Postby Turpitz » 1 decade 6 years ago (Wed Apr 14, 2004 4:19 pm)
It can be quite complicated but In stonemason terms they are known as supporting 'pillars' if free-standing and generally slender in relation to their height, and support an overhead structure. If attached to another structure then they are 'pillasters'. A column is a pillar of circular section. A column is tapered (entasis) toward the top about two-thirds the way up. A 'pier' in stonemasons terms are the free-standing intermediate supports of an arcade. In bricklayers/masons language they are known as reinforced concrete supporting piers. They are also 'isolated piers' meaning they are free standing, rather than 'attached piers' which are tied into a structure. Because these are made of concrete, and the buildings are composed of brick units and not natural stone, they are 'isolated piers'.
There is nothing sinister about these piers, they are a basic fundamental when supporting overhead masses. An absolute Prerequisite when concerned with heavy flat roofs. Pitched roofs are not so concerned with supporting piers as their loads are lateral rather than vertical. A pitched roof wants to push at the bottom, sideways, whilst a flat roof wants to push straight down.
The reason they were in the morgue is extremely obvious. They were to support the mass of the roof slab at it's weakest point, at the centre of it's span (unless they are supporting concrete or steel joists/lintols that span the building, or other load bearing internal walls to pick up the roof slab at various intervals. In which case the piers will be kicked over to the obvious central position.) Concrete has incredible compressive strength, but is very weak under tensile load, i.e. It cannot tolerate being bent.
If you imagine yourself in the Krema looking up at the underside of the roof slab (also reinforced concrete). imagine the strain on the massive roof slab in the middle of the room ? All that weight wanting to sag and bend in the middle. So taking into consideration concrete is very weak under tensile load, you put reinforced concrete piers in to support it.
Another obvious flaw in their lies, is that the diameter of the piers is very small, so small in fact, that if these piers were hollow, it would have made the pier walls very thin , which would render them extremely weak and totally useless. Hence they were solid and reinforced with steel to strengthen them enough to serve their purpose as structural supports.
Every decent Architect or Builder would know this, but they are all to frightened to speak up and face the demented fury of Zionist wrath, as they resort to vile tactics which enable them to cling desperately to their mythical 'Six Million' Talmud dream.
What a load of bollocks all this industry claptrap is !
