The full report (PDF) reveals five proximate causes for the collapse, chief of which is “he manual and inconsistent splay of the wires during cable socketing,” which we take to mean that the individual strands of the cables were not spread out correctly before the molten zinc “spelter socket” was molded around them. They enlisted the help of the Columbia University Strength of Materials lab, which sent pieces of the failed cable to the Oak Ridge National Laboratory’s High Flux Isotope reactor for neutron imaging, which is like an X-ray study but uses streams of neutrons that interact with the material’s nuclei rather than their electrons. But one always wants to know the fine-scale details of such failures, a task which fell to forensic investigation firm Thornton Tomasetti. So there was no real mystery as to what happened, at least from a big-picture perspective. The long run-up to the telescope’s final act had a silver lining in that it provided engineers and scientists with a chance to carefully observe the failure in real-time. The inevitable finally happened on December 1, when over-stressed cables on support tower four finally gave way, sending the platform on a graceful swing into the side of the natural depression that cradled the reflector, damaging the telescope beyond all hope of repair. From the first sign of problems in August, when the first broken cable smashed a hole in the reflector, to the failure of a second cable in November, it surely seemed like Arecibo’s days were numbered, and that it would fall victim to all the other bad luck we seemed to be rapidly accruing in that fateful year. In case you somehow missed it, back in 2020 we started getting ominous reports that the cables supporting the 900-ton instrument platform above the 300-meter primary reflector of what was at the time the world’s largest radio telescope were slowly coming undone. The simplest justification for this is that, in these cases, the "combined" form is almost exactly the same in appearance as the non-combined form.Nearly three years after the rapid unplanned disassembly of the Arecibo radio telescope, we finally have a culprit in the collapse: bad sockets. Although these examples do include more than one Transformer (or a Transformer and a fleshling), they are not considered "combiners". This is the case when Mini-Cons powerlink with bulks, as well as with binary-bonded partners like Headmasters, Powermasters/Godmasters, Kiss Players and Breastforce members. Sometimes a smaller Transformer will attach to and enhance a larger Transformer in some way. (Confusing things further are the comics which treated Sky Lynx and the Duocons as triple changers, able to transform between the combined mode and the ones for individual components without any parts separating off.) Such robots are occasionally referred to as "Reverse Combiners" within the fandom. All of these examples are not combiners because there is only one Transformer involved in each of them, regardless of how many bodies that Transformer may simultaneously operate. The Duocons are another case of this sort. However, all of these components are considered to be "part of" the overall Transformer, even through they can act independently. G1 Sky Lynx has lynx and dino-bird components, G1 Omega Supreme has tank, base, and rocket components, and Magmatron has three dinosaur components. Energon Landmine, for example.Ī similar case can be found in Transformers who have two or more "components" which combine into a single entity. As mentioned above, many Super Robots-which are formed through a conglomeration of parts-are not combiners. Not all cases of multiple things attaching to each other are combiners.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |