explosive?
The test was done in an atmosphere of
pure SO2. If SO
2 could melt/corrode/explode steel beams, every building that got to 940
oC would explode.
I hope you are joking otherwise I don't think there is a facepalm picture on the internet big enough for replying to this. I'm actually thinking that this is a pure nugget of stundie gold.
Do you know that I actually thought about putting in a clarification for the word "explosive" in that quotation, but then I thought it wouldn't be necessary because I didn't think anyone would be stupid enough to take it literally as opposed to contextually. Then again.
What it means is the reaction continues at an extremely accelerated pace.
Pure SO2? No you completely misunderstand how experiments are conducted in gas atmospheres and how concentrations (partial pressures) are controlled. You are looking for any minute thing that you can justify for not accepting reality. This makes you look foolish, even more so when everyone reading can see that you are way out of your depth.
ElMondo, We have covered this already.
The SO2 corrosion takes place over a period of years and it is not localized like the beam in question.
No it's not been covered, because we are talking about the sulphur diffusing into the steel to produce the liquid Fe-O-S eutectic above 940°C. It's this liquid that attacks the steel, further accelerating the corrosion rate over and above that caused by the diffusion of sulphur from the SO2 gas. Sulphur still diffuses from the liquid eutectic into the solid steel (preferentially) along grain boundaries to form sulphides ahead of the penetrating liquid. That's evidenced in post #495 above (see picture). Infact these sulphides upon oxidisation breakdown to FeO and the liberated sulphur is free to diffuse further and deeper into the solid. It's a kind of rolling barrage.
High temps plus sulphur and oxygen present in the atmosphere leads to sulphur and oxygen penetration of the steel (sulphidation + oxidation) via a diffusion mechanism forming an oxide scale (rust) and internal sulphides in the solid steel (sometimes including a sulphide layer under the oxide ) depending on kinetics. The formation of which are both exothermic at @1000°C. As the O and S continue to diffuse, an Fe-O-S eutectic composition (iirc roughly 55% FeO, 45% FeS) is reached which transforms to a liquid at 940°C that preferentially attacks grain boundaries (that are already full of FeS which has a melting temperature of 988°C) accelerating the rate of corrosion. The temperature for this must
remain high @940°C plus. As the penetration of the liquid eutectic progresses along grain boundaries, multiple individual solid grains (of steel) are separated from the solid. Spalling of the oxide layer and these grains occur exposing fresh metal to this combined attack. As long as the temperature remains high enough then this level of high temperature corrosion will continue close to the maximum possible rate. There will be other complicating factors such as the presence of alloy additions in the steel and other elements present in the atmosphere that will affect the corrosion rate.
The problem with thermite/thermate is it can't sustain the temperature required for any length of time for the corrosion mechanism observed in the samples. Thermate/thermite uses the heat transferred from it's reactants to the metal that is required to be heated/melted. That's why it is used as an incendiary to render military equipment useless and to weld railway tracks. It does this in seconds by heat transfer not days/weeks through a corrosion mechanism. (otherwise you'd have to wait a few weeks before that important artillery piece was put out of action)
There is a reason why steels with high Chromium and Nickel content are used in such atmospheres - basically the chromium forms an oxide which reduces the rate of oxidation and sulphidation.
If thermite/thermate had been responsible then we would certainly see the resultant liquid iron cooled and adhered to the surface of the steel. This would instantaneously draw the eye of any metallurgist because the microstructure would look different to the steels - there would be a layer of iron, with a different morphology to that of the steel. We would also expect to see Barium if military thermate was used. Similarly it's not guaranteed that all the aluminium would be lost to smoke so we would expect to see that in the sample too.
It's upto the truthers to prove that thermite can cause the microstructures seen in this corroded sample - not the other way around.
C7 - Has anyone ever shown that thermite/thermate can produce this type of corrosion and the microstructures observed in these samples?
Either show this or drop your claims.
Firefighters put water on the debris pile "fires".
