Fire safety in tall buildings

SantaMonica

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Sep 16, 2008
Messages
2,260
Reaction score
750
Location
Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
A civil engineer friend of mine showed me this, for any of you that go into tall buildings. The PDF is attached.


Government Experts Find That Tall Buildings Can Fall Instantly From Small Office Fires

Gaithersburg, MD: The National Institute of Science and Technology (NIST) has issued a report that casts doubt on the safety of large buildings when a fire occurs. The report presents serious concerns for anyone working or living in (or near) steel frame buildings, which typically are buildings larger than 13 stories.

A video statement was issued by Sivaraj Shyam-Sunder, the Senior Science Advisor of NIST, where he stated that "We have shown for the first time that fire can induce a progressive collapse”. This is indeed a first, because fire has never caused collapse of a steel-frame building since steel-frame buildings began being used over 100 years ago.

Not only does the report cast initial dark clouds over the safety of most larger office buildings and residential towers, it also has been given several years of "testing" to prove that nothing has changed since the report was authored. Meaning, if an error had occurred in the study, it would have been discovered by now, and the report would have been corrected. No such corrections have been made.

Unfortunately, no corrections have been made to the U.S. building codes either. This means that the set of requirements that engineers, architects, general contractors and sub-contractors must follow (in order to build safe buildings) are the same codes that allowed the fire to bring down the building in the first place. Many engineers hoped that code requirements would have been corrected by now, because the next steel-frame building which falls due to fire is likely to initiate legal action ("you should have learned from the first building"). But engineers are actually just following the published, current, U.S. building codes; it's actually the codes which are the problem, not the engineers, say those who are in the profession.

The most alarming part about the building collapse may not be the fire, but the freefall speed that the building came down: The entire 47 stories was flattened in 7 seconds. This means that if you were on one of the floors and you saw the ceiling coming down at you, you had less than 1/5 of a second before you were crushed; that's the amount of time it takes to say "goodbye". There is no chance to get to a window or door, much less go down an elevator or make a phone call.

NIST has made the report available for download for those that would like to learn details:
https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/Legacy/NCSTAR/ncstar1a.pdf

Further questions can be directed to Jennifer Huergo, NIST Disaster Failure Studies, at 301-975-6343 or [email protected]


####
 

Attachments

  • Fire Safety In Tall Buildings.pdf
    18.2 KB · Views: 8

reef lover

It's a reef thing....
View Badges
Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Messages
14,296
Reaction score
44,608
Location
new york
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Wow! Glad i dont live work in one if those!
 

flagg37

Custom stair builder - TreeofLifeStairs.com
View Badges
Joined
May 28, 2016
Messages
950
Reaction score
1,119
Location
Denver area
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I wasn’t able to open the pdf on my phone but I don’t understand, it says that a fire can cause a collapse but then says that a fire has never caused a collapse in the 100 years that steel framed buildings have been constructed. Is the report theoretical?

Building codes are re-evaluated every 3 years so depending on when the report was released they may not have had time to change anything. They also need time to test solutions. It’s one thing to point out the problem and a completely other thing to figure out a way to solve it.

I know structural steel is coated with fire rated insulation to give it more time before failure in a fire.
 
OP
OP
SantaMonica

SantaMonica

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Sep 16, 2008
Messages
2,260
Reaction score
750
Location
Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
The PDF is the same text, so you saw it all.

It is saying that never before has a steel frame building collapsed due to fire, until the one in the report. This is why fire fighters used to always run into burning steel buildings, because up until then, they knew they would not collapse.

The report was in 2008.

Apparently the insulation must not always work correctly, or else it could not have fallen.
 

Quietman

2500 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
May 14, 2017
Messages
3,273
Reaction score
10,883
Location
Indiana - born and bred
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Skyscrapers can fall instantly from small office fires?!? There are many small office fires (looked it up 3340 per year average, have to assume some of those are in tall buildings), I'm not aware of a rash of building collapses. Not to say that there isn't something there under the right conditions that can cause a collapse, but I'm hardly going to stop going to work over it.
 

stacksoner

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Jul 29, 2018
Messages
810
Reaction score
1,163
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
A civil engineer friend of mine showed me this, for any of you that go into tall buildings. The PDF is attached.


Government Experts Find That Tall Buildings Can Fall Instantly From Small Office Fires

Gaithersburg, MD: The National Institute of Science and Technology (NIST) has issued a report that casts doubt on the safety of large buildings when a fire occurs. The report presents serious concerns for anyone working or living in (or near) steel frame buildings, which typically are buildings larger than 13 stories.

A video statement was issued by Sivaraj Shyam-Sunder, the Senior Science Advisor of NIST, where he stated that "We have shown for the first time that fire can induce a progressive collapse”. This is indeed a first, because fire has never caused collapse of a steel-frame building since steel-frame buildings began being used over 100 years ago.

Not only does the report cast initial dark clouds over the safety of most larger office buildings and residential towers, it also has been given several years of "testing" to prove that nothing has changed since the report was authored. Meaning, if an error had occurred in the study, it would have been discovered by now, and the report would have been corrected. No such corrections have been made.

Unfortunately, no corrections have been made to the U.S. building codes either. This means that the set of requirements that engineers, architects, general contractors and sub-contractors must follow (in order to build safe buildings) are the same codes that allowed the fire to bring down the building in the first place. Many engineers hoped that code requirements would have been corrected by now, because the next steel-frame building which falls due to fire is likely to initiate legal action ("you should have learned from the first building"). But engineers are actually just following the published, current, U.S. building codes; it's actually the codes which are the problem, not the engineers, say those who are in the profession.

The most alarming part about the building collapse may not be the fire, but the freefall speed that the building came down: The entire 47 stories was flattened in 7 seconds. This means that if you were on one of the floors and you saw the ceiling coming down at you, you had less than 1/5 of a second before you were crushed; that's the amount of time it takes to say "goodbye". There is no chance to get to a window or door, much less go down an elevator or make a phone call.

NIST has made the report available for download for those that would like to learn details:
https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/Legacy/NCSTAR/ncstar1a.pdf

Further questions can be directed to Jennifer Huergo, NIST Disaster Failure Studies, at 301-975-6343 or [email protected]


####

This report says that a combination of major structural damage and fire were the cause. Where do you see that they conclude that fire was the sole cause??
 

hubcap

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 13, 2018
Messages
317
Reaction score
713
Location
Tampa Area
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
going out on a limb and saying if there is a small office fire in a 'tall building' wouldn't it be safe to assume someone would be around to put it out? safe to assume it's monitored by detection and alarm systems?
imo, it'd have to be larger than a "small" fire, or some kind of chemical fire to weaken a steel structure.

that said, fire codes (and building codes, for that matter) are pretty stringent these days, and all fire systems, in the US, need to be built to NICET standards AND be checked and validated by a AHJ (authority having jurisdiction)

and if the fire happens on an off-hour, wouldn't the potential loss of life be minimal to zero? even then, occupancy comes into play and 'sprinkler' systems are mandated to be installed in the structure before occupying. not to mention the addition of fire retardant materials in construction (steel coatings, wire insulations, etc) that would inherently minimize/mitigate fire danger and fire spreading.

unless that 'tall building' is made of wood, or substandard (ill let you name the country) steel Id say you're pretty safe.


(disclaimer 1: I currently work for an alarm and notification company)
(disclaimer 2: I didn't read the whole .pdf provided.)

thoughts?
 

stacksoner

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Jul 29, 2018
Messages
810
Reaction score
1,163
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
going out on a limb and saying if there is a small office fire in a 'tall building' wouldn't it be safe to assume someone would be around to put it out? safe to assume it's monitored by detection and alarm systems?
imo, it'd have to be larger than a "small" fire, or some kind of chemical fire to weaken a steel structure.

that said, fire codes (and building codes, for that matter) are pretty stringent these days, and all fire systems, in the US, need to be built to NICET standards AND be checked and validated by a AHJ (authority having jurisdiction)

and if the fire happens on an off-hour, wouldn't the potential loss of life be minimal to zero? even then, occupancy comes into play and 'sprinkler' systems are mandated to be installed in the structure before occupying. not to mention the addition of fire retardant materials in construction (steel coatings, wire insulations, etc) that would inherently minimize/mitigate fire danger and fire spreading.

unless that 'tall building' is made of wood, or substandard (ill let you name the country) steel Id say you're pretty safe.


(disclaimer 1: I currently work for an alarm and notification company)
(disclaimer 2: I didn't read the whole .pdf provided.)

thoughts?

This post is using the investigation into the collapse of WTC Tower 7 as its sole basis to support the conclusion that OP put in the title.
 

hubcap

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 13, 2018
Messages
317
Reaction score
713
Location
Tampa Area
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I wonder if the source for the article is a flat-earther, too. :p


I, also, wonder what building codes were like in the mid 80s (WTC was completed in 87) as compared to todays standards.

I never had the time, or inclination, to look up 40 year old building codes.

Sticking to my guns and saying tall steel structures are not being brought down by "small fires."
I have a buddy that -swears- he saw "lava" coming out of WTC 7 after the collapse. Said it was probably caused by "pre-planted thermite."

Yeah....I laughed, too.
 

Tentacled trailblazer in your tank: Have you ever kept a large starfish?

  • I currently have a starfish in my tank.

    Votes: 27 30.3%
  • Not currently, but I have kept a starfish in the past.

    Votes: 21 23.6%
  • I have never kept a starfish, but I hope to in the future.

    Votes: 22 24.7%
  • I have no plans to keep a starfish.

    Votes: 19 21.3%
  • Other.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

New Posts

Back
Top