where E is Young's modulus (psi), G is modulus of rigidity (psi) and r is Poisson's ratio. Modulus of elasticity also is called elastic modulus and coefficient of elasticity.
OudeVanDagen says:
"I have also offered technical terms, and suggested using the Modulus Of Elasticity For World Trade Center Steel so that readers can understand the yield and shear points of the steel they talk about and come up with their OWN understanding."
Modulus of Elasticity
The number which represents the relative "springness" of a given type of metal. All steels have the same modulus of elasticity or "springiness" regardless of the tensile or yield strengths. That is, until the yield point is reached they all stretch the same amount for a given load. Aluminum, on the other hand, is more elastic than steel and thus will stretch more than steel under the same loading.
http://www.weirton.com/glossary/M.htmlThe steel in question
would be that used in the construction of the WTC
and it differs from other
steel yield and shear points,
HOW?
modulus of elasticity - (physics) the ratio of the applied stress to the change in shape of an elastic body.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/modulus%20of%20elasticityI would say that the stress applied to the WTC
was most certainly enough to change its shape.
OudeVanDagen,
you have suggested that information is 'just a click away.'
Some of us have been clicking away for weeks and STILL do not know what you meant when you used the term "elastomer" in reference to the WTC towers.
And as for the term "elastomeric temperature"
which you used in reference to the WTC steel,
even YOU YOURSELF
have completely failed to define it.
Sometimes I do not think that you really know or properly understand the matters which are being discussed on this forum.
I am NOT attacking you.
Nobody here really truly knows what happened on that day,
and nobody here really truly understands exactly what brought those buildings down. However, many here are trying to clarify, not confuse.
It is frequently unclear what exactly your intent is.
I am simply making an observation based on your posts.
Allow me to elucidate, using this statement
"I do object to the unfounded claims that the investigation did not follow established protocols."
No established protocols were followed,
(and most especially in the case of Building 7 and the others which were NEVER hit by aircraft)
and the proof of that is only a click away.