• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Trussbolt failiures and flame cutters

peteweaver

Graduate Poster
peteweaver
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
1,006
 
This thread is a little low on content but I just wanted to add that from NISTs recovered perimeter panel sections, the major mode of failure for truss seats below the impact zone was shear failure. At the impact level the trusses often broke the bolt and walked off the seat.
 
e^n said:
This thread is a little low on content but I just wanted to add that from NISTs recovered perimeter panel sections, the major mode of failure for truss seats below the impact zone was shear failure. At the impact level the trusses often broke the bolt and walked off the seat.
Click to expand...

I can well believe that.
 
All those photos must be faked! We all *know* that the towers "virtually turned to dust", and those photos show men working atop huge piles of twisted metal debris!

Shill!
 
Max Photon busts JREFers propagating the pancake, or progressive collapse lie.

peteweaver said:
Several pics that show flame cutters in use on the WTC debris pile

http://www.iridescent-designs.co.uk/images/wtc/flamecutter-wtc-1.jpg

http://www.iridescent-designs.co.uk/images/wtc/flamecutter-wtc-2.jpg

http://www.iridescent-designs.co.uk/images/wtc/flamecutter-wtc-3.jpg

http://www.iridescent-designs.co.uk/images/wtc/flamecutter-wtc-4.jpg

http://www.iridescent-designs.co.uk/images/wtc/flamecutter-wtc-5.jpg

And truss bolts can clearly be seen in this pic

http://www.iridescent-designs.co.uk/images/wtc/debris-pile-shows-trussbolt-failiures2.jpg

All of which are bent downwards, because they were pulled down as the floors pancaked.

Hope these pics help dispell a few myths ;)
Click to expand...

--------

Wow are you guys clueless.


First:

From NIST FAQ #2:

"NIST’s findings do not support the “pancake theory” of collapse, which is premised on a progressive failure of the floor systems in the WTC towers...

Instead, the NIST investigation showed conclusively that the failure of the inwardly bowed perimeter columns initiated collapse

and that the occurrence of this inward bowing required the sagging floors to remain connected to the columns and pull the columns inwards.

Thus, the floors did not fail progressively to cause a pancaking phenomenon."

---------

Second:

There was no (or extremely little) cutting of steel in the controlled-demolitions of the WTC towers.

The controlled-demolitions were done by heat-weakening the steel.


Here is photographic evidence of incendiaries heat-weakening core steel connections.

Look at the 3rd figure (View 2)

http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911...er_op=view_page&PAGE_id=11&MMN_position=23:23

Note the aluminum oxide ash coming off the joints.


Correct, those truss connectors were not cut - they were heat-weakened.

e^n pointed out that a common failure mode was shearing.

Yes, because many truss seats were made brittle, or soft.

That came from deliberate heat-weakening.

--------


I am starting to get the sense that there are no serious 9/11 researchers on this site.

Max

---
 
Max Photon said:
--------

Wow are you guys clueless.


First:

From NIST FAQ #2:

"NIST’s findings do not support the “pancake theory” of collapse, which is premised on a progressive failure of the floor systems in the WTC towers...

Instead, the NIST investigation showed conclusively that the failure of the inwardly bowed perimeter columns initiated collapse

and that the occurrence of this inward bowing required the sagging floors to remain connected to the columns and pull the columns inwards.

Thus, the floors did not fail progressively to cause a pancaking phenomenon."

---------

Second:

There was no (or extremely little) cutting of steel in the controlled-demolitions of the WTC towers.

The controlled-demolitions were done by heat-weakening the steel.


Here is photographic evidence of incendiaries heat-weakening core steel connections.

Look at the 3rd figure (View 2)

http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911...er_op=view_page&PAGE_id=11&MMN_position=23:23

Note the aluminum oxide ash coming off the joints.


Correct, those truss connectors were not cut - they were heat-weakened.

e^n pointed out that a common failure mode was shearing.

Yes, because many truss seats were made brittle, or soft.

That came from deliberate heat-weakening.

--------


I am starting to get the sense that there are no serious 9/11 researchers on this site.

Max

---
Click to expand...

NIST only dealt with collapse initiation, not what followed that. A pancake collapse was not the inital cause.

Once things got rolling below the impact points, pancaking is as good a way to describe the progression.
 
Max Photon said:
--------

Wow are you guys clueless.
Click to expand...
Look in the mirror to see above.
---------

Second:

There was no (or extremely little) cutting of steel in the controlled-demolitions of the WTC towers.

The controlled-demolitions were done by heat-weakening the steel.
Click to expand...
Funny how fire will do that.
Here is photographic evidence of incendiaries heat-weakening core steel connections.

Look at the 3rd figure (View 2)

http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911...er_op=view_page&PAGE_id=11&MMN_position=23:23

Note the aluminum oxide ash coming off the joints.


Correct, those truss connectors were not cut - they were heat-weakened.

e^n pointed out that a common failure mode was shearing.

Yes, because many truss seats were made brittle, or soft.

That came from deliberate heat-weakening.
Click to expand...
By a bunch of Islamic Extremist hijackers flying airplanes into the buildings.
--------


I am starting to get the sense that there are no serious 9/11 researchers on this site.

Max

---
Click to expand...
Wow, talk about clueless. You think that concrete and drywall dust is aluminum oxide!?!?! We may not be serious researchers in your eyes, however, you have no clue what real research is. Here I thought that mjd was arrogant. Well, someday you'll emerge from your mama's basement and join the real world. Those photos are conclusive proof that it wasn't a controlled demolition. If they were so brittle and heat weakened, that spire would have never withstood the fall of everything around it. So, let us know whey you evolve enough to form a conscious thought. Then we may actually take you seriously. Or not.
 
Alareth said:
NIST only dealt with collapse initiation, not what followed that. A pancake collapse was not the inital cause.

Once things got rolling below the impact points, pancaking is as good a way to describe the progression.
Click to expand...

Indeed the floors pancaked. But this was not the initial cause. Sagging floors led to busted columns which led to pancaking. Once the collapse started the floors pancaked for sure, hence the bent bolts -as opposed to each floor blowing up consecutively. :D If the steel was cut or dustified or whatever then explain why the bolts got so bent.
 
Last edited:
Hello Max! I am sorry I haven't had time to talk about your theories as much recently. Your first point has been addressed, FEMA had 'pancake initiation' and NIST refuted this and replaced it with 'perimeter wall initiation', whichever way you look at it the floors must have pancaked because what other direction could they move in?

Now to the main body of your post:
There was no (or extremely little) cutting of steel in the controlled-demolitions of the WTC towers.

The controlled-demolitions were done by heat-weakening the steel.
Click to expand...
Essentially you seem to be saying that the steel in the towers was made more brittle by briefly heating small sections of it to above the critical temperature and then cooling them. Would this be an accurate summary?

If so, I cannot think of any way you can convincingly prove this or any testable scenario whatsoever which would refute your claim. This brings into question, just exactly what thought process did you take in order to arrive at this conclusion? Photos such as this are certainly not proof of anything, how can you tell that is aluminium oxide? Why could it not be drywall?

In addition I wish to ask about your use of "brittle or soft", these are essentially opposite terms. Are you suggesting that sections of the WTC were made more ductile?
 
Max Photon said:
--------

Wow are you guys clueless.


First:

From NIST FAQ #2:

"NIST’s findings do not support the “pancake theory” of collapse, which is premised on a progressive failure of the floor systems in the WTC towers...

Instead, the NIST investigation showed conclusively that the failure of the inwardly bowed perimeter columns initiated collapse

and that the occurrence of this inward bowing required the sagging floors to remain connected to the columns and pull the columns inwards.

Thus, the floors did not fail progressively to cause a pancaking phenomenon."
Click to expand...

The NIST report conclusions pertained to the collapse initiation. Once it started, a "pancake collapse" is effectively what happened. It's as accurate a description as any other.

It's quite clear the OP was not referring only (if at all) to the initiation, but the collapse as a whole. You are being obtuse. Deliberately, is my guess.

I am starting to get the sense that there are no serious 9/11 researchers on this site.
Click to expand...

I'm starting to think there isn't a single truther with an ounce of shame.
 
Max Photon said:
Correct, those truss connectors were not cut - they were heat-weakened.

e^n pointed out that a common failure mode was shearing.

Yes, because many truss seats were made brittle, or soft.

That came from deliberate heat-weakening.

I am starting to get the sense that there are no serious 9/11 researchers on this site.
Click to expand...

The principal failure mode for ALL connections is shear. They don't have to be weakened to fail in that manner. EVERYTHING you say is wrong. I'm starting to get the idea that you're some guy who's playing with everyone. How can anyone be this dense?
 
Max Photon said:
--------

Wow are you guys clueless.


First:

From NIST FAQ #2:

"NIST’s findings do not support the “pancake theory” of collapse, which is premised on a progressive failure of the floor systems in the WTC towers...

Instead, the NIST investigation showed conclusively that the failure of the inwardly bowed perimeter columns initiated collapse

and that the occurrence of this inward bowing required the sagging floors to remain connected to the columns and pull the columns inwards.

Thus, the floors did not fail progressively to cause a pancaking phenomenon."

---------

Second:

There was no (or extremely little) cutting of steel in the controlled-demolitions of the WTC towers.

The controlled-demolitions were done by heat-weakening the steel.


Here is photographic evidence of incendiaries heat-weakening core steel connections.

Look at the 3rd figure (View 2)

http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911...er_op=view_page&PAGE_id=11&MMN_position=23:23

Note the aluminum oxide ash coming off the joints.


Correct, those truss connectors were not cut - they were heat-weakened.

e^n pointed out that a common failure mode was shearing.

Yes, because many truss seats were made brittle, or soft.

That came from deliberate heat-weakening.

--------


I am starting to get the sense that there are no serious 9/11 researchers on this site.

Max

---
Click to expand...
Click to expand...


I am starting to get the sense that you are a boring dunce.
 
MAX, MAX, MAX

Why are you resorting to name calling....tsk tsk tsk.

TAM:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom