Re: Wright's Proposals

[Jevan Furmanski <furmansj@expert.cc.purdue.edu>]

On Fri, 18 Dec 1998, Benjamin Austin wrote:

> 
> 
> On Fri, 18 Dec 1998, Jevan Furmanski wrote:
> 
> > There is a difference in cushy materials and closed-cell high density
> > polymers.  I offered you to fight in a pillow suit, not an impact armor
> > suit.  When the cells are closed in a matrix of non-permiable material
> > (this is a foam)  the air compresses and this absorbs the energy.  The
> > same as nike air shoes.  Clothing just looses most of it's volume apon
> > impact and provides nothing more than skin.
> > 
> 
> First, foam is most definitly not non-permiable.  In fact, it is most 
> easily cut.  When you strike a pillow with a blunt object, the same thing 
> happens (granted, not quite to the level as an impact suit) and the blow 
> is lessened extensively.  Can't your chain mail be viewed as a closed 
> matrix of non-permiable material?

What do you think permiable means?  It has nothing to do with cutting.  It
has to do with transport phenomena.  The pillow is easily compressible
because it doesn't trap air very well, the foam is completely closed.  The
only reason that pillows would lessen the blow it due to the delay from
the air resistance of feathers that restricts the flow from the interior
of the pillow.  As any SI minded engineer knows, pressure is force per
unit area.  The point of almost all armor is to A) distribute the force
over a larger area from a strike and B)  Withstand penetration.  Chain
does both of these.  I have tried to explain why from an experience point
of view and an engineering one.  You should just try it.  Kevin has some
armor and you can whack yourself however you like.  If history, science,
and empirical data aren't enough, then perhaps experience will be.

Jevan 

 > > 
> > The chain is pulled taut over the skin, and blows to a point are
> > distributed over an area as the shock is transmitted through the
> > interlocked rings.  This is all basic statics stuff and all engineering
> > minded folks should understand it.  It really is just common sense.  
> > 
> 
> Absolutely not.  The chain is not a rigid body.  There is nothing to keep 
> the end of a baseball bat from connecting the chain into you or the 
> padding.  Perhaps it's not common sense now, is it?
> 
> 
> > > You're on!  There is a reason that why the people trainning police officers 
> > > to use their battons use what is known as the "red man suit" (which is 
> > > eccentially big foam pads secured around the body) instead of big old 
> > > plates of metal.
> > > 
> > Again, modern inventions...  that is like the french charging machine gun
> > fire.  
> 
> The concepts still apply regardless of what time we're talking.
> 
> 
> > When someone removes armor, I would ask them if they intend to be naked or
> > not.  If not, then they get the clothing bonus.
> > 
> 
> Is it actually separate as Greg says it is for the plate mail?  If it 
> isn't (and, Greg, I'm not sure why you don't know this since Wright cites 
> you as his source for what the armor is), then we should firm this up in 
> order to be consistant.
> 
> B.J. Austin
> jedi@ecn.purdue.edu
> 
> 
> "This country has come to feel the same when Congress is in session
>  as when the baby gets hold of a hammer."
> 						- Will Rogers
> 
>