Debunk Alert: Experiment to Test for Eutectic Reaction

[uke2se]

and you can explain how this happened?

Me personally? No. There's a lot of smart people working for NIST and other scientific organizations who can, though.

Arguments from personal incredulity don't really interest me, but I sympathize with the fact that it's what the twoof-movement has been reduced to.

 

[beachnut]

its amazing that 15.9mm of A36 steel corroded/eroded/dissolved/vaporized/evaporated or whatever method in just 8 days. did it start before the building collapsed?
from the fema report:
"It is possible that this is the result of long-term heating in the ground following the collapse of the buildings. It is also possible that the phenomenon started prior to collapse and accelerated the weakening of the steel structure."

You are interested in this, take a Chem Eng course and learn not to fall for the lies of 911 truth. What is your excuse for ignorance in Chem Engineering? How many professors have you contacted on the subject?

This topic sure brings out the old gullible 911 truth failed followers; 8 years of a failed movement, regurgitating stupid ideas.

Hope you don't believe in the idiotic thermite lies. Why is a eutectic something important? How can you make up insane lies about 911 using a sample showing erosion? If thermite was involved there would be big chunk of iron sitting next to erosion, fused to the sample; evidence that 911 truth would have and not be a bunch of liars with no evidence.

 

[alienentity]

and you can explain how this happened?

The FEMA report already explains what occurred chemically.

What we do know, if we can take the allegations of 9/11 Truthers Steven Jones and his clique seriously, is that the sulphur which was required for the process did not come from thermate.
This is because Jones/Harrit et al are specifically alleging a non-sulphur type of thermite or superthermite, not thermate.

Why is this? Because the 'iron-rich spheres' which they claim were created by thermitic reactions, do not contain sulphur for the most part.
This virtually rules out thermate as the principal material, if you are to believe their theory.

In that case the sulphur had to come from something else. A number of candidates are possible, including gypsum drywall and diesel fuel.
Dr. Frank Greening has written about this.

Either way, whether you are a thermite, thermate or nanothermite believer, there was no example of melted, ie that which experienced temperatures at the melting point of steel.
Eutectic erosion is not really melting, since it is a slow, corrosive process, and certainly never reached the melting temp of steel.

Until truthers can come up with a piece of steel that has been heated to the melting point of steel, the thermite/nanothermite theory is very weak.

A further question truthers need to answer is that, given that their theory of iron-rich spheres requires melted steel, then why was there no melted steel in the materials recovered and inspected? their theory requires this, but yet it does not exist.

No truther has come up with a reasonable answer. There are lots of silly answers, but that doesn't count. (ie 'the steel was melted down before it could be inspected' )

 

[alienentity]

You are interested in this, take a Chem Eng course and learn not to fall for the lies of 911 truth. What is your excuse for ignorance in Chem Engineering? How many professors have you contacted on the subject?

... If thermite was involved there would be big chunk of iron sitting next to erosion, fused to the sample; evidence that 911 truth would have and not be a bunch of liars with no evidence.

Hey beach, don't forget you can't get sulphur from thermite. Truthers don't seem to be able to make those distinctions. But we should.

 

[alienentity]

Steven Jones went thru this mental agony years ago when he discovered that the various thermite/thermate theories were contradictory. For a long time he was finding sulphur everywhere, but he decided to drop sulphur and go with nanothermite.

Now he just finds iron-rich spheres, but no sulphur. So he doesn't care about eutectic erosion......

Must be frustrated to push theories which keep being invalidated by the evidence. Maybe that's why the nanothermite craze died out as quickly as it rose.

 

[RedIbis]

Yes, necessarily.




Approximately twenty-three.

Please list these 20+ sources that show that such devices were close enough, with the capability, to record the collapse of WTC 7.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

BTW: It has not been established that the impact and fires brought the Trade Towers down. That is just a supposition.

You may shove your head up your ass as far as you like, but this statement is a flat out lie.

The causes of the collapses has been proven beyond reasonable doubt to be aircraft impacts and fire.

 

[triforcharity]

You are talking out your ass when you say "pseudo-science" and the Bentham Open Chemical Physics Journal is NOT a sham journal. The phony paper was sent to a different journal. Other journals are occasionally scammed. That does not mean they are sham journals. This is just another BS reason to hand wave the thermite paper.

No, it was certainly Bentham. In fact, as you well know, Bentham's editor QUIT after s/he found out that stuff was being published that the EDITOR had never seen! Bentham also spams people to do their "peer-review" that have no qualifications in that field, and also ask people to write papers they have no education on. Bentham is in fact a SHAM journal.

The phony paper was sent to what other journal? Cite and source please.

I read the RJ Lee report and it has nothing to do with the "piece", it was about the dust that was nearly 6% iron spheres.
[FONT=&quot]Pg 17 [pdf pg 21][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Various metals (most notably iron and lead) were melted during the WTC [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]event, producing spherical metallic particles. Exposure of phases to high[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]heat results in the formation of spherical particles due to surface tension.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Figure 21 [/FONT] [FONT=&quot]and Figure 22show a spherical iron particle resulting from the[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]melting of iron (or steel)[/FONT][FONT=&quot].[/FONT]

But yet, you claim that the ONLY way for the piece that this WHOLE topic is about, was caused by THERMITE. Now, stop combining the issues if they are unrelated in your mind.

Go back and try again. Get used to hearing this.

 

[triforcharity]

So what? NIST did not explain how the Trade Towers collapsed and neither has anyone else. Bazant's one dimensional model includes many "assumptions" and it does not explain the collapse of the south tower.

Um, I think you are confused. NIST in fact does discuss the collapse. HOWEVER, it only goes to collapse initiation, as once the collapse begins, it would be impossible to model the collapse as there are millions and millions of variables.

Listen, I understand that a construction worker, in your mind, knows more than the ENGINEERS, Physicists, and other HIGHLY EDUCATED people who worked on this report, but here is reality, that is simply not true.

Now, go back and try again. SHOW US what NIST got wrong. Get it published in a REAL engineering journal. Show the world just how wrong the NIST is. I'll wait.

 

[triforcharity]

Many of the floors were offices but the area above the dropped ceiling was open so you are right about the heat spreading out to "pre-heat" beams not directly under the fire. However, the 2 hr fire protection took this into consideration. The hottest gases are directly above the fire and once it passes the beams begin to drop in temperature.

Loose the snotty attitude and make an effort to debate like an adult please.
NCSTAR 1-A pg 51 [pdf pg 93]
On Floors 11 through 13 (enclosed offices), the fire likely grew within an office, reaching flashover in several minutes. After about 5 to 15 minutes, the ceiling tile system likely failed and the hot gases created a local hot upper layer. Thermal radiation from this layer ignited adjacent offices. Offices across a corridor likely ignited more slowly.

I have read the FEMA C report. The problem is; NIST did not mention, much less explain how the beam melted.

No, no, no, you've got this all wrong there Chris. You have no idea the complex thermodynamics that go on during a fire. You ASSumption is that an area that is not in the direct area of a fire will begin to cool once the fire has left. This is only partially true. In fact, an area can CONTINUE to heat even after the fire has moved to a different area, as the fire is NOT extinguished in that area.

Also, you need to understand that the SFRM is very picky as to how it is applied. If not applied perfectly, it is basically, useless. If some of the SFRM comes off on a beam, the ENTIRE beam is compromised. There really is an art to applying that stuff. Me personally, I don't reccomend it, as concrete is much better, easier to apply, and much more sturdy.

NIST did not mention it? Imagine that. Maybe because FEMA already explained how it happened. Argument from personal ignorance noted.

 

[triforcharity]

put layers upon layers of the thermitic material prof jones found and cover that material with blazeshield.

do you remember when you and your firefighting buddies couldnt explain this obervation:
"Dr. Astaneh-Asl said that in some places, the fireproofing melted into a glassy residue."

Yeah, Blazeshield does not do well in a high-shock environment. It's not designed to resist a shockwave from a HE. You know that. You're grasping.

No, it was not that I couldn't explain it, I had never heard of it, and as such, wouldn't comment on it, as that is what people who KNOW they are uneducated about a subject do. It's called "Intellectual Honesty", and it is lost COMPLETLY on truthers worldwide. But, what does it matter? Do you have a logical explanation, with facts and such, to back it up? If so, I will gladly look into it. Hell, I might even do a study on it, and get it published. I am about due for another paper.

 

[triforcharity]

also, i belive the upgraded floors had like 3 inches of blazeheild if i remember correct.

That would be rather difficult, as BlazeShieldII, the stuff we are discussing, did not go on the market untill 2007. I guess the NWO could pull some strings.......

ETA: I am going to leave this intact, so as to not be accused of altering my posts, but this is incorrect. Blaze Shield II has been around since aroun 1993. But, none-the-less, it means nothing, as this stuff is not going to muffle an explosive. Sorry, not gonna happen.

 

[AZCat]

NIST did not mention it? Imagine that. Maybe because FEMA already explained how it happened. Argument from personal ignorance noted.

Actually, NIST did mention it, but C7 appears to be ignoring that very easily verifiable fact.

 

[Senenmut]

The FEMA report already explains what occurred chemically.

prof sisson could only get "little" metal to dissolve in 24hrs. 15.9mm in 8 days. think about that.

In that case the sulphur had to come from something else. A number of candidates are possible, including gypsum drywall and diesel fuel.
Dr. Frank Greening has written about this

didnt ya read in the beginning of this thread that he responded to jon's experiment and said it was a good experiment and that wallboard must not have been the source of the sulfur. now he wants to burn pvc pipe.

Either way, whether you are a thermite, thermate or nanothermite believer, there was no example of melted, ie that which experienced temperatures at the melting point of steel.

dont you remember that piece where astaneh- asl saw melting of girders at the wtc site.

Eutectic erosion is not really melting, since it is a slow, corrosive process, and certainly never reached the melting temp of steel.

ok.....slow???? try 15.9mm of A36 steel in 8 days.

Until truthers can come up with a piece of steel that has been heated to the melting point of steel, the thermite/nanothermite theory is very weak.

what happened to those girders that had been melted according to astaneh-asl. what happened to those steel flanges had been "reduced from an inch thick to paper thin." they were probably recycled......

 

[Senenmut]

You are interested in this, take a Chem Eng course and learn not to fall for the lies of 911 truth. What is your excuse for ignorance in Chem Engineering? How many professors have you contacted on the subject?

ive contaced sisson who will not tell me how little metal was dissolved with his hypothesis.

 

[uke2se]

ive contaced sisson who will not tell me how little metal was dissolved with his hypothesis.

He must be an NWO agent - possibly even a lizard. Don't you wish the revolution would happen already so people like him can be dealt with?

 

[alienentity]

prof sisson could only get "little" metal to dissolve in 24hrs. 15.9mm in 8 days. think about that.

So he did get some dissolving. That shows the process is real. You gonna jump to conclusions already? Where's your thermite-creates-eutectic erosion experiment? Hmmm...there is none.

didnt ya read in the beginning of this thread that he responded to jon's experiment and said it was a good experiment and that wallboard must not have been the source of the sulfur. now he wants to burn pvc pipe.

I said there are several possible sources for sulphur. Greening agrees.
In fact, in his paper titled 'Sulfur and the WTC disaster' he writes 'Thus, there can be no doubt that the fires in the WTC on 9-11 provided the appropriate conditions for the release of SO2from
the combustion of sulfur containing materials on affected floors.'

Recently on 9/11 Blogger he wrote 'However, the one thing I would suggest that still makes "natural" sulfidation of steel a real possibility is the inclusion of chlorine in the experiment.' That's where he suggested the inclusion of PVC as an experiment.

Note that he hasn't resorted to claiming the presence of thermate, which has definitely NOT been shown to cause eutectic erosion.

dont you remember that piece where astaneh- asl saw melting of girders at the wtc site.

You need to show some detail about what Dr. Astaneh saw, where he saw it, how much was 'melted' and what exactly he meant. A soundbite ain't gonna do it.
For example, have you read his 5-year Structural Engineering Investigation to find out what he thinks?

I assume you haven't.

So far there is nothing to positively prove the presence of either thermite or thermate. Only talk and speculation.
Show us some concrete lab results of eutectic erosion caused by thermate and we've got something real to talk about. Until then....

 

[Christopher7]

The causes of the collapses has been proven beyond reasonable doubt to be aircraft impacts and fire.

Really? Where? Please show your source.

 

[Senenmut]

So he did get some dissolving. That shows the process is real. You gonna jump to conclusions already? Where's your thermite-creates-eutectic erosion experiment? Hmmm...there is none.

yeah, he got some with poweder!! can ya get office material to create a eutectic to attack the steel? thats what jon's experiment was about.
like i said earlier, prof jones claims thermate creates the same results the fema bpat report showed. i tried emailing him to get some pics so we could argue that point.
prof jones stated:
"I (with colleagues) have done the experiment with thermite + sulfur (often called "thermate") acting on a piece of WTC steel. In fact, I did the experiment with BBC filming it! Then we looked at the steel, including use of electron microscopy, and found the same characteristic corrosion as found by Barnett et al. in WTC 7 steel. OTOH, I know of no expt done to test whether gypsum and heat would have this effect -- I would be VERY surprised, as the sulfur in gypsum is not elemental Sulfur, but is bound as a sulfate (very difficult to reduce to suflur.) We should do the latter experiment to rule out such nonsense. If you can provide direct quotes from the BBC program on this point, it may prove useful in a research note on the subject."

I said there are several possible sources for sulphur. Greening agrees.
In fact, in his paper titled 'Sulfur and the WTC disaster' he writes 'Thus, there can be no doubt that the fires in the WTC on 9-11 provided the appropriate conditions for the release of SO2from
the combustion of sulfur containing materials on affected floors.'

Recently on 9/11 Blogger he wrote 'However, the one thing I would suggest that still makes "natural" sulfidation of steel a real possibility is the inclusion of chlorine in the experiment.' That's where he suggested the inclusion of PVC as an experiment.

at 911blogger:
“In waste incinerators deposit formation is one of the main reasons for corrosion at relatively low metal temperatures… (in the range of 250 to 400°C). Analyses of deposits have shown that outer scales contain mainly sulfates like CaSO4 , Na2SO4,, K2SO4 , ZnSO4 , PbSO4 . The inner scales near the metal surface show considerable amounts of chlorides like CaCl2 , KCl, ZnCl2 and PbCl2 . These salts are able to convert the protective oxide layers to complex oxy-chlorides .”

i dont remember them mentioning chlorine bein gpresent in the wtc 1,2, or 7 samples. greening did mention chlorine in regards to one sample from the wtc. ill have to take a look at that one.

that he hasn't resorted to claiming the presence of thermate, which has definitely NOT been shown to cause eutectic erosion.

he is ruling things out like a good scientist should.

 

[BigAl]

Really? Where? Please show your source.

Performance based structural fire engineering for modern building design
Rini, D., Lamont, S. 2008 Proceedings of the 2008 Structures Congress - Structures Congress 2008: Crossing the Borders 314

Engineering perspective of the collapse of WTC-I
Irfanoglu, A., Hoffmann, C.M. 2008 Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities 22 (1),

Collapse of towers as applied to September 11 events
Cherepanov, G.P. 2008 Materials Science 44 (4), pp. 489-499

Modeling pre-evacuation delay by occupants in World Trade Center Towers 1 and 2 on September 11, 2001
Kuligowski, E.D., Mileti, D.S. 2008 Fire Safety Journal

World Trade Center building disaster: Stimulus for innovations
Kodur, V.K.R. 2008 Indian Concrete Journal 82 (1), pp. 23-31

A collective undergraduate class project reconstructing the September 11, 2001 world trade center fire
Marshall, A., Quintiere, J. 2007 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings

"A new era": The limits of engineering expertise in a post-9/11 world
Pfatteicher, S.K.A. 2007 International Symposium on Technology and Society, Proceedings, art. no. 4362228

Progressive collapse of the World Trade Center: Simple analysis
Seffen, K.A. 2008 Journal of Engineering Mechanics 134 (2), pp. 125-132

Scale modeling of the 96th floor of world trade center tower 1
Wang, M., Chang, P., Quintiere, J., Marshall, A. 2007 Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities 21 (6), pp. 414-421

Failure of welded floor truss connections from the exterior wall during collapse of the world trade center towers
Banovic, S.W., Siewert, T.A. 2007 Welding Journal (Miami, Fla) 86 (9), pp. 263-s-272-s

The collapse of the world trade center towers: A metallurgist's view
Gayle, F.W. 2007 MRS Bulletin 32 (9), pp. 710-716

Building code changes reflect world trade center investigation
Hansen, B. 2007 Civil Engineering 77 (9), pp. 22+24-25

Fire load in a steel building design
Razdolsky, L. 2008 Proceedings of the 4th International Structural Engineering and Construction Conference, ISEC-4 - Innovations in Structural Engineering and Construction 2, pp. 1163-1167

The structural steel of the World Trade Center towers
Gayle, F.W., Banovic, S.W., Foecke, T., Fields, R.J., Luecke, W.E., McColskey, J.D., McCown, C., Siewert, T.A. 2006 Journal of Failure Analysis and Prevention 6 (5), pp. 5-8

Progressive collapse of structures: Annotated bibliography and comparison of codes and standards
Mohamed, O.A. 2006 Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities 20 (4), art. no. 001604QCF, pp. 418-425

A simple model of the World Trade Center fireball dynamics
Baum, H.R., Rehm, R.G., Quintiere, J.G. 2005 Proceedings of the Combustion Institute 30 II, pp. 2247-2254

Impact of the Boeing 767 Aircraft into the World Trade Center
Karim, M.R., Hoo Fatt, M.S. 2005 Journal of Engineering Mechanics 131 (10), pp. 1066-1072

High-fidelity simulation of large-scale structures
Hoffmann, C., Sameh, A., Grama, A. 2005 Lecture Notes in Computer Science 3515 (II), pp. 664-671

Collapses of the world trade center towers
[No author name available] 2005 Indian Concrete Journal 79 (8), pp. 11-16

Industry updates: Fireproofing, staircases cited in World Trade Center report
[No author name available] 2005 Journal of Failure Analysis and Prevention 5 (4), pp. 34

September 11 and fracture mechanics - A retrospective
Cherepanov, G.P. 2005 International Journal of Fracture 132 (2), pp. L25-L26

Structural responses of World Trade Center under aircraft attacks
Omika, Y., Fukuzawa, E., Koshika, N., Morikawa, H., Fukuda, R. 2005 Journal of Structural Engineering 131 (1), pp. 6-15

Impact of the 2001 World Trade Center attack on critical interdependent infrastructures
Mendonça, D., Lee II, E.E., Wallace, W.A. 2004 Conference Proceedings - IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics 5, pp. 4053-4058

Use of high-efficiency energy absorbing device to arrest progressive collapse of tall building
Zhou, Q., Yu, T.X. 2004 Journal of Engineering Mechanics 130 (10), pp. 1177-1187

Progressive analysis procedure for progressive collapse
Marjanishvili, S.M. 2004 Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities 18 (2), pp. 79-85

Lessons learned on improving resistance of buildings to terrorist attacks
Corley, W.G. 2004 Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities 18 (2), pp. 68-78

Anatomy of a disaster: A structural investigation of the World Trade Center collapses
Abboud, N., Levy, M., Tennant, D., Mould, J., Levine, H., King, S., Ekwueme, C., (...), Hart, G. 2003 Forensic Engineering, Proceedings of the Congress, pp. 360-370

World Trade Center disaster: Damage/debris assessment
Thater, G.G., Panariello, G.F., Cuoco, D.A. 2003 Forensic Engineering, Proceedings of the Congress, pp. 383-392

How did the WTC towers collapse: A new theory
Usmani, A.S., Chung, Y.C., Torero, J.L. 2003 Fire Safety Journal 38 (6), pp. 501-533

Microstructural analysis of the steels from Buildings 7, & 1 or 2 from the World Trade Center
Biederman, R.R., Sullivan, E.M., Sisson Jr., R.D., Vander Voort, G.F. 2003 Microscopy and Microanalysis 9 (SUPPL. 2), pp. 550-551

Brannigan, F.L.
"WTC: Lightweight Steel and High-Rise Buildings"
Fire Engineering v.155, no. 4, (2002): 145-150.

Analysis of the thermal exposure in the impact areas of the World Trade Center terrorist attacks
Beyler, C., White, D., Peatross, M., Trellis, J., Li, S., Luers, A., Hopkins, D. 2003 Forensic Engineering, Proceedings of the Congress, pp. 371-382

Clifton, Charles G.
Elaboration on Aspects of the Postulated Collapse of the World Trade Centre Twin Towers
HERA: Innovation in Metals. 2001. 13 December 2001.

"Construction and Collapse Factors"
Fire Engineering v.155, no. 10, (2002): 106-108.

Bazant, Z.P., & Zhou, Y.
"Addendum to 'Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? - Simple Analysis" (pdf)
Journal of Engineering Mechanics v. 128, no. 3, (2002): 369-370.

Corbett, G.P.
"Learning and Applying the Lessons of the WTC Disaster"
Fire Engineering v.155, no. 10, (2002.): 133-135.

"Dissecting the Collapses"
Civil Engineering ASCE v. 72, no. 5, (2002): 36-46.

Eagar, T.W., & Musso, C.
"Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? Science, Engineering, and Speculation"
JOM v. 53, no. 12, (2001): 8-12.

Federal Emergency Management Agency, Therese McAllister, report editor.
World Trade Center Building Performance Study: Data Collection, Preliminary Observations, and Recommendations
(also available on-line)

Gabrielson, T.B., Poese, M.E., & Atchley, A.A.
"Acoustic and Vibration Background Noise in the Collapsed Structure of the World Trade Center"
The Journal of Acoustical Society of America v. 113, no. 1, (2003): 45-48.

"Collapse Lessons"
Fire Engineering v. 155, no. 10, (2002): 97-103

Marechaux, T.G.
"TMS Hot Topic Symposium Examines WTC Collapse and Building Engineering"
JOM, v. 54, no. 4, (2002): 13-17.

Monahan, B.
"World Trade Center Collapse-Civil Engineering Considerations"
Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction v. 7, no. 3, (2002): 134-135.

Newland, D.E., & Cebon, D.
"Could the World Trade Center Have Been Modified to Prevent Its Collapse?"
Journal of Engineering Mechanics v. 128, no. 7, (2002):795-800.

National Instititue of Stamdards and Technology: Congressional and Legislative Affairs
“Learning from 9/11: Understanding the Collapse of the World Trade Center”
Statement of Dr. Arden L. Bement, Jr., before Committee of Science House of Representatives, United States Congress on March 6, 2002.

Pinsker, Lisa, M.
"Applying Geology at the World Trade Center Site"
Geotimes v. 46, no. 11, (2001).
The print copy has 3-D images.

Public Broadcasting Station (PBS)
Why the Towers Fell: A Companion Website to the Television Documentary.
NOVA (Science Programming On Air and Online)

Post, N.M.
"No Code Changes Recommended in World Trade Center Report"
ENR v. 248, no. 14, (2002): 14.

Post, N.M.
"Study Absolves Twin Tower Trusses, Fireproofing"
ENR v. 249, no. 19, (2002): 12-14.

The University of Sydney, Department of Civil Engineering
World Trade Center - Some Engineering Aspects
A resource site.

"WTC Engineers Credit Design in Saving Thousands of Lives"
ENR v. 247, no. 16, (2001): 12.