nvm

[Vzearr]

nvm need to do more research.

 

[Vzearr]

Tagging calc group members (sorry): @DontTalkDT @Executor_N0 @Therefir @Ugarik @DMUA @Damage3245 @TheRustyOne @DemonGodMitchAubin @Jasonsith @Wokistan @Armorchompy @Migue79 @Psychomaster35 @Dark-Carioca @AbaddonTheDisappointment @Aguywhodoesthings @Agnaa @Dalesean027 @DemiiPowa @SeijiSetto @SunDaGamer

 

[Da3ggman]

So we all know those calculations that get extremely high results​

This link doesn't work.

 

[Vzearr]

This link doesn't work.

Fixed it.

 

[DMUA]

I have 2 methods, the second one I recently used and got much more realistic numbers

You say this like said calculation isn't getting four times the yield of a grenade off of mildly denting the hood of a car, something a normal dude can achieve with his bare hands

Generally compression is often conflated with pulverization by the assumption that the material in the way is being crushed to nearly nothing. I think it's very frequent such an idea is flawed, especially in this given case where there just isn't anything actually in the way of something being compressed besides the material's own strength, which certainly wouldn't be equivalent of reducing it to dust.

 

[Vzearr]

You say this like said calculation isn't getting four times the yield of a grenade off of mildly denting the hood of a car, something a normal dude can achieve with his bare hands

Thanks for showing me a dude denting a car and not pulverising the metal within the car. Personally, I don't see any cracks.

Generally compression is often conflated with pulverization by the assumption that the material in the way is being crushed to nearly nothing. I think it's very frequent such an idea is flawed, especially in this given case where there just isn't anything actually in the way of something being compressed besides the material's own strength, which certainly wouldn't be equivalent of reducing it to dust.

It's suggested by the cracks..

 

[DMUA]

Thanks for showing me a dude denting a car and not pulverising the metal within the car.

Anytime, I can see you're having trouble yourself.

It's suggested by the cracks..

Cracking is also referred to as fragmentation. It is not equatable to completely reducing something to dust.

 

[Vzearr]

Cracking is also referred to as fragmentation. It is not equatable to completely reducing something to dust.

If it was fragmentation we would see fragments, yet there are none, therefore it's pulverisation.

 

[DontTalkDT]

We should make a distinction between compression, denting and fracturing. Simple shattering the ground below ones feet should not be considered compression at all, for example.

As for which method to use... I'm not sure. I think proper consideration would need use of the Bulk Modulus or something. Idk, I never finished reading my book on continuum mechanics...

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Cracking is certainly more indicative of fragmentation than pulverization. If anything, it's a step down from fragmentation. It isn't even fully fragmented.

I dislike the practice used in the calc of getting LS for damaging the top of a car, but even if we were to use it, Class M wouldn't be the "realistic" option. I would disagree with this method.

 

[Flashlight237]

Idk, I never finished reading my book on continuum mechanics...

Probably should; I don't think anyone here knows how any of the moduli (shear, elastic, bulk, etc) are supposed to work, never mind bulk modulus.

 

[Viott]

We should make a distinction between compression, denting and fracturing. Simple shattering the ground below ones feet should not be considered compression at all, for example.

As for which method to use... I'm not sure. I think proper consideration would need use of the Bulk Modulus or something. Idk, I never finished reading my book on continuum mechanics...

Can't we use the formula "F = Energy/Distance"?

 

[ElajRuengies]

Can't we use the formula "F = Energy/Distance"?

1. You're not a calc group member (pot calling kettle black I know) and 2. No, Newtons*Meters=Joules only applies when the force over the distance is constant, and how much force it takes to deform solid material greatly varies by how much it's deformed, which is why stress-strain graphs are a thing.

Taking one force value and applying it over any distance is why all of the Destruction Energy values are ridiculously highballed.