A vertical disk of radius r rolls around a horizontal track of radius R. This track rotates at a constant rate of Ω0 about the vertical axis. The center of the disk moves at a constant angular rate of φ ̇ about the same vertical axis. Using the set of unit vectors, eˆr,eˆφ,eˆz, obtain the acceleration of point P, located on the edge of the disk when the point is at its highest position. (from Greenwood, Principles of Dynamics, 1988)
The most rewarding part of SP has been working with and inspiring other creators, and then, in turn, being inspired by those same creators. Your builds continue to impress not only me, but everyone. You have developed a unique style that is very appealing. Your planes are cool, and your mechs are my favorite on the site!
.
As another note - I like this post format. It's like a buffet of good stuff to download. Some of the unreleased builds also look really cool.
Yeah, PID controllers are weird. As for your code, this should work: (Activate2 & VTOL = -1) ? 1 : 0
This code should be entered into your input for your engine. If this doesn't work, then I can give you another variant of the code. Sometimes FT doesn't like it when I streamline code.
The code for the engine shouldn't be affected by the weight of the aircraft. If it is, you can adjust the powermultiplier accordingly. Looks like you deleted the comment that I needed to make the code though, what conditions were there for this engine to activate again? Some combination of trim and an activation group?
.
As for that code, I'm not too familiar with PID controllers, so I wont be very useful deciphering it. I think that the VTOL bar changes the sign (negative or positive) of the correcting action made from the thruster, or makes the correcting action evaluate to zero. Not sure if that is exactly what is going on though.
As usual a part of the community relieves their boredom by squabbling in the forums, which I can see in the comments. As for everyone else, we’re kinda vibin. Good to see a post from you!
The issue would have been resolved amicably, weeks ago, if the community didn't make such a big deal about it. Forum posts like these (and the other post that is on the forums at the moment) are part of the problem. Both sides did not handle this disagreement well. When people have a disagreement, then they shouldn't instantly broadcast it over a megaphone for everyone to hear. Yet, the community continues to post to the forums instead of actually handling an issue themselves. Either sort it out, block, or ask the mods for assistance. Simple as that.
.
I am tired of this manufactured drama hitting the forums. If we weren't so collectively immature, then this "drama" would be a non-issue. There are bigger things to worry about in this world than internet clout.
.
As a note for OP, I am not targeting them specifically with this comment. Rather, I am disappointed with the community as a whole for their immaturity. I sympathize with KoR here, though adding another forum post to this mess doesn't really solve anything.
An air bearing is constructed from a circular disk 2R=1 m in diameter that issues
air from many small holes in its lower surface. The total cross-sectional area of the holes is
almost equal to the entire lower surface area of the disk. The bearing floats h=2.0 mm above the
table and the air flows through the bearing with an average velocity of =3 m/s.
(a) Using control volume analysis, find an algebraic expression for the radial velocity under
the bearing as a function of the radial coordinate r, assuming that the flow is uniform, steady and
incompressible. Your answer may also contain v, h, and R.
(b) Find the magnitude and location of the maximum radial acceleration experienced by a fluid
particle in the gap. You might want to use the expression for the del operator in cylindrical coordinates.
You would essentially need to do a geometry problem to find an angle offset for your turret. Besides that, I can't really help further, since I have not actually done the math myself.
@SavageMan I have some hidden thrusters that prevent autoroll. Think your system, but on all 3 axes, and more spaghetti. My code is under section 3.2 (Facilitating Rotational Stability) in the technical documentation.
Good job on the optimized code! I remember doing something similar with Orbidyn-L, but the code was messier.
.
Of course, my code wasn’t tailored for autoroll, but it was more for general stability.
