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

[Ivan Kminek]

Concerning strontium as a culprit (this metal has been always a rather suscpicious, remember radioactive strontium 90, but personally I like this element).

To Almond and all: Btw, even Si peaks in the Bentham paper (Fig. 7) seem to be asymmetric somehow, tailing slightly up to the higher energies and perhaps indicating overlap of Si and Sr peaks. On the other hand, all other higher peaks look symmetric (except Al peaks with some tiny tail...). What do you think?

 

[Marokkaan]

Thanks, Marokkaan, for your fullhearted wish

Meanwhile… some hints for you.
Are you living in the Earth with its atmosphere rich in oxygen?

Have you ever done such a job like burning an old paint off the steel or other metal with a propane torch?
If yes, you might notice that some particles of the paint sparkle when exposed to the flame, frequently with some time delay. I guess that having microscopic eyes at these moments, you might notice burning of the particles accompanied with some smoke release – similar effects as observed for the Mark Basile red chip.

If you have an electric stove at your home, turn it on and heat it up to the temperatures ca 400 – 500 degrees of C (very deep red/purple color I guess, http://www.bssa.org.uk/topics.php?article=140). (These are the temperatures at which the alleged nanothermite was ignited under air in the Bentham paper under discussion.) When you put particles of some organic matter on the stove (spices, flour, wood dust, etc.) they again quickly burn/sparkle with a release of some tiny smoke.

On the other hand, when performing the same “stove experiment”, let say, on the Moon (without any oxygen available), the same particles would be only heated up to the temperature of the stove and no sparkling/burning would be observed. But, when you put the particles of nanothermite (with a sufficiently low ignition temperature) on that stove, they would ignite even on the Moon.

(In summary: Do you understand our claim that any such experiment performed under air cannot prove thermite?)

ITs just a part of showing, you should do ofcourse a lot more to show.

So show me first all, it will happen the same as what i showed to you, even when you are claiming its possible.

And if you can do that, than we can look at the other characteristics of the ignited nano thermite to compare with your ignited primer paint chip

 

[uke2se]

ITs just a part of showing, you should do ofcourse a lot more to show.

So show me first all, it will happen the same as what i showed to you, even when you are claiming its possible.

And if you can do that, than we can look at the other characteristics of the ignited nano thermite to compare with your ignited primer paint chip

Try typing in English and you'll have greater success being taken seriously. If you're having trouble, ask your parents for help.

 

[DGM]

ITs just a part of showing, you should do ofcourse a lot more to show.

So show me first all, it will happen the same as what i showed to you, even when you are claiming its possible.

And if you can do that, than we can look at the other characteristics of the ignited nano thermite to compare with your ignited primer paint chip

Why are you trying to spoil this thread? Go away. This is so far out of your league words can not describe (as has been shown by your posts).

 

[Sunstealer]

This thread is one of the best concerning 9/11 and the conspiracy theories. I have to say I'm really enthralled by Ivan Kminek and his posts, especially uncovering the fact that there was another primer paint used in the construction of the WTC towers - namely that used on the truss assemblies.

As debunkers we are more often than not reactive, because we have to counter all the nonsenses truthers spout. It's incredibly tiresome and boring. I would never have had the desire, nor the will, having spent a good deal of time on the Harrit et al paper, to actually search for another source of paint, partially because I thought it was such a difficult preposition, yet it's there; in the NIST report. I hold my hands up. I also bow to Ivan K who did the leg work.

When I read Oystein's OP, I pretty much thought that it was a futile exercise. In my mind I thought it was a question that couldn't possibly be answered due to the number of variables. Yet here we are with a rough, working hypothesis that is backed by data. Ironically data that has been provided by truthers! Delicious.

The NIST report on the subject of 9/11 is so large, so thorough, it encompasses so many scientific and engineering subjects, that it really is very difficult for any one person to fully comprehend. With regards to the parts that I have read, ones that fall under my knowledge, I can only say that this is exactly what I would expect from such a professional body. I, myself, have written documentation and reports that echo the professionalism found in the NIST report as have many, many others in their professional working life. Truthers don't even know the half of it.

Ever since the Harrit et al paper was made public, I've found myself revisiting things that I would never have thought I'd see again and it's made me think of things in a new light. Kaolin, for example; which was in the dark, dark regions of the brain, which has now been re-awakened! (albeit 2 years ago now)

The Almond: Monty *********** Carlo simulations! You're havin' a laugh mate! You bastard! I've now had to go back in time and look at that too. I'd forgotten all about that. aargh maths! I'm also learning and absorbing from many people who post in the thread too - it's much appreciated, especially the fire science gurus. (leftysergeant - "It's bleedin' paint.") Classic.

