Victims' Families Want To Air New 9/11 Truth Ad

[eots]

why do engineers of hi rise structures not take into consideration thermal expansion from fire, if the take into consideration for ...sunshine...lol

Because the fire retardant prevents the heat from the fire from affecting the steel long enough for people to get out. This is NOT a hard concept, yet seems to be a concept far beyond what your simple mind can comprehend.

get out before what ?...a complete collapse in seconds at near free fall speed ?

 

[eots]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65Qg_-89Zr8]YouTube - Bad Ass Skyscraper Fires and Destruction!! Awesome!![/ame]

 

[Patriot911]

why do engineers of hi rise structures not take into consideration thermal expansion from fire, if the take into consideration for ...sunshine...lol

Because the fire retardant prevents the heat from the fire from affecting the steel long enough for people to get out. This is NOT a hard concept, yet seems to be a concept far beyond what your simple mind can comprehend.

get out before what ?...a complete collapse in seconds at near free fall speed ?

Always a possibility regardless of how little intelligence you have.

 

[Patriot911]

YouTube - Bad Ass Skyscraper Fires and Destruction!! Awesome!!

Seriously? This is the best you could come up with? I am ashamed of you, eots! Ran out of things to whine about? Finally convinced fire retardant does what everyone has been telling you?

 

[eots]

YouTube - Bad Ass Skyscraper Fires and Destruction!! Awesome!!

Seriously? This is the best you could come up with? I am ashamed of you, eots! Ran out of things to whine about? Finally convinced fire retardant does what everyone has been telling you?

yes,and it apparently works in even in far greater fires burning for much longer

 

[Patriot911]

YouTube - Bad Ass Skyscraper Fires and Destruction!! Awesome!!

Seriously? This is the best you could come up with? I am ashamed of you, eots! Ran out of things to whine about? Finally convinced fire retardant does what everyone has been telling you?

yes,and it apparently works in even in far greater fires burning for much longer

I didn't realize you were one of those truthtards who were so ******* stupid they believe every building should react the exact same way regardless of construction, materials, and circumstances. In hindsight, I should have known you're no smarter than any of the other ******* idiots that can't get this simple concept through their heads. Seriously, eots. Grow a brain.

 

[Gamolon]

actually it was stated the design was the reason the building 7 collapsed from when no others ever have ,I asked where the building design was was ever called into question and to show any building codes changes that reflect this...he could not do so, so he listed a bunch of fire code changes pretending they were building code changes or relevant to design flaws that contributed to the collapse,they even cut the title off paper and left off the link to try and hide the lie

Eots, you stupid git...

You fail at comprehension. It was the way the design REACTED to the fire. It was the way the STEEL reacted to the fire. There was no "design flaw". As has been stated to you time and time again, structural engineers never designed a steel structure to compensate for thermal expansion due to an office fire.

I posted links that directly refuted this claim of yours and you just ignored it as usual.

yes they do ..and they calculate it o being too minimal for concern
lol...so steel structures everywhere are in danger of falling in fire because engineers are blind to the new discovery of thermal expansion...lol

No they don't asswipe. I proivided this link to you before and you ignored it becuase it made you look like an asshole (not that hard actually).

http://www.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/obj/irc/doc/pubs/nrcc50830/nrcc50830.pdf

Here are a couple of quotes from the pdf linked above.

Thermal expansion is not a new term in structural engineering, as it has been considered in the design of bridge structures for many years at ambient temperature. However, such consideration has not been extended to the design of building structures exposed to fire.

This result reveals the fact that currently, there is a clear lack of knowledge and design methodology relating to the effects of thermal expansion on performance of structures in fire.

See that first quote? This addresses your sun versus office fire horseshit. They design for thermal expansion due to ambient temperatures, but not office fires.

So once again, you've been proven to have a complete lack of knowledge in this field, yet you continue to argue while providing no links or evidence to support your claim.

I'll ask again. Please provide the link or source you are using to to make the claim that structural engineers design for thermal expansion due to fires. I have just provided you with a source that debunks your asinine claim and further proves that you are just guessing.

 

[Gamolon]

Here's another document I found concerning offshore structures. The quoted material is for you and the other fuckstick, Mr. Jones, who seems to think all buildings constructed of steel frames will act exaclty the same when exposed to office fires.

http://www.usfos.no/publications/fire/documents/1998-AdvancedFireDesign.pdf

Structures exposed to fire will be heated up, and the
heating rate is dependent on the intensity of the fire,
the surface/mass ratio of structural components, the
surface properties of the actual material and finally
the presence of passive fire protection covering the
surface.
The main effects of the heating are thermal
expansion, reduced elastic modulus and yield stress
and creep. Thermal expansion takes place from the
very beginning, and due to the fact that the different
components will be heated differently (different
exposure and surface/mass ratio), the thermal expansion
will vary from one structural component to another.

Be sure to read the sections on Column Behavior and Fundamental Beam Behavior. Maybe you idiots will learn something.

 

[Gamolon]

Another article for those who THINK they know about structural design and fires.

STRUCTUREmag: Fireproofing Steel Structures

This article clearly shows how different DESIGNS are affected DIFFERENTLY when exposed to office fires.

For you Mr. Jones...

If you have the balls to read (since I'm on ignore) and then admit you were completely wrong.

 

[Gamolon]

A link to a fireproofing brochure...

http://www.carboline.com/docs/FireproofingBrochure_May2007.pdf

Here's a quote from that brochure...

Steel retains approximately 50% of its strength when it reaches 1100°F (600°C). Temperatures during fires can be much
hotter - a standard fire test reaches 1300°F (704°C) in the first 10 minutes. If left unprotected, the structure may collapse
when exposed to fire.
Building codes require certain beam, column, floor, wall and roof assemblies to have fire resistance ratings which are
determined on the basis of standard fire tests. Fire resistance ratings can be accomplished with the application of
sprayed fire resistive materials (fireproofing) to those assemblies.

 

[Gamolon]

More proof that steel is protected to PREVENT COLLPASE...

http://tenders.hpcl.co.in/tenders/t...CR/A-320_FIRE PROOFING Of Steel Structure.pdf

Purpose
Fire proofing is aimed at providing resistance to all the load bearing steel
structures and equipment supports that would collapse under fire conditions and
contribute to the intensity of the fire.
This fire resistance would allow the people to be evacuated and fire to be
suppressed.
Therefore, the supports of all potential fire sources shall be fireproofed.
The support of non-potential fire hazards shall also be fireproofed, if their
collapse is likely to endanger other hazardous equipments.

That bolded and enlarged part of the quote above is for you eots. Since you don't understand what fireproofing is supposed to accomplish in a building fire.

 

[Gamolon]

So eots (and Mr. Jones), in essence. Your understanding of structural design and fire proofing is SEVERELY lacking.

Thermal expansion due to fire is NOT designed for. The structural engineers rely on fireproofing to protect the steel for a certain timeframe. A timeframe in which people can get out and that fire suppression can be applied BEFORE a catastrophic event occurs.

 

[Gamolon]

YouTube - Bad Ass Skyscraper Fires and Destruction!! Awesome!!

Why did a portion of the one building collapse? Why did it not stay completely intact as you say it should?

 

[Gamolon]

YouTube - Bad Ass Skyscraper Fires and Destruction!! Awesome!!

Why didn't the above buildings totally collapse but this next one did. The Kader Toy factory.

CASE STUDY: THE KADER TOY FACTORY FIRE

I thought you idiots said that office fires can't cause steel frame buildings to collapse?

 

[eots]

YouTube - Bad Ass Skyscraper Fires and Destruction!! Awesome!!

Why didn't the above buildings totally collapse but this next one did. The Kader Toy factory.

CASE STUDY: THE KADER TOY FACTORY FIRE

I thought you idiots said that office fires can't cause steel frame buildings to collapse?

it was a toy factory not a hi-rise and the claim is not that structures cant fail in intense fires, it is they can not collapse completely in secs at near free fall speed...stay focused

 

[eots]

YouTube - Bad Ass Skyscraper Fires and Destruction!! Awesome!!

Why did a portion of the one building collapse? Why did it not stay completely intact as you say it should?

never said it would stay completely intact

 

[eots]

Eots, you stupid git...

You fail at comprehension. It was the way the design REACTED to the fire. It was the way the STEEL reacted to the fire. There was no "design flaw". As has been stated to you time and time again, structural engineers never designed a steel structure to compensate for thermal expansion due to an office fire.

I posted links that directly refuted this claim of yours and you just ignored it as usual.

yes they do ..and they calculate it o being too minimal for concern
lol...so steel structures everywhere are in danger of falling in fire because engineers are blind to the new discovery of thermal expansion...lol

No they don't asswipe. I proivided this link to you before and you ignored it becuase it made you look like an asshole (not that hard actually).

http://www.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/obj/irc/doc/pubs/nrcc50830/nrcc50830.pdf

Here are a couple of quotes from the pdf linked above.

Thermal expansion is not a new term in structural engineering, as it has been considered in the design of bridge structures for many years at ambient temperature. However, such consideration has not been extended to the design of building structures exposed to fire.

This result reveals the fact that currently, there is a clear lack of knowledge and design methodology relating to the effects of thermal expansion on performance of structures in fire.

See that first quote? This addresses your sun versus office fire horseshit. They design for thermal expansion due to ambient temperatures, but not office fires.

So once again, you've been proven to have a complete lack of knowledge in this field, yet you continue to argue while providing no links or evidence to support your claim.

I'll ask again. Please provide the link or source you are using to to make the claim that structural engineers design for thermal expansion due to fires. I have just provided you with a source that debunks your asinine claim and further proves that you are just guessing.

any study the points to the collapse of wtc 7 as evidence of thermal expansion and the lack of previous understanding of its effects is flawed in its initial premise...using the failed NIST theories as evidence to build upon and expand their thermal expansion theory

 

[Gamolon]

yes they do ..and they calculate it o being too minimal for concern
lol...so steel structures everywhere are in danger of falling in fire because engineers are blind to the new discovery of thermal expansion...lol

No they don't asswipe. I proivided this link to you before and you ignored it becuase it made you look like an asshole (not that hard actually).

http://www.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/obj/irc/doc/pubs/nrcc50830/nrcc50830.pdf

Here are a couple of quotes from the pdf linked above.

This result reveals the fact that currently, there is a clear lack of knowledge and design methodology relating to the effects of thermal expansion on performance of structures in fire.

See that first quote? This addresses your sun versus office fire horseshit. They design for thermal expansion due to ambient temperatures, but not office fires.

So once again, you've been proven to have a complete lack of knowledge in this field, yet you continue to argue while providing no links or evidence to support your claim.

I'll ask again. Please provide the link or source you are using to to make the claim that structural engineers design for thermal expansion due to fires. I have just provided you with a source that debunks your asinine claim and further proves that you are just guessing.

any study the points to the collapse of wtc 7 as evidence of thermal expansion and the lack of previous understanding of its effects is flawed in its initial premise...using the failed NIST theories as evidence to build upon and expand their thermal expansion theory

Show me your proof that structural engineers design steel structures to accommodate thermal expansion due to office fires. Anything will due. Source the evidence to your claim.

I've asked you this many times, but you refuse to provide it. Show me codes, design guides, quotes from actual structural engineers.

You can't because you are WRONG!

 

[Gamolon]

YouTube - Bad Ass Skyscraper Fires and Destruction!! Awesome!!

Why did a portion of the one building collapse? Why did it not stay completely intact as you say it should?

never said it would stay completely intact

Hmmm. So you admit that fire can affect steel and cause it to partially collapse, but not a total collapse.

Interesting....

Why do you suppose that is eots?

 

[eots]

Building Falls

why would some moron post a video of a building falling over ?