• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Recent content by Kat Dorman

  1. K

    Building 7 . . .

    Re: High School Teacher BUTCHERS NIST WTC 7 Report I sense some sort of conspiracy. I met Ruth Underwood a couple of years ago. Very cool lady.
  2. K

    "Amateur Engineering" practice in progressive collapse analysis[W:222, 344. 1463]

    And, of course, I can ask you for YOUR sample size on observations which go towards refuting my claim of collapse dominated by connection failure. That would be ZERO.
  3. K

    "Amateur Engineering" practice in progressive collapse analysis[W:222, 344. 1463]

    That's better than the percentage for nationwide exit polling. Granted, exit polling doesn't work well when there's massive widespread vote fraud, but it used to work very well. Total 2012 eligible voters is 215,081,000: 2016 electorate will be the most diverse in U.S. history | Pew Research...
  4. K

    "Amateur Engineering" practice in progressive collapse analysis[W:222, 344. 1463]

    It's no longer surprising that you ignore pointed questions, instead seizing on little **** that you think are "gotchas" (which they are not). Want to address this? Where you ****ed up was choosing a support that offers more resistance AFTER it fails than before. You see, I don't need...
  5. K

    "Amateur Engineering" practice in progressive collapse analysis[W:222, 344. 1463]

    It's not a very good sample size, and not random in its collection process. If it were truly random, maybe not so bad. Certainly not as bad as you seem to think. So, what do you have in the way of evidence?
  6. K

    "Amateur Engineering" practice in progressive collapse analysis[W:222, 344. 1463]

    https://app.aws.org/wj/supplement/wj0907-263.pdf
  7. K

    "Amateur Engineering" practice in progressive collapse analysis[W:222, 344. 1463]

    Me, too.
  8. K

    "Amateur Engineering" practice in progressive collapse analysis[W:222, 344. 1463]

    Paper is weaker, but unsurprisingly its characteristics are similar to cardboard, because they're made of the same stuff! The issue here is more the geometry of the deforming support. Your mode of crushing is axial compression on a short cylinder: Like this: Compared to the load...
  9. K

    "Amateur Engineering" practice in progressive collapse analysis[W:222, 344. 1463]

    The reason is simple. Once those kinks form, the column loses most of its strength. Your paper loops do not lost strength when crushed. Bazant's resistive force as columns get 'crushed' in the manner shown above: Notice how the greatest resistance is at the start, then it drops off...
  10. K

    "Amateur Engineering" practice in progressive collapse analysis[W:222, 344. 1463]

    psikeyhackr: In a 1D model, like yours, all supports are destroyed/crushed. That model does not qualitatively capture the tower collapse mechanism. Bazant also has a 1D model which is similarly deficient but is adquate to serve as a bounding case. Your model is capable of being compared with...
  11. K

    "Amateur Engineering" practice in progressive collapse analysis[W:222, 344. 1463]

    You mean this: Another Crush down / Crush up thread - International Skeptics Forum or a more recent mini-screed about dimensionality, which I can't find at the moment? As you know, he's not the only one. This is the profoundly weird thing: when cornered on the idea, many or most do actually...
  12. K

    "Amateur Engineering" practice in progressive collapse analysis[W:222, 344. 1463]

    Agreed. Haha, yeah. Something tells me you've also presented your take a hundred times over the years. Why? Because some nuts are tough to crack, and that makes them interesting. The key word in your statement is 'meaningful'; we've all been talking for years. Some of that interaction has...
  13. K

    "Amateur Engineering" practice in progressive collapse analysis[W:222, 344. 1463]

    I've not seen a glimmer of recognition that the 1D models are inadequate to describe the real collapses. Given that he made a 1D model (two, actually), it's safe to assume he accepts 1D models. There is exactly ONE hurdle which keeps him from understanding WHY his model arrested, and a model...
  14. K

    "Amateur Engineering" practice in progressive collapse analysis[W:222, 344. 1463]

    That's true, but the audience - assuming he even reads it - is psikeyhackr. His initiation is a drop from a comparatively great height through air. Also Bazantine, but biased towards collapse instead of the other way. If psik had dropped it from one "story" height, not much would've happened...
  15. K

    "Amateur Engineering" practice in progressive collapse analysis[W:222, 344. 1463]

    oz will say you ****ed up at more fundamental stage, in demanding all the support be completely crushed like a Bazant model, NOT like the towers which were dominated by connection failure. This is also true. But if you insist on making a model with full crushing - it can be done theoretically...
See more
Back
Top Bottom