The Heiwa Challenge

[Newtons Bit]

Something that truthers don't understand is the concept of a load path.

 

[GlennB]

Something that truthers don't understand is the concept of a load path.

Could that be where a breeze block lands on my shoulder and breaks a few bones but I'm OK in the long run, but a breeze block landing on my head breaks my neck and leaves me quadriplegic? Even though my torso, hips and legs are supporting me much the same both ways?

I could be well wrong here, but I like analogies.

 

[Justin39640]

Provide evidence. You have a history of deception. Without evidence nobody can believe you.

his whole "water table' test is again (and not surprisingly) not comparable to the construction of the Twin Towers

The purpose of the model test is of course to establish the stiffness of the table leg pipes (the columns of the initiation zone) under heat and to see if suddenly, at, e.g. temperature 500° C, the mass above (luckily most water in this test for children) drops down, at a significant speed and with an enormous kinetic energy, and impacts on the cement floor with an enormous dynamic load.

Or does nothing of that sort happen? Maybe the table legs will just bulge. You will find out (the latter)!

now
the real test is to make a structure that represents the subject at hand (The Twin Towers)
but instead of steel plates covering the entire top
make lattice work horizontally so that the structure cant stand without it (cross members)
and make sure other than a central core you have open floor spaces

id also use square stock not pipes maybe square tube for the legs but def square stock for the lattice since that would be similar to the towers
make sure the cross members are at least half the thickness of the legs
light that up and let it burn for over an hour
make sure the legs are sectional
4 sections (skylobbies)
light the fire on the 2nd tier

you (Hewia) said the LEGS were what you were testing
unfortunately the cross members (floors) in the towers was what the fire caused to sag
the connections from the core to the outer tube were lost along with structural integrity

i read you paper and there's several instances that show you really dont understand (or care to) the construction of the towers and how they actually failed

(if he says its not about the towers then he's posted a challenge that has nothing to do with 911 conspiracies and should be banned for wasting 40 pages to an off topic challenge)

 

[Justin39640]

Provide evidence. You have a history of deception. Without evidence nobody can believe you.

his whole "water table' test is again (and not surprisingly) not comparable to the construction of the Twin Towers

The purpose of the model test is of course to establish the stiffness of the table leg pipes (the columns of the initiation zone) under heat and to see if suddenly, at, e.g. temperature 500° C, the mass above (luckily most water in this test for children) drops down, at a significant speed and with an enormous kinetic energy, and impacts on the cement floor with an enormous dynamic load.

Or does nothing of that sort happen? Maybe the table legs will just bulge. You will find out (the latter)!

now
the real test is to make a structure that represents the subject at hand (The Twin Towers)
but instead of steel plates covering the entire top
make lattice work so that the structure cant stand without it

id also use square stock not pipes maybe square tube for the legs but def square stock for the lattice since that would be similar to the towers
make sure the cross members are at least half the thickness of the legs
light that up and let it burn for over an hour
make sure the legs are sectional
4 sections (skylobbies)
light the fire on the 2nd tier

you (Heiwa) said the LEGS were what you were testing
unfortunately the cross members (floors) in the towers was what the fire caused to sag
the connections from the core to the outer tube were lost along with structural integrity

i read you paper and there's several instances that show you really dont understand (or care to) the construction of the towers and how they actually failed

(if he says its not about the towers then he's posted a challenge that has nothing to do with 911 conspiracies and should be banned for wasting 40 pages to an off topic challenge)

 

[tfk]

Heiwa,

Maybe the strong, intact columns below are capable to arrest the collapse, too? You know, they carry the thin, weak floors that are supposed to arrest the collapse! Maybe they work together. By joining The Heiwa Challenge with a real structure you'll soon find out!

Well, let's see if you can do a little figgerin', Mr. Engineer.

According to Greg Urich (WTC Energetics), the mass of the upper 12 stories of WTC1 is 3.42x10^7 Kg. Which equates to a weight of 1.55x10^7 pounds. There were approximately 82 peripheral columns stubs and 16 core stubs on the 99th floor. Therefore, when each of these columns hits the floor of the 98th floor, they carry a total of approximately 1.6x10^5 lbs per column. The cross sectional area of each column is about 2" x (14" + 13") x 0.6" = 32 in^2. This gives about 710,000 psf. If we use NIST's estimate of a factor of 2 for dynamic load, each column would produce about 1.4 million psf dynamic load. Now, the concrete floors were rated at about 300 psf.

