Wtc Core Design, How were they built Options

[elreb]

"WTC core design"

You could sure have fun reading all these pages.

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/plans/table.html

But start at Sub level 5

[Christophera]

The environment of evidence determining core design:

This is why I asked for independently verified evidence for steel core columns, which naturally would exclude such info from very interested parties if not verifiable by other independent sources.

Logically sources that do not identify their source cannot be termed independent authority if it comes from a time after 9-11.

A major controversy is primary if a steel columned core is asserted to have existed.

FIRST it is known the ex mayor took the WTC documents including 15,000 photos and 1,000's of videos while the courts protect their hiding.

Then . . . NIST never states they had the plans. Only the disclaimer identifies their sources for structural design. Grossly inadequate.

All of the above is absolutely true and cannot be disproven showing the environment of evidence is tainted. Such a fact cannot be dismissed. This logically must change normal and reasonable referals to authority because authority is in question, laws have been violated by government related to mass murder. The fact that concrete can be easily fractured by a small amount of explosives to fall instantly and freely while steel cannot must be considered if proposals for feasible demo of steel cannot be reasonably detailed in given conditions of the building occupancy.

In this environment I will show that the plans posted are hopelessy obsolete and to show such a thing in light of the images from 9-11 that only show concrete surrounding the core area. Never a steel core column in the core.

The plans from silverstein and associates are altered, obsolete drawings used to misrepresent the core structure. The port authority film, "The building of the worked trade center", 18 minutes long is erroneous. The supposed stel core columns are never seen ONCE in all 9-11 images. Only the steel framework surrounding the concrete core is seen. The core itself is always empty.

I will evidence and prove that the plans from silverstein do not represent what was built.
This image shows the core wall at its base of WTC 1.



The 3rd floor core plan and 2nd floor core plan (911research.wtc7.net/ plans from silverstein) shows elevators, an airshaft, steam shaft or janitor closet where the 12 foot thick concrete base wall is seen. The smooth curved dark elements on top are very stressed 6 inch rebar used in the foundation that extended up into the core base wall and the bottom of the WTC 2 tapering concrete core.

The APROX. 3x7' hallway running the length of the base wall segment has daylight shining through it. The only steel box columns that were full length structural elements having 100% deep fillet welds on all faces were the interior box columns of the inner framed wall supporting the floor panels on the inside. They were bolted to the concrete core wall face with a 10 floor compression surcharge before the steel could be fastened to the outside of the concrete core walls. That was 10 floors of concreted floors.

A very good end view of the WTC 1 west core wall shows the interior box column of the NW corner to the right of the concrete core wall, ouside the wall. The north concrete shear wall near the corner has fallen already allowing this view left, past the end of the west wall, a narrow end of the core, into the empty core beyond.

This post has been edited by Christophera: Feb 28 2010, 11:15 PM

[SanderO]

That is not true. The film made of the construction, "Building the World Trade Center", Directed by Pilowski and Winestine, 1970 clearly shows some of the core and several of the core steel girders being hoisted. At one point there is a worker sitting or standing on a perimeter CORE girder and you can clearly see it is constructed of steel.

This film shows not evidence of a concrete core or forms on the upper floors.

You are wrong about this. I worked for the architect at the time in 1970. But it was my first job out of school and I wish I could say I remember the drawings. But I can't. I do believe there was no concrete shell for the core.

[Christophera]

That is not true. The film made of the construction, "Building the World Trade Center", Directed by Pilowski and Winestine, 1970 clearly shows some of the core and several of the core steel girders being hoisted. At one point there is a worker sitting or standing on a perimeter CORE girder and you can clearly see it is constructed of steel.

This film shows not evidence of a concrete core or forms on the upper floors.

You are wrong about this. I worked for the architect at the time in 1970. But it was my first job out of school and I wish I could say I remember the drawings. But I can't. I do believe there was no concrete shell for the core.

The film "Building the World Trade Center" misrepresents the towers core and the fact no one has ever posted an image of steel core columns in the core area from 9-11 proves it. The fact I can post this image of the WTC 1 east core wall toppling into the core proves the concrete core surrounding the core area. Here is a second photo from another direction showing the same giant triangular chunk of concrete falling into the empty core.

All information from the port authority, FEMA and silverstein is completely suspect in the environment of guiliani taking teh WTC documents while the courts protect their hiding. This fact CANNOT be reasonably overlooked for one moment.

[SanderO]

What do you mean it misrepresents the core?

The core was constructed exactly the way cores were done back then. In fact, in the beginning of the film they show a typical steel framed tower being built.

I don't see the concrete in the images you cite.

This post has been edited by SanderO: Mar 1 2010, 01:24 AM

[Christophera]

What do you mean it misrepresents the core?

The core was constructed exactly the way cores were done back then. In fact, in the beginning of the film they show a typical steel framed tower being built.

I don't see the concrete in the images you cite.

I only see a concrete wall toppling back into the core area and nothing in the core area. I do see the spire on the opposite side of the core, but the spire is outside the core.



Another, from another angle of the same pale, massive triangular object.



What do you see?

This post has been edited by Christophera: Mar 1 2010, 04:32 AM

[DoYouEverWonder]

What do you see?

Pyroclastic clouds from the explosive demolition that cover everything else up.

Drive down a dirt road on a dry day and see how much dust comes up and how it obscures your vision. Since all the floor were made of concrete poured into steel pans, there was plenty of concrete dust to stir up.

-----

If the Towers had concrete cores, this is what you would see -





Despite the fact that I have shown Chris these pictures before and he refuses to acknowledge that all the Towers had a structural steel core and that there is no visual evidence of a concrete core, I'm posting these images for others reading this thread to SEE for themselves.


Pics of the WTC during construction -

[SanderO]

Case closed.

Thank you!

[BADBURD]

The lobby photo is hard to deny. I was also wondering about the elevator door entrance. If the core was 12' thick at the bottom. That means there would be a 12' hallway to all the elevator doors. I have still insisted that it doesn't matter what the core is made of. It's not going to free fall do to fire. That I think we can all agree on!

[elreb]

My first thought after going thru the blueprints is someone did a good job of faking them. If ground breaking began on 8-5-1966 and Sub-level 5 print shows a 7-31-1967 date and last revision 1-30-1970, then these would be working drawings.

What a beautiful structure. The way the core is tied together leaves me dumb stuck that any amount of airplanes could bring it down.

My next thought was to look for 1993 bombing pictures and see if they can tell us anything.

[Christophera]

The lobby photo is hard to deny. I was also wondering about the elevator door entrance. If the core was 12' thick at the bottom. That means there would be a 12' hallway to all the elevator doors. I have still insisted that it doesn't matter what the core is made of. It's not going to free fall do to fire. That I think we can all agree on!

It is a fact it won't free fall.

WTC 1 core structure and WTC 2 core strucutre were both concrete but very different. WTC 1 had no elevators opening intot he lobby. All elevator acces was through the core hallways. This image proves how different they were.



WTC 2 had twice as many hallways.

Steel core columns can't free fall without being cut. Cutting steel box columns with high explosives requires direct contact on all 4 sides. If there were 47 steel box columns and the average length at GZ was 40 feet, that means around 1,300 such cuts would have to be made. Access for even a few of those probably cannt be shown to exist with contact all the way around. ANother fact is that steel box columns cut in such away are all but non existent at GZ.

On the other hand, concrete can be instantly fractured to fall freely by a small amount of properly placed high explosives.

[Christophera]

Pyroclastic clouds from the explosive demolition that cover everything else up.

Drive down a dirt road on a dry day and see how much dust comes up and how it obscures your vision. Since all the floor were made of concrete poured into steel pans, there was plenty of concrete dust to stir up.

-----

If the Towers had concrete cores, this is what you would see -

Perhaps true except for the fact that guiliani took the WTC documents with 15,000 photos while the courts protect their hiding. So there is a reason we do not have the photos.

The other reason is that the concrete core of WTC 1 & 2 was cast inside the exterior steel so photos of it were almost impossible to get except for from inside the structure.

I noticed that not one image from 9-11 showing steel core columns int he core area was posted. Such an image MUST exist. If it does not, then steel core columns did not exist.

This is an image showing butt plates on the tops of the steel inside the core area.



Butt plates do not have adequate strength to join sections of steel core columns. That is around the 5th floor so 105 stories of core column would be bearing on that with its associated lateral loads.

Notice the plans have NO DIAGONAL braces shown. No details for them. Notice that GZ has no column, beam intersections with heavy gusset plats joing diagonal and horizontal braces. This is because there were none. Such diagonals are absolutely needed for resistence to torsion and sway AND will totally block elevator openings and hallways.

[Christophera]

My first thought after going thru the blueprints is someone did a good job of faking them. If ground breaking began on 8-5-1966 and Sub-level 5 print shows a 7-31-1967 date and last revision 1-30-1970, then these would be working drawings.

What a beautiful structure. The way the core is tied together leaves me dumb stuck that any amount of airplanes could bring it down.

My next thought was to look for 1993 bombing pictures and see if they can tell us anything.

Did you notice that the drawings have freehand lettering in the title block. This is not possible for finish drawings of 2 of the worlds tallest buildings. Then the revision tables have anomalies such as this in about 20% of them.



Not characters of the alphabet. Not even possible to have 1 pixel wide spaces and lines in a scan of a pencil drawing at that scale.

Here is the original on the server of that.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/p...A/A-A-159_1.png

[elreb]

Can ony one ID this photo?

[DoYouEverWonder]

Can ony one ID this photo?

You're looking at the core of WTC 1, with WTC 6 behind it and WTC 7 behind that.

This was taken from the south side looking north.

This post has been edited by DoYouEverWonder: Mar 1 2010, 04:51 PM

[elreb]

So, I guess the upper right hand corner of the photo shows parts of the core of WTC-7!

Fuel oil is some pretty awesome stuff to cause all this much destruction.

[Christophera]

It looks from the south onto a remnant of the WTC 1 core, then to the inside of the north perimeter wall then to a hole in WTC 6, then to WTC 7 on the top right.

[Christophera]

So, I guess the upper right hand corner of the photo shows parts of the core of WTC-7!

Fuel oil is some pretty awesome stuff to cause all this much destruction.

The OCT joke.

WTC 7 had a steel braced core which went down with the rest of it. I would imagine that it would leave a lump in the wreakage.

[DoYouEverWonder]

The OCT joke.

WTC 7 had a steel braced core which went down with the rest of it. I would imagine that it would leave a lump in the wreakage.

It was also about half the height of the Towers and was built on top of cantilevered girders, so it was easier to do a more traditional type of CD, where you drop the building from the bottom first. WTC 7 was actually two buildings. There was an existing ConEd Substation on the site, which they built WTC 7 over.

This post has been edited by DoYouEverWonder: Mar 1 2010, 09:12 PM

[elreb]

What is a OCT joke? Something like this?

A plumbing contractor was speaking with a woman about her bathroom. In the first bath she said she would like a blue sink. The contractor wrote this down and went to the window, opened it, and yelled out...

"Green side up!"

In the second bath she told the plumber she would like a yellow bidet. He wrote this on his pad, walked to the window, opened it, and yelled...

"Green side up!"

The lady was somewhat curious but she said nothing.

In the third bath she said she would like my toilet in a warm rose color. The plumber wrote this down, walked to the window, opened it and yelled...

"Green side up!"

The lady then asked him, "Why do you keep yelling 'Green side up'?"

"He said “I'm sorry," came the reply. "But I have a crew of welders laying a lawn across the street.