Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6]

Author Topic: Material Science: Strange things to reconsider  (Read 10140 times)

VoidPointer

  • Bay Watcher
  • Skilled Computerdwarf
    • View Profile
Re: Material Science: Strange things to reconsider
« Reply #75 on: August 09, 2010, 09:34:50 pm »

The problem with that idea is that even the raw adamantine "ore" has the same imperviousness to all terrestrial temperatures as the final metal.

This is, incidentally, the most problematic and least important (from a utility perspective) property of adamantine. Just a side note. Reducing it to e.g. thermite temperatures would be a big step toward explaining some of this stuff (and making an alternate, but still interesting, production chain at that).

I almost want to say "noble gas" in the molecules, and try to come up with a BS reason for how they could be bound into a molecule in the first place... I can't really think of a metal that doesn't in some way oxidize...

Noble gases aren't, really.
Logged
01011001 01101111 01110101 00100000 01101110 01100101 01110010 01100100 00101110
01001001 00100000 01110011 01100101 01100101 00100000 01110111 01101000 01100001 01110100 00100000 01111001 01101111 01110101 00100000 01100100 01101001 01100100 00100000 01110100 01101000 01100101 01110010 01100101 00101110

Shades

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Material Science: Strange things to reconsider
« Reply #76 on: August 10, 2010, 02:45:23 am »

Actually, Mythbusters disproved that one - the amount of force it takes to actually deform the steel toes of steel toe boots to cut through your toes is an amount of force that would essentially have liquified your entire foot without the protection.

Although mythbuster is fun they are wrong an awful lot. Still I have no reason to doubt that as I only know one person who has had this happen and it's possible nothing could have protected his foot. I've heard kevlar boots can be good but who knows.

The point about that non-sharp edge not cutting is still valid of course, as to if threads are possible to bend I'm not sure how to read the raws either way on that. Even fairly non malleable metals can be used though.

Very interesting, and extremely likely if adamantine is a molecule. Of course, if there is an element found only in adamantine molecules (likely), then we might wonder at its properties as well.

Almost certainly something made with carbon nano tubes, they seem to be the holy grail as far as structures that are applicable to everything science needs.
Logged
Its like playing god with sentient legos. - They Got Leader
[Dwarf Fortress] plays like a dizzyingly complex hybrid of Dungeon Keeper and The Sims, if all your little people were manic-depressive alcoholics. - tv tropes
You don't use science to show that you're right, you use science to become right. - xkcd

Alastar

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Material Science: Strange things to reconsider
« Reply #77 on: August 16, 2010, 07:29:01 am »

I know this is a little bit late and possibly flogging a skeletal horse... but something for those with a stronger science background than myself: Doesn't adamantine's molar mass (same as that of iron) rule out possible exotic properties that were brought up to justify its edge value? If I'm talking nonsense, corrections are very welcome.

Obsidian is 13 times as dense as adamantine, with comparable molar mass (actually lower in-game). So obsidian's smallest 'elementary entities' (mostly silicon dioxide molecules) should be packed more tightly than those of adamantine (whatever their nature).
Given that a monomolecular edge is possible for obsidian blades (and something fairly close is achievable through old-fashioned knapping, if the value takes practicality into account as well as theoretical limits) I can't see a way to justify 20000 for obsidian and 100000 for adamantine.

*

Anyway, harping about adamantine aside... has anyone found a good resource for overall material values yet? The system isn't being used to its fullest atm. For example, in many cases no real distinction is made between different strenghts: impact strength set to 3.5 times tensile strength (most readily available figure), most others set equal to tensile strength. I'm also curious about obsidian as a weapon material using its true properties (which I haven't found anywhere) rather than taking everything from marble.
Logged

mLegion

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Material Science: Strange things to reconsider
« Reply #78 on: August 20, 2010, 01:14:27 pm »

Just assume that a large portion of adamantine forging is done with prayers to Armok to bless the forge fire and hammer to make this possible.
Also Toady now needs to introduce a Priest of Armok noble who makes adamantine forging possible and can cure (or cause) madness and also gives happy thoughts to dwarves if you give him a magma powered temple workshop where you can assign animals for sacrifice.
Logged

ZCM

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Material Science: Strange things to reconsider
« Reply #79 on: August 23, 2010, 04:09:09 pm »

Obviously adamantium is a thermosetting metal. The ore can be manipulated and forged, but heat it to a certain point (well below its melting point) and it becomes permanently hard.
Logged
Badger badgers badger badger badgers badgers badger.
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6]