MTT Key Points - 9-11 Visibility Project

Report
How Did They Fall?
How Did They Not Fall?
Introduction
WTC 7 also “collapsed”
due to “fire” and “gravity” on that day:
It was not struck by aircraft
Introduction
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) study;
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Building Performance Assessment (FEMA BPA);
9/11 Commission and it’s Report;
National Institute of Standards & Technology
(NIST) WTC 1 and 2 study and report
NIST WTC 7 study and report
Introduction
Budget of 17.5 million dollars,
Staff of hundreds
3 year study
10000 page final report
NIST admits they do not know
what caused global collapse of
the Twin Towers.
Introduction
N and S Towers
•
•
•
•
•
•
Historical Background
NIST vs Physical Evidence
Not addressed by NIST
Independent research (Steve Jones et al)
NIST vs the Engineering Community
Appendices
Some Historical Background
Worthington, Skilling, Helle and Jackson
structural engineering firm of record
for the WTC tower construction
1966 - 1970
John Skilling and Leslie Robertson
Principle engineers
Some Historical Background
Steel framed reinforced high rise structures
have never before or since 9/11 collapsed due to fire
Hotel Mandarin
Madrid Spain
Beijing
Some Historical Background
Civilians, and over 100 FDNY firefighters
reported explosions in the towers
Some Historical Background:
Demolition Experts
2001: Bent Lund, Jens Claus Hansen,
NATO General Keld Hillingsoe
Hugo Bachmann
Van Romero, Mark Taylor
Van Romero
later publicly recanted
2007: Danny Joewenko
Confirms WTC7 CD
Some Historical Background
Some Historical Background
$elling out the Investigation
Bill Manning
2002
• Half baked farce
• Destruction of evidence illegal
(City of NY rapidly recycled
300,000 tons of steel from WTC)
NIST Analysis
Based on “Descending block” scenario:
Analysis only done up to image 4
Image 5 shows beginning of “global collapse”
NIST argument
For global collapse
There was no analysis
only the NIST mantra:
“The change in potential energy due to downward movement of building mass above the
buckled columns exceeded the strain energy that could have been absorbed by the
structure. Global collapse then ensued.”
NIST argument
NIST mantra says
fewer lighter floors above aircraft impact outcrushed the more numerous and more
massive floors below
I-Beams above 85th floor
Square beams on lower floors
The biggest problem it turns out…
There was no “upper block”
Upper 34 floors of S. Tower begin to rotate
Angular momentum would carry block away
South Tower Reality:
Angular rotation stops
Upper block disintegrates in mid air
North Tower Reality:
There was no “upper block”
Floors above aircraft impact disintegrate while
falling on the lower tower.
Note the top of the “upper block” has fallen considerably,
While the top of the “lower block” has moved very little
Kevin Ryan blows the whistle
UL: Floor trusses: ASTM E 119
Subjected to 1000 deg. C for two hours
With specified loading
35 ft trusses passed test
NIST: No significant steel
temperatures over 625 deg. C
[steel conducts heat from source]
NIST: floor trusses and columns
weakened and collapsed on
impact floors
N. Tower: Fuel burns up in 8 minutes
S. Tower: More fuel burns outside
Impact at 9:03
S. Tower reality: About 9:41
No hot fire
S. Tower Reality:
Internal fires not severe
911 Commision Report notes:
“Lost Tape”radio transmissions:
Battalion Chief Orio Palmer reached
the impact floors in the South
tower, seconds before it fell,
His men only saw a few small
pockets of fire, and thought they
had the situation under control
244 Perimeter 47 Core
NIST: loads on perimeter columns
ENR: loads on perimeter columns
Structural damage
Abdolhasan Astaneh Asl, NSF Grant
"The impact did nothing to this building."
NIST simulation of
aircraft damage to S Tower
Not addressed by NIST
WTC1, 2 , and 7 fell at close to free fall speed
Implies lower floors offered little resistance
Removal of core columns could cause this
Not addressed by NIST
•
•
•
•
•
N Tower antenna seems to move downward
No façade motion
Noted by FEMA and NYT
Suggests core columns severed
NIST calls motion “lateral” with no analysis
Not addressed by NIST
Squibs (detonator or dud charges) which the
“collapse” overtakes:
This was not dust blowing out of collapsing floors
Not addressed by NIST
Massive material thrown laterally up to 500 ft;
Penetrates into surrounding structures
Beam assemblies weighed tons
Not addressed by NIST
complete pulverization of virtually all
concrete into a pyroclastic cloud.
Not addressed by NIST
Afterglow recorded in multiple videos of the
tower collapses.
Not addressed by NIST
Pools of molten metal in WTC1,2, and 7
basements, 6 weeks after 9/11
Not addressed by NIST
Steel melted and vaporized to razor sharp thinness
by a eutectic mixture of sulfur.
[images from Appendix C of FEMA Report]
Steven Jones asks an
important question:
How can a Gravitational “collapse”:
Occur at free fall speed
Pulverize concrete to a pyroclastic flow;
Cause melted metal in basements;
Vaporize steel columns in mid-air;
Throw massive steel structures 500 ft laterally
Burn or melt thousands of cars and trucks
Research: Steven Jones
South Tower
Molten metal flowing well below aircraft impact
(attributed by NIST to aircraft aluminum)
Research: Steven Jones
Iron rich slag
Ash emissions
Jones thought all of these observations were consistent
with the use of thermite
Research: Steven Jones
Thermite: iron oxide + aluminum powder
Produces: aluminum oxide + heat + iron
Hot enough to evaporate iron & steel
Thermite + sulfur produces thermate
Accelerates thermite reaction
Remember Appendix C of FEMA report:
Sulfur found which produced a eutechtic reaction
Steven Jones et al
WTC Dust
6%: Metallic microspheres:
once molten iron rich droplets
Were once vaporized iron
Highly energetic (reactive)
Red and grey bi-layered chips:
Red layer: high tech nano-particles
Produces metallic microspheres
Carbon: gas/explosive effect
Nano thermite: Livermore Labs
NIST vs The engineering community
The British construction industry magazine
New Civil Engineer International (NCEI)
Has posted articles critical of the NIST study
Raising such issues as:
• NIST continually changing it’s story
• NIST “refusing to show computer
visualizations (ie simulations) of the
[global] collapse”
NIST vs The Engineering Community
Jon Magnusson, CEO of Magnusson Klemencic
Associates, based in Seattle WA
Seattle Seattle
vs NIST
NIST vs The engineering community
NIST vs The engineering community
James Quintiere, PhD,
• One of the world’s leading
fire science researchers
• Former Chief of the Fire
Science Division of NIST
• Objected to certain aspects
of the NIST investigation
• Has
called
for
an
independent review.
NIST vs The fire engineering community
Erik Lawer, Seattle area firefighter,
founded Firefighters for 9-11 Truth
The website states:
"...NFPA (National Fire Protection Association)
921, which is the National Standard for Fire and
Explosion Investigations, very
clearly indicates … that the possibility of explosives
should have been thoroughly investigated.
[But was not]
How all three buildings fell
Shared features in fall of WTC 1, 2, 7:
Perfectly symmetric at or near free fall speed
Pyro cloud
Eroded/vaporized steel
Molten metal in basement
Squibs
Red and Grey chips/microspheres
To be Released Sept 1 2011
Appendix 1: NIST:
Failed in their assigned mission of finding the cause
of global collapse
Drew conclusions inconsistent with photographic
evidence, statements from eyewitnesses, the 911
Commission report, and even their own evidence
Provided no momentum transfer analysis of their
alleged upper and lower blocks
Appendix 1: NIST:
Omitted or distorted many important aspects:
Building free fall
Movement of the WTC1 antenna before the adjacent façade,
Disintegration of “upper blocks”
Squibs,
Pyroclastic dust clouds,
Pools of molten metal in the WTC basements
Eye witness reports
Appendix 1: NIST:
Failed to provide follow up study of the
“eutechtic reaction” referenced in FEMA
Appendix C
Failed to test for explosives residue.
Appendix 2:
Structural details of the towers
Each tower was 1375 ft. tall, with 110 floors of 12.5 ft. height
Each consisted of a perimeter of 244 structural steel columns forming a square
plan, with horizontal bracing (spandrels) and extremely rigid chamfered
corners.
The building cores, of dimensions 79X139 ft., was a veritable forest of 47
columns, horizontal and diagonal cross braced.
The 47 core columns varied in thickness with floor height. Individual core
columns in the lower core measured 52 x 22 in. (in plan), and were formed of
5 and 3 inch plate into almost solid steel shafts that weighed up to 56 tons.
This construction changed to relatively light I-beam cross section above the
85th floor.
Appendix 3
Other problems with descending block scenario
Small number of upper floors vs lower floors
Lower floors constructed with more massive beams
to support more weight
No momentum transfer anaysis
Appendix 3
Other problems with descending block scenario
• FEMA, notes the average core box column
cross section construction changed to
relatively light I-beam cross section above
the 85th floor
• S tower impact at 78-85th floor
• N tower impact at 94-98th floor
Appendix 3
Other problems with descending block scenario
Stress of the Impact of an “upper block” with
a “lower block” will be propagated rapidly
through the entire structure. This
propagation will absorb energy, and the
question is, as in the case of an elastic
spring, how much energy can the structure
absorb without breaking.
Appendix 3
Other problems with descending block scenario
Gordon Ross did such an analysis, and found that the
lower floors would stretch enough to absorb the
energy of impact
NIST provided no such momentum transfer analysis
Appendix 3
Other problems with descending block scenario
Intact portions of tower, apparently hanging in
mid air above the “collapse wave”
Appendix 3
Other problems with descending block scenario
Official stories inconsistent
• In 2006, Implosion World published a paper on
how the tower destruction was NOT like a CD
• Author notes that 95% of the debris fell outside
the building footprint. This is inconsistent with
NIST’s contention that the huge mass of the upper
floors crushed the lower floors
Appendix
Events at the World Trade Center:
Appendix 4:
Documentation and Claims
A document from the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey
(PANYNJ) indicated that the impact of a Boeing 707 aircraft was
analyzed during the design stage of the WTC towers. The analysis
concluded that such a collision “would result in only local damage
which could not cause collapse or substantial damage to the
building.…”
NIST supporter Eduardo Kausel of MIT argues that the 707 and 767 are
comparable aircraft, and that fire caused the collapse.
Appendix 5
Timeline
According to media reports, American Airlines
Boeing 767 Flight 11 crashed between floors 94
and 98 of the North Tower at 8:46 a.m. The North
Tower collapsed at 10:29 a.m. According to media
reports, United Airlines Boeing 767 Flight 175
crashed between floors 78 and 85 of the South
Tower at 9:03 a.m. The South Tower collapsed at
9:59 a.m.
Structural damage
, got access to the steel before the
ASCE/FEMA team and NIST.
Despite the fact that 40 percent of a steel
beam was torn away, the column did not
collapse, an example of redundancy built into
the 1970s-vintage structure.
NIST vs The engineering community
Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth
(www.ae911truth.org), founded by Richard Gage in 2006,
is the preeminent organization in the engineering
community looking closely at the fall of the WTC
buildings
Currently 1500+ architecture and engineering professionals
have signed the AE petition asking Congress for a serious
investigation into the destruction of the WTC buildings
Conclusion
We need a new truly independent
investigation, with supoena power,
to learn the full truth of why the
WTC structures fell.

similar documents