Fire weakens steel to collapse SF bridge., page 2
Pages: <<  1    2    3  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times


reply posted on 1-5-2007 @ 10:55 AM by DazedDave
Originally posted by junglelord
bridge like that collapesed in Montreal last year
exactly
I have never seen a skyscraper fall
I have seen bridges fall.
no fire needed

here is the basic link to the bridge = the towers fallicy

www.infowars.com...





[edit on 1-5-2007 by junglelord]


The bridge that fell in Montreal last year was due to faulty maintenance. Since we have really messed up weather (from very hot to very cold frequently) and extremely cheap and crappy roads, they need to be maintained alot more frequently. They neglected to do so despite huge cracks in the structure and hence it collapsed.


reply posted on 1-5-2007 @ 11:00 AM by forestlady
There is a major difference in the bridge collapse and the WTC.
Jet fuel burns much lower than natural gas and other types of fuel. Jet fuel burns at about 500 to 600F. Natural gas, etc. burns at app. 3,000F or so.
The jet fuel wouldn't have been hot enough to melt the towers, but it wasn't jet fuel that was on the bridge collapse, it was regular fuel and could burn at 3,000F to 3,500 F, hot enough to melt the concrete, which also collapses at those temperatures.
Also, if it had really melted, it would be glass, but it wasn't.

en.wikipedia.org...:Jet_fuel

"After jet fuel is ignited, what temperature does it burn at in standard conditions? It states right here in wikipedia that in open air jetA burns at 500 to 599 degrees F. I am a diesel mechanic and a welder/fabricator, and have first hand experience with most of the factors that are said to have caused the collapse of the twin towers. Being a fabricator and knowing how hot I have to get steel to get it to weaken and bend, I can tell you with certainty that if wikipedia's figures are correct, 600 degrees F is not hot enough to weaken steel, especially the massive steel used in the twin towers."

IMPORTANT: This section of the road was the part that was not reinforced after the Loma Prieta earthquake, meaning it was already in a weakened state.


reply posted on 1-5-2007 @ 11:40 AM by dbates
Here's a side-view that shows the placement of an expansion joint. Again, the expansion joint in this type of bridge has more to do with creating a smooth transition between sections and very little to do with actually supporting any load. The girders resting on the columns are what supports the load.

The top bridge in this image show the typical expansion joint.


I'm not an expert at these bridges, but I've been driving alongside the construction of a 6 lane toll road every day for the last 2 years. I've seen these bridges built from the ground up. The columns have steel rods that pertrude from them that the girders are fastened to. These rods simply keep the girders from moving side-to-side. Even without the steel rods, the girders would sit on the column without falling. The only way these could have fallen is if the concrete girder sagged or the columns were damaged allowing the girders to slip off of one side.

Construction photos

[edit on 1-5-2007 by dbates]
Pages: <<  1    2    3  >>    ^^TOP^^



9-11 lecture at Basel University, Switzerland.
  Posted 13 days ago with 14 member flags
9/11 Actors re-visited
  Posted 6 days ago with 12 member flags
Wikipedia categorizes 9/11 truth as \'denialism\'
  Posted 17 days ago with 11 member flags
Building Collapses in Rio
  Posted 14 days ago with 6 member flags
new film "Human the film (2012)" covers all the bases and more!
  Posted 8 days ago with 6 member flags

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time:

Anonymous hacks CIA
  Breaking Alternative News, Posted 15 hours ago, 112 replies
Free Psychic Readings
  General Chit Chat, Posted 11 hours ago, 96 replies
Hollow Earth Theory New Evidence.
  General Conspiracies, Posted 9 hours ago, 63 replies
Anonymous show your face!
  Rant, Posted 6 hours ago, 58 replies
Free will
  Philosophy and Metaphysics, Posted 13 hours ago, 50 replies