WTC 7: Why Does NIST Ignore Floors 1-7, Basement and Sub-Basements?

Why does the government contract solicitation for a WTC 7 investigation SPECIFICALLY leave out floors 1-7, the basement and sub-basements?

Under solicitation number SB1341-06-Q-0186, a fixed price purchase order has been awarded to APPLIED RESEARCH ASSOCIATES, INC. (ARA) of Albuquerque, New Mexico...

ARA will conduct nonlinear dynamic collapse analyses using LS-DYNA that include analyses of detailed full floor models and global models. The detailed floor analyses will determine likely modes of failure for Floors 8 to 46 due to failure of one or more supporting columns (at one or more locations), and aid the development of a more coarse model for use in the global analyses that captures essential behaviors and failure mechanisms.

Source: wtc.nist.gov...

Roark, Vushta, Duhh, ANYONE? Give me a scientific or investigative reason for leaving out the first 7 floors AND the basements?

[edit on 25-7-2006 by Slap Nuts]

here is google's cached page of the one you mentioned -
wtc7

I am willing to bet that Dr. Van D. Romero, a doctor of physics and vice president for Research and Development at New Mexico Tech... now works for ARA and is highly paid.

Background for those unfamiliar with this man: www.arcticbeacon.com...

Any way to find out?

EDIT: I just called ARA and the secretary says no DR. Romero works there... only a J. Romero.

[edit on 25-7-2006 by Slap Nuts]

ROARK??? Where are you? Zappa? Vushta? Domacles?

Why would they write the contract like this? COME ON GUYS. At least throw a guess out there.

[edit on 25-7-2006 by Slap Nuts]

Originally posted by Slap Nuts
Why does the government contract solicitation for a WTC 7 investigation SPECIFICALLY leave out floors 1-7, the basement and sub-basements?

Judging from NIST's draft reports, it's because a preformed conclusion has been arrived at before the investigation begins, that conclusion being that the cantilever truss girder system from floors 5 - 7 was the loose piece of straw that brought the whole house crashing down from floor 8 and up.

wtc.nist.gov...
* Dr. Steven W. Kirkpatrick ...has a doctorate in mechanical engineering from Stanford University.
* Dr. Robert Bocchieri ...has a doctorate in aerospace engineering from the University of Texas at Austin.
* Mr. James Brokaw ...has a Master’s Degree in civil engineering from West Virginia University.
* Mr. Robert MacNeill ...has a Master’s Degree in mechanical engineering from the Rochester Institute of Technology.
* Mr. Brian Peterson ...has a Master’s Degree in mechanical engineering from Stanford University.

The report is bogus before it starts anyway => They're not structural engineers.




[edit on 2006-7-25 by wecomeinpeace]

Originally posted by wecomeinpeace
Judging from NIST's draft reports, it's because a preformed conclusion has been arrived at before the investigation begins.

This seems to be the common thread in all OFFICIAL 9/11 investigations.

Originally posted by wecomeinpeace
The report is bogus before it starts anyway => They're not structural engineers.

Thanks for pointing that out. Howard will be disappointed.

What about the aerospace engineer... the building was not hit by a plane so any contribution he makes is MOOT and cannot be relied on.

[edit on 25-7-2006 by Slap Nuts]

Harte? Not even you will give me a reason? I thought you guys would be ALL OVER THIS ONE.

Originally posted by Slap Nuts

Originally posted by wecomeinpeace
Judging from NIST's draft reports, it's because a preformed conclusion has been arrived at before the investigation begins.

This seems to be the common thread in all OFFICIAL 9/11 investigations.

It is. It doesn't even look like they're considering fire on this one. It sounds like they're only going to find a way to make it collapse in a computer simulation, for the floors specified anyway.

Preformed conclusion that those ridiculous fires were strong enough, thus not having to deal with that mess in their "research", and preformed conclusion that the building fell via gravity alone, and even a preformed conclusion as to what kind of failure it was that actually failed it.

Reasons this investigation is BS:

1. Physical evidence GONE.
2. Ignoring basements and floors 1-7. (Most OBVIOUS location for CD to begin)
3. Pre-drawn conclusion... backwards science.
4. No structural engineers.
5. Ignoring rooftop and "penthouses". (Convenient because of the supposed "early drop")

Was the diesel the original official reason for the collapse? Wasn't it located below floor 8? This makes NO SENSE.

[edit on 25-7-2006 by Slap Nuts]

Originally posted by Slap Nuts
I am willing to bet that Dr. Van D. Romero, a doctor of physics and vice president for Research and Development at New Mexico Tech... now works for ARA and is highly paid.

If this is true, why are they using a doctor of physics to study the collapse of WTC7? Shouldn't a structural engineer/s be better at this?

Edit: I guess you guys already saw this discrepancy.

[edit on 7/25/2006 by Griff]

Originally posted by Slap Nuts
Was the diesel the original official reason for the collapse? Wasn't it located below floor 8? This makes NO SENSE.

Most of the diesel fuel was recovered, which to me is just more proof these fires were not as big as they like us to think...

Engineers from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation investigated oil contamination in the debris of WTC 7. Their principal interest was directed to the various oils involved in the Con Ed equipment. However, they reported the following findings on fuel oil: "In addition to Con Ed's oil, there was a maximum loss of 12,000 gallons of diesel from two underground storage tanks registered as 7WTC." To date, the NY State Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and DEC have recovered approximately 20,000 gallons from the other two intact 11,600-gallon underground fuel oil storage tanks at WTC 7.

It is worth emphasizing that 20,000 gallons (of a maximum of 23,200 gallons) where recovered intact from the two 12,000-gallon Silverstein tanks. So, it is probable that the 20,000 gallons recovered was all of the oil in the tanks at that time. Since the oil in the Silverstein tanks survived, we can surmise that there was no fire on the ground floor.

www.wtc7.net...

From the same link. : wtc.nist.gov...

The people listed are only the key people.

Select experience of key project personnel is summarized below:

* Dr. Steven W. Kirkpatrick is the program manager for this project. Dr. Kirkpatrick is a Principal Engineer with 21 years of experience in structural dynamics, failure analysis, finite element analysis, impact and penetration mechanics, and vehicle crashworthiness. He has more than 40 publications in these areas. His research experience includes a wide range of government and commercial projects for rail, highway, civil, military, and aerospace applications. He has been a program leader for many studies requiring close collaboration between experimental and computational efforts with emphasis on model validation. Dr. Kirkpatrick was previously the PI for the ARA participation in the NIST WTC investigation in performing the aircraft impact analyses. Dr. Kirkpatrick has a doctorate in mechanical engineering from Stanford University.
* Dr. Robert Bocchieri, Principal Engineer, will provide expertise in nonlinear dynamic finite element analysis, solid mechanics, materials constitutive modeling, rate-dependent material behavior, fracture mechanics and failure analysis, mechanics of composite materials, and structural dynamics. Dr. Bocchieri has a doctorate in aerospace engineering from the University of Texas at Austin.
* Mr. James Brokaw, Senior Security Engineer and Director of the Security Engineering Group, will provide expertise in the analysis of progressive collapse in buildings. He has served as the lead consultant for numerous projects of national significance subject to terrorist threats and assisted in the development of GSA’s progressive collapse analysis and design guidelines. Mr. Brokaw has a Master’s Degree in civil engineering from West Virginia University.
* Mr. Robert MacNeill, Senior Engineer, will provide expertise in finite element analysis (FEA) and thermal analysis. Mr. MacNeill is an experienced user of LS-DYNA, having implemented many advanced features of the code and is skilled at constructing complex parametric finite element models designed to easily interface with simulation based design (SBD) systems and design databases. Mr. MacNeill has a Master’s Degree in mechanical engineering from the Rochester Institute of Technology.
* Mr. Brian Peterson, Senior Engineer, will provide expertise in nonlinear dynamic finite element analysis, impact and penetration mechanics, solid mechanics, materials constitutive modeling, fracture mechanics, and failure analysis. Mr. Peterson has experience in testing of materials and structures and has extensive experience with advanced features of LS-DYNA. Mr. Peterson has a Master’s Degree in mechanical engineering from Stanford University.

I don't know ...sounds like a pretty competent team to me.
Granted they're not of the calibre of say someone who believes Jesus lived with the Mayans..or Paul Wellstone was assassinated by an electromagnetic pulse weapon...but still.....

Seriously the results are not in as far as I know and contrary to the CT mentality, reasoned people wait for the results of the investigation before jumping to conclusions.

The way you guys can spin that around is stunning. Its almost like you don't even see the hypocracy.

Honestly, this is thie first look at this thread.
Why does NIST ignore floors 1-7. You're kidding right?
Its because the handed the investigation over to others and their investigation is still in progress.

That wasn't obvious?


[edit on 25-7-2006 by Vushta]

Originally posted by Vushta
Seriously the results are not in as far as I know and contrary to the CT mentality, reasoned people wait for the results of the investigation before jumping to conclusions.

Emphasis mine.

If they were doing this, then this very thread would not exist.

I'll wait for the final report, and then you'll eat your words. If they do not specifically analyze the fires and their effects upon the steel, especially on the lower floors, then they will have started with a preformed conclusion about the fires and the research will be flawed.

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by Vushta
Seriously the results are not in as far as I know and contrary to the CT mentality, reasoned people wait for the results of the investigation before jumping to conclusions.

Emphasis mine.

If they were doing this, then this very thread would not exist.

I'll wait for the final report, and then you'll eat your words. If they do not specifically analyze the fires and their effects upon the steel, especially on the lower floors, then they will have started with a preformed conclusion about the fires and the research will be flawed.

Man..I don't know what to tell you except maybe read this again:

reasoned people wait for the results of the investigation before jumping to conclusions.

Originally posted by Vushta
Honestly, this is thie first look at this thread.
Why does NIST ignore floors 1-7. You're kidding right?
Its because the handed the investigation over to others and their investigation is still in progress.

That wasn't obvious?
[edit on 25-7-2006 by Vushta]

What the heck are you talkinig about?

THE SOLICITATION TELLS THEM TO IGNORE anything below floor 8. NO ONE IS INVESTIGATING BELOW FLOOR 8 by DEMAND of the NIST.

The solicitiation has made any investigation that follows the guidelines of the solicitation TOTALLY AND COMPLETELY MOOT. USELESS.

YOUR ANSWER NOT ONLY MAKES ZERO SENSE, but ignores all of the facts of the solicitation and the award. Do you even know how this process works?

Originally posted by bsbray11
If they do not specifically analyze the fires and their effects upon the steel, especially on the lower floors, then they will have started with a preformed conclusion about the fires and the research will be flawed.

They are CONTRACTUALLY OBLIGATED to IGNORE floors 1-7, the basements, sub-basements and penthouses.

CONTRACTUALLY OBLIGATED BY THE NIST/Gov't.

There is NO IF. They will not get paid with the NIST citing BREACH OF CONTRACT if they change the scope to include these items AND the report WILL NOT BE PUBLISHED.

End of story.

So... the question is, why would the NIST purposely limit the scope like this?

[edit on 26-7-2006 by Slap Nuts]

From the same source.

No where does it state that the investigation will be limited to floors 8-46.

ARA will conduct analyses, in collaboration with NIST, to determine the location and cause of the initiating event (i.e., the first component or group of components that failed) that led to global collapse of WTC 7. The analyses will determine the series of component and subsystem failures subsequent to the initiating event that led to global collapse that are consistent with observations from video and photographic records and other evidence. NIST will conduct all fire analysis of the building and analysis of the structural response to fires in-house and supply ARA initiating event data based on the in-house analyses.

ARA will conduct nonlinear dynamic collapse analyses using LS-DYNA that include analyses of detailed full floor models and global models. The detailed floor analyses will determine likely modes of failure for Floors 8 to 46 due to failure of one or more supporting columns (at one or more locations), and aid the development of a more coarse model for use in the global analyses that captures essential behaviors and failure mechanisms.

Originally posted by Vushta
From the same source.

No where does it state that the investigation will be limited to floors 8-46.

The detailed floor analyses will determine likely modes of failure for Floors 8 to 46 due to failure of one or more supporting columns.

Umm.... Please explain what the above quotation says.

It just gets WEAKER AND WEAKER.

[edit on 26-7-2006 by Slap Nuts]

Originally posted by Slap Nuts

The detailed floor analyses will determine likely modes of failure for Floors 8 to 46 due to failure of one or more supporting columns.

Umm.... Please explain what the above quotation says.

It just gets WEAKER AND WEAKER.

[edit on 26-7-2006 by Slap Nuts]

You appearantly have some sort of "thing" about me. I'm flattered. But its skewing your reasoning. Now you're using creative editing.

Originally posted by Vushta
Now you're using creative editing.

I DIRECTLY QUOTED YOUR POST. You are fighting a losing battle here... again, you will find NO SUPPORT here or anywhere (IMO) for your false claims.

[edit on 26-7-2006 by Slap Nuts]