Major University Study Finds "Fire Did Not Bring Down Tower 7 On 9/11"

[Crepitus]

The mainstream media will not cover this.

On September 11, 2001, at 5:20 p.m., World Trade Center Building 7 suddenly collapsed into its own footprint, falling at free fall speed for 2.5 seconds of its seven-second complete destruction. WTC 7 was not hit by a plane. After it collapsed, Americans were told that office fires caused a unique — never before seen — complete architectural failure leading to the building collapsing into its own footprint at the rate of gravity.

Major University Study Finds "Fire Did Not Bring Down Tower 7 On 9/11"

 

[the other mike]

"Most Americans" ?

Maybe most millennials, but the rest of us knew another building came down.

No they didn't....and many still don't.

 

[the other mike]

USMB may as well be owned by CNN....the fake news forum.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Ok, let’s have another investigation. It’s possible it didn’t come down in the exact manner as the official report, but will all of you with a heartbeat and a functioning brain stop with the pre-planted explosives theory. It’s 10 times more unlikely than the fire theory.

Let’s consider pre-placed explosives-

First you would need the complete blueprints of the building. Then you would need experts to analyze where the explosives would be placed, how much explosives to use, the timing and detonation sequence would have to precise. You would need nearly unfettered access to the building to place all the explosives and detonators. All this would need to be done in a building which is always occupied without anybody wondering why people are drilling holes in the concrete. Then you would have to coordinate the hijacked planes striking the building to the detonation of the explosives. The access to the building, the number of experts in planning, acquiring, and placing all the necessary explosives makes the theory untenable.

Read this article. No intelligent person can honestly say pre-placed explosives is more likely than fire.
New Twin Tower Collapse Model Could Squash 9/11 Conspiracies
Then molten aluminum becomes [as liquid as] water and has so much heat that it will flow through cracks in the floor and down to the next floor," Simensen explained in an email. There was an automatic sprinkler system installed in each ceiling, and it was filled with water. "When huge amount of molten aluminum gets in contact with water, a fierce exothermic reaction will take place, enormous amount of hydrogen is formed and the temperature is locally raised to 1,200 to 1,500 C," or 2,200 to 2,700 F.

Chaos rapidly ensues: "A series of explosions will take place and a whole floor will be blown to pieces," he wrote. "Then the top part of the building will fall on the bottom part, and the tower will collapse within seconds." This is what Simensen believes happened in the two World Trade Center towers.

 

[the other mike]

Ok, let’s have another investigation. It’s possible it didn’t come down in the exact manner as the official report, but will all of you with a heartbeat and a functioning brain stop with the pre-planted explosives theory. It’s 10 times more unlikely than the fire theory.
.

Bullshit.
Why did they haul all the steel off and prevent a criminal investigation from the beginning ?

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Ok, let’s have another investigation. It’s possible it didn’t come down in the exact manner as the official report, but will all of you with a heartbeat and a functioning brain stop with the pre-planted explosives theory. It’s 10 times more unlikely than the fire theory.
.

Bullshit.
Why did they haul all the steel off and prevent a criminal investigation from the beginning ?

I don’t know, maybe because they were toxic and in the middle of a highly populated city, but that has nothing to do with supporting your theory anyway.

You didn’t read the article. I know because you posted so quickly you wouldn’t have had time. You want to believe it was a conspiracy and won’t consider an alternative.

Tell me Ang, what do you do for a living, what is your level of education. How much science and engineering have you studied? I am just trying to find out how capable you are of being objective about this.

 

[the other mike]

Ok, let’s have another investigation. It’s possible it didn’t come down in the exact manner as the official report, but will all of you with a heartbeat and a functioning brain stop with the pre-planted explosives theory. It’s 10 times more unlikely than the fire theory.
.

Bullshit.
Why did they haul all the steel off and prevent a criminal investigation from the beginning ?

I don’t know, maybe because they were toxic and in the middle of a highly populated city, but that has nothing to do with supporting your theory anyway.

You didn’t read the article. I know because you posted so quickly you wouldn’t have had time. You want to believe it was a conspiracy and won’t consider an alternative.

