It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by HowardRoark
at some point as the liguid dispersed, the right vapor air mixture is reached. . . Kabloom!
Originally posted by bsbray11
Originally posted by DoomX
Is there a certain amount of time needed to be called a "withstand" ?
Yeah. If they didn't fall immediately after the impacts then they withstood them. In fact, look up the word "impact". Notice that nothing inherent about the word itself involves fire of any sort.
Here's an interesting point on the fires, though: they apparently didn't heat the steel to some critical temperature until after the jet fuel had already burned away much earlier and they'd gone from fuel-efficient (lighter smoke) to more inefficient (darker smoke outputs). Considering less inefficient means less combusted hydrocarbons and less heat, that's a kind of puzzler.
Originally posted by mark ten
my apologies if some of this has been addressed before : i have three kids and two jobs and get onto ATS ...erm not very often...
1. Burning Aviation fuel creates intense heat and pressure. One 45 gallon drum is enough to generate heathly respect in the open let alone inside a building. It is also able to spall concrete and degrade it, exposing sections and exploiting gaps.
2. A combustible area such as an office does not have to be directly connected to another area for that area to ignite. The fire gases can contain enough heat to induce pyrolisis in another place.
3. Water expands into steam by a ratio of 3400:1 therefore a 5 litre water cooler makes ...erm...17000 litres of steam plus each floor had a fire suppressant sprinkler system both ( as i understand it ) dry riser and gravity fed. Therefore it is reasonably safe to assume that there was a lot of water and steam pressure in and between floors.
4. However this pressure from steam and fire does not HAVE to be sufficient to blow out windows. If the oxygen levels in the fire areas below the main impact are low enough then the fire will die back but will not be extinguished. As the main building began to collapse, oxygen was entrained and the flammable mixture exited by the weakest routes ie improperly manufactured or fitted windows, ducts, stairwells and exposed joints in the steelwork and concrete.
like i said... its taken me over an hour to type this cos jr keeps waking up...
Originally posted by Masisoar
Still looking for a reasonable answer for the squibs or jets of air being pushed out the sides of the building as it was collapsing.
Originally posted by Vushta
Dark smoke doesn't necessarily mean low temps. The color of the smoke depends on what material is in combustion.
The fuel was not in the offices where the jetting debris blows out autonoumously and containment of the fuel vapor was not sufifcient to create pressues that would blow concrete out windows 60 feet.
The black smoke coming from the towers shows that little oxygen was available. Temperatures were low.
The black smoke coming from the towers shows that little oxygen was available. Temperatures were low.
Originally posted by ChristopheraThe fuel was not in the offices where the jetting debris blows out autonoumously and containment of the fuel vapor was not sufifcient to create pressues that would blow concrete out windows 60 feet.
Originally posted by mark teni didn't say there was any Aviation fuel in these offices. Presumably they had desks, carpets, pictures, copius quantities of paper, plastics etc etc... If there was any transfer of the IMMENSE heat produced by the burning aviation fuel it is not unreasonable to expect that pyrolysis would occur.
Originally posted by ChristopheraThe black smoke coming from the towers shows that little oxygen was available. Temperatures were low.
Originally posted by mark tenerm... black smoke does not mean temperatures were low (and what exactly do you mean by 'low') Avaition fuel burns with an acrid, black smoke. Fires in a backdraft situation will also burn with a black smoke. It means that there is insufficient oxygen to support combustion NOT that temperatures are low.
Originally posted by Christophera"pulverization of the buildings contents must be explained. Collapse does not explain these things, demolition does."
Originally posted by mark tendo you mean that to "pulverize" all the stories of the building there must have been charges laid on all floors? Someone has already posted that when a building is CD they leave the debris as rubble because it is easier to clear away... So Demoltion = rubble ...what = pulverization?
Jet fuel was dumped on impact. The fires produced lighter smoke at that time.
About 15 minutes pass, and at this time even NIST admits most of the jet fuel had burned away. Suddenly the smoke turns darker.
I ask a question with a very obvious answer: why did the smoke turn darker when the jet fuel finished burning away? Some kind of correlation there, maybe, or just another *coincidence*?
When the jet fuel burned away, was the fire suddenly fuel-rich, or lower on fuel, or was it just as well-fueled as when the planes first impacted?
People don't like being wrong, I guess.
Originally posted by Masisoar
Why don't you do research and find out, Vushta.
