Viewing Single Post From: Debunking NIST's August 21, 2008 Final Report on W

Viewing Single Post From: Debunking NIST's August 21, 2008 Final Report on W
Miragememories	Nov 9 2008, 07:43 PM
Posts: 759 Group: Members Member #40 Joined: 01/15/08	Grit1645 "It's entirely possible that no shear studs were used on the girders. They were probably able to determine whether there were any or not from the original construction photos and/or the debris remains of the girders themselves." Chris Sarns "This scenario is easier to posit if the key girder isn't being held firmly with shear studs. Thus, in the August 2008 report, NIST did what it had to do to make it more reasonable that the girder would fail: It magically omitted the shear studs." Debris remains of WTC7 steel? Where have you been Grit1645? You say no shear studs used on the girders is entirely possible? But the NIST acknowledged in their 2004 WTC 7 Preliminary Report that shear studs were used with both beams and girders, but that many of the core girders did not show shear studs in their drawings. NIST 2004 WTC7 PRELIMINARY REPORT "Most of the beams and girders* were made composite with the slabs through the use of shear studs."* "Typically, the shear studs* were 0.75 in. in diameter by 5 in. long, spaced 1 ft to 2 ft on center [apart]."* "Studs were not indicated on the design drawings for many of* the core girders."* The NIST, in their 2008 WTC 7 FINAL REPORT, incorporating their previous report's original language where ever possible, chose to make a couple of "edits" to the original 2004 text. "Most of the beams --- -------* were made composite with the slabs through the use of shear studs."* "Typically, the shear studs were 0.75 in. in diameter by 5 in. long, spaced - -- --* 2 ft on center [apart]."* "Studs were not indicated on the design drawings for ---- --* the core girders."* These are a serious omissions. All the more so because it clearly establishes that original report material (2004), was altered without any appendix explanation. We end up with two critically different translations. The 2004 original wording undermines the NIST Official Story. The 2008 edited wording, supports the NIST Official Story. In effect, we have the NIST saying in 2004, that most of the girders were made composite with the slabs through the use of shear studs. That typically, the shear studs were spaced 1-2 feet apart. And that many of the 'core' girders did not show shear studs in the design drawings. In 2008, we have the NIST in effect saying, most of the beams, but not most of the girders, were made composite with the slabs through the use of shear studs. That typically, the shear studs were spaced 2 feet apart. And that none of the 'core girders' showed shear studs in the design drawings. I'm basically restating Chris Sarn's work here because you are pointedly ignoring the importance of what he was revealing Grit1645. The NIST's duplicity is all too obvious to those without closed minds. MM
Posts: 759 Group: Members Member #40 Joined: 01/15/08

Debunking NIST's August 21, 2008 Final Report on W · WTC 7