• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

10 story hole in WTC 7

Status
Not open for further replies.
This doesn't require any expertise, just the ability to use a dictionary.

Column [in wood - post], girder and beam, are terms used in the construction of wood and steel framed buildings because they perform the same function in both.

If all that is required to construct a building like WTC7 is a dictionary, then where were all the high-rise buildings that should have appeared with the advent of the first dictionary?

Could it be that designing and building a structure like this (not to mention understanding its collapse) requires more expertise than you're willing to admit?
 
Christopher, when you say "No
[*]building has ever collapsed due to fire," do you mean to say it is impossible for a building to collapse due to fire? If so, why don't you just say that instead?
You left out *"modern steel frame high rise"

There are 2 examples where fires burned out of control for more than 7 hours and there was no partial, much less total collapse.

If you want to live in "Anything's possible land", you are free to do so.
 
You left out *"modern steel frame high rise"

There are 2 examples where fires burned out of control for more than 7 hours and there was no partial, much less total collapse.

If you want to live in "Anything's possible land", you are free to do so.

I know the thread is about WTC7, but do you think that 1 & 2 were CD or because of the planes? Once I know what you think about those buildings, I can relate it to a question about 7.
 
You left out *"modern steel frame high rise"

There are 2 examples where fires burned out of control for more than 7 hours and there was no partial, much less total collapse.

If you want to live in "Anything's possible land", you are free to do so.
Hit by another building! Which ones?

There was also a "modern steel frame high rise" on fire for 2 hours and 30 min. where all the steel which wasn't covered in concrete fell. I suspect it took 2.5 hours because it wasn't hit by another building.

Let me know when you stop comparing apples to oranges.

A challenge to conspiracy theorists:

1) Find a steel frame building at least 40 stories high

2) Which takes up a whole city block

3) And is a "Tube in a tube" design

4) Which came off its core columns at the bottom floors (Earthquake, fire, whatever - WTC 7)

5) Which was struck by another building or airliner and had structural damage as a result.

6) And weakened by fire for over 6 hours

And which, after all seven tests are met, the building does not fall down. Anyone dissecting this into 7 separate events is lying to you.

Anything less than meeting these six tests is dishonest because it's not comparing apples with apples. Showing a much lighter 4, 5 or even 15 story building which doesn't even take up a city block, and has an old style steel web design leaves out the massive weight the 47 story WTC 7 had bearing down on its south face columns. Yes, this is "moving the bar", back to where it should have started.

It is an absurdity to expect these buildings to perform the same during a collapse. This is why it's the first time in history these buildings fell as they did. It's the first time in history buildings constructed like this were damaged by impacts as they were.
 
Last edited:
Rrramon said:
Christopher, when you say "No [*]building has ever collapsed due to fire," do you mean to say it is impossible for a building to collapse due to fire? If so, why don't you just say that instead?

You left out *"modern steel frame high rise"

There are 2 examples where fires burned out of control for more than 7 hours and there was no partial, much less total collapse.

If you want to live in "Anything's possible land", you are free to do so.

It wasn't a rhetorical question.

Can I take that as a yes, though?
 
Do you have A.D.D. ? Because we discussed this a short while ago. Did you already forget the huge clouds of dust from 1 WTC's collapse ?
Did you forget that the dust cleared and people went back to GZ in about 15 to 20 minutes?
After the dust cleared, Hayden was able to see that "it took a while for that fire to develop."

In the real world, it's called a paraphrase.
A paraphrase is saying the same thing in a different way.
When you changed "I" to "He" you changed the meaning.
That is called a misquote.
Then you used that misquote to imply that i had contradicted myself.
i.e. He [Hayden] couldn't see thru the smoke.
That was intentionally dishonest.

No, it isn't. Because you're making things up.
Based on the statements in the NIST report, i concluded that:

"The damage to the south west part of WTC 7 did not contribute to the initiating event in the east central part."

This statement is consistent with:

"If the initiating event was due to damage to the perimeter moment frame, then it would have started along the south or southwest facade."

and

"Analysis of the global structure indicates that the structure redistributed loads around the severed and damaged areas."

My reasoning is:
If the damage to the SW part of WTC 7 contributed to the initiating event, NIST would have included it in their 'Collapse Initiation Scenerios'.

You can cling to 'NIST didn't specifically say that it wasn't a factor' if you like.

Please explain how the fires started if not due to falling, flaming debris from 1 WTC.
The fires were due to the falling debris.

Please explain how the collapse occurred if not from structural strain or fire damage.
That is a subject for another thread.

You seem to think that collapses due to fire are impossible
No.

"Modern" doesn't help you, here. Why would the fact that it's "modern" mean anything ? Why did they install fireproofing on the steel if it wasn't at risk from heat ?
I included the word "modern" because someone found a 100 year old steel frame building that had partially collapsed due to fire.

Fireproofing: Good point.

No, indeed. But it is evidence that there were signs of 7 WTC's structural integrity being compromised.
True
 
It is not impossible, just unprecednted, and unlikely.

Unlikely? Because of all the other buildings built like the WTC 7 which were hit by other buildings and on fire on it's lower floors for over 6 hours? Surely that combination isn't unprecedented...:rolleyes:
 
Links to evidence, please.
http://www.interfire.org/res_file/pdf/Tr-049.pdf

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/10/18/world/main649824.shtml

Correction:
Two floors and some staircases collapsed in the Caracus Tower fire.
Firefighting efforts were not abandoned, but they were ineffective.
The fires burned out of control and the temperatures were not reduced as the "the fires in WTC 7 were not fought" argument implies.

Note:
Engineers inspected the building after the fire and concluded that it was solid.
 
Correction:
Two floors and some staircases collapsed in the Caracus Tower fire.
Firefighting efforts were not abandoned, but they were ineffective.
The fires burned out of control and the temperatures were not reduced as the "the fires in WTC 7 were not fought" argument implies.

Note:
Engineers inspected the building after the fire and concluded that it was solid.

The first paragraph from the Caracas article:
(AP) Military helicopters doused one of Venezuela's tallest buildings with water Sunday, bringing under control a blaze many feared might cause the tower to collapse.
Then:
Earlier in the day, officials expressed fears that the building might collapse.

"There is a problem because the building is made of steel. Because of the high temperatures, the structure could collapse," Interior minister Jesse Chacon told President Hugo Chavez during his weekly radio and television show.
Chris, what was the disposition of One Meridian Plaza?

ETA: info on the reinforced concrete Caracas tower. Looks like Jesse Chacon's description wasn't quite accurate:

The reinforced concrete structure consists of perimeter columns connected by post-tensioned concrete “macroslabs” that are each 10 feet (3 meters) deep and above the second–floor mezzanine, the 14th, 26th, 38th, and 49th floors. There’s no central core.

Individual floors between the macroslabs have a steel-deck floor supported by steel beams, all protected underneath with spray-on Cafco Blaze Shield DC/F mineral glass fiber wool with cement fireproofing. According to Cafco’s Manny Herrera, the floor was designed to meet U.S. standards for a two-hour fire resistance rating. However, the overall fire compartmentalization of each floor slab was decreased by the addition of several unrated floor panels to provide access to mechanical and plumbing systems.

Five structural bays rest on four lines of columns in each direction supporting the steel deck. In effect, the concrete structure includes five stacked steel buildings, each supported by a macroslab. During the fire, two steel decks partially collapsed; other than that, there was no collapse inside the building. However, deflection in some steel beams was severe. http://www.nfpa.org/categoryList.asp?categoryID=961&URL=Publications/NFPA%20Journal%AE/March%20/%20April%202005/Cover%20Story&cookie%5Ftest=1
 
Last edited:
Unlikely? Because of all the other buildings built like the WTC 7 which were hit by other buildings and on fire on it's lower floors for over 6 hours? Surely that combination isn't unprecedented...:rolleyes:
The debris damage did not contribute to the initiating event.
That is a fallacy perpetrated by [ironically] self proclaimed 'debunkers'.

There were debris damage and there was an initiating event, but there is no evidence of a connection between the two.
If there were, NIST would have included it in their Collapse Initiation Scenarios.
NIST did NOT say there was a connection.
Why do you ?
 
The debris damage did not contribute to the initiating event.
That is a fallacy perpetrated by [ironically] self proclaimed 'debunkers'.

There were debris damage and there was an initiating event, but there is no evidence of a connection between the two.
If there were, NIST would have included it in their Collapse Initiation Scenarios.
NIST did NOT say there was a connection.
Why do you ?

Chris, would you say that WTC 7 was strengthened, weakened, or unaffected by the damage it sustained?
 
http://www.interfire.org/res_file/pdf/Tr-049.pdf

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/10/18/world/main649824.shtml

Correction:
Two floors and some staircases collapsed in the Caracus Tower fire.
Firefighting efforts were not abandoned, but they were ineffective.
The fires burned out of control and the temperatures were not reduced as the "the fires in WTC 7 were not fought" argument implies.

Note:
Engineers inspected the building after the fire and concluded that it was solid.
Lets see how they meet my apples with apples challenge...

1) Find a steel frame building at least 40 stories high

Meridian Plaza - yes - 38 stories (Almost, I'll let it pass)
Caracas - Yes - 56 stories

2) Which takes up a whole city block

Meridian Plaza - It looks about half the size in width = .5
Caracas - It looks about half the size in width

3) And is a "Tube in a tube" design

Meridian Plaza - NO
Caracas - NO

4) Which came off its core columns at the bottom floors (Earthquake, fire, whatever - WTC 7)

Meridian Plaza - It did not. The fire started on the 22nd floor. That's only 16 floors of weight on it's weakened columns.
Caracas - the fire started on the 34th floor. That's only 22 stories on the effected area.

5) Which was struck by another building or airliner and had structural damage as a result.

Meridian Plaza - it was not
Caracas - it was not

6) And weakened by fire for over 6 hours

Meridian Plaza - Yes
Caracas - Yes



Meridian Plaza = 2.5 out of 6
Caracas = 2.5 out of 6

Still apples and oranges...
 
The Parque Central was a 56 storey government office building in Caracas, Venezuela. The fire started on the 34th floor and climbed to the 47th floor. That's not similar to the WTC 7 because the fires were on the lower levels. The building didn't have a tube in a tube design like any of the WTC buildings either.

The single most important difference are in the columns.

The reinforced concrete structure consists of perimeter columns connected by post-tensioned concrete “macroslabs” that are each 10 feet (3 meters) deep and above the second–floor mezzanine, the 14th, 26th, 38th, and 49th floors. There’s no central core.

Individual floors between the macroslabs have a steel-deck floor supported by steel beams, all protected underneath with spray-on Cafco Blaze Shield DC/F mineral glass fiber wool with cement fireproofing. According to Cafco’s Manny Herrera, the floor was designed to meet U.S. standards for a two-hour fire resistance rating. However, the overall fire compartmentalization of each floor slab was decreased by the addition of several unrated floor panels to provide access to mechanical and plumbing systems.

Five structural bays rest on four lines of columns in each direction supporting the steel deck. In effect, the concrete structure includes five stacked steel buildings, each supported by a macroslab. During the fire, two steel decks partially collapsed; other than that, there was no collapse inside the building. However, deflection in some steel beams was severe.

helicopter.gif


The fire was also aggressively fought for a period of time.:

Commanders at the scene decided to bring a 2-inch (63-millimeter) hose line, fed by fire engines at the ground level, all the way up one of the fire stairs. Two portable booster pumps, each flowing 264 gallons per minute (gpm) at 58 psi (1,000 liters per minute [lpm] at 4 bar), were used to provide adequate pressure above the fire floor.

At approximately 1:15 a.m., firefighters working with two 1-inch (38-millimeter) hose lines from different locations above the 34th floor were able to slow the upward movement of the fire considerably. By 3 a.m., a second 2-inch (63-millimeter) hose line, identical to the first one, had been put into service, and firefighters confined the fire to three to four floors above the 34th floor. This approach was successful through the first five or six hours of the fire, when the fire spread vertically at a rate of approximately one floor every three hours. The 27th floor became the main staging area for about 100 firefighters.

At 7 a.m., some of the booster pumps started to malfunction, and the fire regained intensity, spreading vertically at a rate of about one floor per hour until approximately 10 a.m. Around 11 a.m., the fire breeched the fifth macroslab, below the 39th floor, and around noon, the stairwells’ fire enclosure started to fail. Concerned that the building might collapse, the fire chief immediately ordered that interior firefighting operations be abandoned. It should be noted that the CFD only reported minor injuries among its personnel during this risky operation.

The fire continued to move upwards through the afternoon, at a rate of about 2 1/2 floors per hour. Between 2 and 3 p.m., the Venezuelan government began using helicopters with water buckets, commonly used on forest fires, in an unsuccessful attempt to slow the fire down.

The fire eventually burned itself out at 3 a.m. on Monday morning, after spreading and consuming the contents of some 17 floors, more than 24 hours after it began.

Conclusion
Past history and performance shows that this fire could probably have been controlled quickly by a standard wet-pipe sprinkler system and that the fire department’s chances of controlling the fire at, or a few floors above, the floor of fire origin would have increased if the standpipe system had been working. This fire highlights the importance of periodic inspection, testing, and maintenance of fire protection systems, as well as the importance of strictly following manufacturers’ installation instructions.

This incident once again reminds us of the fire safety challenges high-rise buildings present and demonstrates that no fire department, no matter how large, professional, and well-equipped, can effectively control a fire without properly designed passive and functioning active fire protection systems. The CFD performed admirably in an impossible task, and its commanders made difficult decisions that ultimately proved to be the correct ones.

http://www.nfpa.org/categoryList.as...arch / April 2005/Cover Story&cookie_test=1#d
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom