Creative Speculation

No problem, I've missed replies often.

But your reply demonstrates that you don't understand Bazant at a fundamental level.

It also shows that you have a tendency to play fast & loose with the truth. I've told you my background. SURELY you don't think that I'm going to accept the utterly childish interpretation of Bazant's attention to mass shedding that you've portrayed in your reply.

Would you care to try again. Or are you in the habit of making others clean up your mess.

A useful piece of info is that Bazant uses Kout = 0.2. Independent measurements, based on lidar data, suggested values of 0.25 - 0.3. But Bazant's value is, to a very, very high probability, more accurate because, as he states explicitly, much of the expulsion happens after the building has cratered. And the lidar happened several days after the collapse.

Now, for some more fundamental misunderstandings...

Do you think that Bazant believes that the building's progressive collapse happened as described in Bazant & Le (2001), Bazant & Verdue (2007), or Bazant, Le, Greening & Benson (2008)?