The 9/11 Forum

Your simulation has the level below moving to the left even more than the portion in question moves to the right. Where is evidence for that in the video?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9SSS0DDqfm0

Also that left corner is moving down more than it moves to the right. That is not what it looks like in the video to me.

Doesn't that contradict Occam's Razor just a little bit?

psik

psikeyhackr wrote:Your simulation has the level below moving to the left even more than the portion in question moves to the right. Where is evidence for that in the video?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9SSS0DDqfm0

Also that left corner is moving down more than it moves to the right. That is not what it looks like in the video to me.

Doesn't that contradict Occam's Razor just a little bit?

psik

I'm not quite sure what you mean.

It's only a portion of the width of the tower...the core width.

The mechanics are simply the result of fixed length *bones* with fixed upper and lower positions.

Rotating the green block as shown results in the displayed movement of the *bones* (columns).

The movement is the result of inverse kinematics.

What do you mean ? Increasing the number of dimensions will make very little difference.

femr2 wrote:It's only a portion of the width of the tower...the core width.

What do you mean ? Increasing the number of dimensions will make very little difference.

I didn't know you were just representing the core. But if that is the core then the outer edge of the building connected to that core would move downward at the same angle but faster. That video looks like it has the break moving more to the right than down to me.

There were 5 times as many perimeter columns as core columns and the impression I get is that their total strength was 60% greater then the core. So what could create that break 50 minutes after the oscillation stopped?

psik

psikeyhackr wrote:But if that is the core then the outer edge of the building connected to that core would move downward at the same angle but faster. That video looks like it has the break moving more to the right than down to me.

It's just a quick test to see what we can expect the CC's below to experience with some rotation and some horizontal movement. I'll get around to scaling it and fitting the correct rotoscoped movement...


What I think it highlights is...

* There is a natural rapid left to right progression.
* The amount of column movement on the left is quite extreme for the vertical and horizontal movement of the block above.
* The lateral bracing is not included, but would seem to have to break to match this behaviour, as the distance between each column is not constant.
* There are limitations on movement of the right hand column without it *snapping*, which may help explain the initial lateral movement.
* The initial *punch out* on the left is quite extreme.

Just thoughts...

* The lateral bracing is not included, but would seem to have to break to match this behaviour, as the distance between each column is not constant.

Sounds like you prefer a CC buckling over 2-3 floors too. Imo, it is the only way to explain the huge lateral shift. But indeed the lateral bracing is a real problem for such a movement. Either almost all lateral core connections failed or those "three hinge" buckling had just an effective height of one floor.

Sounds like you prefer a CC buckling over 2-3 floors too. Imo, it is the only way to explain the huge lateral shift.

There may be another way. All CCs removed nearly simultaneous including the 500 row, west, north and south walls left in place. Natural action-reaction pushes out the west wall during the hinge.

A good rotoscope will show how upper 1000CC to 500CC falls relative to their lower counterparts.

If the initial movements of a particular row is straight down, no hinge for that row.


It's just like Achimspok did for the 500CCs but with a very accurate rotoscope.


Secondly, I suspect the push-out of of the lower west wall may be a local phenomenon, not global. (In other words, maybe it is only the lower west wall pushed out for 10 floors and not much else.) If I could see 20 floors over the IZ, 20 floors under the IZ in a rotoscope that doubt would be removed.

I also know there is a strange corner break and bend about 10 floors above the IZ along the NE corner. If we cannot see it we do not know if the cropped version shows global or only local upper and lower block orientation.


As another example, if we did a west side rotoscope for the earliest movement of WTC1, would we see all 6 rows of columns fail downwards? I'm guessing yes. Visuals like that would be fantastic to show how the strength of the whole core just "disappears" all together. We need to see in the earliest movement for each building if a particular row of upper CCs move "through" the lower or if the earliest movement has a sideways rotational element.