Architectural Drawings Available; Columns may be To-Scale

Architectural drawings for the North Tower are now in public domain here:

911research.wtc7.net...




You can browse most/all of the drawings locally on the link above, without having to download the entire collection. (They're available in much higher resolution than the above. )

Columns are shown and I'm told that someone is looking to find whether they are shown in their correct dimensions, as is apparently suggested by the fact that they're numbered in those drawings.

If we can get the loads the columns were expected to carry on a daily basis then we might be able to get somewhere a lot sooner.

[edit on 27-3-2007 by bsbray11]

from 911blogger

"The Towers contained 47 large core columns, more than a dozen of which retained dimensions of 54 x 22 inches through the 66th floor, and tapered in stages on higher floors. The core columns around the South Tower's crash zone were about twice as heavy as those in the North Tower's crash zone."

so the columns that the second plane smashed into were twice the thickness of the first, yet those fell first after burning for much less time. Does NIST's explanation support this? Need to have a read.

It means that the damage would have to have come mainly from the plane impact, as the thinner ones should have 'melted' first.

BitTorrent:
conspiracycentral.net:6969...

Should download fast for ya.

wow, i would love to know what the dimensions are at the crash sites also id love to know how thick the plating was (inside dia, to outside dia) but im going to, just for kicks, base a quick calc on 40mm.

so, LSC=1kg/m (explosive yeild) 54*22=3.89m=3.89kg per column(again explosive) if you had to pop all 47 columns thats just a smidge over 400lbs of c4 equivilant explosive PER FLOOR. (below 66 of course)

wow, thats 4x what i had "guessed" at before.

Originally posted by Damocles
so, LSC=1kg/m (explosive yeild) 54*22=3.89m=3.89kg per column(again explosive) if you had to pop all 47 columns thats just a smidge over 400lbs of c4 equivilant explosive PER FLOOR. (below 66 of course)

wow, thats 4x what i had "guessed" at before.

Does this calculation include weekening of the steel in any manner? I'm still looking into the drawings (I don't have time now as I have my PE exam next Friday). The theory is that fire weekened the steel enough to collapse. Could we find a way to calculate how much explosive would be needed to just weeken the steel to the same amount? I know that blowing just one side would affect the eccentricity and moment of inertia and all that, so I would assume that strength would also be affected by just one side. Since strength is a load at which a column will fail and since stress is a load over an area, lowering the area will cause a decrease in strength.

no that calc is run in, slap four LSC's to each column, connect (i wont even get into how the primed it) and get the hell out and hope no one notices.

as far as enough to weaken the steel...i guess my first, and probably only question is why? i would have to have some more data but im going to throw out a guess and say that if you used enough HE to weaken the steel to the fault point, then youve already used too much to be covert so if yer gonna go go big.

not to mention that if you just wanted them to cut a very precice depth, you'd almost have to have the charges custom made as the HE yeild and the standoff depth etc all have to be taken into account during the manufacture of the "shell" that the HE is packed into.

All I'm trying to get at is that if fire can weeken steel, then surely there is something that doesn't make noise (even though there are plenty of reports of explosions, but that is another thread) that can weeken steel also. The difference being the second material would be able to be controlled where as fire can't. Am I making any sense?

hey at that point all i can say is find someone with experience in chemistry and have at it. id be much more willing to believe slower chem reaction (acid or heat generating reaction) long before i would HE.

outside my field though. if i wanted something to go away on demand i just blew it up

though it was pretty obvious when i did...

This is a big break ne way or the other. The lack of info on the Towers' construction has been a big problem. When people can't even agree on how they were built, it's hard to get any meaningful analysis going on what should or shouldn't've happened. Presuming these blueprints are legit, we finally have something more to go on - Props to that Whilstleblower and to Jim Hoffman!

I'm too ignorant of the details to add anything, but look forward to what others make of this new data in relation to what's already known/suspected...

Originally posted by Damocles
outside my field though. if i wanted something to go away on demand i just blew it up

though it was pretty obvious when i did...

Also way outside my field. The obvious explosions are what is holding me back on the HE theory also.

Originally posted by Caustic Logic
Presuming these blueprints are legit,

I'm open minded to fakes but, why? Also, the drawings are stamped by the architect. Only he can say if they are fake or not. It has his signature also which could be verified to be his or not (in case he decides to lie about it). I'm guessing that is why we haven't heard anything from the official side so far. They can't call them fakes without them really being fake.

we finally have something more to go on - Props to that Whilstleblower and to Jim Hoffman!

I agree. I hope he doesn't have an accident before he spills the structural drawings.

I'm too ignorant of the details to add anything, but look forward to what others make of this new data in relation to what's already known/suspected...

It doesn't take an expert to have a look at them. But, I'm definately going to be going through the drawings in the future to see, either way, what I can come up with. Not that I'm an expert by any means.

Wow, excellent find BsB!

All the information needed to construct a full scale CAD model is now available...are there any other ATS members proficient with AutoCAD or similar software who would be interested in creating a full-scale construction model to both illustrate and analyse the theorised effects and failures of the structural integrity of the buildings?? Would sure help explain graphically, the various ideas and timeframe events of that morning to the non-architectural layman!

I'll be free to lend my skills to such a project after my exams finish in June, anyone else interested in taking up the challenge?? If anyone is, U2U me and perhaps we can set up a work-group to produce something useful

[edit on 12-4-2007 by citizen smith]

If you can find the (i think first) blog about it at 911Blogger.com there was a guy lready talking about it in the comments. you might find the blog using their search feature.

Originally posted by citizen smith
I'll be free to lend my skills to such a project after my exams finish in June, anyone else interested in taking up the challenge?? If anyone is, U2U me and perhaps we can set up a work-group to produce something useful

[edit on 12-4-2007 by citizen smith]

I hate to get involved in something more, but I could help. I use AutoDesk 2007. What do you use? Only problem with me is that I'm self taught and don't know how to 3-D render (yet).

Originally posted by Damocles
LSC=1kg/m (explosive yeild)

Hmmm... Someone needs to check their units of measure then someone needs to do a little conversion for us because according to CDI their LSCs...

It generates around 3 million pounds per square inch pressure at a speed -- depending on the explosive inside the shaped charge -- in excess of 27,000 feet per second."

Originally posted by Pootie

Originally posted by Damocles
LSC=1kg/m (explosive yeild)

oddly enough yer right i did need to recheck my facts

i found an LSC
that only uses 425g/m of RDX to punch 40mm of steel (thats right at 2 inches right?) so by changing the formula i listed above, you still get 170lbs per floor.

for those who've never seen that much go off, its still a lot. so im sorry but im going to just say anyone that really honestly believes you can set that much demo off COVERTLY is just delusional.

Hmmm... Someone needs to check their units of measure then someone needs to do a little conversion for us because according to CDI their LSCs...

It generates around 3 million pounds per square inch pressure at a speed -- depending on the explosive inside the shaped charge -- in excess of 27,000 feet per second."

yeah you lost me, ive posted before RDX goes off at 26000fps, and i took that right out of a US Army book on demo. PETN is a little faster, they use it for det cord (military grade) and depending on the batch it will detonate at 24000-32000fps and taht 3million lbs/in^2 seems right. so...huh?

so other that overstating, by mistake, which ive admitted and corrected...where does your CDI quote on det speeds differ from anything ive ever said? 1/4lb of RDX will detonate just as fast as 10lbs of it...

[edit on 13-4-2007 by Damocles]

Originally posted by Damocles
i found an LSC
that only uses 425g/m of RDX to punch 40mm of steel (thats right at 2 inches right?) so by changing the formula i listed above, you still get 170lbs per floor.

Is that grams per meter? I tried your link but it didn't work for me. If so, I calculated 268 lbs per floor. But, I'm sure I screwed it up and also used very conservative estimates on the steel. I used 30 x 30, 4 inch thick box columns for all 47 columns.

Edit: Of course until I peek at the drawings, I don't know how conservative.

[edit on 4/13/2007 by Griff]

yeah thats per meter but thats only for up to 40mm of steel which is little under 2 inches

did have someone show me this though and i found it interesting

Great find. I'm going to show it. (edit...nevermind, thought I knew how to post a pic?)

That looks about 30 x 30, 4 inch thick. Funny how they got such a square cut. That's definately not torch cut IMO, nor thermite, but something more mundane. It looks like the welds failed. But why? Welds are suppossed to be of higher strength than the materials that they weld. I think that is one of the bigger conspiracies here. Some of the construction, it is speculated, had mob ties.

[edit on 4/14/2007 by Griff]

Originally posted by Griff
Welds are suppossed to be of higher strength than the materials that they weld. I think that is one of the bigger conspiracies here.

Damocles and I were talking and agreed on the same thing: not all of the core columns were welded end-to-end. I've seen MANY core columns with ends too clean, and I can't think of any other explanation.

The mob may or may not have had ties to the construction, I wouldn't know, but this is more important: a Rockefeller commissioned the WTC site, and oversaw the whole project. David Rockefeller in particular, while his brother was simultaneously either governor of NY, or mayor of NYC, I forget which. So they carved out a chunk of land and said neither NY nor NJ could touch it, gave it to the Port Authority, which was a direct result of David Rockefeller.

There seems to have been a lot of shady business. Two bids were made by different companies to produce the steel for the project, and both were considered too expensive. A third deal was made by an obscure company that was somehow a fraction of the price, and this was the one that was accepted by Rockefeller. Also consider the implications of controlling the very land you're building on. NY and NJ had no say on the building's construction once they handed it to the PA.

Off-topic, but Old Rockefeller, once imagined to be the wealthiest man in the US, actually had something like 80% of his company owned by Rothschilds when he died. By definition, Old Rockefeller "sold out" to the Rothschilds. And they've been one of the most powerful and influential families in the United States ever since.