World Trade Center Fireproofing Tests Suggest a Wider Safety Problem

[NNN0LHI]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=68&ncid=716&e=17&u=/nyt/20031213/ts_nyt/worldtradecenterfireproofingtestssuggestawidersafetyproblem

Hundreds of buildings nationwide with fireproofing similar to that used in the World Trade Center could be far more prone to structural damage during major fires than previously thought, according to preliminary calculations by federal investigators.


The investigators are studying the precise causes of the World Trade Center collapse. Their work includes calculations of how heat moves through steel building components with small gaps or imperfections in fireproofing insulation. Their inquiry, which is still in its early stages, shows that during a fire such flaws can act as sluice gates for heat, allowing it to enter the steel, where it becomes trapped, weakening the structure.


Countless buildings put up since the 1960's have used the same type of lightweight, fluffy, spray-on fireproofing to protect their steel. Photographic evidence of the trade center suggests that this material, which is easily damaged, had gaps and possibly larger missing sections. Experts say similar problems are also found in ordinary high-rises.


The investigators want to examine the fireproofing in New York City buildings of similar vintage, and the city's Buildings Department has agreed to help identify them. Patricia J. Lancaster, the buildings commissioner, said that the use of spray-on fireproofing was extremely widespread in the city. "It's everywhere," Ms. Lancaster said. "It's easy to apply, and it's light."

more

[jmowreader]

1. A question about the fireproofing

We know the WTC had spray-on fireproofing on its steel. This is for the firefighters in the group:

If you were to fly an airliner into the side of a building that had this fireproofing on its ironwork, would the force of the impact be sufficient to dislodge this "lightweight, fluffy" fireproofing?

[never cry wolf]

2. I am not a firefighter

But I am an architect and am very familiar with this type of product. You can take this stuff off with your hand, much less an impact from a jet. Over the years as tenant improvements were made, new ductwork and conduit, etc. hung from the joists there were no doubt many areas where the protection was compromised. A worker brushing his arm on the fireproofing would take off enough to make a difference.

[Ernesto]

3. I speak from years of experience

Ideally the sprayed on fire proofing material is still intact after the installation of the all bldgs. internal componets. The problem is that the material is applied to a structural skeleton prior to installation of heating/cooling, electrical, plumbing, walls and ceiling and other systems. As the various sub contracters sequentially pass thru the space, "trade" damage to the paper mache like insulation material inevitably occurs. As the project nears completion, efforts are made to patch all "trade" damage to the fire proofing....... The common knowledge @ the job site is that there is no way that a fire proofing system can be without voids in its integrity. The problem is compounded as re-model work occurs over the life of the bldg...... An interesting side light to the Trade Center story is that the use of abestos for fire proofing was banned just after the 1st tower had 2/3rds of it's fireproofing completed. The rest of the job was finished with asbestos free materials. The news that bush cooked the EPA air quality safety reports is even more troubling when one considers the tons of asbestos dust that were dispersed as Tower #1 collapsed.... Mark my words: hundreds, perhaps thousands of fatal cases of asbestosis will, in the coming years, appear in rescue workers and other exposed people. Hillary has every reason to be pissed off about the wreckless indangerment of her constituents.