Ken wrote:
> 
>   I have little to argue with your statements and did not mean to imply
> that a mushroom cloud would be absent in a modern weapon. Quite contrary
> to that I would think the effeciency of the modern versions would create
> a more unifom shape than the earlier types. The majority of nukes in the
> modern US arsenal are no where near as radioactive as the earlier types
> due to the effeciency at which they consume the radioactive isotopes
> during detonation.
>   My father worked in the military aerospace and weapons industry his
> whole life and there were a couple of underground tests that he was
> invoved with. His presence was needed to set up and monitor special
> blast hardened electronics equipment that was exposed to the shock
> wave of the blast.
>   He mentioned one time that they were allowed back into the tunnels
> within two hours of the blast to retrive their equipment and needed
> no protective equipment to do so. The delay was needed so the surfaces
> of the tunnels could cool enough to be entered. He also mentioned that
> while it was safe to go in afterwards, the equipment that they went to
> retrieve had fused itself into the rock floor of the tunnel. They were
> forced to use pry bars to remove it from the rock as a good 1/4 inch
> or so of the rock surface had turned into a glass carbonaceous like
> substance. Anyway knowing that they can control the radioactive after
> effects to that high degree of precision I see no reason that they
> can't design them to have a nice, pretty, and well behaved mushroom
> cloud too.
> 

I think the beauty of the cloud has never been a primary development
target! :-)

The behaviour of the cloud depends on so many factors like the
environment under the blast area or in the case of ground fusing the
shape of the surroundings that the design of the weapon is only
secondary. 

Well I hope that I never have the chance to see this kind of clound in
real. For the simulation your cloud is more than sufficient! <g>  

-- 
Marc Schimmler

Post a reply to this message

Margus Ramst wrote:

> Bob Hughes wrote in message <371C533D.B0F28C62@aol.com>...
> >I thought that looked wrong somehow, see it correctly now.
> >The lathe is great though, it's more the problem with getting a
> >turbulent look with media that makes it difficult to use. This is a
> >classic example of how well a turbulence for objects themselves would be
> >of good use.
>
> You can make turbulent objects with the Isosurface patch, provided you have
> the equation for the object you want to make turbulent. The torus equation
> should be there. If not, it's really quite simple - but I don't know it by
> heart.
> The turbulence function is called noise3d and has to be added to the object
> equation.

Could you or someone else give me the home page url for the isosurface patch?

>
>
> Margus

Post a reply to this message

I am in no way pro nuclear weapons just the opposite I think they are horrible
but still it would be quite the experience of a life time to witness an above
ground nuclear blast. At a safe distance of course :-)

Marc Schimmler wrote:

> Ken wrote:
> >
> >   I have little to argue with your statements and did not mean to imply
> > that a mushroom cloud would be absent in a modern weapon. Quite contrary
> > to that I would think the effeciency of the modern versions would create
> > a more unifom shape than the earlier types. The majority of nukes in the
> > modern US arsenal are no where near as radioactive as the earlier types
> > due to the effeciency at which they consume the radioactive isotopes
> > during detonation.
> >   My father worked in the military aerospace and weapons industry his
> > whole life and there were a couple of underground tests that he was
> > invoved with. His presence was needed to set up and monitor special
> > blast hardened electronics equipment that was exposed to the shock
> > wave of the blast.
> >   He mentioned one time that they were allowed back into the tunnels
> > within two hours of the blast to retrive their equipment and needed
> > no protective equipment to do so. The delay was needed so the surfaces
> > of the tunnels could cool enough to be entered. He also mentioned that
> > while it was safe to go in afterwards, the equipment that they went to
> > retrieve had fused itself into the rock floor of the tunnel. They were
> > forced to use pry bars to remove it from the rock as a good 1/4 inch
> > or so of the rock surface had turned into a glass carbonaceous like
> > substance. Anyway knowing that they can control the radioactive after
> > effects to that high degree of precision I see no reason that they
> > can't design them to have a nice, pretty, and well behaved mushroom
> > cloud too.
> >
>
> I think the beauty of the cloud has never been a primary development
> target! :-)
>
> The behaviour of the cloud depends on so many factors like the
> environment under the blast area or in the case of ground fusing the
> shape of the surroundings that the design of the weapon is only
> secondary.
>
> Well I hope that I never have the chance to see this kind of clound in
> real. For the simulation your cloud is more than sufficient! <g>
>
> --
> Marc Schimmler

Post a reply to this message

Now I know where Ken got all his nuclear education from. I just wish he
keeps it to develop nice images in pov and nothing else...

Post a reply to this message

Thomas Lake wrote:

> Could you or someone else give me the home page url for the isosurface patch?

I recall seeing a recent upgrade announcement for it in the
povray.programming newsgroup. I'll dig it up later for you
if need be but it's not been there for more than a month or
so and should not take you too long to find it yourself.

-- 
Ken Tyler

mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net

Post a reply to this message

I would have thought that something like the isosurface patch
would have been on Uncle Ken's Links Page.

Cheers
Steve 

Ken wrote:
> 
> Thomas Lake wrote:
> 
> > Could you or someone else give me the home page url for the isosurface patch?
> 
> I recall seeing a recent upgrade announcement for it in the
> povray.programming newsgroup. I'll dig it up later for you
> if need be but it's not been there for more than a month or
> so and should not take you too long to find it yourself.
> 
> --
> Ken Tyler
> 
> mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net

Post a reply to this message

Steve wrote:
> 
> I would have thought that something like the isosurface patch
> would have been on Uncle Ken's Links Page.

There I was just minding my own buisness when out of nowhere this guy
comes running up and steals it from me. I tried to catch him but he
was too fast for me. Since then I just haven't had the time to replace
it. It's on my to do list.

Satisfied with my answer ?

-- 
Ken Tyler

mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net

Post a reply to this message

Quick thinking :-)

Ken wrote:
> 
> Steve wrote:
> >
> > I would have thought that something like the isosurface patch
> > would have been on Uncle Ken's Links Page.
> 
> There I was just minding my own buisness when out of nowhere this guy
> comes running up and steals it from me. I tried to catch him but he
> was too fast for me. Since then I just haven't had the time to replace
> it. It's on my to do list.
> 
> Satisfied with my answer ?
> 
> --
> Ken Tyler
> 
> mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net

Post a reply to this message

Got the link. Thanks Ken!

Ken wrote:

> Thomas Lake wrote:
>
> > Could you or someone else give me the home page url for the isosurface patch?
>
> I recall seeing a recent upgrade announcement for it in the
> povray.programming newsgroup. I'll dig it up later for you
> if need be but it's not been there for more than a month or
> so and should not take you too long to find it yourself.
>
> --
> Ken Tyler
>
> mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net

Post a reply to this message

Thomas Lake wrote in message <371D07D1.E2C4CCC9@home.com>...
>
>Could you or someone else give me the home page url for the isosurface
patch?
>


You already got the link, but I should add that an earlier version of the
Isosurface patch is also included in the Superpatch. Might come in handy to
have the functionality of the both.

Margus

Post a reply to this message