13-08-2013, 11:14 AM
Lauren Johnson Wrote:.
This disagrees with the NIST analysis I take it--although the details escape me? And has this thesis been discussed in the requisite journals? I gotta say that anon posters over at randi don't cut it when it gets down to it. OK, now I will stare at the diagram some more.
This is different from NIST who presented the sagging trusses pulling in the facade, not a core led collapse. The quoted section was from a FEMA report which preceded NIST... I believe. The FEMA scenario is different that what the cartoon suggests... but it shares some key elements. The hat truss was not the ONLY means to redistribute loads... the floor plates did this as well. A finite element analysis would be very complex because of the complexity of the structure and the nature of the fire/heat input. My cartoon is only one possible sequence.
I should point out that the towers destruction was a process not discrete steps.. and there was a blending over time where different processes dominated the destruction so to speak. The first was of course the plane striking and destroying many columns... then the fires began and this weakened them. The strike itself likely knocked insulation from the steel and the fuel did not burn immediately but flowed down and ignited several floors (contents). The plane appears to have severred and shorted the high voltage electrical risers leading to flr 108. This appears to very quickly lead to over heating of the equipment on flr 108 which then catches fire.... it may have also caused the insulting oil to explode. You can see the think black smoke from 108 immediately after the plane hits. This may also have caused the some electrical equipment in the basement to explode and even upstream in the Con Ed sub station in wtc 7. Con Ed did report I think 12 hi tension feeders were offline at them time the plane stuck. As the fire grew there was no fire fighting or sperinkler working up there apparently. The strength of the remaining steel was being eroded by getting hot. It didn't melt nor have to... The heat was causing the frame steel in some places to expand and distort and members began to fail and the loads they carruied were shifted to other columns and this process continued for an hr or more as the building began showing grow visible movements... and then finally there was insufficient capacity available and the actual release of the top 12 stories began.
I don't know if this scenario has been formally presented in an engineering journal. There has been some discussion about the so called "initiation" at the 911freeforum and there is some consensus but clearly it's not even universal. The problem is that the details are impossible to see and so people seem content to accept the over all heat weakening as the cause on top of the mech damage.
Some jref posters are OK, most are not for any number of reasons. The discussion options are few. Truth sites don't accept anything but CD and attempting a non CD discussion is a non starter. They act the same as JREFs. The only forum which has intelligent discussion is 911freeforum which appears to not have a political agenda. It has CD and non CD proponents. Lots of forums people select a nick name.... and it's not only 911truth. People may do that because they feel harrassment or something. I know I've been subject to online attacks about information which is not part of any discussion which I assume is a result of people finding my name and so forth. The attacks are childish and mean spirited. So unfortunately you have to deal with the content and be less concerned with the nick name. Obviously some people are out about their name etc. because they are public advocates such as Gage, Chandler or John Gross, or Ed Depaola. People online hiding behind their made up names can be very nasty... and that's not limited to one side of the debate on any topic.
Make up your mind however it feels right.