This is correct. They were nearing total reapplication of fire retardant materials. Which is extremely expensive.
Most people don't realize that steel buildings require this in order to resist collapse from fire or that it is only rated for specific durations and temperatures. Worse, those buildings never met their legal minimum requirements required for occupancy.
How many steel shelled buildings, with no fire retardant, have collapse from a fire in the last 200 years, worlduwide?
The added retardant is NOT to resist collapse. The idea that this building collapsed from weight shifts and fire is fucking stupid.
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.
(post is archived)