Collapse of the twin towers in 2001. An engineering perspective

[Armour of God]

This is an engineering perspective of how the twin towers collapsed in 2001.

At the time I was in my 20s, studying engineering at university. From a physics standpoint, we (my class mates, teachers and i) couldn't believe how quickly those buildings collapsed.

They fell at the acceleration of gravity. If you dropped a hammer from the same height it would of landed at the same time the top of the building did.

This is impossible. There should of been a resistance below the airplane impact point that would have decelerated the collapse. Instead it accelerated at the same rate as gravity.

According to the laws of physics, the only possible way those buildings could of collapsed like that was if there was nothing holding it up. But obviously the building itself was holding it up.

So then how did they fall so fast.

We concluded, from a physics and engineering standpoint, that it was impossible for the plane damage to bring down the towers that way. Their had to have been demolition charges throughout the buildings core for it to fall that fast. And if you look at the destruction of a building using demo charges, it falls exactly the same way.

Without charges the top of the building may have crushed the levels that were damaged by the plane but would never have destroyed the whole building. At the very least there should of been a deceleration, leaving the lower levels in tact.

Then there was a smaller building, named building 7, that wasn't hit by the airplanes and still collapsed in the same fashion. Its unexplainable without demo charges.

At the time we were all convinced that the Americans would conclude the same thing after an investigation. We thought that the terrosrists must of planted demo charges throughout the buildings.
But much to our surprise the investigation maintained that the planes alone caused the collapse which perplexes me still to this day.

It's important to note that this isn't my own personal conclusion. This event was heavily discussed by our whole class and teachers and the conclusion came about by everyone, uninfluenced by any mainstream explanations that came about later on.

 

[shepherdsword]

Yeah, building 7 sealed it for me. No matter what excuses they used for the collapse of the main towers it doesn't wash for B7

 

[Jay Ross]

This is an engineering perspective of how the twin towers collapsed in 2001.

The post above, is not an engineering explanation of the mechanism of how the twin towers collapsed. It can be explained quite easily using engineering theory and even explaining the explosive type sounds that were heard as each floor pancaked downwards.

I have previously provided an explanation of how the buildings collapsed and my position and understanding of how and why the buildings collapsed.

I was awarded an Engineering Bachelor Degree in Mechanical Engineering in 1987.

When each floor began to fall, there was a momentary resistance as the bolts sheared in resistance to the imposed kinetic energy placed on all the horizonal bolts holding the floor steelwork in place.

The collapsing of both towers happened just under the rate of the gravitational acceleration.

The collapsing of the towers began initially after the bolted sections of the structure was heated to a temperature were plastic deformation could begin. Each floor below failed because the energy of the falling floors above exceeded the energy for the bolts to resist the shearing energy for all of the bolts.

As the floors pancaked the energy of the falling floors increased which accelerated the rate at which the bolts were sheared.

I trust that this simple explanation will help you to understand how the towers collapsed. Remember the critical factor in causing the towers to collapse was the onboard fuel available to heat the floor bolts so that initially plastic deformation could occur for the first failure of the bolted connect for that floor.

Shalom

PS: - Peoples ignorance on the engineering principles of the collapsing buildings does not help at all.

 

[wordandlight]

Interesting perspective. I think this is one of those subjects where it’s important to separate what looks intuitive from what the structural evidence actually shows. Definitely a topic worth examining carefully.

 

[Armour of God]

The post above, is not an engineering explanation of the mechanism of how the twin towers collapsed. It can be explained quite easily using engineering theory and even explaining the explosive type sounds that were heard as each floor pancaked downwards.

I have previously provided an explanation of how the buildings collapsed and my position and understanding of how and why the buildings collapsed.

I was awarded an Engineering Bachelor Degree in Mechanical Engineering in 1987.

When each floor began to fall, there was a momentary resistance as the bolts sheared in resistance to the imposed kinetic energy placed on all the horizonal bolts holding the floor steelwork in place.

The collapsing of both towers happened just under the rate of the gravitational acceleration.

The collapsing of the towers began initially after the bolted sections of the structure was heated to a temperature were plastic deformation could begin. Each floor below failed because the energy of the falling floors above exceeded the energy for the bolts to resist the shearing energy for all of the bolts.

As the floors pancaked the energy of the falling floors increased which accelerated the rate at which the bolts were sheared.

I trust that this simple explanation will help you to understand how the towers collapsed. Remember the critical factor in causing the towers to collapse was the onboard fuel available to heat the floor bolts so that initially plastic deformation could occur for the first failure of the bolted connect for that floor.

Shalom

PS: - Peoples ignorance on the engineering principles of the collapsing buildings does not help at all.

I'm a mechanical engineer. My class mates and even my teachers at the time discussed it at length and came to the same unanimous conclusion. Before any of us could be influenced by mainstream ideas.

My teachers weren't at all ignorant, as your slanderous attack suggests, they were very well educated. That's why they were teachers.

Your explanation is not based on engineering or physics. Your personal opinion is only based on the mainstream excuses they have given about bolts shearing. It's not anything you have objectively thought through yourself like we did in class with our teachers.

There is no way those buildings could free fall.

Bolts on the levels below were not effected by heat and would not all shear so easily. If all the bolts on the levels below were shearing there should have at least been resistance and considerable deceleration. But we didn't see that. We saw gravitational acceleration. No resistance at all. It wasn't just bolts that sheared, it was whole colums.

That's simply not possible.
It defies the laws of physics.

And no, the energy of the top floors falling is not enough to provide a free fall. We calculated all that. It's weight would not even be close enough to shear colums as if they weren't even there. There should still be resistance and considerable deceleration. Small scale demonstrations have not been able to replicate the way they collapsed.

Look closely and puffs of smoke can be seen going off in sequence down the building from the demo charges. Shearing bolts don't create puffs of smoke. Whole colums were found sheared, not just bolts. And thermite was found everywhere from the demo charges.

That mainstream explanation is flawed. It doesn't explain the collapse of the twin towers or of building 7 either. It's just an explanation to fool the average person

At the end of the day you have your own personal opinion. Its just a repeat of the mainstream explanation. Nothing that you objectively thought through yourself by using any kind of engineering or physics or calculations.

Mine is the opinion of a whole class and engineering teachers and was examined, calculated, discussed and concluded before any mainstream explanation came about.

Your personal attack of us all being ignorant is just you resorting to slander.

 

[Armour of God]

Here's some damning evidence

No building fire has ever resulted in such a collapse. EVER. And their have been countless building fires around the world

 

[Armour of God]

A comparison of a controlled demo of a building compared to the collapse of the twin towers

Very much the same. A free fall

This next one looks more like the way building 7 went down with the bottom floors giving way first and the rest falling on top of it.

 

[Wrangler]

The post above, is not an engineering explanation of the mechanism of how the twin towers collapsed.

I was awarded an Engineering Bachelor Degree in Mechanical Engineering in 1987.

When each floor began to fall, there was a momentary resistance as the bolts sheared in resistance to the imposed kinetic energy placed on all the horizonal bolts holding the floor steelwork in place.

@Jay Ross, it’s sad to see you discredit yourself like this. Do you expect people to believe sky scrapers are designed to be held up only by bolts? A degreed mechanical engineer cannot come up with a more structurally sound lattice? Come on now!

 

[shepherdsword]

The post above, is not an engineering explanation of the mechanism of how the twin towers collapsed. It can be explained quite easily using engineering theory and even explaining the explosive type sounds that were heard as each floor pancaked downwards.

I have previously provided an explanation of how the buildings collapsed and my position and understanding of how and why the buildings collapsed.

I was awarded an Engineering Bachelor Degree in Mechanical Engineering in 1987.

When each floor began to fall, there was a momentary resistance as the bolts sheared in resistance to the imposed kinetic energy placed on all the horizonal bolts holding the floor steelwork in place.

The collapsing of both towers happened just under the rate of the gravitational acceleration.

The collapsing of the towers began initially after the bolted sections of the structure was heated to a temperature were plastic deformation could begin. Each floor below failed because the energy of the falling floors above exceeded the energy for the bolts to resist the shearing energy for all of the bolts.

As the floors pancaked the energy of the falling floors increased which accelerated the rate at which the bolts were sheared.

I trust that this simple explanation will help you to understand how the towers collapsed. Remember the critical factor in causing the towers to collapse was the onboard fuel available to heat the floor bolts so that initially plastic deformation could occur for the first failure of the bolted connect for that floor.

Shalom

PS: - Peoples ignorance on the engineering principles of the collapsing buildings does not help at all.

and Building 7?