I have no idea whether any trusses or parts thereof survive. Does anyone know if they do or where they are held? Is it even possible to get samples?

It's a bit crazy after all.

 

[Ivan Kminek]

Thank you, Sunstealer) I only did some quick search on NIST pages using keywords „paint“ and „primer“ and, accidentally, I chose the right page, i.e. NCSTAR 1-6B. Perhaps there is more info about Laclede paint in other NIST pages, I will check it later.

All this „net detective paperwork” is quite funny, but I think we really need some direct physical proof (at least DSC). Rest of the floor trusses should be available in NIST deposits/labs. I am even willing to write some inquiry for such samples to NIST, but I am probably not the right person, e.g. because I live in some almost unknown European country (?). Perhaps NIST people would even measure DSC of paint on the trusses if we argue properly. After all, this could serve as a support for their immense effort.

Concerning Hangar 17 in JFK airport, I have just checked this interactive view of its content http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2008/09/10/nyregion/20080911-hangar-panos.html but I am not sure if there is anything looking like floor trusses. It seems that we should expect something like this: http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/JJ/JJ5.html, Fig.14 (sorry to link the site of “Prof.” Judy Wood here). Another pictures are here http://willyloman.wordpress.com/2010/02/17/sneak-peak-revised-demolition-theory-hypothesis/. Is this hangar open to the public (at least at request)? (Anyway, samples must have a clean chain of custody, so it is not advisable just to steal them)

Marokkaan (and all): You wrote “So show me first all, it will happen the same as what i showed to you, even when you are claiming its possible.“ We can not do any thermal behavior measurements without samples of the Laclede paint.
But, meanwhile…
As I already noted in the post #106, distinct exotherms at ca 410 to 420 degrees C were observed for the epoxide resins http://www.springerlink.com/content/c06147654665660h/. This review is not available online, but I have just photographed the relevant page and put it here

Now, compare these DSC curves to the exotherms in the Harrit's paper, Fig. 19 (heating rate was slightly higher in Harrit's paper, 10 K/min, in comparison with 5 K/min in the review on epoxides). Aren't these curves “suspiciously similar”, concerning exotherms between 400 and 500 degrees C? (For Marokkaan only: note that exotherms have negative peaks in the cited review, contrary to exotherms in Harrit et al. paper.) (It's a pity that there is no info about released energies in the linked graphs.)

(note: there are no more DSC curves of epoxides at such high temperatures in that review since it deals mostly with the curing of epoxides, which takes place at much lower temp. below ca 250 degrees C)

 

[leftysergeant]

NIST has specimens of the floor trusses. Someone could, perhaps write to them requesting some minute samples...

 

[Oystein]

Ivan, Sunstealer, Almond,

I am thinking about composing a blog post, or maybe a short paper (PDF), that summarizes and structures your work here. I would frame it like this:


- Purpose/abstract: We have looked at available data from Harrit, Jones e.al. and NIST. We disagree with the conclusion "thermitic material" and instead propose a different conclusion that fits the data better, namely "LaClede steel primer from floor joists".
- Assumptions: We assume that Jones' material samples are indeed very likely from the World Trade Center, and that the measurement data by Harrit, Jones, Basile etc. are genuine and honest. Similarly, we assume that the information found in the NIST reports is reliable as stated (that LaClede paint was in fact specified such and such, even though we can't be totally sure that the delivered precisely according to specs)
- Method: We calculate estimated relative mass of chemical elements in LaClede paint, Tnemec, and reasonable compositions of nano-thermite as well as the steel(s) painted with these primers. From these estimates, we simulate XEDS spectra. In the discussion, we will show that the spectra obtained by Harrit, Jones, HenriCo are a very good fit with LaClede paint, and not a good fit with thermites or Tnemec. Further, we will show that other expected properties of LaClede Paint were found by Harrit e.al., such as DSC behaviour, flame test, etc. Special attention to the possibility that the chip specimen represent different materials (a-d different from MEK soaked e; possible that a-d are not all the same; possible that HenriCo and basile looked at different materials)
- Conclusion: Since no one has done these tests on actual floor joist paint from WTC, we can't claim with certainty that we correctly identified the red-gray chips as LaClede Paint on steel flakes. However, our theory explains the available data better than any other theories put forward so far, and thus supercedes the "thermitic" theory. We consider it likely that the red layers are LaClede paint, or some very similar paint formulation.

I would like to pay special attention to possible weaknesses of our argument, such as

• Any deviations of the Harrit data from what we expect (e.g. missing low energy Cr-peaks, red layers somewhat thinner than spec for LaClede)
• what margins of error do we have
• Scarcity of XEDS data beyond 10keV
• etc

Maybe this can evolve into a full paper, fit for publication? I have never published in a scientific venue, so any recommendations are welcome. Is it advisable to put nearly all the work that goes into an eventual paper out on the internet?

What do you guys think? Credits to be shared by the four of us, with Ivan and Sunstealer getting the lion's share.

 

[Ivan Kminek]

I will answer tomorrow or perhaps on Sunday, Sunstealer, because we are just preparing mother's rounded birthday for tomorrow. I think for now that this is a good start but we should perhaps try to find some more data supporting our hypothesis before publishing anything even in some blog. But I can be wrong...

 

[alienentity]

Great idea, Oystein. I'd be interested in putting together a youtube video based on all this work (been waiting patiently for things to progress) as well - it would be great to link to such a resource in a video description, so the truly curious would get exposed to the flaws in the paper by Harrit et al.

 

[DGM]

Ivan, Sunstealer, Almond,

I am thinking about composing a blog post, or maybe a short paper (PDF), that summarizes and structures your work here. I would frame it like this:


.

I'd love to read this. Although I don't have the chops to understand all of it (I'm sure), I would enjoy spending the time trying.

 

[Ivan Kminek]

Still preparing mother's birthday...
Meanwhile one correction, I overlooked that in the linked figure of DSC of epoxide resins (post #206) the temperature is in K, not C degrees. The temperature scale ends at about 300 ^oC there so these figures are without value for us, sorry
For Monday, I plan to acquire some referrences and data on the thermal decay/oxidative pyrolysis of epoxide resins at work (from DSC and TGA (thermogravimetric analysis) people)...

 

[Marokkaan]

Thank you, Sunstealer) I only did some quick search on NIST pages using keywords „paint“ and „primer“ and, accidentally, I chose the right page, i.e. NCSTAR 1-6B. Perhaps there is more info about Laclede paint in other NIST pages, I will check it later.

All this „net detective paperwork” is quite funny, but I think we really need some direct physical proof (at least DSC). Rest of the floor trusses should be available in NIST deposits/labs. I am even willing to write some inquiry for such samples to NIST, but I am probably not the right person, e.g. because I live in some almost unknown European country (?). Perhaps NIST people would even measure DSC of paint on the trusses if we argue properly. After all, this could serve as a support for their immense effort.

Concerning Hangar 17 in JFK airport, I have just checked this interactive view of its content http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2008/09/10/nyregion/20080911-hangar-panos.html but I am not sure if there is anything looking like floor trusses. It seems that we should expect something like this: http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/JJ/JJ5.html, Fig.14 (sorry to link the site of “Prof.” Judy Wood here). Another pictures are here http://willyloman.wordpress.com/2010/02/17/sneak-peak-revised-demolition-theory-hypothesis/. Is this hangar open to the public (at least at request)? (Anyway, samples must have a clean chain of custody, so it is not advisable just to steal them)

Marokkaan (and all): You wrote “So show me first all, it will happen the same as what i showed to you, even when you are claiming its possible.“ We can not do any thermal behavior measurements without samples of the Laclede paint.
But, meanwhile…
As I already noted in the post #106, distinct exotherms at ca 410 to 420 degrees C were observed for the epoxide resins http://www.springerlink.com/content/c06147654665660h/. This review is not available online, but I have just photographed the relevant page and put it here

Now, compare these DSC curves to the exotherms in the Harrit's paper, Fig. 19 (heating rate was slightly higher in Harrit's paper, 10 K/min, in comparison with 5 K/min in the review on epoxides). Aren't these curves “suspiciously similar”, concerning exotherms between 400 and 500 degrees C? (For Marokkaan only: note that exotherms have negative peaks in the cited review, contrary to exotherms in Harrit et al. paper.) (It's a pity that there is no info about released energies in the linked graphs.)

(note: there are no more DSC curves of epoxides at such high temperatures in that review since it deals mostly with the curing of epoxides, which takes place at much lower temp. below ca 250 degrees C)

Still preparing mother's birthday...
Meanwhile one correction, I overlooked that in the linked figure of DSC of epoxide resins (post #206) the temperature is in K, not C degrees. The temperature scale ends at about 300 ^oC there so these figures are without value for us, sorry
For Monday, I plan to acquire some referrences and data on the thermal decay/oxidative pyrolysis of epoxide resins at work (from DSC and TGA (thermogravimetric analysis) people)...

 

[Myriad]

Hmm, does that mean you don't support people who are doing actual research on 9/11? That would be odd, because in another thread you just recently told me that you do.

I certainly do. Interesting work, everyone.

Respectfully,
Myriad

 

[Ivan Kminek]

Hangover after mother's birthday (But a lot of fun yesterday

Meanwhile, some running commentaries and questions:

Laclede binder composition: although I tried to calculate the approximate content of elements relevant for XEDS (carbon, oxygen), I should find some independent numbers, e.g. typical elemental compositions of Bisphenol A epoxides cured by amines. I can also buy such epoxide (epoxide paint), cure it and give it to our lab measuring elemental analyses. As Almond explained, carbon XEDS peaks cannot be taken quantitatively, but we should present the overall expected composition of Laclede paint based on more data in any publication.

Red-gray chips thickness: It is written in the paper of Harrit et al.: "Thicknesses vary from roughly 10 to 100 microns for each layer (red and gray)." (And the declared/expected thickness of Laclede primer paint layer was 1 mil +/- 0.2 mil (25 µm +/- 5 µm)). Although average values are very roughly in accordance, there seems to be a quite high variability of the thicknesses of red layers of the chips. On the other hand, as regards published photos, most of red layers in both Bentham paper and HenryCo´s presentation seem to be ca 10 to 20 µm thick, eg. somewhat thinner than expected for Laclede. At the same time, I would not expect any substantial change in the layer thickness during even 30 years. I am not sure what all this means (I only think that nanothermite layer with a thickness around 20 µm could not destroy WTC towers)) Almond, you mentioned in your post #18 that you have a lot of experience with paint particles, any advice?

 

[Oystein]

...(I only think that nanothermite layer with a thickness around 20 µm could not destroy WTC towers)...

No need to just think. We know this already, the calculations have been done years ago: Nano-thermite in layers as thin as paint would warm perimeter columns by a few degrees only. But it's easier than that: As a rule of thumb, to melt a mass unit of steel, you need a mass unit of thermite, or more. So 20 µm of thermite could melt 20 µm of steel, give or take a few µm, assumning that the steel below that layer doesn't even warm up ar all. It should be obvious that removing 0.00002m from steel that's 0.00635m^*) thick would not significantly affect its strength: That's 0.3%



*) Near the top of the tower, the steel plates that made up the perimeter columns were thinnest, being only 0.25 inches thick

 

[bill smith]

Hangover after mother's birthday (But a lot of fun yesterday

Meanwhile, some running commentaries and questions:

Laclede binder composition: although I tried to calculate the approximate content of elements relevant for XEDS (carbon, oxygen), I should find some independent numbers, e.g. typical elemental compositions of Bisphenol A epoxides cured by amines. I can also buy such epoxide (epoxide paint), cure it and give it to our lab measuring elemental analyses. As Almond explained, carbon XEDS peaks cannot be taken quantitatively, but we should present the overall expected composition of Laclede paint based on more data in any publication.

Red-gray chips thickness: It is written in the paper of Harrit et al.: "Thicknesses vary from roughly 10 to 100 microns for each layer (red and gray)." (And the declared/expected thickness of Laclede primer paint layer was 1 mil +/- 0.2 mil (25 µm +/- 5 µm)). Although average values are very roughly in accordance, there seems to be a quite high variability of the thicknesses of red layers of the chips. On the other hand, as regards published photos, most of red layers in both Bentham paper and HenryCo´s presentation seem to be ca 10 to 20 µm thick, eg. somewhat thinner than expected for Laclede. At the same time, I would not expect any substantial change in the layer thickness during even 30 years. I am not sure what all this means (I only think that nanothermite layer with a thickness around 20 µm could not destroy WTC towers)) Almond, you mentioned in your post #18 that you have a lot of experience with paint particles, any advice?

Hi Ivan. Could it be said that the grey layer is more or less consistently the same thickness ?

 

[Marokkaan]

Hmm, does that mean you don't support people who are doing actual research on 9/11? That would be odd, because in another thread you just recently told me that you do.

I certainly do. Interesting work, everyone.

Respectfully,
Myriad

:facepalm:

 

[TheRedWorm]

What, precisely, is wrong with his question?

 

[Oystein]

myriad, RedWorm, I think it's best not to engage Marokkaan here, unless he contributes to the topic of this thread constructively, for example by offering valid critique or pointing to useful data.

No need to talk about his personal ignorance and incredulity.