Tuesday, June 2, 2009
Openness in Government Demands NIST Reconsider Significance of the Free-Fall Drop of WTC7
Two Seconds That Will Live in Infamy
by Dwain Deets
WTC Building 7 Collapses in 6.5 seconds
The National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST), the government agency responsible for investigating and reporting on the destruction of World Trade Center Building 7, tried to avoid admitting that there was any free-fall acceleration when the building came down on September 11, 2001. All the way to their draft final report on August 26, 2008, nearly seven years after the event, the NIST report’s lead authors held firmly to their position that free-fall did not occur.
Once NIST received comments on its draft report, it was more or less forced to accept the indisputable facts based on the publicly available videos proving that free-fall had occurred. David Chandler, a high school physics teacher and AE911Truth researcher, provided the most compelling argument in a video seen widely on YouTube, "The Free-fall Acceleration of Bldg 7 ."
In their final report, issued November 20, 2008, the NIST report’s authors stated they had made a more detailed examination, and found a 2.25-second period in which the center roofline exhibited a “free-fall drop for approximately 8 stories.” Chandler had measured a 2.5-second period.
The NIST report did not state the significance of a free-fall drop. The significance is that during that period of free-fall, all of the gravitational energy (also known as potential energy) is being converted into energy of motion (also known as kinetic energy). There is no energy available for doing other work, such as breaking up structural columns, or causing structural pieces to be hurled out of the way. The graphic chart is an illustration depicting these points.
8 stories free fall drop
NIST tried to hide its admission of free-fall from public view by not listing it in the description of the changes it made in response to public comments. Admitting to free-fall leads directly to the question, What source of energy eliminated the 8 stories of heavy, interlocked structural steel? The NIST report’s authors didn�t explain. They tried to hide this dramatic change of position, that WTC7 did display a period of free-fall. However, gravitational forces alone can’t come close to explaining that.
The simple figure above, where section A had to have been instantaneously removed in order for the section above (B) to exhibit a free-fall drop, is suggested as an aid in explaining the NIST-free-fall issue to non-technical people. First on the list are all U.S. Senators. Two matters of Senate business are candidates for addressing this issue. One is the confirmation hearings of the head of NIST, who serves under the Secretary of Commerce. The other is the proposed Truth and Reconciliation Commission advocated by Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy.
In the words of the title, “Two Seconds that Will Live in Infamy,” the assertive attitude corresponds to a positive expectation towards President Obama’s promise to “reestablish transparency and openness in government.” The processes are in place to re-open NIST’s assessments of the WTC’s destruction. If this promise is actually fulfilled, then the chances are very good these two seconds will indeed live in infamy.
The building was constructed above a Con Edison substation that had been on the site since 1967. The substation had a caisson foundation designed to carry the weight of a future building of 25 stories containing 600,000 sq ft (55,700 m²). The final design for 7 World Trade Center was for a much larger building covering a larger footprint than originally planned when the substation was built. The structural design of 7 World Trade Center included features to allow a larger building than originally planned to be constructed. A system of gravity column transfer trusses and girders was located between floors 5 and 7 to transfer loads to the smaller foundation. Existing caissons installed in 1967 were used, along with new ones, to accommodate the building. The fifth floor functioned as a structural diaphragm, providing lateral stability and distribution of loads between the new and old caissons. Above the seventh floor, the building's structure was a typical tube-frame design, with columns in the core and on the perimeter, and lateral loads resisted by perimeter moment frames.