Common Feat - Destroying a Skyscraper

[Agnaa]

I looked at the reference calc for destroying a skyscraper and noticed quite a few weird things about it.

1. Why does it use shear strength everywhere? I thought that was just used for cutting feats. Destruction feats like this would use the destruction values from our Calculations page, which would put Reinforced Concrete's destruction 2.8x lower than this calc has. EDIT: I have been informed that shear strength is our basis for frag, we just revised the values, leaving this 2.8x higher due to being outdated.
2. Why does it use the separate materials used in the construction of concrete and then add up their destruction values? The whole point of making concrete is that doing so changes the material you get. The stuff that's used to make concrete does not have the same properties as concrete. This gave results ranging from 2.3x higher to 2.6x higher than the already inflated shear strength outdated destruction values do (I have no idea where that 0.3x variation comes from).
3. The first method takes the mass of a skyscraper, and instead of directly using the density of concrete to get the volume, it gets the density of the components of concrete (which have 1.54x the volume of the final product of concrete), uses them to get the volume, and then never adjusts the volume back down. Despite the weirdness, this only gets a volume 1.04x higher, not super wrong in final result, but just very strange.
4. Earlier on in the calc it was just using Cement, Silica, and Granite, but in the last calc for melting, it included Silica, Alumina, and Granite, admittedly ignoring Cement. From a quick search, I found this page giving the specific heat and melting point of concrete; when I plug those into the volume the calc used, I get a result 1.5x higher, without including latent heat of fusion due to me being unable to find that.
5. Why does this calc only give a melting value for the far higher estimate of skyscraper size?
6. Why does this calc use two different estimates of skyscraper size, one of which is 29x higher than the other, without saying which one is the reference for this common feat? It has values almost 67x apart (with the highest frag one being 187x off what I think is most reasonable) despite meaning to be a common reference for a generic feat!!

So uhh, thoughts, everyone?

 

[KLOL506]

Shear strength is what we use for frag energy of materials as a whole actually, just noting that down. The cutting formula used shearing strength as well, but that used a different methodology IIRC which we then rejected and then just resorted to area of the cut section x thickness of the blade x pulverization energy.

But yeah, the current calc for busting a skyscraper has been outdated for quite a long while since new material destruction values were established.

 

[Agnaa]

Ahh okay, that makes sense.

 

[KLOL506]

Unironically, I do remember redoing skyscraper busting eons ago using the new reinforced concrete values using the methodology you described (Dividing the mass with concrete density to get volume and then multiplying the volume with the destruction value after all the proper conversions are done), and I remember getting 8-A for frag, Low 7-C for v. frag and 7-C for pulv. But I never put the calc in anywhere and completely forgot.

 

[KLOL506]

Mostly it was a response to Golden Age Superman's Skyscraper busting feats.

 

[Antvasima]

Would you or some other calc group member be willing to write a new calculation blog for this type of standard feat, KLOL?

 

[KLOL506]

Would you or some other calc group member be willing to write a new calculation blog for this type of standard feat, KLOL?

I can do the frag, v. frag and pulv. ends, but melting, vaporization, atomization and sub-atomic destruction might need bigger brains than mine. Gimme a moment.

 

[Agnaa]

You can find specific heat and melting point for concrete here. No latent heat of fusion, tho. I couldn't find that myself.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you for helping out. It is appreciated.

 

[KLOL506]

You can find specific heat and melting point for concrete here. No latent heat of fusion, tho. I couldn't find that myself.

Yeah, a lot of materials don't have the latent heat of fusion or vaporization (The latter you need for vaporizing).

 

[KLOL506]

You can find specific heat and melting point for concrete here. No latent heat of fusion, tho. I couldn't find that myself.

Actually, wikipedia states a specific heat capacity of 0.88 J/g K

'Kay, lemme see what I can do with this...

Melting point is 1527 degrees C.

Mass is 222500 US tons or 2.01848605e+8 kg

I will just assume room temperature for temperature change. 23 degrees C.

1527-23= 1504 degrees C change

Dumping the mass and values into this nifty specific heat calculator, I get 2.671506657e+14 J or 63.8505415128107074 kilotons of TNT (7-C+, Town level+).

According to this link, concrete has a latent heat of fusion of 4800-7200 J/kg. I will use the mid-end of 6000 J/kg or 6 kJ/kg

Dumping the values into this latent heat calculator, I get 1.21109163e+12 J or 289.4578465583173852 tons of TNT (8-A, Multi City Block level)

Combine the two values: 2.671506657e+14 + 1.21109163e+12 = 2.6836176e+14 J or 64.14 kilotons of TNT (7-C+, Town level+)

If anything went wrong or has egregious link assumptions, please let me know. I will correct it and add it to my blog here, no evaluations until then please.

 

[Agnaa]

I think you may have misused that second calculator; by default it does kJ/kg not J/kg as your value is. So you got a result 1000x higher. When I tried finding it manually, I got 1.21e12 Joules for latent heat of fusion, giving 2.68e14 Joules total.

Other than that, it seems good!

 

[Antvasima]

Yes. Thank you for helping out.

Please post your finished versions into a blog post in our wiki.

 

[KLOL506]

I think you may have misused that second calculator; by default it does kJ/kg not J/kg as your value is. So you got a result 1000x higher. When I tried finding it manually, I got 1.21e12 Joules for latent heat of fusion, giving 2.68e14 Joules total.

Other than that, it seems good!

'K, fixing it.

EDIT: DONE. Will add to the blog eventually.

 

[Antvasima]

Thanks again for helping out.

 

[KLOL506]

No problem. Here is the blog: https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/User_blog:KLOL506/Skyscraper_Busting_(REDUX)

@Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan @Mr._Bambu @DMUA @Therefir @Jasonsith Since you were the original progenitors of the Common Feats calculations, it only feels fair that I ask for your help regarding the new calc.

@AbaddonTheDisappointment @DemonGodMitchAubin @CloverDragon03 @Migue79 @Aguywhodoesthings @Psychomaster35 @Armorchompy Your help would also be appreciated here.

 

[Jasonsith]

No problem. Here is the blog: https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/User_blog:KLOL506/Skyscraper_Busting_(REDUX)

@Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan @Mr._Bambu @DMUA @Therefir @Jasonsith Since you were the original progenitors of the Common Feats calculations, it only feels fair that I ask for your help regarding the new calc.

@AbaddonTheDisappointment @DemonGodMitchAubin @CloverDragon03 @Migue79 @Aguywhodoesthings @Psychomaster35 @Armorchompy Your help would also be appreciated here.

Anyone willing to helo with an actual knowledge in architecture and construction engineering?

 

[KLOL506]

Bump.

Anyone also willing to help out with finding the boiling point and the latent heat of vaporization of reinforced concrete for finding a vaporization value?

 

[Jasonsith]

concrete does not actually have a melting point, but it decomposes into various components due to the makeup of concrete, which is mostly sand and gravel with portland cement added - a temperature of thousands of degrees Fahrenheit is needed to decompose concrete

What Is the Melting Point of Concrete?

Concrete does not actually have a melting point, but it decomposes into various components due to the makeup of concrete, which is mostly sand and gravel with Portland cement added. A temperature of thousands of degrees Fahrenheit is needed to decompose concrete.

www.reference.com

While data for the melting point and boiling point of steel (or at least iron) are already there, we need to find the melting point and boiling point of "sand".

 

[KLOL506]

concrete does not actually have a melting point, but it decomposes into various components due to the makeup of concrete, which is mostly sand and gravel with portland cement added - a temperature of thousands of degrees Fahrenheit is needed to decompose concrete

What Is the Melting Point of Concrete?

Concrete does not actually have a melting point, but it decomposes into various components due to the makeup of concrete, which is mostly sand and gravel with Portland cement added. A temperature of thousands of degrees Fahrenheit is needed to decompose concrete.

www.reference.com

While data for the melting point and boiling point of steel (or at least iron) are already there, we need to find the melting point and boiling point of "sand".

Hmmmmmm. Sand has a melting point of 1700 degrees C.

Any other material melting point else we need other than the percentages?

 

[Antvasima]

So what currently needs to be done here?

 

[Agnaa]

KLOL's blog with frag through melting has been accepted.

However, Jason brought up that concrete doesn't stay as one substance when it melts, so that method may need to be done differently.

And KLOL seems to still want some higher ends for this calc to exist (i.e. vaporization).

Personally, I don't think those ends are super common, so we probably could just apply frag through pulv and close the thread, but we could still leave it up for them to discuss those higher ends.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. I also do not mind if what was accepted is added then.

 

[KLOL506]

KLOL's blog with frag through melting has been accepted.

However, Jason brought up that concrete doesn't stay as one substance when it melts, so that method may need to be done differently.

And KLOL seems to still want some higher ends for this calc to exist (i.e. vaporization).

Personally, I don't think those ends are super common, so we probably could just apply frag through pulv and close the thread, but we could still leave it up for them to discuss those higher ends.

I guess I can just axe the melting point for now and re-add them later if someone finds a better way to do melting and vaping.

 

[Arceus0x]

a better way to do melting and vaping.

imagine vaping a whole building man, stuff's gonna be loud.

Anyways i am very interested in vaporization of a building myself so i'll follow the thread

 

[KLOL506]

imagine vaping a whole building man, stuff's gonna be loud.

Anyways i am very interested in vaporization of a building myself so i'll follow the thread

Gotta wait for another thread then, this thread's pretty much finished.

That being said, if anyone finds the boiling points, specific heat capacities and latent heat of vaporization values as well as the percentage composition values of concrete (Steel is easy), lemme know.

 

[Antvasima]

So has what was accepted here been added now?

 

[Agnaa]

It has not been added to the references for common feats page yet, no.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. If it has been accepted by our calc group, would somebody here be willing and able to appropriately adding it please?

 

[Agnaa]

I have made the edit. But I haven't patrolled for pages which need to be updated.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. Thank you for helping out. Is somebody here willing to start a revision thread for that purpose?

 

[Antvasima]

See here for further information regarding all of the pages that preferably need to be inspected:

Pages that link to "References for Common Feats" | VS Battles Wiki | Fandom

vsbattles.fandom.com

 

[Agnaa]

I've made a thread.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you. I will check.

 

[Antvasima]

Should I close this thread then? (The one we are present in currently, not the new one.)

 

[Agnaa]

I guess we could do that. If someone comes across this and wants to help adding higher ends for melting/vaporization, they can talk to KLOL and make a separate thread.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. I will close this thread then.

Thank you to everybody who helped out here.

 

[Antvasima]

It was requested that I unlock this thread, so we can continue the math discussion here.

 

[Agnaa]

In the last thread it was mentioned that skyscrapers have a notable steel content, which would increase the energy needed to destroy one significantly.

When trying to find out how much of a skyscraper was made of steel, a low-end seemed to be the Burj Khalifa

Well, if the Burj Khalifa is a skyscraper with less steel than usual, we could probably use it as the low-end.

That means the calc would add 9.49% of the concrete's total weight, as the mass of steel involved, and calculate the destruction of that on top of the rest.

However, @Furudo_Erika said that that number wasn't one that all sources agreed upon

Some sources also say it has 55,000 tonnes of reinforced steel as well, not just 39,000 tonnes.

So uhh, @Furudo_Erika could you post which sources give which values so we can evaluate which ones are more reliable?

Or could someone else try to look for another low-end which doesn't have this inconsistency issue?

 

[KLOL506]

In the last thread it was mentioned that skyscrapers have a notable steel content, which would increase the energy needed to destroy one significantly.

When trying to find out how much of a skyscraper was made of steel, a low-end seemed to be the Burj Khalifa

However, @Furudo_Erika said that that number wasn't one that all sources agreed upon

It's the tallest manmade structure on Earth, that should already tell you why it's a massive outlier.

So uhh, @Furudo_Erika could you post which sources give which values so we can evaluate which ones are more reliable?

Or could someone else try to look for another low-end which doesn't have this inconsistency issue?

The Empire State Building weighs 331,000 metric tons, one would have to find the composition of all the materials of it first. And even then, it's way too tall to be considered average.

The average skyscraper is defined as being 100-150 m tall but there's no officially accepted definition, but the Empire State Building is well over 3-4x those values.