Norwegian scientist proposes new alternative theory

[Darkstar November]

This is all over the news now in europe. Materials expert Christian Simensen is proposing that explosions caused by molten aluminium mixing with water may have triggered the collapse of the towers.

"If my theory is correct, tonnes of aluminum ran down through the towers, where the smelt came into contact with a few hundred litres of water," Christian Simensen, a scientist at SINTEF, an independent technology research institute based in Norway, said in a statement released Wednesday."

"Simensen presented his theory at an international materials technology conference in San Diego, California, and has detailed his calculations in an article published in the trade journal Aluminum International Today.

"The aluminum industry had reported more than 250 aluminum -water explosions since 1980," he said.

In a controlled experiment carried out by Alcoa Aluminum , 20 kilos (44 pounds) of molten aluminum was allowed to react with 20 litres of water, along with a small quantity of rust.

"The explosion destroyed the entire laboratory and left a crater 30 metres (100 feet) in diameter," Simensen said."

Quotes are from canada.com.

w w w .canada.com/news/theory+collapse+Twin+Towers+study/5436052/story.html

w w w.news.com.au/technology/were-twin-towers-felled-by-chemical-blasts/story-e6frfro0-1226143261174
w w w.calgaryherald.com/story_print.html?id=5436122&sponsor=curriebarracks
w w w.popsci.com/science/article/2011-09/new-theory-world-trade-center-collapse-blames-explosive-chemical-reaction

 

[carlitos]

Note, truthy people reading this:

- Presented at a conference
- Published in a trade journal
- "all over the news"


I have no comment on the viability of the theory, just pointing out how it came to our attention.

 

[Travis]

But would the molten aluminum have contacted the water on the impact floors?

 

[ElMondoHummus]

From the PopSci link:

Simensen’s idea, presented at a materials technology conference in San Diego this week, is thus: after the planes impacted the WTC towers, tons of molten aluminum ran down into the floors below the impact sites, mingling with several hundred liters of water from the buildings’ fire sprinkler systems. This mix of aluminum and water is known to cause a chemical reaction that can not only boost temperatures but also put off combustible hydrogen in the process. Basically, it’s a recipe for a really hot explosion.

... But Simensen’s explanation is intriguing. It doesn’t dismiss the official report, but simply claims that it doesn’t tell the whole story. He says the aluminum industry has recorded more than 250 water-aluminum explosions since 1980, and that at one point aluminum maker Alcoa did an experiment involving just 44 pounds of molten aluminum and 20 liters of water (along with a small quantity of rust, which exacerbates the reaction). The resulting explosion destroyed the lab and left a 100-foot crater, he says.

That was under controlled conditions, but extrapolate that to the uncontrolled conditions inside the WTC towers just after the attacks. Jet fuselages contain roughly 33 tons aluminum alloy that melts at roughly 1,220 degrees, Simensen says, turning to a water-like liquid at nearly 1,400 degrees. When the aircraft hit, they exploded and were immediately trapped between floors where debris like plaster quickly melted around them, creating a kind of insulated oven that would push temperatures well north of aluminum’s melting point.

It's intriguing, to say the least. I think it might potentially be contradicted by the state of the steel in NCSTAR 1-3C, but it's interesting enough to not dismiss out of hand.

 

[ElMondoHummus]

And wow... the idiots are out in force at the PhyOrg link.

 

[brazenlilraisin]

Interesting idea, but I doubt it played any role in initiating either collapse. In fact, I think I can safely say thank FSM it didn't!

 

[sheeplesnshills]

This is all over the news now in europe. Materials expert Christian Simensen is proposing that explosions caused by molten aluminium mixing with water may have triggered the collapse of the towers.

"If my theory is correct, tonnes of aluminum ran down through the towers, where the smelt came into contact with a few hundred litres of water," Christian Simensen, a scientist at SINTEF, an independent technology research institute based in Norway, said in a statement released Wednesday."

"Simensen presented his theory at an international materials technology conference in San Diego, California, and has detailed his calculations in an article published in the trade journal Aluminum International Today.

"The aluminum industry had reported more than 250 aluminum -water explosions since 1980," he said.

In a controlled experiment carried out by Alcoa Aluminum , 20 kilos (44 pounds) of molten aluminum was allowed to react with 20 litres of water, along with a small quantity of rust.

"The explosion destroyed the entire laboratory and left a crater 30 metres (100 feet) in diameter," Simensen said."

Quotes are from canada.com.

w w w .canada.com/news/theory+collapse+Twin+Towers+study/5436052/story.html

w w w.news.com.au/technology/were-twin-towers-felled-by-chemical-blasts/story-e6frfro0-1226143261174
w w w.calgaryherald.com/story_print.html?id=5436122&sponsor=curriebarracks
w w w.popsci.com/science/article/2011-09/new-theory-world-trade-center-collapse-blames-explosive-chemical-reaction

I'm very dubious about this as there was no obvious explosion before the top parts of the buildings came down. If there had been there would be no need for all the silent thermite nonsense...........

 

[Jack by the hedge]

This is all over the news now in europe.

I started with the BBC and I can't find it.

 

[Sunstealer]

In a controlled experiment carried out by Alcoa Aluminium, 20 kilos of molten aluminium was allowed to react with 20 litres of water, along with a small quantity of rust.

"The explosion destroyed the entire laboratory and left a crater 30 metres in diameter," Mr Simensen said.

So a controlled experiment destroyed the entire laboratory in which it was conducted? Why would any one conduct such an experiment within a lab? The dangers of water and liquid metals, at high temperatures, are well known.

Is there any report corroborating this? Surely such a failure would be examined by a national body on safety grounds.

Firing a rocket with fire-retardant that could coat the aircraft body could also help prevent metal alloy from melting.

That last quoted makes me raise my eyebrows - on following the links briefly I see the following quote:

A paper which undercuts the conspiracy theories about the collapse of the World Trade Center was featured on TV.

http://www.aluminiumtoday.com/news/view/world-trade-center-paper-on-tv/aluminium-news/

On the face of it (and that means a cursory glance) I am left scratching my noggin.

I'll try to read more to get the full picture.

From the above it appears that this report claims to counter conspiracy theory, however at first glance, I'm extremely sceptical of the claims.

It doesn't seem to add up. I'll spend a bit more time looking at the links later.

 

[ergo]

They know the current set of patchwork theories are neither compatible nor viable and that it's just a matter of time before the wider population catches on, so they needed something new, with molten aluminum, explosions, and catastrophic failure.

 

[The Big Dog]

They know the current set of patchwork theories are neither compatible nor viable and that it's just a matter of time before the wider population catches on, so they needed something new, with molten aluminum, explosions, and catastrophic failure.

Who the **** is "they" ergo?

Note, the opening post does not support any idiotic theory the truthers have come up with.

Anyway, post "bedunker," chuckles, it makes you seem smart.

 

[Sabrina]

His theory is interesting... but it fails in one key area.

There were no loud enough explosions immediately prior to the start of the collapse to account for it. Plus, his theory says the molten aluminum "ran down through the towers", implying that the chemical reaction occurred many floors below the impact zones... so why did the collapses BEGIN at the impact zones?

 

[Dave Rogers]

This whole thing appears to be on a similar level to Genady Cherepanov's fracture wave theory; it's an attempt to derive a non-conspiratorial explanation of a phenomenon that never actually occurred in the WTC collapses, but which truthers have repeatedly claimed so often that it's started to factor into people's starting assumptions about the collapses. In Cherepanov's case it was collapse times consistent with the fall time from the roof level of an object in freefall, which truthers asserted for a long time but which we know to be wildly inaccurate. In this case it's the explosions immediately preceding the collapse, which truthers continue to claim to this day but which we know to be completely imaginary. It's bad enough that truthers pollute political and historical debate, but we're seeing their misrepresentations starting to pollute scientific enquiry as well here.

Dave

 

[waypastvne]

The author would be talking about a hydrogen explosion... right ?

There is no evidence for a hydrogen explosion prior to the collapse.

 

[leftysergeant]

At most, aluminum/water reaction would have added fuel to the fires in the piles.

That there were no explsoins of significant power on the impacted floors makes this an unlikely cause of collapse.

 

[Horatius]

At most, aluminum/water reaction would have added fuel to the fires in the piles.

That would be my reaction as well. There were no explosions, so that's right out, but based on this:

This mix of aluminum and water is known to cause a chemical reaction that can not only boost temperatures but also put off combustible hydrogen in the process.

The aluminum and water likely wouldn't have been in cohesive enough mass to form good conditions for an explosion, but a more distributed mix could very well have provided additional fuel to the fires, as well as adding heat from the chemical reaction in the first place.

 

[leftysergeant]

The aluminum and water likely wouldn't have been in cohesive enough mass to form good conditions for an explosion, but a more distributed mix could very well have provided additional fuel to the fires, as well as adding heat from the chemical reaction in the first place.

I'm thinking of super-heated steam over molten aluminum.

 

[Darkstar November]

I did a little digging and it seems that these things can really do some damage if the conditions are right. Information about this subjects seems to be quite easily available.

One article from "Aluminium Times", July/August 2009.

"Whenever two liquids, with widely different temperatures, come into contact, an explosion can result. This is purely a physical phenomenon, but with aluminium there is an additional concern because it is a very reactive element that has a strong chemical attraction for oxygen, as evidenced in its naturallyoccurring compounds. Just as a large an amount of energy is required in reduction cell electrolysis to break down the aluminium-oxygen bonds of its oxide form to produce metallic aluminium. This energy is released dramatically if the metal is able to recombine with the oxygen from either water or air. The energy released when 0.5 kg of aluminium fully reacts with oxygen, according to the reaction equation set out below, is equivalent to detonating 1.4 kg of trinitrotoluene (TNT)."

2Al+3H2O = Al2O3+H2 + Energy

The article also shows a picture of a chinese aluminum factory where this kind of explosion supposedly occurred killing instantly 9 and injuring 64 other workers.

But of course there seems to be no evidence for this kind of large scale event taking place on 9/11.

 

[R.Mackey]

Not new. Max Photon's rather comical theory had this as a centerpiece, about three years ago.

Obviously it didn't happen. Failure modes in the steel would have been unmistakably different. (/cue "all the st33l was sh!pp3d to CHINA!!11!!one!")

 

[Sam.I.Am]

Again, no sounds of an explosion (not even a hydrogen gas explosion). There would also have been entire floors worth of windows being blown out and that didn't happen either. It might have provided fuel for the fires as it burned off just as quickly as it was produced but there would be no easily identifiable evidence of that happening in the midst of a such large office fire like that which was seen on 9/11. All it would do, even if it were somehow proven to be true that hydrogen gas was produced in this manner, is that the truthers were wrong (yet again) about their claims of how office fires could not become hot enough to weaken the steel.