in your professional opinion, can jet fuel melt steel beams?

[Newell Steamer]

please, no laymen voting in this poll, only people with relevant professional experience.

And remember, if you do NOT support the idea that jet fuel can melt steel beams, you are attacking free thought - which means you are clearly under the control of lizard people.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

A jet fuel fire will not melt steel. However, it will expose steel to temperatures above 1000 F and it just takes 10 minutes at this temperature for exposed steel to lose a vast majority of it's structural strength. "Fire proofing" on structural steel will delay failure.

<-- Fire protection engineer

 

[Matt1970]

You also need to think of what would have been involved with rigging those buildings with explosives.

 

[Genx87]

It cant melt steel. But it can weaken it. And a weakened steel is all that is needed for it to fail in office buildings.

 

[werepossum]

This is still in question?

No. Freakin' wood fire can deform steel beams if the draw is right.

People who don't believe jet fuel can melt steel beams should be more concerned about how many years worth of steel beams remain to be mined. Sheesh.

 

[Pacfanweb]

This is still in question?

Only from the most moronic of mouth breathing mongoloids.

Anyone with just a bit of brain power knows why the buildings fell: Planes hit them, fire weakened the structure, they collapsed. End of story.

 

[Humpy]

i have seen many people say that jet fuel cannot melt steel beams, but i am not a chemist or mechanical engineer so i don't know if it is true.

industrial professionals of P&N, is it your opinion that jet fuel would be able to melt steel beams?

please, no laymen voting in this poll, only people with relevant professional experience.

100% no. Jet fuel can dissolve some substances though.

 

[BergeLSU]

Here's the easiest way I can present it in lay terms:

At 1000ºF (~550ºC), the Yield Strength of Steel is almost half that at room temperatures.

Yield Strength is the point where steel will begin to deform and not return to its original shape. Think of it like a spoon. You can bend a spoon lightly and it will return back to the original form. Bend a little harder and it will stay that way.

Heat it up a few hundred degrees and it will deform plastically much easier.

So, it can't melt steel, but it can certainly do enough to destroy a building.

 

[clamum]

Only from the most moronic of mouth breathing mongoloids.

Anyone with just a bit of brain power knows why the buildings fell: Planes hit them, fire weakened the structure, they collapsed. End of story.

LOL, "mongoloids." Not too many people use that one. I like you.

I'm still waiting for the 9/11 Truther nutter failures to comment in here.

 

[Homerboy]

Well, with the strategically placed explosives by the CIA, yes.

 

[pontifex]

9/11 was 14 years ago...hasn't this been done to death already? and why bring this up now anyway?

 

[glenn1]

The other thing to remember is jet fuel was only the catalyst for the fire. It wasn't the only combustible. The jet fuel probably only burned about ten minutes.

NIST reported some pockets of fire reached about 1850 degrees. At that temperature steel would be down to around 10% of its normal strength.

You mean an office building might be full of paper which is also flammable and it wasn't jet fuel alone? Unpossible!

 

[mmntech]

Not a professional myself, but my dad is a civil engineer work worked on large steel and concrete structures. Bridges and dams. I grew up around heavy construction.

Yeah, the truther argument comes from a poor understanding of physics, metallurgy and engineering. Jet fuel may not be able to melt steel, but the heat it generates will soften it. Especially when you have a large, sustained fire. This will cause it to deform, in the same way a blacksmith deforms hot metal with a hammer.

So now you have weakened steel supporting the entire weight of the floors above. The beam itself isn't going to give out. What will give out is the weakest points: bolts and welds. When those finally break, it triggers a chain reaction causing the structure to pancake as mass x acceleration adds up.

Fortunately construction techniques have changed since the WTC was built. Fireproofing technology has improved. You also see the use of thicker concrete slabs. The problem with super tall buildings though is they need to be light and sway with the wind. Which the WTC was good at, but ironically made it less structurally sound. Part of why the Empire State Building survived its own place crash was the thick masonry that contained the fire.

 

[PieIsAwesome]

It doesn't need to melt it, the extreme heat is enough to change the steel's microstructure and therefore its mechanical properties.

This is on top of the decrease in strength that occurs with increasing temperature.

 

[Linflas]

I'm not a professional but I'm pretty sure office furniture, reams of paper etc all set on fire by burning jet fuel can cause a fire intense enough to weaken steel. Everyone seems to forget that the jet fuel was just the initial fuel that set everything else on fire.

 

[SlitheryDee]

Yeah well explain this then.

 

[Vdubchaos]

Funny how people still focus on 9/11.....and continue to ignore the greatest robbery on the planet that took place after.

Taking money that's not even there yet from Americans and handing it over to Military/Weapons/Security and other corp interest is the name of the game.

Eike warned us about it, it's been thriving every since and only getting bigger.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military–industrial_complex

 

[KeithTalent]

Don't know, don't care.

KT

 

[JEDIYoda]

Yeah well explain this then.

http://www.debunking911.com/thermite.htm

 

[JEDIYoda]

Threads like this should be locked! Nothing can come of these threads other than more stupidity by the people starting these threads!!

 

[SlitheryDee]

http://www.debunking911.com/thermite.htm

Bunch of conjecture. Might have been workers during cleanup? Sulphur might have come from burning computers? Clearly someone who formed an opinion and then looked for facts that fit their preconceived notions. Not buying it.

 

[Vdubchaos]

Bunch of conjecture. Might have been workers during cleanup? Sulphur might have come from burning computers? Clearly someone who formed an opinion and then looked for facts that fit their preconceived notions. Not buying it.

I don't know what happened on 9/11 (weather it was government planned or true terrorist attack).....neither do I care.

What I do know is that government managed to extract extraordinary amounts of money from American people every since.

I also know that most American's are easily convinced of just about anything. For example, Mr.Snowden is a hero, yet most Americans will tell you he is quite the opposite.

I also don't believe or trust in ANY "corporation/entity" or Government or what they tell me.

Government proving ANYTHING on 9/11 would be equivalent to murderer telling me that they are not guilty (kind of, I don't know......hard to believe).

I'm not taking any sides, but I know that American people are getting raped....

 

[GagHalfrunt]

All steel is not created equal. I have seen turkey fryer fires burn, not melt, stainless steel pots.

Why is this in P & N?

Better question is why is this in 2015?

 

[midwestfisherman]

Did I suddenly get transported from OT to P&N??? WTF?!

 

[Vdubchaos]

Bunch of conjecture. Might have been workers during cleanup? Sulphur might have come from burning computers? Clearly someone who formed an opinion and then looked for facts that fit their preconceived notions. Not buying it.

You mean the heroes and workers that were putting their LIVES on the line and THEN had to SUE the government to cover their health expenses etc as they were left on their own afterwords?

BTW, no different than our hero soldiers. It's embarrassing and shocking what this country does to their "heroes" when they return and need help with injuries etc.