WTC collapses - Layman's terms again

AZCat said:
The problem isn't so much modeling it as recreating it. The first only requires a colossal amount of computer power and time; the second is impossible.
Click to expand...

im pretty sure without a "Bazant Modulus" i for sure cannot recreate it the way you like it :)
 
Last edited:
Dictator Cheney said:
ORLY?

what would hinder me to make a far less simplified model than Bazant is using.

and with what software did NIST try it? and whats the exact reason they stopped it? in case they did try it, did they?
Click to expand...

You've shown that you have access to at some FEA software. Give it a shot! Greg Ulrich has some fairly well accepted values for steel column sizes and masses of the building. It should be enough to get a close approximation. Just don't forget to make the column splices about 25%-50% the strength of the column in bending.

If you have any questions regarding building mechanics etc, let us know. Some of us know a thing or two about this stuff. (Yes, this is what I've been trying to get you to do for awhile now). Just give it a shot.
 
Last edited:
Dictator Cheney said:
ORLY?

what would hinder me to make a far less simplified model than Bazant is using.

and with what software did NIST try it? and whats the exact reason they stopped it? in case they did try it, did they?
Click to expand...

Three software packages were used for the structural modeling: SAP2000, LS-DYNA and ANSYS. Try reading Section 6.6 of NCSTAR 1, available here. NIST explains what simplifications they used for their models, and the computing power and time required to simulate the relevant events. I think you'll find it informative.
 
Newtons Bit said:
You've shown that you have access to at some FEA software. Give it a shot! Greg Ulrich has some fairly well accepted values for steel column sizes and masses of the building. It should be enough to get a close approximation. Just don't forget to make the column splices about 25%-50% the strength of the column in bending.

If you have any questions regarding building mechanics etc, let us know. Some of us know a thing or two about this stuff. (Yes, this is what I've been trying to get you to do for awhile now). Just give it a shot.
Click to expand...

the acces i have is laughable. it would never be taken serious. (i would take another name, my real one :P)

but i maybe come back to the offer and will ask some help in structural things.
i will prefer JREF or Physorg above LC or AJ :P

btw i think i know what you are *trying* to do for a while now and it is very interesting.
and i never questioned your knowledge :) and also not that it is ways beyond mine. wich includes alot other JREFers.
 
Heiwa said:
Evidently the lower structure will withstand the upper block falling on it!! The strength of the lower structure occupies only 0.13% of the area of the structure. The upper block misses that ... and gets entangled in some weak floors and the collapse is arrested. Basic.
Click to expand...

Why do you keep saying this when you have admitted to not being able to support this assertion. Do you think we forget that you have not shown this to be true in your "paper"?

You just can't stop lying can you?
 
AZCat said:
Three software packages were used for the structural modeling: SAP2000, LS-DYNA and ANSYS. Try reading Section 6.6 of NCSTAR 1, available here. NIST explains what simplifications they used for their models, and the computing power and time required to simulate the relevant events. I think you'll find it informative.
Click to expand...

oho where did you link me to?

page 106. Figure 6-14

a "model" of a PW4000

/sarcasm

is that fraudulent "Modeling" ?
the fan blades seem to have no thickness at all.
;)
/sarcasm
 
Last edited:
AZCat said:
I linked you to an organization known as the NIST. Perhaps you've heard of them?
Click to expand...

i think i never gonna claim publicy on JREF that i have red the NIST report.
that makes no sence at all.
i cannot provide evidence.
would i provide evidence
i dont want to prove that i understood it fully, nor would i claim it.

did you know on JREF its just the best way to be a noclaimer.
even if you dont like it.
 
Dictator Cheney said:
i think i never gonna claim publicy on JREF that i have red the NIST report.
that makes no sence at all.
i cannot provide evidence.
would i provide evidence
i dont want to prove that i understood it fully, nor would i claim it.

did you know on JREF its just the best way to be a noclaimer.
even if you dont like it.
Click to expand...

I do not understand your post. Are you trying to say that it would be folly for you to admit to reading the NIST report because either nobody would believe you read it or that you understood it?
 
AZCat said:
I do not understand your post. Are you trying to say that it would be folly for you to admit to reading the NIST report because either nobody would believe you read it or that you understood it?
Click to expand...

after translating folly is say it would be plain folly.
 
Zeal without knowledge is the sister of folly. Blinder Eifer schadet nur.

i find that interesting :) i wonder if that translation is correct.
 
AZCat said:
Then I am at a loss, because I can't see how we can have a productive discussion about the NIST investigation and subsequent report if you won't read it (or admit you read it).
Click to expand...

and when we assume that i did indeed read it?
 
Dictator Cheney said:
i think i never gonna claim publicy on JREF that i have red the NIST report.
that makes no sence at all.
i cannot provide evidence.
would i provide evidence
i dont want to prove that i understood it fully, nor would i claim it.

did you know on JREF its just the best way to be a noclaimer.
even if you dont like it.
Click to expand...

I didn't know you were a poet. It has a nice rhythm.

Or was this meant to be real sentences representing a coherent thought?
 
rwguinn said:
because we are eternal optimists, and there's a first time for everything except for things that have never happened before?

I think I just blew a circuit...
maybe the troofers are right
Click to expand...

That's a royal "we", right? I have been doing this far too long to be anything but a realist. Some people will get it, most won't.
 
Slayhamlet said:
I didn't know you were a poet. It has a nice rhythm.

Or was this meant to be real sentences representing a coherent thought?
Click to expand...

actually i just wanted to post some words that form some sentences that form some message.

im not a poet nor a prince from Denmark.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom