Why do you still believe that a collapse due to fire wouldn't be possible?

[Bell]

Well my intuition tells me that when the "upper block" hits the "lower block" [...]

You're intuition is going wrong right there. The upper block did not hit a lower block.

 

[T.A.M.]

All my training is in my BA of statistics and work in actuarial math. The rest is common sense questions I've gathered upon researching 9/11 conspiracy over the past 2 & 1/2 weeks.

Sure....whatever...once again....watching....waiting.

TAM

 

[uke2se]

Well my intuition tells me that when the "upper block" hits the "lower block" there is going to be resistance - a bumpy curve of acceleration. We would have to determine what is a statistically significant "bump". A good way to find out what an approximately normal bump would be is to measure the amount of jolt from other steel building collapses during which the moment both upward and downward force is proportional to the upward and downward force of the WTC buildings at the particular moments in time we are looking for (it would be good to get this information from Nist, not just for my jolt experiments but to also calculate whether the collapse of each building happened in a realistic time period for a gravitational/fire collapse). There would be degrees of error, hence the words "statistically significant".

So all we need is a copy of the WTC? Well twoofers, stop throwing money at Gage and start pooling up to get this built.

 

[Patriots4Truth]

Originally Posted by Patriots4Truth
wow you are no better than your "twoofers"... "intuition", snap judgments with no evidence etc...


So, you admit that the truthers have no evidence - good start.

The way that we are different, is that we do not believe that the best way to fight for justice is to babble about it on the internet.

no, I admit that "your twoofers" have no evidence - I admit that this is how debunkers perceive things - with big blanket terms such as "no evidence". I have yet to see the Original Story have enough evidence for a fire/gravitational collapse. But even I can admit that there is evidence for fire.

 

[Architect]

I don't have personal confidence in that field (even if my lie a few pages back made me appear like I did - you caught me there).

But I do have several questions, a lot of which should be easy for architects, engineers, and physicists to answer.

Well, fire away with the first two. What you think a physicist can ring to the table I can only guess.....

 

[Patriots4Truth]

So all we need is a copy of the WTC? Well twoofers, stop throwing money at Gage and start pooling up to get this built.

we don't need a copy, we need a clearer idea of what the force may have been. we will never know the exact forces but we can use significant intervals wherein the force must lie for our calculations - most importantly we could use any more information that NIST may be withholding.

 

[Disbelief]

no, I admit that "your twoofers" have no evidence - I admit that this is how debunkers perceive things - with big blanket terms such as "no evidence".

That's because they have not produced any. If they have such compelling evidence, why haas no one taken it to any authority, anywhere in the world, to act on it?

I have yet to see the Original Story have enough evidence for a fire/gravitational collapse. But even I can admit that there is evidence for fire.

What evidence would convince you? You admit that you do not have the math/physics background, say you are too lazy ot research, yet appear to jump aboard anything from "truth" sites. So, what would convince you?

 

[Bell]

most importantly we could use any more information that NIST may be withholding.

What information may NIST be withholding?

 

[Architect]

Well my intuition tells me that when the "upper block" hits the "lower block" there is going to be resistance - a bumpy curve of acceleration. We would have to determine what is a statistically significant "bump". A good way to find out what an approximately normal bump would be is to measure the amount of jolt from other steel building collapses during which the moment both upward and downward force is proportional to the upward and downward force of the WTC buildings at the particular moments in time we are looking for (it would be good to get this information from Nist, not just for my jolt experiments but to also calculate whether the collapse of each building happened in a realistic time period for a gravitational/fire collapse). There would be degrees of error, hence the words "statistically significant".

Yes and no.

Yes, the lower part of the structure will, of course, present some resistance to the collapsing mass.

No, because empirical evidence based on allegedley similar collapses is of no assistance here. "Jolts" are irrelevant. This is about caluclation and analysis, about what steel can and cannot do in the face of massively changed loads and - just as importantly - load paths. Take a look at Frank Greening's calculations and come back with something more focussed, please. Or perhaps Bezant.

 

[Patriots4Truth]

That's because they have not produced any. If they have such compelling evidence, why haas no one taken it to any authority, anywhere in the world, to act on it?



What evidence would convince you? You admit that you do not have the math/physics background, say you are too lazy ot research, yet appear to jump aboard anything from "truth" sites. So, what would convince you?

the complete physics of the collapses (which would have to use significant estimations or intervals for any unknown variables)

 

[carlitos]

Sounds like a free body diagram. There is one of those somewhere around here.

 

[Architect]

the complete physics of the collapses (which would have to use significant estimations or intervals for any unknown variables)

You're right, your questions are easy for archtiects and engineers to answer.

Modelling of the "complete physics" of the collapse is impossible due to the large number of viables. All we need to show is the initiation event and, if we want to be thorough, the likely failure of the next floor. Thereafter forces increase and progressive collapse is inevitable.

 

[Disbelief]

the complete physics of the collapses (which would have to use significant estimations or intervals for any unknown variables)

Since you admit you are not good at physics, how would you be able to tell how good of a job was done?

 

[Patriots4Truth]

Yes and no.

Yes, the lower part of the structure will, of course, present some resistance to the collapsing mass.

No, because empirical evidence based on allegedley similar collapses is of no assistance here. "Jolts" are irrelevant. This is about caluclation and analysis, about what steel can and cannot do in the face of massively changed loads and - just as importantly - load paths. Take a look at Frank Greening's calculations and come back with something more focussed, please. Or perhaps Bezant.

jolts can be proved to be irrelevant if the match of WTC jolts is within the confidence interval for normal model jolts at those particular moments when floors collide into each other at the beginning of each WTC collapse.

until then we agree to disagree

 

[Patriots4Truth]

Since you admit you are not good at physics, how would you be able to tell how good of a job was done?

hire lots of distinguished independent physicists to do my problems. get more information from NIST to make it easier to do my problems

 

[BigAl]

hire lots of distinguished independent physicists to do my problems.

Like these?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=4969965#post4969965
Updated

Performance based structural fire engineering for modern building design
Rini, D., Lamont, S. 2008 Proceedings of the 2008 Structures Congress - Structures Congress 2008: Crossing the Borders 314

Engineering perspective of the collapse of WTC-I
Irfanoglu, A., Hoffmann, C.M. 2008 Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities 22 (1),

Collapse of towers as applied to September 11 events
Cherepanov, G.P. 2008 Materials Science 44 (4), pp. 489-499

Modeling pre-evacuation delay by occupants in World Trade Center Towers 1 and 2 on September 11, 2001
Kuligowski, E.D., Mileti, D.S. 2008 Fire Safety Journal

World Trade Center building disaster: Stimulus for innovations
Kodur, V.K.R. 2008 Indian Concrete Journal 82 (1), pp. 23-31

A collective undergraduate class project reconstructing the September 11, 2001 world trade center fire
Marshall, A., Quintiere, J. 2007 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings

"A new era": The limits of engineering expertise in a post-9/11 world
Pfatteicher, S.K.A. 2007 International Symposium on Technology and Society, Proceedings, art. no. 4362228

Progressive collapse of the World Trade Center: Simple analysis
Seffen, K.A. 2008 Journal of Engineering Mechanics 134 (2), pp. 125-132

Scale modeling of the 96th floor of world trade center tower 1
Wang, M., Chang, P., Quintiere, J., Marshall, A. 2007 Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities 21 (6), pp. 414-421

Failure of welded floor truss connections from the exterior wall during collapse of the world trade center towers
Banovic, S.W., Siewert, T.A. 2007 Welding Journal (Miami, Fla) 86 (9), pp. 263-s-272-s

The collapse of the world trade center towers: A metallurgist's view
Gayle, F.W. 2007 MRS Bulletin 32 (9), pp. 710-716

Building code changes reflect world trade center investigation
Hansen, B. 2007 Civil Engineering 77 (9), pp. 22+24-25

Fire load in a steel building design
Razdolsky, L. 2008 Proceedings of the 4th International Structural Engineering and Construction Conference, ISEC-4 - Innovations in Structural Engineering and Construction 2, pp. 1163-1167

The structural steel of the World Trade Center towers
Gayle, F.W., Banovic, S.W., Foecke, T., Fields, R.J., Luecke, W.E., McColskey, J.D., McCown, C., Siewert, T.A. 2006 Journal of Failure Analysis and Prevention 6 (5), pp. 5-8

Progressive collapse of structures: Annotated bibliography and comparison of codes and standards
Mohamed, O.A. 2006 Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities 20 (4), art. no. 001604QCF, pp. 418-425

A simple model of the World Trade Center fireball dynamics
Baum, H.R., Rehm, R.G., Quintiere, J.G. 2005 Proceedings of the Combustion Institute 30 II, pp. 2247-2254

Impact of the Boeing 767 Aircraft into the World Trade Center
Karim, M.R., Hoo Fatt, M.S. 2005 Journal of Engineering Mechanics 131 (10), pp. 1066-1072

High-fidelity simulation of large-scale structures
Hoffmann, C., Sameh, A., Grama, A. 2005 Lecture Notes in Computer Science 3515 (II), pp. 664-671

Collapses of the world trade center towers
[No author name available] 2005 Indian Concrete Journal 79 (8), pp. 11-16

Industry updates: Fireproofing, staircases cited in World Trade Center report
[No author name available] 2005 Journal of Failure Analysis and Prevention 5 (4), pp. 34

September 11 and fracture mechanics - A retrospective
Cherepanov, G.P. 2005 International Journal of Fracture 132 (2), pp. L25-L26

Structural responses of World Trade Center under aircraft attacks
Omika, Y., Fukuzawa, E., Koshika, N., Morikawa, H., Fukuda, R. 2005 Journal of Structural Engineering 131 (1), pp. 6-15

Impact of the 2001 World Trade Center attack on critical interdependent infrastructures
Mendonça, D., Lee II, E.E., Wallace, W.A. 2004 Conference Proceedings - IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics 5, pp. 4053-4058

Use of high-efficiency energy absorbing device to arrest progressive collapse of tall building
Zhou, Q., Yu, T.X. 2004 Journal of Engineering Mechanics 130 (10), pp. 1177-1187

Progressive analysis procedure for progressive collapse
Marjanishvili, S.M. 2004 Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities 18 (2), pp. 79-85

Lessons learned on improving resistance of buildings to terrorist attacks
Corley, W.G. 2004 Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities 18 (2), pp. 68-78

Anatomy of a disaster: A structural investigation of the World Trade Center collapses
Abboud, N., Levy, M., Tennant, D., Mould, J., Levine, H., King, S., Ekwueme, C., (...), Hart, G. 2003 Forensic Engineering, Proceedings of the Congress, pp. 360-370

World Trade Center disaster: Damage/debris assessment
Thater, G.G., Panariello, G.F., Cuoco, D.A. 2003 Forensic Engineering, Proceedings of the Congress, pp. 383-392

How did the WTC towers collapse: A new theory
Usmani, A.S., Chung, Y.C., Torero, J.L. 2003 Fire Safety Journal 38 (6), pp. 501-533

Microstructural analysis of the steels from Buildings 7, & 1 or 2 from the World Trade Center
Biederman, R.R., Sullivan, E.M., Sisson Jr., R.D., Vander Voort, G.F. 2003 Microscopy and Microanalysis 9 (SUPPL. 2), pp. 550-551

Brannigan, F.L.
"WTC: Lightweight Steel and High-Rise Buildings"
Fire Engineering v.155, no. 4, (2002): 145-150.

Analysis of the thermal exposure in the impact areas of the World Trade Center terrorist attacks
Beyler, C., White, D., Peatross, M., Trellis, J., Li, S., Luers, A., Hopkins, D. 2003 Forensic Engineering, Proceedings of the Congress, pp. 371-382

Clifton, Charles G.
Elaboration on Aspects of the Postulated Collapse of the World Trade Centre Twin Towers
HERA: Innovation in Metals. 2001. 13 December 2001.

"Construction and Collapse Factors"
Fire Engineering v.155, no. 10, (2002): 106-108.

Bazant, Z.P., & Zhou, Y.
"Addendum to 'Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? - Simple Analysis" (pdf)
Journal of Engineering Mechanics v. 128, no. 3, (2002): 369-370.

Corbett, G.P.
"Learning and Applying the Lessons of the WTC Disaster"
Fire Engineering v.155, no. 10, (2002.): 133-135.

"Dissecting the Collapses"
Civil Engineering ASCE v. 72, no. 5, (2002): 36-46.

Eagar, T.W., & Musso, C.
"Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? Science, Engineering, and Speculation"
JOM v. 53, no. 12, (2001): 8-12.

Federal Emergency Management Agency, Therese McAllister, report editor.
World Trade Center Building Performance Study: Data Collection, Preliminary Observations, and Recommendations
(also available on-line)

Gabrielson, T.B., Poese, M.E., & Atchley, A.A.
"Acoustic and Vibration Background Noise in the Collapsed Structure of the World Trade Center"
The Journal of Acoustical Society of America v. 113, no. 1, (2003): 45-48.

"Collapse Lessons"
Fire Engineering v. 155, no. 10, (2002): 97-103

Marechaux, T.G.
"TMS Hot Topic Symposium Examines WTC Collapse and Building Engineering"
JOM, v. 54, no. 4, (2002): 13-17.

Monahan, B.
"World Trade Center Collapse-Civil Engineering Considerations"
Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction v. 7, no. 3, (2002): 134-135.

Newland, D.E., & Cebon, D.
"Could the World Trade Center Have Been Modified to Prevent Its Collapse?"
Journal of Engineering Mechanics v. 128, no. 7, (2002):795-800.

National Instititue of Stamdards and Technology: Congressional and Legislative Affairs
“Learning from 9/11: Understanding the Collapse of the World Trade Center”
Statement of Dr. Arden L. Bement, Jr., before Committee of Science House of Representatives, United States Congress on March 6, 2002.

Pinsker, Lisa, M.
"Applying Geology at the World Trade Center Site"
Geotimes v. 46, no. 11, (2001).
The print copy has 3-D images.

Public Broadcasting Station (PBS)
Why the Towers Fell: A Companion Website to the Television Documentary.
NOVA (Science Programming On Air and Online)

Post, N.M.
"No Code Changes Recommended in World Trade Center Report"
ENR v. 248, no. 14, (2002): 14.

Post, N.M.
"Study Absolves Twin Tower Trusses, Fireproofing"
ENR v. 249, no. 19, (2002): 12-14.

The University of Sydney, Department of Civil Engineering
World Trade Center - Some Engineering Aspects
A resource site.

"WTC Engineers Credit Design in Saving Thousands of Lives"
ENR v. 247, no. 16, (2001): 12.

 

[uke2se]

we don't need a copy, we need a clearer idea of what the force may have been.

We have a pretty clear idea.

we will never know the exact forces but we can use significant intervals wherein the force must lie for our calculations - most importantly we could use any more information that NIST may be withholding.

Do you have evidence that NIST is withholding anything? Is NIST "in on it"?

 

[Architect]

jolts can be proved to be irrelevant if the match of WTC jolts is within the confidence interval for normal model jolts at those particular moments when floors collide into each other at the beginning of each WTC collapse.

until then we agree to disagree

No we don't, because your proposed empirical analysis is inappropriate.

Firstly, we have no comparable large-scale building collapse in terms of failure mode or design type. A benchmark "jolt" does not exist.

Secondly, you appear to make assumptions about the nature of the collapse event and the ability of a collapsing debris interface to create jolts of the type you mention. That's before we start looking at whether the time interval between floor impact events is during the collapse would occur or even be measureable.

Now,as I said in previous post, all we actually have to do is model the initial failure and the first floor thereafter.

 

[Patriots4Truth]

You're right, your questions are easy for archtiects and engineers to answer.

Modelling of the "complete physics" of the collapse is impossible due to the large number of viables. All we need to show is the initiation event and, if we want to be thorough, the likely failure of the next floor. Thereafter forces increase and progressive collapse is inevitable.

okay, I don't want the complete physics.. just enough for my jolt experiments and the experiments where people are trying to figure out a normal speed for the collapses... lots of technical stuff yada yada yada. more information should be released to see if there was axial impacts... it would be nice to see more information about how the WTC7 fell...etc

 

[Architect]

hire lots of distinguished independent physicists to do my problems. get more information from NIST to make it easier to do my problems

Perhaps you could advise as to why you believe physicists are in some manner qualified to comment on matters relating to building failure analysis, structural engineering, and fire engineering in contrast to (say) structural engineers or architects who specialise in this field?