29 Structural & Civil Engineers Cite Evidence for Controlled Explosive Demolition

[Christopher7]

Ok, I see. So, your saying that the N/S girders connecting 7 with 6/8 respectively, were intact?? From what I can understand from the report, is that the N/S girders were damaged. Would this not mean that there was no N/S support in relation to 6,7,8???

http://i63.photobucket.com/albums/h131/triathlete247/corecolumnnumbercomposion2.jpg

Am I right or wrong??

Thank you for a relevant, intelligent response and the graphic. Now everyone can see the girders in question.

NIST glibly declared that Group 7 lost N-S support but there is no mention, anywhere in the report, of what caused the damage or when. The section on debris damage stated:

The damage from the debris from WTC 1 is shown in graphics on pg 182-187 [226-231] of 1-9 Vol.1
"Along the south face, the interior damage was estimated to extend from the south exterior wall toward the core, with increasing interior damage of the south tenant floor between the south face and the core, from Floor 17 down to Floor 7. The core columns and girders were assumed to be structurally undamaged.

1-9 Vol.2 pg 496-523 [158-185] list the beam and girder failures due to fire. They are all in the east half of the building. There is no mention of floor beam or girder failure in the west half of the building.

Columns 65 and 68 were in elevator shafts and not subject to girder damage from fires.

They did state that the girders around columns 58 thru 63 were intact on floors 10-14. That means columns 59 and 62 did not loose N-S lateral support on those floors.

NCSTAR 9-1 pg 607 [pdf 269]
"The floor connections to the columns had not yet failed in this region, as there were no fires observed on the west side of Floors 10 through 14" [around columns 59 and 62]

Time line using data from 1-9 Vol.2 pages 579-585 [pdf 241-247]
-0.5s Column 80 fails [Group 1]
-0.5s Column 66 fails [Group 8]
[Column 80 was 5 column rows away from column 66 and had negligible effect on column 66. The debris damage happened 7 hours earlier.]
[Group 7 supposedly failed before Group 3]
4.3s Columns 59, 62, 65 & 68 fail [Group 7] G6 & G8 loading
4.5s Columns 73 - 75 fail [Group 3]

 

[triforcharity]

Chris, the only report I can find is the Final Report, and it only has 130 pages. Can you please point me in the direction of the report you are citing??

 

[FineWine]

Can you understand that Group 7 did not loose lateral support?

Hogwash. There is nothing complicated about this.

The 9/11 Commission was a cover up. So is the NIST report. They claimed something that is impossible. Come out of your personal incredulity cage and deal with the facts.

But you don't know anything! You keep pretending that hundreds of highly-qualified professional engineers "lied" for the pure hell of it, and NOT ONE engineer from any country unfriendly to the U.S. called them on it.

There was no "cover-up." Your conspiracy theory is incredibly stupid. It didn't happen. You people have raved for almost eight years without producing a shred of evidence for your mad claims. The game is over.

 

[R.Mackey]

Chris, the only report I can find is the Final Report, and it only has 130 pages. Can you please point me in the direction of the report you are citing??

He's quoting (but not understanding) project report 1-9. NCSTAR1A is the overall WTC 7 report of about 130 pages. It references the longer and more detailed NCSTAR1-9, and it in turn references subproject report NCSTAR1-9A. See here for NCSTAR1-9.

 

[FineWine]

That's what the good people of Germany said in the 1930's. It's called personal incredulity and it is foolish.

NIST lied about Group 7 loosing N-S lateral support. That lateral support was the girders between Group 7 and Groups 6 & 8 and they had not failed.

Do you understand this?

Do you understand that NIST didn't lie about anything? Do you understand that you've finally shifted away from your false claim about free-fall acceleration. Do you understand that although every engineer here KNOWS that you are wrong, you have never had the intellectual integrity to acknowledge as much?

Tell us why a carpenter who never took a physics course is capable of lecturing real engineers.

 

[FineWine]

Dude, I'm not even going to read all that much less answer it.

You have adopted the denier "talk it to death" tactic.

I ain't goin' for it.

Group 7 could not fail before Groups 6 and 8.

Have a nice day.

Thank you for admitting that you are totally wrong and in no way qualified to discuss engineering with a real engineer. Your agenda-driven lunacy is a bore. It gets sillier as you grow more desperate.

 

[FineWine]

Denying the parallels is folly.

[FONT=&quot]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjALf12PAWc[/FONT]

It is folly to dream up "parallels" where none exist. The ridiculous fraud Bill Smith runs away whenever he is asked why ALL the predictions made by his insane movement failed. The rest of us notice that Bush quietly turned over his painstakingly-constructed "fascist state" to a member of the opposite party and retired to his ranch.

 

[Christopher7]

Chris, the only report I can find is the Final Report, and it only has 130 pages. Can you please point me in the direction of the report you are citing??

NCSTAR Final URLs

1-A reference page
http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/NCSTAR1Aindex.htm

1-A direct
http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/PDF/NCSTAR 1A.pdf

1-A & 1-9 reference page
http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/NCSTAR1-9index.htm

1-9 Vol.1 direct
http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/PDF/NCSTAR 1-9 Vol 1.pdf

1-9 Vol.2 direct
http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/PDF/NCSTAR 1-9 Vol 2.pdf

 

[triforcharity]

BTW, here is the link I am using.

http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/PDF/NCSTAR 1A.pdf


On page 90, I see where it says, "There is no evidence to suggest that there was damage to the SFRM that was applied to the steel columns, girders, and beams, except in the vacinity of the structural damage from the collapse of WTC 1, which was near the west side of the south face."

Now, here is the graphic I used before. Lets see where that damage they are talking about is.

See, so here there is very little southern support for these columns, only northern. This puts a tremendous strain on the structure's ability to hold the load. ( I am basically telling you what my dad is telling me. He keeps things simple for me. )


Now, we go to page 97 in the PDF file I have posted, and you will see a paragraph that says, " The remaining interior columns buckled from east to west, in the lower floors due to loss of lateral support from floor systems failures, forces exerted by faalling debris impact, and load redistrubited to them from other buckled columns."

So, here is what I understand.

Now, everywhere you see X's is a complete failure. These girders and trusses have failed and have collapsed. This is unseen because it is occuring inside. Now, at this time, the remaining columns have only East lateral support, this is a huge problem. They begin to fail because they are not designed to hold the weight they are holding.

Now, becaause the columns farther to the west side of the building have exceded their weigh bearing capabilities, they begin to fail. And so on. Because of the fact that the East portion has collapsed, it is now PULLING laterally towards the eaast, the rest of the structure.

Page 83 of the PDF has a very detailed picture explaining what I have explained. How can I copy that picture.

 

[triforcharity]

Can any of the Engineers here tell me if my analysis and crude drawings are correct?? Or am I drunk again.....

 

[Christopher7]

But you don't know anything!

Yes I do!

You keep pretending that hundreds of highly-qualified professional engineers "lied" for the pure hell of it, and NOT ONE engineer from any country unfriendly to the U.S. called them on it.

Answered that one already. What makes you think the 13 people who signed off are telling the truth? It's not a given you know. Did I mention that the Bush administration was not known for it's honesty? Come to think of it, do you know of an administration that didn't lie?

There was a "cover-up." Your conspiracy theory about 19 hijackers getting by the most sophisticated military in the world is incredibly stupid. It didn't happen. You people have raved for almost eight years denying every shred of evidence that disputes your mad claims and then claim there is no evidence. Give it up.

 

[Christopher7]

Can any of the Engineers here tell me if my analysis and crude drawings are correct?? Or am I drunk again.....

The debris damage is on pg 182-187 [226-231] 1-9 Vol.1

Your dad might be interested in this:
L.1.9 Lateral System
Above Floor 7, WTC 7 had a perimeter moment frame. Exterior columns were typically rolled W14 shapes of ASTM A36 grade steel. Column trees were fabricated for the east and west facades with field splices occurring every other story in the columns and at the spandrel beam midspan between columns, where the tree stubs were spliced with a bolted connection. On the north and south facades, the moment frames were constructed with spandrel connections at the face of the columns. Some column splices were shown on the erection drawings to be partial penetration groove welds between the column flanges.

I3.1 Perimeter Moment Frame Arrests Failure Progression: Analysis of the global structure indicates that the structure redistributed loads around the severed and damaged areas. A progression of column failure to adjacent columns would have been arrested by the vierendeel action of the perimeter moment frame, which could span across a sizeable opening due to the strength and stiffness of the frame.
http://wtc.nist.gov/progress_report_june04/appendixl.pdf

 

[funk de fino]

Yes I do!

Answered that one already. What makes you think the 13 people who signed off are telling the truth? It's not a given you know. Did I mention that the Bush administration was not known for it's honesty? Come to think of it, do you know of an administration that didn't lie?

There was a "cover-up." Your conspiracy theory about 19 hijackers getting by the most sophisticated military in the world is incredibly stupid. It didn't happen. You people have raved for almost eight years denying every shred of evidence that disputes your mad claims and then claim there is no evidence. Give it up.

Political claptrap. Its all you have.

Your freefall claims are shot. Chandlers data is wrong. Give it up. Its embarrassing.

 

[Christopher7]

Now, here is the graphic I used before. Lets see where that damage they are talking about is.

http://i63.photobucket.com/albums/h131/triathlete247/corecolumnnumbercomposion3.jpg

See, so here there is very little southern support for these columns, only northern. This puts a tremendous strain on the structure's ability to hold the load. ( I am basically telling you what my dad is telling me. He keeps things simple for me. )

Now, we go to page 97 in the PDF file I have posted, and you will see a paragraph that says, " The remaining interior columns buckled from east to west, in the lower floors due to loss of lateral support from floor systems failures, forces exerted by faalling debris impact, and load redistrubited to them from other buckled columns."

So, here is what I understand.

http://i63.photobucket.com/albums/h131/triathlete247/corecolumnnumbercomposi4.jpg

The whole building is not collapsing inside. The 3 east end columns are collapsing. Ask your dad if he thinks the floor slabs that are still attached to the exterior walls would distort those walls when all 3 columns fail in the east end.

Now, everywhere you see X's is a complete failure. These girders and trusses have failed and have collapsed. This is unseen because it is occuring inside. Now, at this time, the remaining columns have only East west, north and south lateral support, this is a huge problem. They begin to fail because they are not designed to hold the weight they are holding.

NIST says columns 76, 77 and 78 [group 2] fell when Trusses 1 & 2 failed.

The horizontal collapse begins when Group 2 collapses and loads Group 3.

It is at this point that Group 7 supposedly fails. [before Group 3]

Column 66 [group 8] had failed for no apparent reason a few seconds earlier, [damage occurred 7 hours earlier] leaving column 65 unsupported to the south. Other than that, there was no damage to the girders surrounding the columns in group 7 on any floor.

 

[Christopher7]

He's quoting (but not understanding) project report 1-9. NCSTAR1A is the overall WTC 7 report of about 130 pages. It references the longer and more detailed NCSTAR1-9, and it in turn references subproject report NCSTAR1-9A. See here for NCSTAR1-9.

I understand that Group 7 cannot fail before Groups 6 and 8 because they were providing lateral support to Group 7.

Do you understand that?

 

[Dave Rogers]

I understand that Group 7 cannot fail before Groups 6 and 8 because they were providing lateral support to Group 7.

Do you understand that?

Chris,

Since everything in the building was providing lateral support to some other part of the building, if this were true then no part of the building could fail before any other part of the building, and therefore the building could not fail under any circumstances. We know that the building did fail, whatever the mechanism, because it isn't still standing. If you argue that this was possible because a specific failure mechanism could have removed the lateral support between groups 6/8 and group 7, what is your evidence that no such failure mechanism could have occurred in a natural collapse?

Dave

 

[Regnad Kcin]

Did I mention that the Bush administration was not known for it's honesty?

Irrelevant.

Come to think of it, do you know of an administration that didn't lie?

Irrelevant.

There was a "cover-up." Your conspiracy theory about 19 hijackers getting by the most sophisticated military in the world is incredibly stupid. It didn't happen.

Claim from incredulity.

There was no "most sophisticated military in the world" involved in the early stages. By the time they were it was too late.

Something like 9/11 could happen again and again and again. And the military would once again be near powerless.

Furthermore, that your sinister and invisible "inside jobbers" didn't engineer a follow-up prior to the 2004 elections, when Mr. Bush came close to losing to Mr. Kerry, as well as prior to the 2006 mid-terms, when Republicans lost control of Congress, is pursuasive in itself that there were none to begin with.

You people have raved for almost eight years denying every shred of evidence that disputes your mad claims and then claim there is no evidence. Give it up.

There's no evidence for a "cover up," an "inside job," or a Starbucks on the dark side of the moon. You can't make something that didn't happen...happen. The world doesn't bend to your frustrated needs to take vengeance on the "dishonest" Bush administration.

 

[FineWine]

Yes I do!

No, you enjoy flaunting your ignorance and lack of reading skills.

Answered that one already. What makes you think the 13 people who signed off are telling the truth? It's not a given you know. Did I mention that the Bush administration was not known for it's honesty? Come to think of it, do you know of an administration that didn't lie?

No, you imagine you answer when, in reality, you merely repeat falsehoods. More than a thousand researchers were involved in the NIST reports. Unlike you, they are not pushing a bizarre political agenda, and have no reason whatever to cover-up a monstrous crime.

Did I mention that you can't think of a single lie told by the Bush adminsistration (please, let's not rehash the WMD crapola).

There was a "cover-up." Your conspiracy theory about 19 hijackers getting by the most sophisticated military in the world is incredibly stupid. It didn't happen. You people have raved for almost eight years denying every shred of evidence that disputes your mad claims and then claim there is no evidence. Give it up.

Sorry, your calling the historic FACT that nineteen Islamist terrorists hijacked four planes a "conspiracy theory" is beyond stupid. Overwhelming evidence--indeed, EVERYTHING-- proved that it happened. You don't have a single shred of evidence that supports your insane lies.

You and your fellow frauds are done.

 

[Christopher7]

I understand that Group 7 cannot fail before Groups 6 and 8 because they were providing lateral support to Group 7.

Do you understand that?

Chris,

Since everything in the building was providing lateral support to some other part of the building, if this were true then no part of the building could fail before any other part of the building, and therefore the building could not fail under any circumstances.

That's the idea when these buildings are designed.

We know that the building did fail, whatever the mechanism, because it isn't still standing. If you argue that this was possible because a specific failure mechanism could have removed the lateral support between groups 6/8 and group 7,

I'm not arguing that. NIST is saying Group 7 failed but they didn't offer a failure mechanism. They just lied about Group 7 loosing N-S lateral support.

what is your evidence that no such failure mechanism could have occurred in a natural collapse?

Hello? You are asking me to prove a negative. That's not the way it works. NIST said Group 7 lost lateral support but did not offer a failure mechanism.

 

[lapman]

Hello? You are asking me to prove a negative. That's not the way it works. NIST said Group 7 lost lateral support but did not offer a failure mechanism.

What was NISTs response to your inquiry about this?