WTC 1 & 2. What happened after collapse initiation?

phunk said:
AA. Steel colliding with steel can 'blow out' steel parts. Steel being bent to the breaking point can catapult out steel parts. Lots of energy is available when 10 storys of an acre-wide building start moving.


BB. When can we see these mysterious friction calculations?
Click to expand...

AA. But the steel columns only occupy 0.13% of the acre wide building and punch holes in the floors (mostly concrete and a thin steel plate (just after initiation). No bending of columns. And lots of friction between failed floors to stop an acre-wide building. Don't forget friction.

BB. There is nothing mysterious about friction. Gravity force times coefficient of friction gives you the friction force. Further details in ref [4] in my latest paper. Do you still believe the gravity forces do not meet any resistance?
 
Heiwa said:
AA. But the steel columns only occupy 0.13% of the acre wide building and punch holes in the floors (mostly concrete and a thin steel plate (just after initiation). No bending of columns. And lots of friction between failed floors to stop an acre-wide building. Don't forget friction.

BB. There is nothing mysterious about friction. Gravity force times coefficient of friction gives you the friction force. Further details in ref [4] in my latest paper. Do you still believe the gravity forces do not meet any resistance?
Click to expand...


Do you still hold the insane belief that dropping the top third of a building from a height of two miles onto the bottom two-thirds does NOT destroy the whole structure?
 
phunk said:
Well, as you said, the windows are framed by the steel columns, so that will reduce the space by half. Also, the 3.6 in your calculation is only at the instant that the collapse starts, when nothing has moved yet. That distance will be shrinking to 0 as the collapse accelerates up to the 3 m/s you estimated for the first impact.

So even if we underestimate 4.4 as the starting figure, that factor will increase at an exponential rate, 3.6 / (3.6 - 1/2 * a * t2) as the floors come together.
Click to expand...

Well, the air starts to escape at the beginning so it will not escape at the speed of light at the end - as there is no air left.

And there is friction to consider. As always.

BTW - how does a 2-D window frame reduce a 3-D space by half?
 
Heiwa said:
Well, the air starts to escape at the beginning so it will not escape at the speed of light at the end - as there is no air left.

And there is friction to consider. As always.

BTW - how does a 2-D window frame reduce a 3-D space by half?
Click to expand...


By the way, your lunatic claim about the results of dropping a third of a building from a great height onto the bottom part is completely WRONG!
 
I am still hoping for JJ to respond to #815

Guess there is nothing obvius wrong with it.:D
 
Heiwa said:
AA. But the steel columns only occupy 0.13% of the acre wide building and punch holes in the floors (mostly concrete and a thin steel plate (just after initiation). No bending of columns. And lots of friction between failed floors to stop an acre-wide building. Don't forget friction.

BB. There is nothing mysterious about friction. Gravity force times coefficient of friction gives you the friction force. Further details in ref [4] in my latest paper. Do you still believe the gravity forces do not meet any resistance?
Click to expand...

Gravity force times coefficient of friction? Only for an object sitting on a level surface. You did pass high school physics, right?

What would it be for one of the columns punching through one of the floors?
 
what amazes me is that Heiwa can claim that the following:

1557948aa121b8c4ee.jpg


could actually stop 10 stories of mass falling onto it and do it with a straight face.
 
Heiwa said:
Well, the air starts to escape at the beginning so it will not escape at the speed of light at the end - as there is no air left.
Click to expand...

No, of course not, but it will increase in speed while decreasing in volume. You can test this yourself as you're so fond of experiments for kids. Go drop a piece of plywood from a few feet up into a pile of dust. The wind escaping from under it will be fastest just before the impact.

And there is friction to consider. As always.

BTW - how does a 2-D window frame reduce a 3-D space by half?
Click to expand...

It doesn't reduce a 3D space, it reduces the size of the opening that the air is expelled through (the windows). As the floor falls that first 3.7 m, the rate of air displacement is increasing proportional to the velocity, while the area it has to escape through is decreasing. Understand why it speeds up yet?
 
PhantomWolf said:
what amazes me is that Heiwa can claim that the following:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/1557948aa121b8c4ee.jpg

could actually stop 10 stories of mass falling onto it and do it with a straight face.
Click to expand...


Don't you get it? However great the falling mass, the equal and opposite force will always be just as great. If I drop a boulder onto a porcelain vase, I can't do any damage. The forces will always cancel out and sum to zero.
According to Heiwa's reinterpretation of physics, Newton taught us this magic.
 
PhantomWolf said:
what amazes me is that Heiwa can claim that the following:

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/1557948aa121b8c4ee.jpg[/qimg]

could actually stop 10 stories of mass falling onto it and do it with a straight face.
Click to expand...

???? It is NIST claiming that! I suggest the columns punch holes in the floor.
 
phunk said:
It doesn't reduce a 3D space, it reduces the size of the opening that the air is expelled through (the windows). As the floor falls that first 3.7 m, the rate of air displacement is increasing proportional to the velocity, while the area it has to escape through is decreasing. Understand why it speeds up yet?
Click to expand...

See my paper where the WTC1 upper block compresses say 20 metres with little smoke ejection before lower structure destruction starts. There seems to be an implosion.
 
The buildings were designed to support static loads not arrest dynamic loads.
After structural failiure in the impact floors The upper blocks fell onto the floors below.

In such a scenario, the building can only be as strong, as its weakest components: the bolts which held everything together. Shear force was transferred into those bolts. And everything came apart.
 
Heiwa said:
???? It is NIST claiming that! I suggest the columns punch holes in the floor.
Click to expand...

Where does NIST claim that the floors will stop the mass? They actaully claim that the seats on both ends will break free and the truss will fall with the top part. You are the one seems to be claiming that the thin welded metal seats on each end are so strong they can hold up to being landed on by the upper mass, in fact so strong that not only can the seats hold up, but that they would hold up when the concrete and steel floor failed and then so strong that they'd arrest the collaspe.
 
Heiwa said:
I have not seen any photos of stacked floors either! Stacked floors would indicate CD in my opinion. Gravity loads on an upper block causing it to displace downwards do not stack floors! The gravity loads/forces only locally damage the floors that then get entangled into one another, friction develops and further destruction should be arrested. The only extra energy released is the hinging of the floors but it is very small.

Topic is what happened after initiation! Say initiation is failure of supporting structure. It can only cause a downward displacement of the structure above (the upper block). It cannot cause free fall, near free fall, impacts or anything like that. During this initial downward displacement, the failing structure is deformed and damaged and absorbs energy, i.e. acts as a damper.
Then there should be contact(s) against undamaged structure below. It is not really the upper block that contacts but the intermediate structure that just failed.
And what was that structure? Right! Only columns. And I suggest that these columns or what is left of them damages the adjacent floors, i.e. the floor above (in the upper block) and below (in the lower structure).
So the upper block starts being damaged at contact after initiation.

BUT, NIST, Bazant, Seffen and other 'liers' suggest it remains intact, even if it is not seen on any videos, etc.

It is quite difficult to discuss this matter when we cannot agree on what should happen first after initiation, i.e. that the upper block should be damaged (and absorb energy) at contact and that friction develops at contact (and absorbs energy).

There are difficulties to explain the 'mushroom' dust clouds developing upwards or sideways at contact. Contact due to gravity is just failed parts touching each other and cannot produce these mushrooms. Try it yourself! Drop a brick on another brick and no mushrooms develop. So what produced the mushrooms?

Take WTC2 just after initiation. The top part is tilting to one side (due to failure on one side only of intermediate structure?) and a big mushroom develops between the top part and the lower structure on the other side ... where there is no damage. Downward displacement has not even started on that side but the mushrooms there are quite visible. LCD in action?
Click to expand...

Buildings don't float.
 
Heiwa said:
Let's do a calculation. Cross sectional area say 63 x 63 = 3969 m². Circumferential area 4 x 63 x 3.6 = 907.2 m² or only about 4.4 times the floor area. OK, there are window frames (steel columns) in the way also but say they blow out also.

So if a complete intact floor pushes down on an intact floor below with a certain velocity the air blows out sideways 4.4 times faster (forgetting friction and air resistance as usual and lift shafts/holes in the floors).

That's for the air. But what about débris and dust? It should not be blown out at all. Air cannot blow out steel parts.

And the dust? Well, it has to be produced first by the crush down one floor crushing against another floor and then it should be pushed out ... but isn't it a little late? Squeezed between two floors?

Anyway, according my calculations the destruction would have been arrested after one/two seconds when 3-4 floors above get entangled with 3-4 floors below. Friction does the rest. No rubble and very little dust.

Clap your hands in front of your face and note that you are not blown away by the air compressed between your hands. Why is that?
Click to expand...

Because buildings don't float.
 
Heiwa said:
If WTC1 upper block would have displaced downwards, only vertical steel columns would have punched holes in the floors, with well known results (see may papers). The locally damaged floors would then drop on one another and then friction would stop further destruction. No rubble, no débris, very little smoke ejection.
No bricks dropping anywhere.
All my children readers understand this. Try yourself.

Another experiment is to push a knife through your hand and see what happens (its like a column through a floor). Do not try it.
Click to expand...

It's because buildings don't float.
 
Heiwa said:
Well, the air starts to escape at the beginning so it will not escape at the speed of light at the end - as there is no air left.

And there is friction to consider. As always.

BTW - how does a 2-D window frame reduce a 3-D space by half?
Click to expand...

So when the air escapes the building cannot float.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom