Proposed Design for Progressive Collapse Demonstration

[stateofgrace]

I have Heiwa on ignore but is he now comparing the towers to sugar lumps, plates and elephants?

Why I am not surprised?

 

[PB2007]

deleted

 

[apathoid]

I have Heiwa on ignore but is he now comparing the towers to sugar lumps, plates and elephants?

Why I am not surprised?

That model isn't perfect but its a fair bit better than sponges and lemons!
Anyways, here is my entry.

I did have to use a pinch of nano-thermite to melt the CD cases tho after they fell.

 

[Heiwa]

Scale, Heiwa, scale. An engineer like you should understand this.

Chose any scale/size and demonstrate a one-way crush down progressive collapse of a structure A by a part C of it.

Try full scale!

If structure is a house of cards, you should first do the lateral test before dropping anything on it.

 

[apathoid]

Chose any scale/size and demonstrate a one-way crush down progressive collapse of a structure A by a part C of it.

Try full scale!

If structure is a house of cards, you should first do the lateral test before dropping anything on it.

Why does it matter if it's a house of cards? What lateral test? You said its impossible for C to destroy A. I showed you a primitive structure in which this theory doesn't hold. A house of cards is alot more analagous to the WTC than your lemons or sponges.

 

[Heiwa]

Why does it matter if it's a house of cards? What lateral test? You said its impossible for C to destroy A. I showed you a primitive structure in which this theory doesn't hold. A house of cards is alot more analagous to the WTC than your lemons or sponges.

lol.

 

[apathoid]

lol.

Does this mean I won't get the million dollars?

 

[tsig]

Does this mean I won't get the million dollars?

Whatever gratification you get from this thread is all you're gonna get.

 

[Bluesky]

Plans for Progressive Collapse Demonstration
QUOTE]

Yes Myriad I am sure this will fail. It is obvious isn't it? This is the 3rd design that I have seen that beats the Heiwa challenge. GlennB also did one.

Mine pancaked nicely, or should I say it pizzad nicely. I am sure there are many more schemes that would fail. There are so many solutions to Heiwas challenge.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.p...28#post4813928

And of course it was stable before it collapsed. Why would it not be stable?
Heiwa concedes defeat?

 

[Juniversal]

QUOTE]

Yes Myriad I am sure this will fail. It is obvious isn't it? This is the 3rd design that I have seen that beats the Heiwa challenge. GlennB also did one.

Mine pancaked nicely, or should I say it pizzad nicely. I am sure there are many more schemes that would fail. There are so many solutions to Heiwas challenge.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.p...28#post4813928

And of course it was stable before it collapsed. Why would it not be stable?
Heiwa concedes defeat?

Link is broken Bluesky.

 

[Heiwa]

Does this mean I won't get the million dollars?

mlol

 

[Klimax]

Link is broken Bluesky.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=4813928

 

[dropzone]

His experiment is intended to win a $1,000,000 challenge offered by one of the CTists. It doesn't have to prove anything other than that a progressive collapse triggered by an initial drop of part of the structure is possible.

Oh. I thought the Three Stooges demonstrated it when Curly climbed into the top bunk.

 

[Dog Town]

Oh. I thought the Three Stooges demonstrated it when Curly climbed into the top bunk.

CORRECT:
Tell him...what he's won!

 

[Bluesky]

That model isn't perfect but its a fair bit better than sponges and lemons!
Anyways, here is my entry.

I did have to use a pinch of nano-thermite to melt the CD cases tho after they fell.

This is a really stupid competition.!!
I thought I had won,
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=4813928

Then GlennB developed a scheme based on mine. Then I read a scheme from Myriad, and then I found yours and another on Youtube. Nice job.!

At this rate if we split the 1,00,000$ we will be lucky if we get 20$ each!

 

[Bluesky]

Here is another 'structure' that anybody can build. You need 22 coffe cup plates and plenty of sugar lumps.

< snip for stupidity >

Ok I guess this is the next stupid challenge from Heiwa ... Make a structure out of coffee cups, paper plates and sugar lumps, and make it fall down when 1/10th of the mass is dropped or removed.

Oh this is difficult ....think, think, think... ok I got one.!

Put cubes in each cup.. stack cups on paper plates to form a two legged pyramid. Keep pulling apart the legs until the pyramid is just about standing.... remove the top cup and leg, and it all falls down.!!

I think this is the negative of Heiwas Challenge and shows that both the challenge and its inverse are incorrect. there must be a word for this?

 

[Heiwa]

Ok I guess this is the next stupid challenge from Heiwa ... Make a structure out of coffee cups, paper plates and sugar lumps, and make it fall down when 1/10th of the mass is dropped or removed.

Oh this is difficult ....think, think, think... ok I got one.!

Put cubes in each cup.. stack cups on paper plates to form a two legged pyramid. Keep pulling apart the legs until the pyramid is just about standing.... remove the top cup and leg, and it all falls down.!!

I think this is the negative of Heiwas Challenge and shows that both the challenge and its inverse are incorrect. there must be a word for this?

You have not understood. You are not supposed to remove or pull apart the elements of the lower part A structure! You are supposed to drop a part C of similar structure on A. Try again!

 

[GlennB]

I think this is the negative of Heiwas Challenge and shows that both the challenge and its inverse are incorrect. there must be a word for this?

Heiwaesque ?

"The argument he put forward was Heiwaesque in its stupidity" or
"That's just plain Heiwaesque"

 

[tuc0]

Here's a page from an old disinfo manual I found in the attic. Why wouldn't this work?

Sorry about the dried baby blood, but sometimes I just forget myself. You know how it is.

 

[Heiwa]

Here's a page from an old disinfo manual I found in the attic. Why wouldn't this work?

[qimg]http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/5896/bs23x.jpg[/qimg]

You have to test!

So a sub-assembly is 4 thin, 2 mm, glass panes, a, b, c, d, glued together unit. This unit has four elements and four glued connections. Then you put 8 units on top of each other. The units are not aligned, i.e. contacts between units are two 4 mm² points between elements a_upper/b_lower and c_lower/d_upper.
Are you gluing those points, too?

It means that two complete glass panes/elements of any unit are outside two glass panes/elements of adjacent units, e.g. b and c or d and a.

Now you drop one unit C on eight units A! OK! Objective is to ensure that the 8 units A are one-way crushed down by a single unit C.

It would appear that C will only contact part A in the two 4 mm² points at impact.

One result may be that two elements of C, e.g. a and d are split into two parts and two elements of C, b and c, are not affected but drops outside A below. I doubt very much that a one-way crush down of A follows.

But have a try!