Molten Steel

[boloboffin]

Find me anywhere in the NIST report where temps exceeding 250C were noted.

Since you wont find any such mention, 1200F is way, way, way hotter than anything NIST noted.

How do you account for such a discrepancy???

And with reports like this in the public domain, how do you account for NIST not being extremely interested in them(were they honest they certainly would have been).But we know they were not honest.

In short, there is a mountain of evidence which in no uncertain terms proves something other than hydrocarbon fire was at work in the towers, and NIST went to unreal lengths to ignore such evidence.

The thermal maps of the Pile clearly indicate high temperatures spots. They were from fires allowed to burn in the first couple of weeks. The fires were allowed to burn because dumping huge quantities of water onto the Pile was not conducive to rescuing people trapped under the Pile. The fires were burning off of two large skyscrapers' worth of office and construction material.

Think about two wood fires. One is a small campfire, the other is a huge bonfire. Which fire is burning hotter? Technically someone might claim they are burning exactly as hot as each other, because the fuel is the same. But the bonfire is actually burning much hotter because there is so much fuel being consumed at the same time. The same holds true under the Pile (or, for that matter, in the buildings). You are clinging to the average temperature of hydrocarbon fires and saying that the fire could never get that hot. You are not taking into account the size of the fires and the availability of fuel.

 

[Holler Hoojer]

Let's see if I can pre-empt Chris's reply:

[c7]
That is not evidence that there was no molten steel at the site!

Many qualified people said there was molten steel. Red hot steel is not molten and 1,200ºF is not hot enough to melt steel.

You are claiming Mark Loiseaux is a liar when he said there was molten steel at the site.

Thermite is the only possible explanation for the molten steel.

Are you denying that there was molten steel?
[/c7]

How did I do?

Dave

I'm gonna go way out on a limb here and guess that none of the CTs have seen a steel furnace. Dripping steel? Gimme a break. Drooping steel is easy; dripping steel is really hard.

 

[roundhead]

The thermal maps of the Pile clearly indicate high temperatures spots. They were from fires allowed to burn in the first couple of weeks. The fires were allowed to burn because dumping huge quantities of water onto the Pile was not conducive to rescuing people trapped under the Pile. The fires were burning off of two large skyscrapers' worth of office and construction material.

Think about two wood fires. One is a small campfire, the other is a huge bonfire. Which fire is burning hotter? Technically someone might claim they are burning exactly as hot as each other, because the fuel is the same. But the bonfire is actually burning much hotter because there is so much fuel being consumed at the same time. The same holds true under the Pile (or, for that matter, in the buildings). You are clinging to the average temperature of hydrocarbon fires and saying that the fire could never get that hot. You are not taking into account the size of the fires and the availability of fuel.

 

[Sunstealer]

Has roundhead just realised that Dave Roger's post was a parody of C7 or did he realise and tried for the wind up?

 

[BigAl]

Find me anywhere in the NIST report where temps exceeding 250C were noted.

So what?

Combustion of jet fuel and/or normal office contents burns at upwards of 1700F. There was lots of open flame shown in the towers. The fact that nobody could get a thermometer to the 80th floor before the buildings collapsed is irrelevant.

Source, for example:

FDNY sets fire to a to-be-demolished appt building equipped with sensors.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8682781475859149895&hl=en

Fire chief cites 1700F temps.​

Notice that one of the firemen in the video has "NIST Fire Research" on his bunker jacket.

 

[johnny karate]

In short, there is a mountain of evidence which in no uncertain terms proves something other than hydrocarbon fire was at work in the towers, and NIST went to unreal lengths to ignore such evidence.

And yet such blatant fraud has not caused an uproar in the structural engineering community.

Do you suppose the world's population of structural engineers have failed to speak out about this becasue they are all cowards in the same way you believe the FDNY to be cowards?

 

[Dave Rogers]

Find me anywhere in the NIST report where temps exceeding 250C were noted.

The fire simulations in NCSTAR 1-5F show colour contour temperature plots up to 1,000ºC, with substantial areas showing these temperatures. Pages 91, 93, 95, 97, 99 and 101-106 inclusive, and the following discussion, note temperatures in excess of 1,000ºC.

Since you wont find any such mention,

Wrong.

1200F is way, way, way hotter than anything NIST noted.

Wrong.

How do you account for such a discrepancy???

There isn't one.

Your extraordinary effort to transcend the usual levels of truther ignorance, stupidity and belief in your own infallibility are much appreciated.

Dave

 

[roundhead]

The fire simulations in NCSTAR 1-5F show colour contour temperature plots up to 1,000ºC, with substantial areas showing these temperatures. Pages 91, 93, 95, 97, 99 and 101-106 inclusive, and the following discussion, note temperatures in excess of 1,000ºC.



Wrong.



Wrong.



There isn't one.

Your extraordinary effort to transcend the usual levels of truther ignorance, stupidity and belief in your own infallibility are much appreciated.

Dave

show me where in the NIST report they found any steel subjected to more than 250c.............you said i was wrong above, show me where i was, kindly cite the passage in the NIST report..........

 

[johnny karate]

show me where in the NIST report they found any steel subjected to more than 250c.

Do you think the structural engineering community has overlooked such glaring flaws because they are cowards afraid to tell the truth in much the same way you've characterized the FDNY as cowards?

 

[roundhead]

Do you think the structural engineering community has overlooked such glaring flaws because they are cowards afraid to tell the truth in much the same way you've characterized the FDNY as cowards?

Start your own thread about the quote i used in your link and i will be glad to respond to it. But its off topic for this thread.

I asked for somebody to post a temp higher than 250 NIST used to describe any WTC steel they looked at. If you arent going to show me otherwise, my point stands.

