Are you referring to the ejections from the dark band almost immediately below the first floor to collapse? If so this was one of the mechanical floors I believe and contained quite a lot of HVAC exits as well as a different exterior design (see above).
How were WTC core columns separated at the weld planes?
- Thread starter Max Photon
- Start date
-
- Tags
- controlled demolition wtc
Max Photon
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2007
- Messages
- 1,592
Why do we see dust ejections before we see columns pull inward?
* * *
NIST FAQ #2 says:
"...the NIST investigation showed conclusively that the failure of the inwardly bowed perimeter columns initiated collapse and that the occurrence of this inward bowing required the sagging floors to remain connected to the columns and pull the columns inwards. Thus, the floors did not fail progressively to cause a pancaking phenomenon."
Now if the sagging floors remained connected to the columns and pulled the columns inward, why do we see dust ejections before we see columns pull inward?
Max
* * *
* * *
NIST FAQ #2 says:
"...the NIST investigation showed conclusively that the failure of the inwardly bowed perimeter columns initiated collapse and that the occurrence of this inward bowing required the sagging floors to remain connected to the columns and pull the columns inwards. Thus, the floors did not fail progressively to cause a pancaking phenomenon."
Now if the sagging floors remained connected to the columns and pulled the columns inward, why do we see dust ejections before we see columns pull inward?
Max
* * *
uruk
Philosopher
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2003
- Messages
- 5,311
For reference:
South Tower aircraft impact hole from floors 78 to 84
The mechanical rooms are floors 75 to 79
The supposed "hanging floors" were 80 and 81
The darker blue-grey color band around the building cover floors 76 to 73
The floors from which a glowing something was seen streaming from the northeast corner
are floors 80-81
The first 2 powerful horizontal rows of ejections appear to be coming from floors 79 and 75
All 47 core columns had welds at the exact same elevations. The welds in this area were on floors 72, 75, 77, 80, 83, 86
To understand this last statement we will have to know some details of the building's structural design which have not yet been discussed and of which most of you are probably not aware.
After we exhaust the "dust ejection" hypothesis being proposed to explain how the first 2 powerful horizontal ejections are separated by 3 or 4 floors, I'll offer an alternative solution based on detonations right along the welds of all 8 core columns in column row 500
South Tower aircraft impact hole from floors 78 to 84
The mechanical rooms are floors 75 to 79
The supposed "hanging floors" were 80 and 81
The darker blue-grey color band around the building cover floors 76 to 73
The floors from which a glowing something was seen streaming from the northeast corner
are floors 80-81
The first 2 powerful horizontal rows of ejections appear to be coming from floors 79 and 75
All 47 core columns had welds at the exact same elevations. The welds in this area were on floors 72, 75, 77, 80, 83, 86
To understand this last statement we will have to know some details of the building's structural design which have not yet been discussed and of which most of you are probably not aware.
After we exhaust the "dust ejection" hypothesis being proposed to explain how the first 2 powerful horizontal ejections are separated by 3 or 4 floors, I'll offer an alternative solution based on detonations right along the welds of all 8 core columns in column row 500
Last edited:
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2002
- Messages
- 24,961
Quite amazing indeed, .... and complete nonsense.
Who says anything about the air skipping floors? There will be a pressure gradient preceding the collapse zone, and it will reach several floors down (a pressure wave travels at the speed of sound). Whether it results in blowouts depends on the strength of individual windows, and on how it distributes itself on each floor, which again depends on the general lay-out of the individual floor; a floor divided in many rooms will se a slower expansion (but a higher pressure gradient) tha´n a floor with big open rooms. As for the dust and debris, those pressure waves can easily burst through gypsum walls and blow papers from desks and shelves.
Tell me, have you ever seen an office or lab area where something exploded?
Hans
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2002
- Messages
- 24,961
Or, the layout of those floors allowed the pressure wave to hit all the windows, hard, and simultaneously. Or, the forces travelling down through the structure from the collapse zone (at speeds several times the speed of sound) made those floors buckle and that was really what broke the windows. I'm sure there are several likely scenarios, besides these.
However, at such time as you come to present your explosives theory, make sure you explain how massive explosions (from the high-explosives needed to breal steel structures) could:
1) Result in dust clouds expanding from the broken windows at definitely subsonic speeds (the expansion stretches over several frames in the video)
2) Avoid showing the characteristic flashes from HE blasts.
3) Cause big clouds of dust and debris to erupt from the building, yet not be heard by anybody.
Hans
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through
Also in the second video we can see the rotation of the upper block as it falls. Doing a bit of simple geometry, this means that the projection of the column spacings of the angled upper block onto the horizontal plane of each floor of the lower block is different to the column spacings in the lower block; in other words, we are not seeing well-behaved column-on-column impacts but rather column-on-floor and floor-on-column impacts. This means that different parts of the floors, even closely spaced parts, will collapse at different times, as the column-on-floor impacts are very localised. Therefore, we would expect to see very large variations in the generation of dust from place to place, very large variations in the overpressure from place to place, and therefore many point ejections instead of the horizontal rows earlier referred to.
Only if this were a homogeneous and quasi-static system. In fact we would expect enormous inhomogeneities, both point-to-point and directional, due to the chaotic nature of the collapse. Far more difficult to explain would be a well-behaved, floor-by-floor progression of ejections of the sort you are trying to imply should have been seen, particularly in view of your own point that the originating floors are heavily damaged.
Your fundamental error in all this is that you are expecting the collapse of the tower to be a well-behaved, orderly, quasi-static situation whose evolution can be predicted precisely. This is simply not the case, and your attempts to read meaning into the apparent patterns - or, in fact, in the lack of apparent patterns - is no more than pareidolia.
Dave
Last edited:
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
Major Tom;
So the investigator on-site were "in on it" or incompetent? Please oh please answer this simple question so I can leave this thread.
DMG asks:
As I mentioned before, it has been commented that perhaps NIST got all the data it needed before the destruction of building material, therefore it was a waste of time and space to retain much of it for further investigation.
Assuming such constraints in space and time did exist, why wouldn't the investigators at least keep a record of digital photographs of every core box column as it was being removed from the premises for future investigation?
Many core box columns had to be hoisted by a crane and placed on the beds of waiting trucks. This would give an excellent opportunity to photograph each core box column from a few different angles for the purposes of later studying where the particular structural failures within the cores occurred.
Every core box column can be identified by using it's cross-sectional and other structural data.
This would have allowed both NIST and present and future structural engineers and researchers to study and better understand the failure mechanisms within each tower, possibly merely for the purposes of building safer towers in the future.
So why doesn't such a digital comprehensive photo collection of individual building components being removed from the WTC complex exist?
Is a digital collection of damage patterns along central structural members just something that investigators forgot to make?
How would time, space and cost constraints prohibit government investigative agencies from at least keeping a thorough record of digital images of the largest structural members being removed from the crime scene?
So DMG, why was there so little effort to properly record the state of major support components in a systematic and comprehensive fashion?
Why is it such a mystery as to what condition these main structural components were found within the debris?
Can you imagine a single commercial airliner accident (before 9-11) in which in-sight investigators would not only physically reconstruct but also photographically record minute details of the wreckage?
Explain this and you answer your own question.
As I mentioned before, it has been commented that perhaps NIST got all the data it needed before the destruction of building material, therefore it was a waste of time and space to retain much of it for further investigation.
Assuming such constraints in space and time did exist, why wouldn't the investigators at least keep a record of digital photographs of every core box column as it was being removed from the premises for future investigation?
Many core box columns had to be hoisted by a crane and placed on the beds of waiting trucks. This would give an excellent opportunity to photograph each core box column from a few different angles for the purposes of later studying where the particular structural failures within the cores occurred.
Every core box column can be identified by using it's cross-sectional and other structural data.
This would have allowed both NIST and present and future structural engineers and researchers to study and better understand the failure mechanisms within each tower, possibly merely for the purposes of building safer towers in the future.
So why doesn't such a digital comprehensive photo collection of individual building components being removed from the WTC complex exist?
Is a digital collection of damage patterns along central structural members just something that investigators forgot to make?
How would time, space and cost constraints prohibit government investigative agencies from at least keeping a thorough record of digital images of the largest structural members being removed from the crime scene?
So DMG, why was there so little effort to properly record the state of major support components in a systematic and comprehensive fashion?
Why is it such a mystery as to what condition these main structural components were found within the debris?
Can you imagine a single commercial airliner accident (before 9-11) in which in-sight investigators would not only physically reconstruct but also photographically record minute details of the wreckage?
Explain this and you answer your own question.
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2002
- Messages
- 24,961
At first glance this comparison with aircrash investigation methodology seems sensible and reasonable. Then you start to think about it, and a number of important differences become evident:
1) There is a simple problem of scale. The WTC towers were more than 20 times larger than the largest airliner in existence. That is more than 8,000 times the volume. Even a partial reconstruction would be daunting.
2) Then there is a problem of purpose. An aircraft investigation is aimed at researching the cause of the crash. We do not reconstruct a crashed airliner to find out why it was disintegrated, wo do it to find out why it crashed. The cause of the collapse of the towers was carefully studied, and we (well, some of us) are satisfied that the cause was found.
3) Finally there is the problem of usefulness. An aircraft investigation needs to discover every little detail because there are numerous identical planes out there, and we want to know all we can to prevent a repetition of the crash. There are no other buildings like the towers out there, and we are never going to build any that are just like them. Whilst general knowledge of the weaknesses of the towers is useful for designing new high-rise buildings, we need not know minute details, since construction techniques and materials have changed since.
Hans
uruk
Philosopher
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2003
- Messages
- 5,311
Here's some info about how the steel was collected and cataloged.
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_apd_x.pdf
The NYC Museaum even collected steel and other objects of thier own.
http://www.nysm.nysed.gov/exhibits/traveling/recovery/documents/RecBro.pdf
In the brochure it mentions how the FBI inspected the steel before it was shipped off for recycling.
Dave comments:
The point ejections to which I am referring are just inside the closest visible corner of the building on each side of the corner. The horizontal rows mentioned earlier do indeed exist and are clearly visible from floors 79 and 75, east face. The horizontal rows are very systematic ejections with a unique geometry, hardly random.
Facts of note:
1) Dave, from the reference data shown a few posts ago, you can see that the aircraft impact hole would not alleviate pressures on floors 78, 77 and 76.
2) The high velocity point source ejections seen just inside the corner of the building, east face, appear AFTER the horizontal row of ejections along the east face at the same elevation. So after pressure is somewhat alleviated along the entire east face through the release of gasses along the horizontal row, we then see yet another high pressure point ejection just inside the corner. Corner ejections FOLLOW the release of air along the entire east face.
Also of note to Max Photon, we can see the corner remains standing for a short time after the rest of the building falls. Max, from what floor is the highest tip of this corner? It is from the exact location where the famous metal fires were seen, floors 80-81.
We will see the same 3 to 6 floor separation of the most powerful ejections just after "collapse initiation" in the North Tower later in this thread. Considering that the core column welds are separated by about 36 feet (3 floors) and all 47 core columns are welded at the exact same elevations, these ejection patterns certainly do seem to mirror weld locations. Interesting.
The point ejections to which I am referring are just inside the closest visible corner of the building on each side of the corner. The horizontal rows mentioned earlier do indeed exist and are clearly visible from floors 79 and 75, east face. The horizontal rows are very systematic ejections with a unique geometry, hardly random.
Facts of note:
1) Dave, from the reference data shown a few posts ago, you can see that the aircraft impact hole would not alleviate pressures on floors 78, 77 and 76.
2) The high velocity point source ejections seen just inside the corner of the building, east face, appear AFTER the horizontal row of ejections along the east face at the same elevation. So after pressure is somewhat alleviated along the entire east face through the release of gasses along the horizontal row, we then see yet another high pressure point ejection just inside the corner. Corner ejections FOLLOW the release of air along the entire east face.
Also of note to Max Photon, we can see the corner remains standing for a short time after the rest of the building falls. Max, from what floor is the highest tip of this corner? It is from the exact location where the famous metal fires were seen, floors 80-81.
We will see the same 3 to 6 floor separation of the most powerful ejections just after "collapse initiation" in the North Tower later in this thread. Considering that the core column welds are separated by about 36 feet (3 floors) and all 47 core columns are welded at the exact same elevations, these ejection patterns certainly do seem to mirror weld locations. Interesting.
Last edited:
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through
That only leaves two reasonable explanations from the initial set I came up with after only a few minutes' thought.
As I said earlier, this wasn't a quasi-static pressurisation of the whole building. The section of the floor close to the corners would be better supported than along the centre of the sides and might fall later, giving an overpressure in the corners after the sides have blown out. Again, there are plenty of possible reasons why what you see could have happened in a gravity driven collapse without the need to invoke explosives. The burden of proof remains with you.
So are you suggesting that the collapse might have consisted of the core columns fracturing initially at their weakest points - the weld locations - and that subsequently the three-floor sections between welds collapsed but that ejections from these intermediate floors weren't so clearly seen because they were masked by the initial ejection from every third floor? And if so, how is this inconsistent with a gravitational collapse?
Dave
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
What is your evidence for your belief that such an achieve does not exist. Is it just because you can't find it on the internet?
As above
We know this.
Again your assuming this information does not exist because you can't find it. Have you tried a FOIA request?
Your evidence that it does not?
Your evidence that they did not?
Your evidence that this does not exist?
How do you know it was not?
Was it a mystery to those who investigated this?
How do you know this was not done. Have you contacted the FBI and NIST and got a statement to this effect? Just because it is not public knowledge doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Do you understand this?
Now. The people on-site. Were they "in on it" or incompetent?
Max Photon
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2007
- Messages
- 1,592
What caused the first dust ejections?
No one seemed to answer, so I'll try again:
If the sagging floors remained connected to the columns and pulled the columns inward, why do we see dust ejections before we see columns pull inward?
Max
* * *
No one seemed to answer, so I'll try again:
If the sagging floors remained connected to the columns and pulled the columns inward, why do we see dust ejections before we see columns pull inward?
Max
* * *
uruk
Philosopher
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2003
- Messages
- 5,311
Can you show us where this happens? NIST shows the spandrel columns bowing inward before the collapse started.
Max Photon
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2007
- Messages
- 1,592
This video shows the dust ejection come AFTER the columns bow inward AND FAIL.
Uruk,
My mistake.
I meant to say "columns bow inward and fail."
However, that lack of clarity aside, allow me to RETRACT my question.
Here is a video that shows the columns bowing and failing, and in it you can clearly see that the dust ejections happen AFTER the bowing columns fail.
Max
* * *
Uruk,
My mistake.
I meant to say "columns bow inward and fail."
However, that lack of clarity aside, allow me to RETRACT my question.
Here is a video that shows the columns bowing and failing, and in it you can clearly see that the dust ejections happen AFTER the bowing columns fail.
Max
* * *
Mr. Skinny
Alien Cryogenic Engineer
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2001
- Messages
- 7,843
Just my humble opinion, but, obvious MAXDEC.
BenBurch
Gatekeeper of The Left
In fact, I believe that the air pressure in parts of the building might have gotten high enough for the temperature of the air to ignite paper. (Boyle's Law is what you twoofers should look up before you comment...)