This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Are Millions of Business People At Risk of Dying In Collapsing Buildings?
This is one in a series of safety-related public service announcements.
Death Traps?
Millions of people work in or visit high-rise buildings … assuming the buildings were more or less safe.
But it turns out that there is a severe, lethal risk of sudden collapse in even the best-made skyscrapers in America, Britain, Germany, Japan and other nations worldwide.
A New Understanding
Before 9/11, no modern steel-frame high-rise building had ever collapsed due to fire.
9/11 radically changed our understanding of architecture and engineering …
Specifically, 3 steel-frame buildings collapsed on that day. That includes one that was never hit by a plane, and had only small, isolated office fires prior to its collapse.
This was unexpected, as much hotter, longer-lasting fires have never before brought down a modern steel-frame office building. For example, the 2005 Madrid skyscraper fire “reached 800 degrees Celsius (1,472 F), said Javier Sanz, head of Madrid firefighter” and lasted some 20 hours without collapsing.
In other words, officials who write building codes, architects and structural engineers had never before worried about small office fires causing office buildings from collapsing.
Appendix A of the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s World Trade Center Building Performance Study notes:
In the case of the fire at One Meridian Plaza, the fire burned uncontrolled for the first 11 hours and lasted 19 hours. Contents from nine floors were completely consumed in the fire. In addition to these experiences in fire incidents, as a result of the Broadgate fire, British Steel and the Building Research Establishment performed a series of six experiments at Cordington in the mid-1990s to investigate the behavior of steel frame buildings. These experiments were conducted in a simulated, eight-story building. Secondary steel beams were not protected. Despite the temperature of the steel beam reaching 800-900 °C (1,500-1,700 °F) in three tests (well above the traditionally assumed critical temperature of 600 °C [1,100 °F]), no collapse was observed in any of the six experiments.
Underwriters Laboratories tested the steel components at the Twin Towers and found they could withstand fires for hours without failure:
“NIST [the government agency - National Institute of Standards and Technology, a branch of the Department of Commerce - responsible for investigating the collapse of the 3 buildings on 9/11] contracted with Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. to conduct tests to obtain information on the fire endurance of trusses like those in the WTC towers…. All four test specimens sustained the maximum design load for approximately 2 hours without collapsing… The Investigation Team was cautious about using these results directly in the formulation of collapse hypotheses. In addition to the scaling issues raised by the test results, the fires in the towers on September 11, and the resulting exposure of the floor systems, were substantially different from the conditions in the test furnaces. Nonetheless, the [empirical test] results established that this type of assembly was capable of sustaining a large gravity load, without collapsing, for a substantial period of time relative to the duration of the fires in any given location on September 11.” (NIST, 2005, p. 140).
Other fire tests have also failed to cause failures at high temperatures.
So the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 on 9/11 (not hit by a plane) was a surprise … and should be a huge concern to the millions of people who work in office buildings worldwide.
To get to the bottom of this issue, Washington’s Blog reached out to a former manager at Underwriters Laboratories – Kevin Ryan – to seek reassurance that the danger was small for the millions of financial services industry workers, business men, lawyers, web executives, and others who work in office buildings:
[Question] Wasn’t the steel used in the Twin Towers and Building 7 of inferior quality? So as long as builders use better-quality steel, can’t we be assured of safety?
[Kevin Ryan] The steel used to build WTC Building 7 was the standard grade for high-rise construction–still used to this day–called ASTM A36 grade steel. It was not inferior in any way from the steel used to make many of the other high-rise buildings in America.
For the Twin Towers, fourteen different grades of steel were used in the construction, including A36, which has a nominal strength of 36 ksi. The other grades used were higher strength steels like 100 ksi WEL-TEN steel which was manufactured in Japan and shipped to the States. The steel used in the Towers was actually far superior to typical structural steel.
The official government reports on the destruction of the WTC buildings did not find any problem with the quality of the materials or construction methods used. And although those reports did make some recommendations for changes to building codes, those changes have not been incorporated in municipal codes or adopted by the building construction community.
[Question] You write in Foreign Policy Journal:
“And if people actually understood and believed the official account of what happened at the WTC they would not enter tall buildings because in doing so they would be putting their lives at risk.”
What do you mean?
[Ryan] What I mean is that high-rise buildings are designed and constructed to withstand fires that are much worse than what we know existed in WTC Building 7. My former company, Underwriters Laboratories (UL), plays a big part in that process. We know that UL did the fire resistance testing that was behind the selection of the steel components for WTC7 because that fact is in the NIST WTC7 report. Therefore the steel columns and floor assemblies should have withstood 2 to 3 hours of intense fire in a testing furnace, as required by the NYC code. But on 9/11, the fire lasted only 20 minutes in any given area, a fact that NIST admits, and the entire structure was destroyed due to an inexplicable failure to resist fire.
