You are viewing this page on 911Research.com, which is the backup mirror of 911Research.WTC7.net .
The original page is at http://911research.wtc7.net/letters/nist/WTC7_Davies.html.
Please link to the original page rather than this mirror page.
9 - 1 1 R e s e a r c h letters
In August of 2008 the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) published a draft of its Final Report on WTC 7. Phil Davies points out a simple and obvious fatal flaw in NIST's theory. This is similar to a letter Davies sent to NIST.
STATUS: sent to WTC7.net, September 18, 2008

Dear WTC7.Net

I am writing in regard to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Final Report on the Collapse of WTC Building 7, which was released in August of 2008. The NIST has not provided any evidence or logical explanation that partial floor collapse outside the core area left “column 79 with insufficient lateral support in the east-west direction". And without this reason for column 79 to fail, you don't have much of a theory. Moreover, it is easy to prove such east-west lateral support still existed.

Column 79 was a core column. Column 79 was always securely connected to adjacent core column 76 just west of 79, even after the partial floor collapse. Since beams connecting adjacent core columns were significantly stronger and provided more lateral support than the long span floor girders that supposedly collapsed, there was still plenty of east-west lateral support for column 79 from column 76.

In addition, beams connecting column 79 to its adjacent core column to the south were still securely connected after the partial floor collapse. This adjacent core column was #80. While the beams from 79 to 80 were still securely in place, girders going from these beams to the east side of the building in an east-west direction were also still in place. These east-west girders connected to beams 79-80 provided even more east-west lateral support for column 79.

The bottom line is that even after the partial floor collapse outside the core, Column 79 had plenty of east-west lateral support, both to its east and to its west. Thus, column 79 never lost its structural integrity nor collapsed as a result of insufficient lateral support in the east-west direction. If I as a layman can figure this out, then structural engineers will likewise do so very soon. The NIST report may be their final report, but it can't be the real final report. Our government owes us a realistic and independent analysis of what caused the collapse of WTC Building Seven.

Sincerely,

Phil Davies, Lafayette Hill PA