Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
Why did the twin towers collapse the way they did?
We are re-learning about 9/11 in my history class. But why did the twin towers just fall straight down? How come it didn't collapse to the side? And why didn't collapse right after the planes hit it?
I was 4 when this happened so I wouldn't know
12 Answers
- Mark FLv 78 years agoFavorite Answer
Gravity.
Gravity works straight down. There is no other direction the buildings could fall. They aren't trees. Trees are solid. Internally the twin towers were 95% air so there is no possible way they could have fallen over. The structures were not nearly that rigid.
As for why the towers did not collapse immediately upon impact that is quite simple. The impacts alone while massive - equivilant in energy to a 2,000 pound bunker-buster bomb - were not sufficient to cause complete structural failure. That required the addition of subsequent damage from fire. The towers were of steel-frame construction and steel performs badly in fire. As it heats up it loses its strength and if it gets hot enough it will no longer be able to support the weight above it. For this reason the steel in the towers was coated with fire resistant insulation to reduce (not eliminate) the effect of fire. This was not designed to last forever but should have been able to survived one to two hours of fire. However, it is believed the impacts dislodged much of this insulation, exposing bare steel and since there were no functional sprinkler systems the fire spread much more rapidly and burned much hotter than anyone could have anticipated.
Source(s): http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/11/10111... http://www.tatasteelconstruction.com/file_source/S... http://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/build04/PDF/b04047.p... http://www.nist.gov/el/disasterstudies/wtc/ http://www.nmsr.org/nmsr911a.htm http://permanent.access.gpo.gov/websites/unt/fema/... - houghtellingLv 45 years ago
Let's just think about how enormously stupid this story is. The towers are on fireplace, men and women are leaping, pieces of particles are falling from the constructing--and you think any one was simply walking by way of on a looking commute when the towers collapsed?
- Menard KLv 78 years ago
note that the towers descended at 64% of the acceleration of gravity
therefore the force pressing down is only 36% of the weight of the mass of stuff above.
This is NOT sufficient to account for massive pulverization of material + hurling tons
of material out the sides + demolishing the structure on the way down.
There had to have been an additional source of energy. NO OTHER WAY!
- LibraryannaLv 78 years ago
Have you ever seen a building demolished? The explosives are placed inside in such a way that it will collapse downward rather than out.
The collapse was due to weakened structures in the building due to fire and explosion. It took time for the fires, etc., to weaken them to the point of collapse.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- 8 years ago
The supports on the bottom of the towers just collapses causing the buildings to fall strait down.
- David1217Lv 58 years ago
The buildings were built that way so if they do collapse they would fall straight down and not tip over.
Source(s): My dad is a construction worker. - herbie7754Lv 78 years ago
I was stunned and shocked when I witnessed this event on TV, even though I'd expected something like this for so long.
But I would have been speechless and amazed had the buildings collapsed upwards !
- Anonymous5 years ago
Was interested in the answer too