9/11

Gee, I wonder what he meant when he said, ". . . designed to be demolished in their own footprint with minimal use of explosive."

This would be a fine time to interpret that for all of us who just can't figure out what "designed to be demolished in their own footprint" means.

 

It's hard to make out what he said, because he wasn't making any sense.

And VG's argument is so unlikely as to be absurd.

Why is it such an affront to point to an internal enemy rather than an external one? I hate this kind of fervent nationalism.

 

I told you, dont let them take advantage of you

 

Photo with freefall comparison, part of a corner co!umn to the right of the building far in advance of the main collapse

 

Anyone want to still claim collapse was close to freefall?

 

Yes, lets recap, 6 core columns 33 perimeter columns?? NIST says these core columns the height of 4 floors at the moment of aircraft impact, the entire south wall at the moment of collapse


NIST NCSTAR 1-6D

Aircraft Impact
.
The aircraft impacted WTC 1 at the north wall.
The aircraft severed or heavily damaged
Columns 112 to 151 between Floors 94 and 98 on the north wall. After breaching the building’s
perimeter, the aircraft continued to penetrate into
the building. The north office area floor system
sustained severe structural damage between Columns
112 and 145 at Floors 94 to 98. Core Columns 503,
504, 505, 506, 604, 704, 706, 805, and 904 were sev
ered or heavily damaged between Floor 92 and
Floor 97. The aircraft also severed a single exteri
or panel at the center of the south wall from Columns
329 to 331 between Floor 93 and Floor 96. In summary, 38 of 59 columns of the north wall, three of 59
columns of the south wall, and nine of 47 core colu
mns were severed or heavily damaged. In addition,
thermal insulation on floor framings and columns we
re damaged from the impact area to the south
perimeter wall, primarily through the center of WTC 1
and over one-third to one-half of the core width.
Gravity loads in the columns that were severed were
redistributed mostly to the neighboring columns.
Due to the severe impact damage to the north wa
ll, the wall section above the impact zone moved
downward. The hat truss resisted the downward move
ment of the north wall and rotated about its east-
west axis, which reduced the load on the south wall.
As a result, the north and south walls each carried
about 7 percent less gravity loads at Floor 98 after
impact, the east and west walls each carried about
7 percent more loads, and the core carried about 1 pe
rcent more gravity loads at Floor 98 after impact.
Column 705 buckled, and Columns 605 and 804 showed minor buckling.

.........Buckling of South Wall and Collapse Initiation.
With continuously increased bowing, as more columns
buckled, the entire width of the south wall buckled inward. Instability started at the center of the south
wall and rapidly progressed horiz
ontally toward the sides. As a result of the buckling of the south wall,
the south wall significantly unloaded, redistributing its lo
ad to the softened core through the hat-truss and
to the south side of the east and west walls through
the spandrels. At 100 min, the north, east, and west
walls at Floor 98 carried about 7 percent, 35 percent, and 30 percent more gravity loads than the state
immediately after impact, and the south wall and th
e core carried about 7 percent and 20 percent less
loads, respectively. The section of the building above
the impact zone tilted to the south (observed at
about 8
̊
) as column instability progressed rapidly from
the south wall along the adjacent east and west
walls (see Fig. E–11), resulting in increased gravity lo
ad on the core columns. The release of potential
energy due to downward movement
of building mass above the buckled columns exceeded the strain
energy that could be absorbed by th
e structure. Global collapse ensued.

 

You know full well that my issue is with the beginning of collapse. The antenna, which was supported by the hat truss, which was tied into the core and perimeter structures, dropped 360 feet in 5 seconds--which is 40 feet shy of freefall--right through the rest of the Tower below it without even a jolt. Your response to that was: "There was no internal intact structure pushing upwards. The external steel columns were holding the load, once they gave way, KABOOM . . ."But of course there was an intact structure below; even the NIST acknowledges that. So . . .

Anyway, I didn't ask you what the NIST hypothesized. I asked you how they arrived at that hypothesis.

Here is the extent of NIST's explanation for the totality of collapses: the total collapse was "inevitable" once a collapse event was "initiated".

A footnote in the Executive Summary reads:

The focus of the Investigation was on the sequence of events from the instant of aircraft impact to the initiation of collapse for each tower. For brevity in this report, this sequence is referred to as the "probable collapse sequence," although it includes little analysis of the structural behavior of the tower after the conditions for collapse initiation were reached and collapse became inevitable. (p xxxvii/39)

Pretty persuasive, huh?

And here the NIST's estimate of column damage:

The debris cut a shallow path through the west and center array of trusses, damaging the insulation up to the north wall of the building core. This devastation took 0.7 s. The structural and insulation damage was considerable and was estimated to be:

• 35 exterior columns severed, 2 heavily damaged.
• 6 core columns severed, 3 heavily damaged.
• 43 of 47 core columns stripped of insulation on one or more floors.
• Insulation stripped from trusses covering 60,000 ft2 of floor area.

Now, go ahead and explain how the destruction of 6 core columns and 35 perimeter columns would cause the rest of the 205 perimeter columns and 36 core columns in the Tower to lose the will to do their job.

 

You Guys will never agree so this is a pointless pissing contest !
the reason I don't post is because I know what happened so no point

 

loud explosions heard on 9/11

 

Stop bullshitting, you know thats just the damage from the initial impact of the aircraft. Then then go on to list the damage by failure of the resultant fires. Then on to the damage as all the relevant sections start to give way. You also never mention any of the plethora of cross beams, where the mechanical floors are. 4 of the columns that carry 20% of the gravity load. All the axial loads- the initial tilt from the plane impact, tilt again whem wtc2 collapses, third tilt and transfer of axial loads as the building starts to collapse. Just because a coloumn and set of beams arent severed doesnt mean they havent shifted out of position and carrying 30% more than they should.

You, like most truthers, rely on people just not bothered to checkup wanting to read anything.

Anyone else reading: just need to google NIST: ncstar 1-6D you dont even need to bother reading it, just a quick glance will show there is a far greater analysis than storch is making out. And he knows it

 

My point is not winning an argument with a guy that is going to go all Sargent Shultz with "oh, theres no concrete in the rubble" "oh no the top of the tower stayed intact when it fell"
" oh no the whole thing freefell" anyway.

Its to expose for anyone else reading now, or in the years to come all the little truther tricks

Quote little parts of F R Greening, even though the guy ends with, oh yeah, theres way plenty of energy for gravitational collapse.

Cherry pick parts of the NIST report, even though they know full well NIST gives gives a summary of the weight and number of floors each floor can handle

And a whole bunch of other things too numerous to list here.

Other conspiracy theories, even in relation to 9/11 people can waffle on however they want. But the collapse of tower 1 especially, can only be super secret explosive vegemite because none of them checked what 11 seconds was. Farrrk me dead

 

The WTC were an illusion and never existed in the first place. New York City was built from the ground up so it could be destroyed to promote attacking exiled Saudis banished to Afghanistan in...Iraq (apparently) and to grab oil, despite the fact that the war drives oil prices up.

 

Buildings are not designed to 'self destruct', they are designed in a way that engineers can demolish them without damage to surrounding structures.

It was unfortunate that the events of 9/11 triggered the process, clearly engineers do not expect buildings to have planes crashed into them.

One thing that few people have considered is what would have happened if the process was not triggered and the buildings had toppled sideways. I imagine that the number of deaths would have been a lot higher.

 

Ha-ha. I am not a structural engineer, but having worked with them for more than 40 years during the design and construction of several theaters and film studios, I have acquired a lot of knowledge about their workings.