The boxer ap upgrade

[Viott]

Old Calc :

Viktor plays minecraft : 54343825 Joules or 0.012988485899 tons of tnt (9-A)

Recalc :

The boxer : viktor ap (Recalc) : 90892970,6799 Joules or 0,0217239414 Tons of TNT (9-A)

Pulverization should be used instead of V.frag

 

[XxZetsuxX]

Agree

 

[Vzearr]

Bump

You can't bump a thread a few hours after you opened it.

 

[Viott]

You can't bump a thread a few hours after you opened it.

Ok

 

[DigDig09]

Agree seen it already been accept.

 

[Arceus0x]

The calc is incomplete since you didn't add the 5% of fragmentation. It is a small change but still, it is important.

 

[Mr_Lumbago]

I disagree with the measuring of the depth. Using shades in order to measure it doesn't work here cause of the context.

Viktor was in a very dark place, where the only source of light came from behind him. Taking that into account, it's only natural that there will be strange shades on his arm because Viktor's body is blocking the only source of light.

 

[Viott]

The calc is incomplete since you didn't add the 5% of fragmentation. It is a small change but still, it is important.

I didn't want to add it because it didn't change the result, but I fixed it anyway.

 

[Arceus0x]

I disagree with the measuring of the depth. Using shades in order to measure it doesn't work here cause of the context.

Viktor was in a very dark place, where the only source of light came from behind him. Taking that into account, it's only natural that there will be strange shades on his arm because Viktor's body is blocking the only source of light.

Disagree with that take as I did before since that changes nothing and it is the only tangible way to calculate this without several assumptions. Using the depth of the wrist, for example, has as much legitimacy as using the length of the forearm and we have no reason not to use it.

To add to this we can see that his hand in the picture is actually moving somewhat upwards rather than downwards. If it was moving downwards perhaps you'd make sense however here we see that it should've been lit up by the light with the rest of the arm. I think the lighting is sorta weird in this shot but then comes the final thing.

The chunk falling from the upper part of the crater is visibly thick and it is easily thicker than Viktor's wrist. That thing clearly was on just the surface of the calc which suggests a greater depth.

 

[Viott]

Disagree with that take as I did before since that changes nothing and it is the only tangible way to calculate this without several assumptions. Using the depth of the wrist, for example, has as much legitimacy as using the length of the forearm and we have no reason not to use it.

To add to this we can see that his hand in the picture is actually moving somewhat upwards rather than downwards. If it was moving downwards perhaps you'd make sense however here we see that it should've been lit up by the light with the rest of the arm. I think the lighting is sorta weird in this shot but then comes the final thing.

The chunk falling from the upper part of the crater is visibly thick and it is easily thicker than Viktor's wrist. That thing clearly was on just the surface of the calc which suggests a greater depth.

Should I use the full sleeve length?

 

[Arceus0x]

Should I use the full sleeve length?

just use the forearm, as in end of wrist to middle of elbow. It should be like 60% of the arm

 

[Robo432343]

i agree but why is bro using half ellipsoid

 

[Viott]

just use the forearm, as in end of wrist to middle of elbow. It should be like 60% of the arm

If I use forearm and hand length the depth will decrease

 

[Arceus0x]

i agree but why is bro using half ellipsoid

because I used that originally and the closest figure to this is a half ellipsoid.

 

[Arceus0x]

If I use forearm and hand length the depth will decrease

it's about 60% of the arm, it would decrease marginally.
Here's the ratio

 

[Viott]

it's about 60% of the arm, it would decrease marginally.
Here's the ratio

I'll wait to find out if other people agree with this.

 

[Mr_Lumbago]

To add to this we can see that his hand in the picture is actually moving somewhat upwards rather than downwards. If it was moving downwards perhaps you'd make sense however here we see that it should've been lit up by the light with the rest of the arm. I think the lighting is sorta weird in this shot but then comes the final thing.

I mean, even if the punch was straight up an overhand punch, which it really isn't, the body will still cover great part of the arm, especially taking into account that Viktor should be quite taller than the miner, and as such his body would cover even more of his arm due to the angle.

The chunk falling from the upper part of the crater is visibly thick and it is easily thicker than Viktor's wrist. That thing clearly was on just the surface of the calc which suggests a greater depth.

I would agree with forearm depth then.

 

[Arceus0x]

I would agree with forearm depth then.

It is settled then

 

[SeijiSetto]

now that i've had a chance to look at this i'm more inclined to recommend a spherical cap for volume - generally fits better for impact craters i think.

 

[Arceus0x]

now that i've had a chance to look at this i'm more inclined to recommend a spherical cap for volume - generally fits better for impact craters i think.

I'd disagree since spherical cap is more so for explosions as explosions are often show are giant circles that go mostly upwards, but in this case it is a literal punch going further and further through the rock.

 

[Arceus0x]

additionally this isn't a sphere. If this were an explosion crater it'd be spherical but if you look at my old pixel scaling it is clearly far from even. There is no sphere as there is no circle.

 

[SeijiSetto]

additionally this isn't a sphere. If this were an explosion crater it'd be spherical but if you look at my old pixel scaling it is clearly far from even. There is no sphere as there is no circle.

(i just explained this to you over discord but for the sake of completion i'll post the same things)

Spoiler: big image

spherical cap doesn't require the hole itself to be spherical. it's just a cap of a sphere - a slice of it. red is the actual cap, the part destroyed, and blue is the sphere in question.
you don't need the dimensions of the sphere to get the volume of the red part - only the diameter and depth of the red part itself.

Spoiler: shapes

i don't think it actually matters all that much so ignore me

 

[Arceus0x]

I will indeed ignore you but just gonna say that the fact that he punched 3 times would definitely ruin the shape that a normal spherical cap would have.

 

[SeijiSetto]

I will indeed ignore you but just gonna say that the fact that he punched 3 times would definitely ruin the shape that a normal spherical cap would have.

and it wouldn't also ruin a half ellipsoid...?
like both are just assumptions based on the info we have, but you're implying that one shape would get warped and the other wouldn't despite modelling as two shapes which are both related to a sphere/ellipse in some way?

 

[Arceus0x]

and it wouldn't also ruin a half ellipsoid...?

why? It would dig deeper into the hole and the depth wouldn't fit the spherical cap. If you poke a hole in dirt in the same spot the width doesn't increase much but the depth does.

like both are just assumptions based on the info we have, but you're implying that one shape would get warped and the other wouldn't despite modelling as two shapes which are both related to a sphere/ellipse in some way?

yes

 

[Viott]

now that i've had a chance to look at this i'm more inclined to recommend a spherical cap for volume - generally fits better for impact craters i think.

No, I don't think it's a spherical cap, half ellipsoid is best.

 

[Viott]

It is settled then

i fixed it

 

[XxZetsuxX]

Rip 900 MJ ;c

 

[Arceus0x]

Rip 900 MJ ;c

it was 90

 

[XxZetsuxX]

it was 90

Wha-

 

[Arceus0x]

So anyways have a calc member review it and then let's see if it works out.

 

[Viott]

So anyways have a calc member review it and then let's see if it works out.

Ok

 

[TheRustyOne]

I'm personally alright with using the new recalculation.

 

[Viott]

I'm personally alright with using the new recalculation.

Thanks for checking

 

[Viott]

So anyways have a calc member review it and then let's see if it works out.

I guess there is nothing else left

 

[Arceus0x]

I guess there is nothing else left

Did you get the revision to the calc reevaluated?

 

[Viott]

Did you get the revision to the calc reevaluated?

Yeah

 

[Arceus0x]

Yeah

This should work