Talk:Frangibility

Firearms Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Firearms, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of firearms on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FirearmsWikipedia:WikiProject FirearmsTemplate:WikiProject FirearmsFirearms
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Technology

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology

Bullets vs. light poles

Light poles lose :-). Obviously bullets and light poles are different topics, but I wasn't sure how or where to split this.

Please edit this as you see fit.

Lent 13:56, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When it comes to frangible bullets, it might be helpful to find information and sources citing what materials are commonly used in their production, their effects on tissue, ballistic differences compared to other forms of bullets, as well as the legality of such ammunition. One article comes to mind and can be found here: http://www.airforcetimes.com/legacy/new/0-AIRPAPER-2418957.php

My research into the matter leads me to believe that most if not all frangible bullets seem to be made using powdered metallurgy and sintering.

frankmarlowe 07:34, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Article name

Instead of bullet, - might ammunition (Frangible Ammunition)

And "frangible" are an adjective?, - i think. An abv. of fragile - tho I'm not sure as English is my second language ;)

One have i.e.

frangible bulb
frangible bulb line
frangible grenade

-And frangibility

Northnor 11:12, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

I agree with the proposed merger into Bullet. Arthurrh 22:48, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Light poles

Another option is something I've seen where they have a plastic pole with a spring on the base. The actual light is below the spring and the pole uses refraction to glow. Hit the pole at almost any height and it just falls to the ground as it bends the spring. Pretty clever, and can be hit over and over without being replaced. Think: Student driving courses. :P

I'm not sure if this would apply to jets though, since they can be moving many times faster than an automobile when landing or launching. They might just rip the pole right off the spring. Either way, this is the very opposite of frangible. The spring makes it elastic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.196.246.113 (talk) 00:26, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Frangibility. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090318063910/http://policeandsecuritynews.com/janfeb01/frangibleammunition.htm to http://www.policeandsecuritynews.com/janfeb01/frangibleammunition.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:53, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Paraphrasing?

From the article: A material is said to be frangible if through deformation it tends to break up into fragments, rather than deforming elastically and retaining its cohesion as a single object. Common biscuits or crackers are examples of frangible materials, while fresh bread, which deforms plastically, is not frangible.

A structure is frangible if it breaks, distorts, or yields on impact so as to present a minimum hazard. A frangible structure is usually designed to be frangible and to be of minimum mass.

From: Forensic Science, An Introduction to Scientific and Investigative Techniques ... By CTI Reviews https://books.google.com/books?id=nvzLAwAAQBAJ&lpg=PT129&ots=OWYFP5r4xZ&dq=Fresh%20bread%20is%20not%20frangible&pg=PT129#v=onepage&q=bread&f=false

Seems very similar. Is this someone using wikipedia or wikipedia using someone else?

Lent (talk) 14:01, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]