The NIST World Trade Center Report: A New Standard for Deception

1
The NIST World Trade Center Report A New
Standard for Deception

• Kevin Ryan

911 Truth Conference Revealing the Truth,
Reclaiming Our Future Chicago,
IL June 4, 2006
2
Introduction

• Im a former manager at Underwriters Laboratories
  (UL), fired for publicly questioning the October
  2004 draft NIST WTC report
• NIST is a government agency, reporting to Bush
  cabinet member Gutierrez (Commerce). The director
  of NIST is also a Presidential appointee
• NISTs WTC report is a product of the Bush
  Administration (i.e. Bush Science)

National Institute of Standards and Technology
3
Bush Science

• The Bush Administration has been deliberately
  and systematically distorting scientific fact in
  the service of policy goals
• Open letter from 60 prominent scientists,
  including 20 Nobel laureates
• We found a serious pattern of undermining
  science by the Bush Administration
• Union of Concerned Scientists
• We found numerous instances where the
  Administration has manipulated the scientific
  process and distorted or suppressed scientific
  findings
• House Committee on Government Reform

4
Important WTC collapse considerations

• No tall buildings have ever collapsed from fire,
  but on 9/11, were told there were three
• No building exhibiting all the characteristics of
  demolition has ever NOT been a demolition
• 99.7 of steel evidence destroyed despite
  outraged cries from public and fire experts
• More than a year passed before full investigation
  began

5
Demo remembers

• The collapse of the WTC towers looked like a
  classic controlled demolition, said Mike Taylor
  of the National Association of Demolition
  Contractors, It cascaded down like an implosion
• It appeared to me that charges had been placed
  in the building -- Ronald Hamburger, structural
  engineer and contributor to FEMA and NIST reports
• Official investigations never considered
  demolition

6
Early support for the official story

• Experts said jet fuel fires melted the steel
• BBC (Chris Wise, etc.)
• Scientific American (Eduardo Kausel)
• NOVA video (Matthys Levy)
• Henry Koffman from USC
• Tom Mackin from Univ. of Illinois
• The New Scientist
• Temperatures exaggerated
• National Geographic Today - 2,900 F
• AE /History Channel video 2500 F

7
Jet fuel fires melted steel?

• Steel melts at 2800 F
• Jet fuel fires burn at maximum of 1500 F unless
  in special combustion chamber
• Gas temps are not steel temps
• Thermodynamic calculations suggest steel
  temperatures in impact zones could have reached
  maximum of 600 F

8
Where are the real experts?

• Our nations air defenses dont stand down
• Terrorists dont come back to life after stealing
  our freedoms
• Tall buildings do not collapse from fire
• Because these are unique events, there are no
  experts on these subjects

9
But there is always an official explanation for
terrorist events

• Disturbing questions about the OKC Murrah
  Building bombing
• Survivors reported multiple explosions
• Many media reports and witness accounts of
  un-detonated bombs left in building
• FBI confiscated videos and would not release them
• Experts said demolition charges required
• Official story stuck with one guy, one truck bomb
• Small group of engineers provided report

10
Official investigations into the collapse of
the WTC buildings

• ASCE
• FEMA BPAT
• Turned ASCE investigation into an assessment
• Report released May 2002
• Silverstein/Weidlinger
• report released October 2002
• NIST
• report released September 2005

11
ASCE Team Murrah Building Team

• Initial ASCE team leaders (9/14/01)
• Gene Corley
• Charles Thornton
• Paul Mlakar
• Mete Sozen
• Other volunteers

• OKC Murrah building report authors
• Gene Corley
• Charles Thornton
• Paul Mlakar
• Mete Sozen

ASCE says there are 1.5 million US engineers.
Why so few when it comes to terrorism?
12
Pre-determined conclusions

• Gene Corley -- knew once the jets hit the
  building that the WTC would collapse as it did,
  I just didnt know when it was going to happen,
  said Corley
• (reported by St. Petersburg Times)
• Charles Thornton -- "Karl, we all know what
  caused the collapse."
• (From Karl Kochs book Men of Steel)
• Shankar Nair -- "Already there is near-consensus
  as to the sequence of events that led to the
  collapse of the World Trade Center.
• (Chicago Tribune September 19, 2001)

13
The first official leaders

• Gene Corley in charge of ASCE investigation
• NYC put Thornton-Tomasetti in charge of site
• Richard Tomasetti (Thorntons partner) cleared
  the decision to recycle the steel, later saying
  had he known the direction that investigations
  into the disaster would take, he would have
  adopted a different stance.

Anyone smell a rat?
14
Restrictions on ASCE investigation

• No access to blueprints
• Not allowed to ask for help from public
• Team members threatened with dismissal for
  speaking to press
• No access to steel until first week of October
• FEMA obstruction

15
FEMA BPAT

• ASCE expanded and was named FEMA BPAT
• John Gross, NIST engineer with oil and gas
  history
• Therese McAllister, Greenhorne and OMara (GO)
• Other government contractors (Arup, Hughes)
• When FEMA took over, 1 million was allocated,
  but only 100,000 was spent by December
• At the same time, Bush was telling us It costs a
  lot to fight this war. We have spent more than a
  billion dollars a month

16
By January, it was a half-baked farce

• Bill Manning, editor of Fire Engineering
  magazine, said the official investigationis a
  half-baked farce that may already have been
  commandeered by political forces whose primary
  interests, to put it mildly, lie far afield of
  full disclosure.
• Dick Cheney called Senate leader Tom Daschle and
  asked him to limit the scope and overall review
  of what happened on 9/11, claiming resources
  would be pulled from the War on Terrorism.
  President Bush met with Daschle privately and
  asked him to limit the investigation.

17
Meanwhile

• Astaneh-Asl, a lone scientist working on a
  National Science Foundation study, got access to
  the steel before the ASCE/FEMA team
• The impact did nothing to this building
  (reported by CNN)
• So now we know, the column did not fail, it was
  a failure of the floor in most cases (reported
  by Wired)

18
Who would design a building for plane crashes but
forget the jet fuel fires?

• Eduardo Kausel The WTC buildings were designed
  to withstand Boeing 707 impacts but were never
  designed for the massive explosions nor the
  intense jet fuel fires that came next a key
  design omission.
• Loring Knoblauch (CEO of UL) the jet fuel fires
  were not reasonably foreseeable.
• What? How would the planes get to the buildings?
  Who would really do this?

19
Not the WTCs design Engineer

• Towers designed by John Skilling
• Skilling had this to say in 1993 when asked if he
  considered plane crashes in his design.
• Our analysis indicated the biggest problem
  would be the fact that all the fuel would dump
  into the building. But the building structure
  would still be there.
• City in the Sky, Glanz and Lipton

20
(No Transcript)
21
Wheres the fire?
Windsor building, Madrid, February 2005
Twin towers shortly after WTC2 hit
22
ASCE / FEMA findings

• April 2002 NOVA video by commentators Corley and
  Thornton
• Fireproofing easily blown off
• Floors collapsed
• Columns buckled outward
• May 2002 final FEMA report
• a pancake-type of collapse of successive floors

23
June 2002 NIST drafts plan

• National Institute of Standards and Technology
• Director is Presidential appointee
• Repository for national reference standards
• First meeting included Public comments by
• Gene Corley
• Richard Tomasetti
• Shankar Nair
• Other contributors to official reports

24
FEMA authors become NIST authors

• FEMA Chapter 1 authors
• Therese McAllister co-wrote NIST report 1-6 and
  1-7
• John Gross co-wrote NIST report 1-6 and 1-7
• Ronald Hamburger NIST contributor
• FEMA Chapter 2 authors
• Ronald Hamburger see above
• William Baker NIST contributor, Freedom tower
• Harold Nelson co-wrote NIST report 1-5 and 1-7
• FEMA chapter 5 authors (WTC 7)
• Ramon Gilsanz co-wrote NIST report 1-6F
• Harold Nelson see above

25
Oct 2002 - Silverstein / Weidlinger report

• Corley and Thornton-Tomasetti involved in study
  to establish Silverstein insurance claim
• Report results
• No floor failure of any kind
• Column failure only
• Directly contradicts FEMA report, NOVA video and
  most other experts (e.g. Astaneh-Asl)
• Apparently floor failure would have meant design
  failure and therefore one event

26
They knew from the start what happened?

• Experts Towering Inferno
• Steel melted
• FEMA
• Floor failure A pancake-type of collapse of
  successive floors
• Silverstein/Weidlinger
• Column failure only
• NIST
• External column failure from sagging floors and
  softened core columns ,etcleading to pile driver
  collapse
• (TNRAT Theyll Never Read All This theory)

TNRAT
27
Demo points out characteristics of demolition

• Dust clouds
• Horizontal ejections (squibs)
• Demolition rings
• Sounds of explosions
• Pools of molten steel

• Sudden onset
• Straight down
• Nearly free-fall speed
• Total collapse
• Sliced steel
• Pulverization of concrete

All supported by photographic evidence and
eyewitness testimonies
28
Sept 2005 - The NIST WTC Report

• 42 sub-reports and
• 10,000 pages
• Only for Twin Towers
• Like others, focused only
• on political story
• Same people as FEMA

TNRAT
29
NFPA 921 used?Standard for fire investigation

• Sec 6-5 Important to remember that conflict of
  interest should be avoided
• NIST used specialists/contractors who were
  dependent on government contracts or on the
  official story itself
• Sec 12-4 Unusual residues could arise from
  thermite, magnesium or other pyrotechnic
  materials
• NIST report does not mention FEMAs puzzling
  sulfur residue

30
Our focus

• NISTs stated goals
• Goal 1 Why and How three buildings collapsed
• Goal 3 What design factors should have
  prevented this?
• NISTs approach and final story
• 5 methods to investigate
• 7 steps to collapse

31
NISTs investigation methods

• A. Review of documents
• B. Interviews with eyewitnesses
• C. Analysis of steel
• D. Laboratory tests
• E. Computer Simulations

32
A. NISTs review of documents

• Reports of original design claims?
• No, many relevant claims not mentioned
• Fire resistance test data (e.g. UL test
  documents)?
• No, documents came up missing
• Skillings fire resistance analysis?
• No, documents missing

33
Original design claims

• The World Trade Center towers would have an
  inherent capacity to resist unforeseen
  calamities.
• For the perimeter columns (83 of total columns),
  live loads on these columns can be increased
  more than 2,000 before failure occurs.
• One could cut away all the first story columns
  on one side of the building, and partway from the
  corners of the perpendicular sides, and the
  building could still withstand design live loads
  and a 100 mph wind from any direction.

All quotes from Engineering News-Record, 1964
34
A. Were the WTC steel components tested for fire
resistance?

• NIST said they found no documents, yet states the
  buildings were rated as Class 1B (3 hours for
  columns and 2 hours for floors)
• Underwriters Laboratories CEO -- UL tested the
  steel to NYC code (meaning 40 years ago)
• Port Authority -- there are no test records in
  our files
• ASTM E119 is used for testing both steel
  components and floor assemblies

35
ASTM E119 Time-temperature curve
36
A. UL comments on testing the WTC steel

• September 2001
• Loring Knoblauch, ULs CEO, told staff that UL
  had certified the steel used in the WTC
• November 2003
• I asked Knoblauch in writing about ULs
  involvement, and he responded in December
  confirming details.
• We tested the steel with all the required
  fireproofing on, and it did beautifully.
• As we do not do follow-up service on this kind
  of product, we can give an opinion only on the
  test sample which was indeed properly coated.
• We test to the code requirements, and the steel
  clearly met the NYC code requirements and
  exceeded them.

37
A. Our Public Safety Guardian (UL) lying?

• August 2004
• UL performed tests of WTC floor models
• Floors barely affected and didnt collapse
• Loring Knoblauch resigned suddenly
• October 2004
• NIST report update showed contradictions
• November 2004
• My letter to NIST became public
• UL quickly backtracked, saying
• No evidence any firm tested the steel
• They played only a limited role in
  investigation

38
B. NISTs performance on interviews

• NIST started planning for eyewitness interviews
  in April 2003
• (7 months after start of investigation, and 19
  months after 9/11)
• By October, still no NIST interviews and no NIST
  access to NYC interviews
• NYC finally agreed to allow NIST access to
  original interviews by December 2003
• but only in NYC offices (sound familiar?)

39
B. Eyewitness interviews not used

• Paramedic Daniel Rivera Did you ever see
  professional demolition where they set the
  charges on certain floors and then you hear Pop,
  pop, pop, pop, pop?I thought it was that.
• Witness Timothy Burke the building popped,
  lower than the fireI was going oh, my God, there
  is a secondary device because the way the
  building popped. I thought it was an explosion.
• Firefighter Edward Cachia It actually gave at
  a lower floor, not the floor where the plane hit.
  We originally thought there was like an internal
  detonation, explosives
• Assistant Commissioner Stephen Gregory -- I
  thoughtthat I saw low-level flashesat the
  lower level of the building. You know like when
  they demolish a building?

40
B. Eyewitness interviews not used

• Firefighter Richard Banaciski It seemed like
  on television when they blow up these
  buildings. It seemed like it was going all
  around like a belt, all these explosions.
• Deputy Commissioner Thomas Fitzpatrick My
  initial reaction was that this was exactly the
  way it looks when they show you those implosions
  on TV.
• Battalion Chief Brian Dixon the lowest floor
  of the fire in the south tower actually looked
  like someone had planted explosives all around it
  becauseeverything blew out on the one floor.
• Firefighter Kenneth Rogers there was an
  explosion in the south towerI kept watching.
  Floor after floor after floor. It looked like
  a synchronized deliberate kind of thing.

41
C. Analysis of steel

• Most of the steel evidence destroyed
• Tomasetti decision (Thorntons partner)
• 236 samples saved for testing (0.3)
• NIST tests
• Paint test indicated low steel temps (480 F )
  despite pre-collapse exposure to fire
• Microstructure test showed no steel reached
  critical (half-strength) values

42
NIST comments before and After

• Before steel temperature analysis
• (12/02/03)
• Regions of impact and fire damage emphasized in
  selection of steel pieces.
• After steel temperature analysis
• (final report)
• None of the samples were from zones where high
  heating was predicted.

43
D. Laboratory tests

• Tests to prove loss of fireproofing?
• Fifteen rounds from a shotgun
• Workstation burn tests
• Gas temperatures, not steel temperatures
• Used double the average amount of jet fuel
• Used Over-ventilation
• UL floor model tests evaluated Pancake Theory

44
Pancake Theory

• I could see it in my minds eye The fire burned
  until the steel was weakened and the floors above
  collapsed, starting a chain reaction of gravity,
  floor falling upon floor upon floor, clunk
  clunk clunk, the load gaining weight and
  momentum by the nanosecond, unstoppable. Once
  enough floors collapsed, the exterior walls and
  the core columns were no longer laterally
  supported and folded in. -- Karl Koch
• (from Kochs book Men of Steel)

45
WTC floor model tests by UL (Aug 2004)

• Used less fireproofing than was known to exist in
  WTC1, and then reduced fireproofing further
• Used maximum load (i.e. applied doubled the
  weight known to have been on floors)
• Heated floors according to ASTM E119
• Minimal floor sagging
• No floor collapse
• The results established that this type of
  assembly was capable of sustaining a large
  gravity load, without collapsing, for a
  substantial period of time relative to the
  duration of the fires in any given location on
  September 11th.

46
NIST comments before and after

• Before UL floor tests
• Tests will determine the fire rating of
  typical WTC floor systems under both as-built and
  specified conditions
• After UL floor tests
• The Investigation Team was cautious about using
  these results directly in the formulation of
  collapse hypotheses

47
E. Computer Simulations

• Input parameters could be tweaked
• Realistic parameters tossed in favor of More
  severe parameters
• Animations generated to compare with observed
  events

48
E. NISTs computer simulated animations
Does your future depend on these cartoons?
49
NISTs investigative practices were deceptive and
unscientific

• Documents needed just happened to be missing
• Eyewitnesses to demolition characteristics were
  ignored
• Physical tests that disproved pre-determined
  conclusions were downplayed or ignored
• Entire theory is built on fudged, inaccessible
  computer simulations

TNRAT
50
NISTs Final, Computer-Based Story

• 1. The aircraft severed a number of columns
• 2. Loads were redistributed (from -20 to 25)
• 3. Insulation (fireproofing) was widely dislodged
• 4. High temperatures softened columns and floors
• 5. Some floors began to sag
• 6. Sagging floors pulled exterior columns inward
  causing them to buckle
• 7. Instability spread around entire building
• Global collapse ensued

51
1. How many columns were severed?

• NIST now admits only a small percentage of
  columns were severed
• 14 in WTC1
• 15 in WTC2
• But since one could cut away all the first story
  columns on one side of the building, and partway
  from the corners of the perpendicular sides, and
  the building could still withstand design live
  loads and a 100 mph wind from any direction, we
  know the buildings could withstand gt 25 column
  loss without a problem.

52
2. How much load was re-distributed?

• NIST says loads on some columns were decreased
  (as much as 20) and other loads were increased
  (up to 25).
• But again, since the original design claims were
  that, live loads on these perimeter columns
  can be increased more than 2,000 before failure
  occurs, these columns should have supported the
  extra load and much, much more
• So far, no reason to even suspect collapse

53
3. Fireproofing widely dislodged?

• The towers would not have collapsed under the
  combined effects of aircraft impact and the
  subsequent multi-floor fires if the insulation
  had not been widely dislodged or had been only
  minimally dislodged by aircraft impact. -- NIST
• What does widely dislodged mean?

54
3. NIST must have done extensive testing to
prove fireproofing was widely dislodged!

• No, they shot 15 rounds from a shotgun at
  non-representative samples in a plywood box
  (were they in a hurry?)
• No evidence that Boeing 767 would transform into
  so many shotgun blasts
  (many thousands would be needed)
• Shotgun test actually proved fireproofing could
  not have been widely dislodged because the energy
  was simply not available

55
No energy left to dislodge fireproofing

• NIST says 2500 MJ of kinetic energy from plane
  that hit WTC1
• Calculations show that all this energy was
  consumed in crushing aircraft and breaking
  columns floors
• Shotgun tests found that 1 MJ per sq meter was
  needed to dislodge fireproofing
• For the areas in question, intact floors and
  columns had gt 6000 sq meters of surface area

Calculations by Tomasz Wierzbicki of MIT
56
4. How hot could the steel have become?

• NIST now says about 4,500 gallons of jet fuel
  were available to feed fires. This would have
  provided 590,000 MJ of energy.
• Office furnishings in the impact zone would have
  provided 490,000 MJ of energy.
• Using masses and specific heats for materials
  heated, a maximum temperature in the impact zone
  can be calculated.
• The result is less than 600 degrees F
• Assuming fuel burnt with perfect efficiency, that
  no hot gases left the impact zone, that no heat
  escaped by conduction, and that the steel and
  concrete had an unlimited amount of time to
  absorb all the heat.

57
Steel Temperatures Discussed (F)
58
Review NIST Story and Problems

• Column breakage (14) weakened building, then
  external columns saw up to 25 increases in total
  load
• Fireproofing widely dislodged
• High steel temps required for long time

• Can lose an additional 30 or more before
  challenging design claims external columns
  designed to withstand 2000 increases in live
  load
• No evidence that Boeing 767 would transform into
  thousands of shotgun blasts no energy available
  to dislodge fireproofing
• Tests and calculations show steel temps were way
  too low

59
5. Some floors began to sag?

• Only very slight sagging is visible in NIST
  photos from UL tests (and no collapse)
• After two hours in high temp furnace, the deck
  of 35 ft floor model sagged only a few inches in
  the middle, and the major joist parts did not sag
  at all
• NISTs computer turned this into dramatic 42 inch
  sagging, with joists bending downward severely

Remember, WTC2 collapsed after only 56 minutes
and WTC1 fires on south face had only 45 minutes
60
6. How did the sagging floors pull exterior
columns inward causing them to buckle?

• Over 30 columns would have to be pulled in to
  challenge design claim
• What new force did a few inches of deck sagging
  apply to those 30 columns? NIST says 14 kips
  per truss seat were applied but does not
  adequately explain how this challenged the
  designed axial load of 1174 kips per column
• What tests did NIST do to prove inward buckling,
  and was the application of the results consistent?

61
The triple double bare steel computer result

• An exterior wall section (9 columns wide and 9
  floors high) was found to bow inward when floor
  connections applied an inward force.
• (computer result for one case out of nine)
• Same report says sagging area only 5 floors high!
• NIST had to exaggerate temperatures (1300 F),
  apply these temps for 90 minutes, strip all
  fireproofing, and then double the height of the
  inward pull zone to produce even a hint of inward
  bowing from fire

Note There are other ways to produce bowing
and buckling of columns just ask Demo
62
7. Instability spread around entire building
perimeter?

• Buildings fell at nearly free-fall speed. How
  fast would instability have to spread first? How
  much of the 10 sec fall time could be spared?
• Perimeter of building was 832 feet. If complete
  in 0.5 seconds, speed of instability spread
  would have been gt1100 mph (Mach 1.5)
• A steel structure, generally speaking, does not
  collapse suddenly when attacked by fire. There
  are unmistakable warning signs, namely, large
  deformations.
• Hart, Multi-Storey Buildings in Steel, Halsted
  Press

63
NISTs collapse initiation sequence What would
objective scientists have found?

• 1. Relatively few columns were lost on impact
• 2. Remaining columns had considerable extra
  capacity
• 3. Fireproofing could not have been widely
  dislodged
• 4. Steel could not have softened at the temps
  found
• 5. Even at higher temps and longer periods tests
  showed minimal sagging of floors
• 6. Forces were not produced to pull columns
  inward
• 7. Instability spread would have taken much
  more time and would not result in uniform
  free-fall

64
NISTs computer story is Bush Science

• The parameters NIST originally considered
  realistic were discarded because computer
  results did not compare to observed events.
• More severe parameters were substituted until
  animations gave the desired result
• NIST will not release 6,899 photographs and 6,977
  segments of real video footage

65
Global collapse ensued?

• What about resistance of floors below? If these
  floors each caused hesitation of only half a
  second, an extra 40 seconds would be needed.
• What about the observed squibs?  (Pile-driving is
  not Pancaking)
•  
• What about the large pools of molten metal
  observed in the basement areas of both Towers and
  WTC 7? 
• What about the sulfur residue found on the steel?

66
The NIST WTC report is false because

• They did not explain why and how the buildings
  collapsed, and their investigation was deceptive
  and unscientific at every step
• They reported findings that were in direct
  contradiction to their physical testing
• They omitted or distorted many important facts
• Original design claims and John Skillings
  analysis
• Resistance from building structure below
• WTC 1 antenna moving first
• Pools of molten metal lingering for weeks
• Numerous eyewitness testimonies about explosions
• Sulfur residue on steel

67
Researchers call for examination of the
demolition hypothesis

• Demolition squibs seen ejected from floors far
  from impact zone
• Everything pulverized
• Molten metal found under rubble piles of all
  three buildings for weeks
• Site cleaned up by Controlled Demolition, Inc.
• Many reports of explosions and flashes of light

68
WTC 7

• Would have been tallest building in 33 states
• Collapsed in 6.6 seconds
• Larry Silverstein, leaseholder for all three
  buildings -- I saidmaybe the smartest thing to
  do is pull it. And the fire department
  commander and I made that decision to pull and
  we watched the building collapse. PBS, 2002
• FEMA -- the collapse was due primarily to fire,
  rather than any impact damage from the collapsing
  towers

69
It takes weeks to plan and implement a
controlled demolition
70
Thank you for listening and watch out for more
rats and elephants
Demo
TNRAT