• 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.

OOS Collapse Propagation Model

Status
Not open for further replies.
It is impossible to approach the highly charged and controversial subject of demolition without examining the initiation sequences of the buildings.
Click to expand...

What the hell does "demolition" have to do with anything that you're discussing?


How were these mappings received within this forum? The thread on the initiation mappings was removed from this subforum. The reason given was, no joking, that the mappings had nothing to do with "conspiracy theories".
Click to expand...
That is correct.


From the conclusions of the book:

Quote:
A key Achille's heel in study and discussion of these subjects over the last decade can be spotted simply by observing the different attitudes people have toward collections of observations and measurements.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Achilles. Your armchair psychology is amusing. When will "Sharp Printing, Inc." want their website back?
 
Last edited:
Newtons Bit said:
I wasn't aware you had made any conclusions, Major_Tom.
Click to expand...
He concludes that he is the only one that understands the collapses. Everyone is not (completely) wrong, they are just not as right. :rolleyes:

Seriously, He concludes that the NIST should have used the events after initiation to suggest code changes.
 
Last edited:
DGM said:
He concludes that he is the only one that understands the collapses. Everyone is not (completely) wrong, they are just not as right. :rolleyes:

Seriously, He concludes that the NIST should have used the events after initiation to suggest code changes.
Click to expand...

And presumably he's shown that these code provisions would have made a difference through a robust engineering analysis?
 
Major_Tom said:
Were I to sum up this forum in one word, I would choose the word 'smear'.

I could also sum up the purpose of this forum in a single sentence. It is to downplay or ignore all contradiction to a particular world view expressed among regular posters here.
Click to expand...

While you're summing things up could you sum up any conclusions you may have drawn from your studies concerning the causes of the building collapses on 9/11?
 
MT is not the only one suggesting code revisions designed to arrest an ROOSD. Its trying to design a barn door that prevents a horse from running out after its already bolted through that door.

Better bet is to design such that conditions that result in ROOSD do not develop or develop slow enough to effect complete evac of the building.
OR
Close the barn door before the horse bolts.
 
DGM said:
Seriously, He concludes that the NIST should have used the events after initiation to suggest code changes.
Click to expand...

jaydeehess said:
MT is not the only one suggesting code revisions designed to arrest an ROOSD. Its trying to design a barn door that prevents a horse from running out after its already bolted through that door.

Better bet is to design such that conditions that result in ROOSD do not develop or develop slow enough to effect complete evac of the building.
OR
Close the barn door before the horse bolts.
Click to expand...

The thing is, preventing ROOSD wouldn't have prevented collapse. If the floor joist and beam connections had been strong enough to transfer the loads to the columns, then the columns would have buckled, per Bazant's energy analysis.
 
Last edited:
WilliamSeger said:
The thing is, preventing ROOSD wouldn't have prevented collapse. If the floor joist and beam connections had been strong enough to transfer the loads to the columns, then the columns would have buckled, per Bazant's energy analysis.
Click to expand...

Explain that.... Are you saying that the floor system carrying additional loads of up to 5 times their normal static load could transfer those loads to the perimeter core columns and they would then be crushed or buckle?

Is this what Mr B says?

Yea right... the connections to from the trusses to the core all perform with this massive 5x overload so that the puny core columns can be crushed and buckle... what have you been smokin'?
 
Last edited:
JSanderO said:
Explain that.... Are you saying that the floor system carrying additional loads of up to 5 times their normal static load could transfer those loads to the perimeter core columns and they would then be crushed or buckle?

Is this what Mr B says?

Yea right... the connections to from the trusses to the core all perform with this massive 5x overload so that the puny core columns can be crushed and buckle... what have you been smokin'?
Click to expand...

Dr. Bazant estimated that the energy released by the top block falling one story was 8.6 times more than the maximum energy the columns could absorb under optimistic conditions (e.g. all the columns failed by buckling).

Lately I've been smokin' e-cigs, but here in Colorado we have more choices than most states. :D
 
WilliamSeger said:
Dr. Bazant estimated that the energy released by the top block falling one story was 8.6 times more than the maximum energy the columns could absorb under optimistic conditions (e.g. all the columns failed by buckling).

Lately I've been smokin' e-cigs, but here in Colorado we have more choices than most states. :D
Click to expand...

The "top" block could not drop even 1 story because.... the columns were in the way! How you erase 12' of 36' long columns all at once. Bazant is blowing make believe non real world hot air and you be smokin' it dude.
 
Last edited:
JSanderO said:
The "top" block could not drop even 1 story because.... the columns were in the way! How you erase 12' of 36' long columns all at once. Bazant is blowing make believe non real world hot air and you be smokin' it dude.
Click to expand...

Wow. You haven't even looked at the pictures in B&Z have you?
 
no way can you have an axial aligned 12' drop of the top without erasing 12' of all the columns... perimeter and facade.
 
JSanderO said:
no way can you have an axial aligned 12' drop of the top without erasing 12' of all the columns... perimeter and facade.
Click to expand...

It's a limiting case showing collapse arrest is impossible even if the strongest vertical elements are fully engaged in the least conservative mode. It's very useful for bounding an otherwise impossible engineering analysis.
 
The newly framed thought experiment is: had the columns failed, i.e.collapse had initiated as it actually did on 9/11, resulting in a massive dynamic load on the floor space of the following level,
AND
the floor successfully transfers this load to the columns.

No axial loading of column on column, JSO.

Bazant had calculated that this same load would have overloaded the columns.

This means collapse would have progressed at least that far.

In this thought experiment the fact that columns get heavier/stronger lower down , might create a situation in which collapse does arrest at a level where they get larger , if those heavier columns can resist buckling/fracturing.

But there's no evidence that column buckling was the primary driver of progression of the global collapse. In addition, if this loading is sufficient to buckle the columns, it is rather ridiculous to expect the floor trusses/truss seats to be able to withstand it.
 
Last edited:
JSanderO said:
The "top" block could not drop even 1 story because.... the columns were in the way! How you erase 12' of 36' long columns all at once. Bazant is blowing make believe non real world hot air and you be smokin' it dude.
Click to expand...

Yes, I always thought differential equations and engineering was hot air. Bazant's hot air make believe is why 911 truth followers were sure it was an inside job? Anyone who can do those calculations in one day must be a NWO operative to blow smoke on the inside job, and followers knew it, joined Gage, and found... woo.

Yep, my engineering courses were blowing make believe non real world hot air, especially the IC course, where we cook sand to make computers using poison.

Did the math make you believe it was make believe? lol, you did not join Gage, did you.
Wonder if they use math building aircraft with that "make believe non real world hot air". Why does 911 truth waste time on NIST and Bazant, when they have all the overwhelming evidence.
 
Newtons Bit said:
It's a limiting case showing collapse arrest is impossible even if the strongest vertical elements are fully engaged in the least conservative mode. It's very useful for bounding an otherwise impossible engineering analysis.
Click to expand...

How is it useful because it has absolutely no relation to the real world event???
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom