NIST WTC 7 Investigation Finds Building Fires Caused Collapse | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 490186 United Kingdom 08/24/2008 07:50 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | 'To reach the conclusions in its report, NIST complemented its in-house expertise with private-sector technical experts; accumulated an extensive collection of documents, photographs and videos related to the WTC events of 9/11; conducted first-person interviews of WTC 7 occupants and emergency responders; analyzed the evacuation and emergency response operations in and around WTC 7; and performed the most complex computer simulations ever conducted to model a building’s response behavior and determine its collapse sequence due to a combination of debris impact damage, fires and a progression of structural failures from local fire-induced damage to collapse initiation, and, ultimately, to global collapse.' |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 490177 United States 08/24/2008 07:57 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | 'To reach the conclusions in its report, NIST complemented its in-house expertise with private-sector technical experts; accumulated an extensive collection of documents, photographs and videos related to the WTC events of 9/11; conducted first-person interviews of WTC 7 occupants and emergency responders; analyzed the evacuation and emergency response operations in and around WTC 7; and performed the most complex computer simulations ever conducted to model a building’s response behavior and determine its collapse sequence due to a combination of debris impact damage, fires and a progression of structural failures from local fire-induced damage to collapse initiation, and, ultimately, to global collapse.' Quoting: Anonymous Coward 490186Popular Mechanics said it's all true...... |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 490198 Canada 08/24/2008 08:05 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | What specific modifications does the NIST propose? What, EXACTLY, was the fuel involved in this fire that caused this amazing amount of heating? Paper, wood? Kryptonite? Marshmallows? |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 481720 United States 08/24/2008 08:16 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
antwan User ID: 484058 Norway 08/24/2008 09:09 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
G. House User ID: 490219 Netherlands 08/24/2008 09:13 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Will the NIST be recommending retrofits to all the thousands of high-rise steel framed structures in the United States, in order to prevent further collapses like this? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 490198What specific modifications does the NIST propose? What, EXACTLY, was the fuel involved in this fire that caused this amazing amount of heating? Paper, wood? Kryptonite? Marshmallows? It wasn't only the fire, it was the fire coupled with the unique and rather bizarre construction methods used in the building. If you don't know what I'm talking about I feel you are too ignorant to give an opinion in the first place. Conventional building method was not used in certain aspects of this building. "Everybody lies." |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 489383 United States 08/24/2008 09:18 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Will the NIST be recommending retrofits to all the thousands of high-rise steel framed structures in the United States, in order to prevent further collapses like this? Quoting: G. HouseWhat specific modifications does the NIST propose? What, EXACTLY, was the fuel involved in this fire that caused this amazing amount of heating? Paper, wood? Kryptonite? Marshmallows? It wasn't only the fire, it was the fire coupled with the unique and rather bizarre construction methods used in the building. If you don't know what I'm talking about I feel you are too ignorant to give an opinion in the first place. Conventional building method was not used in certain aspects of this building. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 481720 United States 08/24/2008 09:27 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 490198 Canada 08/24/2008 09:29 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Will the NIST be recommending retrofits to all the thousands of high-rise steel framed structures in the United States, in order to prevent further collapses like this? Quoting: G. HouseWhat specific modifications does the NIST propose? What, EXACTLY, was the fuel involved in this fire that caused this amazing amount of heating? Paper, wood? Kryptonite? Marshmallows? It wasn't only the fire, it was the fire coupled with the unique and rather bizarre construction methods used in the building. If you don't know what I'm talking about I feel you are too ignorant to give an opinion in the first place. Conventional building method was not used in certain aspects of this building. Ah. So now you're an expert on high rise building construction. Myself, I can't claim to be a structural engineer. But I did run nuclear reactors for the Navy for 8 years, so I think I'll be able to grasp the basic engineering concepts, if you spell them out simply enough. So tell me what exactly was "unique and bizarre" about the construction meathods used in this building? How did this building differ in it's design from all the other thousands of high rise buildings constructed here and around the world in the last 100 years? And how did these "unique and bizarre" construction methods manage to pass muster with New York's building inspectors? Did these "unique and bizarre" building methods comply with New York's high rise building code? If not, how did they differ? Again, specifics are what we're looking for. Feel free to link to any and all engineering, architectural, and building code type websites you might feel are helpful to understanding what you're talking about. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 481720 United States 08/24/2008 09:45 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Again, specifics are what we're looking for. Feel free to link to any and all engineering, architectural, and building code type websites you might feel are helpful to understanding what you're talking about. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 490198Building 7 must have been "unique and bizarre" as well, right Glass House? |
G. House User ID: 490616 Netherlands 08/25/2008 12:01 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Ah. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 490198So now you're an expert on high rise building construction. Myself, I can't claim to be a structural engineer. But I did run nuclear reactors for the Navy for 8 years, so I think I'll be able to grasp the basic engineering concepts, if you spell them out simply enough. So tell me what exactly was "unique and bizarre" about the construction meathods used in this building? How did this building differ in it's design from all the other thousands of high rise buildings constructed here and around the world in the last 100 years? And how did these "unique and bizarre" construction methods manage to pass muster with New York's building inspectors? Did these "unique and bizarre" building methods comply with New York's high rise building code? If not, how did they differ? Again, specifics are what we're looking for. Feel free to link to any and all engineering, architectural, and building code type websites you might feel are helpful to understanding what you're talking about. The building was actually built over the top of an existing structure. Because of this many of the pylons that were foundations for interior columns were offset from the columns that ran through the building. Some of these columns actually ran diagonally to the pylons. If you are not aware of this, look at some actual plans of the building and you will see what I'm talking about. These diagonal members happened to be in the fire area. Contrary to 911 so-called truthers steel does not have to melt to lose considerable strength. This starts happening about 850 degrees F. Building code? The engineers design the building with specifications that they feel will work. They then "seal" the drawings. These drawings are in turn reviewed by whatever city entity with purview and are then approved or disapproved. Designing structural steel is most often by calculation within excepted limits, not so much a code where a certain size has to be used in a certain place. There are too many varibles. And I did not say they did not meet "code" or were illegal. I'm saying they were bizarre and unusual in the sense that most bulidings do not have those features. I mean you can do it that way, but if you have an unexpected fire that isn't put out by the expected sprinkler system (for whatever reason) the possibility of catastrophic failure would be greater. This is due to instead of having things stacked on top of each other, you have things running at angles and under a great deal of stress. If that diagonal fails, well it's game over and you've broken the back of the building so to speak. A conventional build has more redundancy built into it. As an example WTC 1&2 made use of lightweight concrete in its floors. This allowed the use of less steel to support them. "Everybody lies." |
G. House User ID: 490616 Netherlands 08/25/2008 12:03 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Again, specifics are what we're looking for. Feel free to link to any and all engineering, architectural, and building code type websites you might feel are helpful to understanding what you're talking about. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 481720Building 7 must have been "unique and bizarre" as well, right Glass House? Yes I said the building methods used in Building 7 were unique and bizarre. Look at the plans. See how many other buildings have those details built in. I was taken aback the first time I saw the plans. And I have a real problem with so-called 911 truthers saying well it had to do this and it should have done that, when they aren't even aware of how unusual the construction of the building was. The best way I can describe it is if you wanted to build a building as a clusterfuck, that was one way to approach it. "Everybody lies." |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 347173 United States 08/25/2008 12:13 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
G. House User ID: 491062 Netherlands 08/25/2008 09:17 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Wasn't the NIST investigation limited to the eight floor and above? I don't remember exactly but it seems to me that these people are stupider than they think we are. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 347173Don't really know if that was the case. However, like I mentioned before. An existing building was UNDER WTC 7. Are you aware of that? How many buildings do you know of that are built over the top of another building? Especially something that huge. And what unusual building techniques were used to accomplish this? If you don't know the answers to these questions, how con you be so sure the building should have fallen a certain way or what the possible causes were? "Everybody lies." |