Merged: Has this structural engineer been debunked? / Astaneh-Asl "melting of girders"

[remo]

http://www.ehow.com/how_5700758_extr...ur-gypsum.html
I see.
"Heat the gypsum in a kiln to 600 to 900 degrees C in the presence of a reducing atmosphere such as hydrogen or carbon monoxide to produce calcium oxide and sulfur dioxide. Using hydrogen, for example,CaSO₄ + H₂ ' CaO + H₂O + SO₂Thus the gypsum is converted to calcium oxide (lime) and sulfur dioxide, both very useful products. The sulfur dioxide can then be further processed in at least two commercially profitable ways.
Employ a catalyst made up of vanadium pentoxide and an alkali metal sulfate supported on small silica beads at high temperature. The sulfur dioxide will be converted into sulfur trioxide, which is to be dissolved in 98 percent sulfuric acid. That sulfur trioxide reacts with the 2 percent moisture to form additional sulfuric acid. Catalytically reduce the sulfur dioxide into elemental sulfur. The U.S. Department of Energy describes the use of a cerium oxide catalyst to reduce a mixture of sulfur dioxide and carbon monoxide to form sulfur and carbon dioxide. In this reaction, the carbon monoxide is oxidized to carbon dioxide; hence the overall reaction is a reduction-oxidation reaction, or REDOX"

At what time during the split-seconds of almost free fall of the great towers do you think the wallboard went thru this process ?

How do you get elemental sulfur all over Manhattan in ppm from wallboard in a DUST storm if you have to go thru a process as complicated as that begun and ended in the amount of time it took to read this sentence? And in mid-air??
At what part of the process would the elemental sulfur be formed inside the iron rich microspheres? I'm no expert, but maybe at the same temperature and time the intergranular attack on the steel took place??
Oystein, you ask how long the demolition sequences 'would take' as if they hadn't. As if its a question?
Just watch any one of the films taken on the day.
Thats how long it took. You don't even have to guess.

[NoahFence]

Originally Posted by remo

http://www.ehow.com/how_5700758_extr...ur-gypsum.html
I see.
"Heat the gypsum in a kiln to 600 to 900 degrees C in the presence of a reducing atmosphere such as hydrogen or carbon monoxide to produce calcium oxide and sulfur dioxide. Using hydrogen, for example,CaSO₄ + H₂ ' CaO + H₂O + SO₂Thus the gypsum is converted to calcium oxide (lime) and sulfur dioxide, both very useful products. The sulfur dioxide can then be further processed in at least two commercially profitable ways.
Employ a catalyst made up of vanadium pentoxide and an alkali metal sulfate supported on small silica beads at high temperature. The sulfur dioxide will be converted into sulfur trioxide, which is to be dissolved in 98 percent sulfuric acid. That sulfur trioxide reacts with the 2 percent moisture to form additional sulfuric acid. Catalytically reduce the sulfur dioxide into elemental sulfur. The U.S. Department of Energy describes the use of a cerium oxide catalyst to reduce a mixture of sulfur dioxide and carbon monoxide to form sulfur and carbon dioxide. In this reaction, the carbon monoxide is oxidized to carbon dioxide; hence the overall reaction is a reduction-oxidation reaction, or REDOX"

At what time during the split-seconds of almost free fall of the great towers do you think the wallboard went thru this process ?

How do you get elemental sulfur all over Manhattan in ppm from wallboard in a DUST storm if you have to go thru a process as complicated as that begun and ended in the amount of time it took to read this sentence? And in mid-air??
At what part of the process would the elemental sulfur be formed inside the iron rich microspheres? I'm no expert, but maybe at the same temperature and time the intergranular attack on the steel took place??
Oystein, you ask how long the demolition sequences 'would take' as if they hadn't. As if its a question?
Just watch any one of the films taken on the day.
Thats how long it took. You don't even have to guess.

[Spanx]

Originally Posted by remo

http://www.ehow.com/how_5700758_extr...ur-gypsum.html
I see.
"Heat the gypsum in a kiln to 600 to 900 degrees C in the presence of a reducing atmosphere such as hydrogen or carbon monoxide to produce calcium oxide and sulfur dioxide. Using hydrogen, for example,CaSO₄ + H₂ ' CaO + H₂O + SO₂Thus the gypsum is converted to calcium oxide (lime) and sulfur dioxide, both very useful products. The sulfur dioxide can then be further processed in at least two commercially profitable ways.
Employ a catalyst made up of vanadium pentoxide and an alkali metal sulfate supported on small silica beads at high temperature. The sulfur dioxide will be converted into sulfur trioxide, which is to be dissolved in 98 percent sulfuric acid. That sulfur trioxide reacts with the 2 percent moisture to form additional sulfuric acid. Catalytically reduce the sulfur dioxide into elemental sulfur. The U.S. Department of Energy describes the use of a cerium oxide catalyst to reduce a mixture of sulfur dioxide and carbon monoxide to form sulfur and carbon dioxide. In this reaction, the carbon monoxide is oxidized to carbon dioxide; hence the overall reaction is a reduction-oxidation reaction, or REDOX"

At what time during the split-seconds of almost free fall of the great towers do you think the wallboard went thru this process ?

How do you get elemental sulfur all over Manhattan in ppm from wallboard in a DUST storm if you have to go thru a process as complicated as that begun and ended in the amount of time it took to read this sentence? And in mid-air??
At what part of the process would the elemental sulfur be formed inside the iron rich microspheres? I'm no expert, but maybe at the same temperature and time the intergranular attack on the steel took place??
Oystein, you ask how long the demolition sequences 'would take' as if they hadn't. As if its a question?
Just watch any one of the films taken on the day.
Thats how long it took. You don't even have to guess.

Thanks Remo, this post explains alot to me. I now have to agree it could only be thermite. You have explained things in such a manner that even I can understand.

911 was an inside job

[Spanx]

Originally Posted by Senenmut

barnett is blowing hot sulfur dioxide up your buttocks with the whole wallboard scenario!

Would you care to explain why ?

[ozeco41]

Originally Posted by Spanx

Thanks Remo, this post explains alot to me. I now have to agree it could only be thermite. You have explained things in such a manner that even I can understand.

911 was an inside job

Have you debunked/rebutted the Marmite Hypothesis?

[Oystein]

Originally Posted by remo

Oystein, you ask how long the demolition sequences 'would take' as if they hadn't. As if its a question?
Just watch any one of the films taken on the day.
Thats how long it took. You don't even have to guess.

Well, no. Bare-assed assertions don't fly around here. Go back to 911Blogger, that censorship-protected echo-chamber. It suits your fact-free, logic-free, knowledge-free, skill-free approach better.

And I ask a whole lot more.
You have been able to answer zero questions.

So you're out.

[Oystein]

Originally Posted by ozeco41

http://conleys.com.au/smilies/thumbup.gif


Have you debunked/rebutted the Marmite Hypothesis?

And don't forget the fried-okra-hypothesis

[Miragememories]

Originally Posted by Oystein

Well, no. Bare-assed assertions don't fly around here. Go back to 911Blogger, that censorship-protected echo-chamber. It suits your fact-free, logic-free, knowledge-free, skill-free approach better.

And I ask a whole lot more.
You have been able to answer zero questions.

So you're out.

Censorship?

Echo-chamber?

I guess it's not much fun posting in a forum that can't be 'gamed'.

MM

[TheRedWorm]

Originally Posted by Sunstealer

http://www.anr.state.vt.us/dec/waste...ing/gypsum.pdf

http://www.americangypsum.com/pdfs/msds.pdf



http://news.google.com/newspapers?ni...g=3216,4182102

http://www.sesi.net/recycling_drywall.html

I won't even bother going into how SO2 is released at even lower temperatures in a reducing atmosphere as I think the point is proven.

Originally Posted by Senenmut

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1zLIqitCqg

Doesn't this perfectly encapsulate this entire sub-forum? Sunstealer posts actual references, truther responds with a yoooooooooootooooooooooooooooobe.

[Sunstealer]

Originally Posted by Senenmut

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1zLIqitCqg

The above video is nonsense and this has been explained to you at least 50 times before. Jon Cole, just like you, has no idea what he's talking about.

Thermate cannot produce the sulphides found along grain boundaries by solid state diffusion as evidenced here.







The clues are in the phrase solid state diffusion, namely the material is solid, never been liquid and diffusion namely takes time over hours not seconds.

Thermite or thermate acts over seconds producing temperatures high enough to melt the steel material in bulk. The above photomicrographs would be impossible if the material had been liquid.

There is no way that thermate can produce the sulphides seen in the grain boundaries by solid state diffusion. There simply isn't enough time during reaction phase for this to occur. You have been told this a thousand times.

If you think it can then it's upto you to show this. Make up thermate and ignite it on some steel, take sections of the steel, mount, polish and etch those sections and show that it can. You nor any other truther will ever do the simple experiment.

Lastly you support Harrit et al. Please point out where the Sulphur is in the following EDX spectra:



It's not there in any quantity. As usual you are claiming thermite and thermate did the same thing without any evidence for either. Don't just link to youtube, use your own words to make an argument. You can't because you don't understand a word about the subject as has been shown over and over and over again yet you still come back with nonsense that's been debunked dozens of times.

[Sunstealer]

Originally Posted by ozeco41

Have you debunked/rebutted the Marmite Hypothesis?

I did this one ages ago.

[ozeco41]

Originally Posted by Sunstealer

I did this one ages ago.

http://forums.randi.org/picture.php?...pictureid=4056

Curse.

Looks like I have to deploy the big one.

To avoid wasting bandwidth I may plead nolo contendere

Or should I join Oystein in the action with his "fried-okra-hypothesis " and try a "cut throat defence"?

(Like "It wuz him, not me, yer honour.")

Decisions...decisions...decisions....

[Senenmut]

Originally Posted by Sunstealer

The above video is nonsense and this has been explained to you at least 50 times before. Jon Cole, just like you, has no idea what he's talking about.

i think he did a better job than the fire wise professor in trying to recreate the office/debris fire that supposedly created the eutectic and "corroded" the steel.

Originally Posted by Sunstealer

Thermate cannot produce the sulphides found along grain boundaries by solid state diffusion as evidenced here.

http://forums.randi.org/picture.php?...&pictureid=948

http://forums.randi.org/picture.php?...&pictureid=945

http://forums.randi.org/picture.php?...pictureid=4465

The clues are in the phrase solid state diffusion, namely the material is solid, never been liquid and diffusion namely takes time over hours not seconds.

i think it happened over mins but the buildings did collapse and the steel did lay in a heap of office material that did burn. so yeah, they did not cool down for hrs or days. so the diffusion you see and speak of did take hrs to occur.

Originally Posted by Sunstealer

Thermite or thermate acts over seconds producing temperatures high enough to melt the steel material in bulk. The above photomicrographs would be impossible if the material had been liquid.

i think it was used alittle differently. namely in those red gray chips that were hundreds of layers thick. they were pre made and one could probably roll X amount of layers of sulfur between layers of the red/gray material depending on the thickness of the steel. im sure one could easily produce sulfur that rolls out like tape with some sort of binder that holds the sulfur together. anyway, i think the device is more like a blowtorch that attacks the steel in that manner. not by just laying on the steel and reacting.

Originally Posted by Sunstealer

If you think it can then it's upto you to show this. Make up thermate and ignite it on some steel, take sections of the steel, mount, polish and etch those sections and show that it can. You nor any other truther will ever do the simple experiment.

actually i am working on something. got any idea where i could buy some magnetite that is as thin as the gray layer?? thats all i am looking for now. i believe you stated that the gray layer was magnetite.

Originally Posted by Sunstealer

Lastly you support Harrit et al. Please point out where the Sulphur is in the following EDX spectra:

i told ya how i think the sulfur got into the chips. thats just speculation. once the chips ignited, some blew off. thats what jones and crew found.

check out this pic. it is telling. prof astaneh took it soon after he arrived b/c its still on a truck bed. it looks as though the steel got attacked at the connection from both sides of the I beam. see how the bottom looks like a razor's edge. super thin...and some gone! IMO some accelerant device was placed on the I beam on both sides with the "torch" facing the direction of the connecion at an angle.

[Axxman300]

Originally Posted by Senenmut

check out this pic. it is telling. prof astaneh took it soon after he arrived b/c its still on a truck bed. it looks as though the steel got attacked at the connection from both sides of the I beam. see how the bottom looks like a razor's edge. super thin...and some gone! IMO some accelerant device was placed on the I beam on both sides with the "torch" facing the direction of the connecion at an angle.

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting...6c54b826e6.jpg

Wow, cool beans.

Now please tell us which building it came from (WTC-1,2,3,4,5,6,or 7). Then tell where in the particular building the beam was located. Then where was it's approximate location in the pile where it was pulled from?

When you can answer all those questions - then you can tell us if it's strange or not.

[Spanx]

Originally Posted by Senenmut

i think he did a better job than the fire wise professor in trying to recreate the office/debris fire that supposedly created the eutectic and "corroded" the steel.


i think it happened over mins but the buildings did collapse and the steel did lay in a heap of office material that did burn. so yeah, they did not cool down for hrs or days. so the diffusion you see and speak of did take hrs to occur.


i think it was used alittle differently. namely in those red gray chips that were hundreds of layers thick. they were pre made and one could probably roll X amount of layers of sulfur between layers of the red/gray material depending on the thickness of the steel. im sure one could easily produce sulfur that rolls out like tape with some sort of binder that holds the sulfur together. anyway, i think the device is more like a blowtorch that attacks the steel in that manner. not by just laying on the steel and reacting.


actually i am working on something. got any idea where i could buy some magnetite that is as thin as the gray layer?? thats all i am looking for now. i believe you stated that the gray layer was magnetite.


i told ya how i think the sulfur got into the chips. thats just speculation. once the chips ignited, some blew off. thats what jones and crew found.

check out this pic. it is telling. prof astaneh took it soon after he arrived b/c its still on a truck bed. it looks as though the steel got attacked at the connection from both sides of the I beam. see how the bottom looks like a razor's edge. super thin...and some gone! IMO some accelerant device was placed on the I beam on both sides with the "torch" facing the direction of the connecion at an angle.

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting...6c54b826e6.jpg

I think someone is doing an awful lot thinking and coming out with a complete load of ************

But I could be wrong, usually if it looks like it and smells like it

[swright777]

Originally Posted by Senenmut

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1zLIqitCqg

From that video:

Originally Posted by Jonathan H. Cole

... explosive nano-thermite ...

I guess they still don't get it. And I find it hard to take these scienticians seriously when they can't get the use of then and than right.

[Ivan Kminek]

Originally Posted by Senenmut

actually i am working on something. got any idea where i could buy some magnetite that is as thin as the gray layer?? thats all i am looking for now. i believe you stated that the gray layer was magnetite.

Sigh... very apparently, gray layers (magnetite or similar oxide) are scales of oxidized (and painted) WTC steel. You don't need to "buy" it, just go outside and look at some rusted steel objects in your neighbourhood - you will find such iron oxide scales for sure quite soon

[Senenmut]

Originally Posted by Axxman300

Wow, cool beans.

Now please tell us which building it came from (WTC-1,2,3,4,5,6,or 7). Then tell where in the particular building the beam was located. Then where was it's approximate location in the pile where it was pulled from?

When you can answer all those questions - then you can tell us if it's strange or not.

if we can get astaneh to start talking about those beams that showed steel wastage then maybe we could figure it out.
from an article:
"Dr. Astaneh-Asl, a professor of structural engineering at the University of California at Berkeley, changed out of his nightclothes and went downstairs for a closer look. Over the next few nights, he cataloged 30 to 40 of the mighty beams and columns as trucks stopped in front of the hotel.

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/02/sc...pagewanted=all

that piece of steel pictured was on the back of a truck... probably one he catalogued.

[Senenmut]

Originally Posted by Ivan Kminek

Sigh... very apparently, gray layers (magnetite or similar oxide) are scales of oxidized (and painted) WTC steel. You don't need to "buy" it, just go outside and look at some rusted steel objects in your neighbourhood - you will find such iron oxide scales for sure quite soon

remeber the multiple layer chips. i belive that there were multiple gray layers. i think one layer was high in carbon too. the oxide scales you speak of would not occur except close to the steel.

[Miragememories]

Originally Posted by Senenmut

"if we can get astaneh to start talking about those beams that showed steel wastage then maybe we could figure it out.
from an article:
"Dr. Astaneh-Asl, a professor of structural engineering at the University of California at Berkeley, changed out of his nightclothes and went downstairs for a closer look. Over the next few nights, he cataloged 30 to 40 of the mighty beams and columns as trucks stopped in front of the hotel.

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/02/sc...pagewanted=all

that piece of steel pictured was on the back of a truck... probably one he catalogued."

Nice find Senenmut.

A professor of structural engineering, has unimpeded access to WTC steel, transported fresh from Ground Zero, two weeks after 9/11.

The importance of his on-the-record observations cannot be ignored.

Originally Posted by NY Times

"One piece Dr. Astaneh-Asl saw was a charred horizontal I-beam from 7 World Trade Center, a 47-story skyscraper that collapsed from fire eight hours after the attacks. The beam, so named because its cross-section looks like a capital I, had clearly endured searing temperatures. Parts of the flat top of the I, once five-eighths of an inch thick, had vaporized."

bolding is mine

MM

[16.5]

Originally Posted by Miragememories

Nice find Senenmut.

A professor of structural engineering, has unimpeded access to WTC steel, transported fresh from Ground Zero, two weeks after 9/11.

The importance of his on-the-record observations cannot be ignored.


bolding is mine

MM

And you think that he supports truthering?

Bwhahahaha!!!

Quote him again, MM!

[Spanx]

Originally Posted by Senenmut

if we can get astaneh to start talking about those beams that showed steel wastage then maybe we could figure it out.
from an article:
"Dr. Astaneh-Asl, a professor of structural engineering at the University of California at Berkeley, changed out of his nightclothes and went downstairs for a closer look. Over the next few nights, he cataloged 30 to 40 of the mighty beams and columns as trucks stopped in front of the hotel.

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/02/sc...pagewanted=all

that piece of steel pictured was on the back of a truck... probably one he catalogued.

If Astaneh made his observations (over the next few nights) why is the I beam picture taken in day time ?

[Oystein]

Originally Posted by Miragememories

Nice find Senenmut.

A professor of structural engineering, has unimpeded access to WTC steel, transported fresh from Ground Zero, two weeks after 9/11.

The importance of his on-the-record observations cannot be ignored.


bolding is mine

MM

You bolded "searing temperatures".

What does that mean - "searing"? Can you put a number to it? In °C/°F - lower bound?

Thanks.

[Ape of Good Hope]

Originally Posted by Miragememories

Nice find Senenmut.

Not really. He's been trotting out the 2001 Kenneth Chang article as proof of this that and the other for several years.

2008:
http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php...&postcount=238

2009:
http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php...0&postcount=47

2010:
http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php...&postcount=311

2011:
http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php...&postcount=925

Originally Posted by Miragememories

A professor of structural engineering, has unimpeded access to WTC steel, transported fresh from Ground Zero, two weeks after 9/11.

The importance of his on-the-record observations cannot be ignored.

Neither can his email response to Senenmut:

"Let me state again that after 6 years of studying the collapse of World Trade Center, I have not found any evidence to support any of the claims of "conspiracy theorists". In my opinion, and based on scientific facts, the only cause of collapse was the structural and fire damage to the towers"

[remo]

"Parts of the flat top of the I, once five-eighths of an inch thick, had vaporized."
I'm no expert. You tell me. How hot does it have to be to vaporize steel? How hot does it have to be to spray molten iron spheroids over Manhattan 6% by mass in hundreds of acres of dissolved concrete ? Or create molybdenum microspheres? or drop 81 vertically columned 47 storied steel framed high rises straight down at gravitational acceleration?
How hot does it get to have all current metallurgic studies into what evidence was retrievable after the 'bordering on criminal' WTC evidence disposal state categorically extreme and unusual material damage inconsistent with 'normal office furnishings fires' but NONE go that one step further and ask WHAT?

Thats pretty hot.

[Sunstealer]

Originally Posted by remo

"Parts of the flat top of the I, once five-eighths of an inch thick, had vaporized."
I'm no expert. You tell me. How hot does it have to be to vaporize steel?

Explain in your own words what you mean by the term"vaporize".

[Sunstealer]

Originally Posted by remo

How hot does it get to have all current metallurgic studies into what evidence was retrievable after the 'bordering on criminal' WTC evidence disposal state categorically extreme and unusual material damage inconsistent with 'normal office furnishings fires' but NONE go that one step further and ask WHAT? .

I have no idea what you are talking about. Are you writing in your native language and then using google to translate it into English?

[Reactor drone]

Originally Posted by remo

...or drop 81 vertically columned 47 storied steel framed high rises straight down at gravitational acceleration?
...

Wow, I didn't know that many buildings had collapsed.

[BasqueArch]

Originally Posted by remo

"Parts of the flat top of the I, once five-eighths of an inch thick, had vaporized."
I'm no expert. You tell me. How hot does it have to be to vaporize steel? How hot does it have to be to spray molten iron spheroids over Manhattan 6% by mass in hundreds of acres of dissolved concrete ? Or create molybdenum microspheres? or drop 81 vertically columned 47 storied steel framed high rises straight down at gravitational acceleration?
How hot does it get to have all current metallurgic studies into what evidence was retrievable after the 'bordering on criminal' WTC evidence disposal state categorically extreme and unusual material damage inconsistent with 'normal office furnishings fires' but NONE go that one step further and ask WHAT?

Thats pretty hot.

Stream of consciousness writing is sometimes rewarded in the literature and psychology fields.
The rationals know there's no evidence of the use of thermite or explosives. The fires caused the failures of the three towers.

[Senenmut]

Originally Posted by Ape of Good Hope

Not really. He's been trotting out the 2001 Kenneth Chang article as proof of this that and the other for several years.

2008:
http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php...&postcount=238

2009:
http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php...0&postcount=47

2010:
http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php...&postcount=311

2011:
http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php...&postcount=925




Neither can his email response to Senenmut:

"Let me state again that after 6 years of studying the collapse of World Trade Center, I have not found any evidence to support any of the claims of "conspiracy theorists". In my opinion, and based on scientific facts, the only cause of collapse was the structural and fire damage to the towers"

that is funny you link an email because astaneh never has said that in any email. NEVER

[Senenmut]

Originally Posted by Sunstealer

Explain in your own words what you mean by the term"vaporize".

now i have emailed chang...the author of the article.

he states in the email "parts of the I-beam were indeed gone" ....that is what vaporized means. gone....

[Senenmut]

Originally Posted by Spanx

If Astaneh made his observations (over the next few nights) why is the I beam picture taken in day time ?

that was from the chang article. the pic of the I beam was from the Berkleyan. it states he collected data for 10 days.
“In just 10 days looking at the pieces that are coming out, I have learned so much important data about the collapse"

http://www.berkeley.edu/news/berkele...0/03_grou.html

[Senenmut]

Originally Posted by Oystein

You bolded "searing temperatures".

What does that mean - "searing"? Can you put a number to it? In °C/°F - lower bound?

Thanks.

is 1100C searing enough. remember, with 1100C sisson only got "little metal" to dissolve in 24 hrs. he will not give how little that little is. maybe it was much much higher!

[Oystein]

Originally Posted by Senenmut

is 1100C searing enough.

Is that a question? What do I know? You bolded "searing temperatures", that means you somehow think it's important. That means you must have an idea what it is important for and that it is "enough" for whatever you think!

So tell us: Is it "enough", yes or no, and what for?

Originally Posted by Senenmut

remember, with 1100C sisson only got "little metal" to dissolve in 24 hrs.

How much is little, and what is so special about 24 hrs. - would it be plausible that he got twice as much metal to dissolve in 48 hrs and five times as much in 120 hrs?

I.o.w., what's your point?

Originally Posted by Senenmut

he will not give how little that little is. maybe it was much much higher!

Well, yeah, maybe. Maybe not. Maybe the opposite. Right?


So your answer to my question "What does that mean - "searing"? Can you put a number to it? In °C/°F - lower bound?" really is:

No, I, senemut, cannot give you a lower bound, and don't know what it means

Agreed?

[plague311]

Originally Posted by Senenmut

if we can get astaneh to start talking about those beams that showed steel wastage then maybe we could figure it out.
from an article:
"Dr. Astaneh-Asl, a professor of structural engineering at the University of California at Berkeley, changed out of his nightclothes and went downstairs for a closer look. Over the next few nights, he cataloged 30 to 40 of the mighty beams and columns as trucks stopped in front of the hotel.

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/02/sc...pagewanted=all

that piece of steel pictured was on the back of a truck... probably one he catalogued.

I thought the evidence was removed before any real investigating could be done. That's kind of weird.

Hasn't Astaneh-Asl been completely covered? I found this thread which has a lot of information in it on the subject. I don't think he believes in conspiracy theories

[Senenmut]

Originally Posted by Oystein

Is that a question? What do I know? You bolded "searing temperatures", that means you somehow think it's important. That means you must have an idea what it is important for and that it is "enough" for whatever you think!

So tell us: Is it "enough", yes or no, and what for?


How much is little, and what is so special about 24 hrs. - would it be plausible that he got twice as much metal to dissolve in 48 hrs and five times as much in 120 hrs?

I.o.w., what's your point?

im just going to repost what i told chris b/c it answers your question:

of coarse something like that would take way longer than 24 hrs under ideal conditions(im speaking about the extreme steel wastage). HOW LONG is the question. if it is not feasible under normal office fire/debris fire scenario, then a paridigm shift might be needed. sisson (another professor at WPI) has done an experiment trying to reproduce the effects seen on the wtc steel using powders. he could only get "little metal" to dissolve the steel even at 1100C in 24 hrs!!! he will not tell us how "little" it was. consider this. from professor astaneh's observations and measurements, we learn that 1 inch of steel was gone after 0 to 18 days after 911. thats min and max corrosion rate.
"Steel flanges had been reduced from an inch thick to paper thin, Astaneh said."
http://www.berkeley.edu/news/berkele...0/03_grou.html

and another piece that experienced 15.9mm of steel wastage in only 0 to 8 days. the article does say he spent a fews days collecting samples so it might be alittle higher than 8 days. but i bet if astaneh would be willing to share his data with us, we could get the precise days of his observations.

so if sisson only got 5 micrometers of steel to dissolve in 24 hrs, we could multiply that out by days and get a number. would we see 1 inch gone at a max of 18 days or even 15.9 mm in alittle over a week. remember, he bypassed the office/debris fire even creating the eutectic. sisson just put it right on top of the steel and heated it up!!

[Senenmut]

Originally Posted by Miragememories

Nice find Senenmut.

A professor of structural engineering, has unimpeded access to WTC steel, transported fresh from Ground Zero, two weeks after 9/11.

The importance of his on-the-record observations cannot be ignored.


bolding is mine

MM

read this a few times. what is even more interesting is what he thinks happened after the steel got "vaporized"!!

"One piece Dr. Astaneh-Asl saw was a charred horizontal I-beam from 7 World Trade Center, a 47-story skyscraper that collapsed from fire eight hours after the attacks. The beam, so named because its cross-section looks like a capital I, had clearly endured searing temperatures. Parts of the flat top of the I, once five-eighths of an inch thick, had vaporized.

Less clear was whether the beam had been charred after the collapse, as it lay in the pile of burning rubble, or whether it had been engulfed in the fire that led to the building's collapse, which would provide a more telling clue.

The answer lay in the beam's twisted shape. As weight pushed down, the center portion had buckled outward.

''This tells me it buckled while it was attached to the column,'' not as it fell, Dr. Astaneh-Asl said, adding, ''It had burned first, then buckled.''


BURNED FIRST THEN BUCKLED. wow, he just said that the beam experienced extreme steel wastage and then buckled. Not as it fell.....not as it lay in the debris pile. while on the building it experienced the extreme steel wastage!!

[16.5]

Originally Posted by Senenmut

BURNED FIRST THEN BUCKLED. wow, he just said that the beam experienced extreme steel wastage and then buckled. Not as it fell.....not as it lay in the debris pile. while on the building it experienced the extreme steel wastage!!

WOW! No he didn't!!!

"burned" does not equal "extreme steel wastage."

But, ohhhhh, so close and only what 11 years later?

Good for you

[plague311]

Originally Posted by Senenmut

read this a few times. what is even more interesting is what he thinks happened after the steel got "vaporized"!!

"One piece Dr. Astaneh-Asl saw was a charred horizontal I-beam from 7 World Trade Center, a 47-story skyscraper that collapsed from fire eight hours after the attacks. The beam, so named because its cross-section looks like a capital I, had clearly endured searing temperatures. Parts of the flat top of the I, once five-eighths of an inch thick, had vaporized.

Less clear was whether the beam had been charred after the collapse, as it lay in the pile of burning rubble, or whether it had been engulfed in the fire that led to the building's collapse, which would provide a more telling clue.

The answer lay in the beam's twisted shape. As weight pushed down, the center portion had buckled outward.

''This tells me it buckled while it was attached to the column,'' not as it fell, Dr. Astaneh-Asl said, adding, ''It had burned first, then buckled.''


BURNED FIRST THEN BUCKLED. wow, he just said that the beam experienced extreme steel wastage and then buckled. Not as it fell.....not as it lay in the debris pile. while on the building it experienced the extreme steel wastage!!

He didn't say that, he said that it burned and buckled first. It has also been proven that he doesn't believe in any of the conspiracy theories, but does agree with the NIST report.

ETA: Bah, 16.5 beat me to it. My bad.

[Redwood]

Project for truthers: If we literally take Dr. Astaneh's remark that part of the steel had been "vaporized", figure the energy necessary to heat steel to the boiling point, plus the heat of vaporization (340 Kj/mole; compare to thermite's ~4Kj/mole) and tell us how much th*rmite was needed to accomplish this. Or could it be that Dr. Astaneh was speaking figuratively?