|
|
Post by argonbalt on Oct 2, 2016 8:12:37 GMT
Zirconium copper super guns were fixed sure, but now various other materials are being broken.
|
|
|
|
Post by blothorn on Oct 2, 2016 9:33:06 GMT
It has nothing to do with material---I am just using Ferretic Stainless Steel to make it more resistant to barrel sniping. It turns out that all barrel materials have the same properties; you just need to increase power for less conductive materials to offset losses from resistance. Even some of the ceramics are viable for shorter barrels (as the relevant ones have poor yield strength). Of particular note is titanium diboride, which may be more resistant to lasers than any of the metals.  |
|
|
|
Post by astygiannecros on Oct 3, 2016 5:32:37 GMT
Here is something I came up with when trying to make a high-yield but lightweight nuke.
|
|
|
|
Post by captinjoehenry on Oct 9, 2016 21:26:43 GMT
Ok here is my 2.5 4,5 megaton nuke I launch out of coilguns!  |
|
Kahl'Zun
New Member
King of all cardboard
Posts: 19 
|
Post by Kahl'Zun on Oct 10, 2016 6:23:00 GMT
A useful method of gauging the effectiveness of these designs is here:
nuclearsecrecy.com/betas/yieldtoweight/
this shows the weight vs yield for many of the nuclear weapons produced. From what I'm seeing, the best ones here fall into the 2-3 kt/hg range, which surprisingly is exceeded in modern weapons.
So, strangely, these nuke designs are feasible!
EDIT: I didn't notice you were unable to add your own designs. If anyone can find one where you can put in your own figures, that would be very useful methinks. |
|
|
|
Post by blothorn on Oct 10, 2016 7:27:19 GMT
But note the lack of anything at the very small end--only 7 under 100kg, and none above 1kt/kg, while larger CoaDE nukes (such as the one above) can easily pass 20 kt/kg. (The lightest real 4Mt nukes are over 1000kg.) The mass/yield relationship is not linear--for a given mass, we are getting an order of magnitude better yield. Remember also (as noted elsewhere) that this compares boosted fission to the much more mass-efficient Teller-Ulam designs.
And the 20,000kg/m^3 fusion fuel densities seem absurd whatever the outcome.
|
|
|
|
Post by cuddlefish on Oct 10, 2016 8:14:20 GMT
Concur on the fusion fuel density. It seems like there should at least be a strength check on the fissile sphere that is intended to be containing the gas at that pressure.
|
|
|
|
Post by zuthal on Oct 11, 2016 4:15:28 GMT
Ok here is my 2.5 4,5 megaton nuke I launch out of coilguns! -snip- With that design, you can easily replace the Pu-238 with Pu-239, losing only 30 kt of yield for an 85-fold reduction in cost. |
|
|
|
Post by captinjoehenry on Oct 11, 2016 12:39:44 GMT
Also I have made an even better nuke for the same weight!  |
|
|
|
Post by nivik on Oct 11, 2016 15:52:05 GMT
Concur on the fusion fuel density. It seems like there should at least be a strength check on the fissile sphere that is intended to be containing the gas at that pressure. I did the math once, and IIRC, to compress D-T down to 20Mg/m^3 would require something on the order of tens of gigapascals. Around the level where you can turn charcoal into diamonds, or squish copper into degenerate matter. I don't use nukes anymore. |
|
|
|
Post by cuddlefish on Oct 11, 2016 16:33:29 GMT
Concur on the fusion fuel density. It seems like there should at least be a strength check on the fissile sphere that is intended to be containing the gas at that pressure. I did the math once, and IIRC, to compress D-T down to 20Mg/m^3 would require something on the order of tens of gigapascals. Around the level where you can turn charcoal into diamonds, or squish copper into degenerate matter. I don't use nukes anymore. Oi. I wonder why the slider even goes that high, then... |
|
|
|
Post by captinjoehenry on Oct 11, 2016 16:51:42 GMT
Hmm well this is just guessing but maybe it's the maximum density during detonation? I am just guessing mind you as other wise it seems more than a little silly. Another thing though is that the whole nuke system could be trying to represent teller ulam type of thermonuclear weapons with the sliders. I only say this as they are definitely a real thing that are very much used in real life but it is something that is classified so the game wouldn't be able to do the math for a teller ulam design. But as teller ulam nukes are a thing it might be approximating what those type of weapons can do?
|
|
|
|
Post by oprean on Oct 11, 2016 19:09:49 GMT
I agree, fusion fuel should be somewhat regulated, by cost or nuke size.
|
|
|
|
Post by nivik on Oct 11, 2016 22:10:23 GMT
Hmm well this is just guessing but maybe it's the maximum density during detonation? I am just guessing mind you as other wise it seems more than a little silly. Another thing though is that the whole nuke system could be trying to represent teller ulam type of thermonuclear weapons with the sliders. I only say this as they are definitely a real thing that are very much used in real life but it is something that is classified so the game wouldn't be able to do the math for a teller ulam design. But as teller ulam nukes are a thing it might be approximating what those type of weapons can do? Maybe the Teller-Ulam thing. I'm not sure. I know the stock high-yield warhead uses the max boost possible, so it's clearly intentional. As a side note, I wish that using DU or other fissionables as the tamper affected yield due to neutron flux. Right now, as far as I can tell, with pure fission and low-boost warheads you want the densest possible tamper (osmium) and with high-boost warheads you instead want the lightest possible tamper (lithium). Of course, it might be that secondary fission is only a feature of two-stage warheads. I don't know. |
|
|
|
Post by blothorn on Oct 12, 2016 18:59:34 GMT
Hmm well this is just guessing but maybe it's the maximum density during detonation? I am just guessing mind you as other wise it seems more than a little silly. Another thing though is that the whole nuke system could be trying to represent teller ulam type of thermonuclear weapons with the sliders. I only say this as they are definitely a real thing that are very much used in real life but it is something that is classified so the game wouldn't be able to do the math for a teller ulam design. But as teller ulam nukes are a thing it might be approximating what those type of weapons can do? Maybe the Teller-Ulam thing. I'm not sure. I know the stock high-yield warhead uses the max boost possible, so it's clearly intentional. As a side note, I wish that using DU or other fissionables as the tamper affected yield due to neutron flux. Right now, as far as I can tell, with pure fission and low-boost warheads you want the densest possible tamper (osmium) and with high-boost warheads you instead want the lightest possible tamper (lithium). Of course, it might be that secondary fission is only a feature of two-stage warheads. I don't know. That is part of it--U-238 only in response to a very high-energy neutron (1 MeV). Fission reactions produce few such neutrons, so tamper fission plays little role in pure-fission/boosted fission (where most of the fission-produced neutrons will be absorbed by the primary fission fuel). That said, there were designs (I think one was built, and none tested) for bombs with a much larger quantity of fusion fuel between the primary warhead and a DU tamper for the purpose of inducing fission in the tamper. I think this is the static density, not the imploded density, just from how the total masses work out. And I think the "this is replicating Teller-Ulam" unsatisfying because we are achieving ~10x the yield:mass of real Teller-Ulam bombs (for a given mass). |
|
