View Single Post
Old 3rd December 2015, 03:14 PM   #355
ozeco41
Philosopher
 
ozeco41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Moss Vale, NSW, Australia
Posts: 7,617
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
Does anyone know what kind of hardware the university has available to run a FEA that is "more complete" then the NIST?

I know we've come a long way in the 10 years since the NIST did theirs but, it's still a very big job.

I've looked through the study site but, haven't found any specifics.
Neither hardware nor software are likely to set the limits.

IMNSHO the limiting factors will be ability to define loads and temperatures. The temperature prediction stuff probably an order of magnitude less reliable than the loading and redistribution aspects - the "conventional engineering" stuff before the temperature effects are overlaid.

I doubt we will ever get anything MORE plausible than what NIST did. And certainly not on a "Two PhD students' dissertations" level of resourcing. We may see alternate plausibles identified.

Since the AE911Truth assertions are pure nonsense the outcomes will either indicate that NIST was plausible and/or identify some other plausibles OR agree with AE911. I cannot see any university process following the latter.

And none of that will matter - AE911 will spin it dishonestly no matter what the findings.
ozeco41 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top