We've already had a huge discussion on this before, use the search button and look around bud, enlighten yourself.
About 15 minutes pass, and at this time even NIST admits most of the jet fuel had burned away. Suddenly the smoke turns darker.
I ask a question with a very obvious answer: why did the smoke turn darker when the jet fuel finished burning away? Some kind of correlation there, maybe, or just another *coincidence*?
When the jet fuel burned away, was the fire suddenly fuel-rich, or lower on fuel, or was it just as well-fueled as when the planes first impacted?
absolutely, if you're in a balloon. but not always in a fire. overpressure can cause hot fire gases to eject from surpising places and while they tend to want to rise up they may be forced in other directions
Hot air rises, not descends
Vushta, you keep using "I guess we will never know", that's why we're speculating with some ideas, but not all.
- Kerosene (Jet Fuel) takes longer to ignite, which is why they use it, so only god can explain how it caught fire spilling down the elevator.
Like I said, refer to Valhall's statements in the Pyroclastic cloud thread: Need a link?
You see the black smoke because the fire no longer has an efficient fuel source, so thus, because of lack of efficieny, it was cooling down from its original state.
"Of the more than 170 areas examined on 16 perimeter column panels, only three columns had evidence that the steel reached temperatures above 250ºC… Only two core column specimens had sufficient paint remaining to make such an analysis, and their temperatures did not reach 250 ºC. ... Using metallographic analysis, NIST determined that there was no evidence that any of the samples had reached temperatures above 600" ºC. (NIST, 2005, pp. 176-177)"
Originally posted by Masisoar
I'll post the link but first look at this Vushta.
When the jet fuel ignited, it was a catalyst in assistance with office/building materials nearby, of a fuel efficient fire, so it burned hotter. When the jet fuel went out, the smoke turned black because it was cooling. Cooling because the fire wasn't efficient.
You can throw gasoline on a fire, and what? BOOM. You have a fire that's very hot and burning more richly, when it's exhausted, it turns more sooty and less efficient and cools down.
You can also look at a Bunsen Burner. You have the source of fuel, the gas in combination with the air, to cause the light blue flame that burns hottest, the less enriched the flame is, the more yellow and sooty it is. Thus not burning as hot. There are lots of classic examples that black smoke equals a oxygen starved fire.
Now by oxygen starved, what do we mean? We mean the fuel/air ratio is poor, so everything's not combusting efficiently.
That's what the point is that we are in fact getting at.
The fires were cooling because they weren't efficient enough anymore. The hottest the flames could of reached were that within the 15 minutes of the jet fuel burning, from then on it was a cooling fire, maybe not necessarily a dying fire but cooling none the less due to lack of efficiency in its burn.
So any weakening has to of mainly happened during that time. And don't forget what the NIST said:
"Of the more than 170 areas examined on 16 perimeter column panels, only three columns had evidence that the steel reached temperatures above 250ºC… Only two core column specimens had sufficient paint remaining to make such an analysis, and their temperatures did not reach 250 ºC. ... Using metallographic analysis, NIST determined that there was no evidence that any of the samples had reached temperatures above 600" ºC. (NIST, 2005, pp. 176-177)"
Which points to, from the samples they've collected, there was no evidence of the fires of reaching over 600 degree Celsius. This is an interesting point to look at however which way because then that shows that the jet fuel never really did get as hot as some may claim.
So how much damage did the jet fuel fires have on the steel? Within the 15 minutes anyways.
-----------------------------
Thread with Valhall's points:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
----------------------------
Getting back to the point of the thread...
Originally posted by Vushta
Originally posted by Masisoar
So any weakening has to of mainly happened during that time. And don't forget what the NIST said:
"Of the more than 170 areas examined on 16 perimeter column panels, only three columns had evidence that the steel reached temperatures above 250ºC… Only two core column specimens had sufficient paint remaining to make such an analysis, and their temperatures did not reach 250 ºC. ... Using metallographic analysis, NIST determined that there was no evidence that any of the samples had reached temperatures above 600" ºC. (NIST, 2005, pp. 176-177)"
Thats a whole lot of assumptions. I'll have to comment tomorrow. I'm wrapping it up for tonite.
The nist blip you posted was in regards to the perimeter columns? I would think that the fires in the areas of deeper penetration where the planes ended up might be a bit warmer.
Enough for now---me so sleepy. 'nite all.