Oyster Shell Scale Mail
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
7
down vote
favorite
Would it be possible to make a crude scale mail out of oyster or some other mussel shells. If so how effective would it be? Do I need to invent some kind of super tough oyster for it to work?
technology warfare armors
add a comment |Â
up vote
7
down vote
favorite
Would it be possible to make a crude scale mail out of oyster or some other mussel shells. If so how effective would it be? Do I need to invent some kind of super tough oyster for it to work?
technology warfare armors
add a comment |Â
up vote
7
down vote
favorite
up vote
7
down vote
favorite
Would it be possible to make a crude scale mail out of oyster or some other mussel shells. If so how effective would it be? Do I need to invent some kind of super tough oyster for it to work?
technology warfare armors
Would it be possible to make a crude scale mail out of oyster or some other mussel shells. If so how effective would it be? Do I need to invent some kind of super tough oyster for it to work?
technology warfare armors
technology warfare armors
asked Aug 23 at 13:36
The Imperial
5279
5279
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
up vote
10
down vote
Real shell armor does exist. How practical it was is unknown however.
The breastplate of tula was made by drilling and sewing hundreds of shell fragments to a leather base. Helmets of cowry shells also exist. The big issue is it would not survive many hits, shells are brittle and the bigger the individual pieces of shell the weaker that will make the armor because the more that will end up broken after each hit.
I apologize the museum website may require some scrolling to see the close up image.
3
"shells are brittle". This is critical: something can be "hard" and "brittle" at the same time.
â RonJohn
Aug 23 at 14:39
3
Yes in fact the two are often related, crystal lattices are often both hard and brittle, for instance diamonds are amazingly hard but you can also smash one into powder with an iron hammer in seconds, whereas a copper coin is rather soft but you can pound on it for hours without it breaking.
â John
Aug 23 at 18:51
add a comment |Â
up vote
7
down vote
Could you do it? Absolutely yes. Would it be WORTH doing? Well, that's trickier.
Oyster shells are very, VERY tough. Tough enough that the DoD is currently trying to replicate its qualities in modern armor. So toughness isn't an issue at all, and if you could actually MAKE some, it would make very effective protection.
That's where this gets tricky though: How you do you attach the shells to an underlayer or to each other in a way where they won't just constantly be coming off when struck. When you're crafting the scales yourself out of metal or whatnot, you can control the shape to have proper attachment points. Oysters don't NORMALLY have any convenient way to firmly attach them to anything else. If we were trying to do this in our world with our oysters, the way you'd probably have to do it would be by drilling holes in the oyster shells so you could use laces to attach them. This is how traditional scale armor was constructed back in the day.
Of course, the very qualities that make you want to use oyster shells make them VERY difficult to drill, so the time and effort you'd spent making a set of armor like this would be all out of proportion to any reasonable benefit.
I see two possible solutions: You either introduce a tool or technique that's particularly effective at easily putting holes in oyster shells, but impractical as a weapon (some kind of acid might do nicely), OR you find or create a species of oyster that has particularly pronounced protrusions that can easily be used to secure it to armor.
1
Time consuming is not necessarily an impediment, chainmail takes forever to make but it was still popular. your big issue is it will not last for very long.
â John
Aug 23 at 14:16
@John Can you elaborate? Why wouldn't it last very long?
â Morris The Cat
Aug 23 at 14:22
3
Drilling holes in shell is a simple task anyone can do (a bow drill with a hard pointy rock as a bit works well) - this is a negligible consideration and would take less time than tanning the leather backing. The problem is the brittleness of the shell. Modern ceramic body armor has the same issue - it is great for taking the energy of a bullet, but the plate itself is destroyed in the process (how the energy is dispersed). If you want something to last, it must be capable of flexing with the impact, otherwise it breaks to dissipate the energy.
â pluckedkiwi
Aug 23 at 15:04
add a comment |Â
up vote
5
down vote
A couple layers of shells should provide a good set of armor if you have nothing else, though they will certainly start cracking with every good hit so don't expect it to last long.
