Layman's terms please! Tower collapse issue

[padragan]

Not really - uniform density was only 0.18 ton/m3 = not massive. But large, yes. Plenty of air. Thus not solid. 70-80% of the 33 000 tons was just concrete, glass, furniture, insulation, etc.

So IS density an important factor in this case or not? If you say yes you must also explain why my plastic extension wouldn't have helped the tower, if you say no you must explain why you keep dragging density in your postings.

Put up or shut up.

 

[twinstead]

Padragan, you might as well say 'put up or shut up' in Swedish; Heiwa doesn't understand.

 

[Heiwa]

Yes, yes, the whole world is wrong except you. All these trained structural engineers - what do they know?

Now, where are those structural calculations we've been waiting for? Put up, or shut up.

You will get any structural calculations of failures of collapse start, when I get the photos and times of

1. Free falls starting (supports of upper blocks lost), and

2. Free falls ending with impacts (and collapses start), and why not

3. The failures of the uppermost floor of the lower structure.

It is difficult to do proper structural calculations of progressive failures, if you do not have descriptions and a proper time table of alleged events (as pointed out in my article).

But I am glad that you support the idea of clear thinking and proper structural calculations in lieu of

KE > SE (Nist's law why global collapse ensues).

 

[Heiwa]

So IS density an important factor in this case or not? If you say yes you must also explain why my plastic extension wouldn't have helped the tower, if you say no you must explain why you keep dragging density in your postings.

Put up or shut up.

I put up! According Bazant/Seffen uniform density of complete upper block is a necessity for progressive collapse resulting in global collapse (total destruction). Read my article.

If the density of upper block is not uniform, evidently the conclusion is not valid.

And evidently the upper blocks do not have uniform density! Nist in its FAQ December 2007 admits that and suggests that 6-11 floors of the upper blocks suddenly dropped down on the uppermost floor of the lower structure ... and initiated something ... not clear what.

Maybe you should ask Nist for further clarifications?

 

[Architect]

You will get any structural calculations of failures of collapse start, when I get the photos and times of

1. Free falls starting (supports of upper blocks lost), and

2. Free falls ending with impacts (and collapses start), and why not

3. The failures of the uppermost floor of the lower structure.

It is difficult to do proper structural calculations of progressive failures, if you do not have descriptions and a proper time table of alleged events (as pointed out in my article).

But I am glad that you support the idea of clear thinking and proper structural calculations in lieu of

KE > SE (Nist's law why global collapse ensues).

Are you guaranteeing that if we show pictures of all of these that you wiull not prevaricate, hand-wave, or move the goalposts but rather that you wil post detailed structural calculations?

 

[Heiwa]

Are you guaranteeing that if we show pictures of all of these that you wiull not prevaricate, hand-wave, or move the goalposts but rather that you wil post detailed structural calculations?

Of course. And to simplify for you; just WTC1. Thus four pictures (one of each wall) when free fall starts. And time of course. And that all the supports are missing. The upper block is free! To fall 3.7 meters. Would be nice with four pictures of that. You would be able to see through the whole tower, if the view angle is right and if there is no smoke inside. But there is smoke at least on the lee side.

And then 0.8-0.9 seconds later. The famous impact. When the rigid, solid upper block - intact - has reached the lower structure. One picture of each wall would be nice. And time of course.

And then another 0.1-0.5 seconds later showing the first failures of the lower structure top floor and columns below and when collapse of the lower structure really is initiated by the upper block. I will do a structural analysis of that.

If you have some photos of progressive collapse of the second floor below the uppermost floor of the lower structure due to the upper block, they are also welcome.

This info is very important. I will update my article with it accordingly.

Thanks for your assistance.

 

[DGM]

Of course. And to simplify for you; just WTC1. Thus four pictures (one of each wall) when free fall starts. And time of course. And that all the supports are missing. The upper block is free! To fall 3.7 meters. Would be nice with four pictures of that. You would be able to see through the whole tower, if the view angle is right and if there is no smoke inside. But there is smoke at least on the lee side.

And then 0.8-0.9 seconds later. The famous impact. When the rigid, solid upper block - intact - has reached the lower structure. One picture of each wall would be nice. And time of course.

And then another 0.1-0.5 seconds later showing the first failures of the lower structure top floor and columns below and when collapse of the lower structure really is initiated by the upper block. I will do a structural analysis of that.

If you have some photos of progressive collapse of the second floor below the uppermost floor of the lower structure due to the upper block, they are also welcome.

This info is very important. I will update my article with it accordingly.

Thanks for your assistance.

I don't see the calculations for the loading on the columns in the impact zone (post impact). Could you direct me to the section of your article that shows these? Thanks in advance.

 

[Architect]

Of course. And to simplify for you; just WTC1. Thus four pictures (one of each wall) when free fall starts. And time of course. And that all the supports are missing. The upper block is free! To fall 3.7 meters. Would be nice with four pictures of that. You would be able to see through the whole tower, if the view angle is right and if there is no smoke inside. But there is smoke at least on the lee side.

