- 2,106
- 1,851
1. It uses the red line as the volume for the hole, this would be fine if the depth expanded through to the red line, however, we can see that this clearly isn't the case.
2. It uses the fragmentation value for rock? The feat seems to be done in a house so it'd be concrete rather then rock.
2. It uses the fragmentation value for rock? The feat seems to be done in a house so it'd be concrete rather then rock.
1. The pink px line expands past the depth calculated (around to the lower cracks), adding non existent volume.
2. The yellow line is an extremely highballed depth and doesn't work due to the angle Legosi is at, you'd calculate the depth properly by pixel scaling the height of the crater from the panel at the top left and applying it to the bottom panel getting new, correct measurements.
2. The yellow line is an extremely highballed depth and doesn't work due to the angle Legosi is at, you'd calculate the depth properly by pixel scaling the height of the crater from the panel at the top left and applying it to the bottom panel getting new, correct measurements.
This calc uses the violent fragmentation value for rock even though its a building. The calc should use reinforced concrete or just normal concrete.
I'd also like to add that the blue line extends to the cracks of the crater making the volume wrong. The depth is also extremely generous.
I'd also like to add that the blue line extends to the cracks of the crater making the volume wrong. The depth is also extremely generous.
As much as i'd like to explain the flaws of this calc it was never accepted in the first place so it should just be removed.