 

[Christopher7]

Can people ever make a mistake in your world? Not accepting the claim of an eyewitness is not equivalent to calling someone a liar.

We are not talking about one eyewitness, there were many credible eyewitnesses and credible witnesses that said they were told of molten metal/steel.

 

[Christopher7]

The fire simulations in NCSTAR 1-5F show colour contour temperature plots up to 1,000ºC, with substantial areas showing these temperatures. Pages 91, 93, 95, 97, 99 and 101-106 inclusive, and the following discussion, note temperatures in excess of 1,000ºC.
Dave

Those are gas temperatures, not steel temperatures.

 

[lapman]

Those are gas temperatures, not steel temperatures.

According to your standard, that is the steel temperature. Remember, you're the one that states 4500 degree thermite = 4500 degree steel. So, 1000 degree gas temp = 1000 degree steel. Again, this is your standard, not mine.

 

[beachnut]

We are not talking about one eyewitness, there were many credible eyewitnesses and credible witnesses that said they were told of molten metal/steel.

You need to make a list of first hand molten steel people and then verfy what they really saw.
You understand that molten means glowing?

Then you need to say what it means? Oh, you say themite, but thermite is a delusion of Jones he was fired from teaching for making up lies.

 

[roundhead]

You need to make a list of first hand molten steel people and then verfy what they really saw.

Then you need to say what it means? Oh, you say themite, but thermite is a delusion of Jones he was fired from teaching for making up lies.

The fact remains that office fires dont produce molten steel. As the OCT states those are what brought down the towers, it obvious SOMETHING else was at work to create those temps.
What i personally am not sure, but i am sure it wasnt office fires.

 

[stateofgrace]

The fact remains that office fires dont produce molten steel. As the OCT states those are what brought down the towers, it obvious SOMETHING else was at work to create those temps.
What i personally am not sure, but i am sure it wasnt office fires.

Really ?

Underground it was still so hot that molten metal dripped down the sides of the wall from Building 6. (Kenneth Holden, Commissioner of the New York City Department of Design and Construction)

RICH GARLOCK: Going below, it was smoky and really hot. We had rescue teams with meters for oxygen and carbon dioxide. They also had temperature monitors. Here WTC 6 is over my head. The debris past the columns was red-hot, molten, running

http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc_molten_steel.html

So, where did this this molten metal come from ?

 

[phunk]

[FONT=&quot]
NIST FAQ August 30, 2006
Pure liquid aluminum would be expected to appear silvery. However, the molten metal was very likely mixed with large amounts of hot, partially burned, solid organic materials (e.g., furniture, carpets, partitions and computers) which can display an orange glow, [/FONT]

This is baseless speculation. There is no case of this occurring and no scientific evidence to establish that it can occur.

What part of this is baseless speculation? That burning organic materials can create glowing orange coals? Or that flowing molten aluminum could carry those coals?

 

[Wolrab]

The fact remains that office fires dont produce molten steel. As the OCT states those are what brought down the towers, it obvious SOMETHING else was at work to create those temps.
What i personally am not sure, but i am sure it wasnt office fires.

Who the hell says molten steel brought down the towers? Who claims steel has to be heated that much to fail?

 

[Holler Hoojer]

The fact remains that office fires dont produce molten steel. As the OCT states those are what brought down the towers, it obvious SOMETHING else was at work to create those temps.
What i personally am not sure, but i am sure it wasnt office fires.

Well, you have to look at that a little bit more closely. What do you mean by "molten steel"? Normally, that means liquid, flowing easily as on a casting floor. Did anyone actually see steel flowing? Or did they just see glowing, plastic steel?

An ordinary wood fire, such as you might have in your fireplace, easily goes to 1150 K. Add a blower (including natural ones - early blast furnaces were situated in much the same way a skyscraper is so they could receive natural blasts) and you can get 1400-1500 K without much difficulty. Now, if you're adding hydrocarbon gases (jet fuel, carpeting, furniture, etc), you normally see temperatures nearer 2000 K.

So, what happens to structural steel at these temperatures? Well, figure half its tensile strength (or yield strength if you will) is gone by 800 K. Somewhere in the neighborhood of, say 1600 K, you've got a limp noodle.
If you should add a little aluminum (there was some in the WTC), that steel might start to run, but that could only be localized (these were isolated columns and beams, not a cupola).

You can do a little experiment, by the way. Build a fire with pieces of wood, carpet, tile, whatever. Add a good dollop of kerosene to start it all, then add just a wee breeze and keep the mass agitated. Put a piece of ordinary steel (say 1008) in that fire and wait. Bet you a month's worth of chocolate malteds the steel gets soft enough to bend by hand within a half hour.

 

[beachnut]

The fact remains that office fires dont produce molten steel. As the OCT states those are what brought down the towers, it obvious SOMETHING else was at work to create those temps.
What i personally am not sure, but i am sure it wasnt office fires.

You are posting in the molten/glowing steel thread and you have on clue how to tie molten steel, steel that is glowing from simple office fires, to 911 and your MIB failed conspiracy theories. So it was office fires and jet fuel, but you are so sure it wasn’t based on hearsay, lies and fantasy. But it was office fires set with the heat of jet fuel equal to 315 TONS of TNT in each tower delivered by aircraft with the punch of kinetic energy of equal to 1300 and 2093 pounds of TNT.

Got physics? Nope, you have hearsay, lies and fantasy to form delusions so you can apologize for terrorists who murdered people on 911.

You want to blame other people instead of the terrorists who did it and you have no clue what molten steel has to do with 911.

You want to use thermite, which was not at the WTC for the WTC destruction set by people you can’t define or name. What is new after 7 years for your delusions?