Load Redistribution.

[bryan]

While NIST's final report on WTC7 is packed with useless and irrelevant details, it makes only vague references to the "load redistribution" that's crucial to its Probable Collapse Sequence.

Eventually, the fires reached the northeast region of the building. The probable collapse sequence that caused the global collapse of WTC 7 involved the initiation of the buckling of a critical interior column in that vicinity. This column had become unsupported over nine stories after inicial local fire-induced damage led to a cascade of local floor failures. The buckling of this column led to a vertical progression of floor failures up to the roof, and led to the buckling of adjacent interior columns to the south of the critical column. An east-to-west horizontal progression of interior column buckling followed, due to loss of lateral support to adjacent columns, forces exerted by falling debris, and load redistribution from other buckled columns. The exterior columns then buckled as the failed building core moved downward, redistributing its load to the exterior columns. Global collapse occurred as the entire building above the buckled region moved downward as a single unit. This was a fire-induced progressive collapse, also known as disproportionate collapse, eventually resulting in the collapse of an entire structure, or a disproportionately large part of it.

NCSTAR 1A "Final Report on the Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7", November 2008, Chapter 4

People who have read the report and accept its findings are implicitly saying they understand the mechanics of this load redistribution, so let's hope they can explain it better than NIST do.


First, back to basics: in the diagram below, what happens if the four interior columns fail and the floors and roof they were supporting come crashing down?



Do the exterior columns collapse too, or do they remain standing?

[bryan]

Bassheads Is there anybody out there original banned white label - YouTube

Bassheads Is there anybody out there original banned white label - YouTube

[mishy]

Originally Posted by bryan

Bassheads Is there anybody out there original banned white label - YouTube

Choon!

[gamolon]

Originally Posted by bryan

While NIST's final report on WTC7 is packed with useless and irrelevant details, it makes only vague references to the "load redistribution" that's crucial to its Probable Collapse Sequence.




People who have read the report and accept its findings are implicitly saying they understand the mechanics of this load redistribution, so let's hope they can explain it better than NIST do.


First, back to basics: in the diagram below, what happens if the four interior columns fail and the floors and roof they were supporting come crashing down?



Do the exterior columns collapse too, or do they remain standing?

Here's a better question.

If the interior 4 columns weaken by 30% what happens to the load from the floors and roof they helped to support?

[bryan]

Originally Posted by gamolon

Here's a better question.

If the interior 4 columns weaken by 30% what happens to the load from the floors and roof they helped to support?

The interior columns in WTC7 didn't just weaken by 30% - they failed completely.

[bryan]

The question in the OP is clearly too hard for the debunkers, so I'll try and make it a bit easier for them by putting it into 'multiple choice' format.

Here we go...


Q. In the diagram below, what happens if the four interior columns fail and the floors and roof they were supporting come crashing down?



Choose one of the following answers:

A1. The perimeter columns remain standing.

A2. The perimeter columns collapse together with the interior columns.

A3. The perimeter columns remain standing for six seconds, then they all suddenly collapse at exactly the same time.

A4. Nothing is impossible.

[wispy]

Originally Posted by bryan

The question in the OP is clearly too hard for the debunkers, so I'll try and make it a bit easier for them by putting it into 'multiple choice' format.

Here we go...


Q. In the diagram below, what happens if the four interior columns fail and the floors and roof they were supporting come crashing down?



Choose one of the following answers:

A1. The perimeter columns remain standing.

A2. The perimeter columns collapse together with the interior columns.

A3. The perimeter columns remain standing for six seconds, then they all suddenly collapse at exactly the same time.

A4. Nothing is impossible.

What causes them to come crashing down?

And how do they come crashing down? completley at the same time like a flat slab or does part of it start caving in first?

Just curious.

[bryan]

Originally Posted by wispy

What causes them to come crashing down?

And how do they come crashing down? completley at the same time like a flat slab or does part of it start caving in first?

Just curious.

Are these rhetorical questions?

[bryan]

Originally Posted by wispy

What causes them to come crashing down?

Do you know the answer to this question?

If so, please share your knowledge.

If not, you've accepted NIST's report on blind faith.

[bryan]

Gamolon, do you have a similar diagram showing the same basic structure but with 9 floors? If so, could you post it and explain what buckling mode(s) could account for the freefall collapse of the entire perimeter?

[wispy]

Originally Posted by bryan

Do you know the answer to this question?

If so, please share your knowledge.

If not, you've accepted NIST's report on blind faith.

I see. So this is not an imaginary building then?

[bryan]

Originally Posted by wispy

I see. So this is not an imaginary building then?

If you don't think the imaginary building in the diagram can be used to represent WTC 7 in a discussion on load redistribution, you should take it up with gamolon, who first posted it for that very reason.

[alf hearted]

I've just distributed my load. What do I win?

[marky78]

[bryan]

Still no meaningful response from the debunkers. Maybe we can find an answer to our question by consulting their Holy Bible directly.


On page 23 of NIST's Final Report on the Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 we read:

Due to the buckling of Column 79 between Floors 5 and 14, the upper section of Column 79 began to descend. The downward movement of Column 79 led to the observed kink in the east penthouse, and its subsequent descent. The cascading failures of the lower floors surrounding Column 79 led to increased unsupported length in, falling debris impact on, and loads being re-distributed to adjacent columns; and Column 80 and then Column 81 buckled as well. All the floor connections to these three columns, as well as to the exterior columns, failed, and the floors fell on the east side of the building. The exterior facade on the east quarter of the building was just a hollow shell.

So, judging by the information given in this paragraph, it appears that the correct answer to the question in the OP is:

A1. The perimeter columns remain standing.

(to be continued)

[wispy]

Originally Posted by bryan

Still no meaningful response from the debunkers. Maybe we can find an answer to our question by consulting their Holy Bible directly.


On page 23 of NIST's Final Report on the Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 we read:



So, judging by the information given in this paragraph, it appears that the correct answer to the question in the OP is:


(to be continued)

So your drawing was hypothetical then. It didn't look like WTC7 at all. You're now sinking to NIST's level then. Tut tut.

I'll await the next installment.

[bryan]

Originally Posted by wispy

So your drawing was hypothetical then. It didn't look like WTC7 at all. You're now sinking to NIST's level then. Tut tut.

I'll await the next installment.

It was hypothetical when gamolon first posted it as a red herring in another thread:

http://forum.davidicke.com/showpost....&postcount=272


My use of it is more scientific. I'm trying to work out what would happen to the hypothetical building by studying what happened to a real life building that (allegedly) experienced a similar kind of load redistribution.

[wispy]

Originally Posted by bryan

It was hypothetical when gamolon first posted it as a red herring in another thread:

http://forum.davidicke.com/showpost....&postcount=272


My use of it is more scientific. I'm trying to work out what would happen to the hypothetical building by studying what happened to a real life building that (allegedly) experienced a similar kind of load redistribution.

Oh I see. I don't, contrary to some views, trawl every thread.

So what did Gamolon give you as an answer or are you creating your own red herrings?

[bryan]

Originally Posted by wispy

Oh I see. I don't, contrary to some views, trawl every thread.

So what did Gamolon give you as an answer or are you creating your own red herrings?

Gamolon disappeared from the other thread after I gave an answer that was based on what NIST say happened to WTC7. That's why I started this one.

[wispy]

Originally Posted by bryan

Gamolon disappeared from the other thread after I gave an answer that was based on what NIST say happened to WTC7. That's why I started this one.

Oh I see.

And what would have YOUR answer been then for this hypothetical one without any external elevation or deatails shown?

And what criteria and assumptions are you using.

Carry on. Don't take too long, which I am assuming you won't as you are obviously an expert in all this.