|
Post by bigbombr on May 4, 2017 18:30:01 GMT
I refuse to belive that BORON will not always be the ultimate answer. Also all hail Boron. *believe *graphene Fixed a few errors
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on May 4, 2017 18:34:44 GMT
ahh, but Diamonds are forever kaiserwilhelm, which is definitely for your eyes only, the world is not enough for anyone else to know, you just gota live and let die with your license to kill, though tomorrow never dies, so... I named a bunch of bond films
|
|
|
Post by kaiserwilhelm on May 4, 2017 19:08:33 GMT
I refuse to belive that BORON will not always be the ultimate answer. Also all hail Boron. *believe *graphene Fixed a few errors What is this graphene your are talking about. Some form of heresy maybe? But in all seriousness it should be borophenen something like that. Now don't quote me on that but I bellive to have read somewhere that a graphen like structure is possible to create with other atoms than carbon. Correct me if I am wrong.
|
|
|
Post by kaiserwilhelm on May 4, 2017 19:12:23 GMT
The SKY will fall as soon as the SPECTRE of graphene dies killed by THE man with THE golden gun. We should stop should't we.
|
|
|
Post by demetrious on May 4, 2017 19:59:34 GMT
I'm still not supporting making material strength dependent on temperature. For one, it make making new module from abeit difficult to literally a fucking engineering task. It's gonna drive a lot of new player away just from how awfully hard it would be, exponentially so than the current system. Well considering CoaDE is going for realism I don't see why it's an issue. The barrier of entry for your average gamer is already moderately high so raising it a bit isnt going to do much. Material strength dependant on temperature would just be yet another error message to worry about for us anyway not unlike beam deflection stress etc., and means that more reason to use red-hard materials or different materials for different goals instead of a one module/material fits all roles That's exactly why it's worth solving that problem, but dragonkid11 has a point in that it is a problem. There's certain modules I already avoid working on because you can't just dink with sliders until things look kosher - lasers and nuclear reactors being excellent examples. In fact, I even gave up on coilguns! It illustrates that this is a game for nerds willing to look up some basic info, but part of any game's appeal is how they can impart, via dynamic feedback, an innate grasp of the relationships involved. Kerbal Space Program and orbital mechanics is a fantastic example. 3D maneuvering in air combat is another; there's a big difference between reading (or writing) about it, and doing it yourself in a simulator: books teach you a dizzying array of specific maneuvers and leave you with an impression of maneuver-countermaneuver like a chess game, whereas a simulator teaches you quickly that the boundaries between "maneuvers" are very fluid, and that timing is the most essential element in executing them. CoaDE's warning messages and info diagrams, combined with the push'n'pull sliders, allows for similar feedback. It's a major part of CoaDE's appeal and worth preserving and enhancing. qswitched seems pretty competent at handling User Interface/User Experience design so far, so its the data and modelling that seems most challenging. Finding good data to enable this improvement of the simulation might be a lot harder and more time-consuming, which is where the community could help a bit. Steel strength/temperature curves are well-known (and accessible) from decades of industrial use but exotic stuff is a lot harder: I spent a half-hour on google scholar looking for information on reinforced carbon-carbon and the closest I got was this abstract that confirms that RCC doesn't really change even at high temperatures. Maybe I should contact a friend still in University and see if they have Lexis-Nexis access... Ahh, thank you kindly!
|
|
|
Post by bigbombr on May 4, 2017 20:19:56 GMT
*believe *graphene Fixed a few errors What is this graphene your are talking about. Some form of heresy maybe? But in all seriousness it should be borophenen something like that. Now don't quote me on that but I bellive to have read somewhere that a graphen like structure is possible to create with other atoms than carbon. Correct me if I am wrong. Borophene does exist. Something similar based on chlorine too I believe.
|
|
|
Post by bigbombr on May 4, 2017 20:24:19 GMT
... Finding good data to enable this improvement of the simulation might be a lot harder and more time-consuming, which is where the community could help a bit. Steel strength/temperature curves are well-known (and accessible) from decades of industrial use but exotic stuff is a lot harder: I spent a half-hour on google scholar looking for information on reinforced carbon-carbon and the closest I got was this abstract that confirms that RCC doesn't really change even at high temperatures. Maybe I should contact a friend still in University and see if they have Lexis-Nexis access... It would be really awesome if you could do this. Perhaps make a thread for it in the materials section of the suggestions subforum? Qswitched could implement structural weakening by heating for any material he gets the data for.
|
|
|
Post by zuthal on May 4, 2017 20:53:04 GMT
I don't even know which allotrope of boron is assumed in the game - and that may have significant implications for thermal stability. E.g. amorphous boron anneals at ~1275 K.
|
|