Moreover, NIST abandoned its previous hypotheses that suggested the destruction of WTC7 might have resulted from diesel fuel fires, or damage from falling debris, or the design of the building. In the end, NIST said that it was only the effects of the fire fed by office furnishings, on fully-fireproofed steel components, that caused the total destruction of this 47-story building. And since no actions have been taken to retrofit any existing high-rise buildings, we must assume that what happened to WTC7, according to the official account, could happen to any tall building that experiences a typical office fire.
No Change (?!)
Given that 9/11 totally changed our understanding of how dangerous small office fires could be, we couldn’t believe Ryan’s claim that “changes have not been incorporated in municipal codes or adopted by the building construction community.”
So Washington’s Blog contacted Richard Gage, a practicing architect for more than two decades, who has worked on most types of building construction, including one project which used around 1,200 tons of steel framing:
[Question] Have high-rise architects and engineers changed how they build skyscrapers, to prevent collapses after 9/11?
And have they changed how they build skyscrapers to prevent office fires from knocking down steel buildings?
[Richard Gage] No – they haven’t made any structural changes.
No structural changes?!
Either building code writers, architects and engineers are cavalierly ignoring this catastrophic new understanding of the extreme danger of small office fires, or the investigation into the collapse of World Trade Center building 7 on 9/11 was flawed.
No wonder New York residents have launched a High Rise Safety Initiative to try to protect the safety of those who work or visit office buildings.
Postscript: Until this issue is resolved through a complete revision of building codes and architectural and engineering practices, we recommend that everyone stay out of office buildings. Because if even small office fires can cause the whole building to collapse, it’s just not worth the risk to go inside.
»
- advertisements -
+1. I too thought the conspiracy theorists were all wack jobs... until I looked at the evidence. No rational person looking at the evidence can conclude anything other than a planned, inside job.
It's hard to conceive that there are people that could actually be that evil to plan such a horrific event. But there are. And they did.
This video takes an evidence based approach. The evidence is compelling, IMO.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vadSaWyiozg
glad you count yourself among the wackos... don't be so sure about 'll never know / get rid tho.
Don't forget the dump trucks they practically had lined up before the planes hit plus the they took all the melted steel and iron and had it on a ship to China faster than you could catch a taxi in NYC.
I felt the same way as you did until I saw the stuff on Bldg 7. A Dutch guy who does controlled demolitions was shown the video by another guy. It was a YouTube video. He watched it - could not believe and said it would have been a big job to rig and was controlled demo.
He ended up hitting a tree in his small minivan in Holland and dying. The is a man who worked with explosives so I am sure he was a careful driver.
Also check out the Sandy Hoax videos on YouTube - there are dozens and dozens. I was a doubter about that too. Adam Lanza killed 26 people in 5 minutes with no survivors? No video in the school? Children interviewed that day saying they never heard any gun shots. No one saw Adam Lanza for 3 years. The problems, fouls ups, errors, and other fakery on that one are endless. Crisis actors yet again.
"Don't forget the dump trucks they practically had lined up before the planes hit plus the they took all the melted steel and iron and had it on a ship to China faster than you could catch a taxi in NYC."
The removal of debris was done in the open. It took something like 9 months to remove all the debris.
In approximately TWO months they had metal on ships heading for China. Care to figure the logistics out here, how much lead time that took to set that all up? Hint: it's starts backing up toward 9/11.
"In approximately TWO months they had metal on ships heading for China. Care to figure the logistics out here, how much lead time that took to set that all up? Hint: it's starts backing up toward 9/11."
It took 9 months to remove all the debris. In two months X amount of it had been removed.
How long would it have taken a Chinese steel or construction company to call and enquire about whether they could aquire the scrap steel from the WTC? Of coarse it starts backing up toward 9/11, as is when the steel would have been up for grabs.
i have only two problems with your post:
1) we have found out.
2) we will end the fed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=auzfTPp4moA
i declare this my theme song of 2014.
heads will roll,
janus
janus, I see the future: the Fed ends itself.
See my comment above.
Then read these, for starters, and put your cognitive dissonance to rest once and for all:
http://mises.org/books/the_state_oppenheimer.pdf
http://famguardian.org/Publications/OurEnemyTheState/OurEnemyTheState-by...
cleaver...I too see watcha did there....
This is why hot-plates are not allowed in high rise office buildings.
Or Sterno
Ah ha! That explains why security is always so quick to remove bums from all these buildings! (and we all thought it was because of their appearance!)
Or hot babes.
Hot babes are allowed everywhere...EVERYWHERE.
Bring them on.
Great read.
Ditto. And an angle that should bedevil TPTB going forward.
Then again, Snowden might already have the goods and is just biding his time, now that The Intercept is up and running:
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/02/10/welcome-intercept
George,
Didn't you forget the /sarc tag at the end of this article?
No he did not ndeed the sarcasm tag. Either the NIST report about WTC #7 is flawed. Or the report about the safety of High Rise Structures is flawed.
We must demolish all Skyscrapers and sue the Architects and Engineers who designed them.
Boycott any business that owns skyscrapers.
