Quote:
Originally Posted by BrodieMSU
would you rather i state "progression" or "progressive" as many times as i possibly can in one reply? i dont know what your background is in structural engineering, but i know you dont know what you are talking about. its ridiculous to compare a building and a bridge in failure modes. i know this because i actually am a structural engineer.
...
essentially, this was a fatigue crack in a fracture critical member
|
All of the information you posted in this post is what LED to the collapse... not the ACTUAL collapse mechanism or timing involved in the collapse... correct?
The bridge was fatigued and eventually a critical member gave, overloading the other members and causing a global collapse. This took at least 4 seconds per the video and MSM news.
If this is the case you have not answered to anything I have posted.
"A bridge with essentially TWO supports takes 4 seconds to fail because ONE truss was lost and progressed to the others... Progressive collapse, far less supports, smaller safety factor due to age. Why the delay? Why not instant failure like the THREE WTC towers? Why not ignore the intact resistance like in the WTC?
WTC towers avg. 10 seconds to collapse (NIST) because of (officially) a truss failed overloading other trusses and causing them to fail, the causing all the columns to fail even in 70 untouched floors and causing global collapse in < 11 seconds in both cases.
IDK... seems like the bridge should have collapsed in < 1 second per. 9/11 gravity magic."