• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Szamboti's Missing Jolt paper

ozeco41 said:
Process One >> is the accumulation of several partial failure mechanisms in the impact zone which built up to a rapid cascade failure of the impact zone. The "initial collapse". It became too weak to support the "Top Block" of storeys which started to fall.

Process Two >> The "Top Block" fell essentially by wedging itself inside the outer tube of columns of the lower "stub" tower. By doing so the top block near totally bypassed the column strength of the outer tube (and more or less bypassed the core columns but the explanation is a bit more complex).
Click to expand...

Can you explain in more detail how the unicorns managed to bypass the core columns?
 
bardamu said:
More to the point, the core columns were connected to each other by large I-beams.
Click to expand...

So what?

True or not, the core was the last part of the tower to fall. The floors and exterior columns were on the ground while parts of the cores were stills standing.
 
Tony Szamboti said:
Floors 99 through 102 had no damage and collapsed before any of the impact damaged areas did. If they weren't damaged by impact or heat what caused them to collapse without a jolt?
Click to expand...


How long were the beams, Tony?

If floor 98 had X% damaged beams, what percent of the beams on floor 99 had to be damaged?

What percent of the beams on floor 100 had to be damaged?

What percent of the cross trusses on each floor had to be damaged?

This is old news, Tony. You've been told 50 times.

Only willful, intentional ignorance explains this lame question.

Tom
 
bardamu said:
Can you explain in more detail how the unicorns managed to bypass the core columns?
Click to expand...

Do you suppose falling column ends impacted lower column ends square-on? What with the recorded tilt and all?

If not, what did they hit?

Picture this --

Your buddy is lying on his back, legs pointing up. You are up there balanced on his feet, circus-style. You slip sideways and fall. Your (now) high-energy feet connect with his belly and nads. And vice versa. That's gotta hurt, right? Serious pain ensues.

I hope this has clarified the technical aspects for you.
 
GlennB said:
Do you suppose falling column ends impacted lower column ends square-on? What with the recorded tilt and all?

If not, what did they hit?

Picture this --

Your buddy is lying on his back, legs pointing up. You are up there balanced on his feet, circus-style. You slip sideways and fall. Your (now) high-energy feet connect with his belly and nads. And vice versa. That's gotta hurt, right? Serious pain ensues.

I hope this has clarified the technical aspects for you.
Click to expand...


Thank you GlennB. This also explains the "Twin Jolts Model."
 
ozeco41 said:
I am an engineer but you don't need a lot of engineering to understand where Tony is either misunderstanding the mechanisms himself OR is leading a lot of people by the nose.

There is no jolt because the collapse mechanisms which actually occurred would not cause a jolt. He has you chasing a fantasy.
Click to expand...


Oz,

I disagree. By the slightest margin.

Of course, there were LOTS of jolts.

Exactly like when a grasshopper hits the windshield of your car. Actually, the analogy ain't half bad, if you increase it to a small swarm of grasshoppers.

I dare Tony to measure the jolt applied to the car, using a standard video camera from a distance of about 100 yards...

Tom
 
tfk said:
Oz,

I disagree. By the slightest margin.

Of course, there were LOTS of jolts.

Exactly like when a grasshopper hits the windshield of your car. Actually, the analogy ain't half bad, if you increase it to a small swarm of grasshoppers.

I dare Tony to measure the jolt applied to the car, using a standard video camera from a distance of about 100 yards...

Tom
Click to expand...
How fast is the car going? how big a grasshopper?
I calculate it (through my magic eye) as .0000315798 in/sec2, assuming a Kia Spectra at 60 mph and a New Mexico grasshopper which has been feeding on wild mustard. Prove me wrong
I referred to it a similar scenario earlier, in a different post, involving a deer and a greyhound bus...
 
Last edited:
GlennB said:
Do you suppose falling column ends impacted lower column ends square-on? What with the recorded tilt and all?

If not, what did they hit?
Click to expand...

Beams in the upper core hit beams in the lower core. Unavoidable, except with CD or unicorns.


GlennB said:
Picture this --

Your buddy is lying on his back, legs pointing up. You are up there balanced on his feet, circus-style. You slip sideways and fall. Your (now) high-energy feet connect with his belly and nads. And vice versa. That's gotta hurt, right? Serious pain ensues.