For every question, there's an oddly specific research paper that gives the answer: Shell Hardness and Compressive Strength of the
Eastern Oyster, Crassostrea virginica, and the Asian
Oyster, Crassostrea ariakensis.
According to the above paper, the compression strength(ability to not crack) of oyster shells varies based on thickness. About 1000 Newtons are needed to crack a 1mm shell, 2000N to crack a 3mm shell, and 4000N to crack a 5.5mm shell. According to this site, a good swing of a baseball bat hits a baseball with 3400N of force, so if the oyster shells in the armor are 5mm or more it would provide decent protection.
However, this Physics StackExchange answer goes into how much force a hammer hits a nail with: more than 9000N, which is likely closer to what armor would need to withstand in a fight. Thankfully, the original paper shows that compression strength increases non-linearly as shell thickness increases, meaning increasing thickness leads to greater and greater resistance to cracking.
Although it wasn't measured, a 7mm thickness would resist up to 7000N of force, and 10mm should resist at least 10000N if the increase continues at the same rate. Though there's probably diminishing returns, a couple layers of shells should give the strength needed to resist glancing blows, and maybe even a few direct hits before shattering.
1
10mm of shell, overlapping in places, is going to be pretty heavy I would have thought. Might be worth a back-of-envelope calculation for e.g. a breastplate. My guesstimate: using half of en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_surface_area and guessing at 2g/cm^3 for the solid shell density gives a weight of around 20kg for 10mm thick torso-covering suit . . . a bit on the heavy side, but not impossible.
â Neil Slater
Aug 23 at 20:57
add a comment |Â
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
10
down vote
Real shell armor does exist. How practical it was is unknown however.
The breastplate of tula was made by drilling and sewing hundreds of shell fragments to a leather base. Helmets of cowry shells also exist. The big issue is it would not survive many hits, shells are brittle and the bigger the individual pieces of shell the weaker that will make the armor because the more that will end up broken after each hit.
I apologize the museum website may require some scrolling to see the close up image.
3
"shells are brittle". This is critical: something can be "hard" and "brittle" at the same time.
â RonJohn
Aug 23 at 14:39
3
Yes in fact the two are often related, crystal lattices are often both hard and brittle, for instance diamonds are amazingly hard but you can also smash one into powder with an iron hammer in seconds, whereas a copper coin is rather soft but you can pound on it for hours without it breaking.
â John
Aug 23 at 18:51
add a comment |Â
up vote
10
down vote
Real shell armor does exist. How practical it was is unknown however.
The breastplate of tula was made by drilling and sewing hundreds of shell fragments to a leather base. Helmets of cowry shells also exist. The big issue is it would not survive many hits, shells are brittle and the bigger the individual pieces of shell the weaker that will make the armor because the more that will end up broken after each hit.
I apologize the museum website may require some scrolling to see the close up image.
3
"shells are brittle". This is critical: something can be "hard" and "brittle" at the same time.
â RonJohn
Aug 23 at 14:39
3
Yes in fact the two are often related, crystal lattices are often both hard and brittle, for instance diamonds are amazingly hard but you can also smash one into powder with an iron hammer in seconds, whereas a copper coin is rather soft but you can pound on it for hours without it breaking.
â John
Aug 23 at 18:51
add a comment |Â
up vote
10
down vote
up vote
10
down vote
Real shell armor does exist. How practical it was is unknown however.
The breastplate of tula was made by drilling and sewing hundreds of shell fragments to a leather base. Helmets of cowry shells also exist. The big issue is it would not survive many hits, shells are brittle and the bigger the individual pieces of shell the weaker that will make the armor because the more that will end up broken after each hit.
I apologize the museum website may require some scrolling to see the close up image.
Real shell armor does exist. How practical it was is unknown however.
The breastplate of tula was made by drilling and sewing hundreds of shell fragments to a leather base. Helmets of cowry shells also exist. The big issue is it would not survive many hits, shells are brittle and the bigger the individual pieces of shell the weaker that will make the armor because the more that will end up broken after each hit.
I apologize the museum website may require some scrolling to see the close up image.
edited Aug 23 at 18:52
answered Aug 23 at 14:23
John
28.1k83896
28.1k83896
3
"shells are brittle". This is critical: something can be "hard" and "brittle" at the same time.
â RonJohn
Aug 23 at 14:39
3
Yes in fact the two are often related, crystal lattices are often both hard and brittle, for instance diamonds are amazingly hard but you can also smash one into powder with an iron hammer in seconds, whereas a copper coin is rather soft but you can pound on it for hours without it breaking.
â John
Aug 23 at 18:51
add a comment |Â
3
"shells are brittle". This is critical: something can be "hard" and "brittle" at the same time.
â RonJohn
Aug 23 at 14:39
3
Yes in fact the two are often related, crystal lattices are often both hard and brittle, for instance diamonds are amazingly hard but you can also smash one into powder with an iron hammer in seconds, whereas a copper coin is rather soft but you can pound on it for hours without it breaking.
â John
Aug 23 at 18:51
3
3
"shells are brittle". This is critical: something can be "hard" and "brittle" at the same time.
â RonJohn
Aug 23 at 14:39
"shells are brittle". This is critical: something can be "hard" and "brittle" at the same time.
â RonJohn
Aug 23 at 14:39
3
3
Yes in fact the two are often related, crystal lattices are often both hard and brittle, for instance diamonds are amazingly hard but you can also smash one into powder with an iron hammer in seconds, whereas a copper coin is rather soft but you can pound on it for hours without it breaking.
â John
Aug 23 at 18:51
Yes in fact the two are often related, crystal lattices are often both hard and brittle, for instance diamonds are amazingly hard but you can also smash one into powder with an iron hammer in seconds, whereas a copper coin is rather soft but you can pound on it for hours without it breaking.
â John
Aug 23 at 18:51
add a comment |Â
up vote
7
down vote
Could you do it? Absolutely yes. Would it be WORTH doing? Well, that's trickier.
Oyster shells are very, VERY tough. Tough enough that the DoD is currently trying to replicate its qualities in modern armor. So toughness isn't an issue at all, and if you could actually MAKE some, it would make very effective protection.
That's where this gets tricky though: How you do you attach the shells to an underlayer or to each other in a way where they won't just constantly be coming off when struck. When you're crafting the scales yourself out of metal or whatnot, you can control the shape to have proper attachment points. Oysters don't NORMALLY have any convenient way to firmly attach them to anything else. If we were trying to do this in our world with our oysters, the way you'd probably have to do it would be by drilling holes in the oyster shells so you could use laces to attach them. This is how traditional scale armor was constructed back in the day.
Of course, the very qualities that make you want to use oyster shells make them VERY difficult to drill, so the time and effort you'd spent making a set of armor like this would be all out of proportion to any reasonable benefit.
I see two possible solutions: You either introduce a tool or technique that's particularly effective at easily putting holes in oyster shells, but impractical as a weapon (some kind of acid might do nicely), OR you find or create a species of oyster that has particularly pronounced protrusions that can easily be used to secure it to armor.
1
Time consuming is not necessarily an impediment, chainmail takes forever to make but it was still popular. your big issue is it will not last for very long.
â John
Aug 23 at 14:16
@John Can you elaborate? Why wouldn't it last very long?
â Morris The Cat
Aug 23 at 14:22
3
Drilling holes in shell is a simple task anyone can do (a bow drill with a hard pointy rock as a bit works well) - this is a negligible consideration and would take less time than tanning the leather backing. The problem is the brittleness of the shell. Modern ceramic body armor has the same issue - it is great for taking the energy of a bullet, but the plate itself is destroyed in the process (how the energy is dispersed). If you want something to last, it must be capable of flexing with the impact, otherwise it breaks to dissipate the energy.
â pluckedkiwi
Aug 23 at 15:04
add a comment |Â
up vote
7
down vote
Could you do it? Absolutely yes. Would it be WORTH doing? Well, that's trickier.
Oyster shells are very, VERY tough. Tough enough that the DoD is currently trying to replicate its qualities in modern armor. So toughness isn't an issue at all, and if you could actually MAKE some, it would make very effective protection.
That's where this gets tricky though: How you do you attach the shells to an underlayer or to each other in a way where they won't just constantly be coming off when struck. When you're crafting the scales yourself out of metal or whatnot, you can control the shape to have proper attachment points. Oysters don't NORMALLY have any convenient way to firmly attach them to anything else. If we were trying to do this in our world with our oysters, the way you'd probably have to do it would be by drilling holes in the oyster shells so you could use laces to attach them. This is how traditional scale armor was constructed back in the day.
Of course, the very qualities that make you want to use oyster shells make them VERY difficult to drill, so the time and effort you'd spent making a set of armor like this would be all out of proportion to any reasonable benefit.
I see two possible solutions: You either introduce a tool or technique that's particularly effective at easily putting holes in oyster shells, but impractical as a weapon (some kind of acid might do nicely), OR you find or create a species of oyster that has particularly pronounced protrusions that can easily be used to secure it to armor.
1
Time consuming is not necessarily an impediment, chainmail takes forever to make but it was still popular. your big issue is it will not last for very long.
â John
Aug 23 at 14:16
@John Can you elaborate? Why wouldn't it last very long?
â Morris The Cat
Aug 23 at 14:22
3
Drilling holes in shell is a simple task anyone can do (a bow drill with a hard pointy rock as a bit works well) - this is a negligible consideration and would take less time than tanning the leather backing. The problem is the brittleness of the shell. Modern ceramic body armor has the same issue - it is great for taking the energy of a bullet, but the plate itself is destroyed in the process (how the energy is dispersed). If you want something to last, it must be capable of flexing with the impact, otherwise it breaks to dissipate the energy.
â pluckedkiwi
Aug 23 at 15:04
add a comment |Â
up vote
7
down vote
up vote
7
down vote
Could you do it? Absolutely yes. Would it be WORTH doing? Well, that's trickier.
Oyster shells are very, VERY tough. Tough enough that the DoD is currently trying to replicate its qualities in modern armor. So toughness isn't an issue at all, and if you could actually MAKE some, it would make very effective protection.
That's where this gets tricky though: How you do you attach the shells to an underlayer or to each other in a way where they won't just constantly be coming off when struck. When you're crafting the scales yourself out of metal or whatnot, you can control the shape to have proper attachment points. Oysters don't NORMALLY have any convenient way to firmly attach them to anything else. If we were trying to do this in our world with our oysters, the way you'd probably have to do it would be by drilling holes in the oyster shells so you could use laces to attach them. This is how traditional scale armor was constructed back in the day.
Of course, the very qualities that make you want to use oyster shells make them VERY difficult to drill, so the time and effort you'd spent making a set of armor like this would be all out of proportion to any reasonable benefit.
I see two possible solutions: You either introduce a tool or technique that's particularly effective at easily putting holes in oyster shells, but impractical as a weapon (some kind of acid might do nicely), OR you find or create a species of oyster that has particularly pronounced protrusions that can easily be used to secure it to armor.
Could you do it? Absolutely yes. Would it be WORTH doing? Well, that's trickier.
Oyster shells are very, VERY tough. Tough enough that the DoD is currently trying to replicate its qualities in modern armor. So toughness isn't an issue at all, and if you could actually MAKE some, it would make very effective protection.
That's where this gets tricky though: How you do you attach the shells to an underlayer or to each other in a way where they won't just constantly be coming off when struck. When you're crafting the scales yourself out of metal or whatnot, you can control the shape to have proper attachment points. Oysters don't NORMALLY have any convenient way to firmly attach them to anything else. If we were trying to do this in our world with our oysters, the way you'd probably have to do it would be by drilling holes in the oyster shells so you could use laces to attach them. This is how traditional scale armor was constructed back in the day.
Of course, the very qualities that make you want to use oyster shells make them VERY difficult to drill, so the time and effort you'd spent making a set of armor like this would be all out of proportion to any reasonable benefit.
I see two possible solutions: You either introduce a tool or technique that's particularly effective at easily putting holes in oyster shells, but impractical as a weapon (some kind of acid might do nicely), OR you find or create a species of oyster that has particularly pronounced protrusions that can easily be used to secure it to armor.
answered Aug 23 at 13:50
Morris The Cat
2,050316
2,050316
1
Time consuming is not necessarily an impediment, chainmail takes forever to make but it was still popular. your big issue is it will not last for very long.
â John
Aug 23 at 14:16
@John Can you elaborate? Why wouldn't it last very long?
â Morris The Cat
Aug 23 at 14:22
3
Drilling holes in shell is a simple task anyone can do (a bow drill with a hard pointy rock as a bit works well) - this is a negligible consideration and would take less time than tanning the leather backing. The problem is the brittleness of the shell. Modern ceramic body armor has the same issue - it is great for taking the energy of a bullet, but the plate itself is destroyed in the process (how the energy is dispersed). If you want something to last, it must be capable of flexing with the impact, otherwise it breaks to dissipate the energy.
â pluckedkiwi
Aug 23 at 15:04
add a comment |Â
1
Time consuming is not necessarily an impediment, chainmail takes forever to make but it was still popular. your big issue is it will not last for very long.
â John
Aug 23 at 14:16
@John Can you elaborate? Why wouldn't it last very long?
â Morris The Cat
Aug 23 at 14:22
3
Drilling holes in shell is a simple task anyone can do (a bow drill with a hard pointy rock as a bit works well) - this is a negligible consideration and would take less time than tanning the leather backing. The problem is the brittleness of the shell. Modern ceramic body armor has the same issue - it is great for taking the energy of a bullet, but the plate itself is destroyed in the process (how the energy is dispersed). If you want something to last, it must be capable of flexing with the impact, otherwise it breaks to dissipate the energy.
â pluckedkiwi
Aug 23 at 15:04
1
1
Time consuming is not necessarily an impediment, chainmail takes forever to make but it was still popular. your big issue is it will not last for very long.
â John
Aug 23 at 14:16
Time consuming is not necessarily an impediment, chainmail takes forever to make but it was still popular. your big issue is it will not last for very long.
â John
Aug 23 at 14:16
@John Can you elaborate? Why wouldn't it last very long?
â Morris The Cat
Aug 23 at 14:22
@John Can you elaborate? Why wouldn't it last very long?
â Morris The Cat
Aug 23 at 14:22
3
3
Drilling holes in shell is a simple task anyone can do (a bow drill with a hard pointy rock as a bit works well) - this is a negligible consideration and would take less time than tanning the leather backing. The problem is the brittleness of the shell. Modern ceramic body armor has the same issue - it is great for taking the energy of a bullet, but the plate itself is destroyed in the process (how the energy is dispersed). If you want something to last, it must be capable of flexing with the impact, otherwise it breaks to dissipate the energy.
â pluckedkiwi
Aug 23 at 15:04
Drilling holes in shell is a simple task anyone can do (a bow drill with a hard pointy rock as a bit works well) - this is a negligible consideration and would take less time than tanning the leather backing. The problem is the brittleness of the shell. Modern ceramic body armor has the same issue - it is great for taking the energy of a bullet, but the plate itself is destroyed in the process (how the energy is dispersed). If you want something to last, it must be capable of flexing with the impact, otherwise it breaks to dissipate the energy.
â pluckedkiwi
Aug 23 at 15:04
add a comment |Â
up vote
5
down vote
A couple layers of shells should provide a good set of armor if you have nothing else, though they will certainly start cracking with every good hit so don't expect it to last long.
