|
|
Post by The Astronomer on May 17, 2017 1:52:38 GMT
Anybody got graphene with better conductivity? I'm going to get an extremely fast railgun (1 Mm/s) if not for graphene's low conductivity!
|
|
|
|
Post by RiftandRend on May 17, 2017 3:40:23 GMT
Anybody got graphene with better conductivity? I'm going to get an extremely fast railgun (1 Mm/s) if not for graphene's low conductivity! What does it have in your version? |
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on May 17, 2017 4:29:30 GMT
Anybody got graphene with better conductivity? I'm going to get an extremely fast railgun (1 Mm/s) if not for graphene's low conductivity! What does it have in your version? Resistivity_Ohm_m 3.3e-6Adding some metal should help... |
|
|
|
Post by RiftandRend on May 17, 2017 6:19:30 GMT
What does it have in your version? Resistivity_Ohm_m 3.3e-6Adding some metal should help... That resistivity may not be accurately represent the conduction speed of graphene. Electron flow within graphene is somewhat higher than other materials, so you may be getting inaccurate performance due to the game's simplistic modeling. |
|
|
|
Post by bigbombr on May 17, 2017 6:42:23 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on May 17, 2017 6:44:58 GMT
Yes! I wonder if that thing can be used to make a good railgun material. |
|
|
|
Post by bigbombr on May 17, 2017 8:20:57 GMT
Yes! I wonder if that thing can be used to make a good railgun material. Railgun armature, armour, thermocouple, nozzle, coilgun wire and rails of a railgun. What is it not good for? |
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on May 17, 2017 8:27:58 GMT
Yes! I wonder if that thing can be used to make a good railgun material. Railgun armature, armour, thermocouple, nozzle, coilgun wire and rails of a railgun. What is it not good for? Its conductivity's not enough for >200 km/s railguns. Always make my railgun armature melt. |
|
|
|
Post by bigbombr on May 17, 2017 8:41:27 GMT
Railgun armature, armour, thermocouple, nozzle, coilgun wire and rails of a railgun. What is it not good for? Its conductivity's not enough for >200 km/s railguns. Always make my railgun armature melt. Try using graphene as armature, 3D-graphene for rails and graphene as barrel armour. |
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on May 18, 2017 13:59:20 GMT
Material Low Pressure Space Air
Elements O
ElementCount 2
Density_kg__m3 0.433
EnthalpyOfFormation_kJ__mol 0
BondDissociationEnergy_kJ__mol 497
GibbsFreeEnergyOfFormation_kJ__mol 0
BulkModulus_GPa .1132
MeltingPoint_K 50.5
BoilingPoint_K 90
SpecificHeat_J__kg_K 916
ThermalConductivity_W__m_K 6.94
Viscosity_Pa_s 20.18e-6
RelativePermeability 1.0000019
DielectricStrength_MV__m 2.55
RefractiveIndex Oxygen
Dissociation
Products Monatomic Oxygen
ProductCounts 2
There might be some values that differ from liquid oxygen. Please fix this code if you found one.
|
|
|
|
Post by apophys on May 26, 2017 14:19:52 GMT
Lithium hydride and lithium borohydride are missing dissociation definitions. With this edit, lithium borohydride is actually a decent propellant (velocity better than ethane, density better than pentane), though a little expensive.
Edit: Lithium fluoride and lithium oxide are also missing dissociation definitions.
Material Lithium Borohydride
Elements Li B H
ElementCount 1 1 4
Density_kg__m3 666
EnthalpyOfFormation_kJ__mol -190.464
BondDissociationEnergy_kJ__mol 1466
GibbsFreeEnergyOfFormation_kJ__mol -124.733
MeltingPoint_K 541
BoilingPoint_K 643
ThermalConductivity_W__m_K 12.5
ThermalExpansion__K 2.9e-4
Viscosity_Pa_s 6.0e-3
SpecificHeat_J__kg_K 3788.97
RefractiveIndex Lithium
Dissociation
Products Liquid Lithium Monatomic Boron Monatomic Hydrogen
ProductCounts 1 1 4
Material Lithium Hydride
Elements Li H
ElementCount 1 1
Density_kg__m3 780
EnthalpyOfFormation_kJ__mol 140.624
BondDissociationEnergy_kJ__mol 247
GibbsFreeEnergyOfFormation_kJ__mol 117.820
MeltingPoint_K 961.9
BoilingPoint_K 1173
ThermalConductivity_W__m_K 12.5
ThermalExpansion__K 4.2e-5
Viscosity_Pa_s 7.8e-4
SpecificHeat_J__kg_K 3739.75
RefractiveIndex Lithium
Dissociation
Products Liquid Lithium Monatomic Hydrogen
ProductCounts 1 1
Material Lithium Fluoride
Elements Li F
ElementCount 1 1
Density_kg__m3 2635
EnthalpyOfFormation_kJ__mol -340.787
BondDissociationEnergy_kJ__mol 577
GibbsFreeEnergyOfFormation_kJ__mol -361.597
MeltingPoint_K 1118
BoilingPoint_K 1949
ThermalConductivity_W__m_K 14.2
ThermalExpansion__K 34.8e-6
SpecificHeat_J__kg_K 1604
RefractiveIndex Lithium
Dissociation
Products Liquid Lithium Monatomic Fluorine
ProductCounts 1 1
Material Lithium Oxide
Elements Li O
ElementCount 2 1
Density_kg__m3 2013
EnthalpyOfFormation_kJ__mol -166.942
BondDissociationEnergy_kJ__mol 682
GibbsFreeEnergyOfFormation_kJ__mol -187.325
MeltingPoint_K 1711
BoilingPoint_K 2870
ThermalConductivity_W__m_K 11.29
ThermalExpansion__K 25.91e-6
SpecificHeat_J__kg_K 1665.21
RefractiveIndex Lithium
Dissociation
Products Liquid Lithium Monatomic Oxygen
ProductCounts 2 1
|
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on May 26, 2017 14:29:37 GMT
Lithium hydride and lithium borohydride are missing dissociation definitions. With this edit, lithium borohydride is actually a decent propellant (velocity better than ethane, density better than pentane), though a little expensive. Material Lithium Borohydride
Elements Li B H
ElementCount 1 1 4
Density_kg__m3 666
EnthalpyOfFormation_kJ__mol -190.464
BondDissociationEnergy_kJ__mol 1466
GibbsFreeEnergyOfFormation_kJ__mol -124.733
MeltingPoint_K 541
BoilingPoint_K 643
ThermalConductivity_W__m_K 12.5
ThermalExpansion__K 2.9e-4
Viscosity_Pa_s 6.0e-3
SpecificHeat_J__kg_K 3788.97
RefractiveIndex Lithium
Dissociation
Products Liquid Lithium Monatomic Boron Monatomic Hydrogen
ProductCounts 1 1 4
Material Lithium Hydride
Elements Li H
ElementCount 1 1
Density_kg__m3 780
EnthalpyOfFormation_kJ__mol 140.624
BondDissociationEnergy_kJ__mol 247
GibbsFreeEnergyOfFormation_kJ__mol 117.820
MeltingPoint_K 961.9
BoilingPoint_K 1173
ThermalConductivity_W__m_K 12.5
ThermalExpansion__K 4.2e-5
Viscosity_Pa_s 7.8e-4
SpecificHeat_J__kg_K 3739.75
RefractiveIndex Lithium
Dissociation
Products Liquid Lithium Monatomic Hydrogen
ProductCounts 1 1
No carbon, right? Great, this won't clog our NTRs! |
|
|
|
Post by RiftandRend on May 26, 2017 19:08:54 GMT
I don't see how carbon clogging is an issue. The engines in my ships only can run for ~10 min until the tanks are dry. I highly doubt that any appreciable soot buildup could occur during that time. Even across multiple full burns and re fuelings this should be a non issue. Even if it is, cleaning the engine should be a fairly trivial task, just attach a grinder to a drone and remove it. |
|
|
|
Post by Rocket Witch on May 27, 2017 21:04:23 GMT
Lithium hydride and lithium borohydride are missing dissociation definitions. With this edit, lithium borohydride is actually a decent propellant (velocity better than ethane, density better than pentane), though a little expensive. Edit: Lithium fluoride and lithium oxide are also missing dissociation definitions. These originally weren't added because the compounds were composed only with tripropellant use in mind. For the updated entry I will combine your work with someusername6's monatomic lithium, rather than using liquid lithium as the dissociation product: childrenofadeadearth.boards.net/post/20978/thread |
|
|
|
Post by zuthal on May 30, 2017 9:27:44 GMT
I don't see how carbon clogging is an issue. The engines in my ships only can run for ~10 min until the tanks are dry. I highly doubt that any appreciable soot buildup could occur during that time. Even across multiple full burns and re fuelings this should be a non issue. Even if it is, cleaning the engine should be a fairly trivial task, just attach a grinder to a drone and remove it. The thing is, we are talking about hundreds of kilos to several tonnes of propellant per second, propellant which is >80% carbon by mass, through reactor cores with a total mass of only a few dozen kilos or so. So, even assuming less than 1% of the carbon soot produced deposits, it will deposit an amount of carbon equal in mass to the reactor core within those few minutes. |
|
