How Does Aluminum Cut Steel?

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by Disclosed
And this has to with with aluminum cutting thru steel how?

Well your the one who came up with the comparision of the WWII fighter to a 767.

[edit on 5-12-2007 by ULTIMA1]

I'm sorry you could not comprehend the posting I showed. Everyone else seemed to understand just fine. All I showed was a picture of damage a Japanese plane from WW2 caused to the side of a steel ship.

Did I say the zero was a 767? No.

Why must you continue to lie?

Well, the question of how aluminum cuts steel has been answered several times in this thread:

1. Kinetic Energy. An object with enough energy is capable of causing extraordinary damage to another object, even if the first object is very soft compared to the second object. (that was the point of mentioning the waterjet that cuts steel. It's hard to argue that water is harder than steel, but with enough energy...)

2. The wing and fuselage are made of much more than just thin aluminum, so trying to argue that the aircraft structure couldn't have made the apparent holes in the buildings is misleading on that basis.

And to the dude who intends to punch his accelerator to go thru an 18-wheeler, that's probably not a good idea. Unless of course you want your car to end up like those Boeing aircraft did on that day: smashed to bits.

reply to post by StudioGuy


Agreed.

CASE CLOSED.



Mod Note: One Line Post – Please Review This Link.


[edit on 6-12-2007 by elevatedone]

Originally posted by Disclosed
CASE CLOSED.

To be fair the "case" isn't really "closed" unless somebody does the calculations (extremely tedious) or models it. Even if kinetic energy makes sense, you should plug in some variables to make sure everything works out, but it isn't a very easy thing to do.

Remember that NIST tried to model the impacts and they couldn't get it to match the observed impacts, because they couldn't get their simulations to have the plane exit the other side of the building in any way. So they decided to change variables until they made it work.

Originally posted by Disclosed
Did I say the zero was a 767? No.

Then what has it got to do with aluminum cutting steel?

We are tlaking about 767, are we not?



[edit on 6-12-2007 by ULTIMA1]

reply to post by ULTIMA1


I am still waiting for you to post your calculations showing your point of view. When will you be posting them? I am looking forward to review your work. Thank you very much.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by Disclosed
Did I say the zero was a 767? No.

Then what has it got to do with aluminum cutting steel?

We are tlaking about 767, are we not?
[edit on 6-12-2007 by ULTIMA1]

No, we are not.

We are talking about aluminum cutting thru steel. The A6M Zero was built of T-7178 aluminum. It was lighter and stronger than the normal aluminum used at the time, but more brittle.

The picture clearly showed that aluminum can cut thru steel.

That IS what this topic is about, remember?

[edit on 6-12-2007 by Disclosed]

Here is an easy way to find out, go out get a peice of aluminum, 7075 or harder, have it made into a saw blade, install it on a grinder, get a soft piece of steel and cut through it, I bet it works!

at high speeds, almost anything can cut through anything.

Titanium is harder than steel, but I can use a plain high speed drill bit to drill through it.

Why if I bend a steel strap it will crack? but if I bend a aluminum strap made of say 6061-0 it will just bend and bend....
or lets use a material used in aircraft wings, 2024-t3 and 7075-t6
now compare these metals to a building grade steel as used in the towers, and put them through different stresses, bending them in different directions, I bet the steel will fail first. Though a lot more force will have to be used to bend the steel, it will still fail first.

Gentlemen,

I would kindly suggest that you just stop responding to these posts. I can't say whether those that are claiming aluminum can't cut steel are doing this intentionally or not, but you are now being caught in nothing but a game of "who's on first' (made by those great sages Abbott and Costello). Take a listen to it, then come read this thread again and you will see that is exactly what is being done.

Originally posted by Disclosed
We are talking about aluminum cutting thru steel. The A6M Zero was built of T-7178 aluminum. It was lighter and stronger than the normal aluminum used at the time, but more brittle.

But wasn't the plane that was supossed to have hit the twin towers a 767, not a A6M zero?

Originally posted by jfj123
I am still waiting for you to post your calculations showing your point of view. When will you be posting them? I am looking forward to review your work. Thank you very much.

I will post calculations when you post actual facts and evidence that the planes impacts caused the towers collapse.

Also i have shown the facts and evidence needed to prove my point.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by Disclosed
We are talking about aluminum cutting thru steel. The A6M Zero was built of T-7178 aluminum. It was lighter and stronger than the normal aluminum used at the time, but more brittle.

But wasn't the plane that was supossed to have hit the twin towers a 767, not a A6M zero?

I'm sure the adults on this forum understand the posts presented here, so I don't feel I need to explain it to you.

Please refrain from just trolling this forum to get your "post count" up. It is a disservice to all those following these forums, and to the original poster of the questions.

Originally posted by Disclosed
Please refrain from just trolling this forum to get your "post count" up.

Please be mature enough to answer a question.

reply to post by ULTIMA1



Thanks for confirming that you are now just trolling. I would have hoped you would be mature enough to drop your trolling, but it looks like an admins intervention is needed.

Sorry that you folks have to content with ULTIMA1's nonsense. Perhaps the mods can point him in the correct direction.

On Topic Please.

If you have evidence, present it, if you don't, then don't claim that you do.
It's easy.

If you have nothing to add to the discussion then don't post.

hmmm, how does aluminum cut steel? I'm wondering because that's the topic of this thread and yet all I see recently are posts completely unrelated to the topic so, let's stick to the topic and see if we can't find the answer to the question posed in the original post. that question, again, is How Does Aluminum Cut Steel?

Discuss

Originally posted by elevatedone
On Topic Please.
If you have evidence, present it, if you don't, then don't claim that you do.
It's easy.

Ok, no problem. Here is some evidence that the aluminum airframe and wings of a plane cannot do enough damage to the steel beams of a building to cause a collapse. After all we are talking 9/11 here.

i114.photobucket.com...

i114.photobucket.com...

i114.photobucket.com...

i114.photobucket.com...

i114.photobucket.com...



[edit on 6-12-2007 by ULTIMA1]

Originally posted by Crakeur
let's stick to the topic and see if we can't find the answer to the question posed in the original post. that question, again, is How Does Aluminum Cut Steel?

Its been answered Crakeur thats the problem.

And yet, its still being argued about. This thread is in some kind of groundhog day type loop.

Originally posted by neformore
And yet, its still being argued about. This thread is in some kind of groundhog day type loop.

But you have to consider we are in a 9/11 forum.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Ok, no problem. Here is some evidence that the aluminum airframe and wings of a plane cannot do enough damage to the steel beams of a building to cause a collapse.

Umm...

Now I hate to break it to you but thats not "evidence" that a 767 can't punch a hole in the side of a building. Its a bunch of pictures of plane damage.

Not only that, but some of the pictures show aircraft impacts that prove that a sizeable section of airframe survives impacts with objects.

Now - where is the proof, and the evidence, that the 218,000lb mass of a Boeing 767 travelling at 466mph can't punch a hole through the side of the WTC - aluminium cutting steel, as per the topic?

Thats what we're all waiting for, and thats the issue you have been dodging and not presenting any evidence to the contrary.