You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #196: Bazant insists that Part C remains intact. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU
eomer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-11-09 01:24 PM
Response to Reply #185
196. Bazant insists that Part C remains intact.
Can Crush-Up Proceed Simultaneously with Crush
Down?
It can, but only briefly at the beginning of collapse,
as mentioned in the paper. Statements such as the columns
supporting the lower floors . . . were thicker, sturdier, and
more massive, although true, do not support the conclusion
that the upper floors (i.e., the floors comprising Part C)
would be more likely than the lower floors to deform and
yield during collapse (deform they could, of course, but
only a little, i.e., elastically). More-detailed calculations
than those included in their paper were made by Baant and
Verdure to address this question. On the basis of a simple
estimate of energy corresponding to the area between the
load-deflection curve of columns and the gravity force for
crush down or crush up, it was concluded at the onset that the
latter area is much larger, making crush-up impossible. We
have now carried out accurate calculations, which rigorously
justify this conclusion and may be summarized as follows.

http://www.civil.northwestern.edu/people/bazant/PDFs/Pa...


It seems strange that he would continue to insist that Part C remains intact even when challenged but would simultaneously be adjusting the mass and energy of Part B for ejections that came out of Part C. It seems much more likely to me he is adjusting for mass ejections that originate from Part A. In any event, I do agree with your statements if the amount of his adjustment is enough to cover the ejections that originate from both A and C. To be honest I don't know what amount he assumes or how he arrives at it so this question is probably floundered unless or until someone knows that.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC