WTC Collapse Mystery solved, Maybe !

Discussion in 'Physics & Math' started by Singularity, Feb 28, 2006.

  1. Singularity Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,287
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. CANGAS Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,612
    The idea of having a dam lot of weight hanging over my head has never appealed to me, even though I completely understand the engineering reasoning for using it to attempt to dampen earthquake forces.

    I do not happen to know if the buildings had this feature.

    Are you saying that the violence-prone nut jobs who took over the jets are not really to blame?

    If the buildings contained them, the structure was designed, with a big safety factor, to support them, standing still or during any forseeable earthquake. If homo-cidal maniacs had not sinfully and criminally caused violence, they would have remained intact until future real estate developers contracted to tear down the buildings. Structural engineering is a very precise and conservative science.
     
    Last edited: Mar 1, 2006
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Light Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,258
    Evidently she/he/it is among that small group of people that believe the blame belongs on anything but that. :bugeye:
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Singularity Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,287
    Good point, I think all thoes weights should be transfered to the last underground floor; and only the forces should be transfered back up on top using ropes, like the bridges do.

    I tried to search on net, but it seems the illuminati have confiscated all the information.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    And intelligent people like LIGHT are too lazy to find out.

    Nope, They destroyed, broke and made the metal beams to buckle and that may have got the momentum to the mass damper CounterWeights to do the job to Ground Zero.

    Agreed, but that can be said only if Mass Damper theory is true. Any ways its American peoples job to find out, I just gave them a hint.

    There is no such info on WWW.
     
  8. CANGAS Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,612
    I am not a diletante in structural engineering. The theory of mass damping earthquake forces is not guesswork.

    The mass must be high in the building, the higher the better. There is no way to locate the damping mass low and transfer the earthquake forces.
     
  9. Light Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,258
    That's quite correct. And I believe I remember hearing on a documentary about the building of the towers that they used the exact same sub-basement shock absorber technique as was used in the Sears tower in Chicago.
     
  10. Singularity Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,287
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suspension_bridge

    Look at the length of the ropes.

    By placing weights in the basement its possible to transfer the weight forces all the way up on required floors.
     
  11. spidergoat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    51,923
    No, the WTC's didn't have anything like that. In my opinion, these monstrosities are design flaws.
     
  12. CANGAS Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,612
    Mass dampers high in a building are a totally different theory and technology than shock absorbers low in a building.

    Sing.: It is obvious that you have expressed no useful knowledge about technologies aimed at protecting a building from earthquake forces. How much longer are you going to try to bluff?

    Earthquake protection technologies are focused upon the lateral, or, sideways accelerations, or, oscillations that a building is subjected to, in association with the vertical oscillations. Each building must be examined in connection with its immediate environment of soil characteristics and historical earthquake record and therefore expectation. Some buildings may have an inherent resistance, due to early design decisions, to lateral forces, others vertical forces. Whichever technology will complete its required resistance to lateral or vertical forces, or both, is applied. Some buildings, of course, may be sufficiently earthquake resistant with no additional technology beyond their indiginous structural design. An amateur may be bewildered because one building has no additional technology, one has a high mass, one has a low shock absorber, or any combination thereof.
     
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2006
  13. Light Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,258
    Absolutely. Mass dampers are an active system in the sense that they respond to lateral (horizontal) forces and attempt to counteract them. Shock absorbers, like the ones on the Sears Tower and the WTC towers (according to the design video I watched) are passive. They allow the top and bottom of the devices to flex laterally and thus transverse waves move 'beneath' the building, for the most part.

    The action of the mass dampers could be compared to salior shifting his center of gravity in order to remain upright on the rolling deck of a ship.
     
  14. CANGAS Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,612
    The sailor analogy is excellent. While the ground far below is vibrating right and left, and the lower part of the building is trying to transmit the sway upward, the mass high in the building is employing its inertia to try to remain in the same absolute vertical location in space. By remaining in its original vertical location, the top of the building is refusing to sway. This makes it easier for the building to not topple over sideways.
     
  15. Hurricane Angel I am the Metatron Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    471
    Considering the only significant lateral forces the building would have experienced that day were from the plane crashes, I doubt the dampers would have done much.
     
  16. CANGAS Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,612
    You are correct. However, in the context of this thread your comment is a howler of a non sequiter.

    The presence or absence of any low or high earthquake remedy would have made no difference. The difference was accomplished solely by moron nut jobs who took over planes and crashed them into buildings.
     
  17. Hurricane Angel I am the Metatron Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    471
    No... the title exclaims "WTC Collapse Solved".
     
  18. CANGAS Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,612
    The solution seems to have nothing to do with the presence or absence of earthquake technology but rather with the actions of sinfully and criminally destructive people.
     
  19. Hurricane Angel I am the Metatron Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    471
    But that's what I said in the first place.
     
  20. Anomalous Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,710
    Hey there were no dampers in WTC,

    They collapsed due to Bombs, period.
     
  21. Anomalous Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,710
    Your statements are always Anomalous on the negative side of the human comprehendability

    Thats not considered good by me because

    My statements are always Anomalous on the positive side of the human comprehendability

    That make U very boring for all in each thread of yours.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  22. Communist Hamster Cricetulus griseus leninus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,022
    Got any non-circumstantial evidence?
     
  23. Anomalous Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,710
    The third plane was brought down, even after the passengers over powered the hijackers.

    nuf saed !
     

Share This Page