• 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.

Destruction Values of Glass

Status
Not open for further replies.
I only see 200 blog posts that make reference of glass. Shouldn't be much of a problem if we act now.
 
Simple, you just search Glass in the search box and then click "Blog posts" on the left if you're on a PC
 
By the way wikipedia states that Young's modulus of glass is from 50000 MPa to 90000 MPa. Meaning 70000 MPa on average. That means it's ductility is 7/70000 = 0.0001. Using it's tensile strength and ductility we can finf it's actual thoughness: 0.5*0.0001*7 = 0.00035 J/cm3.

Not like it matters anyway
 
I wonder would toughness be more accurate for diamond fragmentation and violent fragmentation, since our current method is completely off for it? Using your method I get 0.058919802 j/cc.
 
The problem is that both ductility and Young's modulus are different during tension and compression. And they usually only take into account tensile ductility. So yes, because it's tensile ductility
 
But I still don't think multipling compresive strength by tensile ductility would be too off
 
Just for your understanding. Ductility of a material mean how much you can stretch it until it breaks. So ductility 0.00241 means that a piece of diamond can become 0.241% longer during tension without breaking.

So 1 meter long diamond rod can become 2.41 mm longer if you're trying to stretch it.
 
And if the rod in question has 1 cm^2 cross sectional area, with 1200 MPa tensile strength you will need 120000 N of force to stretch it.

So if you multiply the distance by the force you will get your energy. And if you devide that energy by the volume of the rod you will get the thoughness.
 
Volume of the rod: 100 cm * 1 cm^2 = 100 cm^3

Energy: 0.5 * 120000 N * 0.00241 m = 144.6 J

144.6 J / 100 cm^3 = 1.446 J/cc
 
I don't think it'd work out for other materials since they don't have the same structure as crystals and shit. Thing about diamond is, it won't break if you hammer it on its flat-side but it will tear itself asunder if you strike at the pointed tip for some reason.

Agnaa sent me an article about the crystal thingy on my wall too.
 
So low-end tensile strength and low-end ductility to get toughness for fragmentation, and high-end tensile strength and high-end ductility to get toughness for violent fragmentation maybe?
 
Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan said:
Is that the same as toughness?
For brittle materials yes, because they do not deform plasticly.

For metals in would be minimal energy required to make a dent
 
Once you have reached a conclusion, you can ask DontTalkDT for help with applying them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top