Origin of the paint that was found as red-gray chips - any ideas?

[Ivan Kminek]

The heat released by 2 of the paint chips was higher than that of perfect thermite, so if that is the benchmark, it wasn't "quite low". "Vigorous", as I understand it, does not only refer to the heat release (energy density) but also, or more so, to the speed of reaction, which is power per mass unit, and indeed the DSC trace charts show that the paint reacted with much higher power peaks (Fig. 19: range from about 10 to 24 W/g) than the nano-thermite referenced from the Tillotson paper (Fig. 29: about 5 W/g).
So if the authors describe the reaction of the chips as "vigorous", I am not inclined to deny that.

You are of course right with all the rest: The heat release in a range from 1.5 to 7.5 kJ/g, and the ignition point around 430°C aren't untypical for a number of materials where organics and inert stuff are mixed. I once calculated that humans, despite consisting to 65% of inert water, have a net energy density around 8-10 kJ/g, so average human tissue would release mire energy in a DSC than those paint chips did.


But all this detracts from the question if anyone has made any progress towards identifying the particular paint that the chips consisted of.

You are right concerning the "quite low released heat", sorry for this and apologies to SkepticOfLies. I was trying to say that the released heat was nothing extraordinary and even burning of organic binder present in mere ca 10-20 % concentration in the chips could produce the same heat as pure thermite. (Ergh... it seems to be almost impossible to completely avoid any mention of nanothermite even here, this strange sticky stuff is everywhere...)

 

[tsig]

I disagree. I see no reason not to assume good faith about what the paper tells us about the chain of custody, and given the fact that we have four samples from four locations, and in each they found very similar such chips, I am satisfied that that dust did in fact originate from the WTC collapses.

Why would you assume good faith in a known liar? Even if we grant that the samples came from NY they were still in his sole possession so tampering has to be considered as a possibility.


ETA: Is there any proof he even did the experiments?

His whole edifice seems to be standing on sand.

 

[Sabretooth]

Yes, but we have some good evidence, provided by Sunsteeler via Steven Jones, that the 4 chips a-d in the Harrit paper are not that primer. Here write-down of the argument:
http://oystein-debate.blogspot.com/2011/03/steven-jones-proves-primer-paint-not.html
Summary:
- The chips a-d are different from the chip they soaked with MEK to allegedly show "elemantal" Al
- Steven Jones, in a video presentation, showed an XEDS spectrum for red WTC primer (Tnemec, I believe)
- That spectrum was very neat fit with the MEK-soaked chip from the Harrit paper
-> The MEK-soaked chip was WTC1+2 structural steel primer, but the 4 other chips a-d were not.

OK, fair enough. But if we are looking for a source of chips a-d, why restrict ourselves to the three WTC towers?

There were several other buildings damaged that day. We could be chasing ghosts. Who's to say the a-d chips didn't come from one of the older buildings that were damaged in the collapse?

We're kind of shooting in the dark at a target 5 miles away. It seems we only know, at this point, that the chips didn't come from the WTC beam primer...and that's pretty much it. There are potentially hundreds of possiblities from here.

 

[Animal]

Now I am begining to wonder whether the floor elements would have been painted with the same primer as the columns. Were they manufactered in the same facility?

Typically no, long span joist manufacturing is a different animal than "red iron" fabrication

 

[bill smith]

Exactly. Simply reading the OP would have sufficed to figure that out. I even bolded it:

Sort of Harrit without Harrit and Jones without Jones if I'm not wrong.. This would be more suited to an email exhange rather than a public forum I think.

 

[bill smith]

You are right concerning the "quite low released heat", sorry for this and apologies to SkepticOfLies. I was trying to say that the released heat was nothing extraordinary and even burning of organic binder present in mere ca 10-20 % concentration in the chips could produce the same heat as pure thermite. (Ergh... it seems to be almost impossible to completely avoid any mention of nanothermite even here, this strange sticky stuff is everywhere...)

Even on this thread it is essential that the existence of nanothermite is accepted.

 

[Sabretooth]

Even on this thread it is essential that the existence of nanothermite is accepted.

Unless you can prove (in another thread) that nanothermite could be a viable form of building demolition, no it doesn't.

 

[Ivan Kminek]

Even on this thread it is essential that the existence of nanothermite is accepted.

In this thread is even more essential that the existence of paints consisting of iron oxide and aluminosilicates as key ingredients is also accepted. (I do not deny the existence of n......te)

 

[bill smith]

In this thread is even more essential that the existence of paints consisting of iron oxide and aluminosilicates as key ingredients is also accepted. (I do not deny the existence of n......te)

This is a solid foundation for the discussion. I also accept that several of the ingedients are common to both primer paint and ....the other substance.

 

[WTC Dust]

I have a six minute clip of Dr.Steven Jones describing the red-grey chips. It might help to focus minds here. I will post it if you think it helps. If not I won't.

I thought I detected a thermite-sniffer in Bill. Gross.

 

[bill smith]

I thought I detected a thermite-sniffer in Bill. Gross.

It's a working theory Dr. Blevins. Feel free to educate me otherwise on your thread as I ask.

 

[leftysergeant]

Typically no, long span joist manufacturing is a different animal than "red iron" fabrication

Then we can probably also expectr a different paint.

The columns seem to have fallen with most of the paint intact. The perimmeter columns were shoved out of the way by the debris plume, and most of the heavy debris fell outside the cores and then the cores just kind of buckled or shook themselves to pieces. Not much going on to grind paint into such small pieces.

The floor slabs were another matter entirely. They were basicly run through a multi-bladed blender going down the confines of the space betweeen core and perimeter columns.

Was there zinc in any of the red-over-grey chips? (Just sitting here thinking how I would design a floor unit.) Were the floor pans galvanized?

If it can be confirmed that the floor uniits had a different primer, I think we have an explanation for why most of the chips were absolutely identical to paint, but were not Tnemec.

 

[Oystein]

Why would you assume good faith in a known liar? Even if we grant that the samples came from NY they were still in his sole possession so tampering has to be considered as a possibility.


ETA: Is there any proof he even did the experiments?

His whole edifice seems to be standing on sand.

I think the proof lies in the fact that they published data that unequivocally DISproves thermite and supports a strong case for paint.
Had they tampered with the dust, or lied about the data, they would have introduced real thermite into the sample or forged the data such that it would actually support their conclusion.

The fact that the data does not at all support their conclusions is a strong hint that the data is real and honest.

 

[Oystein]

OK, fair enough. But if we are looking for a source of chips a-d, why restrict ourselves to the three WTC towers?

There were several other buildings damaged that day. We could be chasing ghosts. Who's to say the a-d chips didn't come from one of the older buildings that were damaged in the collapse?

We're kind of shooting in the dark at a target 5 miles away. It seems we only know, at this point, that the chips didn't come from the WTC beam primer...and that's pretty much it. There are potentially hundreds of possiblities from here.

Oh I agree that there's no easy and obvious target.
However, as the towers added 267 complete stories worth of dust to the environment all over Lower Manhatten, all the other buildings taken together at most 5% of that, as they didn't collapse quite as dynamically. So yes, we have to consider the possibility that these paint chips didn't come from the towers, however they most likely did.

 

[Oystein]

Sort of Harrit without Harrit and Jones without Jones if I'm not wrong..

You are right. We don't need these blokes. They had 2 years time to clean up their act and revoke their erroneous conclusions. The fact they didn't shows they are either incompetent or dishonest. In either case, we're better off without them.

This would be more suited to an email exhange rather than a public forum I think.

With whom??

Even on this thread it is essential that the existence of nanothermite is accepted.

Huh? No one doubts that nanothermite exists. We have seen Tillotson's work and characterisation of it. Harrit's red-gray chips had different characteristics, some of which are totally impossible or nonsensical for n-t, so they are almost certainly not n-t. It is essential on this thread that you accept that.

 

[Oystein]

Unless you can prove (in another thread) that nanothermite could be a viable form of building demolition, no it doesn't.

It could. It has been done with regular thermite before about 75 years ago (if your definition of "building" allows for steel lattice towers with no walls and floors), so there is no reason to assume that nanothermite could not, in theory, do the same.
That is however irrelevant to the case at hand. I wish you would care to address the OP instead replying to some derail with less than convincing arguments.
What is relevant here is whether or not the red layer of the chips is paint, and if so, which paint it is.

Even if one were to accept the possibility that the chips are nano-thermite, it wouldn't matter for this thread and be off-topic, as I have specifically excluded that possibility from the debate.

 

[Oystein]

...
The columns seem to have fallen with most of the paint intact. The perimmeter columns were shoved out of the way by the debris plume, and most of the heavy debris fell outside the cores and then the cores just kind of buckled or shook themselves to pieces. Not much going on to grind paint into such small pieces.

The floor slabs were another matter entirely. They were basicly run through a multi-bladed blender going down the confines of the space betweeen core and perimeter columns.

Good thinking!
I think it wasn't as black and white as you make it to be - quite a number of core column pieces got involved in the big grind, and certainly some of the perimeter, but I can see how there would be differences in the relative amounts of scraped-off paint. Then again, the different physical properties of the paints themselves would make a difference.

Was there zinc in any of the red-over-grey chips?

No zinc. The XEDS spectra of both the gray (fig. 6) and red (fig 7) layer are flat around 8.64keV (K-alpha level of zinc) and just above 1 keV (the several L-levels).

(Just sitting here thinking how I would design a floor unit.) Were the floor pans galvanized?

Don't know.
What would you conclude or predict wrt to our paint chips if they were?

If it can be confirmed that the floor uniits had a different primer, I think we have an explanation for why most of the chips were absolutely identical to paint, but were not Tnemec.

Well, that would still be conjecture and inconclusive. Better fto find out which specific paint formulations were used, and what their properties are.

 

[leftysergeant]

Good thinking!
I think it wasn't as black and white as you make it to be - quite a number of core column pieces got involved in the big grind, and certainly some of the perimeter, but I can see how there would be differences in the relative amounts of scraped-off paint. Then again, the different physical properties of the paints themselves would make a difference.

You might also consider the surface areas of paint exposed to impact, abrasion and erosion in the floor trusses as opposed to the columns. I am kind of thinking that the surface area of the floors far exceded the surface areas of the outer bank of core columns or the perimeter columns, maybe even both.

Core and perimeter columns were also somewhat shielded by drywall. the floor assemblies went right into the blender. A couple good whacks and the foam and concrete would be parting ways with the trusses and floor pans. Now every moving object that they meet starts chipping paint.

No zinc. The XEDS spectra of both the gray (fig. 6) and red (fig 7) layer are flat around 8.64keV (K-alpha level of zinc) and just above 1 keV (the several L-levels).

I have no bloody clue what that means, but i will take your word that it excludes zinc.

Don't know.
What would you conclude or predict wrt to our paint chips if they were?

I was of the opinion that, were the floor pans galvinized before painting, some of the zinc would peel off with the paint. Apparently a moot point.

Well, that would still be conjecture and inconclusive. Better fto find out which specific paint formulations were used, and what their properties are.

By all means, we would need to positively match the paint on the trusses with the non-Tnemec chips. If they are a match, the case, as regards CD by thermite, thermate or super-dooper-nano-banano therm*te is dismissed.

 

[Sabretooth]

It could. It has been done with regular thermite before about 75 years ago (if your definition of "building" allows for steel lattice towers with no walls and floors), so there is no reason to assume that nanothermite could not, in theory, do the same.
That is however irrelevant to the case at hand. I wish you would care to address the OP instead replying to some derail with less than convincing arguments.
What is relevant here is whether or not the red layer of the chips is paint, and if so, which paint it is.

Even if one were to accept the possibility that the chips are nano-thermite, it wouldn't matter for this thread and be off-topic, as I have specifically excluded that possibility from the debate.

I wasn't attempting a derail...my intentions were actually keep the thread on track.

Thermite, in any form, has to be shown to have a plausible or valid reason for being there. The idea that a few stray chips of red/gray paint, showing up in the immense aftermath of such a colossal event, are thermite in a demolition form? That line of reasoning is ridiculous at best...IMO anyway.

We are speculating the origin of the paint in the thread, are we not? With so many other completely viable options, we are far removed from even a remote possibility that thermite, in any form, is the source of that material.

Again, no harm to the thread intended. Maybe I should have made my point more clear from the start.

 

[Seymour Butz]

The columns seem to have fallen with most of the paint intact.

This is an interesting point.

If we determine that only 10% of the paint was scraped off during the collapse, and Jones says that there was a hundred tons of his "thermite" in the dust, then it would follow that there must have been a thousand tons of his gook applied.

At that point, the ridiculousness of his assertions become apparent to all but the idiotic.