| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
scubadiver
Validated Poster
Joined: 26 Apr 2006
Posts: 1850
Location: Currently Andover
|
 Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 10:24 am Post subject: Scale Model of Steel Building Didn't Fall |
 |
|
I am no engineer...
http://www.boston.com/news/science/articles/2007/12/03/the_science_of_ how_buildings_fall_down/
| Quote: |
As the column shattered at the base of the scale model structure in the basement lab, the downward force of the 5,000-pound load - metal weights simulating a real-life building's burden of walls, floors, and contents - shifted instantly, invisibly, to other beams and columns.
Beams bent on the 5.2-by-9.5-foot structure; cracks crazed the concrete; there was a groan of strained materials. "We've got point-46 deformity," called out graduate student Marlon Bazan, monitoring an array of 50 sensors. That meant the main beams had sagged by not quite a half-inch.
But the mock building held.
|
_________________
Currently working on a new website |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Stefan
Banned
Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 1219
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 11:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
It wasn't a scale model of the WTC building - it was a scale model of a hypothetical steel framed building.
The aritcal is interesting though -
Basically says:
Engineers never thought progressive collapses would happen to steel framed buildings when the buildings were designed.
Federal Building and WTC collapses both show they can (erm... should someone point out the obvious to them)
Now they're trying to do research to show how to stop it happening...
And surprise surprise their mock up didn't go into progressive collapse
This is stupidity squared - since there is no feasable explanation for either the WTC or Federal Building "progressive collapses" which doesn't involve explosives placed inside the building at strategic points - both the NIST report and the report on the federal building were done by the SAME TEAM OF GOVERNMENT SCIENTISTS neither adequetely (or in the case of WTC - at all) explain how progessive collapse occurred.
Indeed in the latest correspondance with Jones,Gage,Ryan they plainly admitted they couldn't explain it.
So before people start trying to work out how to AVOID progressive collapse, they should wait until someone can explain HOW progressive collapse can occur in the first place - and realise that without explosives they just don't!
_________________
Peace and Truth |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TonyGosling
Editor
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 18335
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
scubadiver
Validated Poster
Joined: 26 Apr 2006
Posts: 1850
Location: Currently Andover
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 12:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Stefan wrote: |
It wasn't a scale model of the WTC building - it was a scale model of a hypothetical steel framed building.
|
Slightly misleading article, I agree.
_________________
Currently working on a new website |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fish5133
Site Admin
Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 2568
Location: One breath from Glory
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 9:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The reason the model didnt collapse is because they didnt simulate imaginary planes 
_________________
JO911B.
"for we wrestle not against flesh and blood but against principalities, against powers, against rulers of the darkness of this world, against wicked spirits in high places " Eph.6 v 12 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
