NIST Press Briefing on WTC Collapse - Friday, June 18

[Bolo Boffin]

The press release:

Commerce’s NIST to Hold WTC Investigation Press Briefing in New York

Agency to Issue 2nd Interim Report on Progress of Technical Investigation

For Immediate Release: June 8, 2004


Contact:

Michael E. Newman
[phone]



When:
Friday, June 18, 2004
11 a.m. - noon(EDT)

Where:
Odets Room, Fourth Floor
New York Marriott Marquis Hotel
1535 Broadway
New York City


Who:
Lead Investigator Shyam Sunder
World Trade Center Investigation
Commerce Department’s National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)

What:
NIST will hold a press briefing to issue a detailed interim report on the progress of its technical building and fire safety investigation of the World Trade Center (WTC) disaster following the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

WTC Lead Investigator Shyam Sunder will summarize and answer questions on
the report, including highlights such as:

• interim findings and accomplishments;
• working hypotheses for the collapse of the WTC towers and WTC-7;
• key visual observations on the building, fire and smoke conditions in all three WTC buildings derived from the analysis of collected still and video images;
• development of computer simulations to model the most probable collapse sequence for the WTC towers and WTC-7;
• progress in experimental/field work (including the analysis of recovered WTC steel and fire tests); and
• early results from the analysis of first-person interviews of nearly 1,200 WTC occupants, first responders and families of victims.

Following the briefing, the full report will be available on the NIST WTC investigation Web site, http://wtc.nist.gov.


Media Registration: For security reasons, all media—including production crew members—planning to attend the briefing in person must register by noon EDT on Wednesday, June 17, by calling [phone] or sending e-mail to [e-mail]. Registered media must have proper credentials (a news media badge with photo or a photo ID with a business card) to enter the briefing room.

As soon as it's available, I'll post it here.

Smile, people, we're about to find out how the towers fell!

[Bolo Boffin]

1. kick

The report is due tomorrow. Get ready to say goodbye to nukes in the basement and flamethrowing missiles...

[demodewd]

2. NIST...a government mouth piece if there ever was one!

Well well well well well well...Looks like NIST has their big ol hands in the Government cookie jar...big time. And they're going to produce a WTC analysis that wouldn't please their CONTRIBUTOR? hahahahaha!! At least show us a study that might be halfway objective. You know..... truly "adult".

From http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/releases/budget_2005.htm

"President Bush outlined his continued support for science and technology in the FY 2005 budget request he sent to Congress today. Under the proposed plan the Technology Administration (TA) would receive $529.8 million. The funding builds on the President’s continued commitment to research and development, especially in the areas of nanotechnology and cybersecurity.

“The President realizes that technology is central to both our economic security and our homeland security,” said Under Secretary of Technology Phillip J. Bond. “Given the President’s efforts to hold the line on non-defense funding, this budget request represents a significant investment in our science and technology infrastructure that would enable us to both win the war on terror and remain competitive around the world.”

The Technology Administration includes the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Office of Technology Policy (OTP), and the National Technical Information Service (NTIS). Below is a more detailed breakdown of the TA budget:
"National Institute of Standards and Technology $521.5 million"

Well well well well well...521 Million out of a budget of 771 million. Lets just say that doesn't have the right smell of a truly "adult" independent investigation...does it bolo?


Pride goeth before a fall

[Bolo Boffin]

3. Demodewd: I may have to pass

...you the crown of Master of the Obvious.

You're telling me that a governmental agency...

...GETS ITS FUNDING FROM THE GOVERNMENT????????????

:crazy: :think: :wow:

So next you're going to tell us that fish in the ocean...

...ACTUALLY GET OXYGEN FROM THE WATER!!!!!!!!!

:freak:

[demodewd]

4. Attn: Mr Naive

You don't apparently understand the obvious. No agency that gets 65% of its funds from the Feds are going to bite off the hand that feeds them. NIST should recuse itself. It can't possibly be impartial and risk the chance of destroying this Administation. Podnah.

[NecessaryOnslaught]

5. Its Friday

I'm ready for the truth Bolo. Let me have a couple beers so that it dosen't hit me too hard.

[parasim]

6. I guess we can't handle the truth!

[Bolo Boffin]

8. I'm sorry, Necessary...

My ethernet cable died on Friday before I could get online to post the link to the pdf.

I'm just now catching up. My apologies for building you up and then letting you down...thanks, LARED, for posting the key findings...

[LARED]

7. Key findings

http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/factsheet/wtc_keyfindings.htm

The following must be considered when reviewing the interim findings:

• Buildings are not
  specifically designed to withstand the impact of fuel-laden commercial
  airliners. While documents from the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey
  (PANYNJ) indicate that the impact of a Boeing 707 flying at 600 miles per
  hour, possibly crashing into the 80th floor, was analyzed during the design of
  the WTC towers in February/March 1964, the effect of subsequent fires was not
  considered. Building codes do not require building designs to consider
  aircraft impact.


• Buildings are not
  designed for fire protection and evacuation under the magnitude and scale of
  conditions similar to those caused by the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
  


• The load conditions
  induced by aircraft impact and the extensive fires on Sept. 11, 2001, which
  triggered the collapse of the WTC towers, fall outside the norm of design
  loads considered in building codes.


• Prior evacuation and
  emergency response experience in major events did not include the total
  collapse of tall buildings such as the WTC towers and WTC 7 that were occupied
  and in everyday use; instead, that experience suggested that major tall
  building fires result in burnout conditions, not global building collapse.
  


• The PANYNJ was created
  as an interstate entity, under a clause of the U.S. Constitution permitting
  compacts between states, and is not bound by the authority of any local, state
  or federal jurisdiction, including local building and fire codes. The PANYNJ’s
  long-standing stated policy is to meet, and where appropriate, exceed the
  requirements of local building and fire codes.

Collapse of the
WTC Towers – Working Hypothesis

NIST is interested in
determining how and why WTC 1 stood nearly twice as long as WTC 2 before
collapsing (103 minutes versus 56 minutes), even though they were hit by
virtually identical aircraft. In addition, NIST is interested in determining
what factors related to normal building and fire safety considerations not
unique to the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, if any, could have delayed or
prevented the collapse of the WTC towers.

The NIST
investigation team has formulated the following chronological sequence of major
events leading to the eventual collapse of the towers:

• Aircraft impact damaged
  the perimeter columns, causing redistribution of column loads to adjacent
  perimeter columns and to the core columns via the hat truss (the steel
  structure that supported the antenna atop the towers and was connected to the
  core and perimeter columns).


• After breaching the
  building’s exterior, the aircraft continued to penetrate into the buildings,
  damaging core columns with redistribution of column loads to other intact core
  and perimeter columns via the hat truss and floor systems.


• The subsequent fires,
  influenced by the post-impact condition of the fireproofing, weakened columns
  and floor systems (including those that had been damaged by aircraft impact),
  triggered additional local failures that ultimately led to column instability.
  


• Final column
  instability resulted when redistributing loads could not be accommodated any
  further.

Among the factors relevant
to the condition and collapse of the WTC towers – and currently under analysis –
were:

• The
  innovative structural system at the time they were built,
  incorporating many new and unusual features, including:

a
composite floor system, using open-web bar joist elements, and




the use of wind
tunnel testing to estimate lateral wind loads in the design;

• The
  relative roles of the aircraft impacts and subsequent fires;
  


• The
  post-impact condition of the fireproofing on the floor systems;
  and


• The
  qualities and properties of the structural steel used.
  

Following are key points
related to each of the four relevant factors:

Innovative Structural
System

• The fire protection of
  a truss-supported floor system by directly applying spray-on fireproofing was
  innovative and not consistent with prevailing practice at the time of
  construction.


• The fireproofing
  thickness (specified to meet a 2-hour fire endurance rating) was 1/2 inch at
  construction and was upgraded on some floors to 1-1/2 inches prior to Sept.
  11, 2001.


• Unrelated to the WTC
  buildings, a model code evaluation system service recommended in June 2001 a
  minimum thickness of 2 inches for a similar floor system to achieve the 2-hour
  fire rating.


• The three-to-four-fold
  difference (between 1/2 inch and 2 inches) in specifying the fireproofing
  thickness to meet the required fire rating is extraordinarily large and
  confirms the lack of technical basis in selecting a thickness.
  


• While the building
  designers recognized the benefits of conducting a full-scale fire endurance
  test to determine the required fireproofing thickness, no such tests were
  conducted on the floor system used in the WTC towers (NIST will be conducting
  this test later this summer).


• If a “structural frame”
  approach (considering that the floor truss was connected to the interior and
  perimeter columns, essentially forming a single structural unit) had been
  used, the needed fire rating would likely have been 3 hours, as it was for the
  perimeter columns alone.


• NIST
  computer simulations indicate that flames in a given location lasted about 20
  minutes before spreading to adjacent, yet unburned combustibles, and that this
  spread was generally continuous because of the even distribution
  of combustibles throughout the floors and the lack of interior partitions.
  


• The results of two sets
  of wind tunnel tests on the WTC towers conducted by independent laboratories
  in 2002 and provided to NIST show large differences – as much as 40 percent –
  in resultant forces on the structures. Additionally, the wind loads estimated
  from these tests are about 20-60 percent higher than those apparently used in
  the original design of the WTC towers.


• Wind load
  capability is a key factor in determining the overall strength of a tall
  building and important in determining its ability to withstand not only winds
  but also its reserve capacity to withstand unanticipated events such as a
  major fire or impact damage.

[demodewd]

9. The South Tower?

"After breaching the
building’s exterior, the aircraft continued to penetrate into the buildings,
damaging core columns with redistribution of column loads to other intact core
and perimeter columns via the hat truss and floor systems."

Thev core columns of the South Tower were damaged?

[LARED]

12. core columns of the South Tower were damaged????

Of course they were. It is not possible for the plane to miss the core.

[Bolo Boffin]

13. Yes, the core columns in both towers were damaged.

As I recall, at least twice as many were damaged in the North Tower as in the South Tower, but the South Tower had much more of the outer wall compromised, including the corners. That's a big reason why it fell first, even though more core columns were damaged in the North Tower.

[Bolo Boffin]

10. As promised, though delayed, the June 18th Progress Report links!

http://wtc.nist.gov/progress_report_june04/progress_report_june04.htm

The above page will take you to the NIST webpage containing all the links to the various comprehensive chapters of the June progress report.

