• 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.

Tony Szamboti Publishes a Technical Paper about 9/11 Truth

Jetblast said:
I was going to follow through today by saying a second wave of destruction on the core occurred from the mechanical juggernaut of the falling steel beam debris from above. But the primary initiating decoupling or unzipping came from lateral air blasts. I don't see why people have such a problem with this seeing how you can see those air blasts in the form of the dust bursts in the videos. The two items above are all you needed to initiate runaway floor collapse.

Here's where you show your ignorance of science. You're just plain dead wrong there, we should get that straight. We have pure evidence of that pressure wave in the form of the floor collapse seen out ahead of the main collapse front. You also suffer from Szamboti syndrome and fail to see that such a pneumatic force is capable of producing an amplified exponential force that would pass through the structure faster than gravity. Think of the hanging balls I spoke of. This pneumatic wave transferred through the OOS channel as the first punch that unzipped the floors and was followed by the second punch of the mechanical debris tumbling mass. By the way, you're dead wrong about the potential power of air. They use compressed air to cut steel now a days.

If you look at the North Tower collapse video Szamboti did get his core resistance at the base, which would make sense because that is where the inner core was grounded to bedrock. However the outer ring of core columns was stripped. Something happened with the waveform of the collapse towards the bottom that allowed the temporary preservation of the core.

The obvious answer to what you wrote here is that the lateral pneumatic air blasts caused by the debris-weighted, and rammed floor pads were strong enough to decouple the core from the pads no matter what their strength relationship was to the tumbling juggernaut that followed right after.

You must have some ego considering the amount of words I get in reply for simply disagreeing with you.

If you are following empirical inquiry you have to ask yourself what do the dust bursts seen out ahead of the collapse front tell you? Chandler says they are evidence of well-timed progressive demo charges, however he doesn't take the force and effect of those lateral air bursts into account in his models. It is scientifically unsound to not involve such a significant force in your determinations. Well, he gets around that by simply assuming their input as demolition charges. He fails to see pneumatic air blasts from runaway floor collapse would produce the same effect.

No, that's happening at the main collapse front which is why you have two distinct collapse fronts occurring in the event.

I think we are talking a very thin steel seat upon which the hanging floor truss was suspended. You might want to look into the incredible pressure created by compressing air with an accidental steel face floor pad piston being driven by tons of falling debris mass. You would have three escape directions. One to the inner core, one to the outer frame, and downward. Videos of the collapse show evidence of all three.
Click to expand...

scratch.gif

Well folks he cannot say that I didn't try to help. I could follow up with a comment about horses placed in proximity of water...or casting pearls before suidae ....or....

...but I won't.

;)
 
Jetblast said:
What is happening here is like that game where the balls are all hanging on strings touching each other. When you pull the end ball up and let it go the ball on the other end shoots out. This is a transfer of force through the touching balls. The same thing happens with the air pressure pushing the floor pads downward. When you compress air enough it would 'touch' on a lower order scale and that's why you see the floors drop faster than the main collapse. It is also a force that is strong enough to break the columns when directed laterally and in a manner those core columns were not designed to resist.
Click to expand...

Two questions:

1. Please describe what you are "seeing" to differentiate between "dropping floors" and the "main collapse".

2. Are you suggesting that the floor truss connections for each floor were weaker that the windows surrounding said floor? Why wasn't there a "ring" of "blown out" windows all the way around each tower on any given floor?
 
jaydeehess said:
Part of the problem, as I see it, is the difference between the conditions assumed, in an approximation of reality, and what was actually taking place in reality.
In this case I believe that it can be seen in the assumption that floors collapsed evenly. That is to say, that the entire upper floorpan came down into the next floor volume in one solid and simultaneous piece. There is no reason to expect this actually occurred.
Click to expand...
Major_Tom has researched the "zonal" mechanism of ROOSD - i.e. how various zones of floor fell at slightly different times. cannot recall either the details or the limits on scope of how much he found. But some floors at least did not fall as complete units.