Tell me Ang, what do you do for a living, what is your level of education. How much science and engineering have you studied? I am just trying to find out how capable you are of being objective about this.

If you'd read the OP , you'd know where I stand .

 

[LA RAM FAN]

The mainstream media will not cover this.

On September 11, 2001, at 5:20 p.m., World Trade Center Building 7 suddenly collapsed into its own footprint, falling at free fall speed for 2.5 seconds of its seven-second complete destruction. WTC 7 was not hit by a plane. After it collapsed, Americans were told that office fires caused a unique — never before seen — complete architectural failure leading to the building collapsing into its own footprint at the rate of gravity.

Major University Study Finds "Fire Did Not Bring Down Tower 7 On 9/11"

I agree... tower 7 appeared to be professionally brought down

Care4all Bld 7 is the crux of the 9/11 coverup commission the paid shills that have penetrated this forum such as rightwinger,ect,ect cant get around since it was not hit by a plane. They will post the craziest garbage in defeat that a huge part of the building was hit and the combination of the fires brought it down but they ALWAYS ignore that there were OTHER buildings in the area that were MUCH CLOSER to the towers and had FAR MORE SEVERE DAMAGE to them and FAR MORE SEVERE FIRES than bld 7 did yet they all remained standing.

I dont have time to find and post those pics of those building that had far more server fires and far more severe structural damage than bld 7 that remained standing so i will post them tomorrow.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Over the last several decades there has been many multi-story buildings around the world that caught on fire and not a single one has ever collapsed like Building #7 ....

meanwhile asshole hypocrite you are aides the terrorists by kissing the ass of zionist Robert Kraft who is pals with Trump who is covering up 9/11 same as Obama did. this troll is the biggest fake truther Angelo. Be careful of him,he is clever just liek alex jones in fooling you that he cares about this tragedy. you cant have it both ways,love Robert Kraft as he does and be against zionism at the same time,cant have it both ways. thats a fucking hypocrite shill.

he will do as all shill do when i expose them and they cant counter my evidence laugh it off knowing he has been exposed.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

• Truth police .
• 
  
• Coyote
  Varmint
• AyeCantSeeYou
  Senior Mod
• Dont Taz Me Bro
  USMB Mod

how could you possibly have left out sr mod flaccan?

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Ok, let’s have another investigation. It’s possible it didn’t come down in the exact manner as the official report, but will all of you with a heartbeat and a functioning brain stop with the pre-planted explosives theory. It’s 10 times more unlikely than the fire theory.
.

Bullshit.
Why did they haul all the steel off and prevent a criminal investigation from the beginning ?

I don’t know, maybe because they were toxic and in the middle of a highly populated city, but that has nothing to do with supporting your theory anyway.

You didn’t read the article. I know because you posted so quickly you wouldn’t have had time. You want to believe it was a conspiracy and won’t consider an alternative.

Tell me Ang, what do you do for a living, what is your level of education. How much science and engineering have you studied? I am just trying to find out how capable you are of being objective about this.

If you'd read the OP , you'd know where I stand .

He wont read the OP or watch the video since he only sees what he WANTS to see same as all Bush dupes.

 

[Sunni Man]

meanwhile asshole hypocrite you are aides the terrorists by kissing the ass of zionist Robert Kraft who is pals with Trump

The amazing NE Patriots are once again Super Bowl bound!! ...

 

[the other mike]

Care4all Bld 7 is the crux of the 9/11 coverup commission the paid shills that have penetrated this forum such as rightwinger,ect,ect cant get around since it was not hit by a plane. They will post the craziest garbage in defeat that a huge part of the building was hit and the combination of the fires brought it down but they ALWAYS ignore that there were OTHER buildings in the area that were MUCH CLOSER to the towers and had FAR MORE SEVERE DAMAGE to them and FAR MORE SEVERE FIRES than bld 7 did yet they all remained standing.

I dont have time to find and post those pics of those building that had far more server fires and far more severe structural damage than bld 7 that remained standing so i will post them tomorrow.

If 9/11 had happened 10 years earlier, like 1991, they would have had a much easier time covering up everything, but by 2001 we had the Internet and phone cameras everywhere...the truth is coming even though politicians and the MSM will fight tooth and nail to suppress it.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

meanwhile asshole hypocrite you are aides the terrorists by kissing the ass of zionist Robert Kraft who is pals with Trump

The amazing NE Patriots are once again Super Bowl bound!! ...

as always,same as all paid shills,evade the evidence that you are a paid troll for the zionists.

you LOVE a criminal who gets off scott free in a sex scandal operation who has powerful connections so he wont go to jail like regular americans do,you are a fucking sick zionist troll same as your hero Robert Kraft.

"waits for laugher or new post that eaved these facts."

 

[Leo123]

Here are some excerpts from an, IMO, pretty good article that states the WTC collapse was NOT caused by fire alone. Nor was it caused by explosives. The cause is more complicated.

The WTC buildings were unique

"The towers were designed and built in the mid-1960s through the early 1970s. They represented a new approach to skyscrapers in that they were to be very lightweight and involved modular construction methods in order to accelerate the schedule and to reduce the costs."

The plane impact

"The early news reports noted how well the towers withstood the initial impact of the aircraft; however, when one recognizes that the buildings had more than 1,000 times the mass of the aircraft and had been designed to resist steady wind loads of 30 times the weight of the aircraft, this ability to withstand the initial impact is hardly surprising. Furthermore, since there was no significant wind on September 11, the outer perimeter columns were only stressed before the impact to around 1/3 of their 200 MPa design allowable."

"The only individual metal component of the aircraft that is comparable in strength to the box perimeter columns of the WTC is the keel beam at the bottom of the aircraft fuselage. While the aircraft impact undoubtedly destroyed several columns in the WTC perimeter wall, the number of columns lost on the initial impact was not large and the loads were shifted to remaining columns in this highly redundant structure. Of equal or even greater significance during this initial impact was the explosion when 90,000 L gallons of jet fuel, comprising nearly 1/3 of the aircraft’s weight, ignited. The ensuing fire was clearly the principal cause of the collapse"


The fire

"The temperature of the fire was not uniform everywhere, and the temperature on the outside of the box columns was clearly lower than on the side facing the fire. The temperature along the 18 m long joists was certainly not uniform. Given the thermal expansion of steel, a 150°C temperature difference from one location to another will produce yield-level residual stresses. This produced distortions in the slender structural steel, which resulted in buckling failures. Thus, the failure of the steel was due to two factors: loss of strength due to the temperature of the fire, and loss of structural integrity due to distortion of the steel from the non-uniform temperatures in the fire."

The collapse

"Nearly every large building has a redundant design that allows for loss of one primary structural member, such as a column. However, when multiple members fail, the shifting loads eventually overstress the adjacent members and the collapse occurs like a row of dominoes falling down. "

"The perimeter tube design of the WTC was highly redundant. It survived the loss of several exterior columns due to aircraft impact, but the ensuing fire led to other steel failures. Many structural engineers believe that the weak points—the limiting factors on design allowables—were the angle clips that held the floor joists between the columns on the perimeter wall and the core structure (see Figure 5). With a 700 Pa floor design allowable, each floor should have been able to support approximately 1,300 t beyond its own weight. The total weight of each tower was about 500,000 t."

"The World Trade Center was not defectively designed. No designer of the WTC anticipated, nor should have anticipated, a 90,000 L Molotov cocktail on one of the building floors. Skyscrapers are designed to support themselves for three hours in a fire even if the sprinkler system fails to operate. This time should be long enough to evacuate the occupants. The WTC towers lasted for one to two hours—less than the design life, but only because the fire fuel load was so large. No normal office fires would fill 4,000 square meters of floor space in the seconds in which the WTC fire developed. Usually, the fire would take up to an hour to spread so uniformly across the width and breadth of the building. This was a very large and rapidly progressing fire (very high heat but not unusually high temperature)."

Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? Science, Engineering, and Speculation

 

[the other mike]

Here are some excerpts from an, IMO, pretty good article that states the WTC collapse was NOT caused by fire alone. Nor was it caused by explosives. The cause is more complicated.

The WTC buildings were unique

"The towers were designed and built in the mid-1960s through the early 1970s. They represented a new approach to skyscrapers in that they were to be very lightweight and involved modular construction methods in order to accelerate the schedule and to reduce the costs."

The plane impact

"The early news reports noted how well the towers withstood the initial impact of the aircraft; however, when one recognizes that the buildings had more than 1,000 times the mass of the aircraft and had been designed to resist steady wind loads of 30 times the weight of the aircraft, this ability to withstand the initial impact is hardly surprising. Furthermore, since there was no significant wind on September 11, the outer perimeter columns were only stressed before the impact to around 1/3 of their 200 MPa design allowable."

"The only individual metal component of the aircraft that is comparable in strength to the box perimeter columns of the WTC is the keel beam at the bottom of the aircraft fuselage. While the aircraft impact undoubtedly destroyed several columns in the WTC perimeter wall, the number of columns lost on the initial impact was not large and the loads were shifted to remaining columns in this highly redundant structure. Of equal or even greater significance during this initial impact was the explosion when 90,000 L gallons of jet fuel, comprising nearly 1/3 of the aircraft’s weight, ignited. The ensuing fire was clearly the principal cause of the collapse"


The fire

"The temperature of the fire was not uniform everywhere, and the temperature on the outside of the box columns was clearly lower than on the side facing the fire. The temperature along the 18 m long joists was certainly not uniform. Given the thermal expansion of steel, a 150°C temperature difference from one location to another will produce yield-level residual stresses. This produced distortions in the slender structural steel, which resulted in buckling failures. Thus, the failure of the steel was due to two factors: loss of strength due to the temperature of the fire, and loss of structural integrity due to distortion of the steel from the non-uniform temperatures in the fire."

The collapse

"Nearly every large building has a redundant design that allows for loss of one primary structural member, such as a column. However, when multiple members fail, the shifting loads eventually overstress the adjacent members and the collapse occurs like a row of dominoes falling down. "

"The perimeter tube design of the WTC was highly redundant. It survived the loss of several exterior columns due to aircraft impact, but the ensuing fire led to other steel failures. Many structural engineers believe that the weak points—the limiting factors on design allowables—were the angle clips that held the floor joists between the columns on the perimeter wall and the core structure (see Figure 5). With a 700 Pa floor design allowable, each floor should have been able to support approximately 1,300 t beyond its own weight. The total weight of each tower was about 500,000 t."

"The World Trade Center was not defectively designed. No designer of the WTC anticipated, nor should have anticipated, a 90,000 L Molotov cocktail on one of the building floors. Skyscrapers are designed to support themselves for three hours in a fire even if the sprinkler system fails to operate. This time should be long enough to evacuate the occupants. The WTC towers lasted for one to two hours—less than the design life, but only because the fire fuel load was so large. No normal office fires would fill 4,000 square meters of floor space in the seconds in which the WTC fire developed. Usually, the fire would take up to an hour to spread so uniformly across the width and breadth of the building. This was a very large and rapidly progressing fire (very high heat but not unusually high temperature)."

Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? Science, Engineering, and Speculation

Your source is a fossil fuel shill, so taken with a grain af salt as a credible source for your argument. And they're wrong about the design flaw being partly the cause of total near-freefall collapse..

In fact the most important design flaw was the use of asbestos.
Port loses claim for asbestos removal - Business Insurance

 

[Leo123]

Here are some excerpts from an, IMO, pretty good article that states the WTC collapse was NOT caused by fire alone. Nor was it caused by explosives. The cause is more complicated.

The WTC buildings were unique

"The towers were designed and built in the mid-1960s through the early 1970s. They represented a new approach to skyscrapers in that they were to be very lightweight and involved modular construction methods in order to accelerate the schedule and to reduce the costs."

The plane impact

"The early news reports noted how well the towers withstood the initial impact of the aircraft; however, when one recognizes that the buildings had more than 1,000 times the mass of the aircraft and had been designed to resist steady wind loads of 30 times the weight of the aircraft, this ability to withstand the initial impact is hardly surprising. Furthermore, since there was no significant wind on September 11, the outer perimeter columns were only stressed before the impact to around 1/3 of their 200 MPa design allowable."

