Proposed Design for Progressive Collapse Demonstration

[Myriad]

KreeL, is there any point you wished to make about the topic of this thread?

A freestanding structure 410" in height (just over 34 feet, and just over 10 meters) and approximately 52" square, and weighing approximately 11,000 pounds will be constructed indoors atop a 33" high foundation platform. The main materials will be standard wood framing lumber and normal-density concrete. The structure will support 10 "floors" of sixteen square feet each, made of wooden trays filled with concrete, comprising most of its mass. The floors will be supported by columns in such a manner that the structure's weight puts tension on steel connectors whose tensile strength will be calibrated to withstand the static load but break under significant dynamic overloads. The structure will be subject to a horizontal impact of an inert 100-pound mass at a velocity of 12 meters per second striking a support column between the eighth and ninth floors, without the structure collapsing. The top floor, comprising less than 10% of the total mass of the structure, will be disconnected and raised an additional 77 inches (totaling 118 inches, or 300 cm, of clearance from the 9th floor) and dropped. The subsequent behavior will be observed and recorded. The test will be successful if it demonstrates complete progressive collapse of the test structure (not including the foundation). All appropriate safety precautions will be taken throughout.
...
What I would like to discuss is any questions, suggestions, objections, or predictions regarding this project.

You might begin by answering the questions I've asked:

Which part(s) of the model that is the topic of this thread will cause resistance?

How much resistance will occur? (An informative answer would include actual numbers with actual units.)

By what physical mechanisms will the resisting parts cause resistance?

Grizzly Bear, you're not helping.

Respectfully,
Myriad

 

[leftysergeant]

FineWine - find your head yet?

Had to thank myriad for putting up the demolition which shows how using explosives can indeed cause a global collapse. He fails to understand that explosives removed all the lower supports in sequence allowing the collapse. Exactly like WTC.

No explosives were used in that demonstration. The Balzac building was brought down utterly withoput the use of explosives. It produced all of the phenomena of WTC that are of relevance, to include the turbidity flow that idiots like Jeff King and the WeAreChange morons call a "pyroclastic flow."

Start making some comments that have something to do with this time/space continuum and stop talking smack to the adults.

 

[Dave Rogers]

Well, Mark Loiseaux made it very clear on the BBC Conspiracy Files programme that he didn't believe 9/11 was an inside job. That's enough to prove that "All of them" is a lie.

Dave

 

[leftysergeant]

Nothing of uniform construction can be crushed by 15% of itself.

If your model is of uniform construction and you claim it can be crushed by 15% of itself, then by all means try it out and look silly.

Edited to add that if you can produce a model, you better patent it quick. Demolition companies would campaign to make all buildings in the future in your design to aid them when the time comes to demolish them. Simply kick out a floor near the top and job done!

It has been dopne. There is a video posted below of the Balkzac-Viutry demolition.

Maybe where twoofers lose it is that they are not bright enough to do math that even a dyscalcultic old coot like myself can do, or figure out what data are relevant.

For instance, it does not make a freaking bit of difference how much of a structure is standing on the ground when part of it is dropped. You only have to destroy one floor at a time. And one floor is less than 15% of ten or twenty floors. So you have it all backward, just like all the idiots from WAC and LC.

Honestly, I have no idea where non-toofers get their ideas.

Actually, it is more a case of our not getting ideas from nincompoops, criminals, sociopaths, lunatics, Nazis and the kind of dirtbags who would disrupt a television show on another topic to go on a psychopathic rant like the WACoffs do. Not doing drugs helpos one see more clearly, too. It is obvious that a lot of twoofers are tweekers, if you know the behaviors to look for.

And, if you go to Loose Change forums, you will notice that one opf their llead idiots uses faux Roman numerals for marijuana as his screen name.

 

[FineWine]

Easy to answer, FineWine.

Resistance.

Slap yourself on the head - does it roll into the next state or something?

It may be easy, but your answer is wrong. You don't know anything.

 

[leftysergeant]

Any group can be controlled if done correctly by the controller.

The problem is that the WAC types who are trying to control the meme are too stupid to delude anyone but idiots. Now stop trying to steer the disussion into WACoff bog.

Back to the modelling of the collapse, the cores are of the least concern, after it hjas been determined hos much shearing force is required at the impacted floor to cause them to fail.

The strength of the floor-to-perimeter brackets must be measured precisely, because this is the only failure that needs to be proven,

The average air pressure inside the buildings is essential data as well, because this is part of what drove the perimeter columns outward.

Looking at the column of dust rising up the cores during collapse, it might be a good idea to calculate the over-pressurization in the core to calcualte whether that would have been suffiecient to cause and further structural damage..

 

[Myriad]

KreeL, is there any point you wished to make about the topic of this thread?

A freestanding structure 410" in height (just over 34 feet, and just over 10 meters) and approximately 52" square, and weighing approximately 11,000 pounds will be constructed indoors atop a 33" high foundation platform. The main materials will be standard wood framing lumber and normal-density concrete. The structure will support 10 "floors" of sixteen square feet each, made of wooden trays filled with concrete, comprising most of its mass. The floors will be supported by columns in such a manner that the structure's weight puts tension on steel connectors whose tensile strength will be calibrated to withstand the static load but break under significant dynamic overloads. The structure will be subject to a horizontal impact of an inert 100-pound mass at a velocity of 12 meters per second striking a support column between the eighth and ninth floors, without the structure collapsing. The top floor, comprising less than 10% of the total mass of the structure, will be disconnected and raised an additional 77 inches (totaling 118 inches, or 300 cm, of clearance from the 9th floor) and dropped. The subsequent behavior will be observed and recorded. The test will be successful if it demonstrates complete progressive collapse of the test structure (not including the foundation). All appropriate safety precautions will be taken throughout.
...
What I would like to discuss is any questions, suggestions, objections, or predictions regarding this project.

I suggest you begin by answering the questions I've asked, regarding your assertion that "resistance" will prevent any model from collapsing:

Which part(s) of the model that is the topic of this thread will cause resistance?

How much resistance will occur? (An informative answer would include actual numbers with actual units.)

By what physical mechanisms will the resisting parts cause resistance?

Everyone else, I'd appreciate it if you refrain from responding to posts that are not on this topic.

Respectfully,
Myriad

 

[Myriad]

KreeL, is there any point you wished to make about the topic of this thread?

A freestanding structure 410" in height (just over 34 feet, and just over 10 meters) and approximately 52" square, and weighing approximately 11,000 pounds will be constructed indoors atop a 33" high foundation platform. The main materials will be standard wood framing lumber and normal-density concrete. The structure will support 10 "floors" of sixteen square feet each, made of wooden trays filled with concrete, comprising most of its mass. The floors will be supported by columns in such a manner that the structure's weight puts tension on steel connectors whose tensile strength will be calibrated to withstand the static load but break under significant dynamic overloads. The structure will be subject to a horizontal impact of an inert 100-pound mass at a velocity of 12 meters per second striking a support column between the eighth and ninth floors, without the structure collapsing. The top floor, comprising less than 10% of the total mass of the structure, will be disconnected and raised an additional 77 inches (totaling 118 inches, or 300 cm, of clearance from the 9th floor) and dropped. The subsequent behavior will be observed and recorded. The test will be successful if it demonstrates complete progressive collapse of the test structure (not including the foundation). All appropriate safety precautions will be taken throughout.
...
What I would like to discuss is any questions, suggestions, objections, or predictions regarding this project.

I suggest you begin by answering the questions I've asked, regarding your assertion that "resistance" will prevent any model from collapsing:

Which part(s) of the model that is the topic of this thread will cause resistance?

How much resistance will occur? (An informative answer would include actual numbers with actual units.)

By what physical mechanisms will the resisting parts cause resistance?

I'll add this question in addition: if you are unable to answer these questions (especially the second one) as you appear to be, what makes you so certain that resistance will halt the collapse in the model described in the OP?


Everyone else, I'd appreciate it if you refrain from continuing to respond to posts that are not on topic for this thread.

Respectfully,
Myriad

 

[nicepants]

It has everything to do with every topic concerning 9/11.

Try learning some truth and actually begin realizing what happened. All the JREFer pink skyers can argue the piddly things til they turn blue in the face....

Perhaps a new thread would be the best place to discuss your "pink sky" scenario. As for this thread, I"m most interested in your answers to the following questions Myriad has posed to you:

Which part(s) of the model that in the topic of this thread will cause resistance?

How much resistance will occur? (An informative answer would include actual numbers with actual units.)

By what physical mechanisms will the resisting parts cause resistance?

 

[leftysergeant]

The core will cause some problems. It must be able to withstand the core of the top part to some degree, and then to disintegrate once the fllors have been stripped away.

This may be a problem because at least part of the damage to the core was the result of resonnances set up in the steel during the collapse. As anyone who hjas ever even tried to build a musical instrument will probably tell you, it is hard to get a small object to resonate at all.

 

[KreeL]

Perhaps a new thread would be the best place to discuss your "pink sky" scenario. As for this thread, I"m most interested in your answers to the following questions Myriad has posed to you:

Which part(s) of the model that in the topic of this thread will cause resistance?

How much resistance will occur? (An informative answer would include actual numbers with actual units.)

By what physical mechanisms will the resisting parts cause resistance?

I would need more information for actual calculations, but I am already quite satisfied that it would not globally collapse. As for the calculations of the actual towers, Gordon Ross already proved to me (not hard to do because I already knew, as Mackey does also) that a gravity driven global collapse is impossible.

And as I demonstrated earlier, the pink skyers can argue this back and forth til its done to death. It's what they must do rather than face the stark truth. This, by the way, is part of cognitive dissonance they are doomed to suffer with. Enjoy.

 

[Hokulele]

I would need more information for actual calculations...

What information, specifically? I can only think of one that would be relevant, at the moment.

 

[332nd]

I would need more information for actual calculations, but I am already quite satisfied that it would not globally collapse. As for the calculations of the actual towers, Gordon Ross already proved to me (not hard to do because I already knew, as Mackey does also) that a gravity driven global collapse is impossible.

And as I demonstrated earlier, the pink skyers can argue this back and forth til its done to death. It's what they must do rather than face the stark truth. This, by the way, is part of cognitive dissonance they are doomed to suffer with. Enjoy.

No, this is wrong. I know this because you cannot show where Myriad is wrong in his proposed demonstration.

 

[KreeL]

Congrats on getting married, redtail.

As for myriad's model, he should just build it and watch. One that adheres to the challenge conditions could probably be built in his living room on a smaller scale. Video it and put on youtube if it's not too embarrassing.

 

[Hokulele]

As for myriad's model, he should just build it and watch. One that adheres to the challenge conditions could probably be built in his living room on a smaller scale. Video it and put on youtube if it's not too embarrassing.

Do you think Heiwa should accept this model for the $1,000,000 challenge?

 

[332nd]

Congrats on getting married, redtail.

Thank you.

As for myriad's model, he should just build it and watch. One that adheres to the challenge conditions could probably be built in his living room on a smaller scale. Video it and put on youtube if it's not too embarrassing.

K... but why don't you think it will work?

 

[Myriad]

I would need more information for actual calculations, but I am already quite satisfied that it would not globally collapse.

No problem. What information do you need, exactly? One of the main reasons I started this thread is to make sure the description of the model and the procedures are clear, so if there's information missing I will do my best to provide it.

Meanwhile, you can answer the other questions, which do not require any calculations:

Which part(s) of the model will cause resistance?

By what physical mechanisms will the resisting parts cause resistance?

If you are unable to calculate the amount of resistance due to lack of information, what makes you so "satisfied" that resistance will halt the collapse?

Respectfully,
Myriad

 

[TJM]

No problem. What information do you need, exactly? One of the main reasons I started this thread is to make sure the description of the model and the procedures are clear, so if there's information missing I will do my best to provide it.

Meanwhile, you can answer the other questions, which do not require any calculations:

Which part(s) of the model will cause resistance?

By what physical mechanisms will the resisting parts cause resistance?

If you are unable to calculate the amount of resistance due to lack of information, what makes you so "satisfied" that resistance will halt the collapse?

Respectfully,
Myriad

He's been given some time to think about it.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=141183

 

[Newtons Bit]

I would need more information for actual calculations, but I am already quite satisfied that it would not globally collapse. As for the calculations of the actual towers, Gordon Ross already proved to me (not hard to do because I already knew, as Mackey does also) that a gravity driven global collapse is impossible.

And as I demonstrated earlier, the pink skyers can argue this back and forth til its done to death. It's what they must do rather than face the stark truth. This, by the way, is part of cognitive dissonance they are doomed to suffer with. Enjoy.

Ross was debunked a long time ago:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=82680
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=86422
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=97584
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=137881

If Ross is proven wrong, would you change your mind? Or at least be open to the possibility that the WTC can collapse globally?

 

[leftysergeant]

It has occurred to me that "pancaking" may be a bad term to use, in that it makes us think of the floors coming down more-or-less parallel to each other. I seem to recall reading somewhere in the NIST report that the perimeter floor-column joints failed first. This would have a flat sorting tray hanging briefly, dumping its contents onto the floor below before breaking loose, so that there is a constant stream of new materials, rather than pulses of new materials, and thus energy, hitting each floor, building force slightly less rapidly than gravity.

Of course, this would also cause the floors to bang against the core columns as they broke free from their clips. This is going to make the destruction of the cores a little harder to model, if for no other reason than the fact I mentioned earlier that it is easier to set up a mechanical ressonance in a large structure than a smaller one.