WTC 1 & 2. What happened after collapse initiation?

Heiwa:

You DO realize that WTC 1 and 2 were constructed of more than just vertical columns and concrete floors, right?
There were metal beams going horizontally, as well.
You are aware of this, I hope.

I ask becuase, your model of the sections falling past each other damaging only the floors and not the metal structure does not work in a structure with cross-supports.
 
[X] said:
Heiwa:

You DO realize that WTC 1 and 2 were constructed of more than just vertical columns and concrete floors, right?
There were metal beams going horizontally, as well.
You are aware of this, I hope.

I ask becuase, your model of the sections falling past each other damaging only the floors and not the metal structure does not work in a structure with cross-supports.
Click to expand...

Horizontal spandrels and beams are fully described in my articles and, of course, included in the model test. Read my articles again. They are tertiary structure. The spandrels/beams are all aligned between the columns, i.e. not really 'cross-supports'.

50% of all (outer wall) spandrels will not contact anything for obvious reasons and the other 50% will assist in shearing off the bolted floor connections like a French guilotine. The horizontal beams in the core will similarily assist the columns in shearing off the floor connections there.

Thanks for your concern.
 
Heiwa said:
Yes, this is typical NIST re the top floor of the structure below: "assume that the floor is still supported on all columns" and nothing about the columns ... and friction.
Click to expand...
I assume your're referring to your model here: LINK

As far as I can tell from your simplified drawings you do not take into any account the damage to the core of the buildings. The plane impacts damaged the core and in the worst case, severed several of them completely.
You keep on pushing that there could have been only 'local failures'. This is wrong.

The collapse initiation was a result of structural failure on one or two floors between the core and perimeter structure. The floors in these upper sections were falling WITH the structure, bearing all of their weight on the floor immediately blow it.

Heiwa said:
The floor hinges down in all directions and get entangled later with other floors above and below, etc, etc. Only some parts of the top floor of the lower structure is initially locally contacted by the bottom floor of the upper block damaged by the columns of the lower structure.
Click to expand...

I can only assume that you're talking about scenario (D) in your paper. Would you be so kind as to confirm this? If so, the model is invalid as the core was compromised, not just the perimeter structure, as your model seems to suggest.



Heiwa said:
Well, before that would have happened, the local failures of floors above and below the initiation zone would have been arrested by friction between partly loose parts (floors and columns).

Ron, ask Michael Newman why NIST ignores friction between locally damaged parts that would arrest serious destruction, incl. global collapse.
Click to expand...

You are assuming in your models that the core should not have at all failed it seems. Seeing as how the core failed due to a combination of thermal stresses from the fire and the unevenly redistributed loads caused by impact damage, you're model doesn't work.

Even if the collapse proceeded as you claim it should have where the floors hinged downward, it would have removed all lateral bracing from the core at those areas, leading to further collapse. The cores were not designed specifically to resist lateral live loads.


Heiwa said:
PS - Don't forget to ask him about what sect he is associated with.
Click to expand...
It's official... Heiwa's obsessed....
 
~enigma~ said:
Then why and what is your definition of a sect? And what sect do you belong to?
Click to expand...

A sect is a group of people united by beliefs that differ from those more generally accepted by clearly thinking, free, independent persons, even if the sect members try to make a different impression. Sects do not, e.g. believe in generally accepted physics but invent their own versions, and so on.
I am evidently not a member of any sect. Start another thread about sects!
 
Heiwa said:
Don't worry. And keep OT.
Click to expand...
Sorry old timer, but this is the topic!

When do you plan to submit a paper proving that the WTC collapse should have arrested itself?

Or is whining on the internet all you intend to do?
 
Heiwa said:
A sect is a group of people united by beliefs that differ from those more generally accepted by clearly thinking, free, independent persons, even if the sect members try to make a different impression. Sects do not, e.g. believe in generally accepted physics but invent their own versions, and so on.
I am evidently not a member of any sect. Start another thread about sects!
Click to expand...
Your definition of sect is wrong Heiwa. A sect is generally religious but occasionally political. If a sect is political, it has a high degree of tension with the surrounding society, but its beliefs are, within the context of that society, new and innovative (IE alternative).

Why should I start a new thread. You keep using the word and you are defining it wrong. If you want to call the truth movement a political entity then it in fact fits the definition of a sect.

ETA - The truth movement also fits the definition of both a religious sect and a cult.
 
Last edited:
Grizzly Bear said:
I assume your're referring to your model here: LINK

As far as I can tell from your simplified drawings you do not take into any account the damage to the core of the buildings. The plane impacts damaged the core and in the worst case, severed several of them completely.
You keep on pushing that there could have been only 'local failures'. This is wrong.
Click to expand...

The plane impact damages were only local and are included in the analysis. FFS, read my articles!

Your LINK is not correct ... it is just another example of what could happen when heat affects columns, i.e. why local failures are arrested and only some small parts fall off, e.g. the upper block outer walls. No global collapse of structure below.

Thanks for you interest in this thread.
 
WildCat said:
Sorry old timer, but this is the topic!

When do you plan to submit a paper proving that the WTC collapse should have arrested itself?

Or is whining on the internet all you intend to do?
Click to expand...

T is WTC 1 & 2. What happened after collapse initiatiation.

My opinion is that the local failures would have been arrested and no global collapses would ensue ... as described in my popular papers on the net (originally intended for children).

According my stat software the articles have been downloaded by >10 000 people since 11/07 and I have had a good response from some of them.

No need to publish in an engineering journal that nobody reads. Internet is much better. Actually others use my observations in their papers, which makes me very happy.
 
Heiwa said:
Yes, this is typical NIST re the top floor of the structure below: "assume that the floor is still supported on all columns" and nothing about the columns ... and friction. NIST does not understand that the first thing that would happen in their invented, imaginary, fantasy scenario - the upper block free falls - is that columns damage the floor locally so that the floor is not supported on all columns. The floor hinges down in all directions and get entangled later with other floors above and below, etc, etc. Only some parts of the top floor of the lower structure is initially locally contacted by the bottom floor of the upper block damaged by the columns of the lower structure.

But so then they go on: more than the 12 to 29 floors reported above actually loaded the intact floor (of the lower structure - Heiwa clarification) suddenly.

Well, before that would have happened, the local failures of floors above and below the initiation zone would have been arrested by friction between partly loose parts (floors and columns).

Ron, ask Michael Newman why NIST ignores friction between locally damaged parts that would arrest serious destruction, incl. global collapse.

PS - Don't forget to ask him about what sect he is associated with.
Click to expand...


Newman suggests that you take an elementary physics course. You understand nothing and are incapable of learning.
 
Heiwa said:
The plane impact damages were only local and are included in the analysis. FFS, read my articles!

Your LINK is not correct ... it is just another example of what could happen when heat affects columns, i.e. why local failures are arrested and only some small parts fall off, e.g. the upper block outer walls. No global collapse of structure below.

Thanks for you interest in this thread.
Click to expand...


Your articles are incompetent rubbish. You are a ridiculous fraud.
 
Heiwa said:
So why did you ask NIST for advice?
Click to expand...


I don't claim to be an engineer. Now you have been "peer-reviewed"--except Mike Newman is certainly not your peer. It is safe to say that you have few peers and no inferiors.
 
Heiwa said:
No need to publish in an engineering journal that nobody reads.
Click to expand...


I know Heiwa, who ever reads those boring science and engineering journals anyway.

Your paper, written for children, deserves a much wider audience. May I suggest the following journal for your paper .....................


MagazineIssue8.jpg


I may be wrong on this but I do believe they have section where readers can enter their drawings and sketches. I think the section also allows for stories too.
 
Last edited:
~enigma~ said:
Your definition of sect is wrong Heiwa. A sect is generally religious but occasionally political. If a sect is political, it has a high degree of tension with the surrounding society, but its beliefs are, within the context of that society, new and innovative (IE alternative).

Why should I start a new thread. You keep using the word and you are defining it wrong. If you want to call the truth movement a political entity then it in fact fits the definition of a sect.

ETA - The truth movement also fits the definition of both a religious sect and a cult.
Click to expand...

So the beliefs of a political sect are new and innovative! You must be a sect member.

Only clear, logical thinking by honest persons produces new and innovative ideas and no sect is capable of that.
 
pomeroo said:
Newman suggests that you take an elementary physics course. You understand nothing and are incapable of learning.
Click to expand...

I already have very good understanding of structural design and analysis incl. damaged structures.

I wonder why Newman suggests that a floor was so strong that it could resist the weight of 25+ floors or the impact of 11+ floors. It is irrelevant.

Ask Newman again if a floor can resist being punched through by a column and what happens then.

Ask Newman why NIST ignores FRICTION between displaced parts rubbing against each other as the main effect to absorb energy released due to local failures to produce arrest of further destruction. Energy absorbed by friction exceeds energy absorbed by strain energy of deformed components by a factor of 100, I estimate. What is Newman's estimate.

In fact, it would be interesting to get an official NIST explanation why FRICTION and collapse arrest are not considered at all in the 10 000's pages NIST report. Evidently friction forces are not part of static, structural sky scraper tower design, but when analysing damaged structures, friction is the main force and thus energy absorber, to investigate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom