Question for Heiwa

[Heiwa]

When do we get to see your calculations for the 110,000 ton mass of the top section of WTC 2, Heiwa?

If you have read my article (I cannot link to it because of the JREF rules so you have to use Google but the smoking gun is found in Part 2) you know the values for WTC1,where the mass above is 33 000 tons.

So if the mass is 110 000 tons in WTC2 you have to multiply by 3 the cross areas of the columns and find that the compression stresses are exactly the same. The slenderness ratios are evidently reduced so it becomes even more difficult to deform or buckle the columns at the initiation zone. In that respect the columns are stronger in WTC2. And also the plane crash damages and the fire is smaller at WTC2.

But we are told that the fire in WTC2 was more severe and heated the stronger columns quicker so that global collapse suddenly ensued.

OK - the mass above is 3X bigger but it doesn't mean much as the force of gravity is the same in WTC1 and 2. If the potential energy released in WTC1 was 340 kWh when the top part dropped 3.7 meters it was 1020 kWh in WTC2 but as all structures had 3X more cross area the effects are similar. No global collapse would ensue.

The reason why WTC2 fell first after shorter fires is that the perpetrators recognized that they had to blow it first as the fire was running out. If you watch the videos you see how the the whole top part suddenly fell sideways - and not straight down according to Nist when all columns at the initiation zone would fail simultaneously (because they are not) - and then ... the top part disintegrates before putting any impact energy on the structure below. Just look where the dust and smoke origins and you understand. It is not at the initiation zone but higher up. And evidently a rigid body falling down by itself do not produce all this dust and smoke.

The rest - the global collapse that ensued - is evidently not seen as it is covered by dust except for all these smoke clouds spewing out of the windows before 'collapse' ensues. Guess what kind of smoke that is.

So it is not necessary to duplicate the calculations in my article. It is quite good at it is. Thanks for your interest.

 

[Gravy]

Heiwa's brother weighs in from Knoxville, Tennessee:

"Alice Cooper sings " Welcome to my nightmare " during short clips from History Channels ' " Wrecking Ball " episode, as CDI bombs perfectly good govt buildings all over USA, during their " Summer of Destruction " in 2001. CDI owner engineers graduated from University of Tennessee in Knoxville, home of mayor Victor Ashe, now Bush Jr ' s ambassador to Poland (CIA redition torture death camps). CDI ' s $7-billion partner at World Trade Center " after " 9/11/2001 was Browning Ferris Industries, the $40-billion waste cartel HQed in Knoxville. Notice how CDI installs British RDX " cutter charges " in a diagonal position on steel beams, exactly as seen at WTC scrap after 9/11. CDI was required at WTC, because many of the Thermate cutter charges did not explode, and had to be detonated by CDI before removal from the rubble, so this resulted in molten steel for days, weeks and months after 9/11, as the unburned Thermate was ignated by CDI, burned off, then was removed and destroyed in Communist China, and melted down in Knoxville."

http://video.indymedia.org/en/2007/03/758.shtml

I bask in the warmth of the burning crazy.

 

[Heiwa]

Well, at least you have advanced your theory. What a load of drivel.

(Carpet samples?)

So what's wrong with it? Be more percipient.

 

[WildCat]

So what's wrong with it? Be more percipient.

Sorry, it just doesn't compete with:

1. Was there enough gravitational energy present in the World Trade Center Towers to cause the collapse of the intact floors below the impact floors? Why was the collapse of WTC 1 and 2 not arrested by the intact structure below the floors where columns first began to buckle?
Yes, there was more than enough gravitational load to cause the collapse of the floors below the level of collapse initiation in both WTC Towers. The vertical capacity of the connections supporting an intact floor below the level of collapse was adequate to carry the load of 11 additional floors if the load was applied gradually and 6 additional floors if the load was applied suddenly (as was the case). Since the number of floors above the approximate floor of collapse initiation exceeded six in each WTC Tower (12 and 29 floors, respectively), the floors below the level of collapse initiation were unable to resist the suddenly applied gravitational load from the upper floors of the buildings. Details of this finding are provided below:
Consider a typical floor immediately below the level of collapse initiation and conservatively assume that the floor is still supported on all columns (i.e., the columns below the intact floor did not buckle or peel-off due to the failure of the columns above). Consider further the truss seat connections between the primary floor trusses and the exterior wall columns or core columns. The individual connection capacities ranged from 94,000 lb to 395,000 lb, with a total vertical load capacity for the connections on a typical floor of 29,000,000 lb (See Section 5.2.4 of NIST NCSTAR 1-6C). The total floor area outside the core was approximately 31,000 ft2, and the average load on a floor under service conditions on September 11, 2001 was 80 lb/ft2. Thus, the total vertical load on a floor outside the core can be estimated by multiplying the floor area (31,000 ft2) by the gravitational load (80 lb/ft2), which yields 2,500,000 lb (this is a conservative load estimate since it ignores the weight contribution of the heavier mechanical floors at the top of each WTC Tower). By dividing the total vertical connection capacity (29,000,000 lb) of a floor by the total vertical load applied to the connections (2,500,000 lb), the number of floors that can be supported by an intact floor is calculated to be a total of 12 floors or 11 additional floors.
This simplified and conservative analysis indicates that the floor connections could have carried only a maximum of about 11 additional floors if the load from these floors were applied statically. Even this number is (conservatively) high, since the load from above the collapsing floor is being applied suddenly. Since the dynamic amplification factor for a suddenly applied load is 2, an intact floor below the level of collapse initiation could not have supported more than six floors. Since the number of floors above the level where the collapse initiated, exceeded 6 for both towers (12 for WTC 1 and 29 for WTC 2), neither tower could have arrested the progression of collapse once collapse initiated. In reality, the highest intact floor was about three (WTC 2) to six (WTC 1) floors below the level of collapse initiation. Thus, more than the 12 to 29 floors reported above actually loaded the intact floor suddenly.

Because to this layman a thorough report written by a who's who of highly credentialed experts in their fields takes on far more credence than a shipbuilder parroting truther sites and manufacturing math to fit their theories. Whatever the hell your "theory" is.

 

[rwguinn]

Heiwa's brother weighs in from Knoxville, Tennessee:

I bask in the warmth of the burning crazy.

Man!
That much crazy piled on the fire will destroy several states if you do it all at once!
(Except California, which is somehow immune...)

 

[Architect]

So what's wrong with it? Be more percipient.

But Heiwa.....we did tell wrong with your theories over in the "debunkers" thread! And you ran away!!!


Have you patented your amazing fireproof structural steel yet? It would make you rich, I can assure you....

 

[SDC]

Wait a minute ... "as the unburned Thermate was ignated by CDI, burned off, then was removed and destroyed in Communist China, and melted down in Knoxville."

First it was destroyed in China and then it was melted in Knoxville?? Does that seem a little bit, well, odd?

 

[WildCat]

Man!
That much crazy piled on the fire will destroy several states if you do it all at once!
(Except California, which is somehow immune...)

I downloaded that sucker just so I could waste 80mb of their bandwidth.

 

[bje]

So it is not necessary to duplicate the calculations in my article. It is quite good at it is. Thanks for your interest.

Heiwa, perhaps you didn't understand me correctly. I am not asking you for a narrative in which you bring up claims and imaginative scenarios involving your speculations. I am asking for your actual data and calculations.

I will ask you again to provide us your calculations [equations, material specifications for each towers at the damage areas, structural damage from aircraft impacts and subsequent fires, etc.], you know, all the necessary calculations and data that you must have in order to draw any conclusions whatsoever. Without that, there is nothing to assess and nothing to evaluate against NIST's calculations, methodologies, and conclusions.

Surely you had to have made and provided similar calculations in your investigation and book on the Estonia disaster, am I correct?

Certainly, you can easily provide them either in a Excel file, Word document, or PDF file that you must already have, correct?

 

[Architect]

Because no competent engineer would ever claim to have come to a meaningful conclusion without such detailed analysis, correct?

 

[bje]

Because no competent engineer would ever claim to have come to a meaningful conclusion without such detailed analysis, correct?

But of course.

 

[Gravy]

Heiwa, perhaps you didn't understand me correctly. I am not asking you for a narrative in which you bring up claims and imaginative scenarios involving your speculations. I am asking for your actual data and calculations.

Sorry, bje, but you weren't posting here when we learned that Lyte Trip's "see-saw analogy renders any need for 'calculations' moot."

So I guess we're stuck.

 

[Architect]

Sorry, bje, but you weren't posting here when we learned that Lyte Trip's "see-saw analogy renders any need for 'calculations' moot."

So I guess we're stuck.

I tried to tell my structural engineers that when they tendered, but they seemed strangely unimpressed and insisted on sufficient fees to cover things called "analysis", "certification", and "senior partner's new car".

 

[bje]

Sorry, bje, but you weren't posting here when we learned that Lyte Trip's "see-saw analogy renders any need for 'calculations' moot."

So I guess we're stuck.

I would be appalled to think that someone with a degree in [SIZE=-1][SIZE=-1]Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering who is Managing Director of a company, the name of which he uses here as his own, would stoop to Lyte Trip's level and not do any calculations!

Could it really be so?

I think it must be because I forgot to give the secret password:


[/SIZE][/SIZE]

 

[Architect]

I know, it's shocking, isn't it. I'd be black affronted if I were in that position, and I'm only a mere architect.

 

[pomeroo]

No it is the FBI, FEMA, NIST term (censured for national security reasons).

BTW - study http://heiwaco.tripod.com/nist.htm (part 2) for smoke ...

Heiwa, I urge you to ponder the implications of the following sentence:


I would not write a paper on Mayan pottery because I don't know anything about Mayan pottery.

 

[pomeroo]

Just quoting Gravy since Heiwa seems to have him on ignore.

Heiwa, are you still so wedded to your "theory" that you will ignore the testimony of people who were there that day? Still maintaining that alll the evidence against you is faked?

It is a source of constant amazement that there are conspiracy liars who don't have Mark on ignore.

 

[LibraryLady]

The tone of this thread is getting increasingly uncivil. Please tone it down. Thank you.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: LibraryLady

 

[DGM]

I would be appalled to think that someone with a degree in [SIZE=-1][SIZE=-1]Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering who is Managing Director of a company, the name of which he uses here as his own, would stoop to Lyte Trip's level and not do any calculations!

Could it really be so?

I think it must be because I forgot to give the secret password:

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/15939477d70723d6ee.png[/qimg]
[/SIZE][/SIZE]

He's only playing structural engineer to pass the time until someone pays attention to his M/S Estonia disaster conspiracy theories.

 

[GregoryUrich]

You seem to be blissfully unaware that this wall was blasted by airliner and office debris. Here's one of the south wall panels, about 700 feet away. Do you think such impacts would have affected the spray-on and wallboard insulation, Anders?

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/879046b25850d7b3a.jpg[/qimg]

That's one sweet cherry Gravy. That single panel (out of 19) was from the exact center of the building. The landing gear went straight down the hallway in the middle of the building with absolutely nothing (with the possible exception of some poor soul) in it's way. No other panels on the south side were knocked out. Everthing else had to go through 250 tons of stuff (on each floor).