• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

An email from a Conspiracy theorist, and I have no idea how

Heiwa said:
It is OT. I am only discussing load redistribution. And to keep it simple the structure consisted of only five structural column members - one core (subject to heat) and four outer walls (cooled by fresh air) - albeit kept together by floors. But I doubt very much that the floors sagged due to heat. Wishful thinking. I think most heat was vented away with the smoke and cooled by fresh air sucked in through all open windows.
It is a pity the core columns were not examined after the collapse.
Click to expand...

Ahhhhhhh, nice to see you acknowledge the existence and purpose of the floors.

Pity you've never seen the pics of the sagging floor trusses though. Oh well, ignorance is bliss for some people.
 
Heiwa said:
It is OT. I am only discussing load redistribution.
Click to expand...

No, my questions were entirely pertinent to the topic.

You are talking about load redistribution without taking into account any possible changes to the load bearing abilities of the structural members.

Now answer my question: by what percentage of the original value will the critical buckling load of the column be reduced if two floors begin to sag?

What if three floors begin to sag?
 
Heiwa said:
None - but one was hit by an Exocet missile. Big hole + fire - but no collapse.
Click to expand...

So, despite completely different initiating events and construction and quite possibly materials, you feel that analysis on ship hulls and superstructures hit by missiles (if this is only one example, what were the others?) equates to analysis on 110 story skyscrapers hit by commercial airliners going 500mph.
 
Tell you what Heiwa, since you're so much better informed and.... well, just so much more clever than those whacky guys at NIST, why don't you write a technical paper setting out your arguments (try not to put 'I think' in there too many times though) and then send it out to every Structural Engineering Journal and society in the world (email is a wonderful thing).

I assume that you also belong to a professional association, so no doubt they would be very interested in what one of their members has to say about one of the most traumatic events of the last 50 years.

You gonna do it?
 
Tbone said:
So, despite completely different initiating events and construction and quite possibly materials, you feel that analysis on ship hulls and superstructures hit by missiles (if this is only one example, what were the others?) equates to analysis on 110 story skyscrapers hit by commercial airliners going 500mph.
Click to expand...

Yes! The subject is what the NIST-engineers say. There is load redistribution ... and global collapse ensues. To me there is something missing between the two suggestions.
 
uk_dave said:
Tell you what Heiwa, since you're so much better informed and.... well, just so much more clever than those whacky guys at NIST, why don't you write a technical paper setting out your arguments (try not to put 'I think' in there too many times though) and then send it out to every Structural Engineering Journal and society in the world (email is a wonderful thing).

I assume that you also belong to a professional association, so no doubt they would be very interested in what one of their members has to say about one of the most traumatic events of the last 50 years.

You gonna do it?
Click to expand...

At present we are just discussing some observations and missing links of the NIST report. Hopefully others will get the message?
 
Heiwa said:
Yes! The subject is what the NIST-engineers say. There is load redistribution ... and global collapse ensues. To me there is something missing between the two suggestions.
Click to expand...

Do you mean like a change in the load bearing capacity of the structural members?

by what percentage of the original value will the critical buckling load of a column be reduced if two floors begin to sag?

What if three floors begin to sag?
 
Heiwa said:
At present we are just discussing some observations and missing links of the NIST report. Hopefully others will get the message?
Click to expand...

What?

I thought you was 100% certain that the NIST explanation for the collapse was wrong.

Isn't that certainty enough for you to contact those professional bodies direct? Good grief, call yourself a professional? Get a grip.

Publish or be damned.
 
Alferd_Packer said:
Do you mean like a change in the load bearing capacity of the structural members?

by what percentage of the original value will the critical buckling load of a column be reduced if two floors begin to sag?

What if three floors begin to sag?
Click to expand...

According to NIST no floors start to sag when the load redistribution occurs. NIST claims that only load redistribution on the columns - without any calculations - caused global collapse. I show that the load distribution is minimal - 6.25% of the mass above is shifted to and is carried by intact columns and that it cannot cause global collapse.

WTC2 is not a house of cards (where a very small load redistribution causes global collapse at acceleration = gravity)!
 
Heiwa said:
According to NIST no floors start to sag when the load redistribution occurs. NIST claims that only load redistribution on the columns - without any calculations - caused global collapse. I show that the load distribution is minimal - 6.25% of the mass above is shifted to and is carried by intact columns and that it cannot cause global collapse.

WTC2 is not a house of cards (where a very small load redistribution causes global collapse at acceleration = gravity)!
Click to expand...

You are avoiding answering my questions. Why?

By what percentage of the original value will the critical buckling load of a column be reduced if two floors begin to sag?

What if three floors begin to sag?
 
uk_dave said:
What?

I thought you was 100% certain that the NIST explanation for the collapse was wrong.

Isn't that certainty enough for you to contact those professional bodies direct? Good grief, call yourself a professional? Get a grip.

Publish or be damned.
Click to expand...

It has already been done by others. Best is a complete re-hearing of the case in a law court. I am just adding some simple observations in this forum to enlight the uninformed.
 
Heiwa said:
It has already been done by others. Best is a complete re-hearing of the case in a law court. I am just adding some simple observations in this forum to enlight the uninformed.
Click to expand...

And failing miserably.

NIST identifies the sagging of the floor trusses pulling external columns inwards as being the mechanism for collapse.

You can barely bring yourself to admit that the floors tied the internal and external columns together and stopped the columns moving out of upright.

This has been gone over time and time again. You bring nothing new to this forum. If you have the proof that the towers could not have collapsed due to impact damage and fire, then go present it in court or to a professional body.

Bye bye Heiwa
 
Heiwa said:
None - but one was hit by an Exocet missile. Big hole + fire - but no collapse.
Click to expand...

Since you are making this claim of real world experience to establish your "expertise" in the topic, I have to once again ask you to provide details regarding this experience.

Name of the ship?

Year that you inspected it?

Location of the ship when you inspected it?

Under what capacity was your inspection performed (i.e. what was your job title)?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom