[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

latest false flag attack?



On 2018-09-22 05:00, juan wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Sep 2018 22:20:19 +0100
> Peter Fairbrother <peter at tsto.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> 
>>
>> WTC was rated for 3 hours major fire resistance.
>>
>> Put that another way - *it was rated so that it _would_ collapse after 3
>> (or so) hours of major conflagration*.
>>
>> It's in the design docs.
> 
> 
> 	Where's your evidence for that claim Peter? WHERE are those 'design docs' ?
> 
> 	Please QUOTE-LINK the pertinent section of the 'design docs' that say 'rated for 3 hours of fire"

https://ws680.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=861610

<blockquote> For this construction category, columns were required to 
have a 2 h rating as established by the Standard Fire Test (ASTM E 119); 
beams were required to have a 1½ h rating.  The instructions to the 
bidders for the WTC 7 job were to bid on a 3 h rating for the columns 
and a 2 h rating for the metal deck and floor support steel, which 
corresponded to the more stringent fire resistance requirements for Type 
1B (unsprinklered) construction.  These ratings were to be achieved by 
application of Monokote MK-5, a gypsum-based SFRM that contained a 
vermiculite aggregate.  According to the Underwriters Laboratories (UL) 
Fire Resistance Directory (1983), these ratings required a thickness of 
22 mm (7/8 in.) of Monokote MK-5 to be applied to the heavy columns, 48 
mm (1 7/8 in.) to be applied to the lighter columns, 13 mm (1/2 in.) to 
be applied to the beams, and 10 mm (3/8 in.) to be applied to the bottom 
of the metal deck.  Private inspectors found that the applied SFRM 
thicknesses were consistent with these values</blockquote>