/sci/ - Science & Math

[The Doctor No.2625590]

/sci/borgs. I got into a discussion over at sci and came to consider how you'd make the best possible sword with todays technology, of course ignoring that it wouldn't be very useful (So it's science, not engineering!).

It would ideally have to be completely rigid, very light, very sharp and with a powerful swing (Maybe telescopic?).

How would you go about it?

[Anonymous No.2625600]

Dragon's Tooth Sword. Accept no substitutes.

>oh wait, today's technology
>shit

[Anonymous No.2625613]

>>2625590
>completely rigid
Hell no. The vibration would hurt like hell the first time you used it.

>very light
Depends on how you intend to use it. Every sword is used differently.

>powerful swing
If you intend it for heavy slashing and stabbing, yes.

>telescopic
Get the fuck out.

[The Doctor No.2625661]

>>2625613
>completely rigid
Hell no. The vibration would hurt like hell the first time you used it.

You don't grip a hammer tightly, nor do you a sword.

>very light
Depends on how you intend to use it. Every sword is used differently.

>powerful swing
If you intend it for heavy slashing and stabbing, yes.

It all boils down to maximum force per area without being sluggish. It's a tradeoff.

>telescopic
Get the fuck out.

Yes, I'm clueless. I imagined it might make for more powerful swing, multiplying hand velocity by distance.

[Anonymous No.2625681]

>>2625661
What? A telescopic blade of length X is only going to mass a fraction of what a solid blade the same length will.

[Anonymous No.2625684]

You couldnt get one completly rigid if you tried and you definitely dont want it overly light, it would have no power.

Regardless composites would be the way to go:
You want the edge to be hard and not wear down probably laser sharpened.
The body to be made to the right weight and flexability you want


Pick materials best for each part

[Anonymous No.2625691]

>>2625681

and it will only be a fraction as strong, too

telescopiciest
strongest

pick one

[Anonymous No.2625701]

damascus steel, we dont know how to make it though

[Anonymous No.2625703]

>>2625590
You need to specify how you plan on using the sword and what you plan on using the sword for including whatever the hell you're attacking.

Generally you'll probably be happiest with just a knife bayonet and use other equipment for purposes other than stabbing fleshy humans.

[Anonymous No.2625714]

as a guideline hardness is disproportional to toughness. For the qualities you want for the edge and whole sword it would have to be composite

[Anonymous No.2625721]

>It all boils down to maximum force per area without being sluggish.

No, it doesn't. It boils down to intended application and technique. For example, a katana is designed for quick slashing where the blade moves longitudinally down the cutting surface. A broadsowrd is designed for thrusting and for cutting where the blade moves primarily perpendicularly to the cutting edge.

I have drawn you a rough diagram.

[Anonymous No.2625722]

>>2625703
what about for slicing guns in half and also deflecting bullets

[Iron Man !!WXS2cfNYu00 No.2625724]

Make it out of diamonds.

[Anonymous No.2625738]

>>2625724

[Anonymous No.2625747]

>>2625701
yes we do

[Anonymous No.2625749]

tungsten carbide

[Anonymous No.2625779]

Forge it out of an alloy of diamond and purified Dragonforce.

[Anonymous No.2625807]

We could put in a synthetic grip so his hand never slips, coat the blade with superstrong, superslippery ceramic so it never gets stuck, a strong but elastic backing material, one extremely hard and sharp edge that can be exchanged after battle and one less hard and sharp edge in case the other gets too damaged to use during battle.

[Anonymous No.2625829]

>>2625807

its a sword, ass-hat, of course we have the technology

[Anonymous No.2625836]

>>2625724
>>2625738
Far too brittle, it would shatter if you dropped it on the ground

[Anonymous No.2625840]

>>2625829
Are you naming the sword that I proposed "Ass Hat"?
If not, you're just being offensive for the sake of being offensive, in which case I'm afraid I have to ask you to leave this board.

[Anonymous No.2625842]

>>2625747
The recipe got lost a long time ago, we have something similar now. Pattern welding is not the same

[Anonymous No.2625848]

>>2625807
Even with all the tech put into that sword, a gun is cheaper and more effective.

