aggle-rithm
Ardent Formulist
You know what? You truthers have the most boring fantasy life.
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
Hardfire: Physics of 9/11
- Thread starter R.Mackey
- Start date
You know what? You truthers have the most boring fantasy life.
psikeyhackr
Banned
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2008
- Messages
- 470
.
You mean I didn't tell you that I kidnap, torture and kill people that can't figure out obvious physics?
psik
.
You mean I didn't tell you that I kidnap, torture and kill people that can't figure out obvious physics?
psik
You don't explain why what is obvious to you is not obvious to people who have studied longer and know much more.
Do you have the information psik is requesting ?
If you do, could you post it please ?
I would find the masses of the 12 external facade units and their arrangement extremely useful additions to the spreadsheet model I have. I'm not happy with a simple linear scaled mass distribution as I want the data to be as accurate as possible. I want to see for myself what difference those masses make.
If you have the data, great. Otherwise, what is the point arguing about it ?
If anyone has the information, please post.
(I've already got the SAP models, but they only contain multi-element loading information from what I can see, and not the individual element masses themselves)
Thanks.
Furcifer
Guest
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2007
- Messages
- 13,797
http://wtcmodel.wikidot.com/structural-data-wtc-1-2
http://wtcmodel.wikidot.com/forum/t-60066/corrected-some-perimeter-column-info
http://www.efunda.com/math/areas/RolledSteelChannels.cfm
http://wtcmodel.wikidot.com/cc1002
Between those 4 links you can calculate the exact weights if you so choose. It will take some time, but if you think it's worth the effort go at it.
Thanks. Have seen that data. It does not specify the arrangement of the external column units. It is focussed on the core columns, which I'm fine with.
The arrangement is the point. If I have missed something in the links, which one describes which of each of the 12 external column units is positioned where...?
Furcifer
Guest
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2007
- Messages
- 13,797
I'm not sure what you mean by 12 external column units? You have 236 permimter columns spaced 102cm apart (plus 236 spandrels and some 10000 endplates) made with 14 grades of steel. If you don't like the linear distribution I suppose you could assume the grade changes were at the same levels as the core changes (or pretty close).
aggle-rithm
Ardent Formulist
.
You mean I didn't tell you that I kidnap, torture and kill people that can't figure out obvious physics?
psik
Yes...well...
Good luck with all that.
The exterior was designed to handle the stress and different grades of steel were in locations to satisfy the design.
All of what 911Truth needs to know is available, but it takes work and they are not going to stand up and do the hard stuff so they can stop apologizing for terrorists.
NISTNCSTAR1-3A
Last edited:
Furcifer
Guest
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2007
- Messages
- 13,797
I think I may be missing something here, this doesn't seem particularily hard to do with a spread sheet?
I'm inclined to believe the latter part of your post.
Who is 911Truth ? The comment was a response to me, femr2.
You appear to fail to understand what is being asked. Knowing the grades of steel can in no way ever lead to correctly specifying which grades the designers used in what location on the tower. If you are aware of some information which 'states' the actual data, please provide it. If not, just admit...you don't know. I'm not interested in calculating what 'may' have been used. I want to know what 'was' used. I fail to see how asking for some details about external wall panels is 'apologising for terrorists', and I find the phrase offensive and provocative.
So, again, if you don't know, just say you don't know and quit the rhetoric.
tsig
a carbon based life-form
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2005
- Messages
- 39,049
You might want to consider doing your own work and not whining that others won't do it for you.
Furcifer
Guest
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2007
- Messages
- 13,797
Then your question must have been rhetorical? I mean there is no way of knowing exactly what grades were actually used, forget about specified. At least to the degree I think you are implying. From what I've seen you have the info to get it within 10% (based on the error in the grades or plate thickness at any given level)
Even if you had the work orders from PC&F you'd probably be hard pressed to get much higher accuracy.