And then 0.8-0.9 seconds later. The famous impact. When the rigid, solid upper block - intact - has reached the lower structure. One picture of each wall would be nice. And time of course.

And then another 0.1-0.5 seconds later showing the first failures of the lower structure top floor and columns below and when collapse of the lower structure really is initiated by the upper block. I will do a structural analysis of that.

If you have some photos of progressive collapse of the second floor below the uppermost floor of the lower structure due to the upper block, they are also welcome.

This info is very important. I will update my article with it accordingly.

Thanks for your assistance.

I see. Now the prevaration begins.

It has to be a photograph of each and every elevation.

It has to be a photograph showing "all" the supports missing

It has to be a photograph right through the tower, from one side to another.

And then we have to provide a repeat set for each part of the collapse sequence.


You are a joke, Heiwa. You know that photgraphs exist, and you know that they debunk your ludicrous theory just as much as any calculations do. So when someone offers to provide photographic evidence, you begin to qualify your demands, to twist and squirm.

There is no intellectual or professional righour here. You have arrived at a theory uninformed by meaningful structural analysis and, like all belief systems, it will not be easily shaken.

You can't put up, yet clearly you won't shut up.

 

[Zorglub]

??? Sorry, you are mistaken.

No. I am not mistaken. Although i should correct myself. You did not promote hidden cans. You promoted a room within WTC filled with gasoline, the planes, the crashes and so forth was staged and perfomed by a magician.

Roughly translated this is what you wrote 070728
Magic and illusions performed by magicians skillfully manipulating the witnesses. Explosions a.s.o are prepared [before 9/11], for example a bomb within the wall of Pentagon or a room filled with gasoline in WTC2 etc. Making people (the witnesses] believing they saw a plane crash into Pentagon and WTC2 is easy as well if you have made the effort to plant the explosives beforehand. Ask any magician. They know how to trick the public. But in front of a public aware of the tricks.
The total lack of parts from the planes at Pentagon and WTC2 is, according to my point of view a clear evidence of no planes crashing at these sites. If there had been any planes the authoroties would have no problem presenting these parts correctly identified - the lots. So far they have not even showed us a bolt. A real magician would have no problems with that.

No, my translation aint that bad.. It´s just that Heiwa writes in a sort of skewed way. So I tried to translate as true to your original text as possible. Either way the text is confusing. You still haven´t found a magician willing to tell you how he or she would have staged 9/11 have you?

Too bad we only can see 300 of your posts. I´m quite sure that you have written something about the no-planes and whatever that caused the fireball must have been hidden inside WTC2.

 

[Heiwa]

I don't see the calculations for the loading on the columns in the impact zone (post impact). Could you direct me to the section of your article that shows these? Thanks in advance.

The article ( http://heiwaco.tripod.com/nist.htm ) evidently shows and calculates the loadings on the columns and their stressess in the impact zone pre impact. The loads produce compressive stresses <30% yield in the columns, i.e. very safe. No big deal! Then there is some destruction due alleged plane crash and a fire. Nist advices the small redistribution of loadings due to that = all is still safe. All described in the article;

Then there is the mysterious free fall/impact. The loadings in the impact zone just prior, i.e. pre impact are then ZERO. The upper block is detached from the lower structure and has not yet impacted = ZERO loads.

In the article an impact is assumed, energy/force/loads are transmitted to the lower structure and ... generally only elastic compression takes place according calculations. Some plastic failures may occur, but the loads are then diverted sideways and ... the progressive collapse is arrested as excpected.

Hope this clarifies your questions? Thanks for your interest.

 

[Heiwa]

I see. Now the prevaration begins.

It has to be a photograph of each and every elevation.

It has to be a photograph showing "all" the supports missing

It has to be a photograph right through the tower, from one side to another.

And then we have to provide a repeat set for each part of the collapse sequence.


You are a joke, Heiwa. You know that photgraphs exist, and you know that they debunk your ludicrous theory just as much as any calculations do. So when someone offers to provide photographic evidence, you begin to qualify your demands, to twist and squirm.

There is no intellectual or professional righour here. You have arrived at a theory uninformed by meaningful structural analysis and, like all belief systems, it will not be easily shaken.

You can't put up, yet clearly you won't shut up.

You mean prevarications?

Just provide some evidence/times of free fall and impact and initial failures and I will do the structural calculations. I cannot do structural calculations without some agreed input. Do not complicate things! Layman's terms. And polite manners are always appreciated.

 

[Heiwa]

No. I am not mistaken. Although i should correct myself. You did not promote hidden cans. You promoted a room within WTC filled with gasoline, the planes, the crashes and so forth was staged and perfomed by a magician.

Roughly translated this is what you wrote 070728
Magic and illusions performed by magicians skillfully manipulating the witnesses. Explosions a.s.o are prepared [before 9/11], for example a bomb within the wall of Pentagon or a room filled with gasoline in WTC2 etc. Making people (the witnesses] believing they saw a plane crash into Pentagon and WTC2 is easy as well if you have made the effort to plant the explosives beforehand. Ask any magician. They know how to trick the public. But in front of a public aware of the tricks.
The total lack of parts from the planes at Pentagon and WTC2 is, according to my point of view a clear evidence of no planes crashing at these sites. If there had been any planes the authoroties would have no problem presenting these parts correctly identified - the lots. So far they have not even showed us a bolt. A real magician would have no problems with that.

No, my translation aint that bad.. It´s just that Heiwa writes in a sort of skewed way. So I tried to translate as true to your original text as possible. Either way the text is confusing. You still haven´t found a magician willing to tell you how he or she would have staged 9/11 have you?

Too bad we only can see 300 of your posts. I´m quite sure that you have written something about the no-planes and whatever that caused the fireball must have been hidden inside WTC2.

Topic is tower collapse/layman's terms. Regarding events prior to that my views are already clear as the links in the end of my article we discuss show. What you have seen on TV 911 and what has been reported by the 911 Commission are just magic - Hollywood style. 100% fabrications in my opinion.

But this magic cannot cause global collapses of WTC1,2 only due to gravity that we discuss. There is further magic of some kind. I only demonstrate that gravity alone can not produce the WTC1,2 collapses based on common sense and 40 years experience of steel structural design, etc.

The perpetrators of the 911 Hollywood magic apparently do not like that. So let's continue the discussion.

 

[pomeroo]

Topic is tower collapse/layman's terms. Regarding events prior to that my views are already clear as the links in the end of my article we discuss show. What you have seen on TV 911 and what has been reported by the 911 Commission are just magic - Hollywood style. 100% fabrications in my opinion.

But this magic cannot cause global collapses of WTC1,2 only due to gravity that we discuss. There is further magic of some kind. I only demonstrate that gravity alone can not produce the WTC1,2 collapses based on common sense and 40 years experience of steel structural design, etc.

The perpetrators of the 911 Hollywood magic apparently do not like that. So let's continue the discussion.

The real engineers here have demonstrated that you lack the competence to contribute to this discussion.

 

[padragan]

I put up!

No, you are not. You dodge the straightforward question, that's what you do.

IS density a factor or not? That's the first simple yes/no question. I'm not asking about your interpretation of the reports, I'm asking about the actual collapse.

Leverera eller var tyst (following twinsteads advice).

 

[Architect]

Heiwa is incapable of either answering a straight question or of posting structural calculations.

I find it interesting to learn that he's a no-planer (always assuming that Zorgulb's post is a fair transaltion).

 

[Architect]

Leverera eller var tyst

Seconded.

 

[Heiwa]

No, you are not. You dodge the straightforward question, that's what you do.

IS density a factor or not? That's the first simple yes/no question. I'm not asking about your interpretation of the reports, I'm asking about the actual collapse.

Leverera eller var tyst (following twinsteads advice).

Put sb up to sth = inform him of it. E.g. 911 was a put-up! That many puts up with. Not me though. So I put you up to my observations.

Yes, density, uniform, is an important factor for Bazant/Seffen and Nist to prove collapse. Without it, no collapse of any kind. I show in my article that density was not uniform. Plenty of air in the structure, where the KE should have been dispersed in lieu of attacking the columns (0.13% of the foot print).
Only if the density was uniform the KE apparently had no choice but to be applied to the structure below and shake it into 1000 000's of pieces. It happens only in Hollywood productions, though.

It's a pity that Architect & Co cannot show any evidence of this infamous uniform density mass, when it free fell and impacted the structure below. Reason is that it never happened! Because the upper block was not a uniform density mass.

Hoppas du är nöjd med dessa uppgifter.

 

[Heiwa]

The real engineers here have demonstrated that you lack the competence to contribute to this discussion.

Are you joking?

 

[funk de fino]

Are you joking?

No-one laughs at Poms posts but plenty are laughing at yours, so maybe you are the joker?

 

[padragan]

Put sb up to sth = inform him of it. E.g. 911 was a put-up! That many puts up with. Not me though. So I put you up to my observations.

Yes, density, uniform, is an important factor for Bazant/Seffen and Nist to prove collapse. Without it, no collapse of any kind. I show in my article that density was not uniform. Plenty of air in the structure, where the KE should have been dispersed in lieu of attacking the columns (0.13% of the foot print).
Only if the density was uniform the KE apparently had no choice but to be applied to the structure below and shake it into 1000 000's of pieces. It happens only in Hollywood productions, though.

It's a pity that Architect & Co cannot show any evidence of this infamous uniform density mass, when it free fell and impacted the structure below. Reason is that it never happened! Because the upper block was not a uniform density mass.

Hoppas du är nöjd med dessa uppgifter.

Nej, inte nöjd (no, not satisfied).

You still didn't answer the simple yes/no question and the follow-up based on your first answer. I fail to see what the trouble is to answer YES or NO depending on YOUR opinion on what happened without dragging in your pseudo analysis of Bazant/Seffen. And I have a hard time outlining the question in a more simple fashion.