A Question For Truthers Regarding the CD Theory

tempesta29 said:
Are you kidding? Have you ever seen a failed CD where only the first set or first few levels of explosives detonate? The building hits the ground and stops. One floor of buckling will not induce total collapse.
Click to expand...

Verinage Demolition proves you wrong.

Oh so very wrong!
 
tempesta29 said:
And again: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UsePUn5-88c&feature=fvw

Look how much momentum this building has. Guess what? It just stops. This building collapsed roughly half of its height and it just stops.

Want more or are you starting to get the picture?
Click to expand...

Aparently YOU aren't getting the picture. You are comparing a concrete framed structure with no fires or structural damage to a steel framed structure with fire and impact damage.

Are YOU getting the picture? Or do I need to draw some stick figures for you?
 
tempesta29 said:
Are you kidding? Have you ever seen a failed CD where only the first set or first few levels of explosives detonate? The building hits the ground and stops. One floor of buckling will not induce total collapse.
Click to expand...

ROFL.....

And the hits just keep on coming....


Bolding mine...

tempesta29 said:
Your posts are lazy. Form complete questions. I have no idea what you're talking about.
Click to expand...

Yes, we know you don't.
 
tempesta29 said:
And what do you think this means exactly? Are you under the impression that severing one floor of columns at the base will then induce total collapse? It creates the onset of collapse and then, in a CD, another level of columns are severed and so on and so forth.
Click to expand...
I suggest you contact a CD company and ask them how they rig a building.
 
tempesta29 said:
Yeah, I remember that guy's post the first time he didn't make sense writing it. You can stop linking to other posts. I won't be responding any further. Make an argument, and write it on this page.
Click to expand...


It would be simpler if you admit that your argument makes no sense.

tempesta29 said:
Are you kidding? Have you ever seen a failed CD where only the first set or first few levels of explosives detonate? The building hits the ground and stops. One floor of buckling will not induce total collapse.
Click to expand...


Wrong.

You just showed two cases of demolitions that have failed, it doesn't mean that such demolitions are impossible or the collapse is always stopped by the intact floors.

Have you heard about a demolition technique called Vèrinage?



tempesta29 said:
And what do you think this means exactly? Are you under the impression that severing one floor of columns at the base will then induce total collapse? It creates the onset of collapse and then, in a CD, another level of columns are severed and so on and so forth.

The buckling of columns at the base is just that: happening at the base. There are 46 other floors to this building. Stage 1 involves 7 feet of structure. There are about 240 more feet of industrial steel columns to resist collapse.
Click to expand...


Wrong again.

NIST report says that at Stage 1 the structure descended 7 feet. It doesn't mean that buckling, plastic hinges and other structural failures occurred only on a single floor.
 
GlennB said:
Are you under the impression that every floor needs to be cut, otherwise the collapse will arrest? Oh dear.
Click to expand...

Straw man.

Meanwhile in verinage demolition even very robust RC buildings are totally demolished with the removal of a single floor.
Click to expand...

I'm well aware of this technique. If it worked for all types of buildings they'd always use it.


You've missed the point AGAIN that after stage 1 we have - in essence - 8 storeys of wall providing no resistance, therefore leading to a further 8-storey drop before any further resistance is experienced. Having fallen 8 storeys there is no way on earth the collapse will arrest. Remember too (in case you forgot) that the core was collapsing well before any of this happened, so the wall's internal support is marginal to non-existent.
Click to expand...

Wow. "Marginal to non-existent". According to what exactly, your want? For 8 stories WTC 7 descends in free fall, meaning the columns impacting the ground provide no resistance (as if I have to repeat this). There is nothing to indicate these columns are 'already severed' or whatever it is that you're suggesting.

That represents the formation and then rupture of a plastic hinge and would be the initial sub-g phase in the NIST graph. This has been explained several times now so please stop asking the same damn question. In the case of WTC7 the 8-storey section we're considering also involves multiple column connections, making the rupture that much easier to occur.
Click to expand...

There is nothing called the "buckling phase" in NIST's final report on WTC 7's collapse. It is simply the phase at which initial buckling of the columns occurred at the lower levels. There is nothing to indicate that the columns the entire breadth of the building all buckled and failed during this phase to allow free fall.

That's a RC building whose CD has been screwed up. So what?
Click to expand...

So that's generally what happens when a CD occurs on just one or a few floors and stops: the building stops. You can't just cut floors of WTC 7 on one level and expect that momentum to just wreck the entire building. I posted those videos as a direct rebuttal to whoever claimed that it was possible.

And the fact that people are referencing verinage demolitions is just embarrassing. Buildings destroyed using this technique are crap, to be frank. People should know better than to make even the most remote of comparisons.
 
tempesta29 said:
According to what exactly, your want? For 8 stories WTC 7 descends in free fall, meaning the columns impacting the ground provide no resistance (as if I have to repeat this). There is nothing to indicate these columns are 'already severed' or whatever it is that you're suggesting.
Click to expand...


This is implicit when the report says the coluns provide negligible support in Stage 2.

tempesta29 said:
There is nothing called the "buckling phase" in NIST's final report on WTC 7's collapse. It is simply the phase at which initial buckling of the columns occurred at the lower levels. There is nothing to indicate that the columns the entire breadth of the building all buckled and failed during this phase to allow free fall.
Click to expand...


A more detailed analysis of the descent of the north face found three stages: (1) a slow descent with acceleration less than that of gravity that corrosponded to the buckling of the exterior columns at the lower floors, (2) a freefall descent over approximately eight stories at gravitational acceleration for approximately 2.25 seconds, and (3) a decreasing acceleration as the north face encountered resistance from the structure below." -NIST NCSTAR 1-9 (Final Report)

tempesta29 said:
So that's generally what happens when a CD occurs on just one or a few floors and stops: the building stops. You can't just cut floors of WTC 7 on one level and expect that momentum to just wreck the entire building.
Click to expand...


Please don't talk about what you don't understand.

The basic idea of explosive demolition is quite simple: If you remove the support structure of a building at a certain point, the section of the building above that point will fall down on the part of the building below that point. If this upper section is heavy enough, it will collide with the lower part with sufficient force to cause significant damage. The explosives are just the trigger for the demolition. It's gravity that brings the building down.

http://science.howstuffworks.com/engineering/structural/building-implosion.htm

tempesta29 said:
I posted those videos as a direct rebuttal to whoever claimed that it was possible.
Click to expand...


Negative.
You just posted two exceptions to the rule, perhaps due to a miscalculation.

Do you really think demolition engineers would spend money on a technique that does not work?

tempesta29 said:
And the fact that people are referencing verinage demolitions is just embarrassing. Buildings destroyed using this technique are crap, to be frank.
Click to expand...


Just because you want. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
tempesta29 said:
And what do you think this means exactly? Are you under the impression that severing one floor of columns at the base will then induce total collapse? It creates the onset of collapse and then, in a CD, another level of columns are severed and so on and so forth.

The buckling of columns at the base is just that: happening at the base. There are 46 other floors to this building. Stage 1 involves 7 feet of structure. There are about 240 more feet of industrial steel columns to resist collapse.

And what is this "buckling phase" nonsense? Where did you get this term?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIEBLdd6W3Q

Here you go. You're welcome.
Click to expand...

Odd that building looked like a concrete building.
 
tempesta29 said:
Straw man.


I'm well aware of this technique. If it worked for all types of buildings they'd always use it.




Wow. "Marginal to non-existent". According to what exactly, your want? For 8 stories WTC 7 descends in free fall, meaning the columns impacting the ground provide no resistance (as if I have to repeat this). There is nothing to indicate these columns are 'already severed' or whatever it is that you're suggesting.



There is nothing called the "buckling phase" in NIST's final report on WTC 7's collapse. It is simply the phase at which initial buckling of the columns occurred at the lower levels. There is nothing to indicate that the columns the entire breadth of the building all buckled and failed during this phase to allow free fall.



So that's generally what happens when a CD occurs on just one or a few floors and stops: the building stops. You can't just cut floors of WTC 7 on one level and expect that momentum to just wreck the entire building. I posted those videos as a direct rebuttal to whoever claimed that it was possible.

And the fact that people are referencing verinage demolitions is just embarrassing. Buildings destroyed using this technique are crap, to be frank. People should know better than to make even the most remote of comparisons.
Click to expand...

You called your own fallacy!
 
tempesta29 said:
So that's generally what happens when a CD occurs on just one or a few floors and stops: the building stops. You can't just cut floors of WTC 7 on one level and expect that momentum to just wreck the entire building. I posted those videos as a direct rebuttal to whoever claimed that it was possible.
Click to expand...

Yes, we've known for years that RC is stronger than steel.

Do you have any math to back up the hilited portion?

tempesta29 said:
And the fact that people are referencing verinage demolitions is just embarrassing. Buildings destroyed using this technique are crap, to be frank. People should know better than to make even the most remote of comparisons.
Click to expand...

Please elaborate. Thanks.
 
Jackanory said:
And he would be told that they don't rig steel framed buildings for demolition. Never!!!! They dismantle them floor by floor.
Click to expand...

I think they might, sometimes.

cuttercharges-1.jpg
 
Wow. I just watched the video of that one. Impressive. I wonder why that loud BANG BANG BANG and flashes before the collapse started weren't heard in any of the WTC buildings?
 
twinstead said:
Wow. I just watched the video of that one. Impressive. I wonder why that loud BANG BANG BANG and flashes before the collapse started weren't heard in any of the WTC buildings?
Click to expand...

Because they used thermite and thats quiet.

But it was also really intense and steel was flung around hundreds of feet away from the building!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom