• 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.

Total Building Collapse from a Single Column Failure

Tony Szamboti said:
The NIST FEA has the east side exterior collapsing down and over onto the rest of the building, and it occurs before any exterior movement on the west side. Neither of these features of the NIST FEA are observed on video of the actual event.
Click to expand...

deleted
 
Last edited:
Tony Szamboti said:
Both the twin towers and WTC 7 had core and exterior (tube within a tube) steel construction. They were very similar.

The difference between using beams vs. trusses to support the floors in the areas outside of the core was trivial.
Click to expand...
I would consider these similarities to be very limited as the dtructural design on the wtc 7 framing was quite different than wtc 1 and 2. Those differences arent trivial, they affect much more than you let on.
 
I thought tube-in-tube meant a column-free workspace? WTC7 certainly had columns apparent in the interior.
 
GlennB said:
I thought tube-in-tube meant a column-free workspace? WTC7 certainly had columns apparent in the interior.
Click to expand...

It meant column free space outside of the core. The core was one tube which was inside the exterior tube. Both WTC 7 and the twin towers had this configuration.

The empire state building and essentially all earlier high rise buildings had columns evenly placed throughout their floor plan.
 
Last edited:
Tony Szamboti said:
It meant column free space outside of the core. The core was one tube which was inside the exterior tube. Both WTC 7 and the twin towers had this configuration.
Click to expand...

And WTC7 had columns outside the core, so you appear to have contradicted yourself.
 
that's inaccurate...

What about columns 79,80 and 81 all outside the core and not in the exterior.

Some of 7 had no columns in the interior but it is not a tube structure.
 
Tony Szamboti said:
You can't be serious. I said the actual symmetric fall of the exterior (with the east and west sides coming down uniformly and not deforming) could be replicated by pulling eight stories of the core low in the building and the NIST FEA is far from replicating that actual observation.
Click to expand...


Pulling them in which direction, with how much force and/or what limiting speed? If all eight were pulled slowly in the same direction that might have very different results than if half were pulled one direction and half the opposite direction, rapidly. Just as in the old demonstration of a mass hanging from a thin string, with another length of the same thin string hanging from it. (If one pulls rapidly on the lower string, the lower string will break, but if one pulls gradually, the upper string will break.)

One problem with any scenario involving pulling eight stories of the core on 9/11 is that the attachments and machinery needed to pull interior columns with sufficient force (tractors? winches?) would have been noticeable, and yet no such machinery was observed in the vicinity.
 
Last edited:
Myriad said:
Pulling them in which direction, with how much force and/or what limiting speed? If all eight were pulled slowly in the same direction that might have very different results than if half were pulled one direction and half the opposite direction, rapidly. Just as in the old demonstration of a mass hanging from a thin string, with another length of the same thin string hanging from it. (If one pulls rapidly on the lower string, the lower string will break, but if one pulls gradually, the upper string will break.)

One problem with any scenario involving pulling eight stories of the core on 9/11 is that the attachments and machinery needed to pull interior columns with sufficient force (tractors? winches?) would have been noticeable, and yet no such machinery was observed in the vicinity.
Click to expand...
:D
 
The "exterior" columns, and by that we take it to mean all non-core columns, buckle with essentially no resistance. That is what you say and that is what the fea shows. The particulars of the twisting that the structure performed is irrellevent. Does the fea show progression to global collapse after a loss of the single column number 79? Yes, it does and this is due to the loss of core columns during that progressive collapse.

It can be noted that the fea done for the structure without south side damage twisted a great deal more than the fea done which includes that southern damage. We also know of the fire fighter report that an elevator car had been ejected from its shaft at the fifth floor. That is suggestive of yet more impact damage in the core. There were also fires elsewhere in the building that could easily
have caused other damage. All of these are variables not taken into account but given that the southern damage sped up collapse progression and decreased twisting it would be highly suggestive that other damage would do the same.

Where is AE911T's FEA for either a replication of the conditions that NIST says brought down the building, or, for one taken down by controlled demolition?
 
Tony Szamboti said:
WTC 7 was tube construction just like the twin towers. It had a core and exterior connected by the floors of an open area outside of the core.

Faz Khan was the initiator of this type of construction in the early 1960s. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fazlur_Khan
Click to expand...

That really only applies to the upper 40 storeys.
The original ConEd structure had columns that remained in place after the building was expanded, and were under the cantilever trusses but which , although strengthened, insufficient in themselves to support the upper new structure, the core required special structures at each end to laterally brace the core. The entire structure below the eight floor does not come close to resembling a tube in tube design. The towers were the same from ground to top except for the beams on mech floors.

The collapse of the towers was a failure of the tube in tube design. The collapse of WTC7 was the result of the failure below the part of the structure that was nominally a tube in tube design.
 
Last edited:
Gee Tony...you are really over your head here. WTC 7 is not tube construction. At best, you might call it tube-frame. Do your research, and at least be one truther that can emit he was wrong. Can you at least do that?
 
Last edited:
LSSBB said:
Or "2.3 seconds of free fall".

They are Truther Creeds. They must have had some Truther Ecumenical Council, at some point.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. Tony's hoping that if he says "pull" enough it will magically make the interview he claims he saw where Silverstien admitted to demolishing the building appear.

Remember that, Tony? The interview you said you saw where he admitted it. Did you ever find that, Tony?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom