Total Building Collapse from a Single Column Failure

[Spanx]

It is naïve to think that the NIST WTC 7 report distorted the seat width at column 79 for girder A2001 as 11" for any reason other than the reality that the maximum beam expansion was 5.5".

Of course, with the drawings finally being released it was found that the seat was actually 12" wide and the NIST WTC 7 report authors had to admit it. Their June 2012 erratum about it saying the girder would have to travel 6.25", without saying where the extra 3/4" comes from, was clearly an attempt at hoping nobody would notice they could not provide a complete answer. The additional fact that they did not discuss the stiffener omission in that erratum (although it had also been pointed out to them with the seat width issue) is even more damning, as it requires much more than an additional 3/4" of impossible travel distance for the girder to fall off its seat.

Unfortunately, there are no explanations for the seat width distortion and girder stiffener and lateral support beam omissions, other than intentional deception, because the real structure could not have failed as they claimed.

There is a lot to see here, regardless of the protestations of those here who want to claim there isn't but can't show why. The stiffeners and lateral support beams were very critical to the analyses of the collapse of WTC 7 and those responsible for those analyses had no business omitting them. If you actually think they were omitted for simplification, based on engineering judgement that they would not have a significant effect, somebody has a bridge to sell you.

Come on Tony tell us, why or how did building 7 collapse ?

 

[Tony Szamboti]

Come on Tony tell us, why or how did building 7 collapse ?

It is the responsibility of the NIST to tell us that, without omitting pertinent structural features and members and not distorting the sizes of any of them to make a proposed theory work that would not otherwise. They were funded to do so and they have not done that thus far.

 

[Spanx]

It is the responsibility of the NIST to tell us that, while including all pertinent structural features and members and not distorting the sizes of any of them. They were funded to do so and they have not done that thus far.

No Tony, you keep saying inside job and it's down to you to prove it.

 

[beachnut]

It is the responsibility of the NIST to tell us that, while including all pertinent structural features and members and not distorting the sizes of any of them. They were funded to do so and they have not done that thus far.

It was from Fire Tony, not CD. You failed to support your CD theory, which is based on what? Nonsense.

Don't need NIST, you do. You need NIST to attack their probable cause, and you don't have a probable cause. You have no experience in high rise structures, and can't produce your own collapse theory.

NIST has to do it? Wait, you said NIST was wrong. Now you have to supply your theory. Do you have one? I like the rocket fuel explosives jetting steel parts faster than freefall from the old high school teacher. What was your cause. Right, NIST was suppose to do that.

Fire did it Tony, better find a new conspiracy theory to waste 12 years doing nothing; wait you were on TV. Wow, now everyone knows you believer in fantasy. Why are only 0.1 percent of engineers fooled by 911 truth claims? Why can't you detail your claims? Looks like 0.1 percent of all engineers don't know what they are supporting, no clear statement of what happened in your fantasy of CD, and inside job.

 

[Tony Szamboti]

No Tony, you keep saying inside job and it's down to you to prove it.

I am saying the NIST WTC 7 report is not valid due to the girder seat width distortion and the omission of the girder stiffeners and lateral support beams.

It is hard to understand why some, like you, don't seem to have a problem with that after it has been clearly demonstrated, and instead of demanding that the analyses and report be corrected are attacking those who have honestly brought up these serious issues with the NIST WTC 7 report.

 

[Spanx]

I am saying the NIST WTC 7 report is not valid due to the girder seat width distortion and the omission of the girder stiffeners and lateral support beams.

It is hard to understand why some, like you, don't seem to have a problem with that after it has been clearly demonstrated, and instead of demanding that the analyses and report be corrected are attacking those who have honestly brought up these serious issues with the NIST WTC 7 report.

If this is the case why are you part of AE911 truth who claim CD, Thermite, free fall etc ?

 

[Animal]

I am saying the NIST WTC 7 report is not valid due to the girder seat width distortion and the omission of the girder stiffeners and lateral support beams.

And the rest of the world (outside your little troofer bubble) says you are wrong.

It is hard to understand why some, like you, don't seem to have a problem with that after it has been clearly demonstrated, and instead of demanding that the analyses and report be corrected are attacking those who have honestly brought up these serious issues with the NIST WTC 7 report.

Religious fervor will do that......you don't understand why others don't "see the light"

On the other hand.....it is not hard to understand your desperation in keeping your religious beliefs alive.

Troofer translation - "serious" = inconsequential

 

[Animal]

If an investigation is shown to have serious flaws and proven to be invalid it is only proper to hold those who are funded for and responsible for the investigation accountable and to require them to correct it. Your thinking process and comments suggesting otherwise are curious.

So if and when the NIST report is ever shown to have SERIOUS flaws amd be PROVEN to be invalid....I am sure the engineering community will want to see a new investigation.....until then, it will just be you and a little meaningless cabal making noise on obscure internet forums....believing you have found a smoking gun to prove your realcddeal and propping up dicky gage's vacation fund.

 

[Tony Szamboti]

And the rest of the world (outside your little troofer bubble) says you are wrong.



Religious fervor will do that......you don't understand why others don't "see the light"

On the other hand.....it is not hard to understand your desperation in keeping your religious beliefs alive.

Troofer translation - "serious" = inconsequential

Most of the world is generally unaware and not saying anything. However, as far as those who are involved in the debate, it is a much larger group saying and proving that there are serious problems with the NIST WTC 7 report than the small band of individuals (including those like you here) simply saying there isn't, but not being able to back what they say with real data and analysis.

The NIST WTC 7 report is in fact invalid and at some point there will be a reckoning. The disgraceful efforts by a small band of individuals to obscure this reality, and the stonewalling by some at the NIST itself, will not prevent it.

 

[Justin39640]

Most of the world is not saying anything. However, as far as those who are involved in the debate, it is a much larger group saying and proving that there are serious problems with the NIST WTC 7 report than the small band of individuals (including those like you here) simply saying there isn't, but not being able to back what they say with real data and analysis.

The NIST WTC 7 report is in fact invalid and at some point there will be a reckoning. The disgraceful efforts by a small band of individuals to obscure this reality, and the stonewalling by NIST itself, will not prevent it.

All the morons on the internet agree with you! Congrats!

 

[Ape of Good Hope]

Most of the world is generally unaware and not saying anything. However, as far as those who are involved in the debate, it is a much larger group saying and proving that there are serious problems with the NIST WTC 7 report than the small band of individuals (including those like you here) simply saying there isn't, but not being able to back what they say with real data and analysis.

The NIST WTC 7 report is in fact invalid and at some point there will be a reckoning. The disgraceful efforts by a small band of individuals to obscure this reality, and the stonewalling by some at the NIST itself, will not prevent it.

You can keep this up until the end of time and you'll still be Wronger than Mr Wrong of Wrongington-on-the-Wrong.

 

[Animal]

Most of the world is generally unaware and not saying anything.

Most of the world could not care less. (Not to mention they do not have the skills/knowledge to make a intelligent decision.

However, as far as those who are involved in the debate, it is a much larger group saying and proving that there are serious problems with the NIST WTC 7 report than the small band of individuals (including those like you here) simply saying there isn't, but not being able to back what they say with real data and analysis.

As usual....troofers have a oversized sense of self importance. In reality, you represent a tiny fraction of one percentage of the professionals in the industry. The vast majority of licensed professional laugh at your claims.

The NIST WTC 7 report is in fact invalid and at some point there will be a reckoning. The disgraceful efforts by a small band of individuals to obscure this reality, and the stonewalling by some at the NIST itself, will not prevent it.

So lets play your game.......the NIST report.....the probable collapse scenario, is in error, and instead of the one particular girder in question being the cause, it was another girder, or floor plate, or column. So what? It will not change the FACT that WTC collapsed because of unfought fires.......at best, it will be a mystery what initiated the collapse. What will NEVER happen, is for it to be determined that the building was brought down by some CD fantasy. It will remain a fantasy of your little cabal......but it will enable dicky gage to continue to take his free vacations for a few more years.

 

[NoahFence]

The NIST WTC 7 report is in fact invalid and at some point there will be a reckoning. The disgraceful efforts by a small band of individuals to obscure this reality, and the stonewalling by some at the NIST itself, will not prevent it.

 

[jaydeehess]

Most of the world is generally unaware and not saying anything. However, as far as those who are involved in the debate, it is a much larger group saying and proving that there are serious problems with the NIST WTC 7 report than the small band of individuals (including those like you here) simply saying there isn't, but not being able to back what they say with real data and analysis.

You are an explosive demolitions adherant. A conjecture backed by no real data or analysis.

The NIST WTC 7 report is in fact invalid and at some point there will be a reckoning. The disgraceful efforts by a small band of individuals to obscure this reality, and the stonewalling by some at the NIST itself, will not prevent it.

The minor point of the girder in question being shown to move a small distance short of completely off the seat does not negate the fact that such walk-off is the most probable initiating event of the collapse. Nor does it negate the fact that col 79 failure was the cause of the first grossly observable event, the in falling of the EPH. Nor does it negate the fact that the fea of the structure's response to a col 79 failure indicates a progression to global collapse would occur.

If AE911T wants to model the entire freakin building and every nut, bolt and weld then go right on ahead and do it furchrissake.

Maybe Chris Sarns can get on that for you.

 

[beachnut]

Most of the world is generally unaware and not saying anything. However, as far as those who are involved in the debate, it is a much larger group saying and proving that there are serious problems with the NIST WTC 7 report than the small band of individuals (including those like you here) simply saying there isn't, but not being able to back what they say with real data and analysis.

The NIST WTC 7 report is in fact invalid and at some point there will be a reckoning. The disgraceful efforts by a small band of individuals to obscure this reality, and the stonewalling by some at the NIST itself, will not prevent it.

Who are the small band? Your 0.1 percent of all engineers who seem to agree with you, but remain action free, silent like your explosives, and don't do anything but sign Gage's travel club friends list. Wow, you have so many. oops, the larger group is a silent 0.1 percent of engineers who have no clue what you are doing, or not doing; no action, no evidence.

The larger group are a fringe group who to nothing. Good luck.

The day of reckoning? Balsamo used empty threats like that, albeit your does not sound like any action will be involved 911 truth has failed to do more than attack NIST, not a real engineering tool, or method learned at engineering school, more like some Wall Street tactic, or 911 truth effort to smoke screen the zero evidence state of the Overwhelming Evidence card.


If I thought someone was wrong, the last thing I would want is them to do another study. Did you tell 60 minutes? If I have a contractor I think is wrong, doing something wrong, I correct them. For WTC 7 it was fire. There was no thermite and no explosives. Fire is left as the only evidence. ... feel free to present your story.

Where is your work? What caused WTC 7 to collapse? You failed to prove anything about NIST, and fail to explain using engineering concepts why you might be wrong about NIST work. What reasons would NIST have, engineering reasons, which you might mistake as errors? You can't do the work to explain in detail and rule out reasons, engineering details and practices used which might have you thinking NIST is wrong. I see no real engineering discuss from you. Where there should be hundreds of pages of details you boil it down to a sentence. What a small pile of nonsense. '

Your work is like 911 truth claims of overwhelming evidence, an exaggeration, a lie.

You don't have to prove NIST wrong, you have to explain why WTC 7 collapsed. And you can't. It is that simple, and all engineers know this, and the lay people beat all the engineers to that fact. Plus it did not help you to have your anonymous name "realcdeal". Not a great name if you are going to introduce engineering concepts, which you have avoided so far.

Too bad you don't have the mythical much larger group, you could produce a paper if you had any real engineers who could take action on this Pulitzer Prize winning knowledge, oops, it is a fantasy, never-mind.

It is best to ignore the 19 terrorists, the only people on 911 who had motive to murder. Too simple, make up lies, a fantasy of CD. 13th year of no action by the much larger group. Where are you guys hiding?

 

[jaydeehess]

It is the responsibility of the NIST to tell us that, without omitting pertinent structural features and members and not distorting the sizes of any of them to make a proposed theory work that would not otherwise. They were funded to do so and they have not done that thus far.

NIST arrived at a most probable cause of collapse. It is nigh on impossible to know absolutely the exact details of the initiating event. However, THE ONLY OBSERVABLE mechanism by which the collapse could be instigated is the fires. THE first observable event is the infalling of the EPH. THE most probable failure causing that first observable event is the failure of col 79.
THUS is stands to reason (a concept lacking in many people) that heating of elements of the structure caused or led to the failure of col 79.

NIST showed that a large movement of the girder at the 12th floor would occur.
It is therefore very probable that this girder was the first to fail and initiated the sequence of global collapse.

NIST was tasked with finding recommendations to help prevent similar collapses and they did so. Their recommendations, among others, are to design to limit such movements to guard against floor structure failures due to heating.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

NIST arrived at a most probable cause of collapse. It is nigh on impossible to know absolutely the exact details of the initiating event. However, THE ONLY OBSERVABLE mechanism by which the collapse could be instigated is the fires. THE first observable event is the infalling of the EPH. THE most probable failure causing that first observable event is the failure of col 79.
THUS is stands to reason (a concept lacking in many people) that heating of elements of the structure caused or led to the failure of col 79.

NIST showed that a large movement of the girder at the 12th floor would occur.
It is therefore very probable that this girder was the first to fail and initiated the sequence of global collapse.

NIST was tasked with finding recommendations to help prevent similar collapses and they did so. Their recommendations, among others, are to design to limit such movements to guard against floor structure failures due to heating.

THIS...

And honestly I'd be fine with suggesting it's one of several potential scenarios, the NIST just used this one based on the analysis they did of the collapse video showing the collapse initiating in one general area. And as the example posted earlier demonstrates, even though there is some dispute when it concerns the more minute details, none of those disagreements changes the eventual conclusion. They MAY affect the recommendations to building codes depending on the details, but the general consensus is that the building suffered damage from everything that was observed and had several critical vulnerabilities that acted as contributing factors.

This discussion about the studs and bolts literally turns "splitting hairs" into an Olympic sport.

 

[LSSBB]

If an investigation is shown to have serious flaws and proven to be invalid it is only proper to hold those who are funded for and responsible for the investigation accountable and to require them to correct it. Your thinking process and comments suggesting otherwise are curious.

Assertions unsupported by evidence.

 

[Gamolon]

Most of the world is generally unaware and not saying anything. However, as far as those who are involved in the debate, it is a much larger group saying and proving that there are serious problems with the NIST WTC 7 report than the small band of individuals (including those like you here) simply saying there isn't, but not being able to back what they say with real data and analysis.

The NIST WTC 7 report is in fact invalid and at some point there will be a reckoning. The disgraceful efforts by a small band of individuals to obscure this reality, and the stonewalling by some at the NIST itself, will not prevent it.

Questions for both gerrycan and Tony.

Are you pursuing this because you think you will eventually eliminate any and all "fire caused a structural collapse" explanations by NIST leaving only controlled demolition as the cause and thus proving a conspiracy?

...or...

Are you pursuing this because you think NIST is making a mistake and that finding the correct cause for collapse initiation will result in better building standards and engineering practices that will make structures much safer when subjected to fires?

 

[Porkpie Hat]

@Porkpie Hat
Basically they are saying that if NIST is going to recommend new codes for floors structures then the statement of originating event should refer to the floor structure failure rather than the column failure that occurred after that.

Its a matter of semantics and internal consistency.

That's the way I read it as well.

What's clear is they don't dismiss the entire report based on their criticisms.