Saw this article and wondered if someone might have a follow-up. I didn’t paste the whole thing:
*Fire expert challenges WTC collapse theory
February 07 2003 at 03:06PM
London - Thicker fire-proofing insulation on the World Trade Centre girders would have prevented the twin towers from falling so quickly, according to an American fire safety expert.
An analysis by Jim Quintiere, of the University of Maryland’s department of fire protection engineering, suggests that the thickness of the insulation is a key to why the towers collapsed after being hit by two hijacked planes on September 11, 2001.
“The south tower was the first to fall even though it was hit after the north tower. The insulation on its burning floors was only half as thick as the north tower,” New Scientist magazine said on Wednesday.
‘The south tower was the first to fall’ It added that according to Quintiere’s calculations, if both towers had had insulation 50 millimetres thick they might not have collapsed at all.
A preliminary report of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) stated that the insulation was 19 millimetres thick on the floors of the south tower where the plane hit, half of what it was on the floors struck in the north tower.
“The implication of these insulation differences is astounding,” the magazine quoted Quintiere as saying.
Officials who conducted the FEMA investigation into the disaster believe the dislodging of the fireproofing on the girders was the main reason for the collapse.
When the World Trade Centre was built in the 1970s, 19 millimetre fireproofing was used. Doubling it was later recommended but it was only applied to fewer than a third of the towers’ girders by September 11 because the work could only be carried out as floors became empty, according to the magazine.
More work is needed to prove whether or not his theory is correct
“The New York city building code stipulates that the insulation on steel structures should be at least 38 millimetres thick. However, the port authority’s special legal status means it does not have to comply with the code,” New Scientist said.*
http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?click_id=3&art_id=iol1044623212834W532&set_id=1