Could the bulge in the wall of WTC 7 have been a sign of instability?

[ozeco41]

Building Collapse: Learn the Warning Signs

Is it me, or is your source actually talking about wooden building fires?

Could well be - since wooden buildings are a legitimate subset of buildings.

But stop playing silly games.

The Incident Commander was faced by the need to make a decision. In real time. He made it. In real time. And subsequent events proved him right.

Raising the issue is a waste of time at this stage 15 years later. Even raising it with honest intent would be a waste of effort UNLESS it was to identify a legitimate need to improve emergency management protocols. And I will discuss legitimate arguments in that domain with anyone competent to raise them.

So if the question arose in the proper context - which is debrief of incident management after the event - the issue is non sequitur.

And raising it in support of dishonest claims by CT's on internet forums 15 years after the event is sure sign of CT's who know they have lost the argument.

 

[Fledermaus]

Building Collapse: Learn the Warning Signs

Is it me, or is your source actually talking about wooden building fires?

If you look at the sourceS you will note a common theme.....

 

[MicahJava]

Could well be - since wooden buildings are a legitimate subset of buildings.

But stop playing silly games.

The Incident Commander was faced by the need to make a decision. In real time. He made it. In real time. And subsequent events proved him right.

Raising the issue is a waste of time at this stage 15 years later. Even raising it with honest intent would be a waste of effort UNLESS it was to identify a legitimate need to improve emergency management protocols. And I will discuss legitimate arguments in that domain with anyone competent to raise them.

So if the question arose in the proper context - which is debrief of incident management after the event - the issue is non sequitur.

And raising it in support of dishonest claims by CT's on internet forums 15 years after the event is sure sign of CT's who know they have lost the argument.

Yeah lul cause a wooden house is totally like WTC 7.

From taking a look around, the other side plays plenty of games.

 

[Fledermaus]

Yeah lul cause a wooden house is totally like WTC 7.

From taking a look around, the other side plays plenty of games.

Intentional ignorance of what firefighters consider signs of instability in ALL structures.

 

[MicahJava]

Intentional ignorance of what firefighters consider signs of instability in ALL structures.

Intentional ignorance of what firefighters consider signs of instability in ALL structures.

You posted from an article that is probably only talking about wooden buildings. It has a video embedded showing wooden buildings collapsing. Apples and oranges.

 

[ozeco41]

Yeah lul cause a wooden house is totally like WTC 7.

As said - stop playing silly games. Other members may respond to your nonsense - I won't - if you have nothing serious to say I wont waste effort responding.

From taking a look around, the other side plays plenty of games.

The grade school kids on the school buses I drive play that one.
Me to misbehaving kid. Q: "Did you hit him?"
Alleged offender. A: "He hit me first."

-- it is a confession NOT a defence.

The challenge I issued to you was to address the real problem.
If you don't want to or are incapable "From taking a look around..." you have a lot of incompetent allies.

However - if you decide to get serious - let me know.

 

[Kat Dorman]

A few years back, I did find this topic interesting on an academic level. To cut to the chase: where is that bulge in the NIST physics simulation? And, wasn't that bulge supposed to be located in the SW corner between floors 10 and 13? Here's a picture for reference:

Where is it again?

 

[Fledermaus]

I asked how they would create instability. It sounds like you don't know. I would also bet you wouldn't realize that most if not all bulges would have nothing to do with stability of a structure and that it is simply the skin (non-structural) that is bulging.

Around 1230 Deputy Director of the OEM, Richard Rotanz has to make an assessment on the damage to WTC 7. On the exterior he sees the upper 10-15 floors of Tower 7 on fire. "The skin of the building or the outside skirt of the building was taken out,¿ he says. "You see columns gone. You see floors damaged and you see heavy black smoke and fire."

He then enters the WTC 7. "At the time the building wasn't safe but we had to make an assessment, just the same, and we didn't spend that long. You could hear the building creak above us, you could hear things fall, you could hear the fire burning. You could see columns just hanging from the upper floors, gaping holes in the floors up above us.

"There was an elevator car that was blown out of the shaft and it was down the hall. This is the massive impact of Tower 1 onto Tower 7."

Seems people were concerned about the conditions elsewhere as well.....

More signs of instability.

 

[MicahJava]

As said - stop playing silly games. Other members may respond to your nonsense - I won't - if you have nothing serious to say I wont waste effort responding.


The grade school kids on the school buses I drive play that one.
Me to misbehaving kid. Q: "Did you hit him?"
Alleged offender. A: "He hit me first."

-- it is a confession NOT a defence.

The challenge I issued to you was to address the real problem.
If you don't want to or are incapable "From taking a look around..." you have a lot of incompetent allies.

However - if you decide to get serious - let me know.

If I played along with every single thing every reply said, It would be a literally endless internet argument. I don't care for that. You choose to believe that I'm playing games, so sure, whatever, I am.

 

[ozeco41]

If I played along with every single thing every reply said, It would be a literally endless internet argument. I don't care for that. You choose to believe that I'm playing games, so sure, whatever, I am.

The offer is still open. If you want to get serious just let me know - or simply post a serious claim with an outline of supporting argument.

 

[MicahJava]

Around 1230 Deputy Director of the OEM, Richard Rotanz has to make an assessment on the damage to WTC 7. On the exterior he sees the upper 10-15 floors of Tower 7 on fire. "The skin of the building or the outside skirt of the building was taken out,¿ he says. "You see columns gone. You see floors damaged and you see heavy black smoke and fire."

He then enters the WTC 7. "At the time the building wasn't safe but we had to make an assessment, just the same, and we didn't spend that long. You could hear the building creak above us, you could hear things fall, you could hear the fire burning. You could see columns just hanging from the upper floors, gaping holes in the floors up above us.

"There was an elevator car that was blown out of the shaft and it was down the hall. This is the massive impact of Tower 1 onto Tower 7."

Seems people were concerned about the conditions elsewhere as well.....

More signs of instability.

Lol, you stole my source without actually providing a link.

"There was an elevator car that was blown out of the shaft and it was down the hall."

hmmmm... structural damage or bomb damage?

More denial of this "magic elevator" issue in the "Bazant Misconduct website is launched" thread.

 

[TheGoverness]

Lol, you stole my source without actually providing a link.

"There was an elevator car that was blown out of the shaft and it was down the hall."

hmmmm... structural damage or bomb damage?

More denial of this "magic elevator" issue in the "Bazant Misconduct website is launched" thread.

Definitely not bomb damage.

 

[MicahJava]

The offer is still open. If you want to get serious just let me know - or simply post a serious claim with an outline of supporting argument.

The source that Fledermaus cited was specifically talking about wooden buildings.

Source: Fledermaus's source.

 

[Fledermaus]

Lol, you stole my source without actually providing a link.

"There was an elevator car that was blown out of the shaft and it was down the hall."

hmmmm... structural damage or bomb damage?

More denial of this "magic elevator" issue in the "Bazant Misconduct website is launched" thread.

Intentional ignorance of what Richard Rotanz said....

He was very clear.

And it is clear you are trolling at this point.

 

[MicahJava]

Definitely not bomb damage.

Maybe you could explain the magic elevator in the "Bazant Misconduct website is launched" thread?

 

[TheGoverness]

Maybe you could explain the magic elevator in the "Bazant Misconduct website is launched" thread?

All I know is that it wasn't a bomb.

 

[MicahJava]

Intentional ignorance of what Richard Rotanz said....

He was very clear.

And it is clear you are trolling at this point.

Rotanz deduced that what he saw was caused by the collapse of the North Tower because he believes in the official story and he was on a program designed to spread propaganda against the controlled demolition hypothesis.

Rotanz is not here, so you're stuck trying to explain how such a thing is physically possible.

"21.3.2 - High-Order Damage. High-order damage is characterized by shattering of the structure, producing small, pulverized debris. Walls, roofs, and structural members are splintered or shattered, with the building completely demolished. Debris is thrown great distances, possibly hundreds of feet. High-order damage is the result of rapid rates of pressure rise. (See Figure 21.3.2.)"

Source: NFPA 921 Guide for Fire and Explosion Investigations, 2004 edition http://www.sierragal.com/252_stuff/NFPA_921.pdf

 

[Fledermaus]

The source that Fledermaus cited was specifically talking about wooden buildings.

Source: Fledermaus's source.

And in true CT manner you ignore the other sources that say practically the same thing.

Building Collapse: Learn the Warning Signs

Mar 4, 2009

One of the greatest hazards in firefighting is the threat of collapse in a building. What makes this scenario even more dangerous is that we do not have to be on the inside to get killed. We must be alert on the fire scene, and be aware of the signs of imminent collapse.

Too often we are being hurt or killed as a result of exterior collapse situations. Statistics from the USFA reveal that the number of firefighters lost annually due to residential collapses have tripled since the 1980s — despite a decrease in the average number of annual fatalities during the same time period. Structural collapses can come without any warning, and often are very difficult to predict.

Incident command should consider the following when determining collapse potential:

Structural inadequacy, poor construction, illegal or non engineered renovations
Fire size and location, and conditions on arrival
Age of building
Previous fire
Fire load to structural members
Backdraft or explosions
Engineered lumber, truss joists, nail plates
Load increase as a result of water load
Cutting structural members during venting operations
Cracks or bulges in wall
Water or smoke that pushes through what appears to be a solid masonry wall
Unusual noises coming from building or dwelling
Truck operations notice soft or spongy footing
Weather extremes

Where does it state specifically wood buildings?

 

[Fledermaus]

Rotanz deduced that what he saw was caused by the collapse of the North Tower because he believes in the official story and he was on a program designed to spread propaganda against the controlled demolition hypothesis.

Ignorant claim is ignorant.

You are playing the "they are all in on it" card.

When did he enter WTC7? It's right there.

Rotanz is not here, so you're stuck trying to explain how such a thing is physically possible.

"21.3.2 - High-Order Damage. High-order damage is characterized by shattering of the structure, producing small, pulverized debris. Walls, roofs, and structural members are splintered or shattered, with the building completely demolished. Debris is thrown great distances, possibly hundreds of feet. High-order damage is the result of rapid rates of pressure rise. (See Figure 21.3.2.)"

Source: NFPA 921 Guide for Fire and Explosion Investigations, 2004 edition http://www.sierragal.com/252_stuff/NFPA_921.pdf

He explains the damage done to the structure....

And you continue to ignore.

 

[MicahJava]

And in true CT manner you ignore the other sources that say practically the same thing.

Building Collapse: Learn the Warning Signs

Mar 4, 2009

One of the greatest hazards in firefighting is the threat of collapse in a building. What makes this scenario even more dangerous is that we do not have to be on the inside to get killed. We must be alert on the fire scene, and be aware of the signs of imminent collapse.

Too often we are being hurt or killed as a result of exterior collapse situations. Statistics from the USFA reveal that the number of firefighters lost annually due to residential collapses have tripled since the 1980s — despite a decrease in the average number of annual fatalities during the same time period. Structural collapses can come without any warning, and often are very difficult to predict.

Incident command should consider the following when determining collapse potential:

Structural inadequacy, poor construction, illegal or non engineered renovations
Fire size and location, and conditions on arrival
Age of building
Previous fire
Fire load to structural members
Backdraft or explosions
Engineered lumber, truss joists, nail plates
Load increase as a result of water load
Cutting structural members during venting operations
Cracks or bulges in wall
Water or smoke that pushes through what appears to be a solid masonry wall
Unusual noises coming from building or dwelling
Truck operations notice soft or spongy footing
Weather extremes

Where does it state specifically wood buildings?

Building Collapse: Learn the Warning Signs

Where does it say steel buildings or tall buildings? The videos they provide seem to be about wooden building fires. There's a link down below where you can contact the author.

Apples and oranges.

Either way, you have no evidence that the bulge in WTC 7 was any big deal. Only a few witnesses saw it and there apparently isn't any photographic evidence. You think the collapse started on the opposite side at the East Penthouse, right? Or does this discussion stem from your trying to rationalize the WTC 7 foreknowledge? Dude, the bulge didn't do ****.

 

[MicahJava]

Ignorant claim is ignorant.

You are playing the "they are all in on it" card.

When did he enter WTC7? It's right there.

Is everyone who accepts the official story "in on it"? Quite a stretch for the dumb label you're trying to fit onto me.

He explains the damage done to the structure....

And you continue to ignore.

Where does he explain how the elevator car got there? In the form of "when X happened, X happened, making the elevator car physically come out of it's shaft, come through the doors, and it landed several feet away."

 

[Fledermaus]

Building Collapse: Learn the Warning Signs

Where does it say steel buildings or tall buildings? The videos they provide seem to be about wooden building fires. There's a link down below where you can contact the author.

Apples and oranges.

Either way, you have no evidence that the bulge in WTC 7 was any big deal. Only a few witnesses saw it and there apparently isn't any photographic evidence. You think the collapse started on the opposite side at the East Penthouse, right? Or does this discussion stem from your trying to rationalize the WTC 7 foreknowledge? Dude, the bulge didn't do ****.

Where does it state specifically wood buildings?

The source that Fledermaus cited was specifically talking about wooden buildings.

Source: Fledermaus's source.

Where does it state specifically wood buildings?

 

[Fledermaus]

Is everyone who accepts the official story "in on it"? Quite a stretch for the dumb label you're trying to fit onto me.

It is self-labeling in effect.

Rotanz deduced that what he saw was caused by the collapse of the North Tower because he believes in the official story and he was on a program designed to spread propaganda against the controlled demolition hypothesis.

Richard Rotanz seems to have been on the show specifically to defend the official story. Obviously he agrees, but a witnesses interpretation of what they said they saw is different from what they actually did are two totally different things. .

Where does he explain how the elevator car got there? In the form of "when X happened, X happened, making the elevator car physically come out of it's shaft, come through the doors, and it landed several feet away."

Why do you need further explanation?

WTC1 debris hit WTC7. Not enough to cause the collapse but enough to do the damage he states.

 

[MicahJava]

Where does it state specifically wood buildings?



Where does it state specifically wood buildings?

It doesn't in the text of the article. I said "it sounded like" it was talking about wood buildings or non-steel buildings. It provided links to videos of small and apparently non-steel building collapses.

I think I found a quote from a link in the "resources" section that might have solved the mystery:

"A fire in a row of stores caused a steel beam to expand causing a bulge in the paraphet wall. During the fire the building section collapsed, pulling the entire 100-foot wall on each side down with it as it collapsed.

http://vincentdunn.com/dunn/newsletters/Front_wall_collapse.pdf

So a bulge in a steel building may be indicative that a wall could come down? Guess what, that entire facade of WTC 7 ain't coming down from a bulge like that.

 

[MicahJava]

Why do you need further explanation?

WTC1 debris hit WTC7. Not enough to cause the collapse but enough to do the damage he states.

Do you ever ask for further explanations on anything?