Here's the table of contents:

Preface

Executive Summary

Chapter 1-Interim Findings and Accomplishment

Chapter 2-Progress on the World Trade Center Investigation

Chapter 3-Update on Safety of Threatened Buildings (WTC R&D) Program

Chapter 4-Update on WTC Dissemination and Technical Assistance Program

List of Acronyms and Abbreviations

Metric Conversion Table

Appendices A-Q

Appendix A-Interim Report on the Analysis of Building and Fire Codes and Practices

Appendix B-Interim Report on Development of Structural Databases and Reference Models for the WTC Towers

Appendix C-Interim Report on Analysis of Aircraft Impact on the WTC Towers

Appendix D-Interim Report on Preliminary Stability Analysis of the WTC Towers

Appendix E-Interim Report on Contemporaneous Structural Steel Specifications

Appendix F-Interim Report on Inventory and Identification of Steel Recovered from the WTC Buildings

Appendix G-Interim Report on Significant Fires in WTC 1, 2, and 7 Prior to September 11, 2001

Appendix H-Interim Report on Evolution of WTC Fires, Smoke, and Damage based on Image Analysis

Appendix I-Interim Report on Assessment of Sprayed Fireproofing in the WTC Towers-Methodology

Appendix J-Interim Report on Experiments to Support Fire Dynamics and Thermal Response Modeling

Appendix K-Interim Report on Subsystem Structural Analysis of the WTC Towers

Appendix L-Interim Report on WTC 7

Appendix M-Interim Report on 2-D Analysis of the WTC Towers Under Gravity Load and Fire

Appendix N-Interim Report on Analysis of First-Person Accounts from Survivors of the WTC Evacuation on September 11, 2001

Appendix O-Interim Report on Telephone Interviews

Appendix P-Interim Report on Emergency Communications

Appendix Q-NIST's Working Hypothesis for Collapse of the WTC Towers

Wow, that's a lot of information. I'll bet that the missile pod's got to figure in there somewhere, don't you think? Let's find out together.

[demodewd]

11. re: Appendix Q

It took me all of five minutes to read Appendix Q. Pathetically scant for an agency that gets the Fed gravy train at the tune of 551 mill a year. I was expecting something far more comprehensive.

[Bolo Boffin]

14. It's a cumulative thing.

You see, there's a lot more evidence contained in all the pages that proceed Appendix Q.

It's like watching Perry Mason. Perry Mason can sum up the case in a few minutes, but if you only tune into the summation, you've missed at least 45 minutes of right fine entertainment. Plus, a lot of things don't have the same impact.

What you should do, demodewd, is watch the whole episode...IOW, read the entire report. Appendix L, which I've highlighted in another thread, has 56 pages of analysis, new pictures, and lots more, all about Building 7.

You will notice a lack of reliance on rhetorical tricks like "the New Pearl Harbor" in the report. You will notice the abundance of actual evidence and tests being conducted on materials left behind. You will, in short, see what a real investigation into the collapse of the WTC buildings looks like, far beyond my or your efforts and resources.

Whether you accept it as such is up to you. Feel free to continue your belief system, as disconnected from reality as it is. If it makes you happy, it can't be that bad.

You are happy, aren't you?

[Abe Linkman]

15. Classis methods of disinformation specialists. Are you wanting to be one?

Whether you accept it as such is up to you. Feel free to continue your belief system, as disconnected from reality as it is. If it makes you happy, it can't be that bad.

You are happy, aren't you?

[Bolo Boffin]

16. Hiroo Onoda, Patron Saint of Abe Linkman

http://history1900s.about.com/library/weekly/aa120700a.htm

Onoda, you may recall, was the Japanese officer who hid on the Lupang island for 29 years because he didn't believe that WW2 was over.

Onoda first saw a leaflet that claimed the war was over in October 1945. When another cell had killed a cow, they found a leaflet left behind by the islanders which read: "The war ended on August 15. Come down from the mountains!"2 But as they sat in the jungle, the leaflet just didn't seem to make sense, for another cell had just been fired upon a few days ago. If the war were over, why would they still be under attack? No, they decided, the leaflet must be a clever ruse by the Allied propagandists.

Again, the outside world tried to contact the survivors living on the island by dropping leaflets out of a Boeing B-17 near the end of 1945. Printed on these leaflets was the surrender order from General Yamashita of the Fourteenth Area Army. Having already hidden on the island for a year and with the only proof of the end of the war being this leaflet, Onoda and the others scrutinized every letter and every word on this piece of paper. One sentence in particular seemed suspicious, it said that those who surrendered would receive "hygienic succor" and be "hauled" to Japan. Again, they believed this must be an Allied hoax.

Leaflet after leaflet was dropped. Newspapers were left. Photographs and letters from relatives were dropped. Friends and relatives spoke out over loudspeakers. There was always something suspicious, so they never believed that the war had really ended.

Abe, come down off of the mountain. The World Trade Center buildings weren't controlled demolitions.

[Abe Linkman]

17. The amt. of time and resources you have to devote to this is amazing, bolo

You are one VERY resourceful ______. I bet you wish you could find a way to get paid to do this.

[Bolo Boffin]

18. LMAO

time and resources...

Today on the History Channel, they ran a program on Onoda. I walked up to my computer and Googled his name, chose among the hundreds of links, and posted.

Total time: 4 minutes

Total resources: cable TV, cable internet, Google, keyboard. smartassery.

Come down off the mountain, Abe.

[Abe Linkman]

20. Maybe that explains some things

Now that we know how little time you say you actually devote to whatever it is you say you're doing here; it's little wonder that you would be an apologist for the "Cavepeople Did It" Conspiracy Theory. Maybe if you spent a little more time in questioning the lunacy of such a fairy tale, you would realize the errors of your way. < I'm assuming your support for the Bush story is totally innocent -- and yes, I'm sure it's a safe assumption. Sure, I'm sure. Of course. Why would anyone think otherwise? Besides, who cares? >

[Bolo Boffin]

22. LMAO, Part 2

So first you deride me because I'm spending so much time and resources on this forum...

And now you deride me because I'm spending so little.

You are a piece of work, Abe.

[Abe Linkman]

23. Chiding, not deriding.

I'm merely pointing out the dissonance in your claims, bolo.

You are a piece of artful work, bolo..

[Bolo Boffin]

19. kick

:bounce:

[seatnineb]

21. The Kick Inside.

Tom McGinnis was speaking to his wife at 10:25am on 9/11/2001 from the 92nd floor(2 floors below the impact point) on the western side of the North tower .....JUST 3 MINUTES before it collapsed....


IT WAS 10:25.
The fire raged along the west side of the 92nd floor.People fell from windows.
McGinnis again told her he loved her and their daughter,Catlin.
"Dont hang up" she pleaded.
"I got to get down on the floor" McGinnis said.
The phone connection faded out.
It was 10:26, TWO MINUTES BEFORE the tower crumbled.

The exerpt above was copied from The New York Times by The Observer Review on August 18th, 2002.
It is on page 10.

So it seems that in their attempt to accentuate the horror of the day Propaganda matrixes like the NYT and Observer use testimony that actually contradicts the very story that they try to propagate!

And it is hardly suprising that the FEMA and the NIST reports avoid telling us how this unfortunate man could BE ALIVE IN A ZONE JUST 3 MINUTES BEFORE this happens.....

[MercutioATC]

24. You DO realize that heat travels UP, right?

I don't see why the floors below the fire would be unable to support life...until they collapsed onto them, that is. This man was killed by the collapse, not the fire. Is that so unreasonable a deduction?

[seatnineb]

25. Flesh Or Steel

Sure Mercutio...... heat does travel up.......

The heat that would eventually soften the steel trusses and the internal and perimeter columns.......
That would then initiate the collapse of the tower........

But before that happens you have to reach a certain HIGH temperature....
A temperature where the human body is dead and where it would be nothing more than melted flesh and bone .

But the temperature ABOVE THE POINT OF IMPACT at 10:25am in the North Tower on 9/11/2001 WAS ENOUGH to support human life..
At least enough for these poor people TO BE ALIVE and make the
decision whether to stay and suffocate or jump into oblivion.....

And how do we know this.....
From 92ND floor survivor(until collapse) Tom Mcginnis himself.........

"You don't understand," McGinnis said(by phone to his wife). "There are people jumping from the floors ABOVE US."
IT WAS 10:25.
http://www.swishit.com/vent.html

Question....
How can people be alive and suffocating/jumping when the temperature is supposed to be at least 500 degrees centigrade and increasing....?

By the way Mercutio.......
This man was NOT BELOW the fire as you state......
He was on the SAME floor as the fire........
Still not hot enough to kill him......

But enough to contribute to the collapse of the tower apparently.......

[Bolo Boffin]

26. If you look at the report...

...instead of blithely dismissing it, you will find the answers to your question.

Tom McGinniss had been below the impact zone and the fire. Floor 92 resisted the fire for a long time. Only at 10:18 did it suddenly break out and begin sweeping through the 92nd floor, just about the time that Tom called his wife. Seven minutes later, Tom's phone call ended abruptly, and two or three minutes later, the tower collapsed.

There were places where people retreated from the fire, and lived right up to the collapse. Tom is a prime example. Many jumped; all did not. Their survival up to the point of collapse is not evidence of a controlled demolition - it's evidence that where they were in these huge buildings, the temperature remained at a livable level. That's all.

Read the report, because it accounts for the huge fluctuation of temperatures between floors - even on the same floor, the edges of the building maintained a living temperature level while the center was red hot.

Read the report.

[seatnineb]

27. To heat or not to heat......

To quote the honorable Bolo on...
Wed Jul-07-04 12:12 AM
"the edges of the building maintained a living temperature level while the center was red hot."

That is why
Bolo ol' buddy.....
I ask you to consider this.
Assuming 2 objects of different temperatures are touching one another.......
Heat will flow from the warmer object to the cooler one....

Remember how the Twin Towers were constructed......
The perimeter walls were connected to the inner columns via the trusses....

That "red hot center" would be transferring the heat to these cooler trusses and perimeter walls.
And according to your theory they had to be cooler..

Because......

What were the people who survived until the collapse standing on Bolo?
That right.
A floor.
And embedded within these concrete floors are those same steel trusses......
And Bolo, my friend , concrete is a damn good conductor of heat.

I guess for these people to be alive at the perimeter(at the time of collapse) the temperature could not have been more than 40'C or 50'C ....whatever it was ...it had to be well short of the 500'C centigrade needed to soften that steel....

Looks like we a have another 9/11 paradox on our hands.

Remember..the greater the temperature difference....
The more the heat will flow.
The less the thickness.....
Then the heat flow will increase.....
I would say that those steel trusses were comparatively thinner
than the inner columns......wouldnt you......?

So where is that heat from the 500'C inner column gonna go Bolo......
Thats right.
Straight to those people "on the perimeter".

You cant have it both ways.
If the people survive until the time of collapse......
There can be NO COLLAPSE DUE TO HEAT.

Only if there are NO PEOPLE ALIVE at the time of collapse....
Can the building have a remote chance to collapse "due to heat".

I am afraid that your beloved fairy tale is in a twist.

And that is why.....
The FEMA report and the NIST "interim" report are discounting one variable......
The people who survived(until collapse).
You want proof.......
Here goes...

According the holy NIST report.........
"One of the more unusual fire spread episodes in WTC 1 occurred just after the collapse of WTC 2 around 9:59 a.m. Within a couple of minutes, a large intense fire suddenly appeared on the south side of the west face on FLOOR 104 in an area well above any other apparent fire.This unusual jump in fire location is difficult to explain, but is likely associated with vertical shafts located in the core of the tower."
http://wtc.nist.gov/progress_report_june04/appendixh.pdf

And this is what the NIST "analysis" misses out...

104TH FLOOR
Andrew Rosenblum, victim
Cantor Fitzgerald

Andrew Rosenblum was a stock trader and vice president at Cantor Fitzgerald who led a team on the 104th FLOOR of 1 World Trade Center.
His LAST CALL WAS AT 10:23 a.m., and he spoke for 1 minute.
Jill Rosenblum(his wife) told this story:
"They weren't panicking. You heard a couple people saying, "Oh my God." Then we lost our connection. That was maybe two minutes before 2 World Trade Center fell. I watched on T.V. as 2 World Trade Center fell. It never occurred to me that these buildings would fall."
http://www.mishalov.com/wtc_northtower.html

That fire on the 104th(which started at 9:59am) must have spread pretty quick Bolo.......
Because also according to Jill Rosenblum...
"It's a big open area with just long desks and chairs. There's really no offices. Except one or two corners of the room. One was in the northwest corner. He(Rosenblum) and about 50 other people ran into this corner office because their floor had filled up with smoke relatively quickly. "
http://www.mishalov.com/wtc_northtower.html


Yet Andy Rosenblum and 50 other unfortunate people managed to survive just by hiding in a corner office....for 27 minutes! ....strong enough to resist the same heat that was simultaneously softening those inner steel columns and the "roof hat truss"....

Keep on defending the 9/11 paradoxes Bolo........
We are enjoying it whilst it lasts.

[Bolo Boffin]

28. Straw man

You cant have it both ways.
If the people survive until the time of collapse......
There can be NO COLLAPSE DUE TO HEAT.

Only if there are NO PEOPLE ALIVE at the time of collapse....
Can the building have a remote chance to collapse "due to heat".

Temperature doesn't disperse as instantly and completely as you imagine it. Check out Appendix M for a 2-D examination of how the heat spread through the truss section. It wasn't uniform.

Two other reports to check out - at the home page http://wtc.nist.gov , you'll find a listing of several .pdf Powerpoint presentations. The ones demonstrating the ranges of temperatures within the structural steel are:

Simulation of the Fires in WTC 1, 2, and 7

and

Coupled Fire Dynamics and Thermal Response Analysis of WTC Towers and Bldg. 7

These reports don't show floor 104, but they do show how a range of 500 degrees can exist on the same floor. Your premise (that survival of people implies no collapse from heat) is faulty.

Furthermore, from Chapter One of the Interim Report (you did read Chapter One, didn't you?):

Finding 1a.15: NIST has completed a preliminary stability analysis of the WTC towers. The findings from the preliminary analysis, if they remain viable upon further more detailed analysis, suggest that:

• For global instability of the WTC tower to occur under service loading conditions, five floors must have separated completely from all columns if the columns are at room temperature or four full floors must separate if the columns are uniformly heated to 600 oC. Linear stability analysis indicates that some individual core columns begin buckling with fewer “failed” floors at both temperatures without significantly affecting global stability.

• For typical truss-framed floors under service loading conditions, if fifteen core columns are assumed severed due to aircraft impact, tension is induced in those columns by the floor immediately above the failure location of the columns. The tension force increases as more floor loads are picked up by the columns as they approach the hat truss at the roof level. The increase in tension load is limited by the tensile capacity of the column splice. When the tensile load exceeds the column splice capacity at a certain floor level, the splice fails, and all floors below the failed splices must redistribute their own loads directly to neighboring undamaged core columns. When fewer (only eight) core columns are assumed severed, the tension forces in the core columns are smaller due to the larger stiffness of the damaged floor area for eight severed columns, relative to that for 15 severed columns. The stiffer floor area redistributed more of the floor loads directly to neighboring undamaged core columns. The extent to which the severed core columns assist in transferring loads via the hat truss without failure of the column splices is sensitive to the relative magnitudes of the floor loads, column tension force, and column splice capacity.

• WTC 1 maintained stability after aircraft impact, with the highest stressed elements being the perimeter columns next to the region where columns and spandrels were severed on the north face of the tower. The analysis assumed eight columns in the core were severed due to aircraft impact. A “pushdown” analysis was used for evaluating structural stability accounts for geometric and material nonlinearities with plastic hinges. WTC 1 also maintained stability with remaining residual reserve capacity when additional perimeter columns were removed on the south face to represent the inward bowing observed in videos a few minutes prior to collapse. However, loss or weakening of additional core columns, weakening of additional perimeter columns, or loss of additional floors would be needed for global collapse of the tower to occur.

Did you get that? The columns could have been any temperature you like and if five floors had seperated from them, the building would have collapsed.

That quote is from page 14 of chapter 1. The report goes on to describe how the trusses reacted to being heated. First, they expand, then they sag, tugging the columns back and forth with them, until the connections are destroyed due to a combination of heat and load stress.

Read the report, Necessary.

[Abe Linkman]

29. That's good, bolo. That's real good.

When flummoxed, post quotes from the "NIST Warren Commission" Report.
That thing has more magic bullets than Arlen Spector's holster can hold.

[seatnineb]

32. No Bolo.

I suggest YOU read the report.

There were 47 core columns in the North Tower supporting the vast majority of its weight.
Only 8 of which were (assumed) damaged by the plane.

The lullaby NIST "interim" report actually concedes AS MUCH.......

" When fewer (only eight) core columns are assumed severed, the tension forces in the core columns ARE SMALLER due to the larger stiffness of the damaged floor area for eight severed columns, relative to that for 15(supposition) severed columns. The stiffer floor area REDISTRIBUTED more of the floor loads directly to neighboring undamaged core columns. The extent to which the severed core columns assist in transferring loads via the hat truss without failure of the column splices is sensitive to the relative magnitudes of the floor loads, column tension force, and column splice capacity."


