforced concrete. It's just a normal concrete

It's a column,of course it made of reinforced concrete,it is a common knowledge.

 

[GreatIskandar14045]

So you mean the energy that come from a kick is not Kinetic Energy ?,you should learn what is KE first,you just make a fool of yourself here.

Energy from the kick is KE, but what you calculated here isn't KE but merely a destructed area with X or Y destructive method. Go learn the difference first before acting like a smartass next time, this shit is basic.

 

[DenLitz]

And what kind of energy is it ?

I also want to know about this, is it just general energy? or is there another mention?

 

[EinelRendezvous]

Hey bro it's waste of time to correct this guy's stonehead. @Ian2296 @GreatIskandar14045 @RamadhanDayYet

 

[Tinodesu]

Energy from the kick is KE, but what you calculated here isn't KE but merely a destructed area with X or Y destructive method. Go learn the difference first before acting like a smartass next time, this shit is basic.

Now you know that it is KE.

 

[OnsokunoSonic]

 

[Ian2296]

It's a column,of course it made of reinforced concrete,it is a common knowledge.

Yes....and it's impossible for a mere human to pulverized a concrete a kick, it's a common knowledge.

 

[OnsokunoSonic]

Listen, Idk what are you elites talking about, but cracking a concrete wall isn't pulverization no matter what.

 

[Tinodesu]

Yes....and it's impossible for a mere human to pulverized a concrete a kick, it's a common knowledge.

Well it is in fiction though

 

[OnsokunoSonic]

 

[Ian2296]

It's a column,of course it made of reinforced concrete,it is a common knowledge.

Well...

Well it is in fiction though

 

[GreatIskandar14045]

Now you know that it is KE.

Yes, and your explanations suggested the latter not the first, which is not KE at all. Point me where does 1/2mv^2 formula exist within your calculation.

 

[Tinodesu]

Well...

And then ?

 

[KLOL506]

One way of checking if it's really reinforced concrete is really easy.

SEE IF IT HAS REBAR (The twisty steel wires in it that are in a grid-like structure).

If it has large chunks broken off, it's frag.

If it has most of it reduced to really small fragments relative to the size of the original object, v. frag.

If it's completely reduced to dust with not a single fragment in sight, pulv.

Get it now?

 

[KLOL506]

Also, this ain't pulverization, there are lots of big chunks of that wall flying all over. Pulverization would be grounding everything into dust leaving absolutely nothing behind.

And this pillar doesn't have rebar either. So just use normal concrete.

 

[Ian2296]

And then ?

So, just because it's a column doesn't mean it have to be a reinforced concrete on fiction.

Besides, to summary this reinforce concrete or not debate, your argument is literally based on RL which doesn't automatically apply on the fiction vs my argument that evaluate the feat itself.

 

[GreatIskandar14045]

Also, this ain't pulverization, there are lots of big chunks of that wall flying all over. Pulverization would be grounding everything into dust leaving absolutely nothing behind.

Good, now tell him that KE doesn't work on this way.

You are the one who don't understand what are you talking about,we already know how much energy it take to pulverize the reinforced concrete,we only need to multiply it by the volume to get the total amount of kinetic energy used,you clearly knew nothing about KE and how it works.

Of course it does have anything to do with destructive capacity,If 610 joules worth of energy are able to pulverized 1cm³ of reinforced concrete,then logically 1220 joules of energy should be able to pulverized 2cm³,it just that simple. I can't see no problem with the way i am using the destruction value and multiply it by the volume to determine the kinetic energy, everyone did the same thing.

 

[KLOL506]

So, just because it's a column doesn't mean it have to be a reinforced concrete on fiction.

Besides, to summary this reinforce concrete or not debate, your argument is literally based on RL which doesn't automatically apply on the fiction vs my argument that evaluate the feat itself.

Guys, guys, come on, it's not that complicated, no need to get agitated over stuff like this.

It's not that fiction doesn't show stuff like reinforced concrete, it does, I've seen plenty of examples, just that this isn't one of them, because there's no rebar visible here.

 

[KLOL506]

Good, now tell him that KE doesn't work on this way.

I mean, it's not exactly KE to begin with.

Basically our J/cc values are actually MPa (Megapascal) values (MPa and J/cc are the same). Which we multiply with the volume destroyed to get the energy value as per the Calculations page's instructions.

Frag uses shear strength

Violent frag uses high-end shear strength or low-end compressive strength

Pulverization uses high-end compressive strength.

Now, if you wanna find speed out of the AP you just calc'd from the energy, that is an insane, big no-no. It inflates speed to crazy degrees.

 

[AkumaNoHissatsu]

So here I have a little argument with @GreatIskandar14045 and @TheLastStylebender.

@TheLastStylebender disagree with the column made of reinforced concrete.

@GreatIskandar14045 disagree with the column got pulverized and how I use the destruction value of reinforced concrete then multiply it by the volume of the area that got destroyed to determine the kinetic energy of the attack.

I need your opinion regarding this matter.

Bitch please fix your grammar

 

[KLOL506]

You are the one who don't understand what are you talking about,we already know how much energy it take to pulverize the reinforced concrete,we only need to multiply it by the volume to get the total amount of kinetic energy used,you clearly knew nothing about KE and how it works.

True, but kinetic energy isn't the right term for it, since, well, no velocity being used here.

Tinodesu said:
Of course it does have anything to do with destructive capacity,If 610 joules worth of energy are able to pulverized 1cm³ of reinforced concrete,then logically 1220 joules of energy should be able to pulverized 2cm³,it just that simple.

That 610 J/cc is actually 610 MPa, it's compressive strength, it's something you use to crush the reinforced concrete to dust, all of it, not just small sections of it.

I can't see no problem with the way i am using the destruction value and multiply it by the volume to determine the kinetic energy, everyone did the same thing.

I wouldn't use the term "kinetic energy" here, your method is correct, we do multiply the volume with the MPA or J/cc value to get the energy, but it isn't kinetic energy, since there's no velocity being used here.

 

[KLOL506]

Bitch please fix your grammar

I'd recommend that there be no hostility in this thread, it's just a simple misunderstanding going on here.

 

[Tinodesu]

And this pillar doesn't have rebar either. So just use normal concrete.

https://www.researchgate.net/public...e_strength_of_steel_fiber_reinforced_concrete

I don't think because we can see the rebar it is not Reinforced Concrete, it's a column,and a column made of reinforced concrete,and according to the article which is used to determine the destruction value of reinforced concrete "the steel fibers in a concrete matrix improves all the mechanical properties of concrete, especially tensile strength, impact strength, and toughness". So I disagree if we should use a normal concrete for this feat.

 

[KLOL506]

https://www.researchgate.net/public...e_strength_of_steel_fiber_reinforced_concrete

I don't think because we can see the rebar it is not Reinforced Concrete, it's a column,and a column made of reinforced concrete,and according to the article which is used to determine the destruction value of reinforced concrete "the steel fibers in a concrete matrix improves all the mechanical properties of concrete, especially tensile strength, impact strength, and toughness". So I disagree if we should use a normal concrete for this feat.

Reinforced concrete is usually used on large structures like buildings, bridge pillars that serve as support, dams and whatnot. Not on small pillar-like structures that aren't acting as support.

And even then, you'd need to take out the concrete and the steel together in the same attack.

 

[Tinodesu]

Also, this ain't pulverization, there are lots of big chunks of that wall flying all over. Pulverization would be grounding everything into dust leaving absolutely nothing behind.

But we can only see a few chunks and it won't fit to 10% of destroyed area, doesn't it make 90% part of it got pulverized ?,I think it is right to use pulverization.

 

[KLOL506]

But we can only see a few chunks and it won't fit to 10% of destroyed area, doesn't it make 90% part of it got pulverized ?,I think it is right to use pulverization.

That big ass chunk isn't 10%, fam, it's quite large. At best you could argue v. frag since the remaining stuff is so small but pulv can only be applied when the entire structure is reduced to dust/dust-like particles and there's nothing left of it, that or if you're pressing into the ground like a hydraulic press crushing stuff.

 

[GreatIskandar14045]

I'd recommend that there be no hostility in this thread, it's just a simple misunderstanding going on here.

There's actually a history behind of it, the reason why this thread was made here, was because he forced me to debate him here (or he'll call me a "coward" otherwise). Yes, we had a heat debate beforehand + this person is widely known as a guy who suffers superiority complex and likes being indirectly toxic/harsh in Indonesian fictional debating (he's much, much calmer here Idk why). So sorry if you found me to be rude here after some profanity I used.

So that's all the small drama was about.

 

[muramasa]

But we can only see a few chunks and it won't fit to 10% of destroyed area, doesn't it make 90% part of it got pulverized ?,I think it is right to use pulverization.

huh?

 

[IamVinSolosUrFav]

Wow

 

[Megaraptor149]

by the way at least you have to bring a supporting scan that prove it's pulverization, just because the scan above shows only 10% of the frag you dare to claim the rest is through pulverization.

 

[Tinodesu]

Reinforced concrete is usually used on large structures like buildings, bridge pillars that serve as support, dams and whatnot. Not on small pillar-like structures that aren't acting as support.

And judging from the size of it, isn't it obvious that the columns are made of reinforced concrete ?

That big ass chunk isn't 10%, fam, it's quite large.

No it's not if you compare it with true size of the column.

 

[Megaraptor149]

I'd recommend that there be no hostility in this thread, it's just a simple misunderstanding going on here.

a dude like him I feel he deserves that title "bitch"

 

[KLOL506]

a dude like him I feel he deserves that title "bitch"

Let's not accelerate the toxicity here my friend. Regardless of what history you have between each other, that's none of my business, but it affects the well being of this thread if it spills over into here.

 

[Tinodesu]

True, but kinetic energy isn't the right term for it, since, well, no velocity being used here.

I wouldn't use the term "kinetic energy" here, your method is correct, we do multiply the volume with the MPA or J/cc value to get the energy, but it isn't kinetic energy, since there's no velocity being used here.

I don't understand why the energy that come from a kick is not counted as kinetic energy ?