|
Post by picklesthedrummer on Jun 28, 2018 3:46:02 GMT
Today I got the idea to put radiators on a projectile to see if it could slice a bigger hole, and the results were pretty crazy. The projectiles ended up blasting giant holes in Whipple shields and punching straight through the rest of the ship like butter. The projectiles penetrated as well as a very long, thin rod, but made far larger holes. A 100g radiator projectile at 29km/s can punch straight through my Target Dummy like this: Those are roughly 30cm holes through a 0.5mm aluminum Whipple shield, a 6mm osmium/gold heavy Whipple shield, and a full meter of highly-sloped vanadium chromium steel, then back out the other side. This is what 6 shots and 15-20 shots can do to a stock Gunship: That's several orders of magnitude more damage than any other 100g ~30km/s projectiles I've made (though the others might just suck). Here's the projectile and gun I used: RadioisotopeThermoelectricGeneratorModule Radiator Enabler UsesCustomName true FuelPellet Fuel Technetium-99 Mass_kg 0.001 Height_m 0.0284 Thermocouple PTypeComposition Potassium NTypeComposition Sodium Length_m 0.001 ExitTemperature_K 100 Coolant Hydrogen Turbopump Composition Lithium PumpRadius_m 0.001 RotationalSpeed_RPM 1
RadiatorModule Impact Test Radiator UsesCustomName true Composition Lithium PanelWidth_m 0.2085 Height_m 0.01 Thickness_m 0.001 ArmorThickness_m 0.001 Panels 10 FrontTaper_radians 0 BackTaper_radians 0 SurfaceFinish null
CraftBlueprint 100 g Radiator Test Modules Radiator Enabler 1 2.1436 null 0 0 Impact Test Radiator 2 0.019281 Radiator Enabler 0 0 Impact Test Radiator 2 0.029481 Radiator Enabler 1.5708 0 Armor Shape Cylindrical Concave true
RailgunModule 1 GW Radiator Test Railgun UsesCustomName true PowerConsumption_W 1e+09 Capacitor Count 1 DielectricComposition Hafnia Dimensions_m 2 1.124 Separation_m 6.9e-05 Rails Composition Zirconium Copper Thickness_m 0.34 Length_m 5 BarrelArmor Composition Graphite Aerogel Thickness_m 2.06 Armature Composition Zirconium Copper BoreRadius_m 0.0706 Mass_kg 0.001 Tracer null Payload 100 g Radiator Test Loader PowerConsumption_W 4.5e+06 ExternalMount false InternalMount false Turret InnerRadius_m 3.4955 Extruded true ArmorComposition Amorphous Carbon ArmorThickness_m 0.25 MomentumWheels Composition Osmium RotationalSpeed_RPM 1190 AttachedAmmoBay Capacity 1000 Stacks 1 TargetsShips true TargetsShots true
|
|
|
Post by AtomHeartDragon on Jun 28, 2018 7:08:16 GMT
I'm not sure if it's bug. It's quite possible, but at lower velocities it turns out that stuff the radiators are made of makes a lot of difference to the damage they cause which would indicate that the physics simulation still controls what is happening rather than for example going batshit because of clipping. Also, in your first screenshot the holes don't seem to extend to the inner layer.
Do note that it's not projectile's energy that matters, but the part of this energy that is dumped into target - a projectile that passes clean through doesn't deliver much of its energy, same with projectile that dumps all its energy in a single point where most of it is wasted on heating plasma.
Of course it does bear investigation, though if it is a bug, it's quite likely that this is also what contributes to the effectiveness of payload based AP guns.
|
|
|
Post by picklesthedrummer on Jun 28, 2018 9:07:20 GMT
I'm not sure if it's bug. It's quite possible, but at lower velocities it turns out that stuff the radiators are made of makes a lot of difference to the damage they cause which would indicate that the physics simulation still controls what is happening rather than for example going batshit because of clipping. Also, in your first screenshot the holes don't seem to extend to the inner layer. It definitely does feel like the physics handle radiator damage, but it feels like something is done wrong. It almost seems like penetration is calculated from the craft's hull cross-section without the radiators and the total mass including radiators, except it even penetrates more than osmium rods of that cross-section. I have no idea why it punches that size of holes, but they seem way too large for the central RTG and (except for Whipple shield damage) way too small for the radiators. The holes in the first screenshot do go through all the layers of armor. The ship is 49m wide and 185m long so 2.5m of armor is actually pretty thin. There were big black patches on the armor overlay and a bunch of orange from spalling/plasma, but I didn't show that because it made everything too bright in the screenshot. I could also easily see the internals through the holes from a different angle. Do note that it's not projectile's energy that matters, but the part of this energy that is dumped into target - a projectile that passes clean through doesn't deliver much of its energy, same with projectile that dumps all its energy in a single point where most of it is wasted on heating plasma. Of course it does bear investigation, though if it is a bug, it's quite likely that this is also what contributes to the effectiveness of payload based AP guns. I've done a fair bit of experimentation with penetrators based on roughly cylindrical armor and/or radiation shields, and this thing blows them all out of the water. I can make a long rod that can punch a tiny hole through as much armor as this, a pancake that can punch as big of a hole through very thin armor, or something in between, but none of those designs can destroy even 1% this volume of armor. Everything in my experience is saying this lithium waffle should just go splat on the surface and not even penetrate the Gunship's inner armor, yet it can rip a Gunship in half or go through multiple meters of VCS like a 2mm needle while making a 30cm hole.
|
|
|
Post by AtomHeartDragon on Jun 28, 2018 18:50:18 GMT
Have you checked how does it compare to (coarse) flak of comparable mass and material? I have used similar munition, except at lower velocities and made of osmium - it could slice clean through a gunship, but against better armour it wasn't as devastating, using less dense material to allow longer rods turned out to also diminish penetration. You can look up "continuous rod" on this board to find more material to work with. At 29km/s I can't really tell what would happen - on one hand lithium is thin and flimsy, on the other when hitting stuff at nearly 30km/s neither impactor nor impactee will behave in intuitive manner, on third hand radiator projectile impact is concentrated in a single line so is more like a hypervelocity sword cut then getting slapped with a pancake, on fourth long rod penetrators won't necessarily work well that far into hypervelocity regime, on fifth - why the fuck do I have five hands? It's quite possibly a bug but 29km/s is a bit far from my daily experience and thus my comfort zone and I have neither mathematical skills nor access to the game's source to readily opine on that issue. You could try calculating how much energy either of the projectiles will deposit over unit of area and if there is some sort of sweet spot between punching clean through, exploding against whipple and dumping energy into material already turned plasma.
|
|
|
Post by picklesthedrummer on Jun 29, 2018 2:47:04 GMT
Have you checked how does it compare to (coarse) flak of comparable mass and material? I have used similar munition, except at lower velocities and made of osmium - it could slice clean through a gunship, but against better armour it wasn't as devastating, using less dense material to allow longer rods turned out to also diminish penetration. You can look up "continuous rod" on this board to find more material to work with. I tried 98g lithium flak from 1-25 pieces with very narrow spread. It's fairly powerful but nothing like the radiator projectiles. It takes 30-50 hits in the same spot to punch through the target dummy instead of almost every shot going through. Against a Gunship it tends to take 1-2 hits in the same place to get through the front armor, and 2-5 total hits to go through the whole ship. By the time flak can do significant internal damage to a Gunship, the radiator projectiles would've already broken it into 3-5 pieces. An interesting note is that the flak impacts leave armor glowing around the impact and blast off Whipple shields on the way out but not the way in, compared to the radiator projectiles that blast off the front Whipple shield and don't heat anything. I was originally going for a cutting effect like a broadhead arrow, but the test results drove me in this direction. Sturdy, blade-like radiators didn't actually cut lines in the target. They just expanded the central hole and somehow increased penetration. I progressively made the radiators longer and weaker, then eventually less dense, for consistently better results. With this design at this speed, it seems like the radiators just do slight damage to Whipple shields and weak armor, then somehow increase the penetration and size the core hole to ridiculous levels. The radiators are nearly the size of the giant holes in the Whipple shields, so they're clearly not going into the target intact, yet their mass seems to be doing something because a 1.28g RTG definitely doesn't make a hole like that. At 29km/s I can't really tell what would happen - on one hand lithium is thin and flimsy, on the other when hitting stuff at nearly 30km/s neither impactor nor impactee will behave in intuitive manner, on third hand radiator projectile impact is concentrated in a single line so is more like a hypervelocity sword cut then getting slapped with a pancake, on fourth long rod penetrators won't necessarily work well that far into hypervelocity regime, on fifth - why the fuck do I have five hands? It's quite possibly a bug but 29km/s is a bit far from my daily experience and thus my comfort zone and I have neither mathematical skills nor access to the game's source to readily opine on that issue. You could try calculating how much energy either of the projectiles will deposit over unit of area and if there is some sort of sweet spot between punching clean through, exploding against whipple and dumping energy into material already turned plasma. Quite a few of my weapon tests have involved long rods at over 25km/s and two things become apparent: Density and strength are almost irrelevant on impact, and the narrower the rod, the greater the penetration. My scariest weapon so far is a railgun that shoots a 10g 1.72mm x 5m potassium needle at 130km/s and can effortlessly penetrate 20 meters of VCS armor behind Whipple shields. I tried denser materials than potassium but they either make the game stutter like crazy on impact or make the rod too short to shoot accurately. For heavier rods I prefer osmium because shorter rods cause less slowdown from collision detection and they don't go fast enough to need accuracy at 1.5Mm anyway. According to my math (which may be flawed) these projectiles have 25032mm² of impact area. That's equivalent to a 178.5mm x 7.5mm lithium plate, which happens to be a terrible projectile. It only made 8 holes in a Gunship after 150-300 hits and couldn't even reliably get through the Target Dummy's 1mm osmium/2mm gold/3mm platinum heavy Whipple shield.
|
|
|
Post by picklesthedrummer on Jun 29, 2018 6:18:52 GMT
Ok, so I did some more tests and things are apparently a little more complicated than I thought. The length of the projectile with the radiators apparently matters a lot. I added some spacers to it so the gun could fire more accurately, but beyond about 10cm more length it starts failing to penetrate the Target Dummy's armor. That's especially odd since the spacers have no mass and shouldn't really change anything about the impact, and in my rod tests length seemed to be irrelevant anyway. Another interesting detail is that it doesn't take anywhere near a 29km/s impact for these to do damage. At 2km/s it's nearly as effective against a Gunship. The Target Dummy fares a lot better at 2km/s but still takes some damage, which is very impressive for a 100g projectile. Normally at 2km/s the Target Dummy can shrug off anything under half a ton unless it's some variety of ridiculously thin needle or a nuke.
|
|