Actually, this is just the kind of project a school would do. It would make a hell of a senior project, and they could examine how design differences would affect the outcome. The reason they do no is the whole square/cube thing.
Scaling is quite difficult. I do scale work at a wind tunnel for NASA and we cannot model dynamics of flexible structures at all. To be able to do that you need a tunnel where you can use heavy gas or pump out a portion of the air. For a collapsing structure you would have to even more scaling troubles.
A better way to do it would be to model a small portion of the building at full scale, though this would be insanely expensive and beyond what a university could do.
Yep. Maybe I shouldn’t spill the beans, but you are exactly right. When you join the faculty of an engineering school, briefing personel from several government agencies come by to let us know what needs to be kept on the down low.
At 8 am, they had a lecture on the materials science gains from the Roswell crash.
At 11 am they were up to how the Eldritch runes on the JFK bullet caused it to behave erratically.
Unfortunately, the catered lunch was delicious, and they didn’t get to covering 9/11 until late in the afternoon. I was pretty sleepy by the time the talk got to that point. All I caught was something about nanotech explosives and metamaterial cloaking gear used by the Controlled Demolition employees to plant the bombs in secret.
A little after five they got to Obama’s birth certificate. Apparently, it’s worse than we feared - he was actually born in an alternate universe where “Hawaii” refers to the continent of Africa. After several interdimensional jumps, he lost the paperwork, but fortunately…
It is much easier to model a flexible structure than a collapsing one. For the bridge you need to scale certain aerodynamic properties and elastic properties. Very doable. For a collapse you need to model the failure properties, not so easy. Also, I am not sure how you would take into account gravity on a different scale, which is the source of all the destructive energy. These are not so important for the bridge.
I have a theory. The towers never existed at all in the first place. Anyone who ever claimed to go there, any photographs or videos you’ve ever seen of it, or even any personal memories of going into the buildings or touching them are hoaxes planted by the government.
The government uses chemicals put into jet fuel used by commercial airlines to mess with our memories and our skepticism. They doctored movies, photographs and video footage of New York to make us all think those two towers existed, so that after being there for a while, they could make people believe they had been destroyed in a terrorist attack.
The people who supposedly died that day were never born. They never existed and their supposed families had their minds altered to believe as much.
(have I topped the worst conspiracy theories yet?)
What’ll really bake your noodle is that the Towers have always existed, and always will. You live in them right now. Actually, your memories of the outside world are what are false.
And why would we need a scale model of the collapse? They had the physical evidence to exam. The floor joists were warped from heat and the attaching bolts to the vertical columns survived. The vertical columns were bent inward at the point the joists connected to the columns. This is where it failed. The building fell down. It didn’t blow over. There’s no point in building a wind tunnel model. The Tacoma Narrows bridge failed because of harmonic resonance caused by wind.
AFAIK, no. And it’s becoming more common. The Denver theater shooting? Didn’t happen. It’s all fake. Sandy Hook? Didn’t happen. It’s all fake. Sooner or later, one of these nutters is going to confront a surviving family member and get the ever-lovin’ shit beaten out of them. Or also possible, a nutter is going to shoot one of them to ‘help expose the lie.’
Actually, your claim is even more ridiculous than the sort of nonsense that you typically spout in these threads. Each floor of each tower of the WTC was an acre in extent. The total elevator and stairway shafts on the floors with the most elevators was a bit less than 6,000 square feet. You are pretending that the all the air ten feet deep in an acre could be compressed through a space of about one seventh the same area without having any affect on windows that were already being shattered as the walls in which they were mounted were torn loose as each ceiling fell in.
After that bit of foolishness, I expect you to tell us that there is no problem standing in front of a window during a tornado because a the wind would just flow around the house without damaging the windows.
Sorry for this semi-hijack, but regarding Dr. Steven Jones’s credibility … is he the physicist from Brigham Young University who reported in the late 1990’s that he had repeated Dr. Duncan MacDougall’s experiments of weighing people as they died to see if a soul had mass, only instead of weighing dying humans, it was done by dunking insects sealed in plastic bags into liquid nitrogen, and that his lab had gathered evidence that the animals did indeed lose a tiny but consistent amount of weight at the point of death?
If that is indeed him, would this not indicate (along with some of his other claims) that he has occasionally reported scientific findings that (A) most other scientists would find questionable, (B) are out of his field of expertise, and (C) lend support to his pre-existing beliefs? If so, I suspect that I would probably regard his 9/11 conclusions regarding nano-thermite with even more skepticism than I already have.
What percentage of the steel of the building was available for examination?
There were 2900 perimeter wall panels on each tower from the 9th floor to the top. Total weight was 27,000 tons so the average was 9+ tons.
Can you find how many different weights there were and the quantity of each weight? There are more than 200 buildings around the world over 800 feet tall and gravity is pretty much the same all over the planet. Can you find the tons of steel and tons of concrete on each level of any of them?
People who can BELIEVE on the basis of insufficient data do not need models.
The NIST crew selected the pieces they felt they needed and that were critical to the investigation. They did not need to examine every little bit of the tower.
You can whine about it all you want, but these are Structural Engineers, Materials Engineers, Civil Engineers and other relevant disciplines. They have more relevant education in one junior member’s assistant then the entire truth movement combined.
Even before the NIST report was finished, most architects and engineers had a very good idea of the basics behind what actually happened and were adjusting their structures accordingly. The Comcast Center in Philadelphia was built with a concrete core to prevent such a collapse from happening.
Truthers whining about how much steel was examined is just a game of ‘If I ran the zoo’.