Melting steel?

a reply to: wildb

World Financial Center 3 (WFC 3)

Many of my friends from a neighboring city fire department were in that building doing searches
and putting out some fires started by the debris

They did not hear or see any explosions

Were pulled back after 3PM when collapse zone was set up around WTC 7

a reply to: wildb

The fires were mostly out before the collapse , we know that for sure.. it's a fact... MOSTLY OUT..

Jeez my friends WHO WERE AT THE SCENE say different........

I go with with my brother firemen.........

a reply to: firerescue

I go with with my brother firemen.........

So will I...

It's so obvious. You people who defend the official narrative have your head's in the sand. I remember the day of 9/11. I didn't watch much TV then and I answered the door, a friend came in and said do you know we've been attacked? I turned on the "bunny ear" television and got a grainy image on my local channel 11. I was absolutely shocked like everyone else. But what didn't add up was when I left for a minute and came back the media was saying both towers fell but weren't showing footage. I was getting ready to witness two buildings broke off at the top and smoking, I thought. The whole buildings disappeared though. There is no way the small sections on top destroyed the other 80 floors. Pancake/weakened truss theory people can get lost. What happened to the concrete core?

It didn't add up then and it doesn't add up now. I actually thought 10 years ago there would eventually be a real investigation. I have learned a lot since then.

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: smurfy

There were no pools of molten steel at ground zero because there were nothing at ground zero capable of producing such pools.

Whatever you say, but please explain in great detail why not in a few seconds or so. BTW, why do you keep chimping on about thermate, I have not mentioned it at all. Forbye that, have you not considered any other malicious possibility, or just that it's impossible? I'm not sure what you mean



The RJ Lee Group.

a reply to: wildb

Now, let's take a look here.

Photo: WTC 1 Fire

Photo: WTC 2 Fire

And, as a reminder.

Why the World Trade Center Buildings Collapsed: A Fire Chief ’s Assessment

The jet collapsed the ceilings and scraped most of the spray-on fire retarding asbestos from the steel trusses. The steel truss floor supports probably started to fail quickly from the flames and the center steel supporting columns severed by plane parts heated by the flames began to buckle, sag, warp and fail. Then the top part of the tower crashed down on the lower portion of the structure. This pancake collapse triggered the entire cascading collapse of the 110-story structure.

vincentdunn.com...

So what is the consensus on where the molten metal came from in the rubble, which firefighters said was flowing "like lava"?

originally posted by: firerescue
a reply to: wildb
Were pulled back after 3PM when collapse zone was set up around WTC 7

What?!?!?! How did anyone know that WT7 was going to fall, let alone set up a "prior knowledge" collapse zone? Do you realize what you just typed? This is exactly what my last post was referring to. Absurd levels of willful ignorance or denial.

originally posted by: BiffWellington
So what is the consensus on where the molten metal came from in the rubble, which firefighters said was flowing "like lava"?

a reply to: smurfy

Whatever you say,...

Working with metals was a specialty of mine as an airframe technician.

.. but please explain in great detail why not in a few seconds or so. BTW, why do you keep chimping on about thermate,...

Because there are claims that thermite was responsible for pools of molten metal, when in fact, thermite burns out in seconds, not days, weeks, or months later.

...Forbye that, have you not considered any other malicious possibility, or just that it's impossible?

To put it simply, 9/11 had nothing to do with a government conspiracy, especially since numerous warnings flowing in from around the world were pointing their fingers at Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda, which they would later admit their responsibility for 9/11.

300 series steel will still be 300 series steel after you heat it and then cool it. If you heat it to its melting point and cool it, it is still 300 series steel. If you weld it you may see some carbide precipitation in the heat affected zone of the weld and you may see a slight difference at the grain boundary. Both are negligible in terms of tensile strength.

Tensile strength begins to drop above 100F. Failure is not linear. Once the steel begins to move due to heat there is a bias created. A stress riser forms at the bend. This riser is the focus of additional stresses related to the initial fail component and the additional stresses related to the complex structure. Where initially the stress load was spread across the beam evenly now the load is focused on the stress riser and the beam becomes a lever against its own tensile capacity.

Imagine applying force to the ends of a perfectly straight steel bar. Imagine how much force it would take to compress that bar. Now imagine the same scenario but the bar has a slight bulge in the center. Now imagine how much damage would result if the same amount of force was applied to the ends again.

The steel beams didn't have to melt. They only had to lose enough tensile strength to no longer be effective. Fires like the ones at the WTC could easily do that. When one part of the structure fails, it is much easier to take the rest down. Unfortunate, but true.

“And this, of course, is the central problem with conspiracy theorists — once you inflexibly accept that something is a conspiracy, any contrary evidence has the paradoxical effect of making your case stronger. Every contradiction deepens the conspiracy.” -Chuck Klosterman

a reply to: Vroomfondel

The steel beams didn't have to melt. They only had to lose enough tensile strength to no longer be effective. Fires like the ones at the WTC could easily do that. When one part of the structure fails, it is much easier to take the rest down. Unfortunate, but true.

That is correct! Look what a typical fire can do to steel.

Photo: Fire Weakens Steel

originally posted by: skyeagle409
Working with metals was a specialty of mine as an airframe technician.

This is what I asked you to explain,
"There were no pools of molten steel at ground zero because there were nothing at ground zero capable of producing such pools."

Your reply above explains, quite frankly sod all, you could be building Greenhouses for Walmart with that CV.

RJ Lee Group , 3180* F nuff said, but keep ignoring that..folks..

a reply to: skyeagle409

What happened to the concrete? Show me what fire does to 425,000 cubic yards (930,000,000 kg) of a concrete core? Please tell me what happened to the concrete so I can go back to sleep. Please tell me how a concrete core of more than 2050299038.32lbs, 1025149.519tons disappears by external truss failure?

" The 425,000 cubic yards of concrete used in building the World Trade Center is enough to build a five-foot wide sidewalk from New York City to Washington, DC." - hypertextbook.com...

Where did it go? TWICE?????

a reply to: DeceptioVisus

The core was steel.

originally posted by: SuburbanD
a reply to: and14263

CGI planes

....


SuburbanD...I was trying to give your post 14 stars but it wouldn't let me....

The steel beams didn't have to melt. They only had to lose enough tensile strength to no longer be effective

yes, but in this case all 4 sides (even the undamaged sides) had to of been weakened at almost the exact same rate otherwise the top of the building would have fallen off sideways.

The floor of the building was approximately 210 ft by 210 ft, the plane that hit it was approximately 180 ft long. That means that the wall opposite (and 210 ft away) from the impact point had to weaken at the same rate as the impacted wall that sustained the impact and initial explosion.
another way to look at it is like this, the wall that sustained the impact and initial explosion suffered little to no structural damage in the impact and explosion,otherwise it would have already been weaker than the opposite wall and would have succumbed to the heat from the burning jet fuel faster and would have fallen first.
Does that seem very believable to you?

Demo crews really need to see how much steel and concrete reinforced deconstruction they can do with a couple of large hollow aluminum projectiles and some outwardly burning jet fuel. Likewise, if they would just study building 7 they would just need a couple of Bic lighters to bring down 47 stories of modern engineering. They are wasting a lot of money with explosives timers and det cord.