I find your web page offensive posting papers of junk science and implying they have worth on 911. You support the lies of thermite by posting the papers on your web site; a known delusoin of thermite is not science it is a nut case idea invented four years after 911 due to Jones being biased about something. Your web page is anti-intellectual and essentially apologizes for the 19 terrorist who did 911. Did you see the papers from 911Truth you posted? Tripe. The only one close to reality is Greg's paper but he was trying to prove CD also in his early days. Like you.
But alas I was not talking about you. Your model has mass estimated and it is fine; there are others who can't do the work. You estimated the mass very well and your model allows it to be changed in more than one way. You are picky on what you ignore and don't ignore; who cares if you lack the engineering skills to make the right assumptions. An engineer can use your model and turn off the parameters using sound judgment and knowledge while you try to use to prove gravity collapse was not possible with the same parameters and made up dustification of cement.
Just because you have a preordained conclusion doesn't mean you don't do the hard work to model the WTC even if you do it to back in CD or some other stupid thermite idea.
I was not talking about you; Just because you post the "Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice" junk sciecnce projects only proves you lack knowledge on a broad range of subject areas. I was commenting on the different grades of steel and how they were arranged to meet the engineering design goals.
All of what 911Truth needs is available to solve 911 so they can stop apologizing for terrorists. When you figure out the failed papers you post at your web site are biased junk science, you will stop apologizing for terrorist too. I find your presentation of 911Truth papers to be offensive and disrespectful. So? You don't care otherwise you would try to see the massive errors in the work. Are you an engineer?
But no, I was not talking to you; Gee you have found the weights and I think they are perfect for your model, or anyone who wants to model the WTC in a realistic way! But the papers you push as science are junk, just the same.
Macgyver1968
Philosopher
Psikey must be bored since they closed down all the 911 threads on Sciforums. 
psikeyhackr
Banned
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2008
- Messages
- 470
.Psikey must be bored since they closed down all the 911 threads on Sciforums.
[sarcasm]Sure, I never discussed this anywhere on the internet before sciforums.
Sciforums was the center of my universe.[/sarcasm]
It's Mackey bringing up the scaled model business that makes this interesting. He poo pooed my talking about the tons of steel and concrete on every level but now he thinks he can say meaningful things about a scaled model without that information.
http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2209954&postcount=386
http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2208049&postcount=316
Brilliant move for a NASA scientist.
psik
Last edited:
Excellent. As I've said may times, my intention is to make something that can be modified by others to help make conclusions of their own. Once I'm finished changing the mechanisms, I'd be interested in knowing what values you choose to 'switch off'. You mention cement (concrete), but I assume you wouldn't switch it off 'completely'. That would seem very erroneous. I assume you would include concrete crush energy in 'some' way, even if you used a different value or method.
I'm still after actual data if I can get my hands on it. If it comes to it, then I may have to make the assumption that the steel grade changes mimic those of the core columns, which we DO have specific information about in terms of what grade (and column design) was used at what point. The current model uses the linear ramping method, which I'm not content with.
If I could find the specific mass of every chair in the building I'd include it, so I don't think there should be a big issue with asking if anyone has seen the specific data anywhere.
The overwhelming answer seems to be...no.
Fine. No-one has the data. If it turns up anywhere, please let me know.
Last edited:
Asking "psikeyhackr" why he needs perfect data is hopeless. He has no idea. How about you? Why is perfect data significantly better for modeling purposes than estimates that may be slightly off in either direction? Isn't it about time you clarified this issue?
I have no need to say more than "I'd prefer to use specific accurate data rather than estimates at all times".
I guess you don't have the data. No problem. Let me know if you come across it anywhere.
Predictably, you ducked my question, which happens to be the same question that the engineers here keep asking. Let's say you use estimates that are off by 10%. Tell us what difference it makes. If you are sure that it really does make a difference, explain how you know. The engineers seem to think that you and psikeyhackr are blowing smoke. What do you know that they don't and how did you learn it?