How Does Aluminum Cut Steel?

reply to post by ULTIMA1


Ultima, what is deliberatly being ignored by at least one poster, is the fact that those calculations are based on the presumption, of what NIST employees could see from videos, photos and any documented verbal reports given, and thought was taking place elsewhere they could not see.

They assumed if the gas pressure was building in one area that it automatically had to be building in any other areas, on which fires were verbally reported by fire fighters and others. Based on the reported liquid fuel source of the fire. It is a fact. Carbon smoke can build up enormous variety of gas pressure when confined.

That means NIST based those figures on assumption - playing the odds of what they thought was happening - and not what was actually happening to windows. All they had to do is write it this way. "From what we studied of videos, photos, and documented verbal reports of fire locations, we calculate that 1312 windows were broken by impact and gas pressure from fire." That would have resolved any misunderstanding by most, if not all, people reading the NIST report.

But that was not the intent of those dictating how NIST agency supervisor would word any report. It was meant to add confusion, and obviously that dirty tactic succeeded.

reply to post by ULTIMA1
Titanium and tungsten are likely survivors but graphite/carbon fibre bonded with epoxy resins and magnesium would make an interesting pyrotechnic mix.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
I have already posted evidence of the fires not being that large or hot on several of the floors. Well you do know there is going to be some things exploding on the floors.

Molten aluminun coming into contact with other hazmat.

CRTs exploding from heat

Batteriess exploding from heat.

There are dozens of reasons why the windows were broken out besides fire.

Ok, we're getting somewhere now. But now there's dozens of reasons? You stated, rather emphatically, and several times, that the plane debris blew out most of the windows. Looks like you're coming to your senses and retreating from that stance. I applaud you for that.

So you remember the big fireball when the planes hit? These didn't break any windows. Your words.

But CRT's, batteries, and hazmat will explode more energetically than that fireball, with enough overpressure to blow out windows, but remain visually unnoticed?

Riiiiight....

Originally posted by MikeVet
So you remember the big fireball when the planes hit? These didn't break any windows. Your words.

If you could read or do research, you would have seen that the fireballs occured OUTSIDE the buildings, causing little or no damage. (according to most reports)

Now you just need to come around to admitting the fires did not brake most of the windows, and that NIST was guessing the amount broken by fire.





[edit on 2-1-2008 by ULTIMA1]

reply to post by Pilgrum


Aluminum is never a high energy heat conductor for any long period of time. Being the soft metal it is, there goes any high powered thermal energy heat conduction or extended periods of time.

www.ap.stmarys.ca...

"When the handle is heated, the heat is conducted along each of the rods. This heat will eventually melt the wax and make the flags fall. Because some metals conduct heat better then others, the flags will fall one by one, starting with the flag on the rod which best conducts heat (aluminum) and ending with the flag on the poorest-conducting rod (stainless steel). The poorest-conducting rod happens to be such a poor conductor that the aluminum rod melts before the flag falls off the stainless steel rod!"

www.patentstorm.us...

"This invention relates to troughing for molten metals and more particularly it relates to heated troughing for flowing molten metal such as molten aluminum from one station to another.

Conventional troughing used for conveying molten aluminum from a molten aluminum source such as a holding furnace to a work station such as a degasser or caster is either not heated or if heated, utilizes radiant heaters such as glow bars which radiate heat from above the surface of the molten metal. If no heaters are used in the troughing, then the distance the metal can be conveyed is limited or the molten metal must be superheated to compensate for the loss in temperature, with its attendant problems such as skim generation. Radiant heaters have the problem of short service life because they are exposed to aluminum vapors, splashing of molten aluminum and mechanical abuse. Also, radiant heaters have the problem that they produce local heating of the surface of the molten metal in the troughing and deposition of a metal skim on the sidewalls of the troughing which contributes to oxide formation. Thus, it can be seen that there is a great need for an improved troughing for conveying molten metal such as molten aluminum which overcomes these problems. This invention provides such an improved troughing."

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
If you could read or do research, you would have seen that the fireballs occured OUTSIDE the buildings, causing little or no damage. (according to most reports)

I find myself wondering how the fireball got to the outside from inside the building and the windows would need to be bypassed somehow to achieve that observation.

All the windows were broken about an hour later anyway.

Originally posted by Pilgrum
I find myself wondering how the fireball got to the outside from inside the building and the windows would need to be bypassed somehow to achieve that observation.

If you watch the videos it is plain to see the fireballs are outside the buildings.

Since the wings barely made it into the buildings, and most of the fuel is in the wings, its easy to see why.

Also the momentum of the plane carried what was inside the plane through the building to the outside.



[edit on 2-1-2008 by ULTIMA1]

What experiments have been documented and validated, and stating plane components of graphite, hardened graphite, fiberglass, fiberglass hybrid, Kevlar, and Kevlar-graphite has "cut through steel" at any velocity?

Where are the validated and documented experiments that any aluminum has "cut through steel" at any velocity?

Originally posted by OrionStars
Where are the validated and documented experiments that any aluminum has "cut through steel" at any velocity?

www.tms.org...

The only individual metal component of the aircraft that is comparable in strength to the box perimeter columns of the WTC is the keel beam at the bottom of the aircraft fuselage.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
If you watch the videos it is plain to see the fireballs are outside the buildings.

Since the wings barely made it into the buildings, and most of the fuel is in the wings, its wasy to see why.

Also the momentum of the plane carried what was inside the plane through the building to the outside.

Wouldn't the ignition source be inside the buildings?

The windows would present the easiest path for the fuel vapour to actually exit the building but they'd have to be broken first. How they got broken was possibly by projectile debris but the vapour wouldn't get to the outside unless there were holes to let it out.

reply to post by Pilgrum


Exactly all what windows? What NIST reports? How do you know for a fact NIST is reporting accurately? Did you see every one of the windows breaking NIST reports for numbers? If so, how exactly did you do that?

reply to post by ULTIMA1


With all due respect, that brief excerpt bears no relationship to what I asked. In fact, the first alleged plane component to impact would have been fiberglass.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by Pilgrum
I find myself wondering how the fireball got to the outside from inside the building and the windows would need to be bypassed somehow to achieve that observation.

If you watch the videos it is plain to see the fireballs are outside the buildings.

Since the wings barely made it into the buildings, and most of the fuel is in the wings, its easy to see why.

Also the momentum of the plane carried what was inside the plane through the building to the outside.

Hmm, let's examine this statement. The wings barely made it into the building..... and momentum carried what was inside the plane through the building......

Now let's watch a video that shows the plane entering the south side, and a huge fireball exploding out the east side.



Looks like the first part of that statement is bunk, since PLENTY of fuel was available on the east side explosion.....

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by MikeVet
So you remember the big fireball when the planes hit? These didn't break any windows. Your words.

If you could read or do research, you would have seen that the fireballs occured OUTSIDE the buildings, causing little or no damage. (according to most reports)

[edit on 2-1-2008 by ULTIMA1]

"Outside" was the path of least resistance for the pressure wave and in the vector of kinetic movement of the exploding volume of fuel. On the floors that were breached by the aircraft the fireball that started "inside" the building had to go somewhere, the shock wave rocked the building floors above and below the impacted floors buckled with fire piercing through them like a volcano. The floors acted like a containment barrier and since the explosive force of the exploding jet fuel was not a high magnitude explosion the pressure wave took the less restrictive path out of the building which was out the windows. Various debris resulting from the impact then began to burn, the mass of the aircraft in various states, shredded smaller chunks of debris flaming wreckage etc caused secondary combustion of other articles within the impacted floors. After the impacts there was lots of smoke up until the collapse, obviously something was burning. The loss of connector joints in core resulted in the total failure.

Originally posted by OrionStars
Where are the validated and documented experiments that any aluminum has "cut through steel" at any velocity?

Where are the ones that show it doesn't?

Evidence please.

Originally posted by Pilgrum

Wouldn't the ignition source be inside the buildings?

That is an interesting question. At what point between in and outside did any fuel appear to initally ignite?

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Now you just need to come around to admitting the fires did not brake most of the windows, and that NIST was guessing the amount broken by fire.

No, you need to explain how CRT's, batteries and hazmat are gonna blow out windows.

It's your theory. Now back it up.

Originally posted by robertfenix
Outside" was the path of least resistance for the pressure wave and in the vector of kinetic movement of the exploding volume of fuel.

Too bad most of the reports state that the large portion of the fuel was burned off in the intial fireballs OUTSIDE the buildings, and what was left burned off in a few minutes.

[edit on 2-1-2008 by ULTIMA1]

Maybe it's just me but I'm having a hard time trying to see the significance of the windows. They weren't a structural element, they were highly vulnerable to all sorts of trauma and they all got broken in the end regardless.

Originally posted by OrionStarsWhere are the validated and documented experiments that any aluminum has "cut through steel" at any velocity?

As I said earlier today, the multitude of armor-piercing devices used by the military are using soft-metal penetrators, copper or lead, with dramatic effects. I don't know what more validation you need.