mosque in South Tower before and during 9-11
-
fat_boy wrote:
If you were designing a building to survive a plane impact do you suppose the discussion would be very different from that?
I imagine it would've gone more like: "OK, the maximum stress the beams can support is blah, and the expected stress will be blah, and a jet crashing will be about blah, so we're covered there. The support beams are properly fireproofed, so even if the jet causes a fire the beams will be protected, so I guess we're covered there. OK, I think we're good to go!" I mean, the buildings DID survive the impact, quite easily in fact, and they probably would've survived the fire if the insulation was intact.
-
Remind me never to get into a product you engineered! :) And they wouldnt have collapsed if the floor were joined solidly to the shell.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
fat_boy wrote:
Remind me never to get into a product you engineered!
Well, obviously they didn't know that the insulation would be so effortlessly removed, and that was probably the main factor in the collapse, so what's so unreasonable about my hypothetical discussion? Giving artistic license, of course. ;P
fat_boy wrote:
And they wouldnt have collapsed if the floor were joined solidly to the shell.
You can't know that.
-
fat_boy wrote:
Remind me never to get into a product you engineered!
Well, obviously they didn't know that the insulation would be so effortlessly removed, and that was probably the main factor in the collapse, so what's so unreasonable about my hypothetical discussion? Giving artistic license, of course. ;P
fat_boy wrote:
And they wouldnt have collapsed if the floor were joined solidly to the shell.
You can't know that.
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
Well, obviously they didn't know that the insulation would be so effortlessly removed
What, after being smacked into by tonnes of airplane?
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
You can't know that.
If floor collapse was part of the failure, and most analysis points in this direction, then pinning them to the skin and central colllumn, would have made a big difference.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
Well, obviously they didn't know that the insulation would be so effortlessly removed
What, after being smacked into by tonnes of airplane?
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
You can't know that.
If floor collapse was part of the failure, and most analysis points in this direction, then pinning them to the skin and central colllumn, would have made a big difference.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
fat_boy wrote:
What, after being smacked into by tonnes of airplane?
Not even just that - the fast movement of air it caused, apparently, stripped the insulation off.
fat_boy wrote:
If floor collapse was part of the failure, and most analysis points in this direction, then pinning them to the skin and central colllumn, would have made a big difference.
Well, I thought that the floors were anchored to the walls: http://www.debunking911.com/towers.htm[^]. I'm not sure what to make of it.
-
fat_boy wrote:
What, after being smacked into by tonnes of airplane?
Not even just that - the fast movement of air it caused, apparently, stripped the insulation off.
fat_boy wrote:
If floor collapse was part of the failure, and most analysis points in this direction, then pinning them to the skin and central colllumn, would have made a big difference.
Well, I thought that the floors were anchored to the walls: http://www.debunking911.com/towers.htm[^]. I'm not sure what to make of it.
Thats a better explanation. The one I saw at the time said neither end of the beam was anchored. This one shows differently. The anchor is only 3/8th plate. Thats about 10mm. Each plate looks to be about 10 inches long. The plates are fillet welded to the outer skin, with no hanging knees or triangulated supports. Thats a lot of weight hanging off those welds. (The lower bracket wont carry any weight). And you know why the holes are slotted? Its to allow for tollerances. But that means that the end of the beam will often not be up fluch against the skin. Thus the 10mm plate is subjected to not only a shear load at the welds, but also a bending load. If I was bolting that floor together my bowels would start to clench at that thought. Its very weak. The plates shoudl be triangulated at 3 or 4 points along their length. With a good weld this is virtually indestructable. (At least till the outer skin to which they are welded deforms)
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
Thats a better explanation. The one I saw at the time said neither end of the beam was anchored. This one shows differently. The anchor is only 3/8th plate. Thats about 10mm. Each plate looks to be about 10 inches long. The plates are fillet welded to the outer skin, with no hanging knees or triangulated supports. Thats a lot of weight hanging off those welds. (The lower bracket wont carry any weight). And you know why the holes are slotted? Its to allow for tollerances. But that means that the end of the beam will often not be up fluch against the skin. Thus the 10mm plate is subjected to not only a shear load at the welds, but also a bending load. If I was bolting that floor together my bowels would start to clench at that thought. Its very weak. The plates shoudl be triangulated at 3 or 4 points along their length. With a good weld this is virtually indestructable. (At least till the outer skin to which they are welded deforms)
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
Well there you go.