[Anonymous No.2625853]

>>2625848
yeah but its less ninja

[Anonymous No.2625856]

>>2625842
So what, damscus steel is inferior to anything modern metallurgy can make

[Anonymous No.2625860]

>>2625856
i'm not that guy, but your wrong, at least for the qualities mentioned in OP

[Anonymous No.2625858]

>>2625701
>damascus steel, we dont know how to make it though
According to wiki, modern steel is stronger than damascus steel.

[Anonymous No.2625865]

>>2625858
tensile strength is just one property, being light, being able to take a sharp edge, and being able to hold an edge are all equally important properties for a sword. no modern steel can equal damascus steel for the full combination of properties required in a sword.

its weird, but that ancient shit is actually still better for swords.

[Anonymous No.2625870]

>>2625858
stronger means nothing in terms of material science when talking about steels
harder or tougher?

[Anonymous No.2625890]

what's a telescopic blade? never heard it before

[Anonymous No.2625896]

>>2625890

its like those police batons that start out short but then when they whip them out, they get longer.

[Anonymous No.2625915]

>>2625865
>its weird, but that ancient shit is actually still better for swords.
You need a source for that.

[Anonymous No.2625921]

ok right a sword that also a pen and a phone diamond edged and made of carbotaniumn and is also a torch that has a gun on it.

done

[Anonymous No.2625931]

fuck swords you need tha shark!

[Anonymous No.2625939]

actually if you could make this it would be well cool ok

they have powerful lights and lasers right? so why not put one of those suns of bitch in a sword and BAM sword of fucking omens

[The Doctor No.2625944]

>>2625870
> stronger means nothing in terms of >material science when talking about steels
> harder or tougher?

Both.

>>2625807

Listen to this guy.

>>2625779
>Forge it out of an alloy of diamond and purified Dragonforce.

The strongest metal known to man.

>>2625865
Think we have a contender.

[Anonymous No.2625994]

>>2625944
> harder or tougher?
>Both
you cant do that with steels unless it is really poorly manufactured and non-uniform. You have to trade one for the other. Its either hard and brittle or soft and tough

And before you go for the nano-engineering arguement, we cant yet engineer metallic structures on the scale of the ones formed by tempering

[Anonymous No.2625995]

chainsword.

[Anonymous No.2626000]

some shit with carbon nanotubes, and a monomolecular glass edge or something.

[Anonymous No.2626001]

>>2625944
>Listen to this guy.
thank you

>>2625848
Sure, if the thread had been "design a sword that is better than a gun", but Op specifically said, and I quote: "ignoring that it wouldn't be very useful".

So in this case you should take your gun and go clean it a million times while we post on-topic.


And on damascus steel:
>Although modern steel still outperforms these swords, the microscopic chemical reactions may have made the blades more resilient for their time. Other experts are unsurprised, and expect to discover such nanotubes in more and more relics as they are looked at more closely.

http://archaeology.about.com/od/ancientweapons/a/damascus_steel_2.htm
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/11/061116-nanotech-swords.html

So they were extremely good IN THEIR TIME.

>>2625931
I can see how that could be useful in ending a fight extremely fast, by accidentally ripping open one of your major arteries while the opponent looked on, dumbfounded.

[Anonymous No.2626002]

i was always a fan of the mono-molecular blade spooled in a fake thumb prosthetic and ready at an instant's notice

[Anonymous No.2626004]

>It would ideally have to be completely rigid

I think I don't have to read this thread after this

[Anonymous No.2626010]

>>2625590

[Anonymous No.2626020]

Spear + shield is still superior to sword.

[Anonymous No.2626024]

inb4 light sabre

wow

[Anonymous No.2626044]

>>2626020

A lot of thing is "superior" to sword, After all sword is "lot of situation" weapon.
But I still prefer the polearms

[Anonymous No.2626048]

>>2626000
Whoo, trips! It means I'm right. Titanium or some shit. I dunno. I'd just buy a gun anyways.

[The Doctor No.2626061]

>>2626004
That's an ideal. I'm just saying that flexibility isn't a desirable attribute.

>>2625994
You have to make a compromise. It has to deliver pin-point force and not break.

>>2626000
This sounds pretty rad.