For every question, there's an oddly specific research paper that gives the answer: Shell Hardness and Compressive Strength of the
Eastern Oyster, Crassostrea virginica, and the Asian
Oyster, Crassostrea ariakensis.
According to the above paper, the compression strength(ability to not crack) of oyster shells varies based on thickness. About 1000 Newtons are needed to crack a 1mm shell, 2000N to crack a 3mm shell, and 4000N to crack a 5.5mm shell. According to this site, a good swing of a baseball bat hits a baseball with 3400N of force, so if the oyster shells in the armor are 5mm or more it would provide decent protection.
However, this Physics StackExchange answer goes into how much force a hammer hits a nail with: more than 9000N, which is likely closer to what armor would need to withstand in a fight. Thankfully, the original paper shows that compression strength increases non-linearly as shell thickness increases, meaning increasing thickness leads to greater and greater resistance to cracking.
Although it wasn't measured, a 7mm thickness would resist up to 7000N of force, and 10mm should resist at least 10000N if the increase continues at the same rate. Though there's probably diminishing returns, a couple layers of shells should give the strength needed to resist glancing blows, and maybe even a few direct hits before shattering.
1
10mm of shell, overlapping in places, is going to be pretty heavy I would have thought. Might be worth a back-of-envelope calculation for e.g. a breastplate. My guesstimate: using half of en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_surface_area and guessing at 2g/cm^3 for the solid shell density gives a weight of around 20kg for 10mm thick torso-covering suit . . . a bit on the heavy side, but not impossible.
â Neil Slater
Aug 23 at 20:57
add a comment |Â
up vote
5
down vote
A couple layers of shells should provide a good set of armor if you have nothing else, though they will certainly start cracking with every good hit so don't expect it to last long.
For every question, there's an oddly specific research paper that gives the answer: Shell Hardness and Compressive Strength of the
Eastern Oyster, Crassostrea virginica, and the Asian
Oyster, Crassostrea ariakensis.
According to the above paper, the compression strength(ability to not crack) of oyster shells varies based on thickness. About 1000 Newtons are needed to crack a 1mm shell, 2000N to crack a 3mm shell, and 4000N to crack a 5.5mm shell. According to this site, a good swing of a baseball bat hits a baseball with 3400N of force, so if the oyster shells in the armor are 5mm or more it would provide decent protection.
However, this Physics StackExchange answer goes into how much force a hammer hits a nail with: more than 9000N, which is likely closer to what armor would need to withstand in a fight. Thankfully, the original paper shows that compression strength increases non-linearly as shell thickness increases, meaning increasing thickness leads to greater and greater resistance to cracking.
Although it wasn't measured, a 7mm thickness would resist up to 7000N of force, and 10mm should resist at least 10000N if the increase continues at the same rate. Though there's probably diminishing returns, a couple layers of shells should give the strength needed to resist glancing blows, and maybe even a few direct hits before shattering.
1
10mm of shell, overlapping in places, is going to be pretty heavy I would have thought. Might be worth a back-of-envelope calculation for e.g. a breastplate. My guesstimate: using half of en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_surface_area and guessing at 2g/cm^3 for the solid shell density gives a weight of around 20kg for 10mm thick torso-covering suit . . . a bit on the heavy side, but not impossible.
â Neil Slater
Aug 23 at 20:57
add a comment |Â
up vote
5
down vote
up vote
5
down vote
A couple layers of shells should provide a good set of armor if you have nothing else, though they will certainly start cracking with every good hit so don't expect it to last long.
For every question, there's an oddly specific research paper that gives the answer: Shell Hardness and Compressive Strength of the
Eastern Oyster, Crassostrea virginica, and the Asian
Oyster, Crassostrea ariakensis.
