26-08-2013, 10:34 AM
Tony at 555
You know that small but important stuff you would need to provide for your claims to have any validity like
- where the evidence was for the necessary 650 deg. C (1,202 deg. F) steel temperatures to cause the core columns to fail under their service load.
- where the lateral load necessary to translate the 12 story upper section and cause the columns to miss each other, the way you claim, would have come from.
We are waiting.
Tony at 542
Phil, the building actually drops vertically a couple of stories, at a very small tilt of 1 degree or less, before the 8 degree tilt occurs. NIST is wrong about the 8 degrees occurring immediately and before any vertical movement. I don't think they looked at it close enough. The columns were never involved in the collapse based on acceleration measurements and column energy absorption capacity calculations. In other words, had the columns been involved the accelerations achieved would not have been possible. The small tilt does not misalign the columns in any significant way and inertia and the reality that buckling ductile columns don't just separate would cause the upper section to stay aligned in the absence of any significant lateral load on it, so there is no reason for misalignment. We find the collapse should have arrested after a one or even two story natural fall, as there would not have been enough kinetic energy to get through the columns.
Jeffrey at 530 indicates mechanical damage and heat weakening; later, column splice failure/column misalignment.
Lacking is any initiator of the observed multifloor failure and drop.
You know that small but important stuff you would need to provide for your claims to have any validity like
- where the evidence was for the necessary 650 deg. C (1,202 deg. F) steel temperatures to cause the core columns to fail under their service load.
- where the lateral load necessary to translate the 12 story upper section and cause the columns to miss each other, the way you claim, would have come from.
We are waiting.
Tony at 542
Phil, the building actually drops vertically a couple of stories, at a very small tilt of 1 degree or less, before the 8 degree tilt occurs. NIST is wrong about the 8 degrees occurring immediately and before any vertical movement. I don't think they looked at it close enough. The columns were never involved in the collapse based on acceleration measurements and column energy absorption capacity calculations. In other words, had the columns been involved the accelerations achieved would not have been possible. The small tilt does not misalign the columns in any significant way and inertia and the reality that buckling ductile columns don't just separate would cause the upper section to stay aligned in the absence of any significant lateral load on it, so there is no reason for misalignment. We find the collapse should have arrested after a one or even two story natural fall, as there would not have been enough kinetic energy to get through the columns.
Jeffrey at 530 indicates mechanical damage and heat weakening; later, column splice failure/column misalignment.
Lacking is any initiator of the observed multifloor failure and drop.