[Anonymous No.2626070]

>>2626061

>That's an ideal. I'm just saying that flexibility isn't a desirable attribute

[Anonymous No.2626158]

>>2626001
>Sure, if the thread had been "design a sword that is better than a gun", but Op specifically said, and I quote: "ignoring that it wouldn't be very useful".
>So in this case you should take your gun and go clean it a million times while we post on-topic.

Ignoring the existence of modern weapons makes sword fags even more idiotic.

To make this discussion more meaningful, there needs to be some examples of a target to use the new sword against, and other weapons to compare against. Otherwise, just asking "how to make the best sword" is kind of meaningless.

[Anonymous No.2626179]

>>2626158

ignoring that gunfags will never use more they gun than the swordfag his sword makes the gunfags even more pathetic

[Anonymous No.2626195]

>>2626158
And you insist on posting off-topic. While your post might be logical in another context, it's not in this one.

Also, kinda douchy of you to post off-topic and then when someone tells you off, you say your off-topic post isn't a bad thing.

[Anonymous No.2626199]

>>2626179
1/10

[Anonymous No.2626233]

beryllium alloy--about half as heavy as titanium, but even stiffer and stronger. it is not easily weldable though :(

and expensive as fuck-all, but you didn't say it had to be affordable

as a side benefit, it is also a highly-rated carcinogen in humans! even a minor cut could be fatal ,,,, after a few years maybe

mostly it is used for jet engine parts

google "beryllium bicycle frame" for further reading, and astonishing prices

[Anonymous No.2626259]

>>2626233
One of the drawbacks of extremely stiff materials is extreme fragility. You could make the cutting edge from beryllium, but the backing material would have to be something strong and elastic.

[The Doctor No.2626335]

>>2626158
Suppose you're right. Without a context or reference, anything and everything will be pointless. We need a target for our sword (or alternate weapon).

First off it needs to provide crowd control. Like a bayonet might, but as a dedicated weapon. Lethality isn't important, but deterrence is.

Protection. Ability to deflect blows (and other attacks I suppose. Remember it's not enough for the sword to be bullet resistant. The bullet needs to hit the sword).

Lethality, damagepotential. Abiltiy to disable a wide range of combatants, ranging from humans up to, and preferably including vehicles and tanks.

Conservation. Minimal weight, ammo expenditure. Maximum durability. Practical in any environment. Also potentially disposable.

[Anonymous No.2626359]

How about a chainsaw sword?

[Anonymous No.2626376]

>>2626335
>crowd control
How about a detachable-from-belt scabbard that can act as an electric prod?

>Protection
Just use a shield, or my patented BFHPS-technology (pic related).

>Lethality
A very sharp blade is able to penetrate non-plated body armor with relative ease.

>the rest
This is just V1. We'll add those as tech allows the development of V2 and onwards.

[The Doctor No.2626386]

>>2626359
Not bad. How about\
<-----------------/

Shields provide protection. If it could be weaponized somehow.

[Anonymous No.2626391]

gentlemen. /tg/ knows the answer for all your questions. May I present you... the DRILL RAPEIER

[Anonymous No.2626411]

Sword-gun, obviously.

[Anonymous No.2626422]

>>2626391
unless it has automatic reverse, you're gonna kill one dude and then fight hand-to-hand

[Anonymous No.2626441]

>>2626422

it's for wh40k
'nuff said

[Anonymous No.2626453]

>>2626441
Of course it is. To be wielded by some space-elf or a blue space-japanese communist.

[Anonymous No.2626548]

>>2626259
who said it would need an edge?

the sabres and rapiers of the middle ages are usually agreed upon to the the "best" choice for dueling between humans, because even though they don't to huge amounts of damage with a strike, they can move the fastest

the swordsmen of the middle ages already knew all about earlier types and chose not to use them. there must have been a reason.

if you had to fight a pantheon of animals in the Coliseum or something, that would be different,,,,, but others have already pointed out that the best kind of sword really depends on what you expect to be fighting

ive never held a piece of beryllium myself, and may never get to at what it costs

[Anonymous No.2626562]

>>2626548
Even if it just has a point instead of an edge, it can still snap, and you end up with a VERY dull dagger in hand.

[The Doctor No.2626585]

>>2626441
How about an explosive-tipped lance?

>>2626376
>>crowd control
How about a detachable-from-belt scabbard that can act as an electric prod?

Sure, but it's not much of a deterrent.

>>Protection
Just use a shield, or my patented BFHPS-technology (pic related).

Yes... yes! It's certainly good protection (potentially far better than body armour).

>Lethality
A very sharp blade is able to penetrate non-plated body armor with relative ease.

Suppose you could also carry a gun. Let's focus on improving the BFHPS design. The problem with shields is remarkable harmlessness. Suppose spikes and sharp edges, but its still far from a viable weapon.

[Anonymous No.2626609]

What about a graphene sword? It could be 1 molecule thick on the edges, and light as shit. And it's extremely conductive so maybe add in something like a tazer? You might want it spray-painted or something so you could see it clearly though.

[Anonymous No.2626617]

>>2626585
>spikes and sharp edges, but its still far from a viable weapon
How about integrating about a hundred shotgun-barrels into the BFHPS, arranged in rows of fan-patterns, which can be triggered one fan at a time. You coul use any regular shotgun rounds, meaning you could use less-than-lethal rounds, buckshot, birdshot or slugs according to the situation. Recoil would be manageable by either standing the BFHPS on the ground or the 'H'-part of the name.

[Anonymous No.2626675]

BFHPS:
http://www.google.si/images?hl=sl&q=big%20fucking%20heavy%20piece%20of%20steel&um=1&ie=U
TF-8&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&biw=1440&bih=702

[The Doctor No.2626683]

>>2626617
Shotgun shells aren't science :(

I suppose it'd work decently. Alternately could we use it to amplify sound for a demoralizing effect?

[Anonymous No.2626700]

>>2626675
It was my invention in an earlier thread, see pic:
>>2626376

>>2626683
But now the proposition was to make it more practical. Since shotgun shells are available nearly everywher in the world, they are a more-easily replacable powersource for the EnhancedBFHPS™ than a high-capacity battery.

[Anonymous No.2626722]

>>2626700
i know, i just like the results.

[Anonymous No.2626747]

>>2626722
lol, sorry, I thought you were confused

[Anonymous No.2626755]

so the conclusion is that the best sword is a big fucking heavy plate of steel?

[Anonymous No.2626770]

>>2626609
The edge is going to wear out too fast to be of practical use.

[The Doctor No.2626852]

>>2626755
My conclusion is that a shield is excellent for protection, which goes without saying. If it could be made into an effective weapon as well, the sword would be beaten.

Even if just to supplement a weapon carried in the other hand. Shrapnel(shotgun shells) or sound amplification would both be nice (No idea if the latter is viable).

[Anonymous No.2626863]

>>2626852
a big fucking heavy plate of steel with a crowd control loudspeaker then?

[Anonymous No.2626869]

Slightly curved, seramic, ruber grip, steal handle.

Light, wont set off metal detectors (if you remove the handle) easy to use, easy to mass produce. A staple for any ninja army.

[Anonymous No.2626892]

>>2626869
>Light, wont set off metal detectors (if you remove the handle)
but you can see it via xrays

[The Doctor No.2626929]

>>2626869
So the ceramic is destroyed on impact to disperse the force? (I'm not very familiar with ceramics). How about mixing in carbon fibres and add a backing of kevlar?

I was thinking a good shield should be angled like tank armour, but perhaps that would make it take up too much space.

[Anonymous No.2626947]

>>2626892
You slide it in your pant leg.
It could also have a removable metal rod inside the blade, increasing in density to make for easy swinging.

[Anonymous No.2626981]

>>2626929
I was talkig about a sword, not a shield.

[The Doctor No.2627011]

>>2626981

Oh! I'm too full of myself. That would be good. Very simple. Why would the handle be made of steel though? And wouldn't it shatter easily?

[Anonymous No.2627065]

>>2627011
>why would the handle be made of steel?
A little bit of weight is good, otherwise it feels strange to swing.

>wouldnt it shatter?
I dont know, Ive only seen ceramic knives, sorry

[Anonymous No.2627145]

>>2627065
>A little bit of weight is good, otherwise it feels strange to swing.
The weight should be concentrated on the blade and not the handle. Otherwise, it won't swing well at all.

[Anonymous No.2629308]

morning bump

[Anonymous No.2630718]

>>2629308

[Anonymous No.2631770]

derp

[Anonymous No.2632536]

>>2629308