Prepare yourself through online legal training

Thursday, October 25, 2007

architects and engineers for 9 11 truth

plans of 9 11 buildings
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/plans/frames.html


aeHome · Announcements · Speaking Engagements · Join Us · Help Us! · Discussion Forum · WTC 7 · Twin Towers · Blueprints · Online Store
Press · Web Resources · Contact Us · About Us · Tributes · Members · What Can I Do? · Downloads · Tech Articles



Members of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth

Select a Group to View
All Supporters (Warning: Large Document)
All A&E's
Architects (Degreed & Licensed)
Architectural Professionals (Degreed)
Engineers (Degreed & Licensed)
Engineering Professionals (Degreed)
Non-U.S. Architects and Engineers & Architectural and Engineering Professionals
Other Supporters and A&E Students (Warning: Large Document)


Select a Supporter to ViewAlbert V. BurnsBarry K. MillerBasil OrechwaCharles A. MarshallCharles N. PegelowChester W. GearhartCurtiss Lee PalinDavid E. CasselDennis J. KollarDennis M. FischerDerek JohnsonDonald MeserlianEdward MunyakFred NguyenJ. Marx AyresJack KellerJames R. CarrJeffrey M. MoskinJohn F. ShanahanJohn FranklinJohn M. SparnichtJohn V. MizziJoseph TestaKenneth WrennMichael E. StephensMichael S. BenefieldMichael T. DonlyMike MaguireMitchell Scott SteinPeter D. MorseRichard J. SniderRobert Lloyd NielsenRoland Edward AngleRon Paul LeBlancSteven Craig BrantinghamSteven ReiserTim RohachWilliam D. TaylorWilliam J. Cundiff


Engineers (Degreed & Licensed)

Engineers (Degreed & Licensed)
(please upload photo)

Albert V. Burns
P.E. (Ret. AZ. Prof. Civil Engr.) *
Lic: AZ civil engineer #2631, status: retired
BS Civ. Engr. Univ. Of AZ. 1951
Spanish Fork, Utah Engineering — Degreed and Licensed

• Bio:

(pending verification)

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

(pending verification)


Basil Orechwa
Senior Design Engineer
Lic: 32173-6 exp 2008
Wisconsin PE #32173
Beaver Dam, WI Engineering — Degreed and Licensed

• Bio:

Practicing civil engineering since 1975.
Currently with:
Kunkel Engineering Group
Beaver Dam, Wisconsin

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

I have reviewed the government 9/11 report and media footage. In my opinion the government story is simply not credible. Unfortunately, the physical evidence has been destroyed, leaving us to determine who ultimately benefited from this terrorism. This is how any competent criminal investigation would begin from this point forward. Further Congressional hearings are in order until this matter is resolved.

(please upload photo)

Charles A. Marshall
PE, MSCE *
Lic: 9396 civil engineer exp 2008
MS, Civil Engineering,USC
San Gabriel, CA Engineering — Degreed and Licensed

• Bio:

(pending verification)

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

(pending verification)

(please upload photo)

Chester W. Gearhart
P.E., Retired
Lic: Retired
B.S. Civil Engineering, Univ of Missouri
Kansas City, MO Engineering — Degreed and Licensed

• Bio:

I was forced to retire in 2002. I had a long Public Works career for the City of Kansas City, MO as a sewer and street designer and a plan reviewer. I college I had a strong interest and aptitude for structures and architecture. I have reviewed many construction plans for buildings and have watched construction of many large structures in KC. I no longer practice engineering but I have been researching 9/11 since it happened.

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

I have watched the construction of many large buildings and also have personally witnessed 5 controlled demolitions in KC. When I saw the towers fall on 9/11 I knew something was wrong and my first instinct was that it was impossible. When I saw building 7 fall I knew it was a CD. Why was there so many video cameras aimed at B7 when it fell if it was unexpected? Some coincidence. I have been studying this subject since it happened. I can find no evidence that any of the official story, even events other than the 3 buildings, makes any sense or is even possible.

(please upload photo)

Curtiss Lee Palin
P.E.
Lic: Colorado 27315 Professional Engineer exp 2009
MS Engineering
Fort Collins, CO Engineering — Degreed and Licensed

• Bio:

[pending review]

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

[pending review]

(please upload photo)

David E. Cassel
P.E.
Lic: P-5352 Mechanical Engineering exp 2008
B.S. Mechanical Engineering
Oldtown, ID Engineering — Degreed and Licensed

• Bio:

Engineering work in solar energy, conservation, building science, manufactured housing. Also one year of graduate work in PhD program in economics.

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

Only refusal to look at the issues would prevent any thinking person from coming to the conclusion that the planes did not bring down the buildings.

(please upload photo)

Dennis M. Fischer
Engineering Consultant *
MSCE, BSCE
Naperville, IL Engineering — Degreed

• Bio:

(pending verification)

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

(pending verification)

(please upload photo)

Dennis J. Kollar
P.E., Structural Engineer
Lic: 34422-6 professional engineer exp 2008
B.S. + Graduate Coursework
West Bend, WI Engineering — Degreed and Licensed

• Bio:

I began my career in the 1980's as a Structurally Certified Welder and held various welding positions in a shop fabrication environment. I received my B.S. in Civil Engineering from the University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee in 1993 with an emphasis in Structural Engineering. I have several years experience in Municipal Engineering and site design and 10+ Years experience in the structural design of residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional structures of steel, concrete, masonry and timber.

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

For me the most convincing aspect that the 911 collapse was a controlled demolition is the recorded explosions on the 9/11 Eyewitness DVD. The explosions, along with the uniformity and totality of the collapses, when added to the 100's of so-called coincidences on, before and after that day, add up to more evidence of a Government involved crime than has convicted most people in our prisons today.

(please upload photo)

Derek Johnson
E.I.T., C.W.I.
Lic: EIT #37893
B.S. Mechanical Engineering
Marlin, Texas Engineering — Degreed and Licensed

• Bio:

Licensed Engineer in Training in Texas, E.I.T. #37893 University of Texas at Arlington, will take P.E. exam in 2009, also American Welding Society Certified Welding Inspector, structural steel AWS D1.1.

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

I did a much simplified finite element analysis of the 9-11 structures (twins and Solomon) using ANSYS w/the autodyn plug in. The speed of the falls and the downward force impulses that would have been created by the plane damage made many at UTA suspicious of the 9-11 investigation report. It is my opinion that a more complete and thorough FEA survey than the one I performed will help erode the credibility of the 9-11 report of record, and provide political pressure to bring those responsible for the 9-11 murders to trial. I am willing to volunteer time in working toward this goal, if anyone is interested and has access to FEA software, please contact me at cattleprods [at] hotmail.com and I will donate time to further this cause.

(please upload photo)

Donald Meserlian
P.E.
MSME
N. Caldwell, NJ Engineering — Degreed and Licensed

• Bio:

[pending review]

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

[pending review]

(please upload photo)

Edward Munyak
P.E.
Lic: Mechanical 16804 Fire Protection 247
BSME Catholic University of America
Los Altos Hills, CA Engineering — Degreed and Licensed

• Bio:

Registered Mechanical and Fire Protection Engineer in the State of California. Currently working as a fire protection engineer for the city of San Jose, CA

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

I have collaborated with a research chemical engineer( P.E. in CA also) and he has worked with NIST reports that positively show that the jet fuel contributed very little to the duration of the fires and that in fact all the fires were very weak in historical perspective. They were oxygen starved as evidenced by the black smoke. If you dig deeper into the NIST reports they confirm that steel temperatures were low.

I presented for continuing education credits at the NFPA World Safety Conference in Boston, MA 6/4/2007
My presentation showed that all three WTC "collapses" have no resemblance to any previous high rise fire, full scale fire tests in the UK involving much higher steel temperatures, or computer simulations using finite element analysis.

(please upload photo)

Fred Nguyen
P.E.
M.S. Mech. Eng., Stevens Inst. of Tech.
Maplewood, NJ Engineering — Degreed and Licensed

• Bio:

Sr. Energy Engineer for major controls company.
28 years experience in the energy industry.
Masters of Mechanical Engineering (energy conversion and thermodynamics).
Licensed P.E. state of N.J.

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

I do not believe that the combination of air plane crashes and fires led to the collapse of WTC 1, 2 and 7.

(please upload photo)

Jack Keller
Ph.D., P.E.
Lic: 139070-2202 issued 1961, exp 2009
Logan, UT Engineering — Degreed and Licensed

• Bio:

My education includes a B.S. in Civil Engineering from the University of Colorado (1953), M.S. in Irrigation Engineering from Colorado State University (1955), and Ph.D. in Agricultural and Irrigation Engineering from Utah State University (1967). I am still professionally active and my career has been split between academia (teaching, research, and extension) and private consulting and focused on irrigation engineering activities related to water resource development and management.

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

Without any serious study I had simply accepted that the events of 9/11 were as commonly perceived, although I was not happy with the way the disaster was being used to promote what I felt were illegal and self defeating imperialistic policies in the guise of the War on Terrorism. It was not until early 2006 that I stumbled upon sufficient information to become suspicious of the "official" and generally accepted 9/11 storyline. This led me to do my own investigation during which I discovered the demise of WTC 7, which I was heretofore unaware of. Obviously it was the result of controlled demolition and scheduled to take place during the confusion surrounding the day’s events. I now feel morally obligated to deal with and expose the "politically unthinkable" issues surrounding the 9/11 phenomena by participating in such undertakings as signing this petition.

(please upload photo)

Jeffrey M. Moskin
B.S.E.E. *
B.S.E.E.
Culver City, CA Engineering — Degreed

• Bio:

(pending verification)

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

(pending verification)

(please upload photo)

John V. Mizzi
P.E.
B.E.E.
Poughkeepsie, NY Engineering — Degreed and Licensed

• Bio:

My BEE is from Pratt Institute (1963); I also have graduate credits at U. of PA and other institutions. I was an engineer at IBM for 26 years. Currently a consulting patent engineer. I am named inventor of 27 U.S. patents.

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

Upon reviewing the work of Prof. Jones, Jim Hoffman, and others, as well as NIST reports: my opinion is that these "collapses" could not have happened without the use of some sort of explosive, barring repeal of laws of physics!

(please upload photo)

Kenneth Wrenn
P.E. *
B.S., Civil Engineering, NCSU
Durham, NC Engineering — Degreed and Licensed

• Bio:

(pending verification)

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

(pending verification)

(please upload photo)

Michael S. Benefield
Mechanical Engineer
Lic: 31102 Mechanical Engineer exp 2009
B.S. Mechanical Engineering
San Anselmo, CA Engineering — Degreed and Licensed

• Bio:

Graduated from the University of Utah in 1994. Currently working as an asbestos consultant in the State of California.

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

It appears that the NIST report fails to account for known physical evidence found on the scene, and indeed seems to contradict fundamental physical laws. Therefore it cannot be accepted. An independent investigation with full subpoena power is needed.

(please upload photo)

Michael T. Donly
P.E., Structural/Civil Engineer *
B.S.C.E. New Jersey Institute of Technol
Hackensack, NJ Engineering — Degreed and Licensed

• Bio:

(pending verification)

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

(pending verification)

(please upload photo)

Michael E. Stephens
P.E.
Lic: OK 20643 exp 2009; AK 11302
B.S., Geological Engineering
Welling, OK Engineering — Degreed and Licensed

• Bio:

Self employed as a general Civil Engineering Consultant, obtained B.S. degree in Geological Engineering with minor in Hazardous Waste Management from NMSU in 1994.

