As the title says (please bear with the second 9/11 question I made in less than five days). They say the Empire State Building was built as one big rock in Midtown Manhattan, and that had the WTC towers been built like the ESB, they wouldn't have collapsed. Thoughts?
Another 9/11 question: Would the Twin Towers have survived if they were built like the Empire State?
- Thread starter Nightingale
- Start date
NO, please see my post (and other posts) on the other question.
I am sure this question is based upon the famous accident when the B-25 hit the Empire State Building. But the scale of the aircraft is massively different. As is the quantity of fuel. And I believe the type of fuel differs which I think results in a different temperature of fire from each.
The reality is that the Empire State Building is not built all that different then the Twin Towers. By that I mean the are both steel skyscrapers. Yes it has a different exterior and it’s steel structure is in a different location but it is still a building with a steel skeleton and a curtain wall exterior. As such once you have as big of a fire as hot as it was you will weaken the steel. The steel will distort which in layman’s terms means it effectively will get weaker and eventually something critical will give and down will come baby, it is not like one of them is built from solid stone with flying buttresses.
It won’t fail in the exact same way. And in fact may result in a worse result as it may tip over or otherwise “domino” other buildings. The Twin towers were designed to do what they did. Stand as long as they could then if/when to much damage occurs to fall down in such a way as to minimize collateral damage. This was accomplished in part from experience gained over the years from incidence such as the B25. The Twin Towers were also designed to take a larger hit from a larger aircraft. Namely a 707.
Think about what the Twin Towers did that day. They took the impact of a very large jet filled with passenger and cargo and survived. Do you understand the kind of load that represents? It was an amazing example of engineering and design that the impact didn’t bring the building down. And even after being weakened by the impact (that undoubtedly damaged structure) it still resisted the fire long enough for thousands of people to get out of the building. And then when it did fall down. It fell in a manor as to minimize collateral damage.
So in short. Once the Twin Towers or any other building built before 1980 (and most likely any built after 1980) took that hit it was going to come down. And that includes the Empire State Building. Many buildings especially the older ones are going to fail in an even worse manor as they did not have failure designed in from the beginning. In fact I would not be surprised if the Burj Khalifa (spelling?) would come down from that hit.
If you want an interesting what if try this one. What if it was a 747? Or even worse, What if 911 happens years later and it is an Airbus A380 that slams into them?
I am sure this question is based upon the famous accident when the B-25 hit the Empire State Building. But the scale of the aircraft is massively different. As is the quantity of fuel. And I believe the type of fuel differs which I think results in a different temperature of fire from each.
The reality is that the Empire State Building is not built all that different then the Twin Towers. By that I mean the are both steel skyscrapers. Yes it has a different exterior and it’s steel structure is in a different location but it is still a building with a steel skeleton and a curtain wall exterior. As such once you have as big of a fire as hot as it was you will weaken the steel. The steel will distort which in layman’s terms means it effectively will get weaker and eventually something critical will give and down will come baby, it is not like one of them is built from solid stone with flying buttresses.
It won’t fail in the exact same way. And in fact may result in a worse result as it may tip over or otherwise “domino” other buildings. The Twin towers were designed to do what they did. Stand as long as they could then if/when to much damage occurs to fall down in such a way as to minimize collateral damage. This was accomplished in part from experience gained over the years from incidence such as the B25. The Twin Towers were also designed to take a larger hit from a larger aircraft. Namely a 707.
Think about what the Twin Towers did that day. They took the impact of a very large jet filled with passenger and cargo and survived. Do you understand the kind of load that represents? It was an amazing example of engineering and design that the impact didn’t bring the building down. And even after being weakened by the impact (that undoubtedly damaged structure) it still resisted the fire long enough for thousands of people to get out of the building. And then when it did fall down. It fell in a manor as to minimize collateral damage.
So in short. Once the Twin Towers or any other building built before 1980 (and most likely any built after 1980) took that hit it was going to come down. And that includes the Empire State Building. Many buildings especially the older ones are going to fail in an even worse manor as they did not have failure designed in from the beginning. In fact I would not be surprised if the Burj Khalifa (spelling?) would come down from that hit.
If you want an interesting what if try this one. What if it was a 747? Or even worse, What if 911 happens years later and it is an Airbus A380 that slams into them?
Oh man @DougM, this confirms the article in ThoughtCo saying no building made at the WTC's time could have survived the attacks.
I suppose you could have build a skyscraper to take the hit and survive the fire but in that case the building would be so expensive and so over built that it can’t do its primary job. To be an office building. Now if you are talking low rise buildings that is an entirely different story.
Also keep in mind that if I Design a building today to handle an impact from an A380 then two years from now someone starts building ramjet powered Mach 5 aircraft using a fuel that contains a higher energy density and more of it and it hits my building we are back to sq 1.
You can’t built for the future. As it can’t be predicted. Keep in mind that logic would have said smaller and faster (think Concord) was the future of Aircraft.
Remember a good engineer or architect designs a building that is JUST strong enough to do its job. Anything more is over built and costs more then needed and has disadvantages that reduce its functionality for its primary job.
And while we can put columns in different locations and build our floor structures in various ways all high rise building are build in similar wats. They have vertical structure and horizontal structure and use a lot of steal for both. This has not changed in principle in a long time. And heating steel weakens it. You don’t have to “melt” it just weaken it to the point it fails. Thus the single biggest problem with this kind of building is fire. And until we invent what ever material that replaces steel in high rise building fir will remain an issue.
The question I find myself asking about this topic is why does anyone think that there is a big difference between the Empire State Building and the Twin Towers? What do you think difference is that would have effected one differently then the other? Both of them are steel skyscrapers.
Also keep in mind that if I Design a building today to handle an impact from an A380 then two years from now someone starts building ramjet powered Mach 5 aircraft using a fuel that contains a higher energy density and more of it and it hits my building we are back to sq 1.
You can’t built for the future. As it can’t be predicted. Keep in mind that logic would have said smaller and faster (think Concord) was the future of Aircraft.
Remember a good engineer or architect designs a building that is JUST strong enough to do its job. Anything more is over built and costs more then needed and has disadvantages that reduce its functionality for its primary job.
And while we can put columns in different locations and build our floor structures in various ways all high rise building are build in similar wats. They have vertical structure and horizontal structure and use a lot of steal for both. This has not changed in principle in a long time. And heating steel weakens it. You don’t have to “melt” it just weaken it to the point it fails. Thus the single biggest problem with this kind of building is fire. And until we invent what ever material that replaces steel in high rise building fir will remain an issue.
The question I find myself asking about this topic is why does anyone think that there is a big difference between the Empire State Building and the Twin Towers? What do you think difference is that would have effected one differently then the other? Both of them are steel skyscrapers.
Could there have been a way to at least to make some designs in the Twin Towers that could have delayed their collapse? Like The South Tower falling at around noon instead of 9:59 AM, and the North Tower falling at around 12:28 PM instead of 10:28 AM.
IMO think this could have saved more lives, esp. in the South Tower, as some firemen had already reached the 78th floor minutes before the collapse where the plane hit via the still-usable Stairwell A that was spared when UA 175 hit, so maybe they could have pulled more people from the points of impact and above it to safety.
The North Tower though, I see pictures of it and I see that the roof wasn't covered with smoke since the winds were taking the smoke south, and I think that they could have airlifted some survivors there.
IMO think this could have saved more lives, esp. in the South Tower, as some firemen had already reached the 78th floor minutes before the collapse where the plane hit via the still-usable Stairwell A that was spared when UA 175 hit, so maybe they could have pulled more people from the points of impact and above it to safety.
The North Tower though, I see pictures of it and I see that the roof wasn't covered with smoke since the winds were taking the smoke south, and I think that they could have airlifted some survivors there.
I changed the calculus in my latest post, so I'm just asking now if there could have been some design tweaks that delay the collapse to allow more people to escape from the Twin Towers, esp. from the South Tower where one stairway was spared (the North Tower at-or-above-impact-point initial survivors I expect will still be largely lost to fire and smoke inhalation though since the top really burned fast after AA 11 hit and all staircases were destroyed or lost to fire and smoke).
My best guess is that in this case the firemen in the South Tower will have two hours to tell the 600 remaining(source https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_September_11_attacks#South_Tower) that there is a safe stairwell. As we know the elevators were fully functionall as a fire fighter Went up in those and reported it just Before the South Tower collapsed. So if enough help get up and search floor by floor i Think it is possible that most if not all of the 600 people can be brought down safe limiting the casualities in the South Tower to those 200 that died on impact and fire crew that would stay and try to battle the fire.
Same, I think the same. Hmmm, does anyone have more ideas about how to delay the collapse of the Twin Towers?
I was wondering though, what if all the staircases in both towers were located at the corners instead of them being located at the center (with the smaller office space at the corner compensated by the lack of staircases at the center of the building)? And what if the staircases were also pressurized, larger and there was a second set of staircases for firefighters, like the ones at Freedom Tower?
Then more people from above the impactzone in both Towers would have made it to saftey
Thanks, I was kinda concerned that the explosions would have been too intense that the staircases get destroyed even if they were at the corners (save for the South Tower though, nevertheless, there was still an intact staircase IOTL, and ATL the staircases are farther from the points of impact).
I am pretty sure that building codes at the time would have made it all but impossible to build the staircases in the corners. The staircases have to be fire rated and the need landing areas outside the staircase on each floor. And the stairs back then may have had a shelter requirement also. So you would have to basically build 4 independent concrete towers one in each corner. As well as the shafts for elevator. And you are doing this on the outer corner the spot in the building most likely to move with wind loads and other factors.
And it now means that you have to have access for all tenants on that floor to the corner so that is a pain to achieve also. Those little public hallways on most level to allow access to the elevators and stairs just got bigger and more complex as you need them near the core for the elevators and now the have to extend to the stairs wayvout at the corners. And don’t forget they need to be fire rated..
So I suppose it could be built but the increased difficulty and expense flies in the face of practicality. Remember an architect and engineer team are not building this structure in a vacuum, they have to be able to get the owner to pay for it. And the owner has to like the building and or at least think he can make money on the building. And you just took the MOST valuable sq footage, those corner offices that the folks signing the lease just LOVE and put a staircase in them. So those corners go from being money making to non money making and then you made them VERY expensive stairs as the don’t share anything with any other similar thing and you have to deal with the building swaying. So you have just turned the money making corner offices into the most expensive emergency staircases ever built. That is a huge effect on the bottom line as we take away rent and drastically increase the build cost of the stairs. And let’s not forget our hallways to access the corner stairs (on levels with more then one tenant) are bigger so I lose gross leasable area. As an added bonus to this bad idea.
So if you don’t get laughed out of the conference room when you first suggest this you will see the stairs moved back to the middle once we get to the “value Engineering” stage.
So why ASB because you COULD built it. It is close to the same level as we see with the Hittler super ship idea. I could be built but it is an extremely bad idea that is just never going to get approved.
And if that is not enough remember the Towers were built with a more rigid core and getting progressively more flexible as you move out from the center so you want the fire rated staircase often (if not usually) built out of concrete to be located at the most flexible area of the building. So we will be re structureing the whole building yo pull that trick off.
And it now means that you have to have access for all tenants on that floor to the corner so that is a pain to achieve also. Those little public hallways on most level to allow access to the elevators and stairs just got bigger and more complex as you need them near the core for the elevators and now the have to extend to the stairs wayvout at the corners. And don’t forget they need to be fire rated..
So I suppose it could be built but the increased difficulty and expense flies in the face of practicality. Remember an architect and engineer team are not building this structure in a vacuum, they have to be able to get the owner to pay for it. And the owner has to like the building and or at least think he can make money on the building. And you just took the MOST valuable sq footage, those corner offices that the folks signing the lease just LOVE and put a staircase in them. So those corners go from being money making to non money making and then you made them VERY expensive stairs as the don’t share anything with any other similar thing and you have to deal with the building swaying. So you have just turned the money making corner offices into the most expensive emergency staircases ever built. That is a huge effect on the bottom line as we take away rent and drastically increase the build cost of the stairs. And let’s not forget our hallways to access the corner stairs (on levels with more then one tenant) are bigger so I lose gross leasable area. As an added bonus to this bad idea.
So if you don’t get laughed out of the conference room when you first suggest this you will see the stairs moved back to the middle once we get to the “value Engineering” stage.
So why ASB because you COULD built it. It is close to the same level as we see with the Hittler super ship idea. I could be built but it is an extremely bad idea that is just never going to get approved.
And if that is not enough remember the Towers were built with a more rigid core and getting progressively more flexible as you move out from the center so you want the fire rated staircase often (if not usually) built out of concrete to be located at the most flexible area of the building. So we will be re structureing the whole building yo pull that trick off.
Note: I have been inspired to write my first alternate history timeline based on the alternative Twin Tower Design concept Admittedly it is a very short timeline. So be gentle it is my first timeline
In an alternative timeline:
Date: Late 1960s
Location: A conference room in An office building in Michigan.
Subject of meeting. Preliminary design review.
“Let me see if I have this right. You want to located the Staurcases in the corner of the building. You want me to tell our client that we have just drastically increased the construction budget and time to allow us to build these staircases. As instead of locating them all in the center so the can share structure and such we now need 5 separate fire rated shafts. One in the center for the elevators and utilities and such and one on each corner for the stairs, On top of that we will have to redesign our tentative structure and in all likelihood radically increase its cost as the stairwells on the corner are not going to be very flexible when the building moves under wind loads.
While we are at it we have increased the hallways by about 100% so we can run 4 halls out to the corners to reach the staircase, Thus decreasing leasable sq footage. And on top of this you want me to tell the client that all those corner offices that those fat cat CEOs love have been eliminated”. “ Have I missed anything?l
Because I have one thing to say to you. Your FIRED clean out your desk. And while your att it take anyone that things this is a good idea with you.. And you might want to call your university and ask for your money back on those design class you slept through...”
And thus Yamasaki demonstrated that not only was he a brilliant Architect but he was a good manager, as he replaced the original design manager and project manager with new staff, and thus one of the most famous buildings in the world took its final shape and would go on to stand until that tragic day in early Sept.
-An excerpt from “The Twin Towers, and the lessons we can learn from them.
In an alternative timeline:
Date: Late 1960s
Location: A conference room in An office building in Michigan.
Subject of meeting. Preliminary design review.
“Let me see if I have this right. You want to located the Staurcases in the corner of the building. You want me to tell our client that we have just drastically increased the construction budget and time to allow us to build these staircases. As instead of locating them all in the center so the can share structure and such we now need 5 separate fire rated shafts. One in the center for the elevators and utilities and such and one on each corner for the stairs, On top of that we will have to redesign our tentative structure and in all likelihood radically increase its cost as the stairwells on the corner are not going to be very flexible when the building moves under wind loads.
While we are at it we have increased the hallways by about 100% so we can run 4 halls out to the corners to reach the staircase, Thus decreasing leasable sq footage. And on top of this you want me to tell the client that all those corner offices that those fat cat CEOs love have been eliminated”. “ Have I missed anything?l
Because I have one thing to say to you. Your FIRED clean out your desk. And while your att it take anyone that things this is a good idea with you.. And you might want to call your university and ask for your money back on those design class you slept through...”
And thus Yamasaki demonstrated that not only was he a brilliant Architect but he was a good manager, as he replaced the original design manager and project manager with new staff, and thus one of the most famous buildings in the world took its final shape and would go on to stand until that tragic day in early Sept.
-An excerpt from “The Twin Towers, and the lessons we can learn from them.
Yeah but Empire State has a much more solid and heavy facade that is going to make a HUGE mess. And probably is not going to come down as cleanly as the Towers did. So when it falls it is going to be proportional a bigger mess as it relates to its size. Compared to the towers.
And having never seen anything about the structure of Empire State (in detail) the nightmare scenario of a tipping fall vs an imploding fall could be at play here and it would be huge. But as I said I only have a very basic understanding of the structure of the Empire State Building. And never discussed it with an engineer much less one that was knowledgeable about its design.
So exactly how it falls is going to really effect things.
And having never seen anything about the structure of Empire State (in detail) the nightmare scenario of a tipping fall vs an imploding fall could be at play here and it would be huge. But as I said I only have a very basic understanding of the structure of the Empire State Building. And never discussed it with an engineer much less one that was knowledgeable about its design.
So exactly how it falls is going to really effect things.
fdas
Banned
Weren't they designed completely differently?
The twin towers had one central pillar and a lot of the support was from the steel beams on the outer walls.
The Empire State building had pillars scattered throughout the building to support weight rather than having the outer walls do the support.
No airlift out of the North Tower would ever happen.
The comms tower was there in the way: maybe a fear would be it could fall over even if a pilot didn't accidently hit it among all that wind. The roof hadn’t been prechecked for the weight of helicopters. Which helicopters were available that day to take large numbers of people? Who will go up there to open the roof access doors? Who will organise an evacuation from inside the smoke filled building? How will you stop the panic rush into these helicopters from terrified people even if they get to the roof?
And so on. In a movie, they organise a helicopter rescue. In real life, the little obstacles make it impossible.