View Single Post
  #2007  
Old 02-01-2018, 04:22 PM
AddoWolz's Avatar
AddoWolz AddoWolz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Age: 51
Posts: 5,282
Rep Power: 21474845
AddoWolz Sam the man is hereAddoWolz Sam the man is hereAddoWolz Sam the man is hereAddoWolz Sam the man is hereAddoWolz Sam the man is hereAddoWolz Sam the man is hereAddoWolz Sam the man is hereAddoWolz Sam the man is hereAddoWolz Sam the man is hereAddoWolz Sam the man is hereAddoWolz Sam the man is here
Quote:
Originally Posted by wedgetail View Post
The world trade centre buildings had a known structural problem, that the structural stability of the building required that the joints at each corner of each floor needed to remain stable. The thing that would make them unstable would be a fire that would cause warping of the joints leading to a loss of weight bearing capacity. This only had to happen to one floor as this would cause all higher floors to collapse leading to a catastrophic failure as was observed.

To overcome this concern the sprinkler system was over engineered for a building of this size and would have been sufficient from any conceivable internal fire. However they never really considered a plane hitting the buildings.

Grenfell tower did not have this issue with structural stability. Again I point out the complete abandonment of the Trade Towers construction technique starting 17 years ago.
But a plane DIDN'T HIT WTC 7 did it , and the overall engineered sprinkler system should have put out the fires but didn't , and yes the building was hit by falling debris and you could possibly expect a partial collapse , it's just the way that building falls that doesn't add up .
Reply With Quote