Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Politics : Bush-The Mastermind behind 9/11? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: David Howe who wrote (16027)	9/19/2006 6:37:22 PM
From: Orcastraiter	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20039

LOL...you're not keeping up with the story. FEMA said pancake, and that was on the NOVA show...and the same engineers that were instrumental in those early reports are now involved in the current NIST report....which says the floors did not fail!

To: David Howe who wrote (16027)	9/20/2006 12:14:36 AM
From: TigerPaw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20039

the joists pulled away from the core columns and started the collapse. Actually that was an early hypothesis that turned out would not happen. What NIST says did happen is that the steel truss that held the floor heated, weakened, and expanded. Moreover, they expanded across their whole length since the fire covered pretty much the whole floor. When the truss got to red-hot and it's expansion was limited by the attachment to the wall/core, then it began to sag in the middle since this was the only direction left for it to expand in. When the truss sagged it no longer acted as a brace for the side walls, but instead actually began pulling the walls inward. The walls were already damaged and parts of them were getting hot too. This eventually led to the outer walls being pulled in as a kink at some point, and then the upper part of the building was no longer supported. TP