The WTC cores

[Unfit4Command]

Lately I've been trying to find some info about the WTC cores since I've been hearing a lot of stuff from the Truth Movement about how they should have remained standing, and even should have possibly held the rest of the building up.

I need to know more about the construction of them. I've found some stuff like these diagrams:

And this one that shows the collapse sequence but doesn't really explain the collapse of the core:

I've also noticed a few things after watching several videos about the collapses and seeing several pictures. It almost looks like the core of the building doesn't collapse until the building passes the stronger areas of the building(I can't remember what they're called, but the 2 areas on the building that are stronger than the rest). Is that area required to hold the core up?

Like look at these photos:
South Tower core;

sn taken from this video-http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1615521411849861778&q=Dramatic+video+evidence&hl=en

In the beginning of the collapse of the North Tower I saw this:

It seems a little too small, and moveable to be a part of the core, but I'm pretty sure it isn't just smoke and debris moving around.
Here's a slow motion version where you can see it really well:

This is another photo I found which appears to possibly be the core of the South Tower still standing after the collapse:

The only problem is that I've never found any other photos like it, and haven't been able to find any videos that show it either.

And the core of the North Tower still standing is a pretty common picture:

And this is what's left of one of the cores, I'm not sure which it is yet:

So far I haven't been able to find anything dedicated to the collapse of the core, or giving any major explainations for it. AHHH!! I just don't have a lot of info about the core right now, so if anyone can tell me, or show me anything about them, please do.

 

[firecoins]

Read the NIST report.

 

[defaultdotxbe]

isnt christophera our resident core expert? lol

 

[Gravy]

Hi, Unfit. Where have you looked for information about the tower cores?

 

[Unfit4Command]

Hi, Unfit. Where have you looked for information about the tower cores?

hmmm...several places. I'm looking through some of the NIST report right now, but I HATE pdf files, they work so horribly on my computer. Oh well guess I'll have to deal with it unless someone knows of somewhere I can download the report and read it in Word or something.

Anyways, I've mostly just seen various videos on youtube and google video, read a few things from CT and debunking websites, various threads on forums(both CT and debunking sites).
The reason I made this thread is just to see what other people have found, I've barely found anything because I don't really know where to look aside from the NIST report now. Anything else? debunking911.com talks about the core a little, but not enough for me to actually argue a point with my several CT friends, or at least prepare for a possible argument at school which looks more and more likely of happening everyday.

I need it all! haha. If that helps...I plan on putting what I find about the core together into a paper once I finish my one about the Pentagon.

 

[stateofgrace]

Ok I'll have a stab at this. I'm sure if I am wrong I will be quickly corrected.

From my understanding of the construction of the building of the Towers there were three main elements or parts which ever way you want to call them.
There was the central steel support cores, the external steel superstructure and the floors that were braced between the two of them.

When they constructed the Towers they built up part of the core, built up part of the steel super structure and then added a floor that braced the two together. They then continued, core, external super structure, floor. This continued all the way up.

The floors simply braced the core and the external steel super structure together. They were reinforced with concrete. I could be wrong on this one but I am also led to believe that the floors weighted the same, i.e. floor 10 weighted the same as floor 100. They were simply strapped to the core, which took the weight and in turn to the external steel superstructure.

So finally you have a massive steel building. The core and the external steel superstructure are literally taking the weight of the floors but the floors are also acting to brace it al together. So would it not make perfect sense that if the floors are suddenly and violent removed then the entire building is compromised?

Again this is simply how I see things unfolding as the massive weights above the damaged sections suddenly start to drop. It would drop initially on the core, the floors and the external superstructure. Obviously the core will offer up the most resistance and the weight, which is not solid but be deflected onto the floor spaces. It will to a point be contained within the external steel superstructures and continues falling on the floor spaces. They floors are not designed to take this and simply collapse. This collapse literally rips the floors from the core and the steel super structure.

It continues down through the floors spaces, ripping each floor from the core and the steel superstructure. The steel super structure is made up of many pieces and simply gets blown away by the violent destruction of the floors. This continues right down each Tower, floor after floor is simply ripped away.

Until the floors and the superstructure are no more. Parts of the core go with it and some parts remain standing momentarily until it finally collapses under the now unsupported weight.

Hey this is just my opinion, I’m sure I could well be wrong but it makes more sense than bombs missiles and secret death squads.

 

[beachnut]

I need to know more about the construction of them. I've found some stuff like these diagrams:

This information is wrong on a few facts, you have to sort out the misinformation from CT sites and other sites who have it wrong.

There is no concrete core. I have see this diagram and it misleads a lot of people. Poor research by a journalist or other source.

Like spelling a name wrong, they defined the WTC wrong!

 

[Unfit4Command]

This information is wrong on a few facts, you have to sort out the misinformation from CT sites and other sites who have it wrong.

There is no concrete core. I have see this diagram and it misleads a lot of people. Poor research by a journalist or other source.

Like spelling a name wrong, they defined the WTC wrong!

So the core is just made out of steel? ah, that's good to know.

 

[beachnut]

An expert in structures said this about the core:

You are correct that the twin towers did not have a concrete core. However, they, did have a well-defined core consisting of conventional steel framing supported by steel columns. Generally, horizontal framing in the core was not moment-resisting framing, though semi-rigid (type PR) connections were used for some of this framing. Thus, the statement that the core structure was not designed for lateral resistance.

The core framing did play a significant role in resisting collapse, however, after the aircraft impacts and initial damage sustained by these impacts. The core, ultimately, also played a significant role in the collapse. If you would like more information, you may obtain detailed reports at www.nist.gov/wtc

The technical guys would say the load carrying system was designed so that the steel facade would resist lateral and gravity forces and the interior core would carry only gravity loads.

The core does not handle lateral loads very well.

 

[Gravy]

hmmm...several places. I'm looking through some of the NIST report right now, but I HATE pdf files, they work so horribly on my computer. Oh well guess I'll have to deal with it unless someone knows of somewhere I can download the report and read it in Word or something.

Anyways, I've mostly just seen various videos on youtube and google video, read a few things from CT and debunking websites, various threads on forums(both CT and debunking sites).
The reason I made this thread is just to see what other people have found, I've barely found anything because I don't really know where to look aside from the NIST report now. Anything else? debunking911.com talks about the core a little, but not enough for me to actually argue a point with my several CT friends, or at least prepare for a possible argument at school which looks more and more likely of happening everyday.

I need it all! haha. If that helps...I plan on putting what I find about the core together into a paper once I finish my one about the Pentagon.

Well, you come across as a complete ass. But since you don't like words, but like pictures, here are some that I hope will be helpful.

​

 

[Unfit4Command]

Well, you come across as a complete ass. But since you don't like words, but like pictures, here are some that I hope will be helpful.

How do I "come across as a complete ass"? I like both words and pictures, just the NIST report doesn't work well on my computer so it might take a while to read. And I'm pretty sure I like words considering the fact that I read through your whole WTC 7 paper, and the Loose Change guide more than once.

So...sorry for asking a few questions? Sorry for pdf files not working well on my computer? Sorry for wanting as much info about the cores as I can get? Sorry for wanting to be prepared for any possible arguments with CTs? Sorry for planning on writing a paper about the cores? Sorry for writting one about the Pentagon? There are just about apologized for everything I said in my previous post and I don't really know I did to be called a "complete ass" or come across as one, but oh well. Think whatever you want, either way, I'm on your side on the 9/11 issue.

And thanks for the pictures, I have never seen some of them before, they're greatly appreciated

 

[Brainster]

The floors simply braced the core and the external steel super structure together. They were reinforced with concrete.

I believe that the floors were essentially steel pans which were filled with concrete. The purpose of the concrete is not to reinforce the steel, but to deaden sound. It is correct that there was no concrete core surrounding the steel columns; in fact that is one of the improvements that Silverstein has added to the new WTC-7 building (in addition to extra-wide staircases and extraordinary fireproofing of the structural steel).

 

[Pardalis]

Unfit4Command, you said you were doing "papers" on the Pentagon and the WTC disasters, so what are your credentials? Or is it just a school paper?

 

[stateofgrace]

I believe that the floors were essentially steel pans which were filled with concrete. The purpose of the concrete is not to reinforce the steel, but to deaden sound. It is correct that there was no concrete core surrounding the steel columns; in fact that is one of the improvements that Silverstein has added to the new WTC-7 building (in addition to extra-wide staircases and extraordinary fireproofing of the structural steel).

Thanks for that, I had assumed the concrete was there for reinforcement.

 

[hellaeon]

Goodaye unfit,

stick to your research, its good for the mind, but be careful of accepting any information from CT sites on face value. These sites and there calculations have been shown to be consistantly wrong or misrepresented and according to the scientific community, completely wrong. You probably already know this anyway.

You have met a bit of hostility due to the opening post, lots of big pictures and questions which is pretty much how a lot of the CT'ists work. Take it as a grain of salt and for whatever questions you have, search the forums rather then just post a question as you will find that very much every physical arguement in favour of the conspiracy has been shown to be completely wrong.

The only thing left is to find vague coincidences in speeches or quotes from articles as evidence which is sadly a waste of time.

This is why you may be met with hostility as its like a broken record!

Be vigilant in the research and as I said, be careful on your sources. Most of the CT can be debunked by primary school science.

Welcome to the forums

 

[Pardalis]

I agree with Hellaeon. I might have been myself a little blunt in my last post.

But if you are doing papers that are intended for the net, please use extreme caution and be sure to do a thorough and proper research. This is an extremely important issue, that should be dealt with respect and seriousness.

 

[TruthSeeker1234]

Nice little study, Unfit. You are correct, the cores survived, then fell. What could explain this? If all of the floors and perimeter sections "fell" down past the core, why would the core then disintegrate a few seconds later? It makes no sense.

 

[hellaeon]

I should add, the arguements have not only been shown to be completely wrong, but in numerous ways, numerous times!

 

[Pardalis]

It makes no sense.

Yeah, like if the controlled demolitions theory made sense...

 

[Unfit4Command]

Goodaye unfit,

stick to your research, its good for the mind, but be careful of accepting any information from CT sites on face value. These sites and there calculations have been shown to be consistantly wrong or misrepresented and according to the scientific community, completely wrong. You probably already know this anyway.

You have met a bit of hostility due to the opening post, lots of big pictures and questions which is pretty much how a lot of the CT'ists work. Take it as a grain of salt and for whatever questions you have, search the forums rather then just post a question as you will find that very much every physical arguement in favour of the conspiracy has been shown to be completely wrong.

The only thing left is to find vague coincidences in speeches or quotes from articles as evidence which is sadly a waste of time.

This is why you may be met with hostility as its like a broken record!

Be vigilant in the research and as I said, be careful on your sources. Most of the CT can be debunked by primary school science.

Welcome to the forums

Thanks for the info, and yeah I'm always careful of accepting research from any site, whether it's from a CT site or not.

Yeah, I guess a lot of pictures and questions do seem CTish...Oh well. I still have a little getting used to this forum.

And Truth Seeker, I never have thought explosivers or another other CT ideas were used to bring down the cores, I just wanted some info on the subject so I must have come across as thinking otherwise.