Kevin Fenton wrote:
The issue of whether you were clear in post 314 is moot, as I was not responding to what you wrote in your post 314, but to what you wrote in your post 331, where you wrote:
"Let's see.... I post an inspection drawing with the column layout and numbering for 47 steel core columns....
I think I'm gonna say that it's not made from concrete, it's made from 47 steel columns."
It appears from the way that your reasoning is set out that you are basing your conclusion that the core had 47 steel columns on the inspection drawing. The conclusion is correct, but should be based on other evidence.
It appears that you are not quite following my reasoning.
I posted the floor plan in
Post#314. In
Christophera's reply, he posted the dust-obscured-core photo (yet again) along with the question: "
If not concrete, what will you say it is?"
In
response to that question I wrote: "
Let's see.... I post an inspection drawing with the column layout and numbering for 47 steel core columns.... I think I'm gonna say that it's not made from concrete, it's made from 47 steel columns."
If I believed the cores were not made from 47 steel columns, would I be posting information which shows the layout of the 47 columns? Since I had just posted a floor plan that shows that layout, I think it would be safe to assume that I think the cores were made out of 47 steel columns. So when I replied to
Christophera's question, I was pointing out that I had, in effect, just posted what material I thought was used to build the core.
Did I say, or even imply, that I know with absolute certainty, exclusively based on the inspection drawing, that the cores were made with 47 steel columns? Maybe I
am basing my opinion on other evidence. I wonder if it's possible to find something that would indicate that to be the case....
Kevin Fenton wrote:
"4. Accessible column envelopes, including fireproofing.
Every second year, accessible columns were to be inspected for bowing or deviation from plumb." page 75 of the pdf. If some columns were accessible, then it would be logical that some columns were inaccessible. It appears that the accessible columns were by the lift shafts.
Surveys of the accessible columns (columns in the core area that were not enclosed by an architectural finish, which can be visually inspected) in the elevator shafts of WTC 1 and WTC 2 were performed...
- (pdf page 42)Column splices and eccentrically-braced column connections in the express elevator shafts were not tested due to restricted access.
- (pdf page 93)http://wtc.nist.gov/NISTNCSTAR1-1C.pdfSo, some column areas were inaccessible - what does that lead one to conclude?
-Make7
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
