Controlled demolition vs. the towers collapsing

Java Man said:
My assumptions are based on what you've been hammering here all along. It thus speaks lots about your position. If my assumptions are wrong then there is something not right about your version of the story.
Click to expand...

Really? Did I say it was on fire all at the same time? Show me where, then I will go from there.
 
You seem to already have a firm idea of what happened. Why don't you just say it instead of playing games?
 
sabretooth47 said:
So you're a troll. In the last ten minutes I've done more research than you ever will.

I hope you're not planning on reproducing.
Click to expand...

Re-search is not my cup of tea. Especially not when the information is so confused. Take interior box columns for instance. Seems to me to be some kind of hoax term, conspiracy theory bait. Very little information on the Web about it, and that which I found didn't make it much clearer. Who comes up with crap like that?
 
Anders Lindman said:
Re-search is not my cup of tea. Especially not when the information is so confused. Take interior box columns for instance. Seems to me to be some kind of hoax term, conspiracy theory bait. Very little information on the Web about it, and that which I found didn't make it much clearer. Who comes up with crap like that?
Click to expand...


See, Anders, this puzzles me.

You're making some pretty darned big claims here about why you're so sure about why WTC was brought down by explosives (or kerosene) disguised as battery packs and throwing in some "facts" about things like safety factors - I'll come back to that in a minute - and aeroplane parts. But, when pushed, you admit that you don't actually research things.

Do you see the split here? Does the phrase "all fur coat but no knickers" mean anything to you?

Incidentally, the box beams would be referred to as rectangular hollow sections in Europe. It's basic structural stuff. Read that book I suggested.
 
Last edited:
Anders Lindman said:
You didn't answer my question.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, Anders, I was being polite. Allow me to be more specific:

You have substantively misunderstood my post; specifically, you conflate data regarding actual structural performance with your own interpretation of designed safety factors. I suggest you reread the material I gave you and come back with a competent query.
 
Architect said:
See, Anders, this puzzles me.

You're making some pretty darned big claims here about why you're so sure about why WTC was brought down by explosives (or kerosene) disguised as battery packs and throwing in some "facts" about things like safety factors - I'll come back to that in a minute - and aeroplane parts. But, when pushed, you admit that you don't actually research things.

Do you see the split here? Does the phrase "all fur coat but no knickers" mean anything to you?

Incidentally, the box beams would be referred to as rectangular hollow sections in Europe. It's basic structural stuff. Read that book I suggested.
Click to expand...

Yes, when I find something interesting I don't mind doing some research. But I usually only follow simple ideas. There's a jungle of information out there so I need to have a sharp filter in order to cut through all the mess, and it's easiest for me to do that by following simple things that I can understand myself.
 
triforcharity said:
No ergo, there was not any concrete encasement of the steel in ANY of the WTC towers. None.

Read the blueprints. Read the NIST report. If you want anyone to believe that, please feel free to cite your source.
Click to expand...

Excerpts from: NIST NCSTAR 1-1C Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster Maintenance and Modifications to Structural Systems (Draft), 2005

This report documents maintenance and modifications that were made to the structural systems of World Trade Center (WTC) 1, 2, and 7. Included are the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ or Port Authority) guidelines for inspection, repair, and modifications to the structural systems of WTC 1, 2, and 7. Discussed are the guidelines that governed the inspection and strengthening of existing structural members.

p. xxxi - Fireproofing and masonry partitions enclosing the diagonal bracing on exterior column lines in both towers below the Service Level Floor and the transfer trusses below floor 1 in WTC 2 under exterior and core columns (every second year);

p. xxxii - It was noted in the last section of the document that these standards were applicable to only structural steel and reinforced concrete members in WTC 1 and WTC 2.

p. xxxiii - Additional criteria were provided for (1) supports for hung ceilings in the two-way truss areas of the towers, (2) weight, dimensions, and location of heating, ventilation, and air conditioning equipment, (3) walls over an opening, (4) holes in existing steel, (5) coring at power/telephone cells and under induction units, and (5) concrete anchors that were to be used for any connections made to concrete.

p. xxxv - Hairline cracks were found in concrete beam encasement at various locations on all four mechanical equipment room levels.

p. xxxvi - A concrete encased beam on the 110th floor was subjected to steam from a leaking steam valve. Moderate rusting was found on the member, but no significant section loss was found.

p. xxxvii - Loose concrete was found on the north face of column 51 on the 46th floor of the cooling tower area. Silverstein Properties personnel immediately removed the loose concrete.

p. xli - It appears that all of the damaged concrete masonry unit (CMU) walls acting as fireproofing, which were identified in the 1991 Structural Integrity Inspection report, were repaired;

p. xlii - The inspection program for the floor framing supporting the MER consisted of the following:
• Assess the overall performance and structural integrity of the steel and concrete framing.
• Identify locations of defects and signs of distress in slabs, partitions, column enclosures, and concrete supports for mechanical equipment.

p. xlii - Floor Framing over Tenant Areas
The inspection program for the floor framing supporting the tenant areas consisted of the following:
• Assess the overall performance and integrity of the steel and concrete framing.
• Identify locations and signs of distress in slabs, partitions, column enclosures, and steel framing.

p. xlvi - Concrete spandrel beams at Level B3 between columns 318 and 330 also sustained damage. Masonry walls in WTC 1 were breached over distances of approximately 50 ft to the east and 120 ft to the west of the blast origin.

p. 20 - The PANYNJ recognized that the visual inspection of the entire structure, or even a major portion of it, in WTC 1 or WTC 2 was not practical, as stated in PANYNJ (1986). Thus, a statistical inspection program was implemented....

Visual inspection was to be supplemented by the use of simple hand tools, measurements, and recording techniques, as required. Loose, cracked, or rust-stained spray-on fireproofing and concrete or masonry encasement covering structural steel members and connections was to be removed prior to examining the steel.

p. 34 - Concrete fireproofing for covering the steel floor framing was examined for delaminations and underlying corrosion.

p. 43 - Scope
The scope of the survey was determined based on experience gained from the condition survey of WTC 2 in 1990, which was discussed in Sec. 3.1.1 of this report.

1. Floor framing (long, short, and transverse trusses, rolled beams, concrete encased beams, bridging, and connections)

p. 43 - Office Floor Areas
Fourteen office floors (11, 13, 22, 30, 35, 52, 54, 61, 65, 78, 84, 86, 90, and 93) throughout WTC 1 were selected for inspection. Inspection of the structural elements at these levels followed the following sequence:

2. Floor framing, damping unit, utility supports, steel decking, inside faces of steel spandrel plates, spandrel splices, and core concrete or rolled steel members were visually inspected. Structural steel members were examined for signs of deformation or corrosion with fireproofing still in place.

p. 44 - MER and Space Frame
All four two-story MERs were visually inspected from the lower floor and accessible upper floor levels. Floor framing, slabs, interior columns, and utility hangers and pads were inspected. Concrete fireproofing for covering the steel floor framing was examined for delaminations and underlying corrosion.

p. 47 - In the express elevator shafts, beams framing in the north-south direction were typically encased in concrete. Steel in the other direction consisted of built-up welded box girders and columns with sprayedon fireproofing. According

p. 48 - Steel beams supporting the elevator door saddles were encased in concrete, except for a few beams that were found to be partially encased (for example, in one case, concrete was missing from the bottom flange of one of the steel beams). The report states that the fireproofing should be replaced in these cases.

p. 52 - Concrete encasement on the steel beams in the core area was found to be in good condition with hairline cracks at scattered locations.

p. 53 - Recommendations—A priority recommendation was made in the report to replace the leaking valve under the 110th floor that rusted the floor beam. Routine recommendations were made as follows:
(1) Repair the surface cracks in the MER concrete floor slabs with a surface sealer, (2) Repair the cracks in the concrete at the base of the columns, (3) Repair the cracks in the concrete pads supporting mechanical equipment, (4) Patch and repair the spalled concrete encasement of all appropriate structural members, and (5) Repair hangers that were found to be vibrating, bowed, sagged, and/or deformed.

p. 56 - Loose concrete was found on the north face of column number 51 on the 46th floor of the cooling tower area. Due to the potential hazard immediate action was recommended. Silverstein Properties personnel immediately removed the loose concrete.

p. 79 - Table 3–24. Summary of inspections performed on WTC 1 after the terrorist bombing on February 16, 1993.

10/10/94 - LERA Memo on repair of concrete masonry unit wall.
Click to expand...

(I mostly left out the extensive references to concrete and masonry in the basement levels, as I doubt anyone is disputing that.)
 
Java Man said:
Like in a basement or something? Like with all this bunch of debris on top?
Click to expand...
What is your point?

Are you trying to say that there was something unusual about the fires? that they should not have burned that long? that the length of time that they burned indicate (OMG!) thermite?

Other than the kamikaze hijackers, there is nothing unexpected in any of this.
 
Anders Lindman said:
Yes, when I find something interesting I don't mind doing some research. But I usually only follow simple ideas. There's a jungle of information out there so I need to have a sharp filter in order to cut through all the mess, and it's easiest for me to do that by following simple things that I can understand myself.
Click to expand...

It takes seven years to qualify as an architect; those of us who specialise in tall buildings design then typically go through many years of on-the-job, project-led experience before we're let loose on this kind of work. With engineers it's even more pronounced.

But what you seem to be saying - and forgive me if I've misunderstood - is that you're not interested in the kind of complex issues which are absolutely fundamental to the understanding of tall, complex composite structures such as WTC. In short, you're trying to reduce it all to "simple things (you) can understand yourself".

Do you see why this worries me? You, by your own admission, make sweeping accusations because you're not interested in engaging with the structural issues at hand?
 
Architect said:
Ah, good; you see why we don't use diagrams from Antipodean posts to consider issues around actual layout.

Now, do you have a specific point you wish to raise? Bear in mind that the core column sizes you mentioned earier are relatively modest in this drawing.
Click to expand...

Modest? I was talking about the surface area they covered. How could they have found a large and fairly intact piece of the fuselage with airplane windows on it, when the 47 core columns covered such a large surface area together? Maybe it's theoretically possible that the piece found outside the building got sliced off before severely impacting anything further and then was thrown out of the building, but maybe not. That would perhaps be tricky to determine, yet it seems unlikely to me that something like that could have happened.
 
Architect said:
It takes seven years to qualify as an architect; those of us who specialise in tall buildings design then typically go through many years of on-the-job, project-led experience before we're let loose on this kind of work. With engineers it's even more pronounced.

But what you seem to be saying - and forgive me if I've misunderstood - is that you're not interested in the kind of complex issues which are absolutely fundamental to the understanding of tall, complex composite structures such as WTC. In short, you're trying to reduce it all to "simple things (you) can understand yourself".

Do you see why this worries me? You, by your own admission, make sweeping accusations because you're not interested in engaging with the structural issues at hand?
Click to expand...

Nobody can be expert on everything. And to examine the whole 9/11 issue, several things, and in separate areas of expertise have to be included. Otherwise it will be like the blind men examining an elephant and one of them says that the elephant is like a snake (feeling the trunk) while the next man says that the elephant is like a tree (touching on of the legs).
 
Anders Lindman said:
Otherwise it will be like the blind men examining an elephant and one of them says that the elephant is like a snake (feeling the trunk) while the next man says that the elephant is like a tree (touching on of the legs).
Click to expand...

And when it sits down, both of them think it was a controlled demolition.

Dave
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom