Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome!

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
WTC couldn't pancake collapse; reddit-blogOptica
Topic Started: Jul 19 2008, 01:47 PM (183 Views)
Andoo Inc.
Member Avatar
Sir finds a lot
http://exoptica.typepad.com/blogoptica/2008/07/why-the-world-trade-center-tower-floors-could-not-pancake-collapse-as-we-have-been-told.html

Why the World Trade Center Tower's floors could not 'pancake' collapse as we have been told.

The typical floor structural configuration for the World Trade Center Towers spanned from the exterior wall columns to where the inner 49 columns formed support for the elevator shafts, stair towers, air shafts and mechanical systems, as well as, in part, transferring floor and roof loads to the heavily reinforced concrete foundation/footing structure sitting on bedrock some 70' below grade. Leasible floor areas typically terminated at the service core, where individual floor sections began again according to the floor plan layout. Yes, the individual floors acted as a unified structural 'diaphram' to stiffen the structure laterally, but the steel composition of each floor was constructed in smaller units of open web trusses spanning between concrete encased beams and topped with a steel deck and lightweight concrete fill. Thus, each floor was NOT a monolithic slab and structural system spanning across each tower from one exterior wall to the other three, as we are led to believe.

Each floor, in fact, terminating at the contiguous inner structural service core, resembled a square 'donut', with the core area being the 'donut hole', so to speak. Failure of floor structural support in any quadrant of the building plan, or even in any half, thus, would have failed ASSYMETRICALLY. And at the time of failure would not, could not, have 'pancaked' symmetrically as the misleading NIST and commission reports indicate (diagrams shown in these reports are graphically out of scale, and do not accurately represent the building's massive, in fact, over designed, internal structure).

Orignal WTC Construction Drawings: http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/plans/table.html

Floor Plan, 35th to 40th Floors, http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/plans/doc/pac1TowerA/A-A-58_0.png

Building Sections http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/plans/doc/tvmast/CD_ARCH/A-A-177_0.png

How do I know this? What is my personal technical reference? From 1970 to 1972 I was a young design development draftsman for the firm of Minoru Yamasaki Associates, the design architectural firm for the WTC. I was part of the team that detailed the complex aluminum cladding fenestration details for similar building and also worked, in part, on detailing the WTC Executive Floor interior paneling and updating the WTC plans to reflect various 'as-built' construction changes. Based on actual project experience, I was, and am, quite familiar with the structural system at work on the towers, both at a technical and intuitive level.

From the many videos available, to us, and to you, it is clear that the initial devastating floor overloading was uneven, and then, suddenly, floor by floor, the destruction became uniform as the buildings seemingly demolished themselves. I would have expected a random destructive overload to cause only a portion of the building floors to fail at a time. This did not happen. The failure, thus, appears controlled and suspicious.

For the floors to 'pancake' uniformly, the first floor to fail would require all perimeter connections to fail almost simultaneously on each floor. The towers could not possibly have collapsed as we have been told in the 'official' reports, one floor, coincident, on top of another without powerful external forces at work, forces other than the plane crashes and the relatively low temperature jet fuel fires which burned away quickly. What other external forces could there be? Explosives. In other words,the WTC towers were intentionally demolished.

R H Nigl

Email rhnigl@exoptica.com Website http://exoptica.com/nigl/hn_ten_4.html
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · The Lounge · Next Topic »
Add Reply