It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by esdad71
No I want specifics.
Originally posted by esdad71
What do you feel was used and in what capacity?
Originally posted by glitchinthematrix
especially having heard Silverstein say he gave the order to "pull" WTC 7 with his own mouth.
If a specific floor in a building supports all the floors above it, then if those floors collapse, the floor underneath will not collapse.
It's simple physics: when the upper floors collapse, the lower floors have to support less weight than before, and therefore they do not collapse!!!
The top chords were supported on bearing seats at each end of the two trusses. At the exterior column/spandrel beam, a gusset plate was groove-welded to the spandrel face and fillet-welded to the top chord angles. At the bearing seat, two 5/8-inch A325 bolts in 3/4 inch x 1-1/4 inch slotted holes connected the trusses' top chords to the bearing seat with a single bolt in the exterior angle of each truss. The lower chord was attached to the exterior column/spandrel beam with a viscoelastic damping unit connected to a small seat with two 1 inch A490 bolts that provided a slip-resistant connection. The damping unit had a capacity of about 5 kips.
In the case of 2 WTC, this caused the eastern face to buckle, transferring its loads back to the failing core through the hat truss and initiating the collapse. The section above the impact area then tilted in the direction of the failed wall. In the case of 1 WTC, the south wall later buckled in the same way, and with similar consequences.
The collapse of the World Trade Center has been called "the most infamous paradigm" of progressive collapse. In the case of both towers, the top section tilted towards the face that had buckled, behaving largely as a solid block separate from the rest of the building. It fell at least one story in freefall and impacted the lower sections with a force equivalent to over thirty times its own weight. This was sufficient to buckle the columns of the story immediately below it; the block then fell freely through the distance of another story. Total collapse was now unavoidable as the process repeated through the entire height of the lower sections. The force of each impact was also much greater than the horizontal momentum of the section, which kept the tilt from increasing significantly before the falling section reached the ground. It remained intact throughout the collapse, with its center of gravity within the building's footprint. After crushing the lower section of the building, it was itself crushed when it hit the ground.
Acquiring large numbers of people rallying around ideas does not lend any credence to the ideas being truthful or correct.
Originally posted by chunder
reply to post by thedman
Hi, I follow what you are saying and excuse my ignorance, I am no civil engineer but what caused the columns to collapse ?
What weakened them floor by floor ?
What caused the first floorplate to collapse uniformly so that it's entire mass and momentum was available to act immediately on the proceeding floorplate ?
Why did it appear that there was absolutely no resistance to this effect ?
How did the fire get hot enough to melt the first clips / trusses ?
Why hadn't that been predicted as a risk when analysis of a 707 hitting a tower was carried out way back ?
Originally posted by wmd_2008
If any one claims the fires were almost out at the start of collapse look at videos and picture taken then.
Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by chunder
The floors above the impact point weighed 40,000+ TONS
Steel will also lose around 50% of its strength at the temperature these fires went to. So DIDN'T melt DOESN'T have to.
If any one claims the fires were almost out at the start of collapse look at videos and picture taken then.