The collapse of the WTC
by Kevin Ryan
Underwriters Laboratories
Thursday, Nov 11, 2004
The following letter was sent today by Kevin Ryan of Underwriters Laboratories to Frank Gayle of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).
Underwriters Laboratories is the company that certified the steel
componets used in the constuction of the World Trade Center towers. The
information in this letter is of great importance.
Dr. Gayle,
Having recently reviewed your team's report of 10/19/04, I felt the need to contact you directly.
As I'm sure you know, the company I work for certified the steel
components used in the construction of the WTC buildings. In requesting
information from both our CEO and Fire Protection business manager last
year, I learned that they did not agree on the essential aspects of the
story, except for one thing - that the samples we certified met all
requirements. They suggested we all be patient and understand that UL
was working with your team, and that tests would continue through this
year. I'm aware of UL's attempts to help, including performing tests on
models of the floor assemblies. But the results of these tests appear
to indicate that the buildings should have easily withstood the thermal
stress caused by pools of burning jet fuel.
There continues to be a number of "experts" making public claims
about how the WTC buildings fell. One such person, Dr. Hyman Brown from
the WTC construction crew, claims that the buildings collapsed due to
fires at 2000F melting the steel (1). He states "What caused the
building to collapse is the airplane fuel…burning at 2,000 degrees
Fahrenheit. The steel in that five-floor area melts." Additionally, the
newspaper that quotes him says "Just-released preliminary findings from
a National Institute of Standards and Technology study of the World
Trade Center collapse support Brown’s theory."
We know that the steel components were certified to ASTM E119. The
time temperature curves for this standard require the samples to be
exposed to temperatures around 2000F for several hours. And as we all
agree, the steel applied met those specifications. Additionally, I
think we can all agree that even un-fireproofed steel will not melt
until reaching red-hot temperatures of nearly 3000F (2). Why Dr. Brown
would imply that 2000F would melt the high-grade steel used in those
buildings makes no sense at all.
The results of your recently published metallurgical tests seem to
clear things up (3), and support your team's August 2003 update as
detailed by the Associated Press (4), in which you were ready to "rule
out weak steel as a contributing factor in the collapse." The
evaluation of paint deformation and spheroidization seem very
straightforward, and you noted that the samples available were adequate
for the investigation. Your comments suggest that the steel was
probably exposed to temperatures of only about 500F (250C), which is
what one might expect from a thermodynamic analysis of the situation.
However the summary of the new NIST report seems to ignore your
findings, as it suggests that these low temperatures caused exposed
bits of the building’s steel core to "soften and buckle." (5)
Additionally this summary states that the perimeter columns softened,
yet your findings make clear that "most perimeter panels (157 of 160)
saw no temperature above 250C." To soften steel for the purposes of
forging, normally temperatures need to be above1100C (6). However, this
new summary report suggests that much lower temperatures were be able
to not only soften the steel in a matter of minutes, but lead to rapid
structural collapse.
This story just does not add up. If steel from those buildings did
soften or melt, I’m sure we can all agree that this was certainly not
due to jet fuel fires of any kind, let alone the briefly burning fires
in those towers. That fact should be of great concern to all Americans.
Alternatively, the contention that this steel did fail at temperatures
around 250C suggests that the majority of deaths on 9/11 were due to a
safety-related failure. That suggestion should be of great concern to
my company.
There is no question that the events of 9/11 are the emotional
driving force behind the War on Terror. And the issue of the WTC
collapse is at the crux of the story of 9/11. My feeling is that your
metallurgical tests are at the crux of the crux of the crux. Either you
can make sense of what really happened to those buildings, and
communicate this quickly, or we all face the same destruction and
despair that come from global decisions based on disinformation and
“chatter”.
Thanks for your efforts to determine what happened on that day. You
may know that there are a number of other current and former government
employees that have risked a great deal to help us to know the truth.
I've copied one of these people on this message as a sign of respect
and support. I believe your work could also be a nucleus of fact around
which the truth, and thereby global peace and justice, can grow again.
Please do what you can to quickly eliminate the confusion regarding the
ability of jet fuel fires to soften or melt structural steel.
1. http://www.boulderweekly.com/archive/102104/coverstory.html
2. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 61st edition, pg D-187
3. http://wtc.nist.gov/media/P3MechanicalandMetAnalysisofSteel.pdf
4. http://www.voicesofsept11.org/archive/911ic/082703.php
5. http://wtc.nist.gov/media/NCSTACWTCStatusFINAL101904WEB2.pdf (pg 11)
6. http://www.forging.org/FIERF/pdf/ffaaMacSleyne.pdf
Kevin Ryan
Site Manager
Environmental Health Laboratories
A Division of Underwriters Laboratories
