Heiwa, do you think it is possible to drop a big mass on a series of trusses? What would happen to these trusses after the impact from this mass?
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
Another Question for Heiwa : Amazing Fireproof Steel
- Thread starter Architect
- Start date
SpitfireIX
Philosopher
Heiwa, let me ask you this: what do you think would happen if the combined mass (or the maximum impulse) of your many small masses impacting a floor exceeded that floor's safety factor for total load?
X
Slide Rulez 4 Life
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2007
- Messages
- 4,127
You beat me to it e^n.
Heiwa: You have to realize that the columns were not free-standing structures. There were interconnected with everything else.
So instead of a "hole in the floor", you are dropping a larrge mass that opccupies a significant portion of that floor, and thust will take a great many of these interconnections with it, which will in turn take down everything else.
Why don't you try dropping a great many floors onto some more floors, and see where it gets you.
Your "spaghetti analogy" is useless, unless you can proove that there were no other interconnections (like trusses) or large surface areas (like floors) to take into account in both the impacting and impacted portions.
Believe it or not, Heiwa and Apollo20, buildings are generally designed for static load, not kinetic load.
Heiwa: You have to realize that the columns were not free-standing structures. There were interconnected with everything else.
So instead of a "hole in the floor", you are dropping a larrge mass that opccupies a significant portion of that floor, and thust will take a great many of these interconnections with it, which will in turn take down everything else.
Why don't you try dropping a great many floors onto some more floors, and see where it gets you.
Your "spaghetti analogy" is useless, unless you can proove that there were no other interconnections (like trusses) or large surface areas (like floors) to take into account in both the impacting and impacted portions.
Believe it or not, Heiwa and Apollo20, buildings are generally designed for static load, not kinetic load.
Last edited:
What holds up the columns?
Aha. More opinions, then.
What's holding up the columns again?
You're struggling with these analogies, aren't you?
And what happens to the floor structure?
What's holding the columns in place?
I design them for a living. You should assume that I know a wee bit about it.
Pls, this is a forum where you announce your findings and opinions and where questions to individuals are best sent separately.
So you don't know what's holding up a column? You are in good company! FEMA, NIST, Bazant, Seffen haven't got a clue either! And you design buildings for a living?
A column is only held up by itself, i.e. its part below. Of course the perimeter columns are supported by horizontal spandrels between the perimeter columns and the core columns are supported by horizontal beams between the core columns in 0, 90, 180 and 270° directions.
All these horizontal supports provide very little area for a floor to drop on!
Actually all floors are located outside any column and its associated horizontal supports.
Thus a floor dropping down - in itself a strange phenomenon - will not drop either on a column or a column horizontal support. The floors are just hanging on the columns!
And the floors apparently constitute the major mass of the towers.
The major mass parts of a tower, when dropping (very rare event), will not touch the principal structure that keeps the structure up, i.e. columns and their horizontal supports.
That is the beauty of a tower steel structure and explains why they never collapse due to gravity (masses attached to principal structure dropping down).
Do you want me demonstrate that the columns would still stand if I remove all the floors? That is easy.
??? Please, learn to spell. The columns are in principal free standing and interconnected by horizontal spandrels (wall columns) and horizontal beams (core columns) in all directions at regular interwalls. This structure keeps the whole tower in place!
On these columns floors are hanging. Like pictures on a wall. No big deal!
If the hook of the picture breaks, the picture drops down.
Not the whole structure holding the hook.
What is your age? 10? Excellent! You can read? Read http://heiwaco.tripod.com/nist.htm .
Is this point important to your thesis? Have you researched it? Are you absolutely positive that you're right?
Say that the floor (or roof) is 900 m² square (30X30 meters) and that it is designed to carry 200 kgs/m² uniformly or 180 000 kgs total uniformly with a factor of safety of 3.
Now, if you put 180 000 kgs on 1 m² in the middle of the floor, it will punch a hole in the floor and the weight will drop through the hole. That 1 m² could only carry 600 kgs safely and if you overload it, locally, 300 times, the result will be a hole.
The rest of the floor/roof will remain in place.
More questions! Yes, I have researched the subject and I am absolutely positive that I am right.
What thesis are you talking about?
Please learn physics before you correct others and put them down! Your post above about the floor is real dumb. How do you make such incredibly wrong posts? I thought you were joking about gravity but you missed the constant by an incredible amount. Why?
Very nice; proof of something, I have to get the KEG out now! Rob last night, now pure super stuff of something. What is this?
Last edited:
rwguinn
Penultimate Amazing
You mean you guys over there don't use the 6SKH2318 series Sky hooks?
My brother (building and bridge deck design guy) says they keep them in the yard next to the rigidium stock.
SpitfireIX
Philosopher
All right, then, why do you believe that the load from the floors above collapsing wouldn't have been relatively uniformly distributed?
There goes the monitor......
...Heiwa, you're a fraud. I don't believe that you know anything about structures whatsoever. Your littany of error is second only to your arrogance.
The WTC structure did not work as you seem to think. No other buildings do either. Perhaps ships do, but I doubt it.
...Heiwa, you're a fraud. I don't believe that you know anything about structures whatsoever. Your littany of error is second only to your arrogance.
The WTC structure did not work as you seem to think. No other buildings do either. Perhaps ships do, but I doubt it.
Who will tell him if he puts 63.132 of these weights on one floor, the floor will meet the next floor until all the floors below come to rest on earth or something that can handle lots of KE. Core, may stand for a minute, but the shell would be shearing away most likely. Almost like 9/11 but different. Gravity man does it again.