Moderated Steel structures cannot globally collapse due to gravity alone

e^n said:
Sure, it would seem intuitive that there would be some reciprocal damage. The actual amount is beyond my ability to calculate.
Click to expand...

You do not have to calculate. Just drive your car into the garage wall and see yourself :) .
 
e^n said:
This would depend on the mass shedding fraction. If (ignoring the initial rubble layer formation) the mass shed is under the relative difference in resistive capacity between two floors, then the collapse will continue to progress. If it is greater, then the collapse should lose energy and slow down.
Click to expand...

Can you please clarify this in simple language using laymans's terms! Most of us do not have IQ >250!
 
e^n said:
Lemons are likely much better in compression than a thin layer of concrete is in tension.
Click to expand...

You do not get lemon juice in tension :) .

Which remind me that my kid audience is waiting for me to perform the Heiwa coconut 911 experiment. It seems coconuts will magically be opened by gravity alone if you ...
 
Heiwa said:
alexi_drago said:
The reply to that is that while the structure has been destroyed the material is still there, falling.

Would Newton agree with that?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Interresting thing you did there to quote me.

How about quoting the whole thing and answering.
 
alexi_drago said:
Take 2 pizza boxes, place 1 on the ground and push down on it with your hand, it squashes. Put your hand out palm up, place the 2nd pizza box on top and push up, the pizza box may deform slightly but some of the force will cause it to accelerate upwards resulting in less destruction to the pizza box.
Click to expand...

This is Heiwa style. In second part, beware!, 2nd pizza box will crush your arm and you are crushed down according Bazant. ???? No, 2nd pizza box becomes rigid (see NWO physics definitions) and you self destroy.

????? You do not follow? According GWB chief scientist Condo anyone, not believing her, is a terrorist and subject to NWO physics, incl. water boarding*.

Pls do not mix up Hawaii surfing with waterboarding. The latter is mainly done at Cuba*.

* Cuba? Yes, US have a holiday resort there for water boarding**.

** By invitation only.
 
Heiwa said:
This is Heiwa style. In second part, beware!, 2nd pizza box will crush your arm and you are crushed down according Bazant. ???? No, 2nd pizza box becomes rigid (see NWO physics definitions) and you self destroy.

????? You do not follow? According GWB chief scientist Condo anyone, not believing her, is a terrorist and subject to NWO physics, incl. water boarding*.

Pls do not mix up Hawaii surfing with waterboarding. The latter is mainly done at Cuba*.

* Cuba? Yes, US have a holiday resort there for water boarding**.

** By invitation only.
Click to expand...

ಠ_ಠ


(and please stop referring to yourself in third person.)
 
This is Heiwa style.
Click to expand...

Not exactly, i'm comparing pizza boxes with pizza boxes but I was trying to come up with an example you could relate to.

So if you apply a force to an object, will the destructive results of that force on the object change whether or not the object is able to accelerate in the direction of the applied force?
 
Last edited:
Heiwa said:
You do not have to calculate. Just drive your car into the garage wall and see yourself :) .
Click to expand...

qqwxf8.jpg

I don't think this proves your point?

Heiwa said:
Can you please clarify this in simple language using laymans's terms! Most of us do not have IQ >250!
Click to expand...
None of us do. There is a difference in capacity to resist force in every floor of the towers. Typically it increases the closer you are to the ground. In a simple floor by floor collapse, each floor impacted will require slightly more energy to fail it. If the amount of mass being shed on each floor is such that the overall kinetic energy of the collapse is increasing at more than the rate at which the resistive force increases, it will progress. If it is not, it will slow down.
 
e^n said:
[qimg]http://i42.tinypic.com/qqwxf8.jpg[/qimg]
I don't think this proves your point?


None of us do. There is a difference in capacity to resist force in every floor of the towers. Typically it increases the closer you are to the ground. In a simple floor by floor collapse, each floor impacted will require slightly more energy to fail it. If the amount of mass being shed on each floor is such that the overall kinetic energy of the collapse is increasing at more than the rate at which the resistive force increases, it will progress. If it is not, it will slow down.
Click to expand...

Exactly! There is 14 400 m3 structure at every storey with uniform density 0.255 ton/m3 according BLGB and it - 3672 ton of various stuff - is shedded and compressed into a 0.896 m thick layer of rubble with uniform density 1.025 ton/m3. The first shedding is done by the upper part C with mass 54 000 tons (and uniform density 0.255 ton/m3) that is suggested to displace downwards. According BLGB it takes about 1 second.

Now the problem - how can part C - with uniform density 0.255 ton/m3 - compress anything to rubble with density 1.025 ton/m3 ? Is it possible? Why doesn't lower storey shed part C instead? Compare the picture!

What forces are part C applying on lower storey to shed it?

How much energy E0 can upper part C apply on the lower structure during shedding/compression?

What is velocity of part C at start, v0, and end, v1, of shedding first storey?

If it is possible - how much energy E1 is required to both (i) compress complete lower structure elastically and (ii) shed the top storey structure of it?

And how much energy E2 is required to accelerate lower storey rubble to a certain velocity v1 to continue the crush down with next storey?

Is E0 > E1 + E2 ? Then crushing can go on! Prove it!

In my humble opinion E1 > 100 E0 so E0 will just produce some local failures of the top storey (end of damages). E0 will also damage/shed upper part C.

Reason why BLGB gets E0 > E1 + E2 is mainly that BLGB assume that upper part C is rigid = no energy lost there for elastic compression or shedding and that all lower structure below the storey being crushed is also rigid = no energy lost there also for elastic compression. And then of course BLGB invents a very small energy value to compress one storey to 25% of its original volume, e.g. forgetting the friction when compressing structure to rubble.

Sorry - the BLGB model is utter nonsense!

I wonder why it is so difficult to realise that you cannot destroy a structure by dropping a piece of same structure on it? Maybe BLGB has not read http://heiwaco.tripod.com/nist3.htm ?
 
Last edited:
In Heiwa's fantasy world, a chain is only as strong as its strongest link.
 
Heiwa is using real world physics for a day and location that real world physics did not apply.

Alas, making total sense in this forum simply brings out the non-toofers.:boggled:
 
KreeL said:
Heiwa is using real world physics for a day and location that real world physics did not apply.

Alas, making total sense in this forum simply brings out the non-toofers.:boggled:
Click to expand...

Heiwa believes that the towers would survive the upper block being dropped on them from 2 miles in the air.

You may want to re-think your allegiances.

Did you remember to carry out the example I gave you yet or are you simply convinced that you know intuitively what is right?
 
e^n said:
Heiwa believes that the towers would survive the upper block being dropped on them from 2 miles in the air.
Click to expand...

Did Heiwa believe that, or you misquote? Actually Heiwa has never said anything like that. Question was what force an upper block would apply on a lower block after having been dropped from 2 miles and Heiwa just let Newton answer; the upper block applies a force on the lower block that is equivalent to the force that the lower block applies to the upper block. Equilibrium. As usual. I know this appears to be magic to NIST, Bazant & Co but don't blame me, Heiwa. Blame Newton if it makes you happy.

Now a simple question. What force is applied to the upper block when dropping?
 
Heiwa said:
Did Heiwa believe that, or you misquote?
Click to expand...

Look here

where the following exchange takes place :

pomeroo said:
If I magically lift the 110th floor two miles above the 109th and drop it, a "new equilibrium" is quickly reached and no damage is done, right? Crush-up equals crush-down, RIGHT? If I drop the top thirty floors on the bottom eighty from a height of two miles, THEY ESTABLISH A "NEW EQUILIBRIUM," RIGHT??????
Click to expand...

Heiwa said:
According Isaac Newton 1687 - yes! Verified several times since.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom