Ken Doc II
August 5 at 12:02pm
I, Ken Doc challenge
Mick West (creator of Metabunk) to redo his experiment exactly the same way but this time to SCREW each piece of wood together. Deal?
Offset narrow core progressive collapse
See Discussion here:
https://www.metabunk.org/towards-a-replicable-physical-model-illustrating-aspects-of-the-collapse…
YOUTUBE.COM
CommentShare
33
Comments
Ken Doc II Are you going to leave this group too, Mick?
Why did you run away from the 9/11 Truth Movement group?
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 12:03pm
Mike Collins Mick, you didn't even fasten those members together in your model?
Do you think that buildings are made by duct-taping columns together? lol
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 12:03pm
Mick West No, and I already explained why. The connections would be too strong for the scale. The floor slabs need to fail at 6x static load.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 12:03pm
Mike Collins Lol wow man, you should consult with a 7th grade science teacher next time you need help.
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 12:03pm
Ken Doc II Mick West did a similar experiment but instead of screws, he used magnets to attach the structure together. At 2:25 his experiment fails and in his own words he says "partial collapse". So he takes off the magnetic supports in order to deceive his viewers of structural failure at 4:00.
Mick also drops the boards through the center of the structure with least support....
See More
8 Floor progressive collapse, problems with splice plates.
YOUTUBE.COM
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 12:04pm
Mick West Ken, how much static weight could the floor slabs support in the WTC? How do you model that at 1/100th scale?
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 12:04pm
Ken Doc II Mick West claims that he didn;t want to use screws because it would have made the structure too strong..... as each floor is only designed to hold 6-12 times its static load.
But that didn't stop him from using magnets to attach the structure together in another experiment he did.
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 12:04pm
Mick West Er yes, that's exactly why I used magnets. To get the 6x static load failure point.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 12:05pm
Mike Collins The floor slabs didn't have structural loads. They bore the loads of each floor, like occupants and furniture....
You should talk to an actual engineer before making up such ridiculously stupid and childish models. All you are doing is further provi...
See More
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 12:06pm
Mike Collins https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1zED8dy63w
9/11 Firefighters Reveal Bombs Destroyed WTC lobby
YOUTUBE.COM
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 12:07pm
Mike Collins You are a shameful person dude.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 12:07pm
Mick West Mike Collins: " The floor slabs didn't have structural loads. " -EXACTLY, which is why I can't use screws.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 12:07pm
Ken Doc II I will let you take it from here Mike...... Mick has already refused my challenge like a coward and even ran away from the other group.
Mick West refuses my challenge!
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 12:07pm
Mick West I did not run away for the other group, y'all got distracted by someone taking abut energy weapons or something.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 12:08pm
Mick West And I explained the problem with your challenge. You are basically asking me to make a model that is incorrect in terms of connection strength.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 12:09pm
Mike Collins Mick, you cannot make a model which would be anything close to the WTC in terms of scale....
1. Because you don't know the scales involved, besides simple minded assumptions of highly estimated values....
See More
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 12:09pm
Mick West Mike: " Floor slabs don't support the building's structure. " EXACTLY, which is why can't used screws, as then they would be able to support the entire model structure. I'm striving for accuracy.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 12:10pm
Ken Doc II "striving for accuracy"
Were all the structural elements inside the towers bolted together? Or were they just laying on top of each other as in your experiment....
See More
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 12:11pm
Mick West Mike "Mick, you cannot make a model which would be anything close to the WTC in terms of scale." Of course not, if you made a 1/100th model it would have to be a solid monolith of something denser than gold to scale correctly. You can only model ASPECTS of the collapse.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 12:11pm
Mick West The connections had a breaking strength relative to the mass of the floors, did they not? Now should I A) make it the same ratio (magnets), or make it a ratio about 100x too high (screws)? Which is more accurate?
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 12:13pm
Ken Doc II Mick, Mike is a Mechanical Engineer. You are a retired videogame programmer.
He is much more qualified than you on this stuff.
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 12:13pm
Mick West Then Mike will eventually understand what I'm saying about the connection strength ratio.,
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 12:14pm
Mike Collins Qualifications only matter if someone can't understand the subject matter.
The problem with people like Mick is that they aren't versed enough in this subject to understand the difference between 'facts' and 'opinions', so he calls them both the same thing......
See More
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 12:14pm
Paul Kayley Complex models are not needed. After seeing through the catalogue of lies told by NIST about Building 7 it's obvious to anyone without naïve ignorance that all these were demolitions. Anyone who defends this crime is either too stupid to be giving out advice or is complicit in its escape from justice. Mick you should be ashamed.
Like ·
Reply ·
3 ·
August 5 at 12:15pm
Mick West So, Mike, in this scale model, how strong should the floor-to-column connections be, expressed as the static load they can support?
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 12:15pm
Mick West Which words?
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 12:17pm
Mick West Static loads don't change, dynamic loads do. "Live loads" are the typical dynamic loads - like occupants and wind loads.
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 12:19pm
Ken Doc II Here is Mick's "this is about 1/100th scale" model of the Towers! lol
Like ·
Reply ·
2 ·
August 5 at 12:20pm
Hide 11 Replies
Mick West It's the bottom half. Just imagine it twice as high.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 12:21pm
Ken Doc II Oh, so you admit that your replica is now not to scale after stating it was a "1/100th scale". Your words.
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 12:22pm
Mick West Towers were 200 feet wide, my base here is 2 feet wide. The basic principles still apply.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 12:24pm
Mike Collins "The basic principles still apply...Can someone tell me what those principles are because I have no idea what I'm talking about whatsoever and am not anything close to being an engineer"
Unlike ·
Reply ·
2 ·
August 5 at 12:26pm
Mick West Progressive collapse by the floor slab connections failing due to massive dynamic loads far above what they could support. Which at the veery least would result in all the floors falling to the ground. But since the columns lost their lateral support they also failed.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 12:28pm
Mike Collins Progressive collapses do not occur in real life if the bottom of the structure is completely undamaged and begins in static equilibrium.
If you do not understand this principle of physics and the definition of 'static equilibrium', then this conversation is over and you basically are saying "I am just a fool, ignore me"
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 12:30pm
Mike Collins Even if you hit a nail with a hammer at 400 mph, the hammer will decelerate upon hitting the stationary nail, because of the transfer of momentum and the conversion of kinetic energy into the nail...
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 12:30pm
Mick West But the issue here is the failure of the FLOOR SLABS. They can't support the dynamic load of the falling structure, hence they fail. Then the columns fail later.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 12:31pm
Mike Collins You cannot have a progressive collapse, unless the entire building is somewhat weakened, and the dynamic forces can exceed each floors failure strength. However, for this to occur, the building would have to be weakened to about 95% failure already, o...
See More
Demolition Fail Compilation, best…
YOUTUBE.COM
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 12:31pm
Mike Collins See my comment above for other buildings which cannot collapse. The floor slabs and structure are one assembly upon completion of construction. Destroying a floor slab still requires energy. I'm not sure how you are getting so confused, unless you are just trolling.
In which case, I dont want to waste time anymore
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 12:33pm
Mick West We are not talking about destroying a floor slab, we are talking about the floor slab connections failing. The seats. These things:
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 12:35pm
Write a reply...
https://www.facebook.com/groups/286...t=group_highlights¬if_id=1470753818365678#
Mick West The floor connections at the columns support the weight to the floor - a static load. There's a minor live load from the occupants. If we were to take six floor slabs and place them on one floor it would fail at the connectors. So we have to model this in the scale model.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 12:21pm
Ken Doc II DIY Tower Replicator. Screws sold separately. lol
Like ·
Reply ·
2 ·
August 5 at 12:21pm
Mick West So
Mike, how much weight ,expressed as a multiple of floor slabs, should the connectors in one floor slab be able to support in my model? And how can I do this with screws?
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 12:23pm
Ken Doc II https://law.resource.org/.../gov.bd.bnbc.2012.06.02.pdf
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 12:25pm
Mick West Great, and did you find the answer in there?
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 12:26pm
View more replies
Write a reply...
https://www.facebook.com/groups/286...t=group_highlights¬if_id=1470753818365678#
Ken Doc II Geez Mick, you may as well have just built a stack of cards in your experiment.
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 12:24pm
Paul Kayley Why do you guys even bother with people like this? How does he explain the disappearance of the core columns and the floor slabs? The slabs should have stacked up upon each other and core columns remained connected and visible, not turned to powder and fallen to pieces, respectively.
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 12:26pm ·
Edited
Mike Collins I'm not anymore. Just ignore him. People like that can only hear themselves, and even if you listed out textbook quotations, he would just rely on his own youtube videos lol.
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 12:27pm
Mick West Can you just tell me how much weight the floor connectors should support, as a function of the actual floor slab weight?
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 12:29pm
Paul Kayley Yawn
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 12:30pm
Ken Doc II Do your own research Mick or go talk to Structural Engineers.
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 12:32pm
Write a reply...
https://www.facebook.com/groups/286...t=group_highlights¬if_id=1470753818365678#
Mick West Look, the challenge here was to use screws in my model. I've explained why I did not. Does anyone want to dispute my explanation with actual numbers? How strong SHOULD the connections be in my model?
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 12:33pm
Mick West Maybe a simple example would help. Here's an earlier model with super stable columns, just to illustrate the progressive collapse of the floor slabs themselves. Each slab has connectors that can support 6 other slabs.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=beI5UWABDOQ
Double height progressive collapse
YOUTUBE.COM
Like ·
Reply ·
Remove Preview ·
August 5 at 12:37pm
Mick West And this explains the design of the magnet/steel connectors, and a test of the static load.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ddPwLQeowI
Magnets with mending plates as seat connectors
YOUTUBE.COM
Like ·
Reply ·
Remove Preview ·
August 5 at 12:40pm
Ken Doc II Just shut up already and screw the planks into each other.
The only reason you refuse to do so is because you know there would be no total collapse. In other words you created your own experiment to suit your pre determined conclusion. Just like what NIST did.
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 12:40pm
Mick West Watch the above video Ken, it explains the design of the connectors. It demonstrates static loading the same as the towers. Then tell me how I could do that with screws.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 12:41pm
Ken Doc II I saw that video last night. Stop using weak stilts to hold up your planks. Also, your exterior columns still stood.
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 12:43pm
Mick West You want them the correct strength though don't you? Why would you make them 100x too strong? What would that prove?
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 12:45pm
Mick West And I meant THIS video:
https://l.facebook.com/l.php...
Magnets with mending plates as seat connectors
YOUTUBE.COM
Like ·
Reply ·
Remove Preview ·
August 5 at 12:45pm
Ken Doc II So instead you make them 100x too weak. lol
Go talk to a structural engineer you fool.
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 12:46pm
Write a reply...
https://www.facebook.com/groups/286...t=group_highlights¬if_id=1470753818365678#
Ken Doc II Mick doesn;t want to use screws because he didn;t want to make his replica as strong as the Towers....... or a bookshelf for that matter.
Fail!
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 12:55pm
Mick West No, I want to make the connections exactly as strong as they were TO SCALE. It's a scale model remember. They need to support 6-12 times the weight of one floor slab, and they do. So it's accurate.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 1:02pm
Ken Doc II Then attach your structure together, just like in ANY scale model.
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 1:03pm
Mick West THere's a difference between a VISUAL scale model and a model that illustrates the PHYSICAL aspects of an object. Remember how strong Hot Wheels are compared to real cars.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 1:04pm
Ken Doc II Do your experiment on this?
http://skyscrapermodels.us/.../world_trade_center_nyc.html
SkyscraperModels.us - World Trade Center - New York, New York, United States
SKYSCRAPERMODELS.US
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 1:05pm
Mick West Think about the floor connectors. How strong should they be in my model? I'm not asking what they should look like, or what types of connectors to use. I'm asking HOW STRONG should they be.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 1:05pm
Mick West That's a visual model.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 1:06pm
Mick West And it does not have floors, it's basically a cardboard box.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 1:07pm
Ken Doc II They don't make skyscrapers leaning on stilts. Everything is BOLTED together for extra strength and durability.
But that doesn;t concern you for some reason. You're afraid to attach your structure together because your own experiment would fail.
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 1:07pm
Mick West I'm concerned the connections are the right strength. You just seem concerned that I use screws. Which concern is going to lead to the most accurate strength for the connections?
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 1:09pm
Paul Kayley This is like arguing over the sinking of the Titanic being due to a fault in the type rivets! It was a F***ing ice berg! The twin towers were brought down the same way building 7 was! It's obvious!
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 1:09pm
Ken Doc II Ok Mick, you are repeating yourself over and over again and it's becoming quite tiresome.
So make this easy on everyone.... you refuse to accept my challenge!
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 1:10pm
Mick West Your challenge is for me to make a model with unrealistically strong connections. So why would I do that? Again, HOW MUCH WEIGHT SHOULD A FLOOR SUPPORT in my model?
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 1:11pm
Mick West I'm not asking what connections to use. I'm asking how much weight it should support.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 1:12pm ·
Edited
Mick West I'll go do a test with screws right now, if you just tell me how much weight they should support.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 1:12pm
Ken Doc II Mick, shouldn;t you have done this research yourself? Are you telling me that even though you have done 100's of experiments, that you have never looked into how much each floor should hold?
"For example, a properly designed office floor can support 5...
See More
How Much Weight Can a Floor Support? A structural engineer explains. - Allegheny…
ALLEGHENYDESIGN.COM
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 1:15pm
Ken Doc II Note: These figures seem to represent a wooden framed office building, not a steel framed skyrise. It's not clearly stated in my link.
"For example, a floor joist at 16” spacing’s that can carry 53 pounds per linear foot would translate into a 318 pound single point load at its center."
Like ·
Reply ·
August 6 at 7:54am
Write a reply...
https://www.facebook.com/groups/286...t=group_highlights¬if_id=1470753818365678#
Ken Doc II I'm not your Google Bitch, Mick.
Find this shit on your own. Especially, if you are going to do experiments trying to prove a point but yet have no clue what you are doing.
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 1:16pm
Mick West I'm going by the NIST figures which give a conservative estimate of 6x their weight, when gradually applied.
"The vertical capacity of the connections supporting an intact floor below the level of collapse was adequate to carry the load of 11 additio...
See More
NIST Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster Answers to FAQ's-Supplement (12/14/2007)
faq's supplement for WTC investigation
NIST.GOV
Like ·
Reply ·
Remove Preview ·
August 5 at 1:27pm
Ken Doc II The NIST report is so flawed that you shouldn't be using the numbers from a Govt organization that was paid to come to a pre determined conclusion.
Like ·
Reply ·
2 ·
August 5 at 1:36pm
Ken Doc II and you do know that NIST's figures you used are based on a STEEL FRAMED WTC. Not a Wooden framed replica.
Just saying.
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 6 at 7:49am
Write a reply...
https://www.facebook.com/groups/286...t=group_highlights¬if_id=1470753818365678#
Mick West But if you want to go with 50 pounds per square foot, then being REALLY conservative we can take the entire cross-sectional area 200x200 feet (the actual area was less), so 200x200x50 pounds, in tons 1000 tons. So you think a floor should be able to statically support 1000 tons, right? Or about 1/500th the weight of the entire structure?
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 1:32pm
Mick West And that's just static load, right? And spread over the entire floor area.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 1:33pm
Mick West Okay, I'll go do a test with some screws.
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 1:33pm
Ken Doc II I am not a structural engineer Mick. Neither are you. But please, do the same experiment using screws. That is all I have been asking for. Thanks.
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 1:35pm
Barry Mead Mick should explain his test using magnets where the friction coefficient does not equate to live load capacity,his three block live load does not even equal nists claimed live load capacity,and,he has no core,and no peeling walls,just a pancaking collapse induced by sliding magnets and a lot more weight.
That their is science.....in bizarre world
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 1:45pm
Ken Doc II Welcome to the discussion Barry. Mick is preparing his new experiment with screws this time.
and Mick, if you could securely attach your structure to the ground as well, that would be great. I'd hate to see it wobble on you and fall over.
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 1:47pm
Mick West I'm just going to do one floor, to demonstrate it's too strong a connection. As should be pretty obvious.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 1:54pm
Ken Doc II Wooden planks with screws is too strong....... but steel framed buildings with center core columns, trusses, perimeter columns are weak.
This is your train of thought! smh at your logic.
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 1:56pm
Mick West It's all about scale Ken. Would you agree that a floor should fail at the column connections if it were loaded with the mass of 12 identical floors?
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 2:03pm
Mick West The wooden floor slabs, with screws, can support around 200 pounds of fairly dynamic load (i.e. a person). That's 400x their own weiight, or around 66x too strong
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 2:05pm
Ken Doc II Isn't it amazing how strong a tower becomes when it's connected together with bolts.... or in this case.... screws.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 2:08pm
Mick West How strong, relative to the weight of one floor?
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 2:09pm
Ken Doc II What you did in your experiment was create a house of cards.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 2:09pm
Mick West I created something with accurately scaled floor connections.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 2:09pm
Write a reply...
https://www.facebook.com/groups/286...t=group_highlights¬if_id=1470753818365678#
Ken Doc II For a perfect symmetrical collapse like we witnessed tells me that every connection would have failed simultaneously. This is something that fire cannot accomplish alone. Which is why Controlled demolition companies exist.
Got your screws drilled in already?
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 2:06pm ·
Edited
Mick West Here's a single 0.5 pound floor model (with screws) supporting 170 pounds of live load. It's supposed to fail at 3 pounds.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 2:08pm ·
Edited
Ken Doc II Experiment: Have you ever stood on a popcan? I think we have all tried it at one point in time. An empty hollow aluminum popcan typically weighs 15 grams, yet it can easily hold the weight of 100 lbs.
In comparison, 100 lbs is roughly 45,000 grams. Wh...
See More
Standing on a soda can
I stand on a regular Barqes root beer can.
YOUTUBE.COM
Like ·
Reply ·
2 ·
August 5 at 2:10pm
Mick West I stand on cans all the time. It's a great example of the scale problem. Could WTC2 support the weight of 3000 times its own weight.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 2:12pm
Ken Doc II You are comparing Apples to Watermelons! Finish your experiment with screws and let me know when you are done.
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 2:12pm
Mick West Take one WTC2, place another on top of it. The bottom one collapses. Cans do not. It's a scale problem. How do you model a WTC2 that's 12' tall?
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 2:13pm
Mick West That one floor is all that is needed to illustrate the problem. I'll upload the video in a bit.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 2:13pm
Ken Doc II Actually, if you looked at the design of the towers. It's really three towers stacked on top of each other. You can see that when looking where the sky lobbies were.
https://kendoc911.files.wordpress.com/.../wtc-elevators.gif
KENDOC911.FILES.WORDPRESS.COM
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 2:15pm
Ken Doc II That one floor screwed together would probably be able to support 10 floors above it. So I do understand the "scaling strength" you are talking about. But then this goes back to premise that.... It’s physically impossible for the top 1/5th of a building to smash through and completely destroy the entire bottom 4/5ths.
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 2:17pm
Mick West I'd agree if we were talking above a sold block of something. But we are not, we are talking about a complex structure. What if, purely hypothetically, we were to remove all the floor slabs in the building, so the outer walls were no longer attached to the core? What would happen?
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 2:31pm
Ken Doc II Are you trying to change the design of the WTC to suit your needs again?
Lets put things into perspective, no building (HIGH RISE) has ever completely collapsed from fire and /or structural damage in the history of modern construction....
See More
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 2:39pm
Barry Mead I personally would like to ask,and forgive me if covered,where have we covered perimeter wall collapse?
Is it demonstrable that the four sides would all fall out and down? If so,then wouldn't they need to remain connected in order to peel.
If they dri...
See More
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 2:43pm
Ken Doc II Great point Barry. Let's not forget about the 22 degree tilt seen in the video footage. It doesn;t continue falling over. It decides to go straight down through the path of GREATEST resistance at near free fall acceleration.
https://kendoc911.files.wordpress.com/.../22degreetiltmem...
KENDOC911.FILES.WORDPRESS.COM
Like ·
Reply ·
2 ·
August 5 at 2:45pm
Ken Doc II As for the Jolt! There is no jolt from the top block hitting the lower block. In fact, the top block looks to disintegrate before it even touches the bottom block.
WTC1 Upper Section Collapse...
See More
Like ·
Reply ·
2 ·
August 5 at 2:48pm ·
Edited
Ken Doc II Not sure if this animated gif will work but here.
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 2:49pm
Ken Doc II https://kendoc911.files.wordpress.com/.../wtc1frameantenn...
KENDOC911.FILES.WORDPRESS.COM
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 2:49pm
Ken Doc II I got so many more images just like that and they all show the same thing happening.
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 5 at 2:50pm
Mick West I think you are kind of drifting off topic. The issue the model s intended to address is if a structure could collapse from the top down. I think my model illustrates that it can. I also explained why do not use screws.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 2:58pm
Mick West I think also the model shoudl help illustrate why there would be no "jolt". It's not like falling solid block with a flat leading edge, it's a wave of debris.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 3:00pm
Mick West And I ask again. What would happen to the building if the floors were removed?
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 3:00pm
Ken Doc II I have to close up shop now Mick and will be back on later tonight. Hopefully you are a man of your word and finish screwing the rest of the planks and redo your experiment.
"What would happen to the building if the floors were removed?"...
See More
Like ·
Reply ·
August 5 at 3:02pm
Mick West Here's the full test. There's no need to do any more than this, as it's obviously too strong.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqaGgSmcoL4
Why not use screws
Explaining why screws would be far too strong in a scale model of the WTC.
YOUTUBE.COM
Like ·
Reply ·
Remove Preview ·
August 5 at 3:19pm
Ken Doc II Thanks for proving my point! lol
Like ·
Reply ·
August 6 at 8:00am
Write a reply...
https://www.facebook.com/groups/286...t=group_highlights¬if_id=1470753818365678#
Ken Doc II Mick, you are hung up on the 6 to 12 times the static load limit.
A lot buildings are created differently but one thing that is the same is that all the pieces are bolted or screwed together....
See More
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 6 at 7:55am ·
Edited
Mick West Yes the PLANKS can support 100x their own weight with screws However the ACTUAL FLOORS in the WTC could not. Hence I don't use screws, because want it to be accurate.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 6 at 8:08am
Write a reply...
https://www.facebook.com/groups/286...t=group_highlights¬if_id=1470753818365678#
Ken Doc II Like i said before Mick..... please never design a building that people have to walk into. Let alone a book shelf for a book to rest on. lol
Like ·
Reply ·
August 6 at 7:56am
Barry Mead Mick,let me ask a question,few of the debunkers honestly answer.
Why should the top floors or many even,dissapear.
We are not talking whole floors.
The floors were composite sections.
They were on four sides connected eight sides.
Any warp or bow,would...
See More
Like ·
Reply ·
August 6 at 7:58am
Mick West My model illustrates the progression of the collapse. How it got started is another story. I just wanted to illustrate that progressive collapse is possible without explosives.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 6 at 8:10am
Ken Doc II It's only possible if you stack it like a house of cards, which is what you did in the o/p video.
Were the Towers stacked like a house of cards?
Like ·
Reply ·
August 6 at 8:19am
Write a reply...
https://www.facebook.com/groups/286...t=group_highlights¬if_id=1470753818365678#
Ken Doc II The key word you used there Barry is SIMULTANEOUS!
In order for a structure to come down the way we witnessed with both Towers and Building 7. All vertical supports must be removed at the SAME TIME. There are even many cases when Controlled demolitio...
See More
Like ·
Reply ·
August 6 at 8:05am
Ken Doc II I guess that building debunks your 6 to 12 times the static load limit. lol
Like ·
Reply ·
August 6 at 8:05am
Mick West 6-12 is for non-load-bearing floor elements - i.e. the office space.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 6 at 8:06am
Ken Doc II If you add 47 center core support columns to a structure. What is the static load limit compared to a structure without 47 center core columns?
Like ·
Reply ·
August 6 at 8:09am
Mick West The support from columns is irrelevant in the model, because I'm modeling the collapse of the floor via the failure of the seat connections. The columns could essentially be infinitely strong in this model. Remember we can't simulate EVERYTHING at this scale, just aspects of the collapse.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 6 at 8:12am
Ken Doc II but but but, you claimed your model was almost at "1/100th scale" but then you said, you have to add another tower on top of it.
So which is, is it a 1/100th scale or did you lie?
Like ·
Reply ·
August 6 at 8:13am
Mick West the 1/100th scale is based on the width being 2 feet. The model would need to be higher to be true to scale (in terms of the aspect ratio). However it's only intended to model the collapse progression - once it gets started it would obviously accelerate and keep going. It's just rather tricky to build a 13 foot high model. I went up to 8 feet.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 6 at 8:21am
Ken Doc II and you also forgot to attach the pieces together but ya!
In your last video, you proved that just by adding screws that the structure was able to support your own weight (170lbs)
Like ·
Reply ·
August 6 at 8:31am
Mick West Yes, that was the point. It supported too much weight.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 6 at 8:34am
Mick West So why would I add screws and make it inaccurate?
Like ·
Reply ·
August 6 at 8:35am
Ken Doc II So why would you not even attach them at all and make it inaccurate? How about glue or would that make it too strong as well?
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 6 at 8:39am
Write a reply...
https://www.facebook.com/groups/286...t=group_highlights¬if_id=1470753818365678#
Ken Doc II Mick creates a replica of the WTC and then says the Center core is irrelevant. LOL
Like ·
Reply ·
August 6 at 8:14am
Ken Doc II Answer my question....
What are the static load limits of a floor structure in a building which has a center core and does not have a center core?
Like ·
Reply ·
August 6 at 8:16am
Mick West Load limits are a design spec, they can be achieved with or without a central core.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 6 at 8:18am
Ken Doc II Heck, why do they make a center core if they only need to achieve a 6-12 times static load? lol
Like ·
Reply ·
August 6 at 8:21am
Mick West To hold up the building, and to give the floors something to be attached to. You are confusing the overall structural loads with the local static loads of the floors. The floors do not need to support the vertical load of the building - they just hol...
See More
Like ·
Reply ·
August 6 at 8:24am
Ken Doc II "It's the columns that hold up the building."
and are these columns attached together or just sitting on themselves?
Like ·
Reply ·
August 6 at 8:36am
Ken Doc II "The floors do not need to support the vertical load of the building"
This is correct but adding a center core is only going to give the floor that much more support. As each floor will be sitting and bolted to the core!
Like ·
Reply ·
August 6 at 8:41am
Ken Doc II You like to leave things out that don't suit your needs. Just like NIST!
Besides the center core, bridging trusses and the steel deck, Nist totally left out the concrete floors! So this whole theory of the “truss Pull in” is totally flawed because the...
See More
Like ·
Reply ·
August 6 at 8:43am
Ken Doc II Just one of NIST's many theories.
https://kendoc911.files.wordpress.com/.../nistcoll_truss.gif
KENDOC911.FILES.WORDPRESS.COM
Like ·
Reply ·
August 6 at 8:45am
Ken Doc II NOVA thought the core was irrelevant too. Only problem is that the Core was not still standing.
Debunking Novas Pancake Theory of WTC using common sense...
See More
Debunking Novas Pancake Theory of WTC using…
YOUTUBE.COM
Like ·
Reply ·
August 6 at 8:46am
View more replies
Write a reply...
https://www.facebook.com/groups/286...t=group_highlights¬if_id=1470753818365678#
Barry Mead Mick we know a progressive collapse can be done without explosive ,verinage method shows that,but.
The verinage I have examined have different lines at different heights,internal jacks,everything possible removed,and weakened.
So the etc not weakened ...
See More
Like ·
Reply ·
August 6 at 8:51am
Barry Mead Yep that fema image is a classic,and highlights my point,because a 3d rendering will show a isolated pocket of fire under a spot of sagging floor,the WTC 5 columns show us buckling,which we would expect in the twins and subsequently,lean,and partial failure.
We instead get,straight through itself all the way
Like ·
Reply ·
August 6 at 8:53am
Ken Doc II The verinage techinique cannot be done on steel framed buildings. Only buildings with load bearing walls.
The Verinage Technique Characteristics:...
See More
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 6 at 8:54am
Ken Doc II Debunkers forget to mention any of these characteristics when explaining the Verinage technique.
The Verinage technique only helps validate that what happened on 9/11 was physically impossible without the aid of explosives.
Like ·
Reply ·
1 ·
August 6 at 8:54am
Barry Mead Went through with a debunker and discovered that verinage rarely even caused a total collapse and ALWAYS had prep,like you said and I said,weakening wall.rwmoval,cables and jacks over multiple.floors.
Proving that you need to control the demolition very carefully to replicate what is seen.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 6 at 9:56am
Mick West The original question here is if I should have used screws in my model. I think I've explained why not.
Like ·
Reply ·
August 6 at 9:58am
Paul Kayley There's only one issue regarding you and a screw or two mate!
Like ·
Reply ·
August 6 at 10:12am