Anouncing a new web site: The Science of 9/11
- Thread starter Stretch
- Start date
Ranters roost
Talk on
CKA
Me and Toro used to gang bang them together at one time but their like energizer bunnys,they just keep going and going and going.
Really, even one of you links says the core was the supporting structure.
" Inside this outer tube there was a 27 m × 40 m core, which was designed to support the weight of the tower."
Not massive compared to what? Here are their actual dimensions.
"The core of WTC 1 was designed to support the entire weight of the buildings several times over. Far more than a mere "service core", it comprised of 47 steel box columns tied together at each floor by steel plates, similar to the 52" deep spandrel plates that tied the perimeter columns together. The largest of these core columns were 18"x36", with steel walls 4" thick near the base and tapering in thickness toward the top, and was anchored directly to the bedrock."
Kerosene fires would not weaken a structure that is 'boxed' every 12 ft
It worked for the post I made at the time. It was speaking in general terms for the layperson.
Where do you suppose the "largest of these columns" would be? At the top of the building? It said "at the base". They were basicall steel trees. The buildings were designed to withstand sheer force more than compressive force and to have a relatively light-weight footprint.
Well, you had better write the experts that wrote that journal piece that you know better than they and that they are drastically mistaken, then.
All that had to happen was enough damage done to one floor to make a few structures buckle, and the 90,000 liters of burning fuel supplied varying temperatures in the steel itself to cause some of it to buckle. As the article said, steel, and particularly steel created mainly to prevent sheer force effect, weakens drastically in relatively cool temperatures (as far as fire goes)
Household fires reach as low as 370°C and that is considered low temperature for fire.
The difference between heat and temperature:
So you have a few floors (15 floors in one of the towers) bearing down on one or two increasingly weakening and damaged floors. What do you think would be the natural outcome? (That's rhetorical).
Last edited:
not the size of these steel beams it wouldnt......nor would kero.......
do some research into how hot kero burns at......... if kero can bend and melt steel, why the hell do we use acetaline to bend and melt steel?
Photographic Analysis of Damage to WTC7 and Critical Errors in NIST's Estimations
By "Winston Smith" of StudyOf911.com 2006-10-19
Last updated 2006-10-25
StudyOf911 Forum
StudyOf911 Main
The collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 features prominently in research and debate concerning the possibility of 9/11 being an inside job. This 47-storey building, located approximately 350 feet north and east a little of World Trade Center Building 1, imploded smoothly and completely into a neat pile in 6 to 7 seconds, which is the same time an object in free fall would take to reach the ground if dropped from the top of the building. This implies that WTC7 collapsed with no or negligible resistance from the support members and assembly connections of the structure, something that has never before been observed in a steel-framed building outside of controlled demolition.
In 2002 the National Institute of Standards and Technology was tasked with studying and explaining the collapse of WTC7 after FEMA, previously charged with the task, openly stated they could not produce any realistic hypothesis. Now, four years later, the NIST report on WTC7 is more than a year overdue and still NIST has only produced low-content, preliminary reports. The institute's current working hypothesis proposes that damage to the building caused by falling debris from the collapse of WTC1, possibly combined with thermal load from the resulting fires, somehow caused a failure in the eastern portion of the building. This localized failure, the hypothesis proposes, then progressed horizontally and vertically through the entire structure resulting in a rapid and global implosion of the entire building. In this paper I will use photographic evidence, including a new image of the south face previously unknown to NIST, compared with eye witness reports to show that NIST's damage estimates are likely drastically erroneous, and the institute's current hypothesis invalid.
Images of WTC7 before 9/11, on 9/11, and after the collapse can be viewed here.
NIST's collapse hypothesis and damage estimates for WTC7 are published in the following reports:
June 2004 Progress Report - Appendix L Interim Report on WTC7
Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster: Part IIC – WTC 7 Collapse - Final"
Damage estimates from the reports are as follows:
Interim Report on WTC7 (page L-18)
After WTC 1 collapsed::
• Heavy debris (exterior panels from WTC 1) was seen on Vesey Street and the WTC 7 promenade structure at the third floor level.
• Southwest corner damage extended over Floors 8 to 18.
• Damage was observed on the south face that starts at the roof level and severed the spandrels between exterior columns near the southwest corner for at least 5 to 10 floors. However, the extent and details of this damage have not yet been discerned, as smoke is present.
• Damage to the south face was described by a number of individuals. While the accounts are mostly consistent, there are some conflicting descriptions:
-- middle one-fourth to one-third width of the south face was gouged out from Floor 10 to the ground.
-- large debris hole near center of the south face around Floor 14.
-- debris damage across one-fourth width of the south face, starting several floors above the atrium (extended from the ground to 5th floor), noted that the atrium glass was still intact.
-- from inside the building at the 8th or 9th Floor elevator lobby, where two elevator cars were ejected from their shafts and landed in the hallway north of the elevator shaft, the visible portion of the south wall was gone with more light visible from the west side possibly indicating damage extending to the west.
Part IIC – WTC 7 Collapse - Final (page 15)
Debris Damage from WTC 1:
• Heavy debris on Vesey Street and WTC 7 Promenade.
• No heavy debris observed in lobby area, white dust coating.
• SW Corner Damage – floors 8 to 18.
• South face damage between two exterior columns - roof level down 5 to 10 floors, extent not known.
• South Face Damage:
-- middle 1/4 -1/3 width south face, 10th floor to ground.
-- large debris hole near center around 14th floor.
-- 1/4 width south face, above 5th floor, atrium glass intact.
-- 8th / 9th floor from inside, visible south wall gone with more damage to west, 2 elevator cars dislodged into elevator lobby.
Fig. 1: The NIST report displays internal columns, trusses, and shows NIST's damage estimates reaching far into the building towards critical structural elements.
NIST's collapse hypothesis hinges on the failure of one or more of columns 79, 80, and 81. The report cites the massive size and strength of the three columns as appearing to require "severe fires and/or damaged fireproofing to initiate thermally-related failures". Damage to the building from WTC1 debris is pointed to as the most likely contributing factor or direct cause of that failure, specifically damage to truss #2 (or adjacent components) which was located on the 6th floor. Simply put, a single truss or a single column is claimed to have been the Achilles heel of the structure, a heel that once broken, caused the entire entire 47 storey building to implode perfectly in on itself, with no resistance and at free fall rate.
The reports contain images in NIST's possession which show damage to the structure, specifically these two:
Fig. 2: Looking down at the west face of WTC7 from the north west, showing damage to the south west corner. (Click image for larger version.)
Fig. 3: Looking down at the roof of WTC7 from the north west, showing minor damage to the south parapet wall. (Click image for larger version.)
An image not in the reports (Fig. 4) shows mild facade damage to the upper floors, as described in NIST's appraisal. Since the building collapsed from the bottom, this damage can be considered unimportant for determining possible trigger events for the collapse.
Fig. 4: A television news capture shows damage to the uppermost floors of the south face of WTC7.
Yet none of these images show the center of the south face where NIST has estimated an enormous potion carved out of the building. As detailed in the interim report, their assessment is based on photographs, video footage, and eye witness testimony, and since NIST has to date not produced any photographs or video to support their damage estimate, nor do any appear to be available in the public realm, we can assume that the WTC7 south face damage estimates are based on eye witness testimony. The interim report specifically states a lack of photographs or video showing the damage to the south face of WTC7, and that the institute utilized eye witness reports as the basis for their estimation:
more here........ 9/11: Photographic Analysis of Damage to WTC7 and Critical Errors in NIST Estimations - StudyOf911.com Article
so.....one would assume that the failure of columns 79, 80 and 81 then the building would've fallen in that direction...... not straight down......if you have a failure on one side of a structure it would fall to that side...its physics
By "Winston Smith" of StudyOf911.com 2006-10-19
Last updated 2006-10-25
StudyOf911 Forum
StudyOf911 Main
The collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 features prominently in research and debate concerning the possibility of 9/11 being an inside job. This 47-storey building, located approximately 350 feet north and east a little of World Trade Center Building 1, imploded smoothly and completely into a neat pile in 6 to 7 seconds, which is the same time an object in free fall would take to reach the ground if dropped from the top of the building. This implies that WTC7 collapsed with no or negligible resistance from the support members and assembly connections of the structure, something that has never before been observed in a steel-framed building outside of controlled demolition.
In 2002 the National Institute of Standards and Technology was tasked with studying and explaining the collapse of WTC7 after FEMA, previously charged with the task, openly stated they could not produce any realistic hypothesis. Now, four years later, the NIST report on WTC7 is more than a year overdue and still NIST has only produced low-content, preliminary reports. The institute's current working hypothesis proposes that damage to the building caused by falling debris from the collapse of WTC1, possibly combined with thermal load from the resulting fires, somehow caused a failure in the eastern portion of the building. This localized failure, the hypothesis proposes, then progressed horizontally and vertically through the entire structure resulting in a rapid and global implosion of the entire building. In this paper I will use photographic evidence, including a new image of the south face previously unknown to NIST, compared with eye witness reports to show that NIST's damage estimates are likely drastically erroneous, and the institute's current hypothesis invalid.
Images of WTC7 before 9/11, on 9/11, and after the collapse can be viewed here.
NIST's collapse hypothesis and damage estimates for WTC7 are published in the following reports:
June 2004 Progress Report - Appendix L Interim Report on WTC7
Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster: Part IIC – WTC 7 Collapse - Final"
Damage estimates from the reports are as follows:
Interim Report on WTC7 (page L-18)
After WTC 1 collapsed::
• Heavy debris (exterior panels from WTC 1) was seen on Vesey Street and the WTC 7 promenade structure at the third floor level.
• Southwest corner damage extended over Floors 8 to 18.
• Damage was observed on the south face that starts at the roof level and severed the spandrels between exterior columns near the southwest corner for at least 5 to 10 floors. However, the extent and details of this damage have not yet been discerned, as smoke is present.
• Damage to the south face was described by a number of individuals. While the accounts are mostly consistent, there are some conflicting descriptions:
-- middle one-fourth to one-third width of the south face was gouged out from Floor 10 to the ground.
-- large debris hole near center of the south face around Floor 14.
-- debris damage across one-fourth width of the south face, starting several floors above the atrium (extended from the ground to 5th floor), noted that the atrium glass was still intact.
-- from inside the building at the 8th or 9th Floor elevator lobby, where two elevator cars were ejected from their shafts and landed in the hallway north of the elevator shaft, the visible portion of the south wall was gone with more light visible from the west side possibly indicating damage extending to the west.
Part IIC – WTC 7 Collapse - Final (page 15)
Debris Damage from WTC 1:
• Heavy debris on Vesey Street and WTC 7 Promenade.
• No heavy debris observed in lobby area, white dust coating.
• SW Corner Damage – floors 8 to 18.
• South face damage between two exterior columns - roof level down 5 to 10 floors, extent not known.
• South Face Damage:
-- middle 1/4 -1/3 width south face, 10th floor to ground.
-- large debris hole near center around 14th floor.
-- 1/4 width south face, above 5th floor, atrium glass intact.
-- 8th / 9th floor from inside, visible south wall gone with more damage to west, 2 elevator cars dislodged into elevator lobby.
NIST's collapse hypothesis hinges on the failure of one or more of columns 79, 80, and 81. The report cites the massive size and strength of the three columns as appearing to require "severe fires and/or damaged fireproofing to initiate thermally-related failures". Damage to the building from WTC1 debris is pointed to as the most likely contributing factor or direct cause of that failure, specifically damage to truss #2 (or adjacent components) which was located on the 6th floor. Simply put, a single truss or a single column is claimed to have been the Achilles heel of the structure, a heel that once broken, caused the entire entire 47 storey building to implode perfectly in on itself, with no resistance and at free fall rate.
The reports contain images in NIST's possession which show damage to the structure, specifically these two:
Fig. 2: Looking down at the west face of WTC7 from the north west, showing damage to the south west corner. (Click image for larger version.)
Fig. 3: Looking down at the roof of WTC7 from the north west, showing minor damage to the south parapet wall. (Click image for larger version.)An image not in the reports (Fig. 4) shows mild facade damage to the upper floors, as described in NIST's appraisal. Since the building collapsed from the bottom, this damage can be considered unimportant for determining possible trigger events for the collapse.
Yet none of these images show the center of the south face where NIST has estimated an enormous potion carved out of the building. As detailed in the interim report, their assessment is based on photographs, video footage, and eye witness testimony, and since NIST has to date not produced any photographs or video to support their damage estimate, nor do any appear to be available in the public realm, we can assume that the WTC7 south face damage estimates are based on eye witness testimony. The interim report specifically states a lack of photographs or video showing the damage to the south face of WTC7, and that the institute utilized eye witness reports as the basis for their estimation:
more here........ 9/11: Photographic Analysis of Damage to WTC7 and Critical Errors in NIST Estimations - StudyOf911.com Article
so.....one would assume that the failure of columns 79, 80 and 81 then the building would've fallen in that direction...... not straight down......if you have a failure on one side of a structure it would fall to that side...its physics
9-11: QUESTIONS FOR MICHAEL MOORE!
Tags: 911
COVER-UP/DECEPTIONS/PROPAGANDA
Question 3: Is Michael Moore aware that just
ten days after 9-11, the FBI stated (and CNN reported)
that the 9-11 perpetrators were using skillfully
made fake IDs with identities stolen from Arab men?
Question 4: Is Michael Moore aware that FBI Director Robert Mueller has admitted
in public that there is actually no evidence that proves
the named 9-11 hijackers were actually on the aircraft?
QUESTIONS FOR MICHAEL MOORE
Tags: 911
COVER-UP/DECEPTIONS/PROPAGANDA
Question 3: Is Michael Moore aware that just
ten days after 9-11, the FBI stated (and CNN reported)
that the 9-11 perpetrators were using skillfully
made fake IDs with identities stolen from Arab men?
Question 4: Is Michael Moore aware that FBI Director Robert Mueller has admitted
in public that there is actually no evidence that proves
the named 9-11 hijackers were actually on the aircraft?
QUESTIONS FOR MICHAEL MOORE
Former High-Ranking Intelligence Officer: Cheney Responsible for 9/11
Tags: 911
Pakistan briefed Cheney [about the plans for the terrorist attacks ahead of time] …nations also got wind of this and warned the CIA. We also had two walk-ins to the FBI, one in Orlando, one in Newark, that were dismissed by the FBI because the names were all virgins and not in the FBI data base–the arrogance of stupid bureaucracy.
Cheney saw an opportunity for what Bush called his trifecta, and gave it to him by giving the go-ahead to ISI and Al Qaeda, and ordering up a terrorism exercise that allowed him to send all relevant close-in air defense strip alert craft away from the target areas, and to disable the NORTHCOM normal response to flight path diversion.
TruthNews.us » Blog Archive » Former High-Ranking Intelligence Officer: Cheney Responsible for 9/11
Tags: 911
Pakistan briefed Cheney [about the plans for the terrorist attacks ahead of time] …nations also got wind of this and warned the CIA. We also had two walk-ins to the FBI, one in Orlando, one in Newark, that were dismissed by the FBI because the names were all virgins and not in the FBI data base–the arrogance of stupid bureaucracy.
Cheney saw an opportunity for what Bush called his trifecta, and gave it to him by giving the go-ahead to ISI and Al Qaeda, and ordering up a terrorism exercise that allowed him to send all relevant close-in air defense strip alert craft away from the target areas, and to disable the NORTHCOM normal response to flight path diversion.
TruthNews.us » Blog Archive » Former High-Ranking Intelligence Officer: Cheney Responsible for 9/11
you just keep on believing that,Cheney's not the sharpest tool in the shed so let me get this straight,your saying ol Dick pulled this all off on his lonesome?
Theres tons of facts that would prove you wrong but I know how foilers cant let facts get in the way of the truth.
Theres tons of facts that would prove you wrong but I know how foilers cant let facts get in the way of the truth.
Conspiracy: The fire could not have gotten hot enough to melt the steel.
Science: The Energetic Materials Research and Testing Center (EMRTC) designed explosives to test the effects of burning jet fuel on steel. EMRTC used a bare steel beam because the National Institute of Standards and Technology reports that much of the any fireproofing material would have been knocked off at the moment of impact. Within two minutes of igniting the fuel, the temperature peaked just above 2,000 Fahrenheit and complete structural failure occurred in less than four minutes.
Conspiracy: The collapse was caused by controlled demolition.
Science: The film crew recorded the demolition of a college dormitory building to learn all that is involved in the process of prepping and loading. The first step was to expose the columns in order to attach explosives to them. The World Trade Center had 47 inner core columns that would have needed to be prepared. To cut the steel beams the demolition team used a shape charge, which is piece of copper apportioned to a shape-charged weapon. When an explosive is attached and ignited, the device implodes and forms a stream of liquid copper that cuts through the steel. A demolition of this scale would leave clear evidence behind, but no such traces were found at Ground Zero.
Conspiracy: Thermite, which is less traceable, was used in the controlled demolition that brought down the towers.
Science: Some Truthers claim that pulverized dust found by some New Yorkers after the attack contained the checmical signature of thermite. Scientists assert that even if this dust did contain thermite, it would be impossible to determine whether the thermite came from a controlled demolition or simply from the melting of the airplanes. EMRTC designed an experiment to see if thermite was a plausible option in the collapse of the towers. The thermite in the test was not even able to melt a column much smaller than those in the World Trade Center.
9/11: Science and Conspiracy | National Geographic Channel
Now I think national geographic has a wee bit better understanding about the "science" behind 9/11
Science: The Energetic Materials Research and Testing Center (EMRTC) designed explosives to test the effects of burning jet fuel on steel. EMRTC used a bare steel beam because the National Institute of Standards and Technology reports that much of the any fireproofing material would have been knocked off at the moment of impact. Within two minutes of igniting the fuel, the temperature peaked just above 2,000 Fahrenheit and complete structural failure occurred in less than four minutes.
Conspiracy: The collapse was caused by controlled demolition.
Science: The film crew recorded the demolition of a college dormitory building to learn all that is involved in the process of prepping and loading. The first step was to expose the columns in order to attach explosives to them. The World Trade Center had 47 inner core columns that would have needed to be prepared. To cut the steel beams the demolition team used a shape charge, which is piece of copper apportioned to a shape-charged weapon. When an explosive is attached and ignited, the device implodes and forms a stream of liquid copper that cuts through the steel. A demolition of this scale would leave clear evidence behind, but no such traces were found at Ground Zero.
Conspiracy: Thermite, which is less traceable, was used in the controlled demolition that brought down the towers.
Science: Some Truthers claim that pulverized dust found by some New Yorkers after the attack contained the checmical signature of thermite. Scientists assert that even if this dust did contain thermite, it would be impossible to determine whether the thermite came from a controlled demolition or simply from the melting of the airplanes. EMRTC designed an experiment to see if thermite was a plausible option in the collapse of the towers. The thermite in the test was not even able to melt a column much smaller than those in the World Trade Center.
9/11: Science and Conspiracy | National Geographic Channel
Now I think national geographic has a wee bit better understanding about the "science" behind 9/11
For those interested in real science and reality.
Aluminum melts at 660.5 degrees Celsius. A fuel fed carbon fire can reach temperatures as high as 2000 degrees Celsius under the right circumstances. It's more likely that an open flame uncontrolled fire under the circumstances witnessed in the WTC, would have burned at closer to 700, to 800 C. That takes care of the molten metal dripping from the windows.
Now for the steel, even the highest quality structural steel is susceptible to heat degradation. This is completely commonsense to myself and anyone else that works with steel for a living, or has taken the time to read real science on the stuff and not been fed someone else' silly ideas.
We already know, and can easily prove from a multitude of sources, that a fuel fed carbon fire can reach temperatures in excess of 1500 C. And under certain circumstances, reach temps in the range of 2000 C.
The WTC's structural columns and joists, were A36 Structural steel. To weaken this material, a temperature of 500, to 600 C, needs to be reached. This process is called 'annealing'. Under controlled processes, it is what we do to soften steel, to making cold working easier, or to relieve stresses. Given the fact that the fires could have easily reached 1000 C in that confined, high fuel environment. It is NOT beyond any reason to expect the catastrophic failure of any steel structure within the fire.
These are all simple verifiable facts, so I'm sure most C/T's will either ignore it or just become insulting.
Read this, it is the simplest and most comprehensive book for the noob to structural steel and the affects of heat.
Hell, I even found an online copy for them to read...
Structural steel selection ... - Google Books
When you're done with that, try this one...
Structural steel design - Google Books
If any of you had an actual clue about the reality of steel, construction, explosives or anything practical for that matter, this wouldn't be an issue.
Now, do I really have to post all about Thermite, 'super' Thermite and 'nano' Thermite again?
I mean really? 'nano' Thermite is a micro welding compound, so unless you're planing on welding minute instriments, it's pretty much useless. 'super' thermite doesn't even exist. And Thermite is a welding compound, commonly used by rail companies to weld steel rails together for smoother rail service. Sure it can cut, horizontally and straight down.
This too is commonsense. All one needs to do is contact a company like CORRTECH and ask for the material specs. It really is that simple. Which is why so many C/T's have such difficulty getting it I guess.
Aluminum melts at 660.5 degrees Celsius. A fuel fed carbon fire can reach temperatures as high as 2000 degrees Celsius under the right circumstances. It's more likely that an open flame uncontrolled fire under the circumstances witnessed in the WTC, would have burned at closer to 700, to 800 C. That takes care of the molten metal dripping from the windows.
Now for the steel, even the highest quality structural steel is susceptible to heat degradation. This is completely commonsense to myself and anyone else that works with steel for a living, or has taken the time to read real science on the stuff and not been fed someone else' silly ideas.
We already know, and can easily prove from a multitude of sources, that a fuel fed carbon fire can reach temperatures in excess of 1500 C. And under certain circumstances, reach temps in the range of 2000 C.
The WTC's structural columns and joists, were A36 Structural steel. To weaken this material, a temperature of 500, to 600 C, needs to be reached. This process is called 'annealing'. Under controlled processes, it is what we do to soften steel, to making cold working easier, or to relieve stresses. Given the fact that the fires could have easily reached 1000 C in that confined, high fuel environment. It is NOT beyond any reason to expect the catastrophic failure of any steel structure within the fire.
These are all simple verifiable facts, so I'm sure most C/T's will either ignore it or just become insulting.
Read this, it is the simplest and most comprehensive book for the noob to structural steel and the affects of heat.
Hell, I even found an online copy for them to read...
Structural steel selection ... - Google Books
When you're done with that, try this one...
Structural steel design - Google Books
If any of you had an actual clue about the reality of steel, construction, explosives or anything practical for that matter, this wouldn't be an issue.
Now, do I really have to post all about Thermite, 'super' Thermite and 'nano' Thermite again?
I mean really? 'nano' Thermite is a micro welding compound, so unless you're planing on welding minute instriments, it's pretty much useless. 'super' thermite doesn't even exist. And Thermite is a welding compound, commonly used by rail companies to weld steel rails together for smoother rail service. Sure it can cut, horizontally and straight down.
This too is commonsense. All one needs to do is contact a company like CORRTECH and ask for the material specs. It really is that simple. Which is why so many C/T's have such difficulty getting it I guess.
Stretch, no-one said anything about the jetfuel melting anything. What has been said is that it causes a weakening of random areas of the steel. That difference in temperature between the areas is enough to warp the steel and therefore causing it to weaken. Also heating the steel is enough to weaken it alone.
BTW, jetfuel burns in open air at about 975º C, so the steal won't melt, but it will lose 60-80% of it's strength. At 600º C, steel will lose about half its strength. Look in the library of any firefighter and you can find all kinds of interesting FACTS.
BTW, the hottest open air fire tested reached slightly under 1300º C (about 2400º F).
Last edited:
Actually Anna, open air burn temps of jet fuel is 275º C. It's neither here nor there, your point is correct. Just wanted to keep things real...;-)
As for Stretches assertion that we need oxy/acetylene to work steel, BS. As early as 202BC, the Han dynasty was forging alloy metals with simple carbon fires.
Another simple fact of reality lost on the C/T's.
ooops S'what happens when my fingers get in a hurry.
- Wikihttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steel#cite_note-needham_volume_4_part_3_563g-20http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steel#cite_note-gernet_69-21
