Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth

[GlennB]

ANSYS and LS-DYNA are just software to do static analysis or simple dynamic analysis of one ... one ... structural model. They cannot do structural damage analysis, i.e. repeated analysises of changing models with modified input due to modifications (failures) in the analysis.

They use the ANSYS and LS-Dyna software, massive and complex laboratory simulations and advanced engineering mathematics.

You , however, visualise pizza boxes falling on each other.

Please excuse me if I'm not impressed.

 

[240-185]

Advice: Any evidence that NIST is telling the truth?

A lot of structural engineers have worked on the case.
You are not a structural engineer.

I can't even believe you are an engineer who doesn't know the difference between weight and mass.

 

[Christopher7]

And where did the vertical collapse start? And can you clarify what you mean by "vertical collapse" and "horizontal collapse."

"Vertical collapse" appears in the NIST report exactly one time. "Horizontal collapse" appears zero. Did you mean to use "progression" instead of "collapse?"

[FONT=&quot]NCSTAR 1A pg 47-48[/FONT]
The probable collapse sequence that caused the global collapse of WTC 7 was initiated by the buckling of Column 79, which was unsupported over nine stories, after local fire-induced damage led to a cascade of floor failures. The buckling of Column 79 led to a vertical progression of floor failures up to the east penthouse and to the buckling of Columns 80 and 81. An east-to-west horizontal progression of interior column buckling followed, due to loss of lateral support to adjacent columns, forces exerted by falling debris, and load redistribution from other buckled columns. The exterior columns then buckled as the failed building core moved downward, redistributing its loads to the exterior columns. Global collapse occurred as the entire building above the buckled region moved downward as a single unit.

WTC 7 was prone to classic progressive collapse in the absence of debris impact and fire induced damage when a section of Column 79 between Floors 11 and 13 was removed. The collapse sequence demonstrated a vertical and horizontal progression of failure upon the removal of the Column 79 section, followed by buckling of exterior columns, which led to the collapse of the entire building.


Final report Tech beat extra, 11-20-08
In response to comments from the building community, NIST conducted an additional computer analysis. The goal was to see if the loss of WTC 7’s Column 79—the structural component identified as the one whose failure on 9/11 started the progressive collapse—would still have led to a complete loss of the building if fire or damage from the falling debris of the nearby WTC 1 tower were not factors.
http://nist.gov/public_affairs/techbeat/tbx2008_1120_wtc7.htm

 

[beachnut]

horizontal progression - and you were talking about your "horizontal collapse"? wake up

Someone will explain. This is funny. Sorry, but you need to build a house of cards, a big one and you will see horizontal progression sometimes in a global collapse.

 

[Christopher7]

horizontal progression - and you were talking about your "horizontal collapse"? wake up

Someone will explain. This is funny. Sorry, but you need to build a house of cards, a big one and you will see horizontal progression sometimes in a global collapse.

Please, It was a horizontal progression of interior column buckling [collapse]. Is English your first language?

 

[beachnut]

Please, It was a horizontal progression of failure [collapse]. Is English your first language?

The horizontal collapse was the result of the vertical collapse, not the fires. The fires did not damage or weaken the columns.

Wake up.

You called it wrong. Is your memory like my English?

Seems you will begin attacking because your delusions have been proven to be delusions.

Gage is a fraud, he fooled you big time and you still defend his idiotic ideas. Take some classes, the semester hours are cheap here in CA; no excuse for not taking your delusions to a teacher and learn enough to see Gage is making all his doltish conclusions.
Steel failure and wood remains. Gage says steel is what? Steel fails in fire, ask firemen

In Gage's world this can't happen! In the real world it does. Which world will you pick?

 

[Christopher7]

Wake up.

You called it wrong. Is your memory like my English?

An east-to-west horizontal progression of interior column buckling followed, due to loss of lateral support to adjacent columns, forces exerted by falling debris, and load redistribution from other buckled columns.

No mention of columns being weakened by fire because they were not weakened by fire.

 

[psikeyhackr]

What good are pictures of steel supposedly warped by a fire if we don't know how long the fire lasted? Or could it be that if we were told the time it would obviously not be applicable to the WTC?

WTC 2 came down less than 1 hour after impact and WTC 1 after less than 2 hours.

Does that steel look like it could have been used to support 16 stories of a building? Why don't we have something as simple as the TONS of STEEL on each level after SEVEN YEARS? In fact why isn't Richard Gage talking about that?

psik

 

[Baylor]

Hey psik, why didn't NIST compute the mass distribution in their model? Just asking?

 

[Grizzly Bear]

What good are pictures of steel supposedly warped by a fire if we don't know how long the fire lasted? Or could it be that if we were told the time it would obviously not be applicable to the WTC?

The yield strength of structural steel in fire is not a function time, it's a function of temperature. Go back to structures class please...

WTC 2 came down less than 1 hour after impact and WTC 1 after less than 2 hours.
psik

And your point is?


Sheesh none of you seem to have much grasp on design principals...

 

[Bell]

What good are pictures of steel supposedly warped by a fire if we don't know how long the fire lasted? Or could it be that if we were told the time it would obviously not be applicable to the WTC?

WTC 2 came down less than 1 hour after impact and WTC 1 after less than 2 hours.

Does that steel look like it could have been used to support 16 stories of a building? Why don't we have something as simple as the TONS of STEEL on each level after SEVEN YEARS? In fact why isn't Richard Gage talking about that?

psik

Why do you care about steel now? Did concrete start to bother you?

 

[DGM]

Does that steel look like it could have been used to support 16 stories of a building? Why don't we have something as simple as the TONS of STEEL on each level after SEVEN YEARS? In fact why isn't Richard Gage talking about that?

psik

Because unlike you some people stayed in school and took more than one structures class. I've asked this before but, Would you care to tell us what is your frigging point? (don't start with the masses are not available because they are and you know it)

 

[T.A.M.]

Try NIST! They just inform anybody asking that their calculations are not available any longer. Maybe NIST is preparing for Obama asking? Sorry, maybe GWB didn't return them?

SO do you have an email reply from them indicating, upon your request for calculations, that they cannot find them?

Or are you simply fabricating this bullcrap, like you do everything else?

TAM

 

[T.A.M.]

What good are pictures of steel supposedly warped by a fire if we don't know how long the fire lasted? Or could it be that if we were told the time it would obviously not be applicable to the WTC?

WTC 2 came down less than 1 hour after impact and WTC 1 after less than 2 hours.

Does that steel look like it could have been used to support 16 stories of a building? Why don't we have something as simple as the TONS of STEEL on each level after SEVEN YEARS? In fact why isn't Richard Gage talking about that?

psik

Well it is you and your crowd that go around to anyone who will listen, screaming,

"Fire CANT MELT STEEL!!!"

TAM

 

[psikeyhackr]

The yield strength of structural steel in fire is not a function time, it's a function of temperature. Go back to structures class please...

.
So you are saying that the core temperature of the steel is NOT A FUNCTION OF THE TIME and the temperature of the fire and the thickness and quantity of steel?

Leave out information and pretend to be smart. Truly impressive.

ROFLMAO

psik

 

[Christopher7]

The cantilever beam that was the weak spot in WTC7 was around the 5th floor. It was known as a point of theoretical failure even before 9/11/2001.

NCSTAR 1A Page xxxvii
The transfer elements such as trusses, girders, and cantilever overhangs that were used to support the office building over the Con Edison substation did not play a significant role in the collapse of WTC 7.

 

[Heiwa]

SO do you have an email reply from them indicating, upon your request for calculations, that they cannot find them?

Or are you simply fabricating this bullcrap, like you do everything else?

TAM

Pls, read http://heiwaco.tripod.com/nist7.htm to see the correspondence with NIST.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

.
So you are saying that the core temperature of the steel is NOT A FUNCTION OF THE TIME and the temperature of the fire and the thickness and quantity of steel?

Sure, time is a factor as dependent on the heat transfer properties of the steel. The relationship on the yield strength is determined by the temperature. If your case being made is that the structural steel could not have reached the temperatures required for substantial weakening, then by all means demonstrate your contention and floor me. You can find the relevant mathematical formulas for doing so in the AISC Specification for Structural Steel Buildings 2005 edition on page 467 of the PDF.

Leave out information and pretend to be smart. Truly impressive.

Then by all means prove your superior understanding in steel specifications by demonstrating to your audience the validity of your contention. You have everything you need in the link provided. Now get to it.

 

[lapman]

Would it be asking too much for you to address the evidence I presented?

Would it be asking too much for you to address (3rd request):
Please provide even one example, before or since 9/11, where 4 ton steel columns was found intact with no blast effects 600 feet away from the explosion. While your at it, please provide even one example of a CD by explosives, before or since 9/11, where not one single audio recording device picked up the sound of the explosive sequence. And, since you have moved the goal post to WTC 7, please provide one example of a CD by explosives, before or since 9/11, where the roof structures collapsed into the building seconds prior to the rest of the structure.

 

[Christopher7]

Would it be asking too much for you to address (3rd request):
Please provide even one example, before or since 9/11, where 4 ton steel columns was found intact with no blast effects 600 feet away from the explosion.

Rhetorical request.

While your at it, please provide even one example of a CD by explosives, before or since 9/11, where not one single audio recording device picked up the sound of the explosive sequence.

You don't know if there are any recordings of sounds of explosions. The government has over 7,000 video clips that they still won't release. Stop saying there are no audio recordings of explosions until you have heard all the video clips.

And, since you have moved the goal post to WTC 7, please provide one example of a CD by explosives, before or since 9/11, where the roof structures collapsed into the building seconds prior to the rest of the structure.

Rhetorical question. All CD's are unique. WTC 7 was by far the tallest building ever to be imploded. The collapse of the east central part of WTC 7 was to clear out a hole so the rest of the building could fall inward. That is what happened.


You cannot deny that this is true. Can you admit that it is true?

1) The columns are much larger on the lower floors so any horizontal collapse would occur on the upper floors first.

The slabs are the same weight on floors 8 to 45 which is where NIST says* the horizontal collapse began.

A chain will break at it's weakest link and in a steel framed building, the columns get smaller as you go up because they are carrying less weight.

*"[FONT=&quot]Column buckling and floor failures continued to propagate from east to west across the core in the lower floors, until all the interior columns buckled between Floors 9 and 14.[/FONT]"