"*sigh*
Instead of joining in the "you're an amateur" barrage, lets' give Clayton the benefit of the doubt by looking at "what he knows" shall we?"
"Damage usually only proceeds in one direction, the path of least resistance."
"Inhabited buildings aren't solid as trees, they aren't inherently monolithic either. In many cases including WTC 7 they have structural elements spread across large footprint and they are considerably less rigid than a solid tree. If they loads are off kilter on these parts (AKA eccentric, and unevenly redistributed) then what do you expect? The building to still fall over like a tree? Perhaps you should drop the looney toon physics (strangely after ten years you and "like minded" believers seem to believe in this looney physics)."
Okay, we are in agreement that large buildings are not filled with solid material. That was a brilliant observation Grizzly Bear and I'm sure the stoners out there will appreciate the clarification.
If the loads are off kilter on these parts (AKA eccentric, and unevenly redistributed), I expect an off balance look to any ensuing collapse. Duh!
"That is not what happened in WTC7(or the towers)."
"Of course WTC 7 didn't "tip over." Tipping over like a tree is a behavior that you cannot expect a large building lacking monolithic properties to do."
Brilliant deduction Sherlock.
Tipping over is what you might expect if a building lost its structural integrity on the majority area of one side or the other.
Hmm..column 79, followed within a second, according to the NIST, by columns 80 and 81. Sounds like the east side should have started collapsing. But. If this was part of global collapse initiation, than the rest of the building should have eventually joined in. Hmm. That would lead to an expectation of a topple to the east, the side that failed first.
"The failure of one steel support column caused every other steel support column to fail within 30 seconds? That interpretation is like an event in a Saturday morning cartoon."
"The failure of one floor corner caused the rapid collapse of the entire corner in Ronan point. That's what a progressive collapse is, whether it's one corner, or the entire building. Tell me, have you ever studied the structural plans for WTC 7? Can you justify your contention that this is all like an event in a Saturday morning cartoon with hard engineering and design analysis? I'm thinking the answer is a resounding "no," in which case you'd better provide a good reason why anyone should pay attention to what you're arguing?"
And how Grizzly Bear does that pathetic example illustrate what was observed with WTC7?
Oh I get it. You expect the fools in the audience to believe that column 79 failed over 6 floors, dropping the east penthouse below the roof, that columns 80 and 81 failed within a second of each other, that the external structure remained apparently unaffected, and meanwhile the whole inner core of WTC7 proceeded to fail while the exterior shell exhibited nothing more than some window breakage on the upper northeast face. Finally, by an act of God I guess, the remaining external peripheral structure, amazingly, let go, at all points, at the very same time, for at least 2.5 seconds.
Talk about making your Saturday morning cartoon a reality Grizzly Bear..wow!
Yes, I think you'd better provide a good reason why anyone should pay attention to what you're arguing.
Too funny.
MM