As usual with M_T's technical work I would expect it to be high quality. A lot on 911Forum - I don't recall that much of that topic has been posted here.
jaydeehess said:
In short, and as we have pointed out many times, this collapse quickly became extremely chaotic. Calculations such as yours are an upper limit of air pressure and velocity.
Click to expand...
Yes. However chaotic doesn't mean that we cannot put boundaries and probabilities around the plausible scenarios.

As I did in my response which clearly scared Jetblast into retreating rapidly into his land of fantasy physics. ;)
 
iirc the over pressure on a floor pan, from below, that will lift it off of its seats is quite low, >10 psi above atmospheric. Of course on office buildings this is never expected to occur. OTOH, downward force is designed for and it would take an over pressure caused force greater than the designed FoS for floor space loading, to overcome it. That would be orders of magnitude greater than that required to lift a floor off its seats. So just after collapse initiation, lowest floorpan of upper section presuurizes the volume between it and the next lower floorpan (and here we will again assume the approximation of a solid, even floor pan drop) and this falling floor pan will lift off its seats well before air pressurization snaps the seats of the lower floor pan.
 
Last edited:
What would be the area of the window space of one floor of a tower?

It should be obvious that milliseconds after collapse initiation, all windows on the now affected floor, are no longer in place.
If you want to calculate air velocity, and assume solid piston and solid 'cylinder' foundation, then it the volume of air passing through the area of escape over the time of the piston to reach the foundation of the 'cylinder.

Or at least volume divided by area divided by time will yield a parameter consistent with velocity.
 
Last edited:
Jetblast said:
The pressures in the last foot or so of compressed airspace would eject with serious buckling force.
Click to expand...

So serious of a buckling force that the air ejected out of ONE window/area?


Is that "squib" below the red arrow evidence of where your supposed "floor collapse front" has progressed to?
 
ozeco41 said:
[qimg]http://conleys.com.au/smilies/scratch.gif[/qimg]
Well folks he cannot say that I didn't try to help. I could follow up with a comment about horses placed in proximity of water...or casting pearls before suidae ....or....

...but I won't.

;)
Click to expand...
Well Ozecco41 you're a better man than David Chandler, whose "My Response to Chris Mohr" on YouTube ends with the admonition not to cast pearls before swine!
Oink Oink

PS I was not saying I agreed with the idea that wind could destroy a WTC Tower column, just wondering if 400 mph could do it. I too rather doubt it, and common sense tells me that 10,000,000 pounds per floor crashing down at 100+ mph would do the trick better than air.,
 
Last edited:
Jetblast said:
I don't know the physics of it but I would expect the last foot or so of space, as the floor dropped to the one below it, would create enormous compressed air pressure. While the outward direction probably had less resistance because the outer frame wasn't backed by anything but air the inward direction did have the hollows of the core shafts to burst into. The pressures in the last foot or so of compressed airspace would eject with serious buckling force. Remember we just need enough to initiate ROOSD. Once ROOSD accumulated enough mass just from the floor debris pile driver it would destabilize the structure.
Click to expand...

Floor debris pile driver? Rubble does not have a pile driver effect. Rubble has decelerating effect.

If a floor dropped what happened to the adjacent huge steel support columns.
 
Gamolon said:
I'm getting 3712 sq ft of window per floor.

2' wide by 8' tall = 16 sq ft.

58 windows per side = 928 sq ft.

4 sides = 3712 sq ft.
Click to expand...

Only two foot wide? So two foot wide windows and approx 1.5 foot space between them?

Well then something is amiss. Using my poor assumptions above that means air speed of
185 mph (though the calculator on the Android ain't great, hope I entered it right) or 270 f/s.
Is the dust debris thrown out , approx 270 feet from the building after one second?
 
Last edited:
Clayton Moore said:
Floor debris pile driver? Rubble does not have a pile driver effect. Rubble has decelerating effect.

If a floor dropped what happened to the adjacent huge steel support columns.
Click to expand...

Loose rubble, loose molecules can't do anything; that is why shotguns never kill, never damage, etc - where do truthers learn science?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FM9FeEgI0Eo

Wait, what if we slow down the debris?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvPmfqyBD_k

Oops, mass seems to be mass. Darn, who knew?


lol, tony had to change "missing jolt" to "smoothness" to fool a journal that can't check the papers they publish to keep out fraud and woo.
 
Aber said:
Remember that the air pressure would act in ALL direction including upwards - it is not a piston but a mass of debris so some air will go upwards...
Click to expand...

Not quite... the mass of debris hits a solid slab and it acts like a piston kinda until it breaks apart... it's not terribly porous as it's impacted by the debris from above. Think of it like a door moving the air when it is being closed.
 
chrismohr said:
Well Ozecco41 you're a better man than David Chandler, whose "My Response to Chris Mohr" on YouTube ends with the admonition not to cast pearls before swine!
Oink Oink

PS I was not saying I agreed with the idea that wind could destroy a WTC Tower column, just wondering if 400 mph could do it. I too rather doubt it, and common sense tells me that 10,000,000 pounds per floor crashing down at 100+ mph would do the trick better than air.,
Click to expand...

I don't think the air pressure destroyed the slabs, but it would destroy the contents between the impacted slab and the one below it. That is what you see being ejected from the windows ahead of the collapse front is floor CONTENTS... ceiling tiles, furniture etc... not the floor slabs themselves. No?
 
Clayton Moore said:
Floor debris pile driver? Rubble does not have a pile driver effect. Rubble has decelerating effect.

If a floor dropped what happened to the adjacent huge steel support columns.
Click to expand...

Why not? If you dropped 30,000 tons of gravel on a WTC slab it would drive right through the floor destroying it. You don't expect the floor to support that mass ...do you?
 
chrismohr said:
Well Ozecco41 you're a better man than David Chandler, whose "My Response to Chris Mohr" on YouTube ends with the admonition not to cast pearls before swine!
Oink Oink..
Click to expand...
Not a lot better - I pretended to not use the expression. Like one fellow I met when i was refereeing soccer. He said "Ref - I know it would be an infringement if I called you a blind ignorant one sided...(words beginning with F, B, C) --so I wont say it." My two actions which followed seemed to surprise him:
yelcard.gif
redcard.gif


(Yeah all you soccer rules pedants - I know - but it looks prettier that way for the oval shaped ball mob.)
chrismohr said:
...I too rather doubt it, and common sense tells me that 10,000,000 pounds per floor crashing down at 100+ mph would do the trick better than air.,
Click to expand...
Common sense works most times. Just that on some occasions the engineering is counter intuitive. For example the one we see Mr T Sz get wrong is that cutting out 30% of columns does not reduce safe load by 30%. AND that comment is ON TOPIC. :D
 
JSanderO said:
That is what you see being ejected from the windows ahead of the collapse front is floor CONTENTS... ceiling tiles, furniture etc... not the floor slabs themselves. No?
Click to expand...

The undersides of the floor slabs were coated with spray on fire proofing.

ceilingdetail59_1349.jpg


Most of the dust we see exiting the windows was probably dust from the fireproofing knocked off of the floor slabs.
 
jaydeehess said:
Only two foot wide? So two foot wide windows and approx 1.5 foot space between them?

Well then something is amiss. Using my poor assumptions above that means air speed of
185 mph (though the calculator on the Android ain't great, hope I entered it right) or 270 f/s.
Is the dust debris thrown out , approx 270 feet from the building after one second?
Click to expand...

Yeah, perimeter columns were 3'-4" apart. Columns were about 15" at their widest. Plus aluminum cladding/insulation around the columns.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom