That is non-sequitur logic combined with bullshit.
My statement is accurate. The issue is, heating causes uneven expansion. Expansion tears welded joints. Failed joints destroyed weight distribution required for stability and integrity. Forcing weight onto other joints. Making each failed joint and beam more significant than the previous.
Additionally, as steel heats its ability to carry weight is significantly reduced on a curve. The ability to redistribute load around failure is specific to each design and intended loaded of the type of steel used in construction.
It's not like I'm saying fuckery isn't afoot. But you destroy your own argument when you have to be deceptive to make it.
You're either disingenuous or dumb af.
Yes, steel weakens as it heats. But "structural steel", an actual thing defined by the carbon doping in the steel material, does not lose any significant strength at temps anywhere near those experienced in a building fire, which is why it is required by code to be used to build buildings AND why structures that are totally engulfed in flames for over 20+ hours do not collapse. Look up the code requirements for "structural steel".
Further, if a weld fails, if several joints fail, there still wouldn't be a total and full collapse of the entire building. The idea that a few joints here and there are the only thing keeping a building from total and imminent collapse is fucking absurd. And even if the buildings were so poorly designed that a couple of joint failures would cause a global (entire building) collapse, the collapse wouldn't occur symmetrically and at the near free fall rate witnessed on 9-11. The floor above would have to collapse symmetrically onto the floor below it and have virtually no resistance to collapse all the way down.
And to repeat, which is why it has never fucking happened in the history of steel framed buildings, and didn't happen that way on 9-11.
Get a fucking grip.
You're either disingenuous or dumb af.
Why the anger? I've been polite and factually accurate. What more could you ask for?
Still holding a grudge because I pointed out you're an illegal anchor baby?
does not lose any significant strength at temps anywhere near those experienced in a building fire,
Not only is this not true, but several people conducted tests, with structural I-beams (are the i-beams which are not structural?), to show it is not true. This is basic metallurgy.
Additionally, videos of formal retardant tests clearly show your statement is wholesale false. These were widely watched at the time.
The idea that a few joints here and there
That's your unsubstantiated contention. And is contrary to general understanding of the fire. Especially for all steel near the elevator shafts.
Your anger is misplaced and undeserved. As I said, you destroy your own position.
The retardant is a critical requirement for building code. Without, it is not considered structurally safe against fire. Period. This is in fact why the building was sold. While I no longer remember the cost associated with replacement (billion?), it is considered the primary reason for their insurance scam. The previous owners were losing insurance because it was not safe for occupancy without the retardant. The sale reset that and it became a condition of coverage.
It's mind blowing to me that you won't even consider the most likely truth. That collapse was much easier to create specifically because of the reason they would lose insurance coverage and required massive expense to mitigate.
But I guess sticking with the facts makes me a shill...
I seriously don't know why you're angry here.
You are not even remotely factually accurate. About as accurate as describing me an an illegal alien.
"Structural steel" is a classification of steel required by code to be used to build steel frame buildings. The speculation is specifically chosen for resistance to fire re minimal expansion and strength maintenance in temps associated with building fires. Read the fucking code requirements for structural steel. Hours at temps over 2000F under full rated load with no deformities.
Thousands of architects and engineers have called bullshit on the pancake theory of collapse and have put their names, licensees, and reputations on the line making that determination.
Fire retardant on columns is not put there to prevent steel beams from collapsing in a fire. That's fucking stupid. It is used to lower the cost of recovery following a building fire. Within the parameters of the retardant, far less testing and repair is required if it can be shown that the fire retardant limited the exposure to the steel.
Again, with or without retardant, steel framed buildings do not collapse symmetrically, near free fall speed, because fire. Never happened. Never will.
(post is archived)