NIST and Proof of Temperature.

(An oldie from the DemocraticUnderground archive... the difference between what's provable at the freeway collapse and the WTC should be obvious. Re-posted here for posterity. -r.)

NIST's New Mechanical and Metallurgical Analysis of Structural Steel (WTC)

by stickdog - Sun Jun-26-05

Highlights:

1) No WTC-7 steel was recovered or analyzed.

2) No unprocessed, intact floor trusses were recovered or analyzed.

3) No testing for explosives (or sulfidation or other residue of any kind) was performed.

4) Only 12 total core columns were recovered from WTC-1 & WTC-2 combined.

5) Of the recovered core pieces, none showed exposure to temperatures in excess of 250 C.

6) Of 170 examined areas on the perimeter column panels, only three showed exposure to temperatures in excess of 250 C and for one of these three forensic evidence indicated that the high temperature exposure occurred AFTER the collapse.

7) No recovered steel showed any evidence of exposure to temperatures above 600 C for any significant time.

http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/NISTNCSTAR1-3Draft.pdf

A total of 236 recovered pieces of WTC steel were cataloged; the great majority belonging to the towers, WTC 1 and WTC 2. These samples represented a quarter to half a percent of the 200,000 tons of structural steel used in the construction of the two towers. The NIST inventory included pieces from the impact and fire regions, perimeter columns, core columns, floor trusses, and other pieces such as truss seats and wind dampers.

The collection of steel from the WTC towers was sufficient for determining the quality of the steel and, in combination with published literature, for determining mechanical properties as input to models of building performance.

...

Of the 31 core floor truss connectors (core seats) recovered, about 90 percent were still intact, although many were extensively damaged. Only two were completely torn from the channel.

...

A coating on the SFRM prevented the loss of the SFRM in some locations on the perimeter columns. This coating appeared as a band of white features on the SFRM wherever two aluminum panels met on the exterior columns of the buildings, becoming visible when the panels were dislodged. This may be a coating applied to protect the SFRM from moisture infiltration at the aluminum panel joints, acting to preserve the SFRM even when the SFRM was knocked off both above and below those locations.

...

The pre-collapse photographic analysis showed that 16 recovered exterior panels were exposed to fire prior to collapse of WTC 1. None of the nine recovered panels from within the fire floors of WTC 2 were observed to have been directly exposed.

NIST developed a method to characterize maximum temperatures experienced by steel members using observations of paint cracking due to thermal expansion. The method can only probe the temperature reached; it cannot distinguish between pre- and post-collapse exposure. More than 170 areas were examined on the perimeter column panels ...

Only three locations had evidence that the steel reached temperatures above 250 °C.

These areas were:

• WTC 1, east face, floor 98, column 210, inner web,
• WTC 1, east face, floor 92, column 236, inner web,
• WTC 1, north face, floor 98, column 143, floor truss connector

Other forensic evidence indicates that the last example probably occurred in the debris pile after collapse. Annealing studies on recovered steels established the set of time and temperature conditions necessary to alter the steel microstructure. Based on the pre-collapse photographic evidence, the microstructures of steels known to have been exposed to fire were characterized. These microstructures show no evidence of exposure to temperatures above 600 °C for any significant time.

Similar results, i.e., limited exposure if any above 250 °C, were found for two core columns from the fire-affected floors of the towers.

...

No steel was recovered from WTC 7!

...

From the observations made of the spandrel connections on recovered panels, there was no difference in failure mode whether or not the panels were exposed to pre-collapse fires.

...

Table 6–2 lists the 12 identified core columns, including as-built locations and possible conditions to which they may have been exposed prior to the collapse of the buildings. Due to the small number of samples, statistical data analysis of the damage features and failure modes would be of little use. Therefore, in-depth descriptions of the four significant pieces (C-80, C-88a, C-88b, and HH) that were located within the fire zone floors are provided below. For reference, Fig. 6–29 displays the position of the columns within the core and with respect to the perimeter panel damage.

...

Core columns C-88a and C-88b, from WTC 2, were unique among the recovered core elements in that the columns were still connected at the welded column splice. ... There was no visible necking of the plate in the area of failure, with the remaining portion of the plate having been flame cut during the recovery effort. ... The fracture surfaces were too corroded for analysis.

Aside from the three columns discussed above, only one other core column was recovered from within the fire region.

...

All floor truss samples received at NIST were either small sections (less than 3 ft to 4 ft in length) of chord and rod material (Fig. 6–35a) or large, entangled masses ... According to Structural Engineers Association of New York (SEAoNY) volunteer members involved in the recovery effort, it was necessary to “ball up” any truss pieces of significant size to facilitate removal from the WTC site and subsequent handling in the recovery yards. This was necessary since the primary and bridging trusses for a given floor were welded together into huge grids. During the collapse, these lightweight floor sections were severely damaged and could not be easily removed. Thus, it is unknown when specific damage features occurred. Further, it is likely that sections of multiple trusses were “balled” together and labeled as a single unit rather than that NIST labeled samples consisting of just one pre-fabricated truss unit.

Attempts were made to identify the as-built location of the truss material, but unlike the other major structural elements, identifying marks could not be found on the trusses. Difficulty was also encountered in trying to measure the length of the truss members to determine if they were of the 35 ft or 60 ft variety. It appears that no whole length sections were recovered. A large majority of the compressive resistance welds between the chords and rods were observed to have failed. This was evident from the large amount of chord material recovered without rods attached and vice versa. It is unknown when these failures occurred or what caused them.

...

The spandrel steels identified as having been exposed to fire prior to the collapse of the building showed no microstructural evidence of change. Similar results indicated that three of the four seats observed to be exposed to severe pre-collapse fire conditions did not experience significant microstructural changes as a result of the exposure. However, the seat with the melted binder (Fig. 6–38) did show signs of microstructural alteration as a result of elevated temperature exposure, though it was unknown when this exposure occurred. Finally, in the several columns with known pre-collapse fire exposure, metallographic analysis provided no conclusive evidence that the steel exceeded 625 °C, based on calibrations in furnace exposure studies of WTC steel reported in NIST NCSTAR 1-3E.

...

Based on microstructural analysis of the recovered structural steel, there was no evidence indicating that the pre-collapse fires were severe enough to affect the steel microstructure of these pieces. Based upon this evidence, it is believed that no steel was recovered which experienced temperature excursions above 600 °C for any significant length of time as a result of the pre-collapse fires.

...

Because NIST recovered no steel from WTC 7, it is not possible to make any statements about its quality. The recommended values for the stress-strain behavior were estimated using the same methodology that was used for the WTC 1 and WTC 2 steels (NIST NCSTAR 1-3D). The static yield strengths were estimated from historical averages and corrected for testing rate effects.

Because, prior to collapse, WTC 7 did not suffer any high-strain rate events, NIST made no effort to estimate high-strain-rate or impact properties of the steel.

No metallography could be carried out because no steel was recovered from WTC 7.

...

Discernible changes to the microstructure of furnace exposed WTC steel were observed when exposed to a temperature of 625 °C for as little as 0.25 h. At or below 500 °C, no microstructural change was apparent using light optical microscopy. The hardness of these samples varied for a given temperature and material type, but correlated well with microstructural observations.

...

Of the 31 core floor truss connectors (core seats) recovered, about 90 percent were still intact though extensive damage may have occurred. Only two were observed to have been completely torn from the channel.

...

The pre-collapse photographic analysis showed that 16 of the 33 exterior panels recovered from WTC 1 were exposed to fire prior to building collapse. None of the nine recovered panels from within the fire floors of WTC 2 were observed to have been directly exposed.

It is difficult or impossible to determine if high-temperature exposure occurred prior to or after the collapse. Of the more than 170 areas examined on 21 exterior panels, only three locations had mudcracking of the paint, indicating that the steel may have reached temperatures in excess of 250 °C.

Annealing studies on recovered steels established the set of time and temperature conditions necessary to alter the steel microstructure. Based on the pre-collapse photographic evidence, the microstructures of steels known to have been exposed to fire were characterized. These microstructures show no evidence of exposure to temperatures above 600 °C for any significant time for the recovered pieces.

Two of the core columns with as-built locations in the fire-affected floors were examined for paint cracking. The few areas with sufficient paint for analysis did not show mud cracking patterns, indicating the columns did not exceed 250 °C.

This is a quote taken

This is a quote taken directly from the NIST report.
NIST has in its possession about 236 pieces of WTC Steel. Additionally, regions of impact and fire damage were emphasized in the selection of steel for the Investigation, NIST has samples of all 14 grades of steel used in the exterior column-spandrel panels. It also has samples of two grades of steel used for the core columns (wide flange and built-up box columns) that represent steel used to fabricate 99 percent of the core columns. {Most importantly} NIST believes that this collection of steel from the WTC Towers is adequate for purposes of the Investigation, which included estimating the maximum temperature reached by the steel.
So to recap.they deliberately chose steel from impact anf fire damaged areas and they state that the amount of steel was adequate for analasis.The results as you state did not show any of the core reached 250 degrees c,about the same temperature you cook a chicken in your oven at home..This is crucial to the NIST conclusions because they also state that without the fire weakening the core,the towers would have stood indefinately.250 degrees c is knowhere near hot enough to sufficiently weaken the core.That is why in NIST,s computer analasis they used a temperature of 700 degrees c.Why were they allowed to get away with that when the physical evidence was so contradictory.As a side note the physical tests done by NIST to evaluate the amount of floor sag showed that after the realistic burn time of 50 minutes the sag would be a paltry 4".The computer simulations showed a floor sag of 42" .Thats over 10 times more than the physical test result.This proves the computer simulations bear no resemblance to reality.The conclusion i have reached is that the NIST report debunks itself.They continually disregard physical evidence and continually contradict themselves.Without the physical evidence to prove their outrageous assumptions the report is null and void.

NEW:- Proof that the Thermal and Gravitational Energy...

Available Were Insufficient to Melt Steel in the Twin Towers and 7 World Trade Center on 9/11/01...

New Volume in Journal of 911 Studies...

Link : http://journalof911studies.com/volume/200704/ProfMorroneOnMeltingWTCsteel.pdf

By Terry Morrone - Professor Emeritus of Physics, Adelphi University

Many thanks and best wishes

NIST has in its possession

NIST has in its possession about 236 pieces of WTC Steel. Additionally, regions of impact and fire damage were emphasized in the selection of steel for the Investigation,

how exactly was NIST able to discern which pieces of steel were from the "impact and fire" regions of the wtc?
here we see wtc2, and 5/8 of it is just gone:
http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b108/janedoe444/.site1106.jpg

NIST and their phony pancake bacon & eggs or whatever theory is beneath contempt.

I have a question

I hope someone answers this:

How does the lack of evidence of any recovered steel in the rubble pile to have been exposed to any tempratures above 250C not contradict the reports of Molten Metal in the pile?

Another point, does this contradict the thermite theory? I thought it produced enormous tempratures?

I am asking honestly, please do not flame, I am not bedunker, just a 9/11 skeptic.

----------------------------------------------------------------

http://patriotsquestion911.com/

Help me shout 9/11 articles on:

www.shoutwire.com

I'll try

Q: How does the lack of evidence of any recovered steel in the rubble pile to have been exposed to any tempratures above 250C not contradict the reports of Molten Metal in the pile?

A: The steel that became molten IRON from the use of thermate, for example, is not part of the material considered "recovered steel". I think they are saying 'of the recovered steel, none was found to have been exposed...etc...'

Q: does this contradict the thermite theory? I thought it produced enormous tempratures?

A: No, as explained in the first answer. Yes, Thermate produces enormous temperatures and the by product is molten iron and aluminum oxide dust/smoke (white, whispy). People often say "steel" or "molten steel" which is what they thought it to be, its most likely molten iron which is the byproduct of the thermate/thermite reaction.

Sorry if I have misunderstood your questions

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Physics/Science/Mathematics do not lie, only people do.
9/11 was an INSIDE JOB

Ok

Ok cool, I got the first point.

But the second point, isn't the thermite supposed to "cut" through steel by actually exposing it to very high tempratures enough to melt it?

I understand now that what you are tying to say is, that molten metal reported is postulated to be molten Iron according to the the Thermite/ Thermate theory.

P.S. thanks for the explanation.
----------------------------------------------------------------

http://patriotsquestion911.com/

Help me shout 9/11 articles on:

www.shoutwire.com

Q: wasn't the molten iron

Q: wasn't the molten iron alleged to be red hot even after being sprayed with water continuously for 100 days?
if this allegation were indeed true could thermate have been responsible for this alleged length of time?

http://www.saunalahti.fi/wtc2001/soldier4.htm

No

We know that Fires existed for 100 days, but we do not know that Iron was red hot for 100 days. In fact on 23/9/2001, most of the hot spots were gone.

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/rubblefires.html

----------------------------------------------------------------

http://patriotsquestion911.com/

Help me shout 9/11 articles on:

www.shoutwire.com

Not sure on duration

but one thing we know for sure was there indeed was molten "metal" witnessed on 9/11 and in the recovery efforts/clean up for some time after the event. Was it 100 days later? None of us can answer that unless we were witness to it, at that time. What we do know, however:

1) There is video of orange molten metal pouring out of the north side of the south tower just prior to its collapse, which has been proven to NOT be aluminum from the aircraft. It does display the white whisps of smoke that the thermate reaction would produce as aluminum oxide.

2) Firefighters and cleanup crews are on record, on video, describing "flowing" "molten steel" (again, mischaracterized as steel) "running down the channel rails, like youre in a foundary, like lava in a volcano" down in the bottoms of the wreckage pile some time after the day of 9/11. Not sure how long after, but if they are in the bottom of these piles (some 8-11 storeys high including the sub basements) I would image it would have taken some fair span of time (months?) to get down that far.

Again as for duration I cant say, but as for the presence of molten "metal", I think we can agree its undeniable.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Physics/Science/Mathematics do not lie, only people do.
9/11 was an INSIDE JOB

Here's a picture taken 50 days after 9/11...

on 31-Oct-2001

Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.us


You have the famous "hold off the water" video, where the chief fireman on the video states "it's almost six weeks"...


The below picture, taken by Frank Silecchia (GZ clean-up worker) with the quote...

this is a picture of Tower #1 ..2 months later, molten steel

Source : http://web.archive.org/web/20020609005905/http://www.wtcgodshouse.com/photos.html


Hope this helps a bit, best wishes

It's not complicated. All of

It's not complicated. All of the steel in those buildings make up the total set (A) of data regarding the steel. NIST selected a portion of set (A) to describe, set (B). Set (B) has certain traits. These traits are not necessarily the same as other traits in set (A). It's dishonest science. Plain and simple. They are giving some facts, not ALL the facts. The fact that they did this should make EVERYONE question their motives for presenting a subset of the available data.

There is no contradiction here. They just selected a small portion of the total data to discuss.

"... In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." (Galileo Galilei, 1564 - 1642)
OIL IS OBSOLETE - WAKE UP - YOU'VE BEEN LIED TO, AGAIN!
http://www.waterfuelcell.org/

I see

You mean that the samples that NIST have collected may not have necessarily been exposed to thermite. Right?

It makes sense though.

----------------------------------------------------------------

http://patriotsquestion911.com/

Help me shout 9/11 articles on:

www.shoutwire.com

Thats the point it does

Thats the point it does contradict in a very big way.A simple analogy is does your cooker weaken when cooking at 250 degrees c.Of course it doesn,t and nor did the core.Evidence of steel examined from WTC7 showed eutectic reaction occurred.In simple terms two or more solid phases followed by a liquid stage.This liquid stage is molten metal,the eutectic reaction proves positively that molten steel did occur.FEMA acknowledge the phenomenon but cannot explain it.Sulfer was found in the grain structure of the steel so an outside force was in action.Basically the sulfer would reduce the temperature that the steel would melt from over 1500 degrees c to 900 degrees c.Thermite produces sulfer and is a viable explanation,it is the only thing NIST and FEMA have not examined.Eutectic reaction is widely understood but has never occurred in a building fire in the history of steel framed buildings.Then again no steel framed building has ever collapsed due to fire in the history of steel framed buildings.There are two cast in stone facts,1 the steel of the core never reached 250 degrees c and 2 molten steel was found at all three sites.That contradiction is so immense it is proof positive an outside energy played a big part in the collapse.We need to know what that energy was.This was no conventional collapse.