Total Building Collapse from a Single Column Failure

[DGM]

The concerns of the CTBUH were not answered by NIST in regard to the omission of end/fin plates on the girder in question.

And you know this how? Are they still pushing this issue?

No, they thought that the inclusion of end plates may have had an effect on the supposed failure analysis. They were correct. They would have, and they were present. A fact that was made clear when the drawings were released.

This is your opinion. You have not shown it to be true.

I understand that you are on a hiding to nothing when it comes to this particular aspect of NISTs analysis. I think you understand that all too clearly also, as do they.

What?

Do you think that NIST should have included the plates and beam stubs in their analysis? , You seem to have trouble answering this

I don't think they would matter. I've never had trouble answering this.

 

[Muc]

So how did fire manage to initiate the collapse? Do you agree with the CTBUH or with NIST? Clearly, at least one of them is wrong

Which, once again, brings us dangerously close to the point at which we ask ourselves how quietly exploding paint-on (nano-)thermite was supposed to initiate the collapse as observed. Or any other explosive/incindiary. Or are we still waiting for a "new real investigation" to make sense out of this because the 9/11 Truth side won't?

By the way, there are at least two threads in which this derail would be on-topic: this one and this one. If you want to make sure that your questions don't end up in AAH, you might want to continue the discussion in one of them.

 

[Justin39640]

I agree. Heat weakens steel and causes it to expand also. Only up to about 600 degrees though at which point it will tend to sag and lose the ability to push.
My question though, was who do you agree with, NIST or the CTBUH?

From the CTBUH comments:

"The Council believes that the NIST report is a responsible attempt to find the cause of the failure, and finds that the report has investigated many of the probable causes. The Council has several technical questions about details of the modeling; but we would not expect that to change the conclusions: that the floor beams failed due to fire, which led to buckling of the internal columns resulting in global failure."
http://www.ctbuh.org/Portals/0/People/WorkingGroups/Fire&Safety/CTBUH_NISTwtc7_ DraftReport.pdf

 

[Animal]

My conclusions are that the stiffener plates and beam stubs should have been included in the analysis. Had the CTBUH and the wider public been given access to the structural drawings at the time that the report was out for public comment, then statements such as this from the CTBUH:
"If the girders had fin plates or end plates would the building have
survived?"
Would have been examined far more closely. Turns out that the girder did have plates, and NIST left them out of their analysis.

So what......the seat did not have a stiffener......turns out the NIST ADDED one in their analysis.

 

[Tony Szamboti]

Even if that were true, this makes the conclusion that a failure of column 79 in the lower quarter of the building is in error? It somehow disputes the fact that the first grossly visible event is the in falling of the EPH?

Will AE911T now run an FEA that includes ALL details, as they were on 9/11?

No assumptions, strict adherence to reality.
If not, why not?

You did some calculations and came up with a 1 inch discrepancy. One inch of girder flange suffices to keep a floor intact. As a layman then I really have to wonder why the hell they wasted so much money building 12 inch wide seats.

The east penthouse vertical kink and failure is indicative of column 79 failing but cannot be used to determine at what level the initial failure occurred. The penthouse would have behaved the same way if column 79 had failed high in the building first.

NIST was tasked with explaining the collapse but their present explanation does not work without leaving out critical elements and distorting the seat width. Thus, we don't presently have an adequate explanation.

 

[beachnut]

The east penthouse vertical kink and failure is indicative of column 79 failing but cannot be used to determine what level the initial failure occurred. The penthouse would have behaved the same way if column 79 had failed high in the building first.

So this whole 13th floor failure which NIST cannot justify without leaving out critical elements and distorting the seat width is important.

Why is there silly conspiracy junk in the Pepper letter?

Is there a missing jolt in WTC7? When will you prove the CD stuff? Why is there no thermite products found in WTC debris?

Have you talked to Pepper, and were you the one who fooled him with the CD fantasy?

 

[Tony Szamboti]

Why is there silly conspiracy junk in the Pepper letter?

Is there a missing jolt in WTC7? When will you prove the CD stuff? Why is there no thermite products found in WTC debris?

Have you talked to Pepper, and were you the one who fooled him with the CD fantasy?

I think the real point is you cannot explain the collapse of WTC 7.

 

[Reactor drone]

NIST was tasked with explaining the collapse but their present explanation does not work without leaving out critical elements and distorting the seat width. Thus, we don't presently have an adequate explanation.

Does that mean you think a natural collapse is possible, all the perpetrators had to do was remove two pieces of metal from one girder to compromise the structure and no simultaneous explosive demolition or nanothermite is required?

 

[LSSBB]

The east penthouse vertical kink and failure is indicative of column 79 failing but cannot be used to determine at what level the initial failure occurred. The penthouse would have behaved the same way if column 79 had failed high in the building first.
NIST was tasked with explaining the collapse but their present explanation does not work without leaving out critical elements and distorting the seat width. Thus, we don't presently have an adequate explanation.

You have engineering proof for the highlighted, Tony?

 

[Dog Town]

I think the real point is you cannot explain the collapse of WTC 7.

How defensive!

 

[JayUtah]

NIST was tasked with explaining the collapse but their present explanation does not work without leaving out critical elements and distorting the seat width. Thus, we don't presently have an adequate explanation.

No, that's a wash. You're misrepresenting the nature and purpose of the analysis in a way that would probably fool a layman, but doesn't convince that vast majority of qualified professional engineers.

 

[JayUtah]

I think the real point is you cannot explain the collapse of WTC 7.

Shifting the burden of proof. No one needs an affirmative claim in order to challenge your affirmative claims.

The real problem seems to be that you cannot explain your version of the events in a way that convinces more than a tiny fraction of the qualified professionals in the relevant fields, and you cannot even attempt it without intermingling pseudoscience with conspiratorial rhetoric.

 

[NoahFence]

No, that's a wash. You're misrepresenting the nature and purpose of the analysis in a way that would probably fool a layman, but doesn't convince that vast majority of qualified professional engineers.

Just so you know, i'm a layman and he hasn't fooled me for a second.

 

[jaydeehess]

The east penthouse vertical kink and failure is indicative of column 79 failing but cannot be used to determine at what level the initial failure occurred. The penthouse would have behaved the same way if column 79 had failed high in the building first.

There was a line of window breakage coinciding with the failure at roof level that suggests the origin was indeed lower in the building.

NIST was tasked with explaining the collapse but their present explanation does not work without leaving out critical elements and distorting the seat width. Thus, we don't presently have an adequate explanation.

No!
First of all the global collapse was shown to follow a failure of col 79 low down in the fea of the collapse.
Your point concerns only the specific of the cause of failure of a girder connected to col 79.
Yet even at that you are wrong , or at the very least cannot demonstrate that you are correct.
You calculate a 1 inch remaining , full depth, flange section on an near infinitely stiff seat, on a hot column and assuming no heat effect on any other nearby structural members.

Hey, you are all for inclusion in an fea so let's see yours containing all detail.

 

[beachnut]

I think the real point is you cannot explain the collapse of WTC 7.

Fire. I win.

The truth is, 911 truth (and you) can't figure out 911 after 12 years.

The CD nonsense fails, and 911 truth can't figure out the flying part of 911 spreading silly lies about remote control, or planes can't fly fast. I am an engineer and a pilot who flew big jets, ... it only takes a grade school education to figure out 911 truth is fraud. Everything 911 truth stands for is nonsense. 911 truth can't grasp the engineering or flying parts of 911. 911 truth followers and CD fantasy believers will have better luck with Bigfoot, JFK, Chemtrails, 800, and OKC. They can use the same evidence, delusional opinions.

Pepper was fooled by 911 truth, he can't think for himself. How does WTC7 fit with Flight 77 and 93? Stuck on WTC7, 911 truth is the faulty logic movement of woo.

 

[NoahFence]

Stuck on WTC7, 911 truth is the faulty logic movement of woo.

Which is why I asked them (him) to go back and try to figure out how Shanksville and the Pentagon fits into the narrative. Who knows? Maybe in while researching that a light bulb will go off and they'll find their answers to WTC 7.

But they won't. They're too comfortable in their ignorance to even begin to think outside the box.

 

[Redwood]

The amusing thing about the failed Truth movement is that it could never figure out what it was about. Leaving aside the complete lack of evidence for their position, there were two possibilities: a mass political movement, or a movement of professional people.

A mass political movement centered about WTC 7 was doomed to failure since nobody was killed, and nobody paid much attention to the collapse of WTC 7 except as a sort of anticlimax to that terrible day. Any interested Pete and Polly in Peoria, if they couldn't precisely remember what happened, could look it up and find that FDNY reported it to be creaking and leaning, the fires were out of control, and FDNY cleared a collapse zone around it. The ensuing collapse simply proves to the average person that FDNY was correct, and that's the end of it.

OTOH, a movement aimed at professionals (structural and fire engineers) isn't going to succeed with Argumenta YouTubea; professionals would want evidence and want engineering papers proposing an alternate and better explanation than NIST's. Truthers haven't even gotten to step one of this. Carping about details of NIST's explanation isn't going to cut it.

 

[LSSBB]

The amusing thing about the failed Truth movement is that it could never figure out what it was about. Leaving aside the complete lack of evidence for their position, there were two possibilities: a mass political movement, or a movement of professional people.

A mass political movement centered about WTC 7 was doomed to failure since nobody was killed, and nobody paid much attention to the collapse of WTC 7 except as a sort of anticlimax to that terrible day. Any interested Pete and Polly in Peoria, if they couldn't precisely remember what happened, could look it up and find that FDNY reported it to be creaking and leaning, the fires were out of control, and FDNY cleared a collapse zone around it. The ensuing collapse simply proves to the average person that FDNY was correct, and that's the end of it.

OTOH, a movement aimed at professionals (structural and fire engineers) isn't going to succeed with Argumenta YouTubea; professionals would want evidence and want engineering papers proposing an alternate and better explanation than NIST's. Truthers haven't even gotten to step one of this. Carping about details of NIST's explanation isn't going to cut it.

I think we need to rethink what we mean by "failed". Gage is still travelling around on a paid vacation raking in bucks with his Death by PowerPoint. People like Pepper keep channelling their inner crazy to keep Fighting the Good Fight. They can keep this schtick going for years.

 

[JSanderO]

I think we need to rethink what we mean by "failed". Gage is still travelling around on a paid vacation raking in bucks with his Death by PowerPoint. People like Pepper keep channelling their inner crazy to keep Fighting the Good Fight. They can keep this schtick going for years.

The hard core leaders..Gage, Jones etc.. are either scamming and taking the public for a ride because their deal seems credible enough to naive people with some a priori reason to distrust government. Truthers are all driven by the belief that some cabal did it all, lied about it and made out big time. This conceptually rings true despite no real evidence to support this. What they do it try to poke holes in the official account which if it is not 100% complete and accurate in every detail is proof of the cabal's existence and their plot and cover up.

On the other hand the hard core leaders might actually believe the rubbish they spout and that's equally troubling because it would make them not opportunists and snake oil salesmen but mad men... delusional and incapable of actually understanding their own insanity. Having read what some truthers write about the event it's clear that they have completely left the reservation and don't know it, can't see it, refuse to see it and will go on and on and on.

And then there are the idiots who think these are serious scientists, engineers and professional people incapable of self delusion, incompetence or scamming. They follow like sheep or parishioners.

Sad and funny at the same time.

 

[Tony Szamboti]

A mass political movement centered about WTC 7 was doomed to failure since nobody was killed, and nobody paid much attention to the collapse of WTC 7 except as a sort of anticlimax to that terrible day. Any interested Pete and Polly in Peoria, if they couldn't precisely remember what happened, could look it up and find that FDNY reported it to be creaking and leaning, the fires were out of control, and FDNY cleared a collapse zone around it. The ensuing collapse simply proves to the average person that FDNY was correct, and that's the end of it.

I believe I even heard that someone said WTC 7 was observed to be swaying in the breeze it was so damaged by the fires in it. Was it you? I can imagine some here saying that is proof it fell by fire.

Unfortunately, there is no video of this, so NIST couldn't use that as proof in their report. Thus they will still have to come up with something feasible since the discovery that they omitted structural features made their first try fail.