Grizzly Bear
このマスクに&#
- Joined
- May 30, 2008
- Messages
- 7,963
Kind of the same concept as why we use say this... as opposed to this shape for beams. Or perhaps this as opposed to a gigantic solid volume.
The Heiwa Challenge
- Thread starter Heiwa
- Start date
- Status
Kind of the same concept as why we use say this... as opposed to this shape for beams. Or perhaps this as opposed to a gigantic solid volume.
(bolding and emphasis mine)
Try reading the whole report next time, before you attempt to construct an argument that they ignored something.
It's not obvious at all. All the experts that reviewed it, and the engineering community in general, appear to believe that the collapse should have progressed as it did. I think that was the point of the investigation.
You are not really addressing any iof the ssues with your movies...but you specifically dont address the angle of impact, momemtum, connection effects and the scale.
The perimeter columns were only 14in wide, so even a small rotation of the top of the building would result in columns hitting floor beams rather than columns below. There are plenty of WTC1 videos that show significant rotations of the mast. So what is your argument when the top of the builing columns impact onto the bar joist trusses.??
The other thing that is worth noting is that once the collapse got going the perimeter columns did not really contribute to resisting the collapse...they got blown outwards and essentially unzipped.
Also the scale is deceptive. Your image of the belt truss implies it was almost solid..its over 99% air.
I am not sure how all this fits into you pizza box model, but I look foward to hearing. And ae911truth should be clear that what they really want is a new government investigation they will explain the collapses with pizza boxes.
Reminder - this is The Heiwa Challenge thread! You are supposed to design a structure that self-destructs, when you drop part C on part A.
It doesn't work, if part C structure is one pizza box and part A structure is nine pizza boxes glued together. Part C structure just bounces on part A structure.
You must design a structure that is much more fragile and heavier than pizza boxes and then remove the top part C and drop it on lower part A, so that part A is one-way crushed down by part C to have a chance in The Heiwa Challenge!
All the experts that have tried, and the engineering community in general, appear to have failed The Heiwa Challenge so far!
But that's the purpose of The Heiwa Challenge!
Have you removed your fraudulent and illegal use of the phrase "European Agency..." and the EU emblem from your website yet?
Why is your bogus "challenge" in the 9/11 conspiracies forum? It has nothing to do with the events of 9/11/01. The twin towers fell for the reasons explained by NIST, as proved by computer simulations conducted by teams of researchers at Purdue and Berkeley. The Berkeley team was headed by a severe critic of NIST, Professor Astaneh, yet when he simulated the towers exactly as they were built, they collapsed exactly as they did in real life. You made a huge mistake by inviting real engineers at the ASCE journal to rip apart your nonsense. When they are done with you, you will be bleating about religious fundamentalists, your mindless parrots will continue to parade their stupidity, and those of us who haven't already done so will toss you into the dumpster of history.
Of course not as I, good European, use it quite legally to brighten up my web site. No risk to confuse Heiwa Co with EMSA, etc. Heiwa Co is furthermore much older than EMSA.
http://flagspot.net/flags/eu_law.html#pro, and so on.
Now, have a go at The Heiwa Challenge. Or does your structural design not self-destruct?
Let's first ASCE/JEM publish my little article, which is about Bazant's theory, i.e. very much part of the OTC.
And has Purdue produced a structure that self-destructs as per The Heiwa Challenge? Pls, provide a link to this magic structure!
The Heiwa Challenge is bogus. It does not relate in any way to the actual collapses of the twin towers. If you had an ounce of shame, you'd be embarrassed to pontificate about a subject you can't understand, and you'd ask yourself why you are unfamiliar with computer simulations conducted by teams of serious researchers.
Not legally at all. By using the emblem together with the title "European Agency for..." you are breaking the law. You are masquerading as something you are not, i.e. an EU agency. You are lying. Again.
MIKILLINI
Incromulent Logic
- Joined
- May 3, 2007
- Messages
- 2,979
Pssst! Hey Bill! The challenge is flawed, so it is wrong.
bill smith
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2009
- Messages
- 8,408
Why so bitter Glenn. Cheer up.
How cheerful will you be when the buffoon you blindly worship is demolished--again--by the real engineers at the ASCE journal?
Wanna bet that he gets demolished? Why not? Maybe they're all religious fundamentalists, huh, Bill?
Justin39640
Illuminator
- Joined
- May 22, 2009
- Messages
- 4,202
whats the ETA on that you think?
bill smith
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2009
- Messages
- 8,408
His aticle has already been examined by some of those engineers you speak of and judged worthy of publication in their journal. That in itself is a kind of peer review. The only questions are whether they will go ahead with publication and when.
.
Let's see...
IF it really does get published... Heiwa, when they told you that they were going to publish your comments, had you sent them your discussion or just an abstract of your discussion?
If they see the whole offering, and thru some massive lapse in judgment still decide to publish it, I can envision the following sequence of events...
They'll notify Bazant that he's got a comment coming & send him a preprint.
It'll probably take a couple of days before Bazant gets around to reading it.
About 4 sentences into it, a "WTF?" expression will gradually take over his face.
It'll take a half hour or so to actually read the comments, trying all along to figure out what Anders is talking about...
