Structure Magazine helpfully explains how fire can melt steel
posted at 7:41 pm on November 16, 2007 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
The magical secret: It doesn’t have to actually melt the steel. All it has to do is weaken the steel in one critical column in a building constructed a certain way, and down she comes. The nuts and bolts appear on page 3 but here’s the bottom line for the benefit of MM’s “friends” and any Ron Paul supporters who might be stopping by tonight:
The images accompanying this article are taken from a CBS News Archives video to show key points observed during the collapse. As seen in the photos, a kink develops in the east penthouse before it falls into the building. The west penthouse then fails, followed by a kink in the entire facade of the building. Total collapse follows.
This sequence of events, with roof elements sinking into a building with an intact facade, suggests an interior failure. An interior failure would explain the appearance of a “controlled” collapse with a relatively small debris field, as seen with WTC 7.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Since when have facts been part of the Trufer discussion?
Hening on November 16, 2007 at 7:45 PM
well knock me over with a feather .
Mojack420 on November 16, 2007 at 7:51 PM
If Rove and the Jews could detonate this building, he could certainly force the writers of this magazine to come up with this story.
JiangxiDad on November 16, 2007 at 7:53 PM
the Truthers will never absorb this,,,their eyes glaze over when they see lots of words. We need a report with very few words and pretty pictures
realVerse on November 16, 2007 at 7:54 PM
#1 or the Lib’s period. Lib’s to thetruth is like water to oil.
oldernslower on November 16, 2007 at 7:55 PM
rove’s goons threaten publisher
u have to see b4 u r next.
stop
think
breathe.
Dork B. on November 16, 2007 at 7:56 PM
whooops…Lib’s is to the truth, like water is to oil.
oldernslower on November 16, 2007 at 7:56 PM
Facts to liberals are like Kryptonite to Superman.
Gee, how interesting that as time goes on, more facts come out and disprove the a priori conclusion Truthers have. Yay science!
It isn’t necessary to discredit or disprove the claims made by Truthers. Just like the dopey conspiracy nuts who held that FDR knew about Pearl Harbor but let it happen so he could get the country into war (Now where have I heard that before?? Hmmm…), we will never get rid of these Truthers. The more evidence that comes out confirming what the rest of us have always known, the more Truthers will be ignored and swept into the dustbin of history.
Weebork on November 16, 2007 at 7:56 PM
Dude, where’s my hat tip?
TexasDan on November 16, 2007 at 7:58 PM
LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA….. I can’t hear you!!!
csdeven on November 16, 2007 at 7:59 PM
Rosie looks like she’s farting in that vidcap because this article knocks a little more wind out of her argument.
Dork B. on November 16, 2007 at 8:04 PM
I assume it’s something on my end, but all I get when I click on the “page 3″ link is that little x in the box in the upper left corner of my screen.
JetBoy on November 16, 2007 at 8:16 PM
Not knocking your choice of topic to post on and I’m always happy to see the debunking stay in the news (cuz the Truthers ain’t goin’ away), but didn’t we already know this? Isn’t this exact point what folks on our side have said all along?
RightWinged on November 16, 2007 at 8:16 PM
Well, minus the point about the critical column, though. Identifying that column and how the collapse proceeded is the whole point of the article. Interesting stuff.
Allahpundit on November 16, 2007 at 8:18 PM
In the 90s, there was a high rise in Philadelphia which caught on fire, but didn’t collapse. The engineering company which I work for was involved in the investigation and condition assessment after the fire. One of our staff members was telling me how the steel beams had sagged during the fire. One had softened and dipped to the point that inspectors had to duck under it to get by.
Yes
VirginiaRosie, fire will deform steel.Mallard T. Drake on November 16, 2007 at 8:25 PM
Good link, Allah. Thanks.
Splashman on November 16, 2007 at 8:28 PM
I think Structural Magazine would have more credibility if they had modeled the building with chicken wire and concrete blocks. I bet if they snipped the critical strand of wire, the model would have kinked just like the building. That would have put it in terms which the Truthers could understand.
Mallard T. Drake on November 16, 2007 at 8:28 PM
But…but…Rosie said!!!1! Are you actually insinuating she’s batsh*t crazy?
Oh, wait…she is.
amerpundit on November 16, 2007 at 8:29 PM
Nevedr take - one thing the Trufers exhibit consistently: An extremely poor grasp of mathematics in general, and by extension, the physical sciences in particular. Concepts of mass, acceleration, exponential increase, percentages, thermal dynamics…
Might as well explain a box of crayolas to them in Aramaic.
As bad as the standards for public education have become, we should probably be thankful that only 10% or less of the population is truly so cognitively dissonant as to be unable to process enough information to identify the trufer BS as BS.
Also provides a pointed answer to the age old adolescent lament “algebra? When, like, are we ever going to use that in REAL life?”
Um..how about when you need to avoid looking like a total moron?
