Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

when comparing....

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU
 
wildbilln864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-30-06 10:28 PM
Original message
when comparing....
the number of buildings in history that have collapsed from fires and the number that have collapsed from deliberate demolition, which is the most likely in the case of WTC building #7?
:hi:

PCS!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
piobair Donating Member (416 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-31-06 02:44 PM
Response to Original message
1. Why do you ignore
The effects of a fully fueled passenger jet crashing into the structure? Based on your thought process the answer to the question, "how many steel framed buildings that have been struck by BA 757's at cruise speed have collapsed from the ensuing damage and fire"? The answer is of course....all of them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Contrite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-31-06 05:48 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Passenger jet didn't crash into WTC7
That is what the OP asks about
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hack89 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-31-06 06:20 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. But there are eyewitness accounts ..
of severe structural damage to WTC7 facing the WTC1 and 2.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Contrite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-31-06 06:59 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Extent of damage detailed here
http://www.wtc7.net/articles/FEMA/WTC_ch5.htm

At 10:29 a.m., WTC 1 (the north tower) collapsed, sending its debris into the streets below. The extent and severity of the resulting damage to WTC 7 are currently unknown. However, from photographic evidence and eyewitness accounts discussed below, it was assumed that the south side of the building was damaged to some degree and that fires in WTC 7 started at approximately this time.

It does not appear that the collapse of WTC 1 affected the roof, or the east, west, and north elevations of WTC 7 in any significant way. However, there was damage to the southwest corner of WTC 7 at approximately floors 8 to 20, 24, 25, and 39 to 46, as shown in Figure 5-16, a photograph taken from West Street....debris from WTC One had to fall across WTC 6 (and across Vesey Street, altogether a considerable distance) before it could impact WTC 7.

According to the account of a firefighter who walked the 9th floor along the south side following the collapse of WTC 1, the only damage to the 9th floor facade occurred at the southwest corner. According to firefighters' eyewitness accounts from outside of the building, approximately floors 8-18 were damaged to some degree. Other eyewitness accounts relate that there was additional damage to the south elevation.

A review of photos and videos indicates that there were limited fires on the north, east, and west faces of the building. One eyewitness who saw the building from a 30th floor apartment approximately 4 blocks away to the northwest noted that fires in the building were not visible from that perspective. As the day progressed, fires were observed on the east face of the 11th, 12th, and 28th floors (see Figure 5-19). The Securities and Exchange Commission occupied floors 11 through 13. Prior to collapse, fire was seen to have broken out windows on at least the north and east faces of WTC 7 on some of the lower levels.

On the north face, photographs and videos show that the fires were located on approximately the 7th, 8th, 11th, 12th, and 13th floors. American Express Bank International occupied the 7th and 8th floors. The 7th floor also held the OEM generators and day tank. Photographs of the west face show fire and smoke on the 29th and 30th floors.

It is important to note that floors 5 through 7 contained structural elements that were important to supporting the structure of the overall building. The 5th and 7th floors were diaphragm floors that contained transfer girders and trusses. These floors transferred loads from the upper floors to the structural members and foundation system that was built prior to the WTC 7 office tower. Fire damage in the 5th to 7th floors of the building could, maybe, possibly, perhaps, therefore, have damaged essential structural elements.

With the limited information currently available, fire development in this building needs additional study.

Available information indicates that fires spread horizontally and vertically throughout the building during the course of the day. The mode of spread was most likely either along the south facade that was damaged, or internally through shafts or the gap between the floor slab and the exterior wall. It is currently unclear what fuel may have been present to permit the fires to burn on these lower floors for approximately 7 hours.

Review of video footage indicates that the collapse began at the lower floors on the east side. Studies of WTC 7 indicate that the collapse began in the lower stories, either through failure of major load transfer members located above an electrical substation structure or in columns in the stories above the transfer structure. Loss of strength due to the transfer trusses could explain why the building imploded, with collapse initiating at an interior location. The collapse may have then spread to the west, causing interior members to continue collapsing. The building at this point may have had extensive interior structural failures that then led to the collapse of the overall building, including the cantilever transfer girders along the north elevation, the strong diaphragms at the 5th and 7th floors, and the seat connections between the interior beams and columns at the building perimeter.

Questions that remain involve what the exact extent of damage to the south side, what fueled the fires, why the fires were allowed to spread and their impact on the structure and the exact mechanisms for progressive collapse (i.e., which structural members needed to be damaged and how the compromise of these members by fire brought about the total collapse of the building).



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-31-06 07:04 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. The FEMA report is obselete
Try checking out the NIST Preliminary report on 7 for a more detailed picture of the damage to 7, although even now there are more pictures and videos available to the public than when it was released last year.

NIST has released a progress report on their 7 WTC report. It's at their website: http://wtc.nist.gov
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Contrite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-31-06 07:14 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. Based on the progress report
Edited on Sun Dec-31-06 07:26 PM by Contrite
It appears they have been addressing the recommendations for areas needing further study in the wtc7net report and we will not really have definitive conclusions until they release their full report this spring. I saw no additional photos in the report; can you point me to those?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-31-06 07:57 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Here are some I've become aware of since the interim report
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Contrite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-31-06 08:18 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. Thanks
These photos seem to corroborate what wtc7net says about 8-18 floors on the SW side being damaged.

What still needs explaining is this:

Available information indicates that fires spread horizontally and vertically throughout the building during the course of the day. The mode of spread was most likely either along the south facade that was damaged, or internally through shafts or the gap between the floor slab and the exterior wall. It is currently unclear what fuel may have been present to permit the fires to burn on these lower floors for approximately 7 hours.

Review of video footage indicates that the collapse began at the lower floors on the east side.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Contrite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-31-06 10:40 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. More . . .
Edited on Sun Dec-31-06 11:10 PM by Contrite
"The final report from NIST regarding the collapse of 7 WTC was due in July 2005, but is still ongoing.<7> NIST released a progress report in June of 2004 outlining its working hypothesis. On this hypothesis a local failure in a critical column, caused by damage from either fire or falling debris from the collapses of the two towers, progressed first vertically and then horizontally to result in "a disproportionate collapse of the entire structure".<8><9> In a New York Magazine interview in March 2006, Dr S. Shyam Sunder, NIST's lead WTC disaster investigator, said of 7 World Trade Center, "We are studying the horizontal movement east to west, internal to the structure, on the fifth to seventh floors.” and then added "But truthfully, I don’t really know. We’ve had trouble getting a handle on Building No. 7".<10>

Despite FEMA's preliminary finding that fire caused the collapse, conspiracy theorists believe the collapse was the result of a controlled demolition, usually as part of a larger belief in 9/11 conspiracy theories. When asked about controlled demolition theories, Dr. Sunder said, "We consulted 80 public-sector experts and 125 private-sector experts. It is a Who’s Who of experts. People look for other solutions. As scientists, we can’t worry about that. Facts are facts."<11> In answer to the question of whether "a controlled demolition hypothesis is being considered to explain the collapse", NIST says that "hile NIST has found no evidence of a blast or controlled demolition event, it would like to determine the magnitude of hypothetical blast scenarios that could have led to the structural failure of one or more critical elements."<7>"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center

A video shows squibs going up the SW side?

http://www.plaguepuppy.net/public_html/collapse%20update/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-31-06 10:57 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. Those are not squibs.
This is a squib:

A squib is a small explosive device which has a wide range of uses, such as generating mechanical forces as well as in pyrotechnic use. A squib can range in size from 2 to 15 millimetres in diameter. The squib, being an explosive device, releases a lot of energy, and can be used for shattering, triggering, propelling and cutting a wide range of materials.


You have no evidence of a small explosive device. We can only see something being expelled from the side of the building; a squib is only a possibility.

There is clearly damage to that part of the building before the building falls. The expelled clouds happen in mid-collapse, when all sorts of floors are falling apart inside the building. Air pressures could have easily pushed dust and lighter materials out of that corner. It is the more probable cause of the phenomenon being incorrectly labeled "squib".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Contrite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-31-06 11:09 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. True, no proof.
Edited on Sun Dec-31-06 11:10 PM by Contrite
But it could be evidence of squibs as well as dust clouds.

I edited it to include a question mark.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
quickesst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-01-07 12:59 AM
Response to Reply #11
13. "Those are not squibs."
"a squib is only a possibility". Just a small observation. Thanks.
quickesst
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-01-07 01:06 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. Contrite understood me.
A squib is an explosive device. There are no explosive devices in that camera frame.

Just a small observation. Goodbye.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
quickesst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-01-07 09:04 AM
Response to Reply #14
15. OK....
Edited on Mon Jan-01-07 09:16 AM by quickesst
"
You have no evidence of a small explosive device. We can only see something being expelled from the side of the building; a squib is only a possibility."

Whatever you wish to believe you said. Somehow I believe you really
believe it. Goodby? You goin' somewhere? Thanks.
quickesst

It's not understanding your intention, it's just about time this side of the coin had some fun skewing a few threads by nitpicking the shit out of every little detail. Go ahead, pick a thread. They're almost all full of it. Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mirandapriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-31-06 07:58 PM
Response to Original message
8. Side by side comparison
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBBfN0ELKJY
of wtc7 and a controlled demolition - identical. I would like to be balanced and find a comparison of a building collapsed by fire with wtc7, but it's too hard too hard to find pictures/videos with significant fires in the wtc7! Hmmm, so what might a reasonable person conclude? hmmm.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 18th 2024, 11:39 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC