Alert icon
We're changing our privacy policy. This stuff matters.  Learn more  Dismiss

WTC Impact Model - MIT

Loading...

Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon
Upgrade to the latest Flash Player for improved playback performance. Upgrade now or more info.
10,179
Loading...
Alert icon
Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon

Uploaded by on Nov 10, 2007

Model demonstrating the effects of changes in mass and its distribution to show the need for informatiom on the quantity of steel and concrete on every level of the WTC.

Category:

Education

Tags:

License:

Standard YouTube License

  • likes, 34 dislikes

Link to this comment:

Share to:

Uploader Comments (psikeyhackr)

  • Well, 10,001 hits on 10/4/11. It took almost 4 years. Views started leveling off around June of 2009. So when I America going to do physics? Probably can't handle the psychological shock.

  • Just wondering, but have you noticed that this model is significantly stronger than the tower construction? The towers' main strength lay in the core column, and the outer panels were only held on by the trusses extending from the core. Therefor, a possibly more accurate portrayal would be if you used popsicle sticks or something (though those are probably too strong as well).

    There is simply a fundamental flaw in your model. It does not accurately represent the physics.

  • @Daniel092004 The purpose of that model was to show that the response of the structure due to the impact changed with the mass and the distribution of mass in the structure. Therefore that information had to be necessary to analyze the effect of the airliner impact on the towers.

    So why hasn't everyone been demanding the steel and concrete data on the towers?

    It's only been TEN YEARS!

  • Well, it's that day. TEN YEARS of Bad Physics!

    The Physics Profession has not demanded accurate data on the distributions of steel and concrete down the towers. Who cares about Potential Energy and the Conservation of Momentum?

    I guess it is time to burn Isaac Newton in effigy.

  • your impact object did not penetrate your model. I would like to see what would happen to your model if the object did take out half of a level...

  • @teampenit My impact mass was 8 to 25% of the weight of my model.

    The airliner was less then 1/2 of 1/10th of 1% of the mass of the towers. One floor slab was more than triple the weight of the plane.

    .

Top Comments

  • Dr Sunder of the NIST said the north tower came down in 11 seconds. Argue with him. It is in a podcast on PBS.

    I am approaching the point where I decide to delete everything you post because it is nothing but idiotic drivel.

  • Ye I agree. I'd love that info. But still this video is irrelevant to the collapse. If you notice in the calcs I mentioned I had to assume a weight for each floor based on an assumed concrete slab thickness. I seen your other vids and they are the most thought out models I have seen on youtube (thats not hard) but its difficult to draw conclusions from them. I think it would not be a stretch to assume the weight of each floor would be the same as any differences would be negligible

Video Responses

see all

All Comments (188)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • the evidence to me that pancaking happened comes from the videos of the collapse, the portion above the point of impact retained its shape and it's orientation as dust and debris came out from the pancaking levels below the point of impact....and it is that downward pancaking that pulverized the majority of the buildings.

  • the plane took out not just one level but parts of several levels. when that first level collapsed, the floor directly below had to withstand the impact of not just the weight of the floor directly above but the weight of ALL the floors above that point. The amount of energy transferred had to be huge. I am sure there are people out there that could do a calculation based on guesstimates...I can accept the idea that pancaking downward, once it started was unstoppable

  • screaming "TONS of STEEL and TONS of CONCRETE in SEVEN YEARS" over and over does not make your argument any more valid, you don't win a debate based on how many times you say the same thing over and over...

    your model did not get penetrated, it did not catch on fire, it's useless.

  • @Insolent85 Doesn't that mean the CORE TEMPERATURE of the steel has to rise to that level? How much time does that take? How could it happen in LESS THAN ONE HOUR for the south tower when there had to be enough steel there to support another TWENTY NINE STORIES?

    .

Loading...

Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more