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

It was apparent to me from the day of 9/11 that the buildings did not fall due to catastrophic failure initiating from the impact by jet planes. If the towers had fallen due to anything but a controlled demolition, they would have taken out several city blocks and most adjacent buildings would have also been taken down by the towers.

(please upload photo)

Mike Maguire
P.E. *
MS, Mech/Aero Engineering, UC Davis
Livermore, CA Engineering — Degreed and Licensed

• Bio:

(pending verification)

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

(pending verification)

(please upload photo)

Mitchell Scott Stein
P.E.
Lic: env pe #84826
M.S. Civil Eng., Univ. of Texas at Austi
Austin, TX Engineering — Degreed and Licensed

• Bio:

Civil Engineering Site Designs; Potable Water Treatment Processes; Industrial Wastewater Treatment Processes

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

None of WTC 1, WTC 2, or WTC 7 could have fallen in the duration in took them to fall (on the order of 10 seconds), virtually directly downward, UNLESS the majority of their many key supporting structural elements on EACH FLOOR were 100% ineffective, or nearly 100% ineffective, and such a situation seems virtually 100% IMPLAUSIBLE, unless there was some sort of configuration for a controlled demolition in place PRIOR TO the planes hitting WTC 1 and WTC 2.

(please upload photo)

Peter D. Morse
P.E., Mechanical Engineer
Lic: Mechanical Engineer #38829 exp 2009
B.S., Mech. Engr., B.A., Journalism
Tucson, Arizona Other: Mechanical Engineering — Other: Licensed in 4 western states

• Bio:

My professional engineering career has been directed towards providing engineering design, procurement, and construction management services (EPCM) for very large capital expenditure projects for American industry as a member of large, multidisciplinary A/E teams.

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

"Those who have the privilege to know also have a duty to act." - Albert Einstein

I, like you, am privileged to be able to distinguish that the Official 9/11 Story defies natural law yet the observed phenomena of the day do not. I call on all my peers to understand and then expose the myths of the Official Story through the sound application of the natural laws that are the basis of our education and subsequent life's work. It is tragic but necessary that as engineers and architects this task looms large as our most important - and urgently needed - contribution.

(please upload photo)

Richard J. Snider
P.E.
Lic: PE electrical engineer license 73615, Texas
BSEE, University of Texas, Austin
Dallas, Dripping Springs, TX Engineering — Degreed and Licensed

• Bio:

Network Engineer - Grad in 1969. Commute from Dallas to Austin weekly - operate small WISP business west of Austin. Married 34 years, 2 Children

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

Physics of collapse, Clear indication of pre-planted explosives, and all the surrounding standdowns and pre-indications of major event on Sept. 11 indicate need for full re-examination of this crime.

(please upload photo)

Roland Edward Angle
Civil Engineer
Lic: 18242 Civil Engineer exp 2009
B.S. U.C. Berkeley
Alameda, CA Engineering — Degreed and Licensed

• Bio:

CA License 18242. Forty years experience in Civil & Military design, analysis & construction, including blast analysis of nuclear hardened facilities.

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

The official explanation of the building failures defies known scientific methods of analyses and is untenable in the face of logical investigation.

(please upload photo)

Steven Craig Brantingham
P.E.
Lic: OK PE License #13027 1982, exp. 9/09
B.S., ChemE, U. of Arkansas Fayetteville
Cypress, TX Engineering — Degreed and Licensed

• Bio:

I graduated in 1973 from the U. of Arkansas. I have 34 years experience in project and process engineering in the natural gas industry.

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

I first became aware of the 9/11 Truth movement in 2005, after viewing David Ray Griffin's presentation on C-SPAN. I then began researching the inconsistencies in the official story and have concluded that it is impossible that the events of 9/11 occurred the way the government claims they did.

(please upload photo)

Steven Reiser
Chemical Engineer
Lic: 10-7-07 bg emailed to ask for license number
Westminster, CO Engineering — Degreed and Licensed

• Bio:

Double B.S. - Chemical Engineering/Chemistry at University of Idaho 1978 - worked in Mining, Metal Refining R&D, Natural Gas Processing, Oil Refining, Nuclear Fuel Reprocessing R&D, and program management.

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

All engineering Student are required to take Engineering Physics, and Engineering Statics and Dynamics Courses, these give us the basic scientific and engineering principles to evaluate technical issues such as this. I have also worked with high explosives in government work in the past. I can state with confidence that the building collapses which happen at free fall such as on 9/11 require the violent controlled destruction of the support structures in order to effect a complete collapse of the structures as occurred on 9/11/2001.

(please upload photo)

William J. Cundiff
P.E. *
BSCE
Whitinsville, MA Engineering — Degreed and Licensed

• Bio:

(pending verification)

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

(pending verification)

(please upload photo)

William D. Taylor
P.E.
Lic: Florida P.E. license #56163
B.S. Engineering
Tequesta, FL Engineering — Degreed and Licensed

• Bio:

Licensed Professional Civil Engineer in the State of Florida.
Graduate of the University of Florida, 1995, with a B.S. in Engineering.

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

I remember back to September 11, 2001 when the towers fell how shocked I was to actually see them fall. Based on my knowledge of structures and seeing the fires in the buildings appear to subside, I figured that the buildings would be salvageable. As many did, I did not question what I saw. However, when I woke up and researched further years later, I confirmed my initial gut feeling that the official story was not accurate.

(please upload photo)

Barry K. Miller
P.E., Mechanical Engineer
Lic: California Mechanical Engineer #27447 exp 6/09
Hinsdale, NY Engineering — Degreed and Licensed

• Bio:

(please enter a short bio)

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

(please enter a personal 9/11 statement)

(please upload photo)

Charles N. Pegelow
PE, Civil Engineer. lic Calif CE 26344 (Structural
Lic: Calif license 26344 Civil Engineer, exp 2008
Houston, Texas Engineering — Degreed and Licensed

• Bio:

(please enter a short bio)

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

(please enter a personal 9/11 statement)

(please upload photo)

J. Marx Ayres
PE, Mechanical Engineer
Lic: 10631 mechanical
Santa Monica, CA Engineering — Degreed and Licensed

• Bio:

(please enter a short bio)

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

(please enter a personal 9/11 statement)

(please upload photo)

James R. Carr
Ph.D., P.E.(geological engineering,, Professor, Ge
Lic: 007464 Geological Engineer 1987, exp 2008
Reno, Nevada Engineering — Degreed and Licensed

• Bio:

(please enter a short bio)

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

(please enter a personal 9/11 statement)

(please upload photo)

John Franklin
P.E. *
Lubec, ME Engineering — Degreed and Licensed

• Bio:

(please enter a short bio)

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

(please enter a personal 9/11 statement)

(please upload photo)

John F. Shanahan
PE, Electrical Engineer
Lic: 12091 electrical
Rancho Cucamonga, CA Engineering — Degreed and Licensed

• Bio:

(please enter a short bio)

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

(please enter a personal 9/11 statement)

(please upload photo)

John M. Sparnicht
P.E., Civil Engineer, California
Lic: CA license #89504 Civil Engineer, exp 12/31/07
Dayton, NV Engineering — Degreed and Licensed

• Bio:

(please enter a short bio)

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

(please enter a personal 9/11 statement)

(please upload photo)

Joseph Testa
P.E., Civil Engineer
Lic: PE 072702 New York License
Thousand Oaks, CA Engineering — Degreed and Licensed

• Bio:

(please enter a short bio)

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

(please enter a personal 9/11 statement)

(please upload photo)

Robert Lloyd Nielsen
PLS, Land Surveyor
Lic: 8075 Land Surveying exp 12/31/07
Walnut Creek, CA Engineering — Degreed and Licensed

