Introduction Of Heiwa, Planes should not collide with towers Options

[Heiwa]

Hi all. I am Heiwa. Naval architect. Designing ships since 40 years. Quite complex! Lots of forces acting on a ship structure in the interface water/air affecting strength, buoyancy and stability. Like planes. Structures fixed on land are easier to design. Take a tower/skyscraper:

A tower/skyscraper structure consists generally of load carrying elements of only two types, i.e. vertical steel columns and horizontal composite steel/concrete floor panels, all joined together one way or another, e.g. by bolts.

The vertical elements, the columns, joined on top of each other are primary structural elements that transmit their loads down to ground.

The horizontal elements, the floor panels, placed between and connected to the columns are secondary structural elements that transmit their loads to the columns.

And that’s it. Nothing magic at all! Not like a ship or a plane.

If a skyscraper has 110 floors, like WTC, there are thus 110 assemblies of horizontal floor panels all connected to the vertical columns. Evidently the columns between ground and the first floor are designed to carry 110 floors and the columns below the top floor (or roof) are designed to carry just one floor (or the roof).

It means that the lowermost columns of a tower structure are 110 times stronger than the topmost columns.

Airplane pilots are highly recommended not to fly their planes into towers/skyscrapers, as the vertical and horizontal elements of the towers/skyscrapers will slice/shred the plane into small pieces. Evidently the plane will cause some local damage to the structural elements of the tower or skyscraper … but that’'s it.

Anyone believing that flying planes into the weak tops of skyscrapers will destroy or crush the strong bottom parts of same towers should read my scientific paper at http://heiwaco.tripod.com/tower.htm . I am happy to inform that you can in fact fly as many planes you like into the tops of skyscrapers and nothing will happen to skyscraper below impact. The plane's pilot will evidently get smashed.

If you belong to a terrorist organization and plan a flying attack anywhere you should thus avoid flying planes sideways into the weak tops of skyscrapers as you will only produce local failures up in the weak top and kill yourself. Better is to hit the bottoms or Stuka style vertically through the roof. But you will still kill yourself.

I have informed the FBI and CIA about the above and they, Pearl Harbour style, informed that couldn’t care less, I was sorry to hear. They apparently have great difficulties in Afghanistan forgetting the home front. Well, do not blame me.

This post has been edited by Heiwa: Nov 5 2011, 01:38 PM

[onesliceshort]

http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_ch2.pdf

It is believed that almost all of the jet fuel that remained on the impact floors was consumed in the first few minutes of the fire.

Sporadic, smokey office fires that firefighters (RIP) had called in as "small pockets of fire" that needed "two lines" weakened the steel SanderO??

Here are a few more...

pages 180, and 181 of the Final Report NIST

“None of the recovered steel samples showed evidence of exposure to temperatures above 600 ºC for as long as 15 min. This was based on NIST annealing studies that established the set of time and temperature conditions necessary to alter the steel
microstructure.”

“Only three [out of 171] of the recovered samples of exterior panels reached temperatures in excess of 250 ºC during the fires or after the collapse. This was based on a method developed by NIST to characterize maximum temperatures experienced by steel members through observations of paint cracking.” (NCSTAR 1, 181)

After only 15 minutes of exposure at 625ºC, the pearlite showed signs of spheroidization. As this feature was not observed in any of the four spandrel materials evaluated, it was believed that the spandrels were not exposed to this temperature or that if they were, it was for significantly less time than 15 minutes.

Annealing studies on recovered steels established the set of time and temperature conditions necessary to alter the steel microstructure. Based on the pre-collapse photographic evidence, the microstructures of steels known to have been exposed to fire were characterized. These microstructures show no evidence of exposure to temperatures above 600º C for any significant time

Similar results, i.e., limited exposure if any above 250º C, were found for the two core columns recovered from the fire-affected floors of the towers, which had adequate paint for analysis.

NIST had no physical proof whatsoever that the steel was "weakened" yet despite this went on to say..

“Following the impact of the aircraft, the jet-fuel-ignited fires created the sustained and elevated temperatures that heated the remaining building structure to the point of collapse initiation.” (NCSTAR 1, 121)

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/pilotfly.gif)

You're here doing exactly the same!

Explosions felt, witnessed and recorded = "transformers" or "air pockets"

Explosions witnessed and severe damage testified to = "jetfuel mist making its way down to subbasements"

Collapse = "Office fire affected steel beams"

You've always said that advocating a "gravity driven collapse" isn't supporting the OCT. That the collapse initiation was the problem. Now you're saying that weakened steel was a factor in the collapse.

You are an OCT apologist who even goes beyond what NIST had the audacity to claim.

Is that a fair comment based on what I've posted MrM?


Heiwa, are you on the glue?

[Heiwa]

Heiwa, are you on the glue?

I drink coffee in the morning, red Bordeaux wine at lunch and dinner and ... that's it. Keeps you fit.

NIST says: “Following the impact of the aircraft, the jet-fuel-ignited fires created the sustained and elevated temperatures that heated the remaining building structure to the point of collapse initiation.”

OK, it means that fires/high temperatures changed the structure so it reached the point of collapse initiation.

And then?? Collapse is initiated high up in the structure and what then? A point is reached - the point of collapse initiation! What kind of point is that?

Small, weak top C drops by gravity and crushes big, strong bottom A into rubble B, pouff, pouff, pouff after reaching a point?

LOL
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif)