Yesterday I had word with 2 persons - one has been working more than 10 years as architect (mainly metal structures for industrial buildings) and guy who will get his structural engineer doctor degree in 2007.
Question was - can this type tower collaps directly down and in less than 15 secs. Answer was both times no.
Structure was strong enought to withstand plane crash...but why then tower collaps 57 minutes after that? Heat can not change steel structure so fast. So nor collaps or heat wasn't reason why those towers collaps. And if you ask me, I belive those guys more then my parents or what government told me.
Now the bold part..if you take wind against tower (lateral force) then what happens with structure? One side will get compressed and other side stretch out. And this is vertical direction force for those steal beams and outher structure = crushing weight from above. So what you said is not 100% correct.
...and removal of the fire protection coating from the steel beams.
Steel used for building does not melt or weaken in so short fire...even without fire-resist coating (If you remember melted metal was found in tower basement :shock
About Oklahoma: The Federal Building did collapse, and much faster than the WTC - it just left parts of the 3 walls standing because of the way the building was designed - which was also repsonsible for the progressive collapse. Here is a photo of the building before the bombing so I can demonstrate the different construction techiques.
The yellow lines show the aprox. location of the upper load bearing columns. The green is a main cross member that transfers the downward force of the upper floors to the thicker more widely spaced lower colums. The truck took out the two marked in red, leaving a large section of the main cross beam unsupported, the weight of the upper floors panckaked and fell forward away from the support still offered buy the undamaged sections. Differnt types of construction, different materials, different design, different type of building, different type of damage.
Ok, different type of construction...but still there was a lot of undamaged structure in towers. Do you have any idea how was 7 build? Probably also box-type?
OK, I tried to watch the video, I really did. You can't be serious. There was not one shred of positive proof in there, just a bunch of paranoid connections of chance events. Ok, a manual was issued with the WTC in crosshairs, why do you suppose that is?
Cmon, it's not important for how stuff collapse
I really don't care about this type of bs
I want solid forensic proof that there were explosives...
You need to produce hard evidence, not conjecture and speculation.
Belive me, I would like to rewind and take a closer look what happened there
zenkidori said:
Yes, I don't have doctor degree ot something about demolitions or engineering. But hell yeah I have clue how things work.
no actually, you don't.
I have born in land where I live and work. Don't make it personal. And btw, I hate racist.
you probably don't know english well enough to know that there was nothing personal or even remotely racist in that post. way to not get it at all, good job.
1) Sorry, but you are not open-mind person and I don't see point to argue with you.
2) Yes, it's not my native language. And I hope your words are ment as irnoy, not arrogant
zenkidori said:
I'm just saying that he totally misread my previous statement.
even having a degree from whatever school in estonia doesn't make you qualified to speak on such matters. There are very specific areas of study in question here. even if you went to mines or MIT as a few of my friends have, you still wouldn't be qualified.
all this is just conjecture and conspiracy theories.
also, why does someone in estonia even care about the US?
1) Sorry
2) I don't have degree in engineering and I haven't said that.
3) "Not qualified to speak"? Dude, what? So if I don't have degree of thinkig and engineering, if I don't have firefigher training tc etc I can't ask questions why 3+3 thousand people are dead? Sorry, but I think.
(~3000 in towers and ~3000 in war after that)
4) Yes, because original raport does not answer for all questions. And asnwered ones are not 100% firm.
5) Sadly yes. Our government send troops to Iraq...why, don't ask me
///M said:
1) Want to know why they collapsed? THEY GOT HIT BY AIRLINERS. Simple as that. It was a miracle and a testament to the engineers that the building stood that long.
2) Listen, you claim to be an engineer...it is important to back your claims with sound, scientific and mathematical evidence.
3)
http://www.loosechangeguide.com/LooseChangeGuide.html . Read it in detail. The author brilliantly outlines the countless number of complete falseties, irreputable sources, and outright disrespect towards the victims on this tragic day.
4) This asshole put together this movie in what seems to be weeks.
1) Really? Is it so simple? For me it's bad engineering or building. Because if we think how towers was supposed to build...they should not collaps. Andif they would collaps...then not like they did.
2) I'm not engineer and I can't find where I have said that :S And sorry, I don't want to 24/7 deal with this thing
I'm busy person
3) It's good stuff definitely. I still haven't got enought time to read and watch it fully. But
for me this author (with his arrogant attitude) don't answer why they collapse so fast.
4) Why you call him as*hole? Because he thinks different? Because he don't belive official raport? Sorry, but if you really are engineer...you don't speak very nicely for educated person.
For me it's clear - those towers (including 7.) should not been collapsed. But they did...and in way no educated and not brain-washed engineer can explain.
And once more - I'm not engineer with degree.
I think I might not reply here more...not much point to spend my time for somethin I belive anyway. I hope someday we will get answers how and why it all happened. I meanwhile hope to read and watch more about flight 93.
Thanks for Blind_Io for sane replys.