According to the above paper, the compression strength(ability to not crack) of oyster shells varies based on thickness. About 1000 Newtons are needed to crack a 1mm shell, 2000N to crack a 3mm shell, and 4000N to crack a 5.5mm shell. According to this site, a good swing of a baseball bat hits a baseball with 3400N of force, so if the oyster shells in the armor are 5mm or more it would provide decent protection.
However, this Physics StackExchange answer goes into how much force a hammer hits a nail with: more than 9000N, which is likely closer to what armor would need to withstand in a fight. Thankfully, the original paper shows that compression strength increases non-linearly as shell thickness increases, meaning increasing thickness leads to greater and greater resistance to cracking.
Although it wasn't measured, a 7mm thickness would resist up to 7000N of force, and 10mm should resist at least 10000N if the increase continues at the same rate. Though there's probably diminishing returns, a couple layers of shells should give the strength needed to resist glancing blows, and maybe even a few direct hits before shattering.
A couple layers of shells should provide a good set of armor if you have nothing else, though they will certainly start cracking with every good hit so don't expect it to last long.
For every question, there's an oddly specific research paper that gives the answer: Shell Hardness and Compressive Strength of the
Eastern Oyster, Crassostrea virginica, and the Asian
Oyster, Crassostrea ariakensis.
According to the above paper, the compression strength(ability to not crack) of oyster shells varies based on thickness. About 1000 Newtons are needed to crack a 1mm shell, 2000N to crack a 3mm shell, and 4000N to crack a 5.5mm shell. According to this site, a good swing of a baseball bat hits a baseball with 3400N of force, so if the oyster shells in the armor are 5mm or more it would provide decent protection.
However, this Physics StackExchange answer goes into how much force a hammer hits a nail with: more than 9000N, which is likely closer to what armor would need to withstand in a fight. Thankfully, the original paper shows that compression strength increases non-linearly as shell thickness increases, meaning increasing thickness leads to greater and greater resistance to cracking.
Although it wasn't measured, a 7mm thickness would resist up to 7000N of force, and 10mm should resist at least 10000N if the increase continues at the same rate. Though there's probably diminishing returns, a couple layers of shells should give the strength needed to resist glancing blows, and maybe even a few direct hits before shattering.
edited Aug 23 at 14:48
answered Aug 23 at 14:26
Giter
9,36842030
9,36842030
1
10mm of shell, overlapping in places, is going to be pretty heavy I would have thought. Might be worth a back-of-envelope calculation for e.g. a breastplate. My guesstimate: using half of en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_surface_area and guessing at 2g/cm^3 for the solid shell density gives a weight of around 20kg for 10mm thick torso-covering suit . . . a bit on the heavy side, but not impossible.
â Neil Slater
Aug 23 at 20:57
add a comment |Â
1
10mm of shell, overlapping in places, is going to be pretty heavy I would have thought. Might be worth a back-of-envelope calculation for e.g. a breastplate. My guesstimate: using half of en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_surface_area and guessing at 2g/cm^3 for the solid shell density gives a weight of around 20kg for 10mm thick torso-covering suit . . . a bit on the heavy side, but not impossible.
â Neil Slater
Aug 23 at 20:57
1
1
10mm of shell, overlapping in places, is going to be pretty heavy I would have thought. Might be worth a back-of-envelope calculation for e.g. a breastplate. My guesstimate: using half of en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_surface_area and guessing at 2g/cm^3 for the solid shell density gives a weight of around 20kg for 10mm thick torso-covering suit . . . a bit on the heavy side, but not impossible.
â Neil Slater
Aug 23 at 20:57
10mm of shell, overlapping in places, is going to be pretty heavy I would have thought. Might be worth a back-of-envelope calculation for e.g. a breastplate. My guesstimate: using half of en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_surface_area and guessing at 2g/cm^3 for the solid shell density gives a weight of around 20kg for 10mm thick torso-covering suit . . . a bit on the heavy side, but not impossible.
â Neil Slater
Aug 23 at 20:57
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f122715%2foyster-shell-scale-mail%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password