"The only individual metal component of the aircraft that is comparable in strength to the box perimeter columns of the WTC is the keel beam at the bottom of the aircraft fuselage. While the aircraft impact undoubtedly destroyed several columns in the WTC perimeter wall, the number of columns lost on the initial impact was not large and the loads were shifted to remaining columns in this highly redundant structure. Of equal or even greater significance during this initial impact was the explosion when 90,000 L gallons of jet fuel, comprising nearly 1/3 of the aircraft’s weight, ignited. The ensuing fire was clearly the principal cause of the collapse"


The fire

"The temperature of the fire was not uniform everywhere, and the temperature on the outside of the box columns was clearly lower than on the side facing the fire. The temperature along the 18 m long joists was certainly not uniform. Given the thermal expansion of steel, a 150°C temperature difference from one location to another will produce yield-level residual stresses. This produced distortions in the slender structural steel, which resulted in buckling failures. Thus, the failure of the steel was due to two factors: loss of strength due to the temperature of the fire, and loss of structural integrity due to distortion of the steel from the non-uniform temperatures in the fire."

The collapse

"Nearly every large building has a redundant design that allows for loss of one primary structural member, such as a column. However, when multiple members fail, the shifting loads eventually overstress the adjacent members and the collapse occurs like a row of dominoes falling down. "

"The perimeter tube design of the WTC was highly redundant. It survived the loss of several exterior columns due to aircraft impact, but the ensuing fire led to other steel failures. Many structural engineers believe that the weak points—the limiting factors on design allowables—were the angle clips that held the floor joists between the columns on the perimeter wall and the core structure (see Figure 5). With a 700 Pa floor design allowable, each floor should have been able to support approximately 1,300 t beyond its own weight. The total weight of each tower was about 500,000 t."

"The World Trade Center was not defectively designed. No designer of the WTC anticipated, nor should have anticipated, a 90,000 L Molotov cocktail on one of the building floors. Skyscrapers are designed to support themselves for three hours in a fire even if the sprinkler system fails to operate. This time should be long enough to evacuate the occupants. The WTC towers lasted for one to two hours—less than the design life, but only because the fire fuel load was so large. No normal office fires would fill 4,000 square meters of floor space in the seconds in which the WTC fire developed. Usually, the fire would take up to an hour to spread so uniformly across the width and breadth of the building. This was a very large and rapidly progressing fire (very high heat but not unusually high temperature)."

Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? Science, Engineering, and Speculation

Your source is a fossil fuel shill, so taken with a grain af salt as a credible source for your argument. And they're wrong about the design flaw being partly the cause of total near-freefall collapse..

In fact the most important design flaw was the use of asbestos.
Port loses claim for asbestos removal - Business Insurance

I never mentioned a design flaw, in fact, if you actually READ the link I posted is says the buildings were NOT subject to any design flaw. Apparently you didn't even READ the article. They were adequately designed. BTW 'fossil fuel' was partially to blame for the collapse who would no better and a fossil fuel expert? WTC conspiracy nuts are such stupid fucks.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Aren’t these the same folks who faked an assassination attempt on JFK who is living on an island with Elvis, Stevie Ray Vaughan and Amelia Earhart where they staged the moon landing?

You forgot about Tupac

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Here are some excerpts from an, IMO, pretty good article that states the WTC collapse was NOT caused by fire alone. Nor was it caused by explosives. The cause is more complicated.

The WTC buildings were unique

"The towers were designed and built in the mid-1960s through the early 1970s. They represented a new approach to skyscrapers in that they were to be very lightweight and involved modular construction methods in order to accelerate the schedule and to reduce the costs."

The plane impact

"The early news reports noted how well the towers withstood the initial impact of the aircraft; however, when one recognizes that the buildings had more than 1,000 times the mass of the aircraft and had been designed to resist steady wind loads of 30 times the weight of the aircraft, this ability to withstand the initial impact is hardly surprising. Furthermore, since there was no significant wind on September 11, the outer perimeter columns were only stressed before the impact to around 1/3 of their 200 MPa design allowable."

"The only individual metal component of the aircraft that is comparable in strength to the box perimeter columns of the WTC is the keel beam at the bottom of the aircraft fuselage. While the aircraft impact undoubtedly destroyed several columns in the WTC perimeter wall, the number of columns lost on the initial impact was not large and the loads were shifted to remaining columns in this highly redundant structure. Of equal or even greater significance during this initial impact was the explosion when 90,000 L gallons of jet fuel, comprising nearly 1/3 of the aircraft’s weight, ignited. The ensuing fire was clearly the principal cause of the collapse"


The fire

"The temperature of the fire was not uniform everywhere, and the temperature on the outside of the box columns was clearly lower than on the side facing the fire. The temperature along the 18 m long joists was certainly not uniform. Given the thermal expansion of steel, a 150°C temperature difference from one location to another will produce yield-level residual stresses. This produced distortions in the slender structural steel, which resulted in buckling failures. Thus, the failure of the steel was due to two factors: loss of strength due to the temperature of the fire, and loss of structural integrity due to distortion of the steel from the non-uniform temperatures in the fire."

The collapse

"Nearly every large building has a redundant design that allows for loss of one primary structural member, such as a column. However, when multiple members fail, the shifting loads eventually overstress the adjacent members and the collapse occurs like a row of dominoes falling down. "

"The perimeter tube design of the WTC was highly redundant. It survived the loss of several exterior columns due to aircraft impact, but the ensuing fire led to other steel failures. Many structural engineers believe that the weak points—the limiting factors on design allowables—were the angle clips that held the floor joists between the columns on the perimeter wall and the core structure (see Figure 5). With a 700 Pa floor design allowable, each floor should have been able to support approximately 1,300 t beyond its own weight. The total weight of each tower was about 500,000 t."

"The World Trade Center was not defectively designed. No designer of the WTC anticipated, nor should have anticipated, a 90,000 L Molotov cocktail on one of the building floors. Skyscrapers are designed to support themselves for three hours in a fire even if the sprinkler system fails to operate. This time should be long enough to evacuate the occupants. The WTC towers lasted for one to two hours—less than the design life, but only because the fire fuel load was so large. No normal office fires would fill 4,000 square meters of floor space in the seconds in which the WTC fire developed. Usually, the fire would take up to an hour to spread so uniformly across the width and breadth of the building. This was a very large and rapidly progressing fire (very high heat but not unusually high temperature)."

Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? Science, Engineering, and Speculation

Your source is a fossil fuel shill, so taken with a grain af salt as a credible source for your argument. And they're wrong about the design flaw being partly the cause of total near-freefall collapse..

In fact the most important design flaw was the use of asbestos.
Port loses claim for asbestos removal - Business Insurance

I never mentioned a design flaw, in fact, if you actually READ the link I posted is says the buildings were NOT subject to any design flaw. Apparently you didn't even READ the article. They were adequately designed. BTW 'fossil fuel' was partially to blame for the collapse who would no better and a fossil fuel expert? WTC conspiracy nuts are such stupid fucks.

stupid fuck conspiracy nuts are people like you who ignore the laws of physics that were violated that day as well as ignoring the witness testimonys of the witnesses many being credible firefighters experienced in the sound of explosives,and brushing off their testimonys that they heard explosives in the basements before the plane hit as them lying, stupid fuck conspiracy nuts are people like you who ignore there are thousands of architects and engineers as well as demolition experts said the towers were brought down by explosives.



stupid fuck conspiracy nuts are people like you who ignore the people who initially gave reports that did not go along with the governments version of events of hearing explosions, ended up dying in mysterious deaths.

oh and you REALLY lost your credibility there with that debunked that old tiresome debunked bullshit propaganda bullshit many independent investigaters debunked that the ensuing fires was the principal cause of the collapse.

Oh and that propaganda article does not even mentioned Bld 7 I see which is the crux of the 9/11 coverup commissions that i addressed in my first post and proved explosives brought it down


Oh and you are REALLY getting desperate trying in your failed desperate attempt to try and debunk his thread by using Thomas Eager as your source,he has been exposed as a paid shill on the government payroll same as you are. Eager must have heard about this thread and sent you here. total miserable fail shill.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Here are some excerpts from an, IMO, pretty good article that states the WTC collapse was NOT caused by fire alone. Nor was it caused by explosives. The cause is more complicated.

The WTC buildings were unique

"The towers were designed and built in the mid-1960s through the early 1970s. They represented a new approach to skyscrapers in that they were to be very lightweight and involved modular construction methods in order to accelerate the schedule and to reduce the costs."

The plane impact

"The early news reports noted how well the towers withstood the initial impact of the aircraft; however, when one recognizes that the buildings had more than 1,000 times the mass of the aircraft and had been designed to resist steady wind loads of 30 times the weight of the aircraft, this ability to withstand the initial impact is hardly surprising. Furthermore, since there was no significant wind on September 11, the outer perimeter columns were only stressed before the impact to around 1/3 of their 200 MPa design allowable."

"The only individual metal component of the aircraft that is comparable in strength to the box perimeter columns of the WTC is the keel beam at the bottom of the aircraft fuselage. While the aircraft impact undoubtedly destroyed several columns in the WTC perimeter wall, the number of columns lost on the initial impact was not large and the loads were shifted to remaining columns in this highly redundant structure. Of equal or even greater significance during this initial impact was the explosion when 90,000 L gallons of jet fuel, comprising nearly 1/3 of the aircraft’s weight, ignited. The ensuing fire was clearly the principal cause of the collapse"


The fire

"The temperature of the fire was not uniform everywhere, and the temperature on the outside of the box columns was clearly lower than on the side facing the fire. The temperature along the 18 m long joists was certainly not uniform. Given the thermal expansion of steel, a 150°C temperature difference from one location to another will produce yield-level residual stresses. This produced distortions in the slender structural steel, which resulted in buckling failures. Thus, the failure of the steel was due to two factors: loss of strength due to the temperature of the fire, and loss of structural integrity due to distortion of the steel from the non-uniform temperatures in the fire."

The collapse

"Nearly every large building has a redundant design that allows for loss of one primary structural member, such as a column. However, when multiple members fail, the shifting loads eventually overstress the adjacent members and the collapse occurs like a row of dominoes falling down. "

"The perimeter tube design of the WTC was highly redundant. It survived the loss of several exterior columns due to aircraft impact, but the ensuing fire led to other steel failures. Many structural engineers believe that the weak points—the limiting factors on design allowables—were the angle clips that held the floor joists between the columns on the perimeter wall and the core structure (see Figure 5). With a 700 Pa floor design allowable, each floor should have been able to support approximately 1,300 t beyond its own weight. The total weight of each tower was about 500,000 t."

"The World Trade Center was not defectively designed. No designer of the WTC anticipated, nor should have anticipated, a 90,000 L Molotov cocktail on one of the building floors. Skyscrapers are designed to support themselves for three hours in a fire even if the sprinkler system fails to operate. This time should be long enough to evacuate the occupants. The WTC towers lasted for one to two hours—less than the design life, but only because the fire fuel load was so large. No normal office fires would fill 4,000 square meters of floor space in the seconds in which the WTC fire developed. Usually, the fire would take up to an hour to spread so uniformly across the width and breadth of the building. This was a very large and rapidly progressing fire (very high heat but not unusually high temperature)."

Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? Science, Engineering, and Speculation

Your source is a fossil fuel shill, so taken with a grain af salt as a credible source for your argument. And they're wrong about the design flaw being partly the cause of total near-freefall collapse..

In fact the most important design flaw was the use of asbestos.
Port loses claim for asbestos removal - Business Insurance

I never mentioned a design flaw, in fact, if you actually READ the link I posted is says the buildings were NOT subject to any design flaw. Apparently you didn't even READ the article. They were adequately designed. BTW 'fossil fuel' was partially to blame for the collapse who would no better and a fossil fuel expert? WTC conspiracy nuts are such stupid fucks.

you are hardly in any position to be calling ANYBODY except yourself of course, a WTC conspiracy nut stupid fuck as i just proved in my previous post.

He just took you to school that your source you used is a fossil fuel shill same as i got done just saying so anything that article says has ZERO credibility ESPECIALLY since it avoids bld 7 the crux of the 9/11 cover up commission.


Tell your boss shill Tom Eager,how he failed as he ALWAYS has to disprove explosives brought down the towers.