So the loads were effectively redistributed to the neighboring core columns.
The perimeter columns would have also been instrumental in supporting the extra load/weight.

Proof ........the structure held after it was hit.

Now.........
To complete the lullaby the NIST implies something a little extra was needed other than "load stress"
to initiate collapse.
"However, loss or weakening of additional core columns, weakening of additional perimeter columns, or loss of additional floors would be needed for global collapse of the tower to occur."

They are referring to the heat.

But that heat aint gonna come to save the NIST fairytale.....

The poor people being alive until collapse PROVED IT.
Because...........
The flames and heat generated by the burning fuselage/wings/kerosene/office combustibles ect were still going to come into contact with those ruptured internal steel columns.
That IS WHERE what was left of the plane came to rest.
Right?
Those same ruptured internal steel columns THAT WERE STILL IN CONTACT WITH THE FLOORS ABOVE the point of impact.

Oh and in which direction does heat travel in.
Thats right.
Upwards.

But when it comes into contact with something cooler.
And this something cooler consists of concrete and steel i.e the floors ABOVE THE POINT OF IMPACT.
IT WILL SPREAD TO THEM.
How fast depends on
The surface area.
The thickness/length.
The difference in temperature.

Each individual floor truss was 35 foot long
And 20 foot wide.
So from the Perimeter column to the OUTWARD inner column was no more than 35 feet .

For the 35 foot steel truss to buckle at any point due to heat(and it would have had to have been heat on the upper floors above the point of impact) you need to reach a temperature of 500'C to 600'C.

So we know that they did not buckle.Because the people were alive and standing on them.The temperature could not have been more than 30'C or 40'C ,50'C tops.

Conclusion.
The inner columns were hot.Probably too hot to support life.
But not hot enough to cause buckling.

[DeadBroke]

34. Heat wasn't considered the only reason.

In related threads I described some of the September 11 public forums I attended. To refresh memories; they were held throughout the 5 boros during the Spring, Summer and Fall of 2002, some hosted by the New York Public Library, some by The Archdiocese, some by the NYC Office for Public Affairs, the Board Of Education and so on. Each forum had a panel of speakers from FDNY, NYPD, engineering firms, or engineering professors from places like Stevens Tech, NJIT and Columbia University. Each speaker had 10 to 15 minutes and some had slides or a video as well. All forums ended with lengthy Q and A sessions, and speakers were generous with their time after wards as well and continued to answer follow-up questions. They were usually held in schools and were packed with people at first, many were turned away, but later interest declined. Except for a few archive newspaper accounts there are no web links to the records of these forums and while I saw dozens of small tape recorders on or near the podium I do not know if there are any verbatim records anywhere.

One of the more popular questions I heard asked during the Q and A concerned the temperatures of the fires, and it seemed that the questioner usually doubted the fires were hot enough to weaken columns to the point of failure. The engineers and professors that fielded the questions at these forums, that were held just a few months after September 11, indicated that sufficient testing for a conclusion had not been completed and that except for estimates - one professor called it a "guesstimate", actual fire temperatures were not really known; but each speaker added that fire temperature wasn't the only reason adding that fire duration was just as important. The speakers also said that the loads transfered from displaced columns created motion among the columns. They described the transfer of loads creating motion in the columns to the left, right, and up and down of the damaged ones - something like multilevel dominoes.

[Abe Linkman]

35. Other ambient conditions "COULD" also have been involved

Humidity, wind direction and terminal velocity (at higher elevations), outside temperature etc. In fact, at the time of those forums, none of the experts had yet done any testing to see if maybe a nearby "fault" in the Earth could have also been involved. Also, if enough radios, TV's, cell phones and DVD's were in use, the energy created by them "COULD" have had an effect (especially, on some of the weaker building trusses).
Also, I heard that Oliver North was in NYC at the time.

[DeadBroke]

36. I don't know about cell phones and faults ...

... and I never heard or read about them being contributors to the collapse before.

I was simply reporting that the panels at these public forums could only respond to questions from the skeptical public about fire temperatures with their estimates, but added that the duration of the fires was also just as important as the temperatures.


In hindsight and in the months since those public forums it has become interesting to me that the some of the panels also spoke about the movement and motion of the columns which is something that has also been described and discussed in these DU forums, including a link to NIST witness statements that included one man saying the building he was in was swaying.

It's also interesting to me how links to the Weidlinger report and the NIST report (quoted in message #32) refers to the "hat truss" which was also described in these DU forums.

From this it seems to me anyway that some DU forum members who have provided insight and information BEFORE Weidlinger and NIST came out actually knew what they were talking about.

That information was also much more accurate than the statement that the floor truss were only 35 feet long. The Trade Center towers were squares and the cores were rectangles. The short sides were 35 feet or so, the longer sides nearly twice that. I installed mobile aisle shelving in the Trade Center and the sections were nearly 50 feet in length. I saw the trusses several times while working at the Trade Center, and I can also remember seeing the trailers that delivered them years ago during the construction phase. They were flatbeds that had extendable sections to accomodate the 60 foot plus lengths. It is incorrect to state the truss were only 35 feet.

I also have a problem with the comments that "only" eight columns were damaged. For one, saying eight is almost the same as saying 20 percent of them, and 20% is a lot; but from my years as an ironworker I am certain that eight columns actually means more. Those 8 were connected to eight below and eight above; and by way of beams, chevrons, and other structural steel framing members to columns to the sides. Whatever happens to one affects the other. I've erected too many columns to count, and then plumbed and racked them so that they are perfectly straight up and down. We use heavy cables and turnbuckles to straighten, plumb and rack the columns before all the bolts are tightened and torqued and before the connections are welded. Turning those turnbuckles doesn't just move one column into place it moves the one above and affects ALL the other ones connected to it as well. Having 8 damaged columns actually translates to many more.

Also from my years as an ironworker I will again state that steel columns, beams and trusses are extremely sensitive to heat, even just to the sunlight. NYC is presently having sunny days with high 80 degree temperatures. Ironworkers are having some rough times with the fit and finish of structural steel framing members. Beams lying on the deck will bend or slightly curve from the sunlight and also elongate. An oldtimer ironworker will spend his day checking and marking these beams for curves so that the beam can be erected and fitted with the least amount of difficulty. He'll be checking by pulling a string from one end to another, he'll then place 1/2" shims at each end, and then he'll measure along the whole length of the beam and then mark which is the best and worst side - much the same way a carpenter will hold a board and eye it for bends and twists. Steel doesn't need much heat, the sun makes a rough job harder, and foremen do their best to get the iron hung early in the day when it's cooler to avoid headaches with fit and finish.

I can drive over an operable steel bridge everyday, but avoid it in the summer. Whenever it opens for an extended length of time to allow the passage of a tugboat and barge it elongates and can not close. The fire department has to come and spray water on it so it cools and returns to size. NYC has a subway lift bridge at the nortern tip of Broadway. They raise and lower and inspect it daily, but do so much more quickly in the summer or skip extra hot days due to heat expansion and elegation problems. The same is true at lift bridge section of the TriBorough Bridge.

[seatnineb]

46. Broke' .........

You do realize.......

That by increasing the length of the truss from 35 to 60 ft.
You are actually damaging the fairy tales parameters even more.
Remember the CORRUGATED STEEL that was layed BETWEEN the concrete and the trusses..........
Thats one large surface area which if heated sufficiently is going to buckle the trusses(at 500'C and above).

At least so we are told.

But that did not happen.

Because we have proof that the heat generated by these fires on the perimeters above the impact zone were cool enough to ALLOW FOR HUMAN LIFE UP TO AND INCLUDING collapse.
Hence no BUCKLING OF THE TRUSS AND NO BUCKLING OF THE EXTERIOR COLUMNS onto which these people WERE CLINGING ONTO for dear life.



Also.......
By elongating the trusses from 35 to 60 feet..
You are providing an extra 25 by 20 feet of concrete and steel for the fragile Aluminum plane to penetrate.
Which means those inner columns have got a bit more protection.

By the way I learned that the trusses were 35 feet long from:

The New York Times.
A Nation Challenged.
Published By Jonathan Cape.
London.
Page 32.

So who do I believe?
Propaganda propagators The New York Times.?
Or Deadbroke.?

[DeadBroke]

52. I worked there ...

... numerous times over the years, and I know what I saw. I laid out the tracks for the shelving, drilled, bolted, grouted and know that the core was rectangular and centered in a square building making the truss spans 35 on the short side and over 60 on the long. My TAB brand track shelving units would not have fitted into 35 foot spans. FYI: Previous Trade Center 9-11 discussions here at DU included the posting of floorplans verifying the lengths of truss span. These floorplans were the source for a lengthy dicussion between Lared and plaguepuppy when they were attempting to formulate ("back of envelope" was their term) the square footage of collapsing floors and air compression. I really don't care who you believe. I was there and hung my coat from the trusses, and know what I saw.

[vincent_vega_lives]

55. Do you have anything of substance to add to these threads???

Or are you just the forum eejit?

[Abe Linkman]

33. No way they could have come down except by controlled demolition

Your beloved cover-up investigation can come up with all kinds of convoluted theoretical, conceivably-possible-under-highly-unlikely conditions that are inconsistent with other known facts about the WTC collapses...but the bottom line is: those puppies came down thanks to an outfit appropriately named: Controlled Demolition, Inc.

That one to two foot thick pulverized "snow" covering the ground could only have been made possible as the result of energy far, far in excess of what could have been the result of a fire or anything else observed.

What you are doing is NOT what an objective truth-seeker would do. You are acting solely as a partisan. As an advocate for a client would. Your client has a huge investment in promoting an indefenisble claim, and you are doing your best to try and support that position.

You would gain in respect if you would simply acknowledge what is glaringly obvious to anyone who has been here for a while.

Diversions and excursions into the world of 9-11 Black Hole Theories do not deter; they only cause delay and a forced acceptance of your right to come here and engage in what can't be truthfully labeled, under DU rules currently in place.

[MercutioATC]

37. The dust wasn't the result of the fire, Abe.

It was the result of thousands of tons of concrete falling hundreds of feet. Try it some time. Throw a piece of concrete on the ground (which doesn't even come close to the forces involved in the tower collapses) and I'm betting you'll find concrete dust on the ground.

[NecessaryOnslaught]

38. Try again

The dust was created instantaneously, not as a result of hitting the ground. The videos and pictures clearly show a demolition wave ejecting fine dust running down the face(s) of the building. 220 acres of office space and all it's contents turned to a fine powder, instantaneously with this demolition wave(s).

As for explosive residue and any other demolition "artifacts", have you seen the report showing these tests were negative? You can't find something unless your looking for it. And you can't look for it if you get rid of the steel before the forensic team even has a chance to look at it.

[MercutioATC]

41. Yes, the dust was ejected as the upper floors collapsed onto the lower

floors. Again, a lot of concrete falling will tend to do that.

Have you seen any report showing evidence that there WAS explosive residue or artifacts? I haven't seen a report that says it wasn't caused by a giant mutant space goat, but I don't consider that as proof that a giant mutant space goat did it.

Show me one report from a qualified person that actually examined the site that supports what you claim.

[Abe Linkman]

43. Hilarious, merc. Really. How did you come up with THAT? LOL

"Yes, the dust was ejected as the upper floors collapsed onto the lower"

[MercutioATC]

45. Why WOULDN'T concrete falling on concrete create dust

(and smaller pieces of concrete) and why wouldn't those pieces and dust be ejected?

You're correct, I have no engineering training, but why do you find debris being ejected from a shrinking volume "hilarious"?

[gbwarming]

47. Like this:

The wrecking ball rebounds after a mighty hit that fells the upper six floors of Downtown YWCA.

http://detroityes.com/downtown/23ywcadust.htm

[Abe Linkman]

39. Wrong AGAIN, atc OBL rep.

Throw a piece of concrete on the ground, and you'll get small pieces of concrete. Most people would. Maybe not Osama, or an ATC employee -- but most people would. You'd need a big hammer or some kind of explosive energy force to pulverize concrete into dust. The WTC dust resulted from the massive explosions that Larry would say is the result of the buildings having been "pulled".

[MercutioATC]

40. Obviously, you didn't TRY it, Abe...

Sure, you get chunks of concrete. You also get dust. There were both at the WTC site.

Yes, it's true that to create the amount of dust at the WTC site, you'd need something like a "big hammer". How would you characterize thousands of tons of concrete falling from a great height? Possibly as a "big hammer"?

(Oh, and you might want to back off on the "OBL rep." stuff until you have a chance to reread the posting rules.)

[Abe Linkman]

42. That much dust would only result from an explosion.

Please confine your remarks to your claimed area of expertise.

Only Oude says he's an engineer. So, only posts under that handle would be appropriate to a conclusion that 1 to 2 to 3 feet of dust was caused by concrete falling on floors down to the ground.

You can't be both. At least, not at the same time. Or, can you?

[MercutioATC]

44. And YOUR area of expertise allows you to make that claim, how?

"That much dust would only result from an explosion."

Please confine YOUR remarks to your claimed area of expertise...oh, you don't HAVE a claimed area of expertise, do you?

[Abe Linkman]

48. My expertise

Is identifying people who pretend to be more than one person on Internet forums.

[MercutioATC]

49. Ooooh! I want to learn that! Where did you get your degree?

Does it pay well? How are the benefits? Do you have to wear a uniform....like a funny hat?

:tinfoilhat:

[Abe Linkman]

50. Sorry, and I don't mean to hurt your feelings, but.............

I don't think you're academically qualified. You stick with your CRT
work. Maybe you could be an Engineering Assistant.

[MercutioATC]

53. Believe me, my feelings aren't hurt...

In fact, if I ever claim to be as omniscient as some people here, I hope somebody locks me up.

[vincent_vega_lives]

57. Really?

Exactly what is your experience with explosions? cuz I got news for ya, what turns concrete in to dust is having FORCE applied to it, alot of it...not unlike the force of the towers converting tremendous potential energy in to kinetic energy...which is...you guessed it...what explosives do, only with a chemical reaction rather than mass and gravity.

[seatnineb]

51. Yo Abe!

To quote Abe...........
"Those puppies came down thanks to an outfit appropriately named: Controlled Demolition, Inc."

And for good measure,mate,lets remind ourselves..........

That what was done before........



Could be done again......

[Fusions_Minion]

54. there ya go

great pictures.

[vincent_vega_lives]

58. Yup nice pics

However what you are seeing here is a structual failure, same as what occured in the towers, only difference in this case is chemical instead of mechanical initiation.

If there were masses of chemical explosives in the WTC it would be very easy to detect for, even now.

[vincent_vega_lives]

56. Ahh, some substance

That one to two foot thick pulverized "snow" covering the ground could only have been made possible as the result of energy far, far in excess of what could have been the result of a fire or anything else observed.

I'm sure you are aware of the fact that every floor of both WTC towers consisted of 4" non-load bearing (brittle) slab concrete that was subjected to far more kinetic energy any demo squibs could create when the towers collapsed.

[gbwarming]

30. Your basic heat transfer understanding is wrong

You're talking about conductive heat transfer. For a uniform, steady state, one dimensional flow

q = kA(t1-t2)/L

q: heat flow rate (BTU/hour)
k: thermal conductivity (BTU/(hour ft degF)
A: cross sectional area normal to flow (ft^2)
(t1-t2): temperature difference (degF)
L: length of heat flow path (ft)

Thinner sections result in less heat flow. As do longer paths.

But really, this problem isn't steady state, or one dimensional. There's no reason off hand to expect that conduction through the floor would be the main heat transfer mode from the center to the edges.

[seatnineb]

31. No gbwarming....

When I wrote........
"The less the thickness"(According to your formula - the conductor inbetween t1 and t2)
"Then the heat flow will increase"

The point being heat would flow from the interior columns to the trusses via the comparitevely thinner steel beams............

And when I wrote this............

"I would say that those steel trusses were comparatively thinner
than the inner columns......wouldnt you......?"

I was not refering to the heat flow from interior to exterior.
What I implied was that the thickness of the steel of the inner columns would impede the flow"up" towards the top.
And Remember.
The thickness of the interior columns FOR THE HIGHER FLOORS DECREASED , DECREASING the heat flow more.

The same much needed heat that would have been neccessary to loosen the wedges and the steel beams that attached the trusses to the interior columns on the floors ABOVE the impact zone.