Then an hour or so with several re-readings ...
A couple of calendar checks to make sure it isn't April 1st ...
Perhaps a call or two to ASCE to see if someone is pulling his leg...
And then comes a fork in the road for Prof. Bazant...
He might just decide that, if he dignifies this with a thought out response, he'll be answering such unmitigated crap for years. In this case, I'd predict a terse reply along the lines of "Children, STOP...!" Plus a nasty-gram to the editors of the ASCE/JEM.
If he decides to reply, then it's actually going to take him a bit of time. Because Bazant will have to do all of Anders' work for him. Because, of course, there is NO real engineering in anything that we've seen from him thus far.
Of course, he might simply pass it around to a class of freshman engineering students and have them reply. As a bonus, it would serve very well as a cautionary tale of what can happen if they don't pay attention in class.
tom
Heiwa's response is stupid, and he appears to use it whenever he gets stuck. He loves having his name in bold, doesn't he?
Anyway here is an example of how total collapse can be generated by less than 1/20th of the total weight of a structure:
1. Get 20 Pizza boxes and stack on top of each other.
2. Tape together the sides with a few vertical lines of scotch tape.
3. cut each side vertically into 4, starting at each corner. Add vertical tape to stick the columns together
4. cut out all horizontal cardboard (the floors), and then replace them sticking them back in position with tiny amounts of blu-tak, that is only just able to support the self weight of 1 piece of cardboard.
5. drop the top horizontal piece.
So what happens.
1. the top piece falls and hits the next piece.
2. and because the blu-tak is only strong enough to support one piece of cardboard the next piece falls...
3 and so on, until all the horizontals have fallen
4. at some point during the collapse the outside of the box falls down. The columns will become unstable because they have lost the lateral restraint of the floor thro the blu-tack. The columns will not be able to support their own weight as a single skin of cardboard 20 pizza-boxes tall. The columns will tend to fall outwards because the air is being pushed out of the boxes by the collapse.
Interestingly, the floors will collapse at essentially free-fall speed as they pancake, because the blue-tak offers no real resistance and is massively overloaded, even after the first impact (200% of design load plus impact force to bring it to about 300% of design). The columns will be slower to fall, and will tend to fall radially out from the middle.
Now I am sure Heiwa will say that I am cheating, but not according to "Heiwa's Challenge" . And, of course, this type of failure works even better in steel, although Heiwa did suggest Pizza boxes. The "heiwa challenge" was to cause collapse by using a tiny proportion of the total mass, which this does quite nicely.
Don't ya just love pizza!! If by some miracle Heiwa concedes, then pls donate my winnings to a charity that supports the victims of the Iraq war; both the servicemen and the civilians
Heiwa's response is stupid, and he appears to use it whenever he gets stuck. He loves having his name in bold, doesn't he?
Anyway here is an example of how total collapse can be generated by less than 1/20th of the total weight of a structure:
1. Get 20 Pizza boxes and stack on top of each other.
2. Tape together the sides with a few vertical lines of scotch tape.
3. cut each side vertically into 4, starting at each corner. Add vertical tape to stick the columns together
4. cut out all horizontal cardboard (the floors), and then replace them sticking them back in position with tiny amounts of blu-tak, that is only just able to support the self weight of 1 piece of cardboard.
5. drop the top horizontal piece.
So what happens.
1. the top piece falls and hits the next piece.
2. and because the blu-tak is only strong enough to support one piece of cardboard the next piece falls...
3 and so on, until all the horizontals have fallen
4. at some point during the collapse the outside of the box falls down. The columns will become unstable because they have lost the lateral restraint of the floor thro the blu-tack. The columns will not be able to support their own weight as a single skin of cardboard 20 pizza-boxes tall. The columns will tend to fall outwards because the air is being pushed out of the boxes by the collapse.
Interestingly, the floors will collapse at essentially free-fall speed as they pancake, because the blue-tak offers no real resistance and is massively overloaded, even after the first impact (200% of design load plus impact force to bring it to about 300% of design). The columns will be slower to fall, and will tend to fall radially out from the middle.
Now I am sure Heiwa will say that I am cheating, but not according to "Heiwa's Challenge" . And, of course, this type of failure works even better in steel, although Heiwa did suggest Pizza boxes. The "heiwa challenge" was to cause collapse by using a tiny proportion of the total mass, which this does quite nicely.
Don't ya just love pizza!! If by some miracle Heiwa concedes, then pls donate my winnings to a charity that supports the victims of the Iraq war; both the servicemen and the civilians
Very nice! Now get your pizza boxes and blu-tak and make a real demonstration!
So you agree in principle that this should work. Can you just confirm that you will you will pay out your money to anyone who makes this... or something similar work.
Excellent this is more of a "Heiwa Concedes" than I would expect.
It's easy 20 plates stuck to sticks would work just as easy... but I bet you would argue that I had some invisible thermite charges.
Not really. I don't even know what blu-tak is! So, please, make a real blu-tak + pizza boxes structure, number the elements n and connections m and demonstrate. For conditions, see post #1. Do not forget the lateral pre-test.
You may be a winner!
- Status