SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : LastShadow's Position Trading -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: james-rockford who wrote (41637)9/11/2001 8:03:06 PM
From: Ira Player  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 43080
 
Not my area of expertise, however, I had a friend explain some of this to me in the past...the last time these buildings were attacked.....

Building of this size have a few constraints that have to be met:

1. Lower floors must support higher floors...therefore upper floors must be as light as possible or the lower floors design become impossibly "strong" and are not cost effective to build.

2. The lower floors have the most support (obviously), but have walls that "give" (not structural), allowing energy from an explosive device to be channeled outward, therefore released without sufficient focused force to destroy the support structure. (most of the damage is "cosmetic") This is why attacking from the ground level doesn't work. It takes a really big bomb.

3. As you move up the building, more of the support is "built into" the walls and structure. This efficiency is required to reduce the weight. However, now there is no "cosmetic" damage. All damage is structural.

From his description, there is a minimum explosive force required to destroy a building and there is an optimal location for any given size explosive.

If an explosive is not large enough to destroy the building, exploding it higher will cause the most damage, since these floors are structurally weaker.

Once the amount of energy is reached where destruction is possible, the "optimum location" moves down the building with more explosive force.

The idea is to damage the building as low as the explosive force you have can cause structural failure. This allows all of the potential energy of the concrete and steel above the explosion to become kinetic energy that causes a cascaded overloading of successive floors.

Not a pleasant subject......

Ira



To: james-rockford who wrote (41637)9/12/2001 7:10:58 AM
From: Julius Wong  Respond to of 43080
 
I am a registered Professional Engineer.

The jet fuel fire temperature could reach up to 2000 degrees. The enormous heat from the fire caused the steel frames to bent. When the steel frames deformed too much, the modern steel buildings fail.

Julius



To: james-rockford who wrote (41637)9/12/2001 12:49:24 PM
From: Little John  Respond to of 43080
 
It was the heat from the fire that caused the collapse of the buildings. This is well explained in a Chicago Tribune article yesterday.
-----------------------------------------------------
Posted at 11:26 a.m. PDT Tuesday, Sept. 11, 2001
Engineers shocked by towers' collapse
BY BLAIR KAMIN, Chicago Tribune

CHICAGO -- The World Trade Center, a symbol of American economic might, survived one terrorist attack in 1993. It was designed to withstand the impact of a jet, but both its towers collapsed this morning after planes rammed them.
The structural engineer who designed the towers said as recently as last week that their steel columns could remain standing if they were hit by a 707.
Les Robertson, the Trade Center's structural engineer, spoke last week at a conference on tall buildings in Frankfurt, Germany. He was asked during a question-and-answer session what he had done to protect the twin towers from terrorist attacks, according to Joseph Burns, a principal at the Chicago firm of Thornton-Thomasetti Engineers.
Burns, who was present, said that Robertson said of the center, ``I designed it for a 707 to smash into it.''
Burns, whose firm did the structural engineering for the Petronas Twin Towers in Malaysia -- the world's tallest buildings -- said Robertson did not elaborate on the remark. Robertson could not be reached early Tuesday.
Completed in 1972 and 1973, the 110-story twin towers were the fifth and sixth tallest buildings in the world. One World Trade Center, finished in 1972, was briefly after its construction the world's tallest building. The towers have been called ``a monumental gate to New York and the United States.''
They withstood the 1993 attack, when a bomb-laden van exploded, killing six people and injuring more than 1,000.
Closely spaced steel columns that ringed their perimeter held up the World Trade Center towers. Chicago's Aon Center (formerly the Amoco Building), completed in 1973, uses a similar support system, known to structural engineers as a ``tube.''
Shocked by the building's collapse, structural engineers pointed to fire as the likely cause of the structural failure.
``Fire melts steel,'' Burns said. In addition, he said, the impact of the plane could have severely damaged the building's sprinklers, allowing the fire to rage, despite fireproofing supposed to protect steel columns and beams.
``You never know in an explosion like that whether they (the sprinklers) get cut off,'' Burns said.
Architects Minoru Yamasaki and Associates, in association with Emery Roth & Sons, designed the World Trade Center.
The structural engineers were the firm of Skilling, Helle, Christiansen, Robertson. The developer was The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey.
Tuesday's attack marked the second time that a plane has crashed into a New York City skyscraper, although the first incident was an accident.
In 1945, a B-25 flying at 200 miles per hour slammed into the 78th and 79th floors of the Empire State Building, gouging an 18-by-20-foot hole 913 feet above the streets of Manhattan. The pilot, Lt. Col. William F. Smith Jr., had been heading from New York's LaGuardia Airport to Newark, N.J., when he became disoriented.
Fourteen people died in the crash and the fire that followed -- three people in the plane and 11 in what was then the world's tallest building.
Like the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, which also was struck by a plane, provided a sizable and symbolic target.
The Pentagon is the world's largest office building, with a total of 6.5 million square feet, serves as headquarters for the world's most powerful military. Sears Tower, by comparison, has about 3.5 million square feet of office space.



To: james-rockford who wrote (41637)9/15/2001 12:37:59 PM
From: Jeff Jordan  Respond to of 43080
 
I was amazed to see the building collapse the way they did also. I am still confused as to the effects on the surrounding buildings.

usatoday.com