淞岛
加入时间: 2006/06/24
文章: 297
经验值: 52
|
|
|
作者：淞岛 在 罕见奇谈 发贴, 来自 http://www.hjclub.org
Sorry, but the remark is not political at all.
Instead of thinking WTC as indestructible, why not finding weakness in the building?
The twin tower had two structural weaknesses, inadequate fireproofing and lack of redundancy.
The rational in the remark goes like this: most of civil construction has been build with apparently compliance with minimum safety standards. It is the cost control by economists which forces engineers to find low cost solution or even explorer smut holes in the regulations. Just for an example, a civil engineer once told me that the massive columns in a fashionable lobby are all hollow inside.
Only after spectacular disaster like collapse of WTC, the rules will be enhanced and future building may be slightly safer.
A design principle for the new freedom tower is that personal should have time to evacuate the building before collapse; the old WTC by Rockefeller brothers apparently did not satisfy this principle.
On the other hand, it is not reasonable to wish a civil structure to withstand a military action. It is little chance to raise charges against owner of WTC.
作者：淞岛 在 罕见奇谈 发贴, 来自 http://www.hjclub.org |
|
|
九．一一事件讨论参考资料