We're all having a laugh at "DA VINKY?" and all, but most people fail to see what actually happened here. Reading "Da Vinci" most people default to Florentine Vulgar Latin (modern Italian) pronunciation "Da Vin-chi"; generally that would be correct as Leonardo Da Vinci was actually Florentine. However, if we consider that Italian is just based on a vulgar regional dialect of Latin, we can look at official Latin pronunciation which would sound more like "Da Win-ki", and given that the twins are allegedly of Hungarian descent we know that most Eastern Europeans interpret "W" as "V". What I'm getting at here is that the twins are not actually just stupid and think "Da Vinci" is pronounced "Da Vinky", I'm saying that the twins speak true Roman Latin and know that it's actually pronounced "Da Win-ki" and due to their Eastern European upbringing they pronounce it as "Da Vin-ki". These twins must have been around long enough to have heard Classical Latin, and thus must have been around since the age of the Western Roman Empire.
These twins aren't stupid, they're geniuses. They are immortal beings, who simply toy with humans by pretending to be fools for our amusement and their benefit. We shouldn't mock them, we should fear them.
We're all having a laugh at "DA VINKY?" and all, but most people fail to see what actually happened here. Reading "Da Vinci" most people default to Florentine Vulgar Latin (modern Italian) pronunciation "Da Vin-chi"; generally that would be correct as Leonardo Da Vinci was actually Florentine. However, if we consider that Italian is just based on a vulgar regional dialect of Latin, we can look at official Latin pronunciation which would sound more like "Da Win-ki", and given that the twins are allegedly of Hungarian descent we know that most Eastern Europeans interpret "W" as "V". What I'm getting at here is that the twins are not actually just stupid and think "Da Vinci" is pronounced "Da Vinky", I'm saying that the twins speak true Roman Latin and know that it's actually pronounced "Da Win-ki" and due to their Eastern European upbringing they pronounce it as "Da Vin-ki". These twins must have been around long enough to have heard Classical Latin, and thus must have been around since the age of the Western Roman Empire.
These twins aren't stupid, they're geniuses. They are immortal beings, who simply toy with humans by pretending to be fools for our amusement and their benefit. We shouldn't mock them, we should fear them.
@Mostly @Jerba I'd definitely say that I'm impressed. I'm really liking the vibes that this build gives off.
.
By the way, I love the way this looks! Please tag me when it's done @AzureCorp
@BaconAircraft Same - with a few additions here and there. MATLAB and solidworks are the backbone of my software these days. The occasional Autodesk inventor (ew) does come up for my student org though. Every once in a while I have to open messy legacy CAD models to get some old measurements.
.
Say what you want about MATLAB, but it has been really useful for me. Its high-level format makes it easy to code some computational models for, in my case, simple mechanical systems.
@BaconAircraft Well it isn’t a fun game if no one gets hospitalized ;). Sarcasm of course. A few friends of mine have run some basic sims, but I haven’t. We’ll see if I get to use ANSYS given that aerodynamics and propulsion aren’t really my specialties. Aerospace system design (and some attitude dynamics) seems to interest me these days.
.
Speaking of software, can OP say how they tested their engine? As in the program they used. ANSYS? Some other CFD? Hydrocode? Maybe a fancy MATLAB model? High-level CAD/PLM suite?
@BaconAircraft I appreciate the ANSYS namedrop lol. Have you used it yet? I still have yet to actually use it or any other robust CFD software (I have dove a bit into hydrodynamic code but I was coddled along the way). I heard that a shot per ANSYS error message is one heck of a drinking game.
@ThomasRoderick I misread a good amount of this post, but I'd say that I was trying to answer how the blast yield is calculated. It seems like the relationship between explosionScalar and the damage of the weapon is not linear, yes. I'd say the explosionScalar actually can be interpreted as the blast radius, as it scales the blast radius up by a certain value. In this case, the yield (energy) of the weapon is directly related to what we would call the damage of the weapon. I guess that any change we make to the explosionScalar of the weapon would not necessarily give us an expected, linearly-scaled, damage value.
.
As for the turrets, we would need to consider reference frames. In other words, we need to know what our "local" orientation is. I'd say adding the pitchAngle to the TargetElevation would be a good start. I'm not sure if targetHeading would actually need to be adjusted. I haven't been able to play much SP due to school, so I have not actually experimented with these new FT variables yet.
.
It is also important to note that your turret's code will need to be adjusted based on its position on your aircraft. An underside turret will have slightly different code from a turret on the side or top of your aircraft.
If we are talking about real-life blast yields, the relationship between blast radius and blast yield is certainly not linear. I would assume that the blast radius solution differs between types of weapons (a small explosive most likely differs from a nuclear weapon in the megaton regime).
.
Taylor's solution, in the form of this equation, is an entry-level method to estimate yields from blast radii. Note that the radius, r, is a function of time, t.
.
Just thought that this would be interesting. There is a lot of cool research related to blast waves out there :)
Finding a niche is certainly something that helped me get my internet points. I like building futuristic and doing math, so I guess my niche kinda came naturally.
Sure, why not:
1. Anything that comes from the cute little mom-and-pop sushi restaurant in my hometown
2. I was looking for a sandbox game on iOS, and eventually upgraded to PC
3. Designing stuff is fun. Now that we have FT, I can apply my technical knowledge to my builds too! Applying mathematics to SP is really satisfying.
This looks awesome - please tag me when it’s out! The soonest that I can help with code will be this weekend, as I have a very tight exam schedule rn
No worries! Appropriate credit was given here.
+1A vertical disk of radius r rolls around a horizontal track of radius R. This track rotates at a constant rate of Ω0 about the vertical axis. The center of the disk moves at a constant angular rate of φ ̇ about the same vertical axis. Using the set of unit vectors, eˆr,eˆφ,eˆz, obtain the acceleration of point P, located on the edge of the disk when the point is at its highest position. (from Greenwood, Principles of Dynamics, 1988)
Ty! And to reiterate, your builds are definitely not the usual that we see on SP
+1The most rewarding part of SP has been working with and inspiring other creators, and then, in turn, being inspired by those same creators. Your builds continue to impress not only me, but everyone. You have developed a unique style that is very appealing. Your planes are cool, and your mechs are my favorite on the site!
+4.
As another note - I like this post format. It's like a buffet of good stuff to download. Some of the unreleased builds also look really cool.
If you don't get any help soon enough, let me know. I can make some quick code for the thruster tomorrow.
Yeah, PID controllers are weird. As for your code, this should work:
+1(Activate2 & VTOL = -1) ? 1 : 0
This code should be entered into your input for your engine. If this doesn't work, then I can give you another variant of the code. Sometimes FT doesn't like it when I streamline code.
The code for the engine shouldn't be affected by the weight of the aircraft. If it is, you can adjust the powermultiplier accordingly. Looks like you deleted the comment that I needed to make the code though, what conditions were there for this engine to activate again? Some combination of trim and an activation group?
.
As for that code, I'm not too familiar with PID controllers, so I wont be very useful deciphering it. I think that the VTOL bar changes the sign (negative or positive) of the correcting action made from the thruster, or makes the correcting action evaluate to zero. Not sure if that is exactly what is going on though.
sure! Does the engine go to 100% throttle when we meet these conditions? Or should it still be throttlable by the user?
I have some pretty heavy school stuff at the moment, so I wont be able to actually play SP. I can give some advice and code though!
The community works in mysterious ways lmao
As usual a part of the community relieves their boredom by squabbling in the forums, which I can see in the comments. As for everyone else, we’re kinda vibin. Good to see a post from you!
+2I see MC Ride, I upvote.
Looks really good! I'm gonna spotlight since this is good work, especially from a bronze user.
+1The issue would have been resolved amicably, weeks ago, if the community didn't make such a big deal about it. Forum posts like these (and the other post that is on the forums at the moment) are part of the problem. Both sides did not handle this disagreement well. When people have a disagreement, then they shouldn't instantly broadcast it over a megaphone for everyone to hear. Yet, the community continues to post to the forums instead of actually handling an issue themselves. Either sort it out, block, or ask the mods for assistance. Simple as that.
+3.
I am tired of this manufactured drama hitting the forums. If we weren't so collectively immature, then this "drama" would be a non-issue. There are bigger things to worry about in this world than internet clout.
.
As a note for OP, I am not targeting them specifically with this comment. Rather, I am disappointed with the community as a whole for their immaturity. I sympathize with KoR here, though adding another forum post to this mess doesn't really solve anything.
An air bearing is constructed from a circular disk 2R=1 m in diameter that issues
air from many small holes in its lower surface. The total cross-sectional area of the holes is
almost equal to the entire lower surface area of the disk. The bearing floats h=2.0 mm above the
table and the air flows through the bearing with an average velocity of =3 m/s.
(a) Using control volume analysis, find an algebraic expression for the radial velocity under
the bearing as a function of the radial coordinate r, assuming that the flow is uniform, steady and
incompressible. Your answer may also contain v, h, and R.
(b) Find the magnitude and location of the maximum radial acceleration experienced by a fluid
particle in the gap. You might want to use the expression for the del operator in cylindrical coordinates.
Not sure why people don’t like the group account. Group accounts have existed on SP for years now. Sounds like people are just being petty.
+5@Brendorkus I pronounce it "speffie-jerb-if"
+1Very cool. Needs more attention. Hopefully a spotlight will help with that.
+3Hot
SpefySpefyTheJerbf
+4.
Somehow this new name is even more confusing than my original. Didn't think that would be possible.
You would essentially need to do a geometry problem to find an angle offset for your turret. Besides that, I can't really help further, since I have not actually done the math myself.
@SavageMan I have some hidden thrusters that prevent autoroll. Think your system, but on all 3 axes, and more spaghetti. My code is under section 3.2 (Facilitating Rotational Stability) in the technical documentation.
Good job on the optimized code! I remember doing something similar with Orbidyn-L, but the code was messier.
+1.
Of course, my code wasn’t tailored for autoroll, but it was more for general stability.
@FuriousChicken Not sure yet. Feel free to make some recommendations!
@Gluck Said the solution pretty well here
+1Lmao. Not sure what their target demo is here
@ThomasRoderick The link? The Streisand effect is essentially when someone tells the internet not to do something, and the internet does anyway.
+1Ha, you can't tell me what to do!
+3People like to put some lore behind their builds. Often, fictional companies are part of that lore.
ͬͬͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͬͦͬͬͤ ͦͬͬͤ ͬͬͤ ͬͤ ͤ Ỏ̷͖͈̞̩͎̻̫̫̜͉̠̫͕̭̭̫̫̹̗̹͈̼̠̖͍͚̥͈̮̼͕̠̤̯̻̥̬̗̼̳̤̳̬̪̹͚̞̼̠͕̼̠̦͚̫͔̯̹͉͉̘͎͕̼̣̝͙̱̟̹̩̟̳̦̭͉̮̖̭̣̣̞̙̗̜̺̭̻̥͚͙̝̦̲̱͉͖͉̰̦͎̫̣̼͎͍̠̮͓̹̹͉̤̰̗̙͕͇͔̱͕̭͈̳̗̭͔̘̖̺̮̜̠͖̘͓̳͕̟̠̱̫̤͓͔̘̰̲͙͍͇̙͎̣̼̗̖͙̯͉̠̟͈͍͕̪͓̝̩̦̖̹̼̠̘̮͚̟͉̺̜͍͓̯̳̱̻͕̣̳͉̻̭̭̱͍̪̩̭̺͕̺̼̥̪͖̦̟͎̻̰Ỏ̷͖͈̞̩͎̻̫̫̜͉̠̫͕̭̭̫̫̹̗̹͈̼̠̖͍͚̥͈̮̼͕̠̤̯̻̥̬̗̼̳̤̳̬̪̹͚̞̼̠͕̼̠̦͚̫͔̯̹͉͉̘͎͕̼̣̝͙̱̟̹̩̟̳̦̭͉̮̖̭̣̣̞̙̗̜̺̭̻̥͚͙̝̦̲̱͉͖͉̰̦͎̫̣̼͎͍̠̮͓̹̹͉̤̰̗̙͕͇͔̱͕̭͈̳̗̭͔̘̖̺̮̜̠͖̘͓̳͕̟̠̱̫̤͓͔̘̰̲͙͍͇̙͎̣̼̗̖͙̯͉̠̟͈͍͕̪͓̝̩̦̖̹̼̠̘̮͚̟͉̺̜͍͓̯̳̱̻͕̣̳͉̻̭̭̱͍̪̩̭̺͕̺̼̥̪͖̦̟͎̻̰ ͬͤ ͬͬͤ ͦͬͬͤ ͬͦͬͬͤ ͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͬͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͬͬͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͦͬͬͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͬͦͬͬͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͤͬͦͬͬͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͬͦͬͬͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͦͬͬͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͬͬͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͬͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͬͦͬͬͤ ͦͬͬͤ ͬͬͤ ͬͤ ͤ Ỏ̷͖͈̞̩͎̻̫̫̜͉̠̫͕̭̭̫̫̹̗̹͈̼̠̖͍͚̥͈̮̼͕̠̤̯̻̥̬̗̼̳̤̳̬̪̹͚̞̼̠͕̼̠̦͚̫͔̯̹͉͉̘͎͕̼̣̝͙̱̟̹̩̟̳̦̭͉̮̖̭̣̣̞̙̗̜̺̭̻̥͚͙̝̦̲̱͉͖͉̰̦͎̫̣̼͎͍̠̮͓̹̹͉̤̰̗̙͕͇͔̱͕̭͈̳̗̭͔̘̖̺̮̜̠͖̘͓̳͕̟̠̱̫̤͓͔̘̰̲͙͍͇̙͎̣̼̗̖͙̯͉̠̟͈͍͕̪͓̝̩̦̖̹̼̠̘̮͚̟͉̺̜͍͓̯̳̱̻͕̣̳͉̻̭̭̱͍̪̩̭̺͕̺̼̥̪͖̦̟͎̻̰Ỏ̷͖͈̞̩͎̻̫̫̜͉̠̫͕̭̭̫̫̹̗̹͈̼̠̖͍͚̥͈̮̼͕̠̤̯̻̥̬̗̼̳̤̳̬̪̹͚̞̼̠͕̼̠̦͚̫͔̯̹͉͉̘͎͕̼̣̝͙̱̟̹̩̟̳̦̭͉̮̖̭̣̣̞̙̗̜̺̭̻̥͚͙̝̦̲̱͉͖͉̰̦͎̫̣̼͎͍̠̮͓̹̹͉̤̰̗̙͕͇͔̱͕̭͈̳̗̭͔̘̖̺̮̜̠͖̘͓̳͕̟̠̱̫̤͓͔̘̰̲͙͍͇̙͎̣̼̗̖͙̯͉̠̟͈͍͕̪͓̝̩̦̖̹̼̠̘̮͚̟͉̺̜͍͓̯̳̱̻͕̣̳͉̻̭̭̱͍̪̩̭̺͕̺̼̥̪͖̦̟͎̻̰ ͬͤ ͬͬͤ ͦͬͬͤ ͬͦͬͬͤ ͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͬͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͬͬͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͦͬͬͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͬͦͬͬͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͤͬͦͬͬͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͬͦͬͬͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͦͬͬͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͬͬͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͬͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͬͦͬͬͤ ͦͬͬͤ ͬͬͤ ͬͤ ͤ Ỏ̷͖͈̞̩͎̻̫̫̜͉̠̫͕̭̭̫̫̹̗̹͈̼̠̖͍͚̥͈̮̼͕̠̤̯̻̥̬̗̼̳̤̳̬̪̹͚̞̼̠͕̼̠̦͚̫͔̯̹͉͉̘͎͕̼̣̝͙̱̟̹̩̟̳̦̭͉̮̖̭̣̣̞̙̗̜̺̭̻̥͚͙̝̦̲̱͉͖͉̰̦͎̫̣̼͎͍̠̮͓̹̹͉̤̰̗̙͕͇͔̱͕̭͈̳̗̭͔̘̖̺̮̜̠͖̘͓̳͕̟̠̱̫̤͓͔̘̰̲͙͍͇̙͎̣̼̗̖͙̯͉̠̟͈͍͕̪͓̝̩̦̖̹̼̠̘̮͚̟͉̺̜͍͓̯̳̱̻͕̣̳͉̻̭̭̱͍̪̩̭̺͕̺̼̥̪͖̦̟͎̻̰Ỏ̷͖͈̞̩͎̻̫̫̜͉̠̫͕̭̭̫̫̹̗̹͈̼̠̖͍͚̥͈̮̼͕̠̤̯̻̥̬̗̼̳̤̳̬̪̹͚̞̼̠͕̼̠̦͚̫͔̯̹͉͉̘͎͕̼̣̝͙̱̟̹̩̟̳̦̭͉̮̖̭̣̣̞̙̗̜̺̭̻̥͚͙̝̦̲̱͉͖͉̰̦͎̫̣̼͎͍̠̮͓̹̹͉̤̰̗̙͕͇͔̱͕̭͈̳̗̭͔̘̖̺̮̜̠͖̘͓̳͕̟̠̱̫̤͓͔̘̰̲͙͍͇̙͎̣̼̗̖͙̯͉̠̟͈͍͕̪͓̝̩̦̖̹̼̠̘̮͚̟͉̺̜͍͓̯̳̱̻͕̣̳͉̻̭̭̱͍̪̩̭̺͕̺̼̥̪͖̦̟͎̻̰ ͬͤ ͬͬͤ ͦͬͬͤ ͬͦͬͬͤ ͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͬͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͬͬͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͦͬͬͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͬͦͬͬͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͤͬͦͬͬͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͬͦͬͬͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͦͬͬͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͬͬͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͬͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͬͦͬͬͤ ͦͬͬͤ ͬͬͤ ͬͤ ͤ Ỏ̷͖͈̞̩͎̻̫̫̜͉̠̫͕̭̭̫̫̹̗̹͈̼̠̖͍͚̥͈̮̼͕̠̤̯̻̥̬̗̼̳̤̳̬̪̹͚̞̼̠͕̼̠̦͚̫͔̯̹͉͉̘͎͕̼̣̝͙̱̟̹̩̟̳̦̭͉̮̖̭̣̣̞̙̗̜̺̭̻̥͚͙̝̦̲̱͉͖͉̰̦͎̫̣̼͎͍̠̮͓̹̹͉̤̰̗̙͕͇͔̱͕̭͈̳̗̭͔̘̖̺̮̜̠͖̘͓̳͕̟̠̱̫̤͓͔̘̰̲͙͍͇̙͎̣̼̗̖͙̯͉̠̟͈͍͕̪͓̝̩̦̖̹̼̠̘̮͚̟͉̺̜͍͓̯̳̱̻͕̣̳͉̻̭̭̱͍̪̩̭̺͕̺̼̥̪͖̦̟͎̻̰Ỏ̷͖͈̞̩͎̻̫̫̜͉̠̫͕̭̭̫̫̹̗̹͈̼̠̖͍͚̥͈̮̼͕̠̤̯̻̥̬̗̼̳̤̳̬̪̹͚̞̼̠͕̼̠̦͚̫͔̯̹͉͉̘͎͕̼̣̝͙̱̟̹̩̟̳̦̭͉̮̖̭̣̣̞̙̗̜̺̭̻̥͚͙̝̦̲̱͉͖͉̰̦͎̫̣̼͎͍̠̮͓̹̹͉̤̰̗̙͕͇͔̱͕̭͈̳̗̭͔̘̖̺̮̜̠͖̘͓̳͕̟̠̱̫̤͓͔̘̰̲͙͍͇̙͎̣̼̗̖͙̯͉̠̟͈͍͕̪͓̝̩̦̖̹̼̠̘̮͚̟͉̺̜͍͓̯̳̱̻͕̣̳͉̻̭̭̱͍̪̩̭̺͕̺̼̥̪͖̦̟͎̻̰ ͬͤ ͬͬͤ ͦͬͬͤ ͬͦͬͬͤ ͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͬͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͬͬͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͦͬͬͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͬͦͬͬͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͤͬͦͬͬͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͬͦͬͬͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͦͬͬͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͬͬͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͬͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͤͬͦͬͬͤ ͬͦͬͬͤ ͦͬͬͤ ͬͬͤ ͬͤ ͤ Ỏ̷͖͈̞̩͎̻̫̫̜͉̠̫͕̭̭̫̫̹̗̹͈̼̠̖͍͚̥͈̮̼͕̠̤̯̻̥̬̗̼̳̤̳̬̪̹͚̞̼̠͕̼̠̦͚̫͔̯̹͉͉̘͎͕̼̣̝͙̱̟̹̩̟̳̦̭͉̮̖̭̣̣̞̙̗̜̺̭̻̥͚͙̝̦̲̱͉͖͉̰̦͎̫̣̼͎͍̠̮͓̹̹͉̤̰̗̙͕͇͔̱͕̭͈̳̗̭͔̘̖̺̮̜̠͖̘͓̳͕̟̠̱̫̤͓͔̘̰̲͙͍͇̙͎̣̼̗̖͙̯͉̠̟͈͍͕̪͓̝̩̦̖̹̼̠̘̮͚̟͉̺̜͍͓̯̳̱̻͕̣̳͉̻̭
We're all having a laugh at "DA VINKY?" and all, but most people fail to see what actually happened here. Reading "Da Vinci" most people default to Florentine Vulgar Latin (modern Italian) pronunciation "Da Vin-chi"; generally that would be correct as Leonardo Da Vinci was actually Florentine. However, if we consider that Italian is just based on a vulgar regional dialect of Latin, we can look at official Latin pronunciation which would sound more like "Da Win-ki", and given that the twins are allegedly of Hungarian descent we know that most Eastern Europeans interpret "W" as "V". What I'm getting at here is that the twins are not actually just stupid and think "Da Vinci" is pronounced "Da Vinky", I'm saying that the twins speak true Roman Latin and know that it's actually pronounced "Da Win-ki" and due to their Eastern European upbringing they pronounce it as "Da Vin-ki". These twins must have been around long enough to have heard Classical Latin, and thus must have been around since the age of the Western Roman Empire.
These twins aren't stupid, they're geniuses. They are immortal beings, who simply toy with humans by pretending to be fools for our amusement and their benefit. We shouldn't mock them, we should fear them.
+1We're all having a laugh at "DA VINKY?" and all, but most people fail to see what actually happened here. Reading "Da Vinci" most people default to Florentine Vulgar Latin (modern Italian) pronunciation "Da Vin-chi"; generally that would be correct as Leonardo Da Vinci was actually Florentine. However, if we consider that Italian is just based on a vulgar regional dialect of Latin, we can look at official Latin pronunciation which would sound more like "Da Win-ki", and given that the twins are allegedly of Hungarian descent we know that most Eastern Europeans interpret "W" as "V". What I'm getting at here is that the twins are not actually just stupid and think "Da Vinci" is pronounced "Da Vinky", I'm saying that the twins speak true Roman Latin and know that it's actually pronounced "Da Win-ki" and due to their Eastern European upbringing they pronounce it as "Da Vin-ki". These twins must have been around long enough to have heard Classical Latin, and thus must have been around since the age of the Western Roman Empire.
These twins aren't stupid, they're geniuses. They are immortal beings, who simply toy with humans by pretending to be fools for our amusement and their benefit. We shouldn't mock them, we should fear them.
+9@Mostly @Jerba I'd definitely say that I'm impressed. I'm really liking the vibes that this build gives off.
+2.
By the way, I love the way this looks! Please tag me when it's done @AzureCorp
@BaconAircraft Same - with a few additions here and there. MATLAB and solidworks are the backbone of my software these days. The occasional Autodesk inventor (ew) does come up for my student org though. Every once in a while I have to open messy legacy CAD models to get some old measurements.
+1.
Say what you want about MATLAB, but it has been really useful for me. Its high-level format makes it easy to code some computational models for, in my case, simple mechanical systems.
@BaconAircraft Well it isn’t a fun game if no one gets hospitalized ;). Sarcasm of course. A few friends of mine have run some basic sims, but I haven’t. We’ll see if I get to use ANSYS given that aerodynamics and propulsion aren’t really my specialties. Aerospace system design (and some attitude dynamics) seems to interest me these days.
+1.
Speaking of software, can OP say how they tested their engine? As in the program they used. ANSYS? Some other CFD? Hydrocode? Maybe a fancy MATLAB model? High-level CAD/PLM suite?
@BaconAircraft I appreciate the ANSYS namedrop lol. Have you used it yet? I still have yet to actually use it or any other robust CFD software (I have dove a bit into hydrodynamic code but I was coddled along the way). I heard that a shot per ANSYS error message is one heck of a drinking game.
+1Vibe.
+1They are definitely better than the average forum post.
+1@YamaSama Thank you. I would like to point out that you have some pretty nice builds though!
+1@ThomasRoderick I misread a good amount of this post, but I'd say that I was trying to answer how the blast yield is calculated. It seems like the relationship between
+2explosionScalar
and the damage of the weapon is not linear, yes. I'd say theexplosionScalar
actually can be interpreted as the blast radius, as it scales the blast radius up by a certain value. In this case, the yield (energy) of the weapon is directly related to what we would call the damage of the weapon. I guess that any change we make to theexplosionScalar
of the weapon would not necessarily give us an expected, linearly-scaled, damage value..
As for the turrets, we would need to consider reference frames. In other words, we need to know what our "local" orientation is. I'd say adding the pitchAngle to the TargetElevation would be a good start. I'm not sure if targetHeading would actually need to be adjusted. I haven't been able to play much SP due to school, so I have not actually experimented with these new FT variables yet.
.
It is also important to note that your turret's code will need to be adjusted based on its position on your aircraft. An underside turret will have slightly different code from a turret on the side or top of your aircraft.
If we are talking about real-life blast yields, the relationship between blast radius and blast yield is certainly not linear. I would assume that the blast radius solution differs between types of weapons (a small explosive most likely differs from a nuclear weapon in the megaton regime).
+2.
Taylor's solution, in the form of this equation, is an entry-level method to estimate yields from blast radii. Note that the radius, r, is a function of time, t.
.
Just thought that this would be interesting. There is a lot of cool research related to blast waves out there :)
I made a hover system a while back that essentially 'cancels out' the aircraft's weight. You can find more details here, under "The LUNA Flight System" section.
Finding a niche is certainly something that helped me get my internet points. I like building futuristic and doing math, so I guess my niche kinda came naturally.
If we consider how people make friends in the forums, that upvote their planes, then we can reduce the number by a small factor.
+1Writing these is honestly a pretty good way to solidify your understanding of econ
+11Sure, why not:
+21. Anything that comes from the cute little mom-and-pop sushi restaurant in my hometown
2. I was looking for a sandbox game on iOS, and eventually upgraded to PC
3. Designing stuff is fun. Now that we have FT, I can apply my technical knowledge to my builds too! Applying mathematics to SP is really satisfying.
Idk. Might just make the barrier for entry even larger for these advanced concepts.
+2@Alpha6 Definitely not cheap. The weapons are probably quite pricey.