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.

 

Aluminothermics and "Thermite"

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 08:08 AM
link   
There seems to be some confusion regarding thermite and it's uses... The NIST always talks about thermite PROPER, this post is to make clear that there are MANY "Aluminothermics", thermite being the simpleset and "weakest" which requires large amounts and is relatively slow to react.

I suggest that from this point foreward that when one references "thermite" that instead they address this entire class of incedaries/explosives (yes, they can be either) as Aluminothermics.

This class includes:

- Basic Thermite (Fe + Al exothermic reactants)
- Thermate (Thermite plus S as a catalyst, resulting in a faster hotter burn)
- Nanothermite/mate (the FE and Al are reduced to micron sized particulates making for a far hotter and faster reaction)
- "Superthermite" (sol-gel incorporating Fe2O3/Al (thermite) nanocomposites illustrates the extremely fine mixing of ultrafine aluminum and iron oxide.

There are many other additives/catalysts such as Potassium Permanganate or Polytetrafluoroethylene and many other mixtures/combinations which make the "you need too much thermite argument" MOOT. NIST conviently ignores this as do many on this site.

So, please, let us use the term Aluminothermics to be precise and avoid this simplification and disqualification of aluminothermics based on required mass.

[edit on 7-9-2006 by Slap Nuts]




posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 10:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Slap Nuts
There are many other additives/catalysts such as Potassium Permanganate or Polytetrafluoroethylene and many other mixtures/combinations which make the "you need too much thermite argument" MOOT. NIST conviently ignores this as do many on this site.


Such an argument lacks critical thought in the first place, simply because these same people believe that no thermite was required to initiate a collapse.

Therefore, simply cutting even one column with thermite, the theoretical "straw that broke the camel's back", would necessarily be possible in the same circumstances.

But it's a good point here, that to cut many more columns would not require thousands and thousands of pounds of ground-up aluminum and rust. Neither would it require cutting on every single floor. It may have been possible to severe the core structure at each set of reinforced mechanical floors and the lower reinforced floors (around 1-8 or 9) and/or basements, which I think is Griff's hypothesis, and the building's main support structure would come straight down upon itself.



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 03:33 AM
link   
Did you ever think the planes themselves caused thermite reactions ?

You have got tons of aluminum, steel and lots of hazards material on the aircraft.



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 03:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Did you ever think the planes themselves caused thermite reactions ?


Even if they did create a thermite reaction (doubtful), how did this chaotic creation of thermite know to cut through the correct columns at the correct time to initiate a symmetrical vertical collapse? Let alone cut through the steel columns to begin with?

If the planes had cause a thermite reaction we would have seen something totally different imo.

How would the planes have cause a thermite reaction anyway?
I doubt a jet fuel fire is hot enough and what iron oxide would there be? Plain rust makes very bad thermite, and I doubt there was enough to mix with the planes aluminum before it was all ignited.

Maybe I'm missing something?

Great post BTW Slap


[edit on 8/9/2006 by ANOK]



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 04:05 AM
link   
Well you have other flammable metals on the plane like magnesium, you have oxygen generators and tanks of oxygen.

It could be possible to create a thermite reaction with all the material on hand.



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 07:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Did you ever think the planes themselves caused thermite reactions ?



Not possible. The components need to be ground and mixed in certain ratios and have an ignition source far hotter than was available that day.

Simply having a block of iron oxide and aluminum does not equal thermite.



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 07:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
It could be possible to create a thermite reaction with all the material on hand.


Sure, if you milled it correctly, mixed it correctly and ignited it correctly. There is 100% NO WAY this happens by accident. Not a chance. Do some research on making simple thermite and you will find this is true.



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 09:16 AM
link   
I did not say it made thermite. I said it could have made a thermite type reaction with all the molten aluminum and other flammibale metals and material.

Read up on how molten aluminum reacts to concrete.



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 09:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
I did not say it made thermite. I said it could have made a thermite type reaction with all the molten aluminum and other flammibale metals and material.

Read up on how molten aluminum reacts to concrete.


How does it react by the way? I'd like to know cause I happen to do my own aluminum casting, and have on many occasions spilled all the contents of my crucible on my drive way.



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 09:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
I did not say it made thermite. I said it could have made a thermite type reaction with all the molten aluminum and other flammibale metals and material.

Read up on how molten aluminum reacts to concrete.


Sorry, I must have misunderstood this...


Originally posted by ULTIMA1
It could be possible to create a thermite reaction with all the material on hand.


and this...


Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Did you ever think the planes themselves caused thermite reactions ?


Question... where is the word "type"?

Concrete reacting with molten Al? Greening is an idiot...


So we poured molten aluminum onto a concrete cinder block to see whether “explosive reactions” would in fact ensue. They did not. In this case, we formed two “puddles” of molten aluminum, one directly onto the concrete, and the other onto concrete, acrylic plastic, and a piece of aluminum foil which held a fair amount of iron rust extracted from a very rusty iron ball. In both cases, the molten aluminum sat on the surfaces with no “explosive reactions” whatsoever. Instead, the aluminum cooled steadily, suggesting no exothermal chemical reactions were competing with radiative and conductive cooling.

Some water was present in the concrete, which clearly formed steam and then a distinct bubble under the aluminum melt. The rectangular piece of plastic also released gases which formed a separate bubble under the aluminum melt poured over the plastic. The rust was embedded in the aluminum melt (the aluminum foil melted) without showing any “explosive” reaction at all. When the aluminum was removed from the concrete surfaces, we observed a dark pattern on the surface (not deeply etched into the concrete) where the aluminum had been, so there may have been some surface reactions with the concrete. The rectangular piece of plastic left an image which shows where the aluminum did not contact the concrete


sourece: www.scholarsfor911truth.org...



[edit on 8-9-2006 by Slap Nuts]



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 09:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by WithoutEqual
How does it react by the way? I'd like to know cause I happen to do my own aluminum casting, and have on many occasions spilled all the contents of my crucible on my drive way.


...and amazingly, you are still alive to talk about it. The only thing that could really happen is that trapped moisture in the concrete could rapidly turn to steam causing "popping" or chips to fly off... certainly not EXPLOSIVE force or "spontaneous thermite".



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 11:46 AM
link   
Aluminothermics can be easily made in any decently equipped chem lab as the ingredients are readily available in large quantity... for thermite and thermate at least all you need is:

Aluminum
Iron Oxide
Sulphur

To make "nano-aluminothermics"... nano aluminum can be manufactured by directing current through aluminum that is immersed in an acid. This procedure is derived from a previously posted patent. A more "involved" manufacturing procedure requires an aerosol reactor... (U.S. Patents 6077329, 5885321) The iron oxide DOES NOT need to be milled or broken to nano sized particulates... So again all that is needed is a simple chem lab and common easily obtained ingredients.

Making Aerogel or Sol-gel is more complicated and requires specialized machinery, however, most major Universities and I am sure military "labs" have the capability... an overview of the process can be found here...

www.chemat.com...



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 12:17 PM
link   
Why Believe in Superthermate at WTC?

A VERY strong reason to believe that Super-thermate was used in the WTC is in my sig. line...


One molecule, described by the EPA's Erik Swartz, was present at levels "that dwarfed all others": 1,3-diphenylpropane. "We've never observed it in any sampling we've ever done,"


1,3-diphenylpropane is a by-product of Aerogel...

So, why would the EPA find 1,3-diphenylpropane in levels that "dwarfed all others" and never have observed it in any testing previous to 9/11?

You do not need to believe Dr. Jones... BELIEVE THE EPA!!!

Ask the EPA what could account for this compound being discovered in large quantity.

[edit on 8-9-2006 by Slap Nuts]



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 12:28 PM
link   
Why the "thermite" mass requirement calculations are WRONG.

The NIST recently addressed the usage of "thermite" in the twin towers and wrote:


Therefore, while a thermite reaction can cut through large steel columns, many thousands of pounds of thermite would need to have been placed inconspicuously ahead of time, remotely ignited, and somehow held in direct contact with the surface of hundreds of massive structural components to weaken the building. This makes it an unlikely substance for achieving a controlled demolition.


This is VERY misleading ON PURPOSE and they know it. Here is why...

1.

iron-thermite is typically not used alone as an incendiary mixture. It is used in multi-component thermite-incendiary compositions, in which another oxidizer and binder are included, together with thermite. Thermate-TH3, a mixture of thermite and pyrotechnic additives, was found to be superior to thermites and was adapted for use in incendiary hand grenades. Its composition by weight is generally thermite 68.7%, barium nitrate 29.0%, sulfur 2.0% and binder 0.3%. Addition of barium nitrate to thermite increases its thermal effect, creates flame in burning and reduces the ignition temperature.
SO... #1 they would not have just used Iron thermite.

2. ThermAte burns minimally 2x-10x as hot and fast as thermIte (depends on formula)... Reduce their calculations by 1/2 minimally or 1/10th.

3. NANO-thermAte... typical aluminum particles have only 1/10th of 1% of their atoms exposed on the surface. Whereas, nano-particulates, have almost 50% of their surface exposed as atoms, increasing reaction rates by 1,000x.

So... you tell me... MINIMALLY Nano-thermate has reaction rates 1000x faster and 2x hotter than "thermite"... do you really need that much?

Then, we take our nano-thermate and put it in some aero-gel which allows us to shape it however we like to make perfect shaped charge cuts... This addresses the "inconspicuous and direct contact" arguments.

So, NIST... How many AERO-GEL, NANO-THERMATE SHAPED CHARGES would it take?



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 03:16 PM
link   
www.firehouse.com...


Molten aluminum has a 4-digit UN identification number of 9260. When referenced in the ERG it refers to guide 77 for hazards of the material. Guide 77 was an addition to the 1993 version of the ERG. Molten aluminum is the only material that refers to this guide. The guide indicates that the material is above 1300? F, and will react violently with water, which may cause an explosion, and release a flammable gas.

When contacting concrete on a roadway, or at a fixed facility, molten materials could cause spalling and small pops. This could cause pieces of concrete to become projectiles.


If only small amounts could cause reaction to concrete what do you think several tons of molten aluminum would do.



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 03:30 PM
link   
I'm guessing at the WTC not too much. Why? Because it wasn't molten aluminum that was poured on the concrete. The plane (aluminum) wasn't molten when it crashed. It had to be heated up to melt...which would have evaporated the water out of the concrete while doing this. Since the water would be out of the concrete, once the plane melted....it wouldn't have this violent reaction. This reaction happens only when already molten aluminum is poured onto concrete. This didn't happen on 9/11 because it was a heating proccess that both the plane and the concrete would have gone through together.



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 04:23 PM
link   

Moreover, as hypothesized below, thermite reactions may have resulted in substantial quantities (observed in pools) of molten iron at very high temperatures – initially above 2,000 °C (3,632 °F). At these temperatures, aluminum materials from the buildings should continue to undergo exothermic oxidation reactions with materials also entrained in the molten metal pools including metal oxides, which will then keep the pools molten and even growing for weeks despite radiative and conductive losses.

Thus, molten metal was repeatedly observed and formally reported in the rubble piles of the WTC Towers and WTC 7, metal that looked like molten steel or perhaps iron. Scientific analysis would be needed to conclusively ascertain the composition of the molten metal in detail.



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 05:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Scientific analysis would be needed to conclusively ascertain the composition of the molten metal in detail.


Which was never done BTW. Anyway, what does the exothermic reactions have to do with what we were talking about with pouring molten aluminum onto concrete?



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 07:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Slap Nuts

Originally posted by WithoutEqual
How does it react by the way? I'd like to know cause I happen to do my own aluminum casting, and have on many occasions spilled all the contents of my crucible on my drive way.


...and amazingly, you are still alive to talk about it. The only thing that could really happen is that trapped moisture in the concrete could rapidly turn to steam causing "popping" or chips to fly off... certainly not EXPLOSIVE force or "spontaneous thermite".


Exactly. Matter of fact, it burned the oil from leaky cars right out of the cement. Cleanest area of the driveway matter of fact lol. Now taking a blow torch to the cement, that's a different story, but were also talking about a heck of alot more heat, for a longer duration.

To those of you that may try molten Al experiments, be very very careful. One wrong move and you'll get burned far worse than exposure to a direct flame. And as SlapNuts mentioned trapped moisture causing steam which popping can occur, but should you attempt to quench something like an ingot with water, or any large amount of molten metal, realize that a steam explosion can occur, which will make your molten Al airbone. This has nothing to do with the discussion, but I just wanted to point out that one wrong move with molten metal, can cause critical injuries, and even death. When I pour into my molds, I have a 1/8in thick piece of steel that's 6ft long, and 4 ft tall inbetween my mold and my body just incase I splash, or spill. Be careful with this stuff.



posted on Sep, 9 2006 @ 10:31 AM
link   
Videos of thermite reactions at WTC 2.

www.gieis.uni.cc...



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join