|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
I'm not qualified to comment on building construction or firefighting
techniques but I will say this. Thank god there are people who will
come to your aid when you need help. What an honorable profession.
Tom Brun
Vic Brower wrote:
> William,
>
> I do have strong feelings about this, but I sincerely
> don't understand where I have clouded the issue.
>
> I am a firefighter on a ladder company in the Seattle
> Fire Department. You obviously have a good
> understanding of building construction. With the
> exception of your statement that I have clouded the
> issue, I agree with everything you said.
>
> My previous response was simply to refute the
> allegation that the F.D.N.Y. "screwed up royally".
> This kind of armchair quarterbacking by sedentary
> individuals who have never fought fire really
> irritates me.
>
> The FD's job is to take a situation that is out of
> control and somehow make it better. Given the insane
> circumstances on Sept 11, I think the FDNY did the
> best job it could. They deserve accolades, not
> condemnation.
>
> -Lance
>
> --- William Brower <1000mileman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Clearly you have strong feelings on this issue but
> > you have let them cloud
> > the issue. The Fire Department has no
> > responsibility for the design
> > characteristics of buildings, some of which include
> > the materials used, the
> > fire resistance ratings of the structural members
> > and the structural
> > behavior under various conditions (fire, wind load,
> > vibration, settlement,
> > shear, racking). The design requirements for such
> > structures are firmly
> > embedded in specifications set forth by various
> > design and testing firms
> > and adopted by local government agencies. Design
> > engineering firms use
> > these guidelines for producing the building plans
> > and specifications. City
> > building inspectors are charged with enforcement of
> > the building code. The
> > Fire Department is eventually charged with the
> > responsibility of
> > controlling fires and saving lives.
> >
> > The fireproofing used on the steel in the WTC was
> > most likely blown
> > completely off some of the structural members.
> > Fireproofing comes in many
> > forms but to build a skyscraper, the accepted form
> > is called spray-on
> > fireproofing. It is a mixture of cementious
> > material mixed with fire
> > retardant. It is soft and can be scratched easily
> > with your finger. It is
> > very likely that portions of that material were
> > dislodged during the impact
> > of the plane and then the fire weakened the steel
> > which led to the
> > collapse. Interior structural members, known as the
> > core of the structure,
> > are often the most critical to the stability of the
> > structure. That is
> > often where the diagonal bracing is located. The
> > core is usually
> > fireproofed with cement masonry units (CMU), better
> > known as concrete
> > blocks. These walls were also likely to have been
> > knocked down at the time
> > of the impact. The underlying core steel members
> > would then be totally
> > exposed. The collapse would then be unavoidable.
> >
> > OK, so how do we build buildings to prevent this
> > type of disaster. Very
> > simple, you define the type of blast and fire you
> > anticipate and then build
> > the structure to meet these requirements. Based on
> > what we have seen so
> > far, the sky scraper of the future would probably
> > have 110 stories with 20
> > feet of reinforced concrete exterior walls with no
> > windows. No matter what
> > you build, the terrorist has the ability to choose a
> > weapon to attack the
> > structure you build. It is not a game you can ever
> > win by redesigning the
> > buildings. You need to prevent the attack in the
> > first place.
> >
> > At 10:04 AM 9/22/01 -0700, you wrote:
> > >Hello Omega list,
> > >
> > >I'm writing mainly in response to Jack Griffin's
> > >statement in which he "condemns" F.D.N.Y. for not
> > >"knowing" that the World Trade Center buildings
> > were
> > >going to collapse.
> > >
> > >I'd also like to shed some light on the purpose of,
> > >and limitations of fire sprinkler systems in
> > response
> > >to Mark Brown's post.
> > >
> > >Jack Griffin wrote: Come on, the Fire Department
> > >should have thought about it. So if you won't
> > condemn
> > >them I will. It was their job to know this (that
> > the
> > >WTC’s would collapse). It was even in the stupid
> > >building design that the steel could only last 2
> > hrs
> > >at best in a fire. They screwed up royally…
> > >
> > >I am almost as stunned by the ignorance of this
> > >statement as I am by the fact that men would fly
> > >planes into buildings.
> > >
> > >Jack, I assure you that the F.D.N.Y. did, in fact,
> > >give some thought to the possibility of collapse.
> > >Allow me to educate you about why we have Fire
> > >Departments, and what their priorities are. The
> > >acronym L.I.P. adequately sums up the FD’s incident
> > >priorities. L.I.P.
> > >stands for: L Life safety. I Incident
> > >stabilization. P Property conservation.
> > >
> > >Upon arrival at the WTC incident, or any “typical”
> > >building fire, the Incident Commander must weigh
> > the
> > >benefits versus the risks of sending firefighters
> > into
> > >the building. Probably the most important question
> > the
> > >IC has to consider is, “are there victims inside
> > this
> > >structure who can be saved by aggressive interior
> > >tactics?” If the answer to this question is yes (as
> > it
> > >was at the WTC incident), then any IC worth their
> > salt
> > >will send firefighters into the building in an
> > attempt
> > >to save lives.
> > >
> > >Basically, if there are lives to be saved,
> > >firefighters will put themselves in harms way to
> > save
> > >those lives. Even if building collapse is a
> > >possibility. There was no way to “know” that the
> > WTC
> > >towers would collapse so quickly.
> > >
> > >Although most people intuitively understand this,
> > Jack
> > >apparently fails to get it.
> > >
> > >Imagine the following scenario. It’s 2:00 am, the
> > >kitchen, living room, and attic of your parent’s
> > home
> > >are completely involved in fire, and the rest of
> > their
> > >home is being charged with thick smoke. Your
> > parents
> > >are asleep behind their closed bedroom door, and
> > >because of carbon monoxide, they fail to awaken at
> > the
> > >sound of the smoke detectors going off. When the
> > fire
> > >department arrives, they decide it’s too dangerous
> > to
> > >try to enter the home and save your parents because
> > >there is a possibility the roof might collapse due
> > to
> > >the lightweight truss construction in the attic.
> > How
> > >would you feel about this fire department after
> > your
> > >parents died in their bed of smoke inhalation,
> > their
> > >bodies untouched by fire? At that point, do you
> > think
> > >you might become a fan of aggressive fire
> > department
> > >tactics?
> > >
> > >The F.D. at the WTC was faced with similar
> > decisions,
> > >on a massively larger scale. What if the fire
> > >department didn’t go into the WTC towers, and they
> > >didn’t collapse, and thousands of people died in
> > the
> > >fire? What would you think then?
> > >
> > >Jack, it’s easy to play Monday morning quarterback,
> > >after a ballgame or a tragic incident. Until you’ve
> > >worn a set of turnouts and crawled around in a
> > burning
> > >building, you don’t have the right to condemn any
> > fire
> > >department, because you don’t know what you’re
> > talking
> > >about.
> > >
> > >
> > >Moving along…
> > >
> > >
> > >A typical fire sprinkler will discharge
> > approximately
> > >25 - 35 gallons of water per minute when activated.
> > >Fire sprinklers are activated by a fusible link
> > that
> > >opens the sprinkler head when the temperature
> > reaches
> > >a given level. Only those sprinklers in direct
> > contact
> > >with the fire's heat will react.
> > >
> > >When jumbo jets slammed into the WTC buildings,
> > most,
> >
> === message truncated ===
|