Some Misunderstandings Related to WTC Collapse Analysis

[Lauren Johnson]

Jeffrey, @341, Tony and I gave differing interpretations of you Top Down cartoon. Tony said this:

The reason both Jeffrey's and NIST's explanations are confusing is that they aren't real and there was nowhere near enough load redistribution to cause additional failure in their scenarios. In my opinion their scenarios are worse than your analogy of a stable human losing one leg instantly and would be more like a four legged animal suddenly losing one leg. There isn't enough overload to fail the other three legs.

I gave you the benefit of the doubt. This was your answer @352:

This was a 4D process. LxWxHxT so it's hard to communicate in a sketch or even a narrative how this was taking place. Not a linear process by any means.

I tried to explain that there was what I call phase transition but not actually phase boundaries like discreet steps. There was a blending... a progression of weakening and forces (loads) were being redistributed as axial support was compromised and being eroded (or removed)....

Your explanation is fuzzy and confusing. You back away from your cartoon. I looked at all your cartoons. This one needed to stand, in my view. You have abandoned it. If only you had 4D.

Chief Palmer certainly didn't have the whole picture. But and a very big BUT, he did not radio back to the effect, this thing is an inferno. We have to back off. No, two isolated fires that they could knock down.