Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: WTC structural site



At 19:37 9/16/01 -0600, Bob Rogers wrote:

Another site that has good factual information on the structure of
the WTC is


<http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/americas/newsid_1540000/1540044.stm>

Bob Rogers

/snip/ It is worth the look.

<http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/americas/newsid_1540000/1540044.stm>

Ken Fox

I take it that it is words like the following that you are expected
to find interesting:

"...The steel and concrete structures performed
amazingly well, said John Knapton, professor in
structural engineering at Newcastle University, UK.

"I believe tens of thousands of lives have been saved
by the structural integrity of the buildings," he told
BBC News Online.

"They had a lot of their structure taken out, yet they
remained intact for more than an hour, allowing
thousands to escape."

The structural steel community has been agitating for relaxation
of fire precautions in recent years, citing the fact that no
steel frame building had collapsed in fire in recent times.

The party line has not yet accomodated itself to the facts
as presented, it seems to me.

I have another take on the topic:
WTC performed amazingly, shockingly badly.
Progressive catastrophic collapse in less than one third of the
necessary escape time from a large building is a recipe for disaster.

If we can learn lessons about brittle cold failure of iron in a
severe lacerating impact from a disaster like RMS Titanic,
we can certainly learn a little something about using adequate
fire protection for overheated structural columns of skyscrapers
whose loss is catastrophic.

Another prime lesson that needs to be learned is that stranding people
in upper stories of skyscapers, with no escape roiute until a fire
is extinguished is unacceptable.

I do not ever again want to see Americans hand in hand, leaping off
a hundred story building in order to evade the alternative death
by burning.

It is an unwanted monument to skyscraper economics. We can do better.
We should do better. It takes money.


brian whatcott <inet@intellisys.net> Altus OK
Eureka!