Posted: Jul 14, 2013 8:29 pm
Weaver wrote:Psikeyhackr's experiment shows nothing about the WTC. Continuing to bring it up as if it does is simply more lies and dishonesty from a CTer.
But anyone that disagrees whit me has no choice but to take that position but where do they build a model that actually does what supposedly happened to the north tower.
Does my model have significant mass unlike a house of cards? YES, my model weighs as much as 17 packs of cards and each washer dropped individually would fall like a stone, unlike an individual card from a deck.
Does my model get heavier toward the bottom? YES, the washers are of different thicknesses to my surprise so I sorted them. The top one should be about 1.4 oz and the bottom about 2.1.
Can the structure support its own weight? YES, that is obvious from the video.
Does the structure get stronger toward the bottom like a skyscraper? YES, The paper loops were tested for maximum static load capacity. 11 single loops at the top, 17 double loops in the middle and 5 triple loops at the bottom.
Do individual components sustain damage in the collapse? YES, also obvious from the video. Unlike a house of cards which can be rebuilt from the same parts, the paper loops sustain damage thereby absorbing kinetic energy from the falling mass slowing it and eventually arresting its progress. It takes about 0.118 joules to flatten a single paper loop.
So where is a model that can support its own weight and yet completely collapse when 15% or less by height and weight is dropped on the rest?
So all you can do it TALK!
So what can engineering schools do but avoid the subject? The 3D printer sounds like the most efficient way to do the test and build a real tube-in-tube structure and it would allow control for column thickness and strength without building a really big and potentially dangerous model. I would think engineering schools would love the idea if they wanted to do the test.
[110476]
psik