UL Lab Director Speaks Out on WTC Study. The buildings should have easily withs

[Guest guest]

911Truth.org

 

Friday, November 12, 2004 7:44 PM at company that certified WTC steel questions

official collapse theory

 

X-Mailer: GeekLog 1.3.7sr1

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1

 

 

" The buildings should have easily withstood the thermal stress caused

by pools of burning jet fuel. " - Kevin Ryan of Underwriters Laboratories.

 

 

 

A letter questioning the common theory that fuel fires caused the

collapse of the World Trade Center towers was sent yesterday by Kevin

Ryan to Frank Gayle of the National Institute of Standards and

Technology (NIST).

 

Ryan directs Environmental Health Laboratories and is one of 23

directors at its parent company, Underwriters Laboratories. UL, the

product-compliance and testing giant, certified the steel components

used in the construction of the World Trade Center towers. Statements

that the Twin Towers collapsed because fires weakened steel beams

certified by UL are obviously of concern to the company.

 

911Truth.org is publishing Ryan's letter today at

http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20041112144051451

 

For more than two years, Gayle has headed the team at the U.S.

government agency NIST charged with studying how the trade center was

built and why it fell. A draft of its final report is due in January.

 

A copy of Ryan's letter was received last night in an e-mail to David

Ray Griffin, author of the New Pearl Harbor. He asked for and received

permission to forward it for Web distribution.

 

911Truth.org called Ryan's office several times today. In one of the

follow-up calls, we received assurances from a UL operator that Ryan

was aware of our efforts to determine whether the letter was genuine.

He later called back and confirmed his authorship.

 

The letter raises disturbing questions, pointing out that steel

recovered from the towers tested up to its certified standard (i.e.,

it should have easily withstood the fuel fires without buckling).

 

A chemist by profession, Ryan said he took this unusual step in the

hope of receiving a public response from Gayle. Given how the

aftermath of September 11 has changed the world, Ryan said, everyone

needs to know the full truth of what really happened on that day. He

added that he considers Gayle to be a good scientist and an honest person.

 

Meanwhile, the New York Times reports today that the NIST team under

Gayle is planning to hold some of its deliberations on the WTC

collapse in secret...

 

This is a big story: If the long-standing story that fuel fires caused

the WTC collapse is as self-evidently false as Ryan claims, why are

experts still repeating it on TV? And what caused the collapse?

 

 

Read the letter here

http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20041112144051451

 

UL Lab Director Speaks Out on WTC Study

 

November 12:

 

" The buildings should have easily withstood the thermal stress caused

by pools of burning jet fuel. "

 

The following letter, questioning the common theory that fuel fires

caused the collapse of the World Trade Center towers, was sent

yesterday by Kevin Ryan to Frank Gayle of the National Institute of

Standards and Technology (NIST).

 

Ryan directs Environmental Health Laboratories and is one of 23

directors at its parent company, Underwriters Laboratories. UL, the

product-compliance and testing giant, certified the steel components

used in the construction of the World Trade Center towers. Statements

that the Twin Towers collapsed because fires weakened steel beams

certified by UL are obviously of concern to the company.

 

For more than two years, a team headed by Gayle at the U.S. government

agency NIST has been studying how the trade center was built and why

it fell. A draft of its final report is due in January.

 

A copy of Ryan's letter was received last night in an e-mail to David

Ray Griffin, author of the New Pearl Harbor, and Catherine Austin

Fitts of the 911Truth.org board. Griffin asked for and received

permission to forward it for Web distribution.

 

911Truth.org called Ryan's office several times today. In one of the

follow-up calls, we received assurances from UL operators that Ryan

was aware of our efforts to determine whether the letter was genuine.

He later called back and confirmed his authorship.

 

Ryan raises disturbing questions, pointing out that the steel in the

towers tested up to its certified standard (i.e., it should have

easily withstood the fuel fires without buckling).

 

A chemist by profession, Ryan said he took this unusual step in the

hope of receiving a public response from Gayle. Given how the

aftermath of September 11 has changed the world, Ryan said, everyone

needs to know the full truth of what really happened on that day. He

added that he considers Gayle to be a good scientist and an honest person.

 

Meanwhile, the New York Timesreports today that the NIST team under

Gayle is planning to hold some of its deliberations on the WTC

collapse in secret. " The announcement has been sharply protested by

advocates for families of the 9/11 victims, who said they were

considering a lawsuit to force the agency to open the meetings to the

public, " the Times writes.

 

As the Times notes, the NIST investigation was started in 2002 after

lobbying by, among others, the Skyscraper Safety Campaign, an

organization created by Monica Gabrielle and Sally Regenhard, both of

whom lost family on September 11. NIST has " one job, and one job only

- to find out the truth of what happened to those buildings and to

report to the public about it, " Gabrielle told the Times. " You don't

owe industry, the Port Authority or federal agencies anything. You owe

it to the public - the truth, no matter where it goes. " (See

www.nytimes.com)

 

-911Truth.org (nl)

 

Letter, Nov. 11:

 

From

Kevin R. Ryan

Laboratory Director of the Environmental Health Laboratories

South Bend, Indiana

(Company site at www.ehl.cc)

A division of Underwriters Laboratories, Inc.

(Company site at www.ul.com)

 

To Frank Gayle

Deputy Chief of the Metallurgy Division

Material Science and Engineering Laboratory

National Institute of Standards and Technology

NIST and the World Trade Center at wtc.nist.gov

Dr. Gayle biography wtc.nist.gov/pi/wtc_profiles.asp?lastname=gayle

 

Kevin R Ryan/SBN/ULI

frank.gayle

 

11/11/2004

 

 

 

Dr. Gayle,

 

Having recently reviewed your team's report of 10/19/04, I felt the

need to contact you directly.

 

As I'm sure you know, the company I work for certified the steel

components used in the construction of the WTC buildings. In

requesting information from both our CEO and Fire Protection business

manager last year, I learned that they did not agree on the essential

aspects of the story, except for one thing - that the samples we

certified met all requirements. They suggested we all be patient and

understand that UL was working with your team, and that tests would

continue through this year. I'm aware of UL's attempts to help,

including performing tests on models of the floor assemblies. But the

results of these tests appear to indicate that the buildings should

have easily withstood the thermal stress caused by pools of burning

jet fuel.

 

There continues to be a number of " experts " making public claims about

how the WTC buildings fell. One such person, Dr. Hyman Brown from the

WTC construction crew, claims that the buildings collapsed due to

fires at 2000F melting the steel (1). He states " What caused the

building to collapse is the airplane fuel ? burning at 2,000 degrees

Fahrenheit. The steel in that five-floor area melts. " Additionally,

the newspaper that quotes him says " Just-released preliminary findings

from a National Institute of Standards and Technology study of the

World Trade Center collapse support Brown's theory. "

 

We know that the steel components were certified to ASTM E119. The

time temperature curves for this standard require the samples to be

exposed to temperatures around 2000F for several hours. And as we all

agree, the steel applied met those specifications. Additionally, I

think we can all agree that even un-fireproofed steel will not melt

until reaching red-hot temperatures of nearly 3000F (2). Why Dr. Brown

would imply that 2000F would melt the high-grade steel used in those

buildings makes no sense at all.

 

The results of your recently published metallurgical tests seem to

clear things up (3), and support your team's August 2003 update as

detailed by the Associated Press (4), in which you were ready to " rule

out weak steel as a contributing factor in the collapse " . The

evaluation of paint deformation and spheroidization seem very

straightforward, and you noted that the samples available were

adequate for the investigation. Your comments suggest that the steel

was probably exposed to temperatures of only about 500F (250C), which

is what one might expect from a thermodynamic analysis of the situation.

 

However the summary of the new NIST report seems to ignore your

findings, as it suggests that these low temperatures caused exposed

bits of the building's steel core to " soften and buckle " (5).

Additionally this summary states that the perimeter columns softened,

yet your findings make clear that " most perimeter panels (157 of 160)

saw no temperature above 250C " . To soften steel for the purposes of

forging, normally temperatures need to be above 1100C (6). However,

this new summary report suggests that much lower temperatures were be

able to not only soften the steel in a matter of minutes, but lead to

rapid structural collapse.

 

This story just does not add up. If steel from those buildings did

soften or melt, I?m sure we can all agree that this was certainly not

due to jet fuel fires of any kind, let alone the briefly burning fires

in those towers. That fact should be of great concern to all

Americans. Alternatively, the contention that this steel did fail at

temperatures around 250C suggests that the majority of deaths on 9/11

were due to a safety-related failure. That suggestion should be of

great concern to my company.

 

There is no question that the events of 9/11 are the emotional driving

force behind the War on Terror. And the issue of the WTC collapse is

at the crux of the story of 9/11. My feeling is that your

metallurgical tests are at the crux of the crux of the crux. Either

you can make sense of what really happened to those buildings, and

communicate this quickly, or we all face the same destruction and

despair that come from global decisions based on disinformation and

" chatter " .

 

Thanks for your efforts to determine what happened on that day. You

may know that there are a number of other current and former

government employees that have risked a great deal to help us to know

the truth. I've copied one of these people on this message as a sign

of respect and support. I believe your work could also be a nucleus of

fact around which the truth, and thereby global peace and justice, can

grow again. Please do what you can to quickly eliminate the confusion

regarding the ability of jet fuel fires to soften or melt structural

steel.

 

1. http://www.boulderweekly.com/archive/102104/coverstory.html

 

2. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 61st edition, pg D-187

 

3. http://wtc.nist.gov/media/P3MechanicalandMetAnalysisofSteel.pdf

 

4. http://www.voicesofsept11.org/archive/911ic/082703.php

 

5. http://wtc.nist.gov/media/NCSTACWTCStatusFINAL101904WEB2.pdf (pg 11)

 

6. http://www.forging.org/FIERF/pdf/ffaaMacSleyne.pdf

 

Kevin Ryan

Site Manager

Environmental Health Laboratories

 

[Note: The letter is followed in the e-mail by a standard UL message

footer]

 

-- For more information about UL, its Marks, and its services for EMC,

quality registrations and product certifications for global markets,

please access our web sites at http://www.ul.com and

http://www.ulc.ca, or contact your local sales representative.