They were a set of towers, a challenge against the forces of nature and feat of human ingenuity.
"It was a brilliant engineering design," University structural engineering professor David Billington said yesterday of the World Trade Center complex.
As the country reevaluates and strengthens its safety and security measures, one question that begs answering is how the horrifying attack and subsequent building collapses might have been prevented. It appears, however, that the engineering world has no convenient solution.
Billington, who designed structures in New York City for eight years before coming to the University in 1960, said he could not imagine a building capable of withstanding the types of pressures subjected to the Twin Towers last Tuesday.
The integrity of a steel structure, Billington noted, is lost at the very high temperatures reached when the fueled jets exploded — partially inside the two buildings.
New construction technologies, such as those that combine steel and modern types of concrete, may offer greater resilience than offered by methods commonly used a half century ago.
Nevertheless, the difference would probably not have saved the World Trade Center, Billington said.
"All of our large steel structures are always susceptible to these kinds of massive human interventions," he said.
Billington also said he does not know of an economically feasible way to construct very tall buildings capable of withstanding the types of attacks witnessed Sept. 11.
Designing against human attack "is a social issue, not a technical issue," Billington suggested.
So where does that leave the future of building design?
"I'm quite certain that no one will build up tall right away," he said.
But the professor was reluctant to offer a prediction on the long-term outlook for new tall buildings.
He only said that "this [attack] is a great loss for our profession. Those were great buildings."
Read More
As endowment tax looms, Princeton asks departments to make plans for ‘permanent’ budget cuts, warns of potential layoffs
Christopher Bao and Annie RupertusPrinceton asked all departments and University units to prepare “separate plans for 5 percent and 10 percent permanent budget cuts to be phased in over the next three years in a memo sent Monday. Administrators warned of layoffs as the University prepares for a potential federal endowment tax, set to be debated in Congress later this week.
Princeton asked all departments and University units to prepare “separate plans for 5 percent and 10 percent permanent budget cuts to be phased in over the next three years in a memo sent Monday. Administrators warned of layoffs as the University prepares for a potential federal endowment tax, set to be debated in Congress later this week.
Newark airport disruptions snarl student travel plans
Cynthia TorresNewark has been facing disruptions for around two weeks amid a national air traffic controller shortage, leading to delays of up to five hours for some flights. As a result, some students flying home for the summer have changed their flights.
Newark has been facing disruptions for around two weeks amid a national air traffic controller shortage, leading to delays of up to five hours for some flights. Some students flying home for the summer and may be effected by delays and some students changed their flights.
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth ’03 ‘plagiarized’ small portions of his senior thesis, experts say. But how serious is it?
Sena ChangA review of the senior thesis of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth ’03 by The Daily Princetonian, in consultation with three plagiarism experts, found eight instances of uncredited material, sham paraphrasing, and verbatim copying. According to the experts, each passage violated Princeton’s academic integrity policies but varied in severity.
A review of the senior thesis of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth ’03 by The Daily Princetonian, in consultation with three plagiarism experts, found eight instances of uncredited material, sham paraphrasing, and verbatim copying. According to the experts, each passage violated Princeton’s academic integrity policies but varied in severity.