The Sinking of MS Estonia: Case Re-opened Part II

[GlennB]

I never said I had A-Level Physics. Stop lying.

Not lying, just wrong. 5 years of study would take you to 'O' level, assuming you started at age 11 or so. That alone would be more than enough physics education to make you realise you'd asked a stupid question. You'd also have encountered Bunsen burners (see below).

A quick google tells you: The hotness of the gas stove flame ranges from 600℃-3000℃ depending on two important factors. One of these important factors is the amount of energy beings released from fuel combustion, while the other important factor is the availability of pure oxygen rather than air to ensure complete combustion.

You've quoted a cookery website, which is poorly informed. Gas burner^WP is a better source, though there are countless others.

Gas appliances should burn with a blue flame, rather like a Bunsen burner with the air vent open. To get to a lower (yellow/red) flame temperature you'd need to reduce the air supply which isn't possible with a properly functioning gas cooker as it's fixed, unlike a Bunsen burner. If a cooker burns yellow or red it's a sign of a faulty stove.

 

[zooterkin]

My question was a rhetorical one to help enable GlennB consider how misconceived his view is that the heat of a mig welder of 6K° is equivalent to heating up steel to the same temperature.

On the contrary, you are demonstrating your ignorance of physics by believing GlennB's view to be misconceived (not to mention that I suspect your characterisation of his view in incorrect, though that is not relevant except as further proof of your lack of understanding of basic physics).

 

[zooterkin]

I am sure you are right but you clearly haven't been following the conversation if you thought I was asking GlennB for the answer to a simple question.


As if I would need to ask GlennB how water boils!

Perhaps you could tell us how the specific heat capacity of water compares with that of steel?

 

[MarkCorrigan]

I take it it is an assumed name? Hence the quotation marks. Take it up with JayUtah as he is the one who insists one must be a licensed engineer to discuss the Estonia sinking. I have never claimed any expertise.

It's a character from a TV show. Why would you put my name in scare quotes ut not say, JayUtah?

1. That is a lie regarding what Jay has said. Stop lying.

2. You claimed you were a scientist ad you claimed someone else doesn't understand the null hypothesis. So explain what the null is and how it is used in science. It's a simple question, stop avoiding it.

 

[SpitfireIX]

As an ROTC cadet, I took four years of "Military Science". I guess I'm a scientist, too! Imagine a cute image posted below.

Oh, that's good; I didn't think of that one. I was thinking of political science, social science, computer science, and Christian Science, to go along with Vixen's business science.

 

[Vixen]

Gas welding does use pure oxygen.

It still doesn't mean it causes the same deformation in metal as a detonation would.

 

[Vixen]

How the MS Estonia lies vis-à-vis the rock bed

Here's how the wreck lies in juxtaposition of the starboard hole to the rock bed.

 

[Vixen]

It's a character from a TV show. Why would you put my name in scare quotes ut not say, JayUtah?

1. That is a lie regarding what Jay has said. Stop lying.

2. You claimed you were a scientist ad you claimed someone else doesn't understand the null hypothesis. So explain what the null is and how it is used in science. It's a simple question, stop avoiding it.

Perhaps you would like to stick to the topic at hand instead of personalising it.

 

[Vixen]

Perhaps you could tell us how the specific heat capacity of water compares with that of steel?

This is something you can look up for yourself on google.

 

[lobosrul5]

You are not a scientist though. Stop making claims that are manifestly not true and we won't bother you about your making claims that aren't true. It's a wonder how that works.

Your claim, stop handwaving and back it up. Answer my question "scientist". What is the null hypothesis and how is it used?

Incidentally, why do you put my handle in scare quotes like that?

Maybe she doubts you're really the Mark Corrigan, of Peep Show fame. I choose to believe you are.

 

[Mojo]

This is something you can look up for yourself on google.

You don’t know, then?

 

[MarkCorrigan]

You are the one claiming that others in this thread do not have knowledge you do. Stop running away and show some backone. Answer the question.

It's not a hard question and it relates to the topic because your ability (or more likely inability) to answer goes directly to the idea that you are in any way competent to analyse the events in question, which despite your protests otherwise you have been doing.

As I have said before, if someone decides to start a thread on something to do with the Finnish people and they claim right out the gate that the Finns speak Flemish their ability to correctly interpret anything regarding the Finnish people is suspect. You are attempting to claim that certain suggested causes for the sinking are possible. In order to fully support that idea you would need to either show some personal expertise or use sources from an expert. However in order to understand if the expert's ideas are possible you would need at least some level of understanding of the ideas in question. You wouldn't need to be an expert, but some understanding is needed. I'm not asking you to calculate anything onerous, just explain in simple terms what the null hypothesis is.

There's a difference between personalising a discussion and asking someone to substantiate that they have some level of knowledge in a subject relevant to the discussion. I am doing the latter, stop claiming I am doing the former. Your evasions are becoming even more desperate.

 

[Mojo]

Stop messing about.

Can you explain the scenario and reasoning behind the question:

What if Person A happens to be your own government?

 

[MarkCorrigan]

This is something you can look up for yourself on google.

Stop deflecting with the cutesy attempt at pretending to misunderstand why we are asking you these questions and finally answer some. This lame attempt at handwaving really is all you've got isn't it? That's really sad.

 

[whoanellie]

This is something you can look up for yourself on google.

Perhaps you should have looked it up before posting about boiling water on a stove. The relevance of your boiling water analogy depends strongly on the answer. Would it take more or less energy to heat a gram of water from 20° to 100° C or a gram of steel? How much more or less?

 

[whoanellie]

I don't know the answer. However, as an experienced professional proofreader of scientific papers, I do know that "changes respectively destruction of the cementite lamellas in the perlite" is not a grammatically correct or coherent description of a property or a change of properties of a material. Most likely, the first two words belong to some other list item or heading and were erroneously attached to the phrase beginning "destruction." Which strongly suggests that the entire list was copied and pasted blindly without comprehension.

It's a translation from the German, which can trip up English speakers in respect of sentence structure. It is from this web page here.

So you did, in fact, copy and paste without any comprehension!

 

[Andy_Ross]

My question was a rhetorical one to help enable GlennB consider how misconceived his view is that the heat of a mig welder of 6K° is equivalent to heating up steel to the same temperature.

How do you think a welder would melt the steel if it didn't heat it up?

 

[Andy_Ross]

It still doesn't mean it causes the same deformation in metal as a detonation would.

It isn't the claim that heat from welding caused the deformation.

Welding is given as an example of high temperature effects being found in the components.

 

[Vixen]

You are the one claiming that others in this thread do not have knowledge you do. Stop running away and show some backone. Answer the question.

It's not a hard question and it relates to the topic because your ability (or more likely inability) to answer goes directly to the idea that you are in any way competent to analyse the events in question, which despite your protests otherwise you have been doing.

As I have said before, if someone decides to start a thread on something to do with the Finnish people and they claim right out the gate that the Finns speak Flemish their ability to correctly interpret anything regarding the Finnish people is suspect. You are attempting to claim that certain suggested causes for the sinking are possible. In order to fully support that idea you would need to either show some personal expertise or use sources from an expert. However in order to understand if the expert's ideas are possible you would need at least some level of understanding of the ideas in question. You wouldn't need to be an expert, but some understanding is needed. I'm not asking you to calculate anything onerous, just explain in simple terms what the null hypothesis is.

There's a difference between personalising a discussion and asking someone to substantiate that they have some level of knowledge in a subject relevant to the discussion. I am doing the latter, stop claiming I am doing the former. Your evasions are becoming even more desperate.

What a ridiculous analogy. People know nothing about Finland at all. They think we are 'near Canada', maybe 'a part of the UK' or a part of Russia (well, technically, my grandparents and great - and great-great were born 'Russian', before then, 'Swedish'), we developed mobile phones and Nokia because we have 'a lot of mountains and needed to communicate' (nope, only up far north do we have any real mountains) the list is endless. Does it bother me? No. I told you before, you cannot measure expertise in terms of paper qualifications. My school was like something out of the Glass Bead Game or the Squid Game: we were all pitted against each other leading to ferocious competition. In the exams it really just meant that people like myself who could absorb a lot of information and retain it long enough to do well in exams did so, but means sweet nothing at all beyond the school gates, which I left behind a long time ago.

What is it with your obsession?

I am confident there are people with doctorates in astrophysics who are totally ignorant about Finland; it doesn't cancel out their doctorate, so your analogy is a stupid one.

As I said before, I never claimed to have expertise. It was people like yourself demanding to know what paper qualifications I had, with the sole aim of taking the piss out of them. Reprehensible conduct but what we have come to expect.

Back to the topic matter in hand.

 

[The Man]

Does welding cause the following to happen, since you are so knowledgeable:

• • the appearance of parallel shear bands (Neumann bands)
  • changes respectively destruction of the cementite lamellas in the perlite
  • hardness increase
  • plastic deformation in the micro area (wavy arrangement of the structure parts)

A simple yes or no will suffice.

the appearance of parallel shear bands (Neumann bands), Yes.

Though not specifically Neumann bands (due to impact) but similar in “the rejection of free cementite to the planes it occupies.”


Science Abstracts: Electrical & electronics abstracts, Volume 21, Part 2

You have to scroll down a bit to get to the quoted part.

Also as part of the welding process slag is often struck off the weld with a welding hammer. So there generally will be impacts to the weld and surrounding area while the material is still hot.

welding hammer

changes respectively destruction of the cementite lamellas in the perlite, Yes

Depending on how the part is cooled, slower cooling tends to anneal the part.

Fragmentation Rate of Cementite Lamellas in Nanopearlite

As noted above a process often involved before manufacturing with the material , to get a baseline crystalline structure and ease, intended, plastic defamation during forming.

hardness increase, Yes

Again depending on how it is cooled.

Rapid cooling locks more of the the perlite and martensite from returning to the austenite structure. IIRC, metallurgy class was almost some 40 years ago and all of my reference books are at home. Also hardening quenching is usually done in oil or also the heating takes place with carbon nearby to provide more carbon for more of the Pearlite Transformation

Pearlite Transformation

Also just using and working a metal part tends to work-harden it over time.

Work hardening

You can flex a wire back and forth until it breaks, that fracture is due to the embrittlement caused by the work-hardening you applied in repeatedly flexing it.

plastic deformation in the micro area (wavy arrangement of the structure parts), Yes

Plastic deformation during welding (from uneven heating and cooling) is a common issue and may even result in a need for the part to be worked back into an adequately functional shape.

Weld Distortion

Arc welding generates a plasma at the bonding area (localized to the electrode tip) which can lead to uneven heating and subsequent cooling of the part. So not only can welding account for all of this, but likewise can just general parts production and stressful in service use, particularly to the point of failure (perhaps even more than one failure if the part had to be welded).