Furthermore since Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Plants was constructed using A36 Steel the Japanese Government needs to sue the United States Government on certifying that containment was even possible using the designed structure.
In fact we ought to sue all City, County, and State Zoning Commissions to force CONDEMNATION OF ALL SKYSCRAPER STRUCTURES. We need to get a Court of Law to enforce that as it poses a direct threat to Public Safety.
http://wtfrly.com/2014/02/05/media-boos-911-superbowl-message-ignores-inspector-general-wtc7-nist-complaint/
Buildings are ONLY at risk if they house offices of agencies investigating financial crimes.
They're still trying to make people think that the WTC buildings collapsed because they were hit by planes (or not) and had fires?
Buildings are ONLY at risk if they house offices of agencies investigating financial crimes.
They're still trying to make people think that the WTC buildings collapsed because they were hit by planes (or not) and had fires?
It is rather obvious that the Towers collapsed due to the fires. A friend of Rick Rescorla (sp?) called him and told him to get out of 2 World Trade because the building was going to collapse due to the fire.
moneybots,
you poor, hapless thing...the only obvious and undeniable fact observable is that you're little more than a high-functioning retard.
sorta like the 'special needs' greeters at walmart. it's cute and all; but it's hardly in anyone's interest for you to go around thinking you're 'people'.
now, i suggest you turn off your computer and step away from the machine before i hurt you with it...and i do feel like hurting you (bad...really, really badly).
a world of pain, moneybots.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1SfzV67Bqw
let me tell you somethin pendejo/
...nobody fucks with the janus,
janus
"moneybots,
you poor, hapless thing...the only obvious and undeniable fact observable is that you're little more than a high-functioning retard."
Name calling is all you have?
It is much better than yhe unsubstatiated information which you spew.
Your employer must be disappointed in your efforts.
If I were paying you to spew disinformation I would hand you your last paycheck and inform you that I no longer need your services.
"It is much better than yhe unsubstatiated information which you spew."
The name calling is because he has nothing to refute me with. thus he calls me names.
That would have ruined this fine piece!
I think the article is more ironic than sarcastic, actually.
hey george, do you have MDB ghost-writing for you nowadays? I wondered where he had gone...
I see what you did there.
Not many of the others did though..
Well said George.
I've always wondered myself where all the lawsuits are against the architects/engineers who purposely designed and built the towers to withstand an impact with a B-707 - an aircraft very similar to the 757. Since they collapsed - wouldn't that be potentially neglegent design/construction?
Well, they also specified asbestos thermal insulation around the steel beams, but asbestos was banned at some point during the construction, so there wasn't any above certain floors. I saw a quote soon after 9-11-01, but haven't been able to find it again, that one of the original engineers said "if a fire breaks out above floor x [unrecalled], that building is coming down."
Of course, there's no suitable substitute material for asbestos in the known universe. I guess WTC7 was built after asbestos was banned - hence no isulation and the collapse - again, making George's point.
And keep in mind that only a scant few years prior WTC7 had been heavily modified to, wait for it... be the mayor's command post in case of emergencies! Yeah, they'd completely ignore any possible threats to the building because, well...
Since 911, buildings just fall down. Get over it. If there's a fire in a building next door, get out of your building, it will just fall down.
Got it?
Since 911, governments just fall down. Get over it
Fire doesn't destory buildings.
Storing financial records destroys buildings.
And storing German gold in the basement.
Normally, a building fire, no matter how intense, could not bring down a skyscraper, and before Sept. 2001 had never done so.
But as we all know, 9/11 changed everything --- including, apparently, the laws of physics.
"Normally, a building fire, no matter how intense, could not bring down a skyscraper, and before Sept. 2001 had never done so.
But as we all know, 9/11 changed everything --- including, apparently, the laws of physics."
The laws of physics have not changed. Fire retardant is sprayed on steel because it can fail when heated by office fires. That other office fires did not cause steel structures to collapse, does not prove it cannot happen. Part of the Windsor Tower collapsed in a fire.
"Part"
Ever tire of grasping at straws?
"Shock & Awe"
It's the new normal.
and shadow gov't dealings
Absolutely.
When young, I was working steel on a high-rise 10 stories up. A guy spilled some gasoline for a generator on a beam and it caught fire from his cig. In a few moments, we could see the steel bending! We got off that structure fast, but that one did not fall, thank God. After that, I always wore a parachute when up on high steel.
Had parachutes been available at 9-11, thousands could have been saved.
You are responsible for your own safety. Take it from a pro, always have an emergency chute if you must conduct business in a skyscraper. Try to have the guy meet you on a sidewalk cafe instead, on the ground.
That's why construction of high rise buildings became suddenly impossible. Welding the steel beams caused immediate bending of the structure. That's why high rise steel buildings can't be built anymore.
I have the same problem with my oven. Every time I ever use the auto clean function on my gas oven, the whole thing melts into a puddle of molten steel on the floor. Then I have to leave the house for a month because the puddle is 2000 degrees for weeks after I turned off the gas WTF!
I had the same problem with Bic lighters.