At 02:04 PM 03/20/2003 -0500, Steve Thompson wrote:
This seems reasonable. As a large structure topples,
the sheer stress across the long axis of the building
will inexorably increase as the upper floors retard
the downward progression of the lower floors (caused
of course by gravity). I suspect
And of course, we captured a set of skyscraper collapses towards the end of
our documentary Fight Club. What suprised us was that the documentary
continued to show on cable even several months after September 11th.
-TD
_
Tired of
On Wednesday, March 19, 2003, at 04:14 PM, Eric Cordian wrote:
Tim Wrote:
With no chance for evacuation, and with a one-fifth of a mile high
building toppling sideways, fatalities might have reached 30,000 or
more.
I'm not a structural engineer, but given that lateral structural
strength
is
On Wed, 19 Mar 2003, Tim May wrote:
I think the nearly perfectly vertical collapse of the WTC towers was
because of the pancaking of each floor into the floors below, as shown
in the videos. Whether removal of one support triggers pancaking or
toppling is more complicated than the blocks
--- Eugen Leitl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 19
Mar 2003, Tim May wrote:
I think the nearly perfectly vertical collapse of
the WTC towers was
because of the pancaking of each floor into the
floors below, as shown
in the videos. Whether removal of one support
triggers pancaking
Tim Wrote:
With no chance for evacuation, and with a one-fifth of a mile high
building toppling sideways, fatalities might have reached 30,000 or
more.
I'm not a structural engineer, but given that lateral structural strength
is likely only a fraction of vertical structural strength, it
