WTC Collapse Simulator - DEMOLITION PROOF.....

[uruk]

Yes, that is stupid! But it is the upper section that should have failed and not the structure below, so the undamaged structure below now provides resistance to the failed structure above.

WHAT!?!? Are you saying the lower section is indestructable? The lower section is composed of the same material as the upper section. You are guilty of the very same assumtion that you are accusing Bazant of.

Please, try to get your parts in order. The upper part is not rigid. It is the first one to be destroyed.

Neither is the lower section. It will suffer destruction same as the upper section.

 

[A W Smith]

Come on, debunk the Match Box Experiment. Win a prize!

drop an ant from 10 times its length onto another ant,

drop a six foot human from 60 feet onto another human,

compare which ones survived.


matchbox experiment debunked, show me my winnings.

 

[NobbyNobbs]

Well in fantasy world three strong steel structures (office towers) suddenly collapsed due to gravity only after being initiated by fire, which has never happened before and will hopefully never happen again.

Word in bold was added by me. Heiwa, extending your logic...

What happened to the Hindenburg will hopefully never happen again. Therefore, the Hindenburg was a matter of arson.

What happened to the Titanic will hopefully never happen again. Therefore, the Titanic was a matter of sabotage.

What happened at Hiroshima and Nagasaki will hopefully never happen again. Therefore....oh, never mind. It's wasted breath.

Of course on videos of the real event we see complete sections of wall columns/spandrels being ejected sideways for which you require energy applied horizontally. But gravity is a vertical force.

Heiwa, try this little experiment. Take a wedge of wood to the ice skating rink. Place it on the ice so that a slanted side is up. Press straight down on the thin end and observe what happens. Do not apply a horizontal force.

Report back.

 

[Heiwa]

WHAT!?!? Are you saying the lower section is indestructable? The lower section is composed of the same material as the upper section. You are guilty of the very same assumtion that you are accusing Bazant of.

Neither is the lower section. It will suffer destruction same as the upper section.

?? If you have read my post, you know very well that the upper part has exactly the same structural arrangement as the lower part; very strong vertical wall and core steel columns supported by spandrels at outside walls and horizontal beams at core, steel floor beams (actually lightweight trusses) between wall/core columns and then concrete floor slabs between the floor beams. The floors can carry 300 kgs/m². Not very strong! Reason for this is that the structure is mostly air and that the floors only carry furniture, etc.

As the lower part carries the upper part via the columns, the lower part columns are stronger than the upper part columns.
It is suggested that all 280+ columns between the upper and lower part fail at some time - buckle - three plastic hinges develop in every columns, two of these hinges fracture through completely and the piece in between drops out. Sounds fantastic but that is the official story.
And the the upper part drops on the lower part. What happens?

Well, the bottom floor and some floors above of the upper part - these floors are very thin - will be demolished, i.e. punched through by the lower part columns that are very strong! Evidently the upper part columns will punch through the top floors of the lower part, if they can! Two outside walls are however outside the part below and contacts nothing.

Result? A lot of damaged floors get entangled into one another and that will cause collapse arrest. The columns are not really damaged! The floors cannot damage those. Two walls of the top part may shear off and drop down outside.

And that's it. The lower structure columns remain intact and there are some damaged floors up top. What remains of the top part, rests up top on the lower part. A loose top part cannot produce global collapse of the lower part. It is quite basic.

Anyone suggesting that the top part - its lowest, thin floor - can crush columns in the lower part doesn't know anything about structural damage analysis.

So what you see on all videos of the destruction is not the top part crushing the lower part. QED.

 

[Thunder]

there is no "upper section" and "lower section".

there is the total weight of the damaged section and the floors above it. all of these floors came crashing down on one floor. that floor couldnt handle the stress...so it collapsed onto the one below it. and so on..and so on.

every floor works together. they were built to hold a static load. once it becomes dynamic..its all over. but we all know that now dont we.