WTC7 - 20 story gash

Originally posted by Pilgrum
My view hasn't changed and I still think the tales of lakes and rivers of molten steel are a gross exaggeration or even a fabrication.

I would say exageration. But here is something of interest:

Burt Vorsanger, AIA, Architect, hired by the Port Authority to keep momentos for the upcomming WTC museum.



Not sure how to imbed videos yet. Here's the link.

www.youtube.com...

[edit on 4/10/2008 by Griff]

[edit on 4/10/2008 by Griff]

I believe this image shows the damage to building 7?




Whilst there is a fair bit of damage to the building it is all in one corner? so surely the building should have fallen to one side (like a tree after a lumberjack has cut a wedge into it?) and yet this building fell straight down

Originally posted by Pilgrum
From their summary:

I just found this, also from FEMA:

Summary

* Rapid deterioration of the A36 steel was a result of hot corrosion.

2. Heating in an environment containing oxygen and sulfur resulted in intergranular melting which transformed to an Iron Oxide and Iron Sulfide eutectic mixture on cooling .

www.abmbrasil.com.br...

The quote you use says the rate is unknown, but this says that it was at least "rapid."

The problem with thermite as the source of that heating is that it's violent and uncontrollable

I know enough about engineering to know this is a ridiculous statement to make. I've seen patents for various devices, even videos of working demonstrations of devices that control and direct the flow of the molten material. I'm not saying that's what was used, I'm just saying I'm not listening to you tell me what is or isn't possible when your imagination is that crippled.

The 1000C figure is supported by NIST test fires with standard building contents like computer workstations where the peak temperature measured was in fact around 1000C

That "peak temperature" is related to what they call a flash over. It is not a sustained temperature, or even anywhere near the temperature of the steel after the heat has been transferred through the air and etc.

Originally posted by Pilgrum
I fail to see how the post-collapse fires are a factor in the failure causing the collapse and despite some of the fuel in WTC7 being recovered, there was far more not recovered.

There was 20,000 gallons recovered, how much was not recovered that seaped into the ground?

reply to post by bsbray11


I have to say that their statements are less than definitive and that's probably because they really don't know exactly how it happened. Is it 'rapid' corrosion compared to rusting or are they comparing it to a thermal lance?
Plenty of room left for conjecture there.

As for controlling thermite reactions, the trick is to hold it in place in a container that applies the heat to a fixed location without the container itself being destroyed before the reaction is finished - modern ceramics are a good candidate for this. The reaction itself isn't controlled as it carries its own source of oxygen in the iron oxide and the faster, the better if the objective is to 'cut' heavy steel.

That 'peak temperature' I referred to is from the NIST experiment in which they burnt typical computer workstations that were in the buildings. The temperature was monitored at ceiling height above the test fires and it peaked at 1000C or slightly above. This is a good indication of the typical temperature that could be achieved with typical building materials and the FEMA analysis also suggests 1000C as the environment in which the long-term heating took place. To top it off, the aerial surveys also indicated temperatures close to 1000C in the rubble fires but I'll concede that those fires were covered by a large amount of material so the deep core temperatures could have been even higher than that. I can not accept that those fires were fueled by thermite.

The only thing is we're arguing mostly about fires that burnt for a long time after the building was down and the only connection is that they were started by burning material that collapsed with the building.

And please note that I make no effort to return your insults - they do not aid discussion in any way.

reply to post by Griff


Actually I've seen the 'meteorite' before and yes it's very interesting. I lean toward the post collapse fires as having the greatest opportunity to cause an effect like that (high temperature over a long time). I've seen no statements of how much material was found in that condition and they speak of it as if it was a unique find, not part of a lake sized mass.

If it happened post-collapse it couldn't have been a causal factor, just a symptom of heat at a particularly vigorous hotspot. Maybe a variety of molten material accumulating in the porous dust and rubble beneath the hotspot to bind it together is how it was formed.

I'd struggle to see a conspiracy in it though.

reply to post by Pilgrum


The conspiracy is that we have government agencies that now say there was no molten metal. Especially steel. Even NIST's own spokesman is caught on tape denying this. Why are they denying this now when at the time, it was common knowledge that there was molten metals? Especially steel.



[edit on 4/12/2008 by Griff]

reply to post by Griff


Their stance on that and many other issues is very puzzling unless there's a benefit to them in keeping the conspiracy wheel turning.

I saw this one new video of ground zero that shows a large steel I-beam which has an area on it glowing hot that catches fire right on camera, these guys come to put the water on it and the flames die down but you could still see the steel is glowing red hot. It's in a new video about ground zero that isn't on youtube or anywhere yet, since its just come out. It's just more evidence of the extreme temperatures present during the collapse and of some of this steel at ground zero being all the way from molten, to glowing red hot and cooler.

Google Video Link

Recently too I saw a clip from 60 minutes which showed some slightly rare shots of the cars right near ground zero and the aluminium from the wheels had turned into solidifed aluminum puddles.

[edit on 13-4-2008 by Insolubrious]

World trace center 7, Across the street and still collapses? notice how wtc6 and wtc7 which were closer and sustained more damage then 7, and still stood for weeks until they leveled them will explosives as well.