Merged Has this structural engineer been debunked? / Astaneh-Asl "melting of girders"

These observations indicate that the World Trade Center steel was subjected to very high temperatures. Yet, while postulating that the towers collapsed due to fire (and without the use of explosives), even Thomas Eagar--an engineering professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology--admitted, "The temperature of the fire at the WTC was not unusual, and it was most definitely not capable of melting steel." [12] One must conclude that the phenomena observed by Astaneh-Asl are therefore highly suspicious.
Click to expand...
http://911blogger.com/node/14062

This is very much the same conclusion Jones came to when analyzing the Lee report.

Again, STEEL MELTED during the WTC event.

Can anyone explain why? And, wouldn't this support eyewitness accounts of flowing molten steel?

No one has touched this yet. Much like the Lee report of melting iron.
 
Sizzler said:
Unless you address my questions in this thread, about this thread, you are temporarily on ignore for this thread because you just can't seem to stay on topic.
Click to expand...
Did you see post #67 Sizzler?

The buildings simply redistributed their loads onto the intact columns when the airplanes hit. But as the fires burned, the floor joists were the first elements of the buildings' structures to fail. Their failure pulled the buildings' exterior columns inward, initiating complete collapse of the structures.

"If you didn't have the fires you would be fine,'' Astaneh-asl said.
Click to expand...
How is this different than what NIST concludes?
 
WildCat said:
Did you see post #67 Sizzler?


How is this different than what NIST concludes?
Click to expand...

The buildings simply redistributed their loads onto the intact columns when the airplanes hit. But as the fires burned, the floor joists were the first elements of the buildings' structures to fail. Their failure pulled the buildings' exterior columns inward, initiating complete collapse of the structures.
Click to expand...

and again..

“When the fires started, they heated up the steel. In my opinion, the truss joists collapsed first, leaving the exterior columns of probably two floors in the impact area with no bracing but still under gravity load from the floors above. As the columns heated up and reached temperatures of nearly 1,000F, their strength was reduced to less than half the design strength and they started to buckle.
Click to expand...

Part in bold
 
Sizzler:
Why don't you contact the man yourself if you have questions about his work? Wouldn't that be the smart thing for someone that wants to know the truth to do?
 
Sizzler said:
http://911blogger.com/node/14062

This is very much the same conclusion Jones came to when analyzing the Lee report.

Again, STEEL MELTED during the WTC event.

Can anyone explain why? And, wouldn't this support eyewitness accounts of flowing molten steel?

No one has touched this yet. Much like the Lee report of melting iron.
Click to expand...

Please provide evidence that the molten metal observed by witnesses was indeed steel and not another alloy such as aluminum or some sort of composite.
 
Quad4_72 said:
Please provide evidence that the molten metal observed by witnesses was indeed steel and not another alloy such as aluminum or some sort of composite.
Click to expand...

But we know for sure steel melted now so moot point.
 
Last edited:
Dave Rogers said:
Because someone beat him to it.

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Biederman/Biederman-0112.html

Dave
Click to expand...

That's funny. And the source of sulfur?

While the exact location of this beam could not be determined, the unexpected erosion of the steel found in this beam warranted a study of microstructural changes that occurred in this steel. Examination of other sections in this beam is underway.
Click to expand...

In other words, it is an anomaly.

Has the source been determined? According to Dr. Greening, more tests need to be done to confirm a source.
 
Lee report states STEEL MELTED!!!!

Link in OP reports STEEL MELTED!!!!!!!

DEAL WITH IT!!
 
Sizzler said:
In other words, it is an anomaly.
Click to expand...

Congratulations, you have identified an anomaly in the generally accepted account of 9-11. The fact that other experts before you have identified this as an anomaly worthy of investigation should not detract from your extraordinary achievement of being able to recognise this when you read the account in which the anomaly is described.

Now, how precisely does this anomaly cast any doubt whatsoever on the generally accepted understanding that the 9-11 attacks were carried out by radical Islamic terrorists, that the WTC 1 and 2 collapses were caused by impact and fire damage, that the WTC7 collapse was caused by debris and fire damage, and that after the collapse of all three buildings the debris experienced high temperatures for several weeks in a chemical environment that is subject to considerable uncertainty?

You see, what you have found here is a minor interesting phenomenon. There is no sensible reason to believe it suggests 9-11 was an inside job. No reasonable mechanism has been suggested by which sulphidation of steel could result from the use of thermite as a demolition agent, for which there is in turn no reasonable mechanism suggested. In contrast, a perfectly reasonable mechanism has been suggested, although not yet proven, by which sulphidation could have occurred in the debris pile.

This belongs in a chemistry forum, not a conspiracy theories forum.

Dave
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom