Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

EMP

This topic is 5312 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

What ways are there to produce an EMP? What are the technical limits of intensity, range, power consumption and limiting affected area? ******** A Problem Worthy of Attack Proves It''s Worth by Fighting Back

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nuclear explosions produce EMPs. You could start by building a nuke. Those days, it might be cheaper and easier. I''m sure you could find a design doc somewhere on the net. Although, it might be in arabic or Russian. Or alternatively, look for "The Anarchist Cookbook".

I''m tired, it''s getting late...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well you could build a nuke. Any size is good for an EMP lol. Anyway another good way for a more localized emp is to build a PBW or particle beam weapon. It fires billions of sub-atomic particles that speeds up the atmoic movement in an object causing it to explode. One of its side effects is a small localized emp. Still those types of weapons require millions of volts of power, so either use your uranium to build a nuclear bomb or a nuclear power plant lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Are you talking about a real EMP or do you want to similate one in code?
To produce a real EMP all you have to do is drasticly change the strength of an electric field very rapidly. One way to produce an EMP is to overload a capacitor and create a short.
If you want to know how strong an EMP will be you can find the equations in any Physics textbook.

I have a dream...
I just wish I had a clue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by walkingcarcass
What ways are there to produce an EMP? What are the technical limits of intensity, range, power consumption and limiting affected area?



The easiest way to produce an EMP is to turn on a light and then turn it off. It wouldn''t be a very powerful EMP...

Or you could rub your shoes on the carpet and then touch some metal...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Apparently the forum lost my post.

Here''s the short version:

Three ways: high-power microwave(HPM), flux-compression generator(FCG), high-altitude nuke.

All three are self-destructing weapons. (i.e. you can''t do what they did in the Matrix with that large of an effect AFAIK)

The effect was accidentally discovered in nukes 700 miles away from the test zone, which gives you some idea of its range. Radio communications are disrupted over a much larger radius.

There''s a howstuffworks.com article on this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think its amusing you actually know!

Asumming a powerful portable power supply exists, I''m thinking of a system which could be re-used.

I take it the falloff in intensity is inverse-square, so anything powerful enough to damage equipment would have a large range, so EMP grenades are a bit impractical, then?

Is it true a conductive mesh will shield an area from the field?

********


A Problem Worthy of Attack
Proves It''s Worth by Fighting Back

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by walkingcarcass
I take it the falloff in intensity is inverse-square, so anything powerful enough to damage equipment would have a large range, so EMP grenades are a bit impractical, then?

inverse-square, like all em phenomena
quote:
Is it true a conductive mesh will shield an area from the field?

If it totally and completely surrounds this volume than yes. If you go to some educational website on em stuff and see what happens to field lines when a conductor is put into the mix you'll see what I mean. EMP's destroy electronics by overloading them. When em waves hit something, a voltage is induced(and therefore a current is induced as well, provided it hits a conductor). For stuff like radios, this induction is so small that it must be amplified for you to hear anything. When the emp hits it simply goes beyond the circuit's tolerances and boom-sizzle-crack! You have some lovely fried circuits.

edit: changed 'area' to 'volume'

[edited by - RolandofGilead on May 31, 2003 1:45:21 AM]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by RolandofGilead
When em waves hit something, a voltage is induced(and therefore a current is induced as well, provided it hits a conductor).

I was always under the impression that the EM waves would induce the current, and EMF was a result of that. Or maybe those were magnetic fields that did that.

I''ve been reading so much about electromagnetism lately I hardly know what''s what anymore!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Once a current exists in a conductor (from EMP or whatever) it creates it''s own magnetic field. If this is moving in relation to another conductor another current will be induced. I think

********


A Problem Worthy of Attack
Proves It''s Worth by Fighting Back

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous Poster
quote:
Original post by walkingcarcass
Is it true a conductive mesh will shield an area from the field?



If you mean Faraday''s cage then yes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by walkingcarcass
Once a current exists in a conductor (from EMP or whatever) it creates it''s own magnetic field. If this is moving in relation to another conductor another current will be induced. I think

Right, electrical inductance. The only catch is that it must be moving. Or the magnetic field at least changing. So if you were to turn the current on and off really fast many times, you would also be inducing current in another conductor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by Zipster
quote:
Original post by walkingcarcass
Once a current exists in a conductor (from EMP or whatever) it creates it''s own magnetic field. If this is moving in relation to another conductor another current will be induced. I think

Right, electrical inductance. The only catch is that it must be moving. Or the magnetic field at least changing. So if you were to turn the current on and off really fast many times, you would also be inducing current in another conductor.




Actualy the faster you change the curent on and off many time the less current that would be produced. This is do to the induced force that is required to acclerate the electrons in the (induced) wire. As you switch the current off a current is induced in one direction. As you turn the current back on a current is induced in the oppisite direction. If you switch the current on and off fast eanough the electrons just vibrate back and forth with no net current being induced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by walkingcarcass
I think its amusing you actually know!

Asumming a powerful portable power supply exists, I''m thinking of a system which could be re-used.

I take it the falloff in intensity is inverse-square, so anything powerful enough to damage equipment would have a large range, so EMP grenades are a bit impractical, then?



There''s a range, which is a property of the delivery system and an area of effect that is also sometimes called range, that is a property of the EMP warhead. Anything from a handheld grenade to a cruise missile could potentially be used as such a delivery system.

Expect the larger effect of any EMP weapon to be the disruption of radio and microwave communications, rather than the destruction of electronics.

Currently, the amount of energy produced by solid-state machines such as the marx generator is at most one tenth the energy produced by explosive means.

quote:
Is it true a conductive mesh will shield an area from the field?
Yes, but only if it completely encloses the area, and no conductors that lead to the inside of the cage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by Flarelocke
quote:
Is it true a conductive mesh will shield an area from the field?
Yes, but only if it completely encloses the area, and no conductors that lead to the inside of the cage.

What if you, say, have an open-ended cone mesh and establish an EMP inside it, will it be directed out of the open end?

Why would and explosion create an EMP? Simply intense heat?


********


A Problem Worthy of Attack
Proves It''s Worth by Fighting Back

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Why would and explosion create an EMP? Simply intense heat?
An explosion is either naturally conductive or can be made conductive. In the case of the FCG, the EMP is created by the effect of a rapidly moving "short circuit" created by the wavefront of the explosion''s shockwave. I don''t know how the explosion is utilized in an HPM.

quote:
What if you, say, have an open-ended cone mesh and establish an EMP inside it, will it be directed out of the open end?
I''m not sure about this one. I think this would be a very interesting experiment.

This is just a guess without doing any math as to what would happen:
The EMP in the direction of the cone''s base would be much stronger, and probably faster. The cone mesh would absorb the pulse and become strongly negatively charged. Depending on the strength of the pulse and composition of the mesh, the cone may melt. The charge would dissipate quickly as the electrons fell back and reemitted the energy as photons, creating a weaker secondary pulse (some of the energy would instead be changed into heat, hence the melting) The secondary pulse would be strongest in the direction of the cone''s opening (all sides would at least partially reemit in the direction of the opening, in addition to unrelated directions). The weakest direction of the secondary pulse would be behind the point.

This is mostly pointless, though, as the FCG is at least partially directional anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites