|
|
Post by ironhold on Jan 27, 2016 3:17:27 GMT
Science fiction frequently has consoles, monitors, and other such devices explode dramatically (and perhaps even injure or kill the user) in order to show that whatever it was mounted to has taken some sort of damage. The issue is so prevalent that a thread was started about it on a sci-fi forum I go to. The OP believed it was all down to a shocking lack of fuses in the equipment being used, and that if the equipment all had proper fuses then this wouldn't be happening. Other people noted that depending upon how the material in question was designed, there might not even be room for fuses in the first place. So - what might be at work? |
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Jan 27, 2016 7:50:06 GMT
Massive power surges will fry electrics, "this we know", if your expecting 12v and get 240, expect a lot of blue smoke and sparks.
Explosives?..
No.
First and foremost, who keeps explosives that close to the off switches.
Consoles, or more accurately control panels, "on the bridge", are at the furthest end away from the big bang stuff.
I will use the USS enterprise in all its variants as example here.
They are only control panels, and therefore shouldnt be packed with any electrical component that goes Big Bang...
Small Bang, Pop, sizzle maybe, plenty of the magic blue smoke, but explosives?.. I dont think so.
In fact I will go as fat to say that if the control consoles go bang, thats a bloody bad design.
Most of the explosive size stuff is kept down in engineering...
The main idea of a control "console" is to keep the user or operator away from the dangerous bits, the idea of "The bridge" is to keep all operators in the big room where they can see the view together well away from the dangerous bits.
In that, I call Hocus Pocus on the special effects.
"A big bolt of energy strikes the bridge".
Yep, if you have a high energy weapon that you target the bridge with, you will cause damage, again, "This we know", but, if you think it through, high energy penetrating "the shields" and hitting the bridge, that energy melting the control console is the last of your problems, how about blown out windows flying glass and being cooked by the blast.
Smaller craft...
Lets look at something the size of a small jet fighter that is in "The real world".
Do they keep explosives close to the pilot?.. hell yeah, he is SAT on them, its called an ejector seat.
However...
I have not yet heard of an exploding console being the major influence of injury in the cockpit.
Malfunctions causing the aircraft to crash [Pilot eject] is unfortunately common, but exploding sat-nag or ILS?..
Shoot the thing so full of holes you can use it as a string vest, most pilots will bang out and floaty floaty down or ride it down on manual, but have the control console "explode" is so massively rare I cant bring one to mind on my own experience.
Having a control console fry....
Yes, that has happened, and indeed it needed hosing down with the christmas tree maker (Fire extinguisher) in flight, that was on the inside of an AWACS thing where one of the radar controllers overheated to the extreme... [...I cant say more exact as they are still top secret?....][ well I could but thats not important here...]
But explode and kill the operator?..
That is like thinking the PC in front of you is going to blow you out of your seat any second now....
XP had a habit of a rather sudden BSOD, Vista was waiting to self destruct as soon as it expired 30 day trial, win7 1st generation was non to stable, but none of them actually blew up the pc they were on.
On that score, in Sci-Fi, we are led to believe that the consoles are no more than PC's running Linux (more stable) that are just the operating system for the machinery that is a few floors and some hefty blast doors away from the bridge.
Explode?..
Nope.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Jan 27, 2016 16:50:29 GMT
usually, the highest amperage available to a control console is 20 amps - and it is more commonly 15.
if I have to hot cut 20 amps, I usually pull out the old pliers so I don't damage the new ones.
however, in theory, if your console is somehow current limited so it doesn't short with enough energy to blow the fuse it could keep arcing for a significant time.
power supplies are always fused.
the other potential scenario is an outside energy source coming in after the fuses, or with enough magnitude to arc across the fuses. - in which case more fuses won't do diddly.
|
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Jan 27, 2016 17:05:23 GMT
usually, the highest amperage available to a control console is 20 amps - and it is more commonly 15. if I have to hot cut 20 amps, I usually pull out the old pliers so I don't damage the new ones. however, in theory, if your console is somehow current limited so it doesn't short with enough energy to blow the fuse it could keep arcing for a significant time. power supplies are always fused. the other potential scenario is an outside energy source coming in after the fuses, or with enough magnitude to arc across the fuses. - in which case more fuses won't do diddly. Many older military radio and navigation equipment had "distructors" in them. These were explosive devices that would destroy the equipment in the event of abandonment in enemy territory. They were usually designated as XJ on the schematics. I don't know what XJ stood for. I don't know if newer military gear has anything like it or not but it wouldn't surprise me if it did. A short circuit to the wrong wiring could conceivably detonate the distructors. |
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Jan 28, 2016 0:00:53 GMT
In the case of star trek power to the ships systems is provided by drawing off plasma from the engines and reactors and feeding it though a network of conduits. The plasma is contained and moved within this system using magnetic coils and force fields. Presumably damage caused to the ship could cause the containment to fluctuate, allowing small amounts of this plasma to leak out and react with the console causing what would appear to be an explosion. The electrical effect might also be a result of those fluctuations, maybe dumping slightly more plasma into what is presumably a converter system that what it was capable of dealing with. This could cause some electrical arcing, especially if the air in that vicinity or the surface of the console was ionized by the leaking plasma.
This is what I can gather from the technical guide for TNG, and while not cannon would make sense based on what we can deduce from episodes regarding the power systems on the various ships.
In the case of the reimagined Battlestar Galactica series the effects seem to be caused by electrical surges and short circuit's in the electrical systems. In fact there is an episode where a console explodes into someone's face during normal operations, and after investigation it is explained as having been caused by a power surge. In that, and every other case I can think of, people may be stunned by exploding consoles but are only actually killed or seriously hurt when they are either thrown into something or something is thrown into them by the force of an impact that shakes the entire ship. It seems reasonable to assume that Galactica uses very heavy duty electrical cables, given that during a battle they attempt to feed power to the FTL system using cabling that was running under the C&C deck (the FTL is at the other end of the ship). Given the over all design of Galactica, basically simple and tough, plus being built in a hurry during wartime, it isn't all that farfetched to think they used the same very heavy duty electrical cabling throughout the ship even in areas and for systems that wouldn't need it. It would simplify supplies during construction, and would allow damaged cables to be replaced or bypassed using the existing cables without having to worry if the cabling can handle the power. Which is what it seems Galactica herself did at least once. And would probably also ease supply chains when in actual service.
|
|
|
|
Post by wvengineer on Jan 28, 2016 1:15:54 GMT
For Trek, what I remember from the TNG tech manual is that they use the EPS (electro-plasma system) for major power transfer throughout the system. At regular intervals the plasma would be converted to electricity for use in the actual devices. the plasma conduits are basically a high tech version of a high voltage distribution line. It still has to be transformed down to something useful.
For a command console, there wouldn't be any actual plasma in it. It would be running on electric power and only contain wire and fiber optic cable.
|
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Jan 28, 2016 7:40:01 GMT
More and more I am thinking who would design any kind of vessel with big explosive bits "Up the sharp end".
Sure its kind of good story to have the console go bang, but, if, and a big if here, if it were real life, the captain would have much to say about explosions on the bridge.
(I say old chap, do you mind?.. one is trying to plot a course here...)
|
|
|
|
Post by ironhold on Jan 28, 2016 7:51:21 GMT
I myself did have something electrical burst on me one time. It was an old power strip that, in hindsight, was likely being pushed past its limits. The on/off button shot up about a foot and a half in the air with such force that anyone who would have been standing over it at the time likely would have needed medical treatment.
Given this, I can see how a component or two could fail catastrophically. However, under the circumstances it'd be more likely that Ensign Noname would lose an eye instead of being killed outright; it would be life-altering for sure, but they'd still be alive.
|
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Jan 28, 2016 9:27:30 GMT
In my own experience, if the covers come off a power control panel that has say 240vdc power supply, or even the 480 industrial flavour, if you tamper and stick your hand on the buzz-bars, your getting curly hair with a blue tinge.
However, with the panel closed, the design should be to allow full control with minimum possibility of any harm of what may be dangerous machinery.
The control panel should be such design that it is the first place to be when anything goes wrong as it has the emergency off button...
