doggie said...petermac33 said...
The Russian skyscraper,soon to be the largest in Russia at 93 floors had a much larger fire recently,funny how it was declared safe,with no future threat of collapse.
Conveniently forgotten?
STOP Peter
I agree with you but stop posting this stuff on here nobody is interested, ok?
C'mon Doggie, we bite for the same reason a dog licks his... because we can :)
The interweb is a breeding ground for conspiracy theorists, but it's easy to google around their own claims using the same method.
The Russian Federation Tower is a cast in place steel re-inforced concrete structure, WTC were primarily steel with (from memory) spray on fire insulation. Concrete is an infinitely better insulator in that situation and does a better job of protecting key structural components.
The WTC was a much bigger fire(4000sqm in an instant) that the Federation Tower, which only involved three floors under construction, slowly engulfing fire that only got to around 300 sqm.
The Fed Tower was probably only fueled by some construction equipment and not much else, the WTC was fueled by the contents, fixtures and fittings of the building, oh, and the contents of a large fully laden commercial airliner carrying nearly 100,000 litres of fuel.
Fire-fighters put the Fed Tower fire out within a few hours of it starting. The WTC firies were probably still climbing the stairs when the first tower collapsed.
Apparently structural steel begins to soften around 425°C and loses about half of its strength at 650°C. The internal temperature of a common candle can be around 1400 °C.
Fed tower didn't have an airliner crash into it, something the WTC was never designed for, maybe not the same as the wind loads on a windy day but a significant impact regardless.
.) For as long as the water is still liquid it won't go above 100C
