Another Steel-Framed Building Collapses Due to Fire

He added: "Intense heat buckled the steel girders holding the roof."
Click to expand...

Wow! The girders buckled, yet they were only holding the roof?

Imagine how they would have faired with 20-odd floors of Twin Tower on top of them.
 
I'll soon be releasing a DVD revealing the consipacy behind the fire at this toilet paper factory. I'm calling it Loose Stool: The Final Wipe.

Steve S.
 
steve s said:
I'll soon be releasing a DVD revealing the consipacy behind the fire at this toilet paper factory. I'm calling it Loose Stool: The Final Wipe.

Steve S.
Click to expand...

Must you always be so anal? ;)
 
TS is right, this is exactly the expected behaviour and is also consistent and similar with the fire in the Madrid tower and also all other fires in steel buildings. It slowly caves in and finds a new balance. Whether there is a block of 2 or 20 stories above it doesn't matter, that will also cave in and find a new balance. Of course more mass on top involved more forces, but the material that carries the block has a strength proportional with that mass, that's how it is built.

One should add a heavy weight on a similar building and raise a fire in the same way and check what happens.
 
einsteen said:
TS is right, this is exactly the expected behaviour and is also consistent and similar with the fire in the Madrid tower and also all other fires in steel buildings. It slowly caves in and finds a new balance. Whether there is a block of 2 or 20 stories above it doesn't matter, that will also cave in and find a new balance. Of course more mass on top involved more forces, but the material that carries the block has a strength proportional with that mass, that's how it is built.

One should add a heavy weight on a similar building and raise a fire in the same way and check what happens.
Click to expand...


*NAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH*

Wrong answer. Neither madrid towers nor the structure mentioned in the OP had the same level of pre-collapse damage to the support structure as the Twin Towers. Or did you forget about those pesky aircrafts banging into the WTC?

Your conclusion is based on a comparison between an undamaged support structure, not the reality of the heavily damaged support of the WTC and therefor flawed.
 
Last edited:
einsteen said:
TS is right, this is exactly the expected behaviour and is also consistent and similar with the fire in the Madrid tower and also all other fires in steel buildings. It slowly caves in and finds a new balance. Whether there is a block of 2 or 20 stories above it doesn't matter, that will also cave in and find a new balance. Of course more mass on top involved more forces, but the material that carries the block has a strength proportional with that mass, that's how it is built.

One should add a heavy weight on a similar building and raise a fire in the same way and check what happens.
Click to expand...

No TS is not right and neither are you.

The building that collapsed supported no weight above, unlike the Towers. You seem to be implying that the fires alone would have simply caused the static weight above the impact areas of the towers to sag and settle out in a new position. I do not see this.

The towers suffered massive and instant damage to its supports. The static weight above the supports has to redistribute to whatever remains. This is instant, it was not gradual and it almost certainly was not uniform. Weight is redistributed unevenly upon the remaining supports and will cause some to give. Combine this with the weakening from the raging fires, which in turn will accelerate the redistribution of the massive static weight above. The very fact it was uneven means that individual supports are subject to over stress which in turn will lead to failure. This further failure will result in further redistribution of the weight. It will continue until the remaining supports are physically unable to bear the load above. At this point what remains will simply give and the static weight above becomes dynamic.

The rest my friend is history.
 
OMG!! The NWO has tried this before!

Giant toilet roll starts factory fire

Apr 18 2005

By Rhodri Phillips, The Journal


A roll of toilet paper the size of a car caught fire at a factory yesterday, in a blaze which took more than eight hours to put out.

More than 50 firefighters and 16 fire engines were called to the blaze at SCA Hygiene in Princess Way, Prudhoe, Northumberland.

The fire started in the factory's pulp yard, which contained dozens of giant rolls of toilet paper, just after 3pm on Saturday.

No-one was injured and production at the factory - at the centre of a controversial planning application - resumed on Saturday evening.

Hexham fire station officer John Arnold said the absorbency and size of the rolls of toilet paper had complicated the firefighting operation.
Click to expand...
 
allright then, but then you can also not use this building as a example for wtc.

I know the story of course, the combination of damage and fire. The damage makes it weak and finally fire brought it down an hour later after it was damaged. But why is there absolute silence for an hour and no between state, the stories don't make it plausible. This is something that maybe could be tested with a scale model. If something holds a massive block for an hour without any bending and then.... in the wtc1 movie there is a correlation with a camera shake 10 seconds before the collapse, someone said the core died probably first but that doesn't solve the matter it only places the same question 10 seconds earlier in time.
 
einsteen said:
allright then, but then you can also not use this building as a example for wtc.
...
Click to expand...

Wrong. This building is a piece of positive evidence that fire can cause structural steel to fail.

Here is an analogy to show why it can be used in the manner we have presented it, but not in the manner you have:
A corpse is found with a small hole in one side of its head and a large hole in the other side.
Upon examining all available evidence we conclude that the person was shot in the head and that this was the cause of death, probably by a large caliber firearm.
You conclude something else (doesn't matter what) caused the hole and that it was not the cause of death (you think they died from a heart attack or something).
We provide a specific example of someone who has been shot in the head, but it is with a smaller caliber firearm and there is no exit wound. We state, "Here is an example of someone who died from a gunshot wound to the head."
You reply, "And this proves that the corpse we found didn't die from a gunshot wound to the head, because the example you showed me doesn't have an exit wound."
 
einsteen said:
allright then, but then you can also not use this building as a example for wtc.
Click to expand...

NO BUILDING can be used as a parallel, positive or negative, to the Twin Towers. They were unique structures - it's apples and oranges.

However, this fire demonstrates that regular building fires can generate enough heat to significantly reduce the strength of steel.

We already knew that, though.
 
einsteen said:
This is something that maybe could be tested with a scale model. If something holds a massive block for an hour without any bending and then....
Click to expand...

There is no way to make a scale model with micro-bolts
and mini trusses. And i guess the bolts were a factor for
the collapse.
 
Fire can damage steel, I knew that already and it's logical, I also don't say that that is not possible. An other thing to mention is that a large structure works as a giant heat sink avoiding a lot of damage.
 
qarnos said:
However, this fire demonstrates that regular building fires can generate enough heat to significantly reduce the strength of steel.

We already knew that, though.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but we didn't have convienient digital pictures and video, so already knowing that doesn't count! Pixels rule, dood!!
 
einsteen said:
allright then, but then you can also not use this building as a example for wtc.

I know the story of course, the combination of damage and fire. The damage makes it weak and finally fire brought it down an hour later after it was damaged. But why is there absolute silence for an hour and no between state, the stories don't make it plausible. This is something that maybe could be tested with a scale model. If something holds a massive block for an hour without any bending and then.... in the wtc1 movie there is a correlation with a camera shake 10 seconds before the collapse, someone said the core died probably first but that doesn't solve the matter it only places the same question 10 seconds earlier in time.
Click to expand...

Is there some part of uneven that you don't understand?

The planes took out supports in an uneven manner. (Some supports were simply destroyed, others were damaged, and some were unaffected)
The weight above was distributed unevenly.
The fires were uneven.
The fires subject the remaining supports to different levels of intensity.
Some supports were affected by the fires, some were not.
The buildings static weight continued to be distributed unevenly.
Some supports sagged, some failed, and some continued to hold.
Eventually the remaining damaged and undamaged supports were unable to physically hold the weight above.
They failed.
The weight became dynamic.

Please enlighten me as to how on earth you expect this to be simulated by putting a block on supports for an hour and setting fire to the supports. I am all ears.
 
einsteen said:
Fire can damage steel, I knew that already and it's logical, I also don't say that that is not possible. An other thing to mention is that a large structure works as a giant heat sink avoiding a lot of damage.
Click to expand...

And what about the weakest parts of a construction - the Bolts and Joints?
 
A scale model will be difficult but it would be nice to have at least a demonstration in which you create asymmetrical damage and fire and check the behavior. But if those towers were extremely unique then it will never be possible.
 
einsteen said:
A scale model will be difficult but it would be nice to have at least a demonstration in which you create asymmetrical damage and fire and check the behavior. But if those towers were extremely unique then it will never be possible.
Click to expand...
It would also be nice to figure out how to avoid death and taxes.
 
WildCat said:
Are you talking about William Rodriguez's basement bomb?
Click to expand...
I don't know what that is. In a movie you see a camera shake about 10 seconds before the collapse of wtc1, in eyewitness there are some huge thunder sounds. And I've seen other youtube material of explosion sounds.
Of course one should ensure they are related.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom