Written by Chris Sarns
Thursday, 22 August 2013
Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth

Editor’s note: To this day, most people, including many architects and engineers, are not aware that a third skyscraper, World Trade Center Building 7, mysteriously collapsed along with the World Trade Center Twin Towers on September 11, 2001. The official report on this building’s collapse by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has been challenged by many reputable and credentialed technical professionals. The NIST analysis has not undergone the rigors of scientific peer review – the typical pathway for validating significant scientific theories. Chris Sarns’ research appears in Dr. David Ray Griffin’s book titled The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7. The studies below represent years of work by Chris Sarns in unraveling some of the most glaring inconsistencies and outright frauds in the NIST report on World Trade Center 7. He demonstrates that the NIST’s theory of the fire-induced collapse of Building 7 is faulty and misleading.

The destruction of this skyscraper on September 11 was truly unprecedented in the history of high-rise buildings. More than 1,900 architects and engineers at AE911Truth are demanding a new investigation.

Chris Sarns has also been deeply involved in the work of AE911Truth, where he provides his expertise on WTC 7.

Quotes from the NIST WTC7 report are shown in “brown”
3. MISSING SHEAR STUDS

NIST’s false claim in its Final Report about the lack of shear studs on the floor support girder between columns 44 and 79 is exposed.
By Chris Sarns & Judy Shelton.

The NIST Final Draft on the collapse of World Trade Center building 7 has many flaws, including blatant fraud.

In their June 2004 report (and in the actual shop drawings*), NIST referred to the use of shear studs in World Trade Center 7. Shear studs are used to keep steel floor beams and girders in place; they impart stability and strength to buildings. But in their August 2008 final report, NIST re-worded their comments on shear studs to make it appear that none were used on the floor girders.

Why would they do this? To know the answer, you need to understand NIST’s collapse theory. This is how it goes:

1. The key girder between column 79 and the exterior wall fails at floor 13.
2. Its failure causes the collapse of floors 13 through 6.
3. Column 79, now unsupported laterally by these floors, buckles and brings down the entire building.
This scenario is easier to posit if the key girder isn’t being held firmly with shear studs. Thus, in the August 2008 report, NIST did what it had to do to make it more reasonable that the girder would fail: It magically omitted the shear studs.

Compare these two paragraphs. In the excerpted paragraph of the 2004 report, NIST says that studs were used with both beams and girders, although the studs “were not indicated on the design drawings for many of the core girders” (the girder associated with column 79, by the way, was not a core girder). In the 2008 report, however, not only does NIST drop the association of girders with shear studs (first sentence of excerpted paragraph), but then they go on to imply that studs were not indicated at all on the girders (last sentence of excerpted paragraph):

June 2004 NIST app. L pg 6 [pdf pg 10]

“Most of the beams and girders were made composite with the slabs through the use of shear studs. Typically, the shear studs were 0.75 in. in diameter by 5 in. long, spaced 1 ft to 2 ft on center. Studs were not indicated on the design drawings for many of the core girders.”
June 2004 Progress Report on the Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster (NIST SP 1000-5)

Read more