User:Brodyriemann/sandbox

Article Evaluation

Dielectric Spectroscopy

• Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
  • The article talks about various dielectric mechanisms and presents a few equations about chemical kinetics. While this background may be important, the article does not explain how it pertains at all to Dielectric Spectroscopy, which is an experimental process.
• Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
  • The article does not appear to have any biased opinions, but it appears the article predominantly mentions biological applications, while leaving out applications to batteries and electrochemistry entirely.
• Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
  • There is little explanation of how to actually perform the experimental procedure, including the theory and the physical steps required.
  • There is no inclusion of the history of EIS or how modeling techniques have changed.
  • The article briefly mentions that Dielectric Spectroscopy can be applied to electrochemical systems (traditionally called Electrochemical Impedance Spectroscopy or EIS). However, it does not explain how EIS is any different from other types of Dielectric Spectroscopy, and does not mention any applications to batteries throughout the article.
  • There is one equivalent circuit model included in the article, but it is unclear in the article what it is supposed to be used for. The parameters in these circuit models are typically chosen through iteration or optimization in order to get the model to fit experimental EIS data as best as possible.
  • There are many other equivalent circuit models in electrochemistry literature besides the one that is included in this article. In fact, the included model has become unpopular in battery applications because it does not capture the frequency response of ion diffusion. As a result, other models have been developed that can more accurately fit the EIS data.
    • No mention of Warburg impedances, which are used to model resistance to mass transport
• Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
  • Of the links I checked, all of them worked and supported the claims in the article.
• Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
  • The article has 31 sources, and the vast majority of them are from scientific journal publications that are reputable and related to the field.
• Check out the Talk page of the article. What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
  • One of the main topics that was discussed earlier on but has apparently been abandoned is the idea of splitting the article so that "Dielectric Spectroscopy" is its own topic, and "Electrochemical Impedance Spectroscopy" is another separate topic.
• How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
  • The article is rated as B-Class and is of Mid-importance. It is part of WikiProject Physics and WikiProject Spectroscopy.

Edit Article Project

Overview

• Group members: Brody Riemann and Braden Hill

• Article: History of weapons, we will be focusing only on the history of Roman weapons. Brodyriemann (talk) 17:54, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

• We chose to modify the History of weapons page because it is an area of interest for both parties. There is no or very limited amount of information on the history of Roman weaponry. We plan to add information regarding specific weaponry that was invented and implemented within the Roman Empire. Bahm9d (talk) 17:53, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Direct Quotes (Notes)

Gladius (Swords)

"Nevertheless, the gladius Hispaniensis (literally 'Spanish sword' - Livy also calls it the gladius Hispanus) was a key and highly recognizable component of the Roman armoury, symbolizing Rome's ability to adopt and adapt arms and armour that proved sufficiently impressive when used against them." Bahm9d (talk) 17:36, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

"According to Junkelmann [2] there were only a few very specialized offensive metal weapons commonly used in the 2nd and 3rd centuries (Fig. 1). There was the gladius, which at 30 cm long was more of a dagger than a sword, and the sica, a curved sword of about 40 cm in length, both of which had a double blade with a rhomboid profile." Bahm9d (talk) 17:36, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Javelin/Pilum/Hasta/Trident

"This new reliance on the javelin throughout Central Italy, albeit likely in conjunction with a backup weapon like a sword or axe, would have also encouraged a more open and flexible battle order." (page 152) Brodyriemann (talk) 17:31, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

"Although spears had most likely been thrown for centuries, if not millennia, in Italy, for the most part they were of the 'multi-purpose' variety - spears which could be used as either a thrusting weapon or a thrown one." (page 103) Brodyriemann (talk) 17:31, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

"There was the short pilum (a javelin = Wurfspeer) with a pyramid shaped spike and the hasta (a light lancet = Stoßlanze), which was a double bladed spike with a rhomboid profile. The most characteristic and specific lancet of the gladiators was the fuscina, a forklike trident. This weapon, borrowed from the fishing metier, was only used by gladiators for man-to-man fighting. The ancient images show this trident sometimes with barbed peaks, but mostly with three straight peaks. A trident found in the ancient harbour of Ephesus showed a 5-cm distance between the different spikes. On this trident the diameter of each coned spike with a nearly circular shaped profile was about 12–15 mm." Bahm9d (talk) 17:36, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

"The pilum was the signature heavy javelin of the Roman legionary infantryman since before the Punic Wars under the Republic until well into the Imperial period. Like musket volleys immediately before more more recent armies clashed on the battlefield, a volley of pila was designed to weaken the impact of an enemy attack by disorganizing their front ranks, allowing the legionaries to get to work at close quarters with the gladius." Bahm9d (talk) 17:36, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Trireme/Naval Technology

"After all, Rome was supposedly a novice in naval combat in the First Punic War (264 to 241 BC), without a ship of her own and entirely reliant on her allies' navies until stolen Carthaginian naval technology (the fortuitous wreck of a Carthaginian trireme which gave the Romans the plans for their construction) allowed the creation of her own fleet." (page 127) Brodyriemann (talk) 17:31, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

"During the fifth cenury BC, however, the rise of the powerful Greek navies (like that of the Athenians) and the wars against the Persians changed the equation. In conflicts with these types of enemies, the old-fashioned, multipurpose ships were simply outclassed, although they did continue to play a role, and triremes were a 'must-have' item if one wanted to compete. As a result, communities like Athens and others around Greece poured immense amounts of state money into their navies - investing heavily in this technology." (page 129) Brodyriemann (talk) 17:31, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Composite Bow

"The eastern, composite, re-curved bow was used by Roman archers ... This composite bow consisted of a wooden core, with layers of horn on the inside and sinew on the outside. The ears of bows were stiffened with laths of bone and antler, which acted as levers." (page 167) Brodyriemann (talk) 17:31, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Darts/Slings

"Special attention has been paid to the plumbatae, which Vegetius describes as having arrow-type flights and a lead weight connected to a wooden shaft. He states that an infantryman was expected to store 5 of these darts behind his shield...these darts potentially had a range of up to 80 m when thrown under-arm." (page 168) Brodyriemann (talk) 17:31, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Catapults and Siege Warfare

"...the torsion-powered artillery of the Greek world was significantly improved by the Romans...the wooden catapult was replaced with a metal-framed, two-armed, torsion-powered catapult during the 2nd c. AD. The fact that these weapons could be operated and manoeuvred around the battlefield by one person, or on a cart, depending on their size, greatly enhanced the tactical flexibility of the army's artillery capability." (page 170) Brodyriemann (talk) 17:31, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

"Nevertheless the presence of automatic weapons in the Greek-Roman era is not very widely known...Almost all these weapons [catapults] were not repeating devices since they had to be reloaded after each strike was thrown, but one little catapult (a scorpion) was a repeating weapon. It was very probably designed by Dionysius of Alexandria, and represents the first example of a repeating weapon." (pages 36-37) Brodyriemann (talk) 17:31, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

"The device...can be considered as a futuristic automatic weapon that throws 481 mm long darts...it was used around the I century B.C.; it was a part of the arsenal of Rhodes that may be considered as a concentration of the most advanced mechanical kinematic and automatic systems of the time, many of which show working principles and conceptions that still can be considered as 'modern'." (page 41) Brodyriemann (talk) 17:31, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Edits to The Romans in History of weapons

Existing Content

After Rome was sacked by the Senones in 390 BCE, they regrouped and formed an alliance of the city states. They deployed thoroughly trained soldiers in the north western frontiers to protect Rome from further attacks. These soldiers were divided into two groups, Legionaries and Auxiliaries, Legionaries were Roman citizens where as Auxiliaries were recruited from tribes and allies of Rome. They eventually defeated the Gauls and gained total control of the Italian peninsula as well as North Western Europe.

Original Content

Swords

The gladius, one of the primary close-combat weapons utilized by the Roman military

Originating in Spain, the gladius was adopted by the Romans as one of their most commonly used weapons for close combat. Typically 30 cm in length, characterizing a short sword, the term gladius was also applied to longer swords. Though many swords were double-edged for ease of cutting, this was not always the case. In addition, the geometry of the sword's point varied over time due to changing combat styles, but all were tapered to allow for stabbing during thrusting. There were other short sword variations that were classified with names other than gladius. One such example is the sica, which was about 40 cm long and had a curved tip. To engage in close combat, Roman soldiers would lead with their shield protected from volleys of arrows or pila and thrust forward with their sword. The gladius was suitable for thrusting, cutting and chopping. Bahm9d (talk) 01:52, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Spears

In addition to short swords, Roman infantry typically carried a spear or other type of pole weapon. The most common was known as the javelin, a heavy spear that could be either thrown or thrusted. Similar in function to the javelin was the fuscina. Although not used by the Roman military, this fork-like trident was one of the most popular gladiator weapons. A version of the javelin that had a much longer and thinner tip was the pilum, which could pierce armor or shields when thrown. Several pila could be thrown to initiate combat, disrupting the structure and defense of enemy armies and providing an opportunity for close combat, where the gladius would take over. The design of the pilum allowed it to become lodged in an enemy shield. Removing a pilum from a shield was often difficult and time consuming during combat. In fact, most were not reusable after removal. Bahm9d (talk) 01:52, 5 April 2018 (UTC) and Brodyriemann (talk) 01:42, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Catapults

A replica of a Greek/Roman catapult used for launching darts or large arrows

Siege warfare gave the Roman army significant offensive advantages over their enemies. Though the catapult was developed in ancient Greece, the Romans were able to replace the traditional Greek catapult made of wood making the most stressed components out of iron or bronze. This allowed for a reduction in size and also the ability to increase the stress levels to provide more power. Since a detailed understanding of mathematics and mechanics was required to design the catapult, it stands as a prime example of cooperation between ancient science and technology. Additional knowledge in topics like metallurgy and machine design helped to improve the performance of catapults. One example is the addition of machine elements like springs and copper bearings. It was known that the size of the catapult's components should be proportional to the weight of its intended projectile. As a result, tables relating standard part sizes and common projectile weights were assembled, which drastically increased the efficiency and production rate of catapults. The Roman catapult could be moved and operated by a single soldier, which allowed a more efficient use of soldiers and resources. These machines were torsion-powered and most were used to launch large spherical or dart-like projectiles. However, more creative options were often used. These included poisonous snakes, jars of bees, and dead bodies that were infected with diseases like the plague. The catapult was versatile, and could effectively launch any projectile that fit in its launch bucket. The Romans also developed an automatic repeating catapult called the scorpion. This was smaller than other catapults, but had more moving parts. The rope coils were often made of twisted bovine sinews, horsehair or women's hair. The kinetic power delivered by a catapult was dependent on the diameter of these coils, making the coil diameter the dimensional standard for power rating. This would be similar to how the caliber system is used in modern firearms. Brodyriemann (talk) 01:42, 16 March 2018 (UTC) and Bahm9d (talk) 01:52, 5 April 2018 (UTC)