Why register? ...To Enhance Your Experience
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. #1
    MembersZone Subscriber E229Lt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Posts
    2,987

    Default Why

    Good point RR
    Last edited by E229Lt; 05-02-2002 at 09:47 AM.


  2. #2
    Member Baker FF/PM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Keene, Texas
    Posts
    60

    Default

    Very good question. I had originally heard that it collapsed due to massive structural damage from the tower collapse. Unfortunatly no one has looked close enough into its collapse to give me other ideas.
    I would...but no!

  3. #3
    JTL
    JTL is offline
    Senior Member JTL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    I don't know...
    Posts
    272

    Default

    LT,

    Excellent point.

    I have heard that secondary damage to structural components caused the collapse. However there was fire and it had to do damage as well.

    The impact of the towers alone created something akin to a minor quake and the blasts could, and probably did, cause a "engineering" disaster in the 60 story structure. However it held up for some time before collapsing. I have to believe that the structure was very weakened by the blast and collapse of the Twin Towers and that fire "Most Likely" played a role in the erosion of remaining stability. Because there has been no report to confirm or deny any of this I am speculating.

  4. #4
    Member Baker FF/PM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Keene, Texas
    Posts
    60

    Default

    O.K. what you are saying is that the gravity resistance system (someone said that the other day, couldn't help but use it), was already severly weakened by the impact and violence of the tower(s) collapse. Then, too add to this weakened state fire was introduced which further attacked the gravity resistance system, and as some New Yorkers might say, Bah-da Bing, catastrophic failure of the entire structure. (whew, I didn't know I could speak so much technically).
    I would...but no!

  5. #5
    Sr. Information Officer NJFFSA16's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    25 NW of the GW
    Posts
    8,434

    Post The fall of #7

    E ngine Lt stated
    ...I'll say it again, the falling of a sixty story building has been brushed aside as a secondary event. There is much to be learned in the remains of that building, I hope someone is looking.
    I think your questions and concerns deserve answers from the same people that investigated the collapse of WTC 1 & 2.

    If you feel strongly about it, my suggestion would be for you...or a representative of FDNY, to send an inquiry to the investigating entity.
    Perhaps, and I admit that it is probably a long shot...another investigation could be undertaken. There are valuable lessons to be learned here. Given an official request...maybe they would indeed act upon it. Heck...what have you got to lose?

    American Society of Civil Engineers
    1801 Alexander Bell Drive
    Reston, VA 20191
    (800) 548-2723

    Additionally, the entire contents of the ASCE report is available in PDF format on their website.

    http://www.house.gov/science/hot/wtc/wtcreport.htm
    Proudly serving as the IACOJ Minister of Information & Propoganda!
    Be Safe! Lookouts-Awareness-Communications-Escape Routes-Safety Zones

    *Gathering Crust Since 1968*
    On the web at www.section2wildfire.com

  6. #6
    JTL
    JTL is offline
    Senior Member JTL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    I don't know...
    Posts
    272

    Default

    NJFFS_A16
    Thanks for the Link.


    Baker FF/PM
    I guess what I am saying is that the building (7WTC) was damaged by the twin towers collapse/blast and then it, meaning 7, burned and fell. That is as technical as it gets.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    MI. USA
    Posts
    138

    Default

    Respectfully deleted.

    I hope through the investigation that sooner or later you do find out what happened Lt.

    GOD Bless FDNY and ALL of the lost Brother's and their families.

    Dave
    FTM, PTB, RFB
    Last edited by FF.1205; 05-02-2002 at 06:31 AM.

  8. #8
    JTL
    JTL is offline
    Senior Member JTL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    I don't know...
    Posts
    272

    Default

    I have never heard any information those forces being applied to building 7.
    I am digging trying to find where that has been mentioned.

  9. #9
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    159

    Question

    I had read in a book about 9-11 that 7 WTC collapsed due to it catching fire and having a fuel depot to run the generators for the Con Ed electrical system that was the power plant for all 7 buildings.

    Of course this could be wrong and way off base, but that is what I read.

    Ed
    I.A.C.O.J.-Member

    "The only difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has limits".-Albert Einstien

    "If opportunity doesn't knock, build a door"-Milton Berle

  10. #10
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Posts
    202

    Default

    Keep in mind that this was a 60 story building FULLY INVOLVED in high intensity fire. Little was done in the way of suppression, and then it took a hit laterally from the falling towers. This is not your normal structural fire.

  11. #11
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jan 1999
    Location
    MA
    Posts
    1,744

    Default Firehouse Article/interview

    According to the interview with Deputy Peter Hayden - Division 1, a bulge was noted in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13 very early on after the collapse of the towers. He does not indicate how much fire was present at the time the bulge was noticed, so it difficult to say whether the bulge was from the fire or the collapse.

    Dave

  12. #12
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Westchester Co., NY USA
    Posts
    567

    Default

    When I arrived at the site around 10am, #7 was heavily involved with fire on numerous floors. Besides the volume of fire, the building also was givin stress from the impact of the collapsing towers on the ground, and the air pressure created, also keep in mind that while the towers fell "straight" down, it wasn't exactly straight, many of these buildings were very close together, debris spread out quite far. Also keep in mind that it received 2 similiar shocks minutes apart Brando, you are correct in your statement about the fuel storage. I cannot remember the size of the tanks in the basement, but I believe there were 2 large tanks. A safety zone was also already in place around #7. I do remember also that it was around 5:30pm EST when it collapsed. I'm sure that it will be mentioned somewhere, someday. Fortunately, from what I understand, there were no fatalities in 7 WTC, there were numerous body parts on the roof from what friends of mine have told me.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    The above is my opinion only and doesn't reflect that of any dept/agency I work for, deal with, or am a member of.

  13. #13
    Keepin it real Fyrechicken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Erial, New Jersey
    Posts
    287

    Default

    Originally posted by BucksEngine78
    Keep in mind that this was a 60 story building FULLY INVOLVED in high intensity fire. Little was done in the way of suppression, and then it took a hit laterally from the falling towers. This is not your normal structural fire.
    Also from reading other reports on it and from eyewitness reports. The building was not your run-of-the-mill building, it was built around and over the verzion building next door (the generator area - this is were the fuel fed fire comes into play) to use available space. I'm not sure as to the nature of the shape I believe it was "U" shaped with the part of the verzion building in the hollow under #7 WTC.


    Robert B.
    NJ-TF1
    Rescue Specialist

  14. #14
    MembersZone Subscriber CJMinick390's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Sitting on my Laa Laa waiting for my Yaa Yaa
    Posts
    1,042

    Post I think #7 was investigated

    Based on testimony before Congress I heard on CSPAN radio, I am led to believe that the ASCE/FEMA report did look at building #7. At some point, I'll try to read the entire report. It's going to be awhile though. Don't seem to have enough time to do anything these days.
    Chris Minick, P.E., Firefighter II
    Structures Specialist, MD-TF 1

    These statements are mine and mine alone
    I.A.C.O.J. Building crust and proud of it

  15. #15
    Senior Member Temptaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    942

    Default Unraveling a 9-11 mystery;

    I saw this article in the news section and thought it may be of interest. I must say I am glad to see that they ARE investigating why this building fell.

    http://webpublisher.lexisnexis.com/i...-X15J-00000-00

    The results of many of Ingberg's experiments found their way into U.S. building codes. (When he was told to turn over his matches on the eve of his 70th birthday, the father of fire research turned his garage into a furnace so he could continue collaborating on tests with his former colleagues.)
    'Much hotter fire'

    But do tests conducted in an era of wood filing cabinets hold up today? Some engineers think not. "Building contents have changed a lot from the 1920s," says Shyam Sunder, the engineer in NIST's Building and Fire Research Laboratory who will lead NIST's in-depth investigation of the World Trade Center if Congress approves the money for it.

    It is about time they start looking at the codes from a fire safety stand point.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts