WTC Bldg #7 12

[BAretired]

I was somewhat taken aback by watching this video posted on another forum. What is the general opinion of structural engineers on the theory of a "controlled demolition" of this building?


BA

 

[Ron]

Yes, it certainly resembles controlled demolition. I've seen and filmed a similar size demolition.

I'm not ready to believe a conspiracy theory, however. There are several probable explanations for this (not counting the conspiracy theories)...who knows what really happened.

 

[msquared48]

You need to do a litle reading and further investigation BA on your own. There's a lot out there.

There are a lot of unanswered questions here. There are a lot of crazy ideas that you will see, but there are very good scientifically based reasons for doubt of the government explanation, and not only for Building 7. Just use your common sense as a structural engineer.

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering

 

[bridgebuster]

I'm not buying any of these WTC conspiracy stories, although it's odd that the Verizon Building and the Post Office survived. Of course "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."

Now on the other hand, I'm still not convinced Oswald was a lone gunman. I used to think Gerald Ford was going to make a statement about this before he died, being that he was the last surviving member of the Warren Commission.

 

[IDS]

There are a lot of crazy ideas that you will see, but there are very good scientifically based reasons for doubt of the government explanation, and not only for Building 7. Just use your common sense as a structural engineer.

I have yet to see a single good scientifically based reason for doubt. The conspiracy theorists claims invariably take any evidence that appears to support their claim as being absolutely correct and indisputable, and simply ignore any evidence that does not support their claims, even when it comes from someone who they have just said can be believed without question.

If WTC7 collapsed through the mechanism given in the official investigation, why wouldn't it look like a controlled demolition?

Doug Jenkins
Interactive Design Services

http://newtonexcelbach.wordpress.com/

 

[msquared48]

I do understand what your are saying.

However, I guess my main question, of many, is "how do you get what looks like a controlled demolition failure from what appears to be an unsymmetrically placed fire/demolition event causing the failure?" It just does not add up to me.

So, I still have a lot of questions...

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering

 

[bridgebuster]

Something to think about: Why would the government want to bring WTC7 down? The towers collapsed about 8 hours earlier.AND, as much as I criticize the Federal government I don't believe they were responsible for 911.

 

[connectegr]

In addition to providing the connection design for the new WTC 7, our firm had access to the Ground Zero site very soon after the search and rescue efforts ended. Historically WTC 7 represents the only steel highrise structure to collapse due to fire. With the other crises and urgency of the tower evacuations, WTC 7 was evacuated and left predominantly to nature's course. There is not conspiracy here, all attention and personal were focused on the evacuation of the towers.

http://www.FerrellEngineering.com

 

[paddingtongreen]

Look at a program about the real controlled demo of a building. There are weeks of preparation, drywall must be removed to allow drilling, wires must be run to the control point, The charges are not placed until the last moment. All this must have gone on in two buildings where work was going on 24 hours a day because the world trading floors don't stop work, without anyone noticing it.

The kicker for me is that in controlled demo, they don't fire all the charges at once, they fire the inner ones first to make sure that the debris falls inward.

Michael.
Timing has a lot to do with the outcome of a rain dance.

 

[msquared48]

Paddingtongreen:

I have wrestled with the same concerns. However, not knowing all the facts to come to an irrefutable conclusion, which we never really will as Ron mentioned, the possibility still remains that it could be done. I'm not saying that it was, only that with the proper control and set of circumstances, it could have been done.

And I do concur with your final sentence in that it was obvious to me from the video that the interior columns failed first in Building 7. Coincidence or planned? Who knows. It's just a suspicious occurrence.

It might be possible for one building to fail, looking like a controlled demo. The problem I have is all three falling in their respective footprints. What is the likelihood of that?

Just some thoughts to ponder. I will be quiet now.

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering

 

[Qshake]

Giving the main reason for collapse of the two towers, burning jet fuel, exterior columns destroyed, load path rearranged, I expect the towers to fall just as they did, as if each floor collapsed on the one below it and so on. As each floor failed and became part of the dynamic mass impacting the floor below it, any outside forces whatsoever couldn't not deter the failure path, which was straight down.

Regards,
Qshake

Eng-Tips Forums:Real Solutions for Real Problems Really Quick.

 

[Forensic74]

I'm a licensed SE.

I do NOT think this was controlled demolition.

None of the shots are showing the other face of the building, the face that sustained most of the damage. There were confirmed reports of blazing fire on the lower floors by the firefighters who didn't have enough water pressure to fight. You can see the fires in one or two of the clips. If you look carefully at the top penthouse, you can see the damaged portion of the building going first.

This building lost its core at the base from out of control fires that burned for hours.

 

[IRstuff]

The video starts off by claiming that there were explosions consistent with demolition, yet, less than 5 minutes later, starts talking about thermite. If thermite, the no explosions. If explosions, then no thermite. Can't and don't need or want both.

And, what's the point of taking down WTC7? If the government was involved in taking down WTC1 and WTC2 and was good enough to make that happen on schedule with the plane impacts, then why the ineptitude in taking down WTC7?

Conspiracy theorists are great at claiming nefarious and extraordinary secrecy and expertise on the one hand, yet, these same perpetrators are so inept at leaving so much evidence to the contrary. Again, either they're good, or they're not. If they're that good, then there should be no evidence to the contrary; there should be no smoking thermite guns.

The video claims that signs of thermitic reactions were eseentially EVERYWHERE their witnesses looked. Why? It takse very little in the way of exposives to do a controlled demo. Likewise, the amount of thermite required to do the same should be equally small, and being buried in the bottom of the rubble, there should be very little evidence of thermite. If there's such massive signs of thermite, then the conspirators were both inept, stupid, and incompetent. Yet, they managed to get away with it?

As with the moon conspiracy theorists, they postulate a massive conspiracy required to pull it off, yet, they likewise postulate sophomoric "errors" that reveal to the theorists that it was a plot.

TTFN

FAQ731-376
Chinese prisoner wins Nobel Peace Prize

 

[ztengguy]

Let me say this, its not a secret if more than one person knows about it. For it to be a controlled demo, more than one person had to be in on it.

 

[paddingtongreen]

The interesting thing for me is the psychology of the believers: any evidence that tends to disprove the theory is taken to be evidence that the plot was even more devious than originally thought.

Michael.
Timing has a lot to do with the outcome of a rain dance.

 

[ishvaaag]

Well, you would be surprised to read at some website (as I read once) that even the 2 WTC towers had built-in demolition charges at construction time; I think to remember it was second hand testimony as told to the writer of such item by someone that purportedly was himself in such works.

It is the duty of citizens to watch on their governments, democratic or not, for if of course the general intent of governments may be overally sounder for the many, it can be exterminating for some, ane everyone can be one of such "some".

The pressure to know the truth of the matters that affect the general public must be always be kept ongoing, and it is extremely unfortunate that most of the more enabled to so provide remain too silent at critical times.

 

[port125]

There is no way jet fuel will burn hot enough to take down a building like that. It had to be the government.

Then again the planes had just taken off and they were still loaded with the con-trail mind control chemicals. and who knows how hot that stuff burns!

 

[hawkaz]

That's a good one Ishvaaag-

How would the conversation go:
Let's see- we are over budget during construction, what can we cut? Perhaps the explosive charges on the columns? No, we better keep that one in case we need to blow up the building in 25 years.


I had some conspiracy theories of my own from other events in the past. My brother-in-law set me straight when he pointed out that for these conspiracy theories to work, we had to assume that the government was competent and could keep a secret. After realizing the ludicracy of that- I gave up on conspiracy theories.

 

[Qshake]

It just has to be hot enough to change the properties of the steel, reducing the yield point and modulus of elasticity.

Regards,
Qshake

Eng-Tips Forums:Real Solutions for Real Problems Really Quick.

 

[woodman88]

"There is no way jet fuel will burn hot enough to take down a building like that."

What I heard was that the impact of the planes knocked the fire protection off enough of the structural steel for the fire to weaken that section of the building.

As for conspiracy theories, I think the government/media ability to spin the information, about something this big that others did, for their own benefit is the most they could do.

Garth Dreger PE - AZ Phoenix area
As EOR's we should take the responsibility to design our structures to support the components we allow in our design per that industry standards.