I hope this has clarified the technical aspects for you.
Click to expand...

That sounds a bit like Heiwa's model, where the top section gets stuck on the bottom section and collapse is arrested. Glad to see you learned something from him while he was here.
 
bardamu said:
That sounds a bit like Heiwa's model, where the top section gets stuck on the bottom section and collapse is arrested. Glad to see you learned something from him while he was here.
Click to expand...
Your joke A and sarcasm B fail to impress audience C.
 
bardamu said:
Beams in the upper core hit beams in the lower core. Unavoidable, except with CD or unicorns.
.
Click to expand...
So what? Would you expect the connections to the columns to survive? If so, why don't you impress us with some calculations? (I won't hold my breath)
 
bardamu said:
Beams in the upper core hit beams in the lower core. Unavoidable, except with CD or unicorns.
Click to expand...

Beams (I assume you mean floor trusses) are not columns. The trusses have an insignificant amount of vertical carrying capacity compared to columns. The maximum is somewhere near 300psf. That's about 3 floors stacked on top of each other. They'll collapse at that point leaving the columns unsupported. The unsupported columns will collapse on their own.

That sounds a bit like Heiwa's model, where the top section gets stuck on the bottom section and collapse is arrested. Glad to see you learned something from him while he was here.
Click to expand...

Heiwa's model relied on friction to arrest. He performed no analysis to arrive at that conclusion. It was one (of many) of his irreducible delusions.
 
Newtons Bit said:
Beams (I assume you mean floor trusses) are not columns. The trusses have an insignificant amount of vertical carrying capacity compared to columns. The maximum is somewhere near 300psf. That's about 3 floors stacked on top of each other. They'll collapse at that point leaving the columns unsupported. The unsupported columns will collapse on their own.

.
Click to expand...

I believe he's referring to the horizontal bracing in the core. At any rate it's still insignificant.
 
bardamu said:
Beams in the upper core hit beams in the lower core. Unavoidable, except with CD or unicorns.




That sounds a bit like Heiwa's model, where the top section gets stuck on the bottom section and collapse is arrested. Glad to see you learned something from him while he was here.
Click to expand...

rothflmaobssatt (rolling on the floor laughing my ass off but strangely still able to type)
 
tfk said:
Oz,

I disagree. By the slightest margin.

Of course, there were LOTS of jolts.

Exactly like when a grasshopper hits the windshield of your car. Actually, the analogy ain't half bad, if you increase it to a small swarm of grasshoppers.

I dare Tony to measure the jolt applied to the car, using a standard video camera from a distance of about 100 yards...

Tom
Click to expand...

Spot on!!!

Which is why I put the qualifiers later in my post:
"There was nothing to cause a (noticable/measurable/large sized) jolt. That is why there was no big jolt."

Tony starts from the (apparent) presumption of demolition and therefore has to ignore what actually happened so he can point out that his fantasy "jolt" is missing.

As for the core on core impact - despite all the cross braces etc it was still one wire basket falling on a similar wire basket - more space that solid. The most probable contacts would be horizontal beams on horizontal beams which would indirectly collapse the columns by pulling them sideways. Too complicated to put in simple words BUT (the fact that matters) no way near the full column strength of the columns would be engaged.

Eric
 
GlennB said:
Do you suppose falling column ends impacted lower column ends square-on? What with the recorded tilt and all?

If not, what did they hit?

Picture this --

Your buddy is lying on his back, legs pointing up. You are up there balanced on his feet, circus-style. You slip sideways and fall. Your (now) high-energy feet connect with his belly and nads. And vice versa. That's gotta hurt, right? Serious pain ensues.

I hope this has clarified the technical aspects for you.
Click to expand...
A good metaphor GlennB.

If I was on top and fell I can imagine which part of my anatomy the foot would contact.


Very painfull. :eek::boggled:
 
The easiest way to put it is that the loads weren't aligned in the vertical. That misalignment introduces off-axis loading, rotation, torque, and a myriad of other load types which for all intents and purposes means the strength of the column is no longer considered what it was in as-built condition. This doesn't even consider an impact load yet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom