Merged Applicability of Bazant's model to the real world

[DGM]

Am sure there's possibly up to a storey of leading debris, however this is the relevant ejecta stream...
[qimg]http://femr2.ucoz.com/_ph/6/8480632.png[/qimg]
[qimg]http://femr2.ucoz.com/_ph/6/2/91907102.gif[/qimg]
[qimg]http://femr2.ucoz.com/_ph/6/2/246506162.gif[/qimg] [qimg]http://femr2.ucoz.com/_ph/6/2/454796303.gif[/qimg]

Focus on point A on the West side of the tower. (Not falling debris as beachnut seems to be getting confused about)

As I've said a few times above, I'm gathering a few resources together to clarify the visual evidence, so if these don't clarify things for you please indicate why and I'll address such, probably via annotations.

I find it extremely difficult to follow your videos (maybe it's just me).

What I do remember is the survivors in the core stair way describing the sound coming from above, then blasts of air, then darkness followed by the sound. That to me sounds like the pressure wave was carrying a significant amount of debris.

My question was why wouldn't this be expected?

 

[rwguinn]

I find it extremely difficult to follow your videos (maybe it's just me).

What I do remember is the survivors in the core stair way describing the sound coming from above, then blasts of air, then darkness followed by the sound. That to me sounds like the pressure wave was carrying a significant amount of debris.

My question was why wouldn't this be expected?

If he'd just label some of the **** he throws out, it might be possible to follow his argument.
Instead, we get a 3rd-generation video, and "look at this! See! I'm right!"
2 posts later.

 

[Major_Tom]

In Femr's images you can see a huge section of perimeter in freefall on the west. That is the west wall of your "upper block". If you want to know the "upper block" could slide into a "lower block", note that the west and north walls fell outward, quickly broke free from the structure and went into free-fall.

An 11 story section the upper north wall appears later.

A 6 story section of the upper NE corner is seen falling..Every one of these large sheets is stripped of flooring and unbuckled.

Your "upper block" has no walls left.

 

[Major_Tom]

DGM, I gave a list of 3 features which call the "great piston" theory into question on the OOS thread, reproduced here:

RE-EXAMINING OVER-PRESSURIZATION BELOW THE COLLAPSE FRONTS.


Bazant's "piston":

[qimg]http://femr2.ucoz.com/_ph/6/358327315.png[/qimg]

From BLGB:

[qimg]http://femr2.ucoz.com/_ph/6/837298858.png[/qimg]


But from our new knowledge of the core remnant, we know there was a gaping hole up the center of the building, which is obvious by looking at particle and dust movement:

[qimg]http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911/images/photoalbum/8/911_HighQualityPhotos4499.jpg[/qimg]

[qimg]http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911/images/photoalbum/8/911_HighQualityPhotos1443.jpg[/qimg]


We no longer have a giant "piston" with a 207x207 ft flat head creating global over-pressures through the lower structure. In fact, if we look carefully at the visible collapse fronts of WTC1 and 2, we can put limits on any theorized over-pressure building up within the floor spaces just under the collapse fronts by observing window and jet behavior on those floors at any moment.


Actual OOS propagation down the WTC2 east and south walls:

http://www.youtube.com/user/Xenomorph911WTC?&MMN_position=314:314#p/u/64/RfI8GHtjJB8


Actual OOS propagation down the WTC1 NW corner and west face:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1iT7mmmc-YY&feature=channel_page


1st vital clue towards understanding true pressure build-up: Uneven collapse fronts.

WTC1 south and north collapse fronts are separated by over 10 floors. WTC2 east and west collapse fronts are noticably separated by at least 5 floors.

For WTC1, the light grey floor by floor ejections appear as vertical rows of destruction, happening down the south side of the west face while the north side grey rows of ejections follow over 10 floors behind.

Both WTC1 and 2 have collapse fronts on different sides of the building separated by a number of floors. The floor by floor light grey ejections happen down vertical corridors, not across open floor spaces.

There is no way to explain the different elevations of different collapse fronts as pressurization of open floor space to the point of blowing out the windows in rows.



2nd vital clue towards understanding true pressure build-up: Regulated velocity of OOS propagation rate. A terminal velocity is reached early in the ROOSD front and maintained at a relatively constant rate in all observable cases.


3rd vital clue towards understanding true pressure build-up: Dust ejection speed, also regulated. If ROOSD was accelerating as it propagated downward, we would expect the rows of light grey dust at the collapse front to be ejected at increasingly faster rates. This is not observed. Instead, we witness a set speed of dust ejections that does not noticably increase at lower elevations.

We would also expect an increasing ejection rate of the individual isolated ejections, or "farts", witnessed below the collapse front as the front moved downward.

Ejection rates seem independent of elevation. This is a very important clue. According to BLGB, ejection rates should increase as the collapse front gets faster lower in the building. Instead, we see a terminal velocity of propagation and ejections of a pretty consistent size all the way down the buildings.

WInd is no surprise. We would like to use all available resources to determine the actual extent and timing of over-pressurization leading the debris.

The "great piston" idea is just another cartoon.

A 4th to include would be witness accounts, with the timing and magnitude of such overpressures being the main focus.

But if you are suggesting that such advancing over-pressures can blow rows of windows out of the south side of a particular OOS floor space while leaving windows on the west and north sides of the same open space largely unbroken....that seems silly.

The uneven collapse fronts show the leading rows of light grey ejections advancing down vertical corridors are debris fronts, not some open space over-pressurization that chooses to break windows only down specific vertical corridors.

 

[tfk]

ROFL. You have definitely inherited the tfk certified penchant for the pedantic post.

Two things tfk couldn't believe could possibly be factual, one of them being perimeter remaining standing after crush front has passed by. He was wrong. Video evidence provided.

Wrong.

A wall that has had all of its connections to the floor trusses severed, and it tilting outward, away from the building is NOT "still standing".

It is "falling".

It's been evident for a long, long time that you've got no career opportunities as an engineer or architect.

Thanks for the reminder.
___

Here is the gif that started this whole waste of time:

I asked Major_Tom a question.

Since Bazant wrote his papers some researchers have actually mapped real WTC1 collapse progression rates for the first time.

http://femr2.ucoz.com/_ph/6/2/730189522.jpg

Please provide your arguments / evidence that this is collapse progression & not pressure wave progression.

Please explain why, if this is collapse progression, there appears to be an un-collapsed corner of the building (vertical light streak = chamfered corner of the building) that remains standing for many floors after collapse wave has passed by.

tk

Explain, please, how the massive wall tilting in this video:

explains this wall, that is standing stationary & vertical, in this video:

Your 2 day charade is just another typical "femr run-around". With the end result being that the whole unpleasant, totally screwed conversation is off topic, unrelated, waste of time.

Congrats.

For t'other one, clarification of ejecta streams denoting crush front position...

Yet again, I have pointed you to a related answer by MT and indicated I'll be gathering some AV resource for t'other question soon.

"… pointed to a related answer by MT…"
"… will be gathering some AV resources …"

IOW, I'll waste two MORE days of people's time, rather than write down a couple of sentences...

Tell ya what. The next time I ask Major_Tom a question, stay the hell out of it.

It'll save everyone a passel of time & annoyance.

Have a nice day…

 

[DGM]

DGM, I gave a list of 3 features which call the "great piston" theory into question on the OOS thread, reproduced here:



WInd is no surprise. We would like to use all available resources to determine the actual extent and timing of over-pressurization leading the debris.

The "great piston" idea is just another cartoon.

A 4th to include would be witness accounts, with the timing and magnitude of such overpressures being the main focus.

So the "wind" they described was not the effect of over-pressure?

This you have to explain.

 

[tfk]

In Femr's images you can see a huge section of perimeter in freefall on the west. That is the west wall of your "upper block". If you want to know the "upper block" could slide into a "lower block", note that the west and north walls fell outward, quickly broke free from the structure and went into free-fall.

An 11 story section the upper north wall appears later.

A 6 story section of the upper NE corner is seen falling..Every one of these large sheets is stripped of flooring and unbuckled.

Your "upper block" has no walls left.

I categorically disagree.

They are clearly, they can ONLY be, the west wall of the LOWER block.

Your evidence that they are from the upper block, please.

Then I'll give my evidence that they are from the lower block.

 

[beachnut]

...
The "great piston" idea is just another cartoon.

No, your statement is another example you can't understand simple models. The delusion of an inside job must be a big block to rational thinking. Your nonsense, fantasy, Bazant's work, applies to reality. When will you publish this failed revelation based on your inside job delusions? 10 years of failure are a lock for 911 truth.


Your say cartoon, but you have the delusion of an inside job, not rational based on evidence.

That was when the wind started, even before the noise. “No one realizes about the wind,” says Komorowski.


The building was pancaking down from the top and, in the process, blasting air down the stairwell. The wind lifted Komorowski off his feet. “I was taking a staircase at a time,” he says, “It was a combination of me running and getting blown down.” Lim says Komorowski flew over him. Eight seconds later—that’s how long it took the building to come down—Komorowski landed three floors lower, in standing position, buried to his knees in pulverized Sheetrock and cement.

Like your comprehension of models, goes your comprehension of 911; failed.

 

[Major_Tom]

If he'd just label some of the **** he throws out, it might be possible to follow his argument.
Instead, we get a 3rd-generation video, and "look at this! See! I'm right!"
2 posts later.

Researchers on the 9/11 forum, including Dr Greening and D Bensoh, have figured this out a few years back.

You are being shown now, in 2011, with pretty explicit visual evidence and you still can't see it.

This conversation is pretty boring for some of us. The extended discourse continues only because of the massive levels of denial by a few JREF debunkers.

 

[tfk]

DGM, I gave a list of 3 features which call the "great piston" theory into question on the OOS thread, reproduced here:



WInd is no surprise. We would like to use all available resources to determine the actual extent and timing of over-pressurization leading the debris.

The "great piston" idea is just another cartoon.

A 4th to include would be witness accounts, with the timing and magnitude of such overpressures being the main focus.

But if you are suggesting that such advancing over-pressures can blow rows of windows out of the south side of a particular OOS floor space while leaving windows on the west and north sides of the same open space largely unbroken....that seems silly.

The uneven collapse fronts show the leading rows of light grey ejections advancing down vertical corridors are debris fronts, not some open space over-pressurization that chooses to break windows only down specific vertical corridors.

Great theory.

Now please explain the fact that, when WTC 2 collapsed, firemen in WTC1 stairwells were knocked to the ground by the force of the blast that traveled ALL the way down WTC2, thru a bunch of underground service tunnels, and up WTC1.

Explain why there is incontrovertible evidence of WTC1 fire & smoke being pushed out of the upper floors of WTC1 by sudden overpressures when WTC2 collapsed.

Great theory, tho...

 

[Major_Tom]

I categorically disagree.

They are clearly, they can ONLY be, the west wall of the LOWER block.

Your evidence that they are from the upper block, please.

Then I'll give my evidence that they are from the lower block.

This is so, so funny. Years behind.

 

[tfk]

This is so, so funny. Years behind.

IOW, you got nothing?

 

[ozeco41]

..
Let me know if you want more.

Yeah, one last thing.

What do you think really happened on 9/11.

Big picture.

OK - 'Big Picture' up to the start of collapse.

• Hijackers flew aircraft into the WTC Twin Towers;
• The impact did a fair bit of damage, started some fires and disabled the in-building fire services;
• Further damage started to accumulate as a result of the unfought fires;
• There was progressive load shedding and load redistribution as this damage accumulated;
• It developed into a runaway cascade process;
• To the point where the damaged impact and fire zone could no longer support the 'top block'
• Which started to fall
• From that point 'global collapse was inevitable'.

Call this 'collapse initiation' and, if there was to be any 'human assistance' it had to be in this stage whether or not it was in the 'global collapse' stage. There has never been a case/hypothesis put forward for 'human assistance' which even starts to look supportable whether we call it demolition, MIHOP or any other jargon. I cannot myself construct a viable pro demolition argument playing 'devil's advocate'.

Therefore I regard explosive demolition as 'impossible' and that is framed as an engineering forensic analysis conclusion. We are not constrained to 'scientific method' and I don't see the need to observe the constraints on claiming 'impossible' that the scientific method would impose.

The global collapse stage then followed. Key points of my description being:

• What happened in the first seconds I am unclear BUT
• It established a situation where most of the falling top block fell inside the outer perimeter columns of the lower tower;
• Because it was the same size I am not clear whether the perimeter of the top block fell inside or outside the perimeter of the lower tower. My thoughts are that probably some faces of the top block fell inside some faces of the top block fell outside. Which did what does not affect my explanation as long as I allow for both. I think other researchers - femr2 et al in particular - may have researched this aspect and may know which bits fell where.
• As it started to fall the top block was structurally intact. It fell apart sometime during the descent. Again where exactly the disintegration occurred does not affect my explanation.
• As the falling top block hit the lower tower, depending on whether its perimeter was inside or outside. For the 'inside' case, the falling block perimeter would strike the next floor below through whatever debris existed in that space and it would shear off the lower floor on that face of the building. For the outside case the stationary lower tower perimeter would impact upwards on the lowest floor of the falling top block and would shear of that floor of the top block. So whichever of those two possibilities actually occurred for any face of the tower the bottom line is a disconnected floor adding to the accumulating debris.*
• Meanwhile the strip down of the core has started.
• Stated briefly the top block core falling on bottom tower core would find that the strongest resistance came from 'beam on beam' connections. Remember that there are no columns in axial contact transferring anything like the original design loads - the column ends however formed are bypassing their other part.
• Repeat till finished
• Outer perimeter falls after the internal OOS crush front has passed. Varying heights of "after" have been identified.
• Core strip down hypothesis strongly supported by the standing remnant spires.

Sorry about the length of the second part. Recall that I have been surprised that there is any contention about the broad outline of the 'global collapse'.

* Fwatits worth, if you accept my explanation it puts paid to 'crush down - crush up' for the Twin Towers.

 

[femr2]

Wrong.

Wow. Your storm-off huff lasted all of about what ? An hour ? Welcome back !

A wall that has had all of its connections to the floor trusses severed, and it tilting outward, away from the building is NOT "still standing".

Cor, I can predict the future...

I'll await the ridiculously pedantic semantic nit-pick with anticipation, at some point, once (you think) all your recent assertions have been forgotten

...

It is "falling".

ROFL.

I've told you already Tom...

you need to continue your new-found eye-opening journey into video evidence analysis.

The upper end of that perimeter section is ejected upon impact with the descending tilted *upper block*. Keyword for you... wedge

You have a very short-term memory Tom.

explains this wall, that is standing stationary & vertical, in this video

What makes you think it's absolutely static ? What makes you think the WTC2 perimeter section is not ? Until it emerges from the dust cloud (timed such that it is clear that impact with the descending perimeter of the *upper block* is the initiating action)...you can't see it !

The pertinent point you couldn't comprehend actually happening, in your own words...

And it wasn't until the crush front had long since passed by, with the high pressure front IN ADVANCE of it, that the outer walls suddenly threw themselves in all direction??

Or perhaps it was late-firing nanothermite that threw the external columns hundreds of feet …?

"Threw the external columns hundreds of feet …?". Oh that cracked me up.

Tell ya what. The next time I ask Major_Tom a question, stay the hell out of it.

I'll respond to whatever posts I please Tom, and recall the number of times you pointed your questions/hand-wave incredulity directly towards my good self seeking answers to your confusion

Have a nice day.

 

[tfk]

I've got 6, count 'em, 6 solid pieces of evidence that they are from the lower block. Two of them are conclusive that they can not possibly be from the upper block.

What have you got that they are from the upper?



Maybe you ought to get femr back in here...

 

[tfk]

Got set up. Watching a little basketball.

Enjoying my afternoon.

So, do you agree with MT? That the columns that you see emerging from this debris cloud:

are from the upper block??

 

[tfk]

Gee, boys.

Got awful quiet all of a sudden...

 

[tfk]

MMMmmmm, doesn't get better than this.

Celtics kicked the Lakers' butt. Paul Pierce had a monster game. Ray Allen, KG & Rondo, great games.

There's a really cute girl asking me for a little advice on pool.

And the twoofer are gathering, looking at videos that they've apparently misinterpreted for years.

Mmmm, think I'll order another beer...

It's a good day.

 

[Major_Tom]

This 11 story piece was seen falling from the north of WTC1:

Tom, can you locate it's original position? (I am aware this is a stupid question, of course he cannot)

 

[ozeco41]

No, the collapse was no surprise; ....[LENGTHY TEXT EDITED]...You were surprised? now that makes sense now

Your mish mash of twisted logic and misinterpreting of what I said is noted. As I said in my post with one minor change:

Yes, I can discern those who have substance to offer from those who don't.

I have not the slightest difficulty accepting a true statement as true whoever makes it. I have no need to make false accusations or insult people simply because they are labelled as truthers. hold opinions which differ from mine.