Anything else is bad design?.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Jan 28, 2016 10:08:32 GMT
For Trek, what I remember from the TNG tech manual is that they use the EPS (electro-plasma system) for major power transfer throughout the system. At regular intervals the plasma would be converted to electricity for use in the actual devices. the plasma conduits are basically a high tech version of a high voltage distribution line. It still has to be transformed down to something useful. For a command console, there wouldn't be any actual plasma in it. It would be running on electric power and only contain wire and fiber optic cable. No, there is no plasma in the console but there is most likely an eps conduit running behind or under it. I'm guessing, based both on the tech manual and the series itself, that the EPS system is rather like a circulatory system. You have arteries that shift high energy plasma to general locations, then smaller capillary conduits that shift smaller amounts of plasma to the consoles and equipment. There is probably a power converter within the console itself, likely in the base or back of the console depending on how it is fixed to the ship, with a capacitor system build in. This would explain how consoles can be activated even if there is no power being produced on the ship, how you can transfer power from one active console to another to get that up and running and why you could plug a phaser into a transporter to power it. The smaller capillary conduits are more likely to have less powerful containment systems, and hence be more likely to partly fail. If this were to happen the small amount of plasma released would turn the mater it contacts, or part of it, into vapour which would be contained with the console. Like any pressurized gas its going to try and equalize the pressure and follow the path of least resistance. That path is likely to be along the internal power cables, or at least the areas they pass though, and they are going to lead to access panels and the gaps between the screen and controls (on TNG they are the same thing). The electrical discharge is likely excess power from the converter following the ionized pathways plasma creates, and/or the molten material created by the plasma squirting out and giving the impression of an electrical discharge. Thinking on it, plasma might not be that bad a way to move energy around a ship. Like water plasma is going to retain heat/energy even if the source of the energy (the engines) stops. So the main power conduits themselves would be able to act as an emergency battery supply in themselves, and probably one that carries far more energy than a conventional battery system ever could and one the you can tap into from any part of the ship. This would explain how the Enterprise could restart its engines even when it seems they have lost all power generation systems and are running on battery power. The plasma system would retain enough energy in itself to kick start the engines, which based on the basic descriptions of them would seem to need a fair amount of power to get running. |
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Jan 28, 2016 10:44:41 GMT
For Trek, what I remember from the TNG tech manual is that they use the EPS (electro-plasma system) for major power transfer throughout the system. At regular intervals the plasma would be converted to electricity for use in the actual devices. the plasma conduits are basically a high tech version of a high voltage distribution line. It still has to be transformed down to something useful. For a command console, there wouldn't be any actual plasma in it. It would be running on electric power and only contain wire and fiber optic cable. No, there is no plasma in the console but there is most likely an eps conduit running behind or under it. I'm guessing, based both on the tech manual and the series itself, that the EPS system is rather like a circulatory system. You have arteries that shift high energy plasma to general locations, then smaller capillary conduits that shift smaller amounts of plasma to the consoles and equipment. There is probably a power converter within the console itself, likely in the base or back of the console depending on how it is fixed to the ship, with a capacitor system build in. This would explain how consoles can be activated even if there is no power being produced on the ship, how you can transfer power from one active console to another to get that up and running and why you could plug a phaser into a transporter to power it. The smaller capillary conduits are more likely to have less powerful containment systems, and hence be more likely to partly fail. If this were to happen the small amount of plasma released would turn the mater it contacts, or part of it, into vapour which would be contained with the console. Like any pressurized gas its going to try and equalize the pressure and follow the path of least resistance. That path is likely to be along the internal power cables, or at least the areas they pass though, and they are going to lead to access panels and the gaps between the screen and controls (on TNG they are the same thing). The electrical discharge is likely excess power from the converter following the ionized pathways plasma creates, and/or the molten material created by the plasma squirting out and giving the impression of an electrical discharge. Thinking on it, plasma might not be that bad a way to move energy around a ship. Like water plasma is going to retain heat/energy even if the source of the energy (the engines) stops. So the main power conduits themselves would be able to act as an emergency battery supply in themselves, and probably one that carries far more energy than a conventional battery system ever could and one the you can tap into from any part of the ship. This would explain how the Enterprise could restart its engines even when it seems they have lost all power generation systems and are running on battery power. The plasma system would retain enough energy in itself to kick start the engines, which based on the basic descriptions of them would seem to need a fair amount of power to get running. I am thinking bad design here. Engineering, yes, they may be inches away from heavy power supplies, because thats the job title.... But the bridge?.. Its about as far away from the engines as you can get. It has control panels to run the ship, but, by their very location, the design must be that they are remote control panels... Wired remote, yes, but very remote. I suggest that the power conduits that run that part of the ship, by design, would only contain "just enough" power to run the systems. Think on it this way, if you have a Water dam running a generator to supply power from Hydro Electric to a whole city, or even a small town, which effectively the Enterprise is, that water will be at [xyz] lbs per square inch at the bottom of say a 200foot drop in height of water for example. However your domestic water supply is what?.. 60lbs per square inch at the tap?... But it will come through the same drain in the bottom of the reservoir... There will be a heavy restriction somewhere in the lines that supply the water to the distribution network that supplies all that water, maybe the water mains along the road will be higher, but, before it hits you house there is a restriction in "a safe place" to distribute the power. The generators will be running at megawatts per hour in thousands of volts, but, the "engineering" will have broken that down to your 240 vA/C or 120vA/C dependant on what side of the pond you are on, in small distribution network transformers "local" to where the power is needed. And then buried deep within the control panels of the "Town hall" or Bridge, you get small power supplies that do the drop to 12vDC that runs most control circuitry. None of the transformers from the distribution network will be, therefore, anywhere near the bridge, rather there will be a separate room elsewhere close by to do all that.... After all, who wants to be sat next to a big transformer whilst trying to get the "radar" to work?... (Or other sensitive equipment), so therefore there will be some form of shielding between the power network and the control circuitry for the bridge. I am therefore in doubt that the design of the bridge, the most sensitive part of the ship, being that is where all the decisions are made, would place that room anywhere near heavy engineering..... Even a Cargo ship has many floors between Bridge and Engine room, the throttle control of the engines may sit on the bridge, but its a long thin wire between the captain and the engine. I therefore ask wouldnt there be breakers of a MCB design that would "sense" a fault and cut off power rather than fry the operators on the bride, and wouldnt those breakers be far enough away that of they did go up in blue smoke, they wouldnt damage the bridge?... I have worked with MCB's that are so sensitive they pop before the data logger on the console can even register there is a problem, and we had to design data loggers that worked on the other side of that to debug power problems. Its this way, I am not an engineer, but, by posting this post, I am trying to indicate that even I could design a system that would prevent damage to the operators of a remote controlled power system. And if I can do this......... |
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Jan 28, 2016 14:22:59 GMT
So we all agree. Control consoles can not explode. Good thing we don't write science-fiction stories.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Jan 28, 2016 15:25:07 GMT
anything can explode if everything goes sideways - but not at the drop of a hat, like sci-fi control panels do.
|
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Jan 28, 2016 15:45:56 GMT
anything can explode if everything goes sideways - but not at the drop of a hat, like sci-fi control panels do. Or if the pyrotechnics are installed right. |
|
|
|
Post by ironhold on Jan 28, 2016 18:31:50 GMT
To me, a more plausible situation would be "The console exploded because it was directly struck by whatever just hit the cockpit or bridge."
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Jan 29, 2016 4:06:54 GMT
To me, a more plausible situation would be "The console exploded because it was directly struck by whatever just hit the cockpit or bridge." or an energy bean struck whatever it was feeding the console. - meaning the energy came from outside the system. and I'm thinking adding more fuses wouldn't do a lick of good in those circumstances. |
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Jan 29, 2016 7:46:24 GMT
To me, a more plausible situation would be "The console exploded because it was directly struck by whatever just hit the cockpit or bridge." or an energy bean struck whatever it was feeding the console. - meaning the energy came from outside the system. and I'm thinking adding more fuses wouldn't do a lick of good in those circumstances. don't forget, sticks of dynamite has fuses. |
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Jan 29, 2016 7:49:21 GMT
or an energy bean struck whatever it was feeding the console. - meaning the energy came from outside the system. and I'm thinking adding more fuses wouldn't do a lick of good in those circumstances. don't forget, sticks of dynamite has fuses. Add to this discussion, if a direct hit blows a console, in outer space, fuses are liable to be the least problem. Containment of some sort of atmosphere to keep you alive would be more important. |
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Jan 29, 2016 14:27:26 GMT
don't forget, sticks of dynamite has fuses. Add to this discussion, if a direct hit blows a console, in outer space, fuses are liable to be the least problem. Containment of some sort of atmosphere to keep you alive would be more important. It wouldn't be a problem, unless of course the fuse to the containment field generator blows. Hey, maybe that's why they don't use fuses. |
|
|
|
Post by wvengineer on Jan 30, 2016 1:41:23 GMT
One thought. When did this trope start? I would guess around the days of the original Star Trek series. They feature some panels that blow up, but more commonly your have equipment that shorts out behind closed grates.
The reason I say this is that the late 60's were primary based on vacuum tube electronics and electromechanical relays. Transistors were in the process of taking over, and while there were integrated circuits, they were very limited in everyday life. The common people thought of tech as tubes. That is why you hear all the relays clicking when the computer in TOS crunches data. That is what people were used to when it came to computers.
The thing about vacuum tubes is that they take a fair amount of power to operate. And the heater inside can get quite hot, even though it is contained. Vacuum tubes are known to fail spectacularly. When they do go, they can cause electrical arcs (flashs) and depending on the failure, even can send some glass flying. So for the time, a panel exploding and injuring someone is not that unreasonable for people to think about. That is wht they are used to dealing with everyday. This idea of spectacular equipment failures has grown over the years as they try to make shows more exciting.
Fast forward 45 years and technology is completely different. When we think of tech today, it is miniaturized to an insane about and power requirements to do the same task is WAYYYYY less. Because of that, electronics are much more robust and when they do fail, these failures tend to be much more contained with minimal damage to surrounding components. To us, the idea of an exploding piece of equipment seams silly because of the technology we are used to on an everyday basis.
My attempt to figure out how it got this way.
|
|
