I found the missing Jolt.

[skyeagle409]

As I said, you do have experience working with structures, but it does not sound like you have ever done design and analysis and may not be fully appreciative of some of the issues raised about the explanations in the NIST WTC reports.

I want to add these photos to show the effects of fire on exposed steel keeping in mind that fire protection of the WTC Towers was compromised by the aircraft impacts.


Photo 1

http://www.greenbuildingadvisor.com/sites/default/files/twisted_steel(1).jpg


Photo 2

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v699/xu-an/woodbeam_fire_bentsteel.jpg


Photo 3

http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~ohscogs/ShelbyPhotos/ost7fire.jpg


Temperature and Strength of Metals

Influence of temperature on the strength of metals

Some common types of steel lose 10% of their strength at 450 C (840 F), and 40% at 550 C (1022 F). At temperatures above 800 C ( 1475 F), it has lost 90% of its strength. Other types of steel are made to stand higher temperatures before losing 10% of their strength, but they are much more expensive (and are weaker at room temperature).

And there are types which actually get stronger, up to 450 F (but then get a lot weaker at higher temperatures

http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/metal-temperature-strength-d_1353.html

 

[Myriad]

The diaper I was referring to quite clearly is the NIST WTC report and it certainly smells and needs changing. If you deny it, as many on this forum do for some strange reason, then you are trying to force everybody else to just put up with the stench instead of doing the right thing and changing it. It is hard to understand why you would do that.

Fine. I'm just pointing out that diapers don't smell when they come out of the diaper factory or when they're on the store shelves.

When they smell, it's because a baby crapped in them.

You seem to think that new investigations are something that should just happen every few years, like Olympics or eclipses or King Kong remakes.

But having crapped on previous investigations to try to make them smell, like a baby in diapers does, is not sufficient reason anyone to keep on providing new ones. Even a baby learns to wear big boy pants eventually.

 

[Tony Szamboti]

I want to add these photos to show the effects of fire on exposed steel keeping in mind that fire protection of the WTC Towers was compromised by the aircraft impacts.


Photo 1

http://www.greenbuildingadvisor.com/sites/default/files/twisted_steel(1).jpg


Photo 2

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v699/xu-an/woodbeam_fire_bentsteel.jpg


Photo 3

http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~ohscogs/ShelbyPhotos/ost7fire.jpg


Temperature and Strength of Metals

Influence of temperature on the strength of metals

Some common types of steel lose 10% of their strength at 450 C (840 F), and 40% at 550 C (1022 F). At temperatures above 800 C ( 1475 F), it has lost 90% of its strength. Other types of steel are made to stand higher temperatures before losing 10% of their strength, but they are much more expensive (and are weaker at room temperature).

And there are types which actually get stronger, up to 450 F (but then get a lot weaker at higher temperatures

http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/metal-temperature-strength-d_1353.html

The heating of steel is a function of its specific heat, size, and the energy of the fire. The beams you show are not indicative of much more massive structural items in steel framed buildings.

Nothing like your photos show would have happened to a relatively common size item used in a steel framed building like a W33 x 130 steel girder vs. the very thin gauge lightweight beams you show in your photos.

The AISC graphs for yield strength and modulus of elasticity of structural steel at elevated temperatures are attached, so people can see that at 500 C (932 F) steel still has 75% of its strength. It also isn't that easy to heat large pieces of steel to that temperature and that is why steel framed buildings have never collapsed to the ground, before or after 911, due to fire.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

The heating of steel is a function of its specific heat, size, and the energy of the fire. The beams you show are not indicative of much more massive structural items in steel framed buildings.

Nothing like your photos show would have happened to a relatively common size item used in a steel framed building like a W33 x 130 steel girder vs. the very thin gauge lightweight beams you show in your photos.

The AISC graphs for yield strength and modulus of elasticity of structural steel at elevated temperatures are attached, so people can see that at 500 C (932 F) steel still has 75% of its strength. It also isn't that easy to heat large pieces of steel to that temperature and that is why steel framed buildings have never collapsed to the ground, before or after 911, due to fire.

Not exactly true, as warping during expansion can change geometry of the steel members reducing strength below the 75 percent threshold.
Geometry can change the strength of the steel, and expansion can change Geometry.
Uneven heating can cause more problems that evenly applied heat, basic welding heat treating Tony, thought you worked with steel?

 

[Tony Szamboti]

Fine. I'm just pointing out that diapers don't smell when they come out of the diaper factory or when they're on the store shelves.

When they smell, it's because a baby crapped in them.

You seem to think that new investigations are something that should just happen every few years, like Olympics or eclipses or King Kong remakes.

But having crapped on previous investigations to try to make them smell, like a baby in diapers does, is not sufficient reason anyone to keep on providing new ones. Even a baby learns to wear big boy pants eventually.

I don't like people bold-face lying to me like many of the NIST report authors are trying to do. Maybe you don't mind.

 

[Tony Szamboti]

Not exactly true, as warping during expansion can change geometry of the steel members reducing strength below the 75 percent threshold.
Geometry can change the strength of the steel, and expansion can change Geometry.
Uneven heating can cause more problems that evenly applied heat, basic welding heat treating Tony, thought you worked with steel?

Nobody is saying there couldn't be some warpage, but I am sure you can't give examples where minor warpage caused a building to completely collapse. Your points here are non-germane and obviously you are just throwing crap at the wall hoping something will stick, because you have no argument against what I am saying.

 

[Myriad]

I don't like people bold-face lying to me like many of the NIST report authors are. Maybe you don't mind.

You mean bold-face lying like when someone displays building 7 "came down in a classic controlled demolition" on an electronic billboard?

That's a complex question, really. I don't like it, but it seems some people and organizations have an emotional need to lie. Maybe if Gage couldn't lie about that he'd be doing something worse, like cooking meth or planning mass shootings for the glory of Allah. I have to consider the harm actually done, and how it stacks up against larger problems in the world, like environmental unsustainability.

 

[NoahFence]

I am not saying you do not have any structural experience as a structural mechanic, supervisor/inspector, and repair manual specialist. I am saying it may not be enough to give you a full appreciation for the analysis, which generally involves things which would only be gotten through formal instruction and experience doing analysis.

You think you need formal instruction and experience to know that Fire + Steel = bad things for buildings??

 

[NoahFence]

I am posting here to point out legitimate problems with the story we have been given for the building collapses in NYC. Putting up with disingenuous barbs is not why I come here.

You ilk still have to tie it in with the rest of the day for it to begin making any sense.

Just so you know....

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Nobody is saying there couldn't be some warpage, but I am sure you can't give examples where minor warpage caused a building to completely collapse. Your points here are non-germane and obviously you are just throwing crap at the wall hoping something will stick, because you have no argument against what I am saying.

Warpage doesn't cause collapse it causes girder walk off, girder walk off causes collapse.

I must have mistaken you for an engineer, sorry may bad.

 

[skyeagle409]

The heating of steel is a function of its specific heat, size, and the energy of the fire. The beams you show are not indicative of much more massive structural items in steel framed buildings

Nothing like your photos show would have happened to a relatively common size item used in a steel framed building like a W33 x 130 steel girder vs. the very thin gauge lightweight beams you show in your photos.

The AISC graphs for yield strength and modulus of elasticity of structural steel at elevated temperatures are attached, so people can see that at 500 C (932 F) steel still has 75% of its strength. It also isn't that easy to heat large pieces of steel to that temperature and that is why steel framed buildings have never collapsed to the ground, before or after 911, due to fire.

Then, let's take a look at this piece of WTC steel. What can you tell us about the steel you see in the photo?


WTC Steel

https://i0.wp.com/i662.photobucket.com/albums/uu347/911conspiracytv/horseshoe_steel.jpg

 

[skyeagle409]

Nobody is saying there couldn't be some warpage, but I am sure you can't give examples where minor warpage caused a building to completely collapse. Your points here are non-germane and obviously you are just throwing crap at the wall hoping something will stick, because you have no argument against what I am saying.

Considering that impact damage had redistributed structural loads and the fact the impacts dislodged fire protection from the steel structures of the WTC buildings leaving the steel columns exposed to the full effects of fire, there would have been much more than just warpage, we are talking structural failures.

I might add that WTC 5 had suffered an internal collapsed due to fire alone, so explain to us how fire managed to set into motion, the internal collapse of WTC 5..

 

[skyeagle409]

Nobody is saying there couldn't be some warpage, but I am sure you can't give examples where minor warpage caused a building to completely collapse.

How about the Kader steel frame buildings that collapsed due to fire? What about the steel frame hangar in California that collapsed due to fire? What about the outer steel structure of the Windsor building that collapsed due to fire?

 

[Grizzly Bear]

Me too - I trust that was a "Freudian Slip"...

....and not just a bummer.

Must stop..... thinking.... . zootopia...... must not think....

 

[Grizzly Bear]

How about the Kader steel frame buildings that collapsed due to fire? What about the steel frame hangar in California that collapsed due to fire? What about the outer steel structure of the Windsor building that collapsed due to fire?

I hate pointing it out but most of the long time members participating in this thread right now have gone over these examples and many others for years... and i dont mean 5 or 6 years... at this stage its been upwards of 10 years now. While I would commend Ozeco for remaining civil and often getting into the fray by criticizing debunkers as well as truthers I have to simply point out that folks like Tony et al will not consider any examples unless it's a generic "steel framed" highrise building. I put "steel framed" in quotations because even then their criteria for "steel framed" includes reinforced concrete buildings. Limiting the scope of comparisons is not in the CT vocabulary.

Tony made clear - again - that he believes no steel framed highrise can ever collapse as a result of initiation by fire. That alone makes me question the professional competence.of his testimony. End of story. I've been in my profession coordinating with engineers long enough to know how full of crap that one remarj i continue reminding people of really is.

Apologies to all... by the way for being so pessimistic. 8 or 9 years of seeing this idiotic repetition of incompetence does kind of put a dent on my motivation to carry out a discussion. I'm done giving benefit of the doubt to some of these people....especially those who clearly have some of requisite professional experience yet abuse their authority with their incompetent remarks on a near daily basis

 

[Axxman300]

I know the SR-71 airframe expands significantly in-flight at high speeds and taking that into consideration in the design is why its fuel tanks don't fully seal until after takeoff and at cruising speed.

And had the Skunk Works overlooked this fact, what happens to the plane at speed and altitude?

It fails.

At those speeds it comes apart as the heat expansion damages connections causing a fatal string of structural failures.

And yes, the Blackbird is made of Titanium, not steel, or aircraft aluminum...because neither do well when exposed to extreme heat for long periods of time...like, oh say, an unprosecuted 8 hour-long fire.

 

[skyeagle409]

Tony made clear - again - that he believes no steel framed highrise can ever collapse as a result of initiation by fire. That alone makes me question the professional competence.of his testimony. End of story.

A real structural engineer would not believe such a statement. After all, there is a very good reason why fire protection is applied to steel frame structures of buildings.

Structural experts also agree that fire was responsible for the collapse of the WTC buildings.

 

[skyeagle409]

The AISC graphs for yield strength and modulus of elasticity of structural steel at elevated temperatures are attached, so people can see that at 500 C (932 F) steel still has 75% of its strength. It also isn't that easy to heat large pieces of steel to that temperature and that is why steel framed buildings have never collapsed to the ground, before or after 911, due to fire.

Structural steel loses about half of its strength at 650°C and you are failing to take into an account dislodged fire protection and redistributed structural loads at the impact points, which brings up this question:

Regarding the WTC Towers, at what locations did the collapse of each tower originate?

I want to further add that at no time before 9/11, were steel frame buildings struck by B-767s at high speed, which incidentally, dislodged fire protection from the steel structures of WTC 1 and WTC 2 and redistributed their structural loads.


.

 

[DGM]

A real structural engineer would not believe such a statement. After all, there is a very good reason why fire protection is applied to steel frame structures of buildings.

Structural experts also agree that fire was responsible for the collapse of the WTC buildings.

I'd be careful with these blanket statements. First of all Tony is not a structural engineer or has he claimed to be. Second is, you are actually creating your own strawman by posting a link that does not exist. .

Welcome to the forum.

 

[skyeagle409]

I'd be careful with these blanket statements. First of all Tony is not a structural engineer or has he claimed to be. Second is, you are actually creating your own strawman by posting a link that does not exist. .

Welcome to the forum.

Thank you!!

I am very surprised that a so-called structural engineer would overlook the reason why fire protection is applied to steel frame buildings and ignore the redistributed structural loads at the impact points where fires raged out of control, which exposed structural steel to temperatures of those fires.

Structural buckling observed during the moments before WTC 1, WTC 2, and WTC 7 collapsed was a prime example of structural weakening due to fire.