Re: (TFT) Penetration of armor by Longbows --> Rick has a study! 2

["Neil Gilmore" <raito@raito.com>]

> He used a blocking material with a memory so you could
> see the depth of the penetration and the deformation.
> (Even if the arrow didn't penetrate, a large enough
> deformation of plate or other armor could drive ribs
> into the lungs.)  He used both the armor and under -
> padding in his tests.

There's 2 modes for armour. The first is spreading the impact, the second
permanent deformation. Both lower force through an impact site.

> There are 5 accounts of to make long bows from his period
> and all are fairly similar self bows but with the heart
> wood making them act something like a composite bow.

Yep. Quartersawn stuff, using the different properties of the different
parts of the log. Good.

> He used a 28" Oregon yew longbow with a draw weight of
> 75 lb for the experiments.  (Most historical accounts
> put the English longbow at a draw weight of 90 to 110 lb.)
> In order to make up for the lower draw weight he shot at
> the target at a much lower range.  He used figures and
> assumptions published in Physics Review in 1995, "The
> Physics of Medieval Archery".  He calculated that at
> point blank range it would match shots at 250 m, but he
> shot at 10 m range for safety.

28" seems short, but he appears to have figured out how to make do with it.

> Since most TFT fights are at point blank range, we
> should assume that the arrows have more punch than I
> said in my previous post.

Certainly point blank for a bow.

> He made sure that the arrows he used matched the
> existing arrows from period times.

The cloth-yard shaft is a pretty heavy item. I'd have to search a bit, but I
think most arrors were wrought iron, compared to steel.

> He mentioned the uncertainty of the various sources as
> to exactly what the armor is.  The experts disagree on
> the details and very few samples survive that can be
> tested.  And even those tested don't say anything about
> if they were TYPICAL or not.  He took his best guess
> and made armor out of various types of mild steel. The
> maille he constructed was typically made with 18 gauge
> wire in a couple of levels of quality.

That would appear to be a hole in his reasoning. Mild steel as we know it
wasn't really available for most of the period. Wroguth iron is hard to get
hold of today (wrought iron, the material, is not used for wrought iron, the
decorative technique). Later armours were heat treated, and there's been a
lot of research in the last 10 years on not only the content of the metal,
but specifically how it was worked.

> However, he mentions this in passing.  There are not
> big sections on the details of construction of the
> armor.  I get the impression that the author has what

It just sounds like the guy is more into archery than armour.

> The report was 28 pages and not the 50 pages I guessed
> before I hunted it down for Neil's questions.

Thanks for doing that. I think that's an appropriate length for a SCA A&S
paper. Typically, the judges won't read it all anyway...

> As I said, I'll see if I can find out if he minds
> having people distribute his work.  (I don't think he
> would object but who knows with out asking?)

Again, I'd love to see it.

Neil Gilmore
raito@raito.com
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"