- #1
DaveC426913 said:This is a test, done here on Earth, under optimal conditions, not an actual impact in space.
Ask Elon...Vanadium 50 said:My first question was "why would anyone want to launch an aluminum block?"
No. "Light-gas gun".HankDorsett said:Electromagnetic railgun?
You are thinking about this wrong. 315 kJ corresponds to .16 lbs of tnt. It is a lot of energy.yelelafella said:No way!
The damage is proportional to the Kinetic energy imparted:
KE = 1/2 m v2...
so i ran the numbers & unfort the Physics doesn't add up.
(NB: 15000mph = 6705.6 meters/sec)
KE = 1/2 x 0.014kg x (6705 x 6705)
= 1/2 x 0.014 x 44 957 025
= 1/2 x 629 398.35
= 314 699 Joules
So it's only:
314.699kJ = 75.3 calories = 0.0875 Kilowatt Hours or
in other words; enough energy to run your 1000W (1kW) radiator
for 0.0875 of an hour...5.25mins
(or for comparison: 564 calories in a Big Mac... so about 1/8th of a burger)
I severely doubt that is enough energy
to spiflicate a solid block of Aluminium like that!
Before anyone asks, melt and vaporization are a small percentage of crater volume. Most of it is from deformation and failure.Tom.G said:25.6g (or 9.5cc) of Aluminum is vaporized
a giant spit-ball-machine using H2 OR He for propulsionDaveC426913 said:No. "Light-gas gun".
Whatever that is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light-gas_gun256bits said:a giant spit-ball-machine using H2 OR He for propulsion
That's not all that was spificated.yelelafella said:No way!
The damage is proportional to the Kinetic energy imparted:
KE = 1/2 m v2...
so i ran the numbers & unfort the Physics doesn't add up.
(NB: 15000mph = 6705.6 meters/sec)
KE = 1/2 x 0.014kg x (6705 x 6705)
= 1/2 x 0.014 x 44 957 025
= 1/2 x 629 398.35
= 314 699 Joules
So it's only:
314.699kJ = 75.3 calories = 0.0875 Kilowatt Hours or
in other words; enough energy to run your 1000W (1kW) radiator
for 0.0875 of an hour...5.25mins
(or for comparison: 564 calories in a Big Mac... so about 1/8th of a burger)
I severely doubt that is enough energy
to spiflicate a solid block of Aluminium like that!
To put it in perspective, TNT with a density of 1.65 gm/cc, for 75gms, is a cube about 3.5 cm on a side.Frabjous said:You are thinking about this wrong. 315 kJ corresponds to .16 lbs of tnt. It is a lot of energy.
I dug up a scaling law for geomaterials, (ρY3)-.25, and it predicted a new crater volume equal to V0/3.7. If one assumes that it retains the same shape, the new lengths are l0/1.5.gleem said:They may have used Al for effect. Also, we do not know what alloy of Al was used. Even among Al alloys, there is a significant difference in strength. If they had used Stainless Steel for example the results would not have been as dramatic. SS has 3 to 4 times the tensile strength of Al alloys plus it is twice as dense and has a melting point twice that of Al. Anyway, it would be interesting to see what would have happened.
Star Trek never touched on mass weapons, focusing primarily on energy weapons. However; Mass weapons can not only be destroyers of huge massive ships like what the Borg cube is supposed to be. They could also be planet destroyers. If we ever encountered another race is space. We would have to peacefully coexist, because they would undoubtedly be as familiar with mass weapons as we are and an all out war would mean mutually complete destruction.Choppy said:So it turns out the way to defeat the Borg was a 0.5 ounce piece of plastic traveling at 15,000 mph.
Who knew?
View attachment 248756
Definitely late to the party, but I suspect the use of aluminum is because that's a very commonly used spaceframe material. Much of the ISS structure is aluminum alloys, iirc.gleem said:They may have used Al for effect. Also, we do not know what alloy of Al was used. Even among Al alloys, there is a significant difference in strength. If they had used Stainless Steel for example the results would not have been as dramatic. SS has 3 to 4 times the tensile strength of Al alloys plus it is twice as dense and has a melting point twice that of Al. Anyway, it would be interesting to see what would have happened.
When an aluminum block hits a hard surface, it will experience a force that causes it to deform or break. The extent of the deformation or breakage will depend on the speed and angle at which the block hits the surface, as well as the strength and composition of the block itself.
Yes, the temperature of the aluminum block can affect its reaction when it hits something. At higher temperatures, the block will be more malleable and therefore more likely to deform upon impact. At lower temperatures, the block will be more brittle and may even shatter upon impact.
The shape of the aluminum block can greatly impact its behavior when it hits something. A block with a flat surface will distribute the force of impact more evenly, whereas a block with sharp edges or corners may experience more concentrated points of stress and may break or deform in a different way.
When an aluminum block hits something, the energy from the impact is transferred to both the block and the surface it hits. Some of the energy may be dissipated as heat, sound, or other forms of energy, while some may be stored as potential energy in the deformed or broken block.
Yes, the speed of the aluminum block can greatly impact the damage it causes upon impact. A faster moving block will have more kinetic energy, which can result in more severe damage to both the block and the surface it hits. This is why high-speed impacts, such as those in car crashes, can cause significant damage to aluminum structures.