Max Photon, upon reading the previous posts I am not sure in which direction this thread is moving. Are we focusing on your original question:
It would seem to me that the question itself would go right over the heads of many of those reading. Judging by some of the comments, many people seem to be unaware that these columns were indeed separated along their original welds as can be seen in collections of photos of the rubble.
So many people commenting seem to be unaware as to how to refer to the photo collections publicly available to look for themselves at the ends of the core box column segments as they lie in the rubble. It is as if they have no capacity to look at the ends of these columns by themselves, but instead must refer to a government report for information on the subject.
I simply mentioned the 2 simple verifiable facts listed below and provided links to photo collections containing ample photos with which anyone can see these very columns for themselves. The facts were:
1) The large, large majority of core box column sections seen in the rubble are totally straight.
2) The large, large majority of core box column sections seen in the rubble have squared-off ends with clean breaks that are right along the original weld surfaces.
Consider the following responses.
rwgwinn wrote: So, Tom has discovered a way to induce a bending moment into a beam with no shear or moment carrying end conditions?
This will turn the engineering world upside down!
I merely pointed out 2 observable and verifiable geometrical facts applicable to most every core box column we can see in the photos of the rubble. If you just look at these photos yourselves, these geometrical features are really hard to miss.
So why does rwgwinn talk about discovering something? Odd.
Consider the response of Gravy to statement #1:
Yes I have. It is difficult to post results here because I am not yet allowed to post pictures. It would take you a whole 20 minutes with the photos provided to get some preliminary, rough results by yourself. The numbers are so lopsided that it will become apparent to you rather quickly that the 2 statements are indeed correct.
It is as if Gravy would be incapable of using his own eyes to look at these pictures all by himself and forming views without "experts" telling him what he should see.
cmcaulif comments:
as if these 2 simple observable and verifiable facts are merely "claims" by me.
Max, he, too seems unable to simply look at collections of pictures all by himself.
So, Max. How, in your opinion, should we proceed to investigate your basic question about how the core column sections were separated from one another?
And, Max, how do you expect many of these people commenting to contribute intelligently to the conversation if they are incapable of looking at and grouping photos of the ends of these very columns as they lay in the rubble?
I fear since no expert seemed to explicitly address the core box column-to-column connections, with nobody to quote, many of the posters will find themselves at a total loss as to how we can study them.
It would seem to me that the question itself would go right over the heads of many of those reading. Judging by some of the comments, many people seem to be unaware that these columns were indeed separated along their original welds as can be seen in collections of photos of the rubble.
So many people commenting seem to be unaware as to how to refer to the photo collections publicly available to look for themselves at the ends of the core box column segments as they lie in the rubble. It is as if they have no capacity to look at the ends of these columns by themselves, but instead must refer to a government report for information on the subject.
I simply mentioned the 2 simple verifiable facts listed below and provided links to photo collections containing ample photos with which anyone can see these very columns for themselves. The facts were:
1) The large, large majority of core box column sections seen in the rubble are totally straight.
2) The large, large majority of core box column sections seen in the rubble have squared-off ends with clean breaks that are right along the original weld surfaces.
Consider the following responses.
rwgwinn wrote: So, Tom has discovered a way to induce a bending moment into a beam with no shear or moment carrying end conditions?
This will turn the engineering world upside down!
I merely pointed out 2 observable and verifiable geometrical facts applicable to most every core box column we can see in the photos of the rubble. If you just look at these photos yourselves, these geometrical features are really hard to miss.
So why does rwgwinn talk about discovering something? Odd.
Consider the response of Gravy to statement #1:
Yes I have. It is difficult to post results here because I am not yet allowed to post pictures. It would take you a whole 20 minutes with the photos provided to get some preliminary, rough results by yourself. The numbers are so lopsided that it will become apparent to you rather quickly that the 2 statements are indeed correct.
It is as if Gravy would be incapable of using his own eyes to look at these pictures all by himself and forming views without "experts" telling him what he should see.
cmcaulif comments:
as if these 2 simple observable and verifiable facts are merely "claims" by me.
Max, he, too seems unable to simply look at collections of pictures all by himself.
So, Max. How, in your opinion, should we proceed to investigate your basic question about how the core column sections were separated from one another?
And, Max, how do you expect many of these people commenting to contribute intelligently to the conversation if they are incapable of looking at and grouping photos of the ends of these very columns as they lay in the rubble?
I fear since no expert seemed to explicitly address the core box column-to-column connections, with nobody to quote, many of the posters will find themselves at a total loss as to how we can study them.
Last edited:
