9/11: WTC High Temperatures & Molten Steel Video!

Originally posted by Griff
Wouldn't the same principal apply to steel as well? I'm not a thermodynamics guy, so that is a real question.

I would imagine it would, while it is possible to superheat materials, this requires a lack of nucleation sites in order to 'force' the material to keep a certain state.

Even so, this would not apply in this situation as the steel would have to remain at 1500C as parts of it melted away. There's no indication of any temperatures above 1000C, which is a completely expected temperature within fires. Maybe I have misunderstood your point.

edit: Re-read your post and I can see what you're saying now, you are saying that because the temperature of the eutectic wasn't mentioned, it could exceed 1000C. Well it's possible, but if it approached 1500C we would see a different melting pattern rather than inter-granular penetration (disclaimer: NOT A MATERIALS SCIENTIST). If it had approached Thermite temperatures (2500C) then the beam would be obviously marked and damaged.

[edit on 2-9-2008 by exponent]

reply to post by Griff


You'd have to allow for the size of the steel members involved and the thermal conductivity of steel. It's totally possible to melt part of a single piece of steel and the thermal resistance makes huge temperature gradients possible.

What FEMA found was that iron sulphide was formed on the surface by prolonged heating in a sulphurous environment and iron sulphide has a much lower melting point than pure iron IE within the range of observed temperatures (700C-1000C) so the metal was corroded away at an accelerated rate.

reply to post by Pilgrum


sounds like you've decribed chemical erosion.

something like what thermite would do to steel.

Originally posted by billybob
sounds like you've decribed chemical erosion.

something like what thermite would do to steel.

Thermite melts steel, it produces 2500C+ temperatures and the result of the reaction is 1500C iron. There is no evidence of this occuring.

reply to post by Griff


well, SOME of the metal in that sample turned into a GAS, so going molten isn't hot enough.

what temperature does steel turn into GAS!? even with sulphur to speed up the process, it must be hotter than 1000˚C.

Originally posted by Griff



Wrong one.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Read through that thread and please tell me there wasn't molten steel found.

Griff,

The video was removed. I believe that was the "meteorite" that I was talking about. The paper was not "unburned" as I stated. But there were parts of it where you could read words. I am curious how paper this close to molten steel would survive.



Preserving The WTC Wreckage
A Visit to Hangar 17
by Beth Fertig

Charles Gargano, vice chairman of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which owns the hangar and the Trade Center Site. Gargano says the compression is actually 4 stories that have been crushed into a jagged object four feet high.

GATT: This is a book. You can find a book inside. You can read letters on these little papers and for some reason they’re still here.

BETH: You can actually make out words on some of these tiny pieces of carbonized paper. The word representative, action, employment.

www.wnyc.org...

reply to post by exponent


I'm not so sure.

If I have a block of ice and I put a flame to it that is 100C, the intergranular melting will show that block of ice never reached above 0C.

If I took an equivalent block of ice and put a flame to it that is 10,000C, the intergranular melting will show that block of ice never reached above 0C.

The difference would be the time to take to melt obviously.

It's called latent heat.

reply to post by ThroatYogurt


Try the second video. These are two totally different meteorites.

www.youtube.com...

Here's the first video. Notice the rusted steel in your picture as oppossed to the total grey mass of the video I linked to.

Two totally different "meteorites".

reply to post by Griff


The 18 second clip does not help much. How many of these were found?

Originally posted by Griff
It's called latent heat.

I'm not ignorant of this concept, but it turns out I was wrong about melting, it turns out nucleation is only important in boiling.

Even so, we're not talking about a state change here. The steel analysed does not show signs of being near 1500C which is the melting point of steel, it shows signs of approaching 1000C, which is well below the melting point of steel.

I do understand what you're saying, that if steel was evaporated or melted off, only the melted section would show temperatures exceeding the steel's melting point. However, this is not what we see, we see steel experiencing temperatures well below its melting point with a relatively thorough explanation of what happened.

Originally posted by Griff
Two totally different "meteorites".

I'm reasonably sure these are the same item, but I will do some more research into it. I've certainly seen this video before being used to support theories using pictures similar to those posted above.

Photos of molten steel.

i114.photobucket.com...

i114.photobucket.com...


Video of how hot the debris pile was as stated by a Fire Chief.

www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by Seymour Butz
They friends of yours?

Can I meet them?

Gee more proof that beleivers cannot stay on topic. When they cannot debate something they try to change the subject.

reply to post by ULTIMA1


Lighten up hoss.

I just wanted to see what photos you had in there and noticed this little treasure trove.

Originally posted by Seymour Butz
Lighten up hoss.

Well we are here to talk 9/11 not photos.

You guys are always jumping on me to post facts and evidence, i expect the same.

[edit on 2-9-2008 by ULTIMA1]

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

You guys are always jumping on me to post facts and evidence, i expect the same.

Not me, I never ask you for anything. I'm just not interested anymore in your copy/paste responses. You bring nothing to the discussion, IMHO.

Besides, I have no interest in anything you have to say until you can provide proof of your claim that an F-4 is mostly steel. Until then, I consider everything you have to say as false.

Originally posted by Seymour Butz
Besides, I have no interest in anything you have to say until you can provide proof of your claim that an F-4 is mostly steel. Until then, I consider everything you have to say as false.

I told you to U2U me, i am not gonig to post on here off topic.



[edit on 2-9-2008 by ULTIMA1]

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
How many of these were found?

Why isn't one enough to dispell the myth of no molten metal at GZ?

Also, isn't it you that has a brother who was there? If so, why not ask him?

Originally posted by exponent
Even so, we're not talking about a state change here. The steel analysed does not show signs of being near 1500C which is the melting point of steel, it shows signs of approaching 1000C, which is well below the melting point of steel.

Thermate causes the steel's melting temperature to lower I believe.

However, this is not what we see, we see steel experiencing temperatures well below its melting point with a relatively thorough explanation of what happened.

Thermate causes the exact same thing you describe here. Thermate has known properties and precedent to back it up. A natural, chaotic eutectic mixture not so much.