Merged "Iron-rich spheres" - scienctific explanation?

Oystein said:
Jim has the equipment. It would cost money, in all fairness. Since this microspheres issue is in fact one of the very few issues from 9/11 twoofdom that I have not been able to account for to my own satisfaction, I might consider it worth a few extra bucks.
Click to expand...

Re: Iron in the concrete and spheres
The USGS study found most, but not all of the concrete samples to contain iron and there is a reference to expanded shale (the lightweight aggregate)
http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2005/1165/table_1.html

I checked some time ago the engineering specs (NCSTAR NIST) for the concrete mix (lightweight and standard weight) which they have, but is just a performance spec, not a design spec with the mix described. The specs called for the contractor supplied concrete mix to be submitted to the engineers for approval. This is standard but couldn't find a record of this submittal. Fly ash is sometimes added in small proportions to portland cement (depending upon price) but some engineers don't approve this.
I'm certain L. Robertson would know if fly ash was used in the mix.

Karl Kock prefabricated the truss assemblies covered with the galvanized metal pans deck in their shop. A lot of welding is done in a steel fabricator's shop and iron spheres could have deposited atop the deck onto which the concrete was poured.

The steel contracts awarded:
  • Fifty-five thousand tons including all exterior steel (columns and spandrels) from the ninth floor to the top-Pacific Car & Foundry Co., Seattle, Wash., $21,790,000.
  • Erecting the entire 192,000 tons of structural steel in the twin towers and the center's subgrade area-Karl Koch Erecting Co., Bronx, N.Y., $20 million.
  • Floor system-Laclede Steel Co., St. Louis, Mo., floor space trusses and miscellaneous steel, $6,650,000; Granite City Steel Co., Granite City, Ill., steel deck and power and telephone ducts, $1,889,000; arid Karl Koch Erecting Co., assembly and delivery of the deck panels combining the two components, $2.5 million.
Raw steel is shipped to some 15 fabricators around the country and from several foreign countries. (Unofficial estimates of foreign steel being used in the trade center range from 30 to 60% of the total.) The fabricators ship completed units to the Greenville railroad yard in New Jersey, just across the Hudson River, where they are stored before being trucked to the site. As of now, with 71,000 tons of steel in place and another 60,000 tons in Greenville, every piece has reached Greenville on time and in proper sequence.
Click to expand...
It wouldn't surprise me if the different fabricators used more than the two primer paints considered.
 
Last edited:
Oystein said:
...
This leaves me with two possible reasons for the increased amount of 5.87% iron spheres, compared to the 0.8%-1.6% iron reported by others:
  • Iron content is higher closer to GZ, including 130 Liberty St, due to the higher density and lower surface-to-volume ratio of iron spheres compared with average dust constituents
  • 5.87% iron-spheres is equivalent to a lower content of the element iron - maybe on the order of 2.5-5%
The first point could possibly verified by looking at data from the other dust studies with a view to finding a correlation between distance from GZ (and possibly direction on the compass, because of wind direction) and iron content.
Click to expand...

I just eyeballed the three dust studies cited in Jenkins' paper, and find my prediction that iron content should be higher closer to GZ not verified. :(
 
superlogicalthinker said:
Ok Chris I have decided to have faith in you. You have shown me you are at least trying to get the testing done. Still though.....they were strange. They didn't belong there. He should have reported them.

Someone asked for a photo of the spherical shape because they didn't beleive they were in that shape. No need for one now is there? Millette admits they were there.

Another point for the logical one! LOL
Click to expand...

Grow up.
 
superlogicalthinker said:
Well Chris says he has those samples from EPA tests. Those are the ones the allagations follow are they not?
Click to expand...

You are approaching Jamo levels of idiocy. When a scientist does a study they do not use ALL of the sample material they have. They use as little as practical so that if something goes wrong they have more so that they can repeat the tests. The remaining material is then labelled and stored in conditions where it will not deteriorate and can be used for further tests and research (new test methods arise and its possible future unexpected health issues may require it to be looked at again). The dust was not in short supply, post 911, so the chances they would have to reuse a test sample is zero.
 
superlogicalthinker said:
bro....the iron rich microspheres are the most important element in this whole topic. How can you say that the spheres are unimportant. That is just silly.
Click to expand...

stopdigging.jpg



Important to whom? Who in the real world cares less about them? :confused:
 
Thanks, BasqueArch, very interesting. It shows me how limited is my knowledge. Do you think that it is possible to ask L. Roberston how was it with fly ash in concrete? Our experience - in paint thread - with such inquiries are bad so far: no answers. In fact, it looks to be more simple to analyze real concrete now:cool:

Your note "It wouldn't surprise me if the different fabricators used more than the two primer paints considered" deserved attention in the paint thread. We have already discussed there that many fabricators/suppliers manufactured/delivered various steel elements to the construction site....
 
Last edited:
ozeco41 said:
I think you are overly generous and optimistic in pursuing truthers down this side track.

The record is simple. No matter how far you follow the truthers as they go way off track thay will still move the goalposts once you answer their question.

By all means enjoy pursuing your own interest in the chemistry stuff.

...but don't lose sight of the fact that the base claim this lot grew out of is the claim that there was CD at the WTC.

There has never been posted a prima facie case that CD could be plausible.

So Jones introduced thermite, arguably in order to bring some attention back to himself since Gage was stealing the limelight.

Still no plausible claim as how thermite could be used in a CD.

Then a marketing replay as Jones et al run "nano thermXte" which gets them another boost in attention. Then Jones disassociates himself from thermXte used for CD.

(there may be a link or two I missed in here)

Then microspheres as another shifted goalposts side track. Cross combined with "pulling it"....

So "What do I think?"

well, for starters why waste time feeding trolls --- it only encourages them at zero benefit to understanding WTC 9/11 collapses...:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Ozeco,
Do you have links to Jones's later backing away from the nanothermite argument? Jim Millette would need to see any changes in Jones's position because his final report on the dust will include Jonese's claims.
To all, I've asked Jim Millette some pretty ridiculous things, and he's been patient, so I can ask him about a sample of broken up concrete from WTC as well.
What the hey.
 
superlogicalthinker said:
the spheres could be from fly ash, from the lightweight concrete, but fly ash is not always used and there is no evidence to establish that it was used in the TT.
Click to expand...

Other than iron micro spheres in the dust?:D
If you want to claim it was as a result of the use of sooper nanny thermnight then first YOU have to exclude all other more likely sources. Please prove that fly ash was not used in the WTC flooring concrete.
 
Ivan Kminek said:
...
I am perhaps rather lost, as regards those iron concentrations (since it's not my hobby) Oystein . If there was 3 to 5 wt% of iron (spheres) measured/found somewhere in the dust, why to bother with those numbers so much? The vast majority of those iron (spheres) can't anyway have anything common with thermite.
Roughly: not counting steel, there was about 600 000 tons rubble and dust (mostly from WTC1/WTC2 concrete and drywalls) left after disaster; with the addition of rubble from other buildings, we have perhaps something like 800 000 tons of material. 5 % from this value represents 40 000 tons of iron. I think that even the craziest truther captured in some intensive treatment unit of well-guarded lunatic asylum can't claim that the most of this iron could come from thermitic reaction. Even 1 % figure is "no better": it still leads to some 8 000 tons of "thermitic iron". For me, it is apparent that the majority of all iron in the rubble (excluding construction steel) simply must originate from the buildings themselves (at least when we consider those iron concentrations in the dust between ca 1 and 5 %).
Or have I missed something important?
Click to expand...

No, you have of course not missed anything important. Echoing ozeco, there was no demolition, so we need not even think about how much thermite might have been used for demolition.

It's just a riddle posed by truthers, and one of the few I haven't figured out yet. Unsolved riddles are more interesting than the solved ones (maybe that's why wrinting up a decent paper takes so long with me - the riddle of the paint chips is solved, so I have a hard time staying focussed).

I think however that your numbers are too high :D

BasqueArch quotes a number of "entire 192,000 tons of structural steel in the twin towers" being erected (not produced) by Karl Koch of the Bronx. I believe this short tons (US units!), or 2000lbs/ton, and is equivalent to 87,089 metric tons of steel per tower.
Jenkins, in the paper I linked to, quotes G. Urich's estimate of 81,117 metric tons per tower - 7% off the contract figure, which I think is pretty good.
Urich estimates the total mass of one tower, including live loads, as 288,000 tons; I believe this includes basement levels - Jenkins quotes Urich's number above grade 217,671 metric tons. Let's go woth the larger number, then each tower has, according to Urich, 207,000 tons of materials other than steel. Two towers 414,000 tons. WTC 7 had about 40% the volume of WTC1, so add 83,000 tons, and we are close to 500,000 tons of material other than structural steel. The other buildings are not claimed to have been CDed, and probably contributed only a minor amount to the overall dust.

5% of 500,000 tons is 25,000 tons of molten iron or iron oxide from thermite.
1% of 500,000 tons is 5,000 tons of molten iron or iron oxide from thermite.
Let's go with the smaller amount (1%, 5,000 tons) and say that a typical thermite charge is 10kg and takes two ninja workers 15 minutes to install and wire at a structural member, including removing walls before and hiding their work after the rigging. I know, assumptions that are ridiculously biased in favour of a CD hypothesis. Then that's 250,000 FTE-hours total. An army of 1,000 riggers, each working 8 hours a day, would have taken a full month to install this much thermite. And this does not yet include the logistics of carrying all the thermite into the towers and up the elevators, which would require many more ninja workers.
If you feel that 1000 ninja workers (more than 2% of the total work force of the twin towers) is too much, then the time required to rigg the towers of course increases accordingly.

Nuff said.
 
Last edited:
superlogicalthinker said:
The floors are vacuumed many times during construction. They must be free of dust before any flooring can be laid down.
Click to expand...

Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur

please show that the steel floor pans were vacuumed before the concrete for poured. I'd bet that at most they were give a quick brush to remove wood scraps and remnants of the steel works lunches! There would be no reason to do more.
Vacuums would not be used until, perhaps, the carpet tiles were laid. And since I have lifted a few carpets over the years perhaps not even then!
 
:rolleyes:I have deleted my post you quoted above, Oystein, since I felt that those figures have probably been discussed many times here (and iron in rubble isn't going to be my "new hobby", since I would spent another tens of hours on this damned matter). Thanks for the more precise numbers about the rubble/dust weight.

As regards concentrations of iron: Wiki says that Portland cement contains 0-6 % of iron (as iron oxide) and fly ash (if any in WTC concrete) has something between ca 4 to 15 % of iron. (Drywalls, as the second important "source" of non-metallic rubble, seem to contain no iron). Using values closer to the upper limits, 1 % of iron in the dust/rubble seems to be quite appropriate. But 5 % is really too high...
 
Last edited:
sheeplesnshills said:
Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur

please show that the steel floor pans were vacuumed before the concrete for poured. I'd bet that at most they were give a quick brush to remove wood scraps and remnants of the steel works lunches! There would be no reason to do more.
Vacuums would not be used until, perhaps, the carpet tiles were laid. And since I have lifted a few carpets over the years perhaps not even then!
Click to expand...

Your speculation is the same as mine. I'm looking through the NIST report. Nothing about the use of fly ash I see.

And plus...the RJ Lee group was clear when they said the spheres were created "DURING the WCT event". The event is a metaphor for the destruction. It's pretty obvious.
 
sheeplesnshills said:
Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur

I am not making any claims so have nothing to prove............you however are claiming that this iron is unusual so You need to prove that it is. We'll wait......:D
Click to expand...

Your making the claim that it wasn't. Are you not? So prove your assertion. And I know your trying to keep my distracted by looking for something thats not even there. Nice try, but I know your play book all to well;)
 
Ivan Kminek said:
:rolleyes:I have deleted my post you quoted above, Oystein, since I felt that those figures have probably been discussed many times here (and iron in rubble isn't going to be my "new hobby", since I would spent another tens of hours on this damned matter). Thanks for the more precise numbers about the rubble/dust weight.

As regards concentrations of iron: Wiki says that Portland cement contains 0-6 % of iron (as iron oxide) and fly ash (if any in WTC concrete) has something between ca 4 to 15 % of iron. (Drywalls, as the second important "source" of non-metallic rubble, seem to contain no iron). Using values closer to the upper limits, 1 % of iron in the dust/rubble seems to be quite appropriate. But 5 % is really too high...
Click to expand...

Thank you Ivan for admitting that the percentage of Iron in the WTC dust is stangly high. Now lets find out why?
 
superlogicalthinker said:
Thank you Ivan for admitting that the percentage of Iron in the WTC dust is stangly high. Now lets find out why?
Click to expand...

Allow me one self-quote, SLT: "5 % from this value represents 40 000 tons of iron. I think that even the craziest truther captured in some intensive treatment unit of well-guarded lunatic asylum can't claim that the most of this iron could come from thermitic reaction."
You succeeded to escape? Congratulation and welcome to the real world (here in JREF):cool:
 
Ivan Kminek said:
As regards concentrations of iron: Wiki says that Portland cement contains 0-6 % of iron (as iron oxide) and fly ash (if any in WTC concrete) has something between ca 4 to 15 % of iron. (Drywalls, as the second important "source" of non-metallic rubble, seem to contain no iron). Using values closer to the upper limits, 1 % of iron in the dust/rubble seems to be quite appropriate. But 5 % is really too high...
Click to expand...

And too high is just as fatal to the twoofers as it means a silly amount of ThermXte had to have been used.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom