| Revision as of 09:24, 1 May 2006 editSeabhcan (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users7,216 edits blanked it. I'll start from scratch← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 18:51, 1 May 2006 edit undoSeabhcan (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users7,216 edits Theories of the collapse | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| ==Theories of the collapse== | |||
| It was quickly realised that the airliner impact damage along was insufficient to explain the collapse, and attention swiftly focused on the resultant fires. The first published technical theory of the collapse of the twin towers was "Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse?—Simple Analysis", written within days of the disaster by ]s Zdenek P. Bazant1 and Yong Zhou. Based on a number of assumptions, particularly a hot prolonged jet fuel fire which raise the core columns to excess of 800C, this paper shows how the building would suffer global failure, following complete failure on a single floor. | |||
Latest revision as of 18:51, 1 May 2006
Theories of the collapse
It was quickly realised that the airliner impact damage along was insufficient to explain the collapse, and attention swiftly focused on the resultant fires. The first published technical theory of the collapse of the twin towers was "Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse?—Simple Analysis", written within days of the disaster by Civil Engineers Zdenek P. Bazant1 and Yong Zhou. Based on a number of assumptions, particularly a hot prolonged jet fuel fire which raise the core columns to excess of 800C, this paper shows how the building would suffer global failure, following complete failure on a single floor.