So, you tell me. Do you think that the cement floor will be able to withstand the spearing impact of the strong columns & arrest the upper block?

C'mon, Heiwa. Show me a little engineering judgment...

tom

 

[FineWine]

Heiwa here's a good video for the collection.

http://www.911research.com/wtc/evidence/videos/docs/north_tower_collapse.mpeg

What's the point of "adding" videos? Real engineers have examined all the videos. Your nutty guru still doesn't have a clue.

 

[FineWine]

Heiwa,



Well, let's see if you can do a little figgerin', Mr. Engineer.

According to Greg Urich (WTC Energetics), the mass of the upper 12 stories of WTC1 is 3.42x10^7 Kg. Which equates to a weight of 1.55x10^7 pounds. There were approximately 82 peripheral columns stubs and 16 core stubs on the 99th floor. Therefore, when each of these columns hits the floor of the 98th floor, they carry a total of approximately 1.6x10^5 lbs per column. The cross sectional area of each column is about 2" x (14" + 13") x 0.6" = 32 in^2. This gives about 710,000 psf. If we use NIST's estimate of a factor of 2 for dynamic load, each column would produce about 1.4 million psf dynamic load. Now, the concrete floors were rated at about 300 psf.

So, you tell me. Do you think that the cement floor will be able to withstand the spearing impact of the strong columns & arrest the upper block?

C'mon, Heiwa. Show me a little engineering judgment...

tom

Isn't it frustrating to expose and refute someone who isn't smart enough to notice?

 

[Juniversal]

^..Okay Truthers might be able to understand the dynamics of the collapse with this simple example.

 

[tfk]

Isn't it frustrating to expose and refute someone who isn't smart enough to notice?

.
FW,

These issues are trivial for pretty much anybody. If it were an issue of smarts, even Heiwa would have gotten it a long time ago.

So, THAT's not the problem.

It takes a real streak of perversity & arrogance & self-superiority to smugly cling to ideas that are obviously wrong.

Heiwa (& the twoofers) have a completely different problem. And, as we've all seen, trying to put things into more & more understandable terms is utterly futile. Because that's addressing the wrong problem.

Which proves my point.

tom

PS. It ain't frustrating, because twoofers' silliness ain't my problem. Now, if it were my kid, that'd be a horse of a different color. I'd have to break out a giant can of whoop-ass. ;-)

 

[FineWine]

.
FW,

These issues are trivial for pretty much anybody. If it were an issue of smarts, even Heiwa would have gotten it a long time ago.

So, THAT's not the problem.

It takes a real streak of perversity & arrogance & self-superiority to smugly cling to ideas that are obviously wrong.

Heiwa (& the twoofers) have a completely different problem. And, as we've all seen, trying to put things into more & more understandable terms is utterly futile. Because that's addressing the wrong problem.

Which proves my point.

tom

PS. It ain't frustrating, because twoofers' silliness ain't my problem. Now, if it were my kid, that'd be a horse of a different color. I'd have to break out a giant can of whoop-ass. ;-)

Heiwa jumped the shark in submitting his idiocy to the ASCE journal where more real engineers can comment on it. Now he has to pretend that the contributors to that prestigious journal are all religious fundamentalists. His mindless parrots here will, of course, swallow any nonsense he spouts and keep carrying his water, but he's sealed his own doom and he knows it.

 

[Heiwa]

Heiwa,



Well, let's see if you can do a little figgerin', Mr. Engineer.

According to Greg Urich (WTC Energetics), the mass of the upper 12 stories of WTC1 is 3.42x10^7 Kg. Which equates to a weight of 1.55x10^7 pounds. There were approximately 82 peripheral columns stubs and 16 core stubs on the 99th floor. Therefore, when each of these columns hits the floor of the 98th floor, they carry a total of approximately 1.6x10^5 lbs per column. The cross sectional area of each column is about 2" x (14" + 13") x 0.6" = 32 in^2. This gives about 710,000 psf. If we use NIST's estimate of a factor of 2 for dynamic load, each column would produce about 1.4 million psf dynamic load. Now, the concrete floors were rated at about 300 psf.

So, you tell me. Do you think that the cement floor will be able to withstand the spearing impact of the strong columns & arrest the upper block?

C'mon, Heiwa. Show me a little engineering judgment...

tom

As described in my papers about WTC 1, assuming part C drops on A, the columns of both parts C and A evidently locally damage the floors at contact and the locally damaged floors get entangled into one another and then, mainly due to friction, further destruction is arrested. Note that no connections between columns/floors are damaged - just the weakest elements; the floors (in both parts).

In The Heiwa Challenge you can evidently make the horizontal elements stronger than the vertical elements (Myriad is trying that) and the result will be that the vertical elements in upper part C fail (and the horizontal elements of C just get stacked on top of A or slides off).

Any way you do it, upper part C cannot one-way crush down lower part A by gravity alone.

 

[Heiwa]

his whole "water table' test is again (and not surprisingly) not comparable to the construction of the Twin Towers



now
the real test is to make a structure that represents the subject at hand (The Twin Towers)
but instead of steel plates covering the entire top
make lattice work so that the structure cant stand without it

id also use square stock not pipes maybe square tube for the legs but def square stock for the lattice since that would be similar to the towers
make sure the cross members are at least half the thickness of the legs
light that up and let it burn for over an hour
make sure the legs are sectional
4 sections (skylobbies)
light the fire on the 2nd tier

you (Heiwa) said the LEGS were what you were testing
unfortunately the cross members (floors) in the towers was what the fire caused to sag
the connections from the core to the outer tube were lost along with structural integrity

i read you paper and there's several instances that show you really dont understand (or care to) the construction of the towers and how they actually failed

(if he says its not about the towers then he's posted a challenge that has nothing to do with 911 conspiracies and should be banned for wasting 40 pages to an off topic challenge)

Thanks for studying my papers! Objective of said test was just to observe how the buckling strength of columns under compressive load (at 0.3 yield) is affected by fire/heat and ... the columns do not suddenly buckle/fail/fracture. NIST has suggested that core columns buckled/failed due to heat but it is not possible.

 

[Baylor]

Thanks for studying my papers! Objective of said test was just to observe how the buckling strength of columns under compressive load (at 0.3 yield) is affected by fire/heat and ... the columns do not suddenly buckle/fail/fracture. NIST has suggested that core columns buckled/failed due to heat but it is not possible.

You evidently did not deposit money in my account after I evidently showed you that Part C one-way crushed down Part A!

 

[FineWine]

As described in my papers about WTC 1, assuming part C drops on A, the columns of both parts C and A evidently locally damage the floors at contact and the locally damaged floors get entangled into one another and then, mainly due to friction, further destruction is arrested. Note that no connections between columns/floors are damaged - just the weakest elements; the floors (in both parts).

In The Heiwa Challenge you can evidently make the horizontal elements stronger than the vertical elements (Myriad is trying that) and the result will be that the vertical elements in upper part C fail (and the horizontal elements of C just get stacked on top of A or slides off).

Any way you do it, upper part C cannot one-way crush down lower part A by gravity alone.

So, when the real engineers at the ASCE journal gently point out that you are spouting nonsense, they will be religious fundamentalists, right?

 

[tfk]

As described in my papers about WTC 1...

Who cares. Your papers are crap.

I know it. All the technically competent people here know it. Even the non-technical people know it.

And it is PATENTLY CLEAR to everyone that YOU know it too. You've made it obvious to everyone every single time you refuse to discuss the details.

And fall back on this nonsense:

... assuming part C drops on A, the columns of both parts C and A ... blah, blah, blah...

.

But THIS may set a new standard in stupid, Anders.

Note that no connections between columns/floors are damaged - just the weakest elements; the floors (in both parts).

"... no connections are damaged ..."??

Sure. Whatever you say. Shear strength of A325 high strength bolt (Type 1, 2 or 3) is about 60 ksi.

So a 3/4" dia bolt fails at about 50,000 lbs. So, what do you think is gonna happen when a column weighing about 150,000 pounds or so happens to land on one of the cross trusses??

Here. I'll give you a hint.

See: NIST NCSTAR1-3C, page 108. Sec 3.3.1 "Types of Failure Modes"

And photographs of the results.
1. Weld failures (ibid., Fig 3-31)
2. Bolt tear outs (ibid, Fig 3-32 & 3-34)
3. Vertical fracture of the spandrel plate (ibid., Fig 3-35)
4. Bolt failures, various (ibid., Fig 3-36 thru 3-49)

The phogographic HARD EVIDENCE says that you are full of baloney. Better go back & review some Mechanics of Solids 101.

In The Heiwa Challenge ...

Yeah sure, Anders. Whatever...

Nobody gives a rat's butt about your silly nonsense & delusions. People are here to discuss the real world. And especially what happened to the WTC towers on 9/11.

Theory & hard evidence agree on exactly what happens when the towers begin to collapse.

tom

 

[bill smith]

Who cares. Your papers are crap.

I know it. All the technically competent people here know it. Even the non-technical people know it.

And it is PATENTLY CLEAR to everyone that YOU know it too. You've made it obvious to everyone every single time you refuse to discuss the details.

And fall back on this nonsense:

.

But THIS may set a new standard in stupid, Anders.


"... no connections are damaged ..."??

Sure. Whatever you say. Shear strength of A325 high strength bolt (Type 1, 2 or 3) is about 60 ksi.

So a 3/4" dia bolt fails at about 50,000 lbs. So, what do you think is gonna happen when a column weighing about 150,000 pounds or so happens to land on one of the cross trusses??

Here. I'll give you a hint.

See: NIST NCSTAR1-3C, page 108. Sec 3.3.1 "Types of Failure Modes"

And photographs of the results.
1. Weld failures (ibid., Fig 3-31)
2. Bolt tear outs (ibid, Fig 3-32 & 3-34)
3. Vertical fracture of the spandrel plate (ibid., Fig 3-35)
4. Bolt failures, various (ibid., Fig 3-36 thru 3-49)

The phogographic HARD EVIDENCE says that you are full of baloney. Better go back & review some Mechanics of Solids 101.



Yeah sure, Anders. Whatever...

Nobody gives a rat's butt about your silly nonsense & delusions. People are here to discuss the real world. And especially what happened to the WTC towers on 9/11.

Theory & hard evidence agree on exactly what happens when the towers begin to collapse.

tom

Now that you have gotten that off your chest T. would you like to have a look at the attached videoclip and tell us what you see in terms of whether the upper block stays intact or not ?

http://www.911research.com/wtc/evidence/videos/docs/north_tower_collapse.mpeg

 

[Dave Rogers]

Now that you have gotten that off your chest T. would you like to have a look at the attached videoclip and tell us what you see in terms of whether the upper block stays intact or not ?

http://www.911research.com/wtc/evidence/videos/docs/north_tower_collapse.mpeg

Oh dear, SteveAustin gave bill a new toy to obsess over. Now we'll have to spend a week explaining to him that you can't see whether things are intact when they're surrounded by completely opaque clouds of dust, something normal human beings generally tend to understand without needing it explained.

Dave

 

[bill smith]

Oh dear, SteveAustin gave bill a new toy to obsess over. Now we'll have to spend a week explaining to him that you can't see whether things are intact when they're surrounded by completely opaque clouds of dust, something normal human beings generally tend to understand without needing it explained.

Dave

Is that the full extent of your observations of this clip ?- too much smoke ? That sounds suspiciously lke the old copout of the antenna video having been an optical illusion.

 

[philkensebben]

I cant really be bothered reading through the thread, but will i have to eat some pizza in order to take part in this challenge? If so, from where?

 

[Heiwa]

Yeah sure, Anders. Whatever...

Nobody gives a rat's butt about your silly nonsense & delusions. People are here to discuss the real world. And especially what happened to the WTC towers on 9/11.

Theory & hard evidence agree on exactly what happens when the towers begin to collapse.

tom

Pls tom, this is The Heiwa Challenge thread, see post #1. You are supposed to design and show a structure that self-destructs in the real world. Historical structures/records do not qualify.