Adventure Bike Rider Forum

My understanding of 'controlled collapse' would be a demolition where the thing falls 'down' vertically rather than 'over' horizontally. The collapse has to start near the top for this to happen.

IE when Fred Dibnah knocked down chimneys, he'd remove bricks at key locations all around the structure, and replace them with lumps of wood. Carefully set fires would then consume the wood in a progressive order, and the thing would collapse in on itself. Nowadays they do the same with explosives.

The conspiracy theory is the WTC buildings collapsed in this manner. And building 7 collapsed having only have been hit by debris, and AFTER live new broadcasts, including the BBC, said it had collapsed.

The report I've linked to is the first I've read in what might be a professional journal that lends any credence to the conspiracy theory. I'd just be interested in hearing from anyone who knows about how these building fail and fall. I don't know enough to have an opinion.

Richard Simpson Mark II wrote: ↑Sat Jan 23, 2021 11:00 pm My understanding of 'controlled collapse' would be a demolition where the thing falls 'down' vertically rather than 'over' horizontally. The collapse has to start near the top for this to happen.

IE when Fred Dibnah knocked down chimneys, he'd remove bricks at key locations all around the structure, and replace them with lumps of wood. Carefully set fires would then consume the wood in a progressive order, and the thing would collapse in on itself. Nowadays they do the same with explosives.

The conspiracy theory is the WTC buildings collapsed in this manner. And building 7 collapsed having only have been hit by debris, and AFTER live new broadcasts, including the BBC, said it had collapsed.

The report I've linked to is the first I've read in what might be a professional journal that lends any credence to the conspiracy theory. I'd just be interested in hearing from anyone who knows about how these building fail and fall. I don't know enough to have an opinion.

Fred's approach was akin to knocking down a tree with an axe. It kind of went when and where he wanted it to, but he had everything crossed.

Cooling towers are a better example of controlled demolition, the whole base can be blown out at the same time causing a vertical collapse in a stack, or a section can be removed causing a topple in a chosen direction.

Buildings are similar, a failure at a point (by design in a demolition) can cause a topple or induce a progressive collapse (where failure is induced by failure etc. Google Ronan Tower.) The point of failure needs to be sufficiently low for the weight above to induce the progressive collapse.

WTC towers were progressive collapse and both came down vertically, with no twisting, which is odd given where the were hit and the building construction. That doesn't mean its wrong, just that its odd.

Building 7 is odd in that the forces required for collapse didn't appear to be there. It could, of course, be that the construction was flawed. Water has been known to be added to concrete to make it go further, but weakens it and steels aren't always to code, so maybe a weaker structure could be brought down by those forces.

There must be a structural Engineer on here somewhere? (just not an Italian bridge designer though)