Wind Rider on November 16, 2007 at 8:32 PM
If you look at the color coded floor plan on Page 3, it is evident why Column 79 was critical. The tributary area of column 79 is huge, especially compared with the other columns. Draw a line, north/south, halfway between Col. 79 and Col. 76, to the west. Now draw a line, east/west, halfway between Col. 79 and Col. 80 to the south. Do the same in the area between Col. 79 and the edges of the building to the north and east. If all the lines are connected, the resulting polygon is the area of each floor which Col. 79 is supporting. Only Col. 58 has a tributary area approaching the size of Col. 79’s.
The article is showing that if Col. 79 is lost, a significant chunk of the building is unsupported. Col. 79 happened to be in the initial area of collapse, so the pieces fit together to make a reasonable case for the cause of failure.
Mallard T. Drake on November 16, 2007 at 8:46 PM
The link is a download for a PDF.
csdeven on November 16, 2007 at 8:49 PM
Are you guys saying that the third lead in Another Stakeout isn’t an expert in metallurgy? I need a bag to breathe into.
Jim Treacher on November 16, 2007 at 8:59 PM
csdeven…Thanks! Yeah, I went to the site’s front page, got the first part of the article, but still get lots of “x”s…I’ve not had a prob with pdf before, but it just won’t load.
But I’m sure it’s just a continuation on the Pop. Mech. debunk…I still am in regualar conversation with a few truthers, who still claim it’s a “big media” conspiracy anyway.
No amount of common-sense proof seem to sink in with them.
JetBoy on November 16, 2007 at 9:16 PM
No way, that’s incredible.
Where John Davidson, Cathy Lee Crosby??? “Fran Tarkington”??? The yoga guy who could fit in a Kleenex box?
This is amazing, what a news flash, all this time we’ve been making buildings out of steel and this new development.
IDIOTS!!!
benrand on November 16, 2007 at 9:22 PM
Well since Rosie,moonbats,truthers are so clever,
I would love to hear their explanation as to why
an airplane,when hitting water,a lake or the ocean,
breaks up into tiny pieces,I’m curious to hear the
wacko take on that one,but dude it’s only water.haha
canopfor on November 16, 2007 at 9:26 PM
Here’s a fact that might freak out Rosie and crew,
would love to see their reaction on video.
Okay Rosie,were going to heat up the tile,and simulate
re-entre of the Space Shuttle,now when it get’s toasty
hot and it glows,you can touch it,ah it’s glowing you
want me to do what!hehe
canopfor on November 16, 2007 at 9:34 PM
Whenever discussion of WTC 7 comes up, I ask myself again and again, “What would have been motive for bringing down this building hours later?” For lack of a better term, the collapse of towers 1 and 2 were the money shots. Had building 7 remained standing, nothing at all would have changed. Not a thing. The country would have been energized to an equal degree. The general public didn’t give a thought to building 7 until the troofers came out of their warrens.
Why would the evil Bushhitlerco. have gone to all the trouble to bring down an unoccupied building hours after the grand finale? The events of the past 6 years were already in motion by 11AM that morning.
KGB on November 16, 2007 at 9:49 PM
You sold me, I’ll check it out later
RightWinged on November 16, 2007 at 9:55 PM
Some folks are way above the facts. Just their ‘gut’ feeling and psychotic paranoid personality is all it takes. Increased stress and chemical abuse can initiate a psychotic episode.
Griz on November 16, 2007 at 10:10 PM
FIRE DOESNT MELT STEEL
U JUST DONT KNOW UR PHYSICS
GOOGLE IT AND UL UNDERSTAND
(bear with me, I’m bucking for a slot on Rosie’s blogwriting staff…)
sulla on November 16, 2007 at 10:18 PM
Yep my dad has a piece and I have seen him heat it up with a blow torch and do just that.
mgtanner on November 16, 2007 at 10:21 PM
I think the cred level here is a tad higher than popular mechanics, not that their explanation lacked anything. But Structure is the technical journal of the NCSEA, a national structural engineers group. One holds out small hope that those who proport to “just ask questions” might be interested in the actual answers.
Progressive collapse, or disproportionate collapse, is a relatively new headache to us engineers. It’s the unfortunate truth that many or perhaps most of our structures cannot survive the removal of one column without damage to an area much larger than that supported by the column, even up to total collapse.
Since one can actually take out a column with a backpack-sized amount of explosive, the pressure is on to design structures to survive such an event. It’s not any easy (read: not inexpensive) problem to solve.
TexasDan on November 16, 2007 at 10:26 PM
Too bad that smart people had to waste their time debunking yet another Dhemocrat myth.
Mojave Mark on November 16, 2007 at 11:14 PM
According to Rosie, horse shoes come out of the ground in that shape.
They are all NUTS!
Talon on November 17, 2007 at 4:24 AM
The physics is…. fire can’t melt stupid.
Always Right on November 17, 2007 at 6:28 AM
“Rosie looks like she’s farting in that vidcap because this article knocks a little more wind out of her argument.”
uh…Rosie had an argument? You mean Rosie had an emotion… an argument implies “thinking” and I don’t see too many synapses firing there.
atadOFF on November 17, 2007 at 7:52 AM
Of course, since the Troofers are thoroughly convinced that their “chicken-wire” models trump everything, including all of human technological progress since the Bronze Age, there’s only one thing to do;
Send Rosie a copy of Wayne Goddard’s $50 Knife Shop (Krause Publications, 2001; ISBN 0-87341-993-6. $19.95)
It explains in great detail, with lots of pictures, how knifesmiths use fire to melt steel ever day of the year.
Of course, to use it, she’d have to be able to read something without “interpreting” it to suit herself. Which I suspect she is incapable of.
No, on second thought, better not send her one. Do we really want her playing with fire and sharp objects?
cheers
eon
eon on November 17, 2007 at 8:23 AM
I’m sure all the workers at US Steel are relieved now that it is confirmed that fire actually CAN melt steel.
They were all pretty worried about how they were going to get all that solid steel out of the blast furnace and into the crucibles…
The fact that this topic was taken seriously by anyone for even a nanosecond makes you wonder if letting “civilization” interfere with the “natural selection” process isn’t a horrible mistake.
landlines on November 17, 2007 at 9:46 AM
Money
Ron Paul was not available for comment, he stopped at the moon on the way from Mars to go potty.
right2bright on November 17, 2007 at 12:38 PM
Why should Ron Paul comment on this again? He’s already gone on national television and said that he doesn’t believe that truther nonsense.
Let me break it down for you and everyone else who continues to disparage Dr. Paul with this “Truther” bullshit:
Ron Paul believes, as our founding fathers believed, that government is inherently inefficient, and should be entrusted with very little power, as it will just abuse that power and use it to gain more power. Our current government is a monstrous behemouth that wields undue powers with predictably damaging results. So Ron Paul is opposed to our current incarnation of government. Hold that thought.
Truthers are paranoid and believe that the government (but not necessarily all government) is evil and “the man” planned and carried out the 9/11 plot.
Where the two meet is that they’re both extremely dissatisfied with our current incarnation of government. It’s for totally different reasons. It’s a relationship of convenience. Truther nuts need a candidate who is radically dissatisfied with our government. Ron Paul isn’t exactly killing in polls, so he can’t afford to shake of any bastion of support (e.g. Truthers), regardless of how much he thinks they’re a bunch of loons.
See also John McCain and fringe evangelical Christians like the late Jerry Falwell.
But you don’t see me talking about how John McCain thinks 9/11 was an inside job by God to punish us for tolerating homosexuals (as McCain’s campaign buddy Falwell said).
Mark Jaquith on November 17, 2007 at 4:00 PM
Yes. And Ron Paul isn’t in league with white supremacists either, he just has a healthy fear of ever-expanding minority rights.
Further, Ron Paul isn’t really ignorant about foreign policy. He’s just for Fortress America and doesn’t see how anyone could possibly pose a threat to us.
BKennedy on November 17, 2007 at 4:59 PM
In the mind of mindless, zombie-tized fan of Rosie O’Donnell:
“Should I believe in a magazine based on the facts of engineering, science and plain common sense or should I believe Rosie, who is my main conduit to reality, I worship like a god and think the sun rises and sets on (literally)…..”
“I believe Rosie!!!”
Planet Boulder on November 18, 2007 at 12:15 PM
Yep, reminds me of a scene from the movie “The Mothman Prophecies” when the main character (Richard Gere whom I loath) is talking to this guy that supposedly had some information about the Mothman and Gere asked him why they (the Mothmen) didn’t just come out and makes themselves known and explain their abilities and civilization to the world? His response essentially was doing so would be like trying to explain quantum physics to a cockroach, it’s really a waste of time for both the person explaining and the cockroach…much like us using facts and science to explain how the towers collapsed to twoofers is a waste of time.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying we shouldn’t expose how ridiculous the twoofers are and how harmful their conspiracy theories are to the war effort (not to mention how hurtful their garbage theories are to the family and friends of those lost on 9-11) but it’s obvious no amount of facts and science will get them to change their minds as they are suffering from severe delusional denial!
Liberty or Death on November 18, 2007 at 1:40 PM
Minorities don’t have rights, unless you’re talking about the ultimate minority: the individual. Trying to twist a belief in individual rights instead of “group rights” into racism is a well-worn tactic of the American Leftard. Congrats.
Mark Jaquith on November 18, 2007 at 6:36 PM
Can someone please re-assure me that all this trooferism among so many high school and college kids is a phase of life out of which these people will one day emerge and say to themselves, “what a dumbshit I was back then. fire really does melt steel, Islamic terrorists brought down the towers, not Don Rumsfeld, and my own government was not so evil as to plan and execute the deaths of thousands of my fellow citizens so Halliburton’s stock would go up one-quarter of a point.”
Please? Coz if not, you might as well give me a pouch full of fish heads and send me out on the ice floe to await death, coz i sure as hell dont want to be around when people like that get into positions of real power.
Its bad enought that people who were in HS in the 80’s and hating on Ronaldus Magnus while praising Daniel Ortega and Che are today running Presidential campaigns and staffing Congressional committees.
20 years of Trooferism would be too much to deal with.
Man, do I need a beer. or 6.
Mike D. on April 2, 2008 at 8:22 PM
Is there an explanation for why that building in Philly didn’t collapse?
Chimpy on April 2, 2008 at 10:09 PM