Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]


[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Gregory from Oz wrote:

***But I am aware of at least one 'flimsiness' aspect, that was the most likely contributing
cause to WTC collapse.***

That would be the airplane crashing into it at a high velocity fully loaded with jet fuel with the fire that ensued.

"flimsiness" is not something I'd classify the WTC as. I haven't studied it in detail like Dr. Astaneh, but I believe his flimsiness comment was in relation to the Sears Tower.

Why was the Sears Tower not flimsy or as flimsy? Because it was designed for a purposeful airplane attack? No, not likely. It was probably "more sturdy" for a number of reasons including it being taller, it being in a high wind zone, and the decisions made by Fazlur Khan to overcome those design challenges. I doubt seriously that it was because he was trying to comply with some provision in the local building code. His decisions were obviously different than Robertson's, but that is likely highly dependent on the forces from wind testing, story heights, the architectural requirements of the exterior look of the building, and the nature of the building not being as slender since it's footprint grows at the lower stories. The buildings are different and of course economics played a role.

Tall buildings can make people sea sick if they are too flimsy. Tuned Mass Dampers lessen that effect. Would Le Messier's (SP) building withstand a jet impact? Is his building Too Flimsy? He corrected a construction flaw to his credit, but if those planes hit his high profile high rise, would he be considered "morally corrupt?"

If the WTC was built to the NY building code, would it have withstood the collision and fire without collapse? I don't know and I'm pretty sure no one knows that answer. What exact code deviation is the most significant factor in this "flimsy" categorization? Live Loads, Wind Loads, Drift???