• Bio:

(please enter a short bio)

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

(please enter a personal 9/11 statement)

(please upload photo)

Ron Paul LeBlanc
PE, Engineer
Lic: PE license 38312
Firestone, CO Engineering — Degreed and Licensed

• Bio:

(please enter a short bio)

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

(please enter a personal 9/11 statement)

(please upload photo)

Tim Rohach
P.E., Mechanical Engineer MSME
Sugar Land, Texas Engineering — Degreed and Licensed

• Bio:

(please enter a short bio)

• Personal 9/11 Statement:

(please enter a personal 9/11 statement)









aeHome · Announcements · Speaking Engagements · Join Us · Help Us! · Discussion Forum · WTC 7 · Twin Towers · Blueprints · Online Store
Press · Web Resources · Contact Us · About Us · Tributes · Members · What Can I Do? · Downloads · Tech Articles
Copyright © 2007 by ae911truth.org — All Rights Reserved · Contact the Webmaster · This page has been accessed 242 times.

3 comments:

Arthur Scheuerman said...

I read all the comments and still believe that there were no controlled demolitions that collapsed the buildings. This is from my book. "Fire in the Skyscraper"

Many reports interpreted the loud sounds and debris being projected out sideways during the Tower collapses as an indication that explosives were used to demolish the buildings. Most of these ‘explosive’ sounds, heard during the collapses were heard after the collapses began. The exterior walls can be seen bending and buckling inward in the videos of both Towers long before any sounds or ground vibrations occurred. In Tower 2, the exterior columns in the east wall were photographed bowing inward up to 10 inches, 18 minutes after the plane’s impact. That’s 38 minutes before the global collapse began. To be technical, you could say that Tower 2’s collapse began slowly, with possibly some noise or impact sounds from falling floors, about 38 minutes earlier than the official collapse time. The explosive sounds and expanding dust clouds occurred just after the east wall buckled inward and started the collapse, and not before the buckling, as would have happened with controlled demolition.
When the south wall of Tower 1 was photographed it was bowing inward up to 55 inches on floors 95 to 101, about six minutes before these columns were seen buckling inward. In the North Tower “thunder” sounds were heard when floors collapsed on the south side 12 to 14 seconds before the top of the building was seen to tilt southward and begin falling as a unit starting the global collapse. Since each section of floor on the long-span side weighed about 500 tons, I would explore these sounds in Tower 1 as evidence of a floor or floors detaching and impacting the floors below on the south side which most probably accelerated south wall failure. I believe all the supposed ‘explosive’ sounds can be explained by the impacts made by the collapsing buildings after the columns were pulled in by the bowing and buckling floors and when the floors themselves began impacting the floors below. The boom, boom, boom, boom, boom repetitive ‘explosive’ sounds reported by firefighters running as Tower 2 was coming down were probably caused by the sequential collision of impacting floors. The great quantity of air on each floor being compressed in a fraction of a second by great weight and momentum would propel air, smoke, and any concrete dust and debris outward at great velocity.
It is also clear from the computer studies that the heat from the fires caused differential expansion of the steel parts in the long span, floor trusses with the resulting thermal bowing in some floors directly exerting pull-in forces on the exterior columns or this thermal bowing could have detached a floor which would have impacted the floor below destroying composite action by separating the concrete slab from the trusses and inducing strong tensile (suspension) forces in the double weighted floor. In other floors thermal expansion of the floor against the columns compressed the trusses which along with shear forces within the trusses buckled the diagonal struts collapsing the trusses which went into suspension and helped pull-in and eventually buckle the exterior column walls. All these adverse truss effects were caused by steel expansion which begins immediately as the steel is heated. Bowing and buckling happen at low temperatures (400 C to 500 C) even before the steel would have weakened from higher temperatures. Once the exterior column buckling spread along an entire wall on one face the buckling spread around the towers exterior and into the core and the top sections of the towers began to tilt and fall. Although the North tower antenna appeared from some angles to have fallen straight down it actually tilted to the south because the south wall buckled first and the cantilevered south top building section pulled the core to the south.

The South Tower’s top tilted to the east because its east wall buckled first. Once the core columns got out of plumb, there would have been little resistance to their buckling at the weak splices. With the incredible weight of the top of the buildings gaining momentum, like a heavy wedge or sledge all it had to do was break the welded, and single bolted connections holding the floors to the columns. This coupled with the fact that the falling building top’s momentum increases as the square of the number of floors impacted as the floors were detached and added to the weight of the descending top. There would have been little resistance to slow the top building section’s acceleration to the ground. Because this acceleration due to gravity increased the speed and momentum of the collapsing floors and building top, the impacts would have been increasingly violent as shown on the seismic graphs increasing amplitude until maximum when the masses of floors hit bedrock seven stories into the cellar.
There have been some engineering analyses about the impacting floors slowing down the collapse so that the time to collapse should have been longer than ‘free fall’ times of an object dropped from the towers tops. I have an engineering idea that may explain this. Since the Tower’s outer wall columns, especially in Tower 1, pealed out like a banana, they may have been able to break the connections to the floors ahead of the floors being impacted? In other words, with the weight of the wall columns pealing outward from the vertical along with the added horizontal forces of impacting floors projecting debris outwards onto these columns; would these columns while leaning out be able to break the wall-to-floor connections ahead of the level of impacting floors? If this is possible than I believe that the connection failures could could have traveled down the sides of the buildings at a speed faster than free fall times. This might help explain the rapid collapses especially in Tower 1. The wall-to-floor connection failures could have traveled down the building sides faster than ‘free fall’ times and in effect started the floors falling before they were impacted by the accumulating mass of impacted floors above.

The heavy exterior wall columns in the 1500 foot high builddings while pealing off would project the column sections outwards a great distance. This distance was proposed as only being made possible by explosive forces. I disagree.
Much has been made of the fact that NIST only analyzed the events up to the point where the Towers were poised to collapse before runaway collapse began and failed to pursue the remaining collapse. This was largely because after collapse began the chaotic impacts of the floors, walls and columns colliding could not possibly be analyzed accurately with even the strongest computers.

In addition, the compression of air in the elevator and air-conditioning shafts by the collapsing upper building section and floors, would project air, smoke, and dust down these shafts and out of any air intake or discharge openings on the exterior walls on the lower mechanical equipment floors. This accounts for the plumes of smoke seen projecting outwards from the buildings well below the collapsing floors. There were quite extensive vertical HVAC shafts built into the building. These shafts are connected to air conditioning exhaust and intake ducts on the mechanical floors. Collapse of these shafts would force the dust and smoke out these HVAC exhaust and intake openings in the side of the building.

The lightweight aluminum cladding’s breaking free from the buckling columns also would have been propelled outward a great distance by this expanding cloud of air and dust. This would account for huge dust clouds and pieces of aluminum seen projected outwards from the upper sections of the collapsing buildings. The light reflected off these aluminum pieces at the north wall of Tower 2 would be interpreted as flashes from explosive ‘squibs’. The flashes below the buckling east wall may have been from the aluminum cladding breaking free from the lower columns as they expanded after being unloaded of axial weight by the buckling of the wall above. Also explosives leave characteristic tears and fractures in steel, and such indications were not found in the debris pile.

Much has been made of the presence of molten metal in the debris pile after the collapse. Presumably this molten metal was somehow connected to explosions or thermite charges, but there were Uninterrupted Power Supply (UPS) battery rooms on some floors of the Towers and Building 7. These battery rooms supplied continuous battery power to computers if the electricity failed for any reason. These batteries contained tons of lead which melts at 327 C or 621 F. The heat form the fires in the debris pile could easily have melted this lead which was probably what was seen flowing through the pile. NIST also reported UPS in the 13th floor of Building 7 and the 81st floor of Tower 2. In addition thermite reactions are rapid and don’t last the hours or days at which times the molten metal was observed. Batteries also contain Sulfuric acid which could have attacked the steel in the debris pile. Additionally the EPA reported over 400 different chemicals in the dust and debris. These chemicals could easily be assembled conceptually to propose any type of chemical reaction imaginable including thermite reactions.

About the concrete destruction into dust; F.R. Greening did a paper called Energy Transfer in the WTC Collapse in which he says “the energy required to crush concrete to 100 μm particles is 1.9 × 1011 J, which is well within the crushing capacity of the available energy. Hence it is theoretically possible for the WTC collapse events to have crushed more than 90 % of the floor concrete to particles well within the observed particle size range.”
http://nistreview.org/WTC-REPORT-GREENING.pdf I would also investigate the possibility that the concrete was sub par due to freezing during curing or too much air or water having been added during construction.

Geezer Power said...

What comments Arthur? And why are your beliefs so strong and unyielding. You had no problem all changing your mind about the paper you wrote about "The Collapse of Building 7". You wrote a revised version of it,looking much like the original, but actually a lot of omissions were made and a lot of it rewritten.

In the second paragraph of the new version we see...

"The anticipation of collapse was a brilliant conclusion and no lives were lost when the 47 story building collapsed about an hour and a half after the evacuation order was given. The BBC somehow misheard the orders to evacuate the collapse zone and reported the building had collapsed well before it actually did."

Which of course didn't exist in the original, and this hogwash has been used all over the internet, and also in the Hardfire video of you being interviewed by Ronald Wieck and Mark Roberts... Shame on you Arthur

psikeyhackr said...

Let’s just face a few simple facts.

Skyscrapers MUST hold themselves up. They must also sway in the wind. The people who design skyscrapers MUST figure out how much steel and how much concrete they are going to put on every level before they even dig the hole for the foundation.

After EIGHT YEARS why don’t we have a table specifying the TONS of STEEL and TONS of CONCRETE that were on every level of WTCs 1&2? The NIST report does not even specify the TOTAL for the concrete. The total for the steel is in three places. So even if the planes did it that 10,000 page report is CRAP!

Conspiracies are irrelevant. The Truth Movement should be marching on all of the engineering schools in the country.

Watch that Purdue simulation. If a 150 ton airliner crashes near the top of a skyscraper at 440 mph isn’t the building going to sway? Didn’t the survivors report the building “moving like a wave”? So why do the core columns in the Purdue video remain perfectly still as the plane comes in?

That is the trouble with computer simulations. If they are good, they are very good. But if they have a defect either accidental or deliberate they can be REALLY STUPID once you figure out the flaws.

The distributions of steel and concrete are going to affect the sway of a skyscraper whether it is from the wind or an airliner.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

How much does one complete floor assembly weigh?

You know those square donut floor slabs? They were 205 ft square with a rectangular hole for the core. There was a steel rebar mesh embedded in the concrete which was poured onto corrugated steel pans which were supported by 35 and 60 foot trusses. There has been talk about those things pancaking on each other for years.

But has anyone ever said what the whole thing weighed? Why haven't we seen that A LOT in EIGHT YEARS? The concrete alone is easy to compute, about 601 tons. But the concrete could not be separated from the entire assembly, the upper knuckles of the trusses were embedded into the concrete. So what did the whole thing weigh and why haven't the EXPERTS been mentioning that A LOT in EIGHT YEARS?

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

So why hasn't Richard Gage and his buddies produced a table with the TONS of STEEL and TONS of CONCRETE that were on every level of the WTC? How much computing power do they have now, compared to the early 1960s when the buildings were designed? I asked Gage about that in May of 2008 at Chicago Circle Campus and he got a surprised look on his face and gave me this LAME excuse about the NIST not releasing accurate blueprints. Gravity hasn't changed since the 1960s. They should be able to come up with some reasonable numbers.