Ask all firefighting and fire related questions here

[BigAl]

thank you for this information. but i do have to ask to see a link where ya got this information.
please explain: "This is completely independent of the cause of the leaning." (sounds like you are wiggling your way out of this data being important to the nist).

what was this "rate of lean" from 11 to mid afternoon and how was it measured. what other studies have been conducted in the past that deal with the amount of "lean" in regards to total collapse? could a FOIA request get this information?

What answer to your question could possibly change the conclusion about the basic cause of the collapse of WTC7, fire and the lack of water for firefighting?

Any steel-frame building that is leaning and ablaze and with no firefighting is probably going to collapse soon.

Leaning is very bad news for any big structure.

 

[Sam.I.Am]

Leaning is very bad news for any big structure.

Leaning is bad news for just about any structure. If your home is leaning the city building inspectors will red tag it and kick you out before it falls down on you in your sleep.

 

[NYCEMT86]

in your 20 yrs, have ya ever run accross A36 steel that looked like "swiss cheese" coming from an ordianary office fire. this fire could have sat in a pile burning for 9 days or so???

Senemut, since you aren't a firefighter I might as well explain this to you.

Have you ever heard the phrase "no job is routine"?

That is because fires are rarely consistent, variables are always changing. I have witnessed things that should have happened, but never did. One example that comes to mind is a fully involved ordinary construction* house that should have collapsed, but after burning 2-3 hours it still stood. However, the next week we caught a job for a single story ordinary construction house fire that resulted in partial collapse after 45 minutes and the fire was contained to one portion of the house.


*-Ordinary construction is basic wood framed houses.

 

[Sam.I.Am]

There was nothing "Ordinary" that happened that day because it all started with two airliners being purposely crashed at high speeds into extremely tall buildings starting multi-acre fires covering several floors all at once. Seeing as that had never happened before, anything that followed wasn't going to be "Ordinary" for the most part by any reasonable standard even though there may be some similarities with other events.

 

[TruthersLie]

it must of showed something if the engineer said you have 5 hrs before wtc7 collapses and he was "right on the money" about the timeframe. so yeah, ill try and file a foia request. i was hoping the fireman here would know a way to get that without going through hoops.

If he said it will collapse by 5pm, then great. Most likely he was looking at the readings and said something like "It will collapse soon, we need to get back." IMHO.

No matter what this on site engineer said, it has no bearing on the NIST report and investigation. Different analysis, different work, different things. Comparing apples to watermelons. Not applicable.

If you want to see that raw data, then file an FOIA and wait for it. While it may be interesting, it will not change the common narrative that 19 terrorists hijacked 4 jets and crashed them into 3 buildings and a field in pennslyvania.

 

[SnidelyW]

I think NIST estimate a combustible load of only about 4 pounds per square foot. You estimate 10 pounds. Who is right ?

I have no idea how NIST came up with their 4 pounds/sq ft fire load figure for the WTC, if that is what you are referring to regarding 4 pounds.

According to this NIST document;

http://www.fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/fire01/PDF/f01106.pdf

Table 3 Fire Loads for Fire Events in a Small Office states;

"These results make sense in that the small event in an office-sized room at about 50 kW is the typical trash can fire that does not spread beyond the trash can unless there is direct flame contact with other combustibles. The medium event at under 200 kW might be enough to ignite a nearby object by radiation but is unlkely to spread. The large event at nearly 700 kW would be likely to spread and the very large event at more than 1 MW would flash over
the space. Thomas’ flashover correlation6 applied to this room yields a minimum flashover energy of just over 900 kW.
Increasing the space to a “bull pen” ofice of 30 m by 30 m with four single doors would increase the maximum heat release rates for the four events to 722, 2420, 9120, and 14250 kW, respectively. Again, these appear to be reasonable for a space this large."

Converting the 14,250 kilowatts (kW) used in the large fire example above to BTU's, we get;
48,655,569.78351 BTU's in a 30m x 30m office.
We divide the figure by our 50k BTU BBQ heat output. That gives us just over 973 BBQ's worth of heat in an area about 100 feet x 100 feet.
You're not going to put out a fire that size with an extinguisher.

Here is your chance to contribute to the new NFPA standard for Determination of Fire Load for Use in Structural Fire Protection Design 2012 Edition. You have until May 28 ,2010 to submit your proposal. PM me if you wish a link to the form.

 

[alfaniner]

OK, I had a half-serious question earlier, but I just can't wade through all the crap that is conspiracy theories.

 

[Dave Rogers]

well that is pretty interesting that fireproofing melts at 1300C. what was the max temp the nist said the wtc experienced? wasnt it around 1000c?

This is getting a bit obsessive. You've had a reply to the effect that glassy deposits are common in buildings that have experienced severe fires. It's also been pointed out that it would be impossible to tell whether such glassy deposits were from melted fireproofing, or just from melted glass. Therefore, if somebody noticed glassy residues in the rubble pile, that would be unexceptional, and if they suggested they were melted fireproofing, that would be unverifiable speculation on their part. There would be nothing unusual about the observation, and nothing significant in the speculation.

in your 20 yrs, have ya ever run accross A36 steel that looked like "swiss cheese" coming from an ordianary office fire. this fire could have sat in a pile burning for 9 days or so???

Let me remind everyone that (a) this effect has been analysed by metallurgists and found to be due to long-term exposure to a corrosive atmosphere at high temperature, and that (b) there is no rational explanation being offered for this effect by the truth movement that involves either thermite or explosives.

Dave

 

[Dave Rogers]

thank you for this information. but i do have to ask to see a link where ya got this information.
please explain: "This is completely independent of the cause of the leaning."

If the angle at which a building is leaning continues to increase at a constant rate, it's logically inevitable that the building will at some point either collapse due to eccentric loadings that it hasn't been designed for, or reach a lean angle of 90º. In either case it can be defined to have collapsed. If you need a link to explain that, you're missing the most basic understanding of geometry.

Dave

 

[sylvan8798]

thank you for this information. but i do have to ask to see a link where ya got this information.
please explain: "This is completely independent of the cause of the leaning." (sounds like you are wiggling your way out of this data being important to the nist).

what was this "rate of lean" from 11 to mid afternoon and how was it measured. what other studies have been conducted in the past that deal with the amount of "lean" in regards to total collapse? could a FOIA request get this information?

If a column buckles past the critical point, it will keep right on going. If that was what they were seeing out there, they (the engineers) would know it.

 

[Senenmut]

This is getting a bit obsessive. You've had a reply to the effect that glassy deposits are common in buildings that have experienced severe fires. It's also been pointed out that it would be impossible to tell whether such glassy deposits were from melted fireproofing, or just from melted glass. Therefore, if somebody noticed glassy residues in the rubble pile, that would be unexceptional, and if they suggested they were melted fireproofing, that would be unverifiable speculation on their part. There would be nothing unusual about the observation, and nothing significant in the speculation.



Let me remind everyone that (a) this effect has been analysed by metallurgists and found to be due to long-term exposure to a corrosive atmosphere at high temperature, and that (b) there is no rational explanation being offered for this effect by the truth movement that involves either thermite or explosives.

Dave

it was fireproofing:
"The wreckage of the World Trade Center could also provide unique insight to what happens to building materials like concrete, steel and fireproofing insulation under extreme conditions that are not tested in the laboratory. Dr. Astaneh-Asl said that in some places, the fireproofing melted into a glassy residue."

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/02/s...olds-clues-and-remedies.html?pagewanted=print

and mackey already stated fireproofing melts around 1300C. go check the msds contents of blazeshield and vermiculite and even asbestos.they dont melt under 1800F.

as for the steel that was "vaporized", elmondo has communicated with sisson and they could only remove "little metal" from A36 steel with their theory. they are shooting bb's at a problem where a 50 cal is needed.
have any of you firefighters seen 15.9 mm of A36 steel corrode/erode or just plain vaporize from a column either during or say up to 9 days in office material fire?

Dr. Astaneh-Asl's saw steel missing 15.9 mm and he relates it to before the column gave way and buckled.

from the article:
One piece Dr. Astaneh-Asl saw was a charred horizontal I-beam from 7 World Trade Center, a 47-story skyscraper that collapsed from fire eight hours after the attacks. The beam, so named because its cross-section looks like a capital I, had clearly endured searing temperatures. Parts of the flat top of the I, once five-eighths of an inch thick, had vaporized.
Less clear was whether the beam had been charred after the collapse, as it lay in the pile of burning rubble, or whether it had been engulfed in the fire that led to the building's collapse, which would provide a more telling clue.
The answer lay in the beam's twisted shape. As weight pushed down, the center portion had buckled outward.

''This tells me it buckled while it was attached to the column,'' not as it fell, Dr. Astaneh-Asl said, adding, ''It had burned first, then buckled.''



so i ask again, have any of you firefighters ever seen 15.9 mm of A36 steel burned up either during the fire like dr astaneh -asl suggested happened or even 9 days later from a fire consisting of office supplies?

 

[Senenmut]

If the angle at which a building is leaning continues to increase at a constant rate, it's logically inevitable that the building will at some point either collapse due to eccentric loadings that it hasn't been designed for, or reach a lean angle of 90º. In either case it can be defined to have collapsed. If you need a link to explain that, you're missing the most basic understanding of geometry.

Dave

kinda like the leaning tower of pisa.....it could take centuries to fall!!

 

[leftysergeant]

in your 20 yrs, have ya ever run accross A36 steel that looked like "swiss cheese" coming from an ordianary office fire. this fire could have sat in a pile burning for 9 days or so???

I have seen various sorts of metal exposed to sulphuric and fuming nitric acid that wound up looking like that. There was sulphuric acid present in all of the buildings. Diluted sulphuric acid reacts more quickly with steel than does fuming sulphuric acid. Please note, too, that the grain of the metal is more easily seen in microphotographs of the eroded areas than in trhe surrounding metal surfaces. The grains are sharp-edged in places. This is inconsistant with thermal melting. It is consistant with acid etching. In macro shots, you can even see vermiculated patterns on the sufrace of the metal This is also consistant with acid etching. Bubbles of hydrogen produced by the reaction keep it from removing metal uniformly across a surface.

In one high school science project, I had to prepare a piece of steel to demostrate how case hardening worked. I polished a cross-sectional surface, then dipped it in sulphuric acid. Under a low-power dissecting microscope, the layer of small grains on the surface and larger grains in the interior were clearly vivsible and well-defined.

 

[leftysergeant]

I also did a lot of acid-resist etching of copper items, like jewelry box hinges.

 

[Senenmut]

OK, I had a half-serious question earlier, but I just can't wade through all the crap that is conspiracy theories.

it is not a conspiracy that there was melted fireproofing.

 

[Senenmut]

If a column buckles past the critical point, it will keep right on going. If that was what they were seeing out there, they (the engineers) would know it.

dont you think they would have passed that info onto NIST so they didnt have to spend all that money and time on their theory.

 

[leftysergeant]

dont you think they would have passed that info onto NIST so they didnt have to spend all that money and time on their theory.

They did, actually, when they concluded that the building was "bulging, leaning, creaking and groaning."

They were just not down with going in there to figure out which columns were about to give it up. Kind of dangerous and probably pointless with what all else they had to actually do something about.

It was obviously up to the NIST engineers to figure out later which elements failed and in what order.

 

[triforcharity]

it was fireproofing:
"The wreckage of the World Trade Center could also provide unique insight to what happens to building materials like concrete, steel and fireproofing insulation under extreme conditions that are not tested in the laboratory. Dr. Astaneh-Asl said that in some places, the fireproofing melted into a glassy residue."

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/02/s...olds-clues-and-remedies.html?pagewanted=print

and mackey already stated fireproofing melts around 1300C. go check the msds contents of blazeshield and vermiculite and even asbestos.they dont melt under 1800F.

as for the steel that was "vaporized", elmondo has communicated with sisson and they could only remove "little metal" from A36 steel with their theory. they are shooting bb's at a problem where a 50 cal is needed.
have any of you firefighters seen 15.9 mm of A36 steel corrode/erode or just plain vaporize from a column either during or say up to 9 days in office material fire?

Dr. Astaneh-Asl's saw steel missing 15.9 mm and he relates it to before the column gave way and buckled.

from the article:
One piece Dr. Astaneh-Asl saw was a charred horizontal I-beam from 7 World Trade Center, a 47-story skyscraper that collapsed from fire eight hours after the attacks. The beam, so named because its cross-section looks like a capital I, had clearly endured searing temperatures. Parts of the flat top of the I, once five-eighths of an inch thick, had vaporized.
Less clear was whether the beam had been charred after the collapse, as it lay in the pile of burning rubble, or whether it had been engulfed in the fire that led to the building's collapse, which would provide a more telling clue.
The answer lay in the beam's twisted shape. As weight pushed down, the center portion had buckled outward.

''This tells me it buckled while it was attached to the column,'' not as it fell, Dr. Astaneh-Asl said, adding, ''It had burned first, then buckled.''



so i ask again, have any of you firefighters ever seen 15.9 mm of A36 steel burned up either during the fire like dr astaneh -asl suggested happened or even 9 days later from a fire consisting of office supplies?

Im not sure where you get thses 9 days from, but that fire burned way more than 9 days.

Again, how many other "normal office fires" burned for weeks on end, in a high sulfer atmosphere, with no ability to get the water on the fires??

HOW MANY????

 

[triforcharity]

kinda like the leaning tower of pisa.....it could take centuries to fall!!

Yes, it COULD take centuries to fall. But, if it begins to lean, and the next hour, it has leaned another (im just using numbers for the sake of discussion) say, 2deg. We can extrapolate aprox. how long before it will reach the point of no return.

The LTOP has been leaning MUCH slower. MUCH slower. nd its not on fire either. Nor did it have a steel frame. They have been able to help stabalize the LTOP over the years. There was no ability to stop WTC7. Remember, no water.

 

[Alferd_Packer]

it is not a conspiracy that there was melted fireproofing.

A bit of further research has indicated that Monokote was used in WTC 7 and Cafco Blaze Shield (two types) was used in the towers. Blaze shield is a mineral wool based product.
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/June2004ThermalInsulationMethodology.pdf

Mineral wool (AKA fiberglass) The melting point of mineral wool varies depending of it’s actual composition but it can range from 700 C to 1200 C.

So basically your claim that the fireproofing “melted” proves nothing.

Try again.