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

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar

in your professional opinion, can jet fuel melt steel beams? (professionals only)

  • yes it can

  • no it cannot

  • too close to call

Results are only viewable after voting.
brianmanahan

brianmanahan

Lifer
Sep 2, 2006
24,546
5,958
136
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.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Subyman

Subyman

Moderator <br> VC&G Forum
Mar 18, 2005
7,876
32
86
There are many variables to determine the maximum temperature achieved by a fire especially in a closed space with a fresh air intake. Similar to a bellows that ancient man used to melt iron. Placing iron over an open fire does nothing. Pump air into a furnace and it melts.
 
F

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,126
53,555
136
You realize there are a lot of reports on this by structural engineers that have examined this very thoroughly, right?

Long story short, jet fuel does not burn hot enough to melt steel. That being said, it not only wasn't the only thing burning, it DOES burn hot enough to weaken steel beams, which is what happened.
 
Bowfinger

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
It's the wrong question. The question should be could jet fuel and the conflagration that followed sufficiently weaken a damaged, steel beam support structure bearing the weight of 40-some stories of building enough to cause said support structure to fail. The answer to that question is yes.
 
F

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,126
53,555
136
brianmanahan said:
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.
Click to expand...

Serious question, if you're interested in expert opinion on this why not consult the huge amount of expert literature on it instead of coming to a politics forum and demanding only civil engineers answer?
 
brianmanahan

brianmanahan

Lifer
Sep 2, 2006
24,546
5,958
136
eskimospy said:
Serious question, if you're interested in expert opinion on this why not consult the huge amount of expert literature on it instead of coming to a politics forum and demanding only civil engineers answer?
Click to expand...

i dont know where to turn for straight answers, but i trust anandtech more than most places on the internet
 
brianmanahan

brianmanahan

Lifer
Sep 2, 2006
24,546
5,958
136
Bowfinger said:
It's the wrong question. The question should be could jet fuel and the conflagration that followed sufficiently weaken a damaged, steel beam support structure bearing the weight of 40-some stories of building enough to cause said support structure to fail. The answer to that question is yes.
Click to expand...

ahh that makes sense, it is not just a closed system
 
MomentsofSanity

MomentsofSanity

Lifer
Jan 25, 2011
16,942
9,344
146
Bowfinger said:
It's the wrong question. The question should be could jet fuel and the conflagration that followed sufficiently weaken a damaged, steel beam support structure bearing the weight of 40-some stories of building enough to cause said support structure to fail. The answer to that question is yes.
Click to expand...

And this is the right answer. The temperature required to melt steel is about 2750 degrees but far less heat is needed for it to lose its structural integrity. At 1100 degrees it loses 50% of its structural strength. Jet fuel burns up to 1500 degrees.

Steel will try to expand at the ends. When it can't it sags which will crack any surrounding concrete.

It's not like the WTC is the first steel frames building to have warped and sagged steel after a fire.
 
MagnusTheBrewer

MagnusTheBrewer

IN MEMORIAM
Jun 19, 2004
24,122
1,594
126
All steel is not created equal. I have seen turkey fryer fires burn, not melt, stainless steel pots.

Why is this in P & N?
 
Last edited:
brianmanahan

brianmanahan

Lifer
Sep 2, 2006
24,546
5,958
136
MomentsofSanity said:
And this is the right answer. The temperature required to melt steel is about 2750 degrees but far less heat is needed for it to lose its structural integrity. At 1100 degrees it loses 50% of its structural strength. Jet fuel burns up to 1500 degrees.

Steel will try to expand at the ends. When it can't it sags which will crack any surrounding concrete.

It's not like the WTC is the first steel frames building to have warped and sagged steel after a fire.
Click to expand...

very interesting, sometimes i wish i would have paid more attention in my couple of classes that dealt with such things
 
highland145

highland145

Lifer
Oct 12, 2009
43,973
6,334
136
Ignore politics and religion and this place is a font of information. I would not have known otherwise. Thanks, Guys.

Do we need another sub forum?
 
MomentsofSanity

MomentsofSanity

Lifer
Jan 25, 2011
16,942
9,344
146
brianmanahan said:
very interesting, sometimes i wish i would have paid more attention in my couple of classes that dealt with such things
Click to expand...

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.
 
Zaap

Zaap

Diamond Member
Jun 12, 2008
7,162
424
126
gradoman said:
This is still in question?
Click to expand...
Seriously. Hasn't this been gone over a gazillion times?

What part of all that needed to happen was the structure be weakened enough for 20 fucking stories worth of building to collapse down onto ONE story- and then the momentum of all those stories crashing down won't stop until the entire structure caves in- is too hard to understand that we need to dicker around about jet fuel and melting steel?

The only amazing thing to anyone with common sense is how the towers stood as long as they did with so many stories worth of weight crushing down on the severely damaged floors.
 
M

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,036
6,598
126
I heard it was the NSAor the CIAor some otherletter combo, that planted thermite on the girders to destroy some documents stored there and tostart a war in Iraq.

I have no idea, but absent any conspiracies the proof looks to be inthe pudding. Planes flew into buildings and they burned andfell. I sawit on TV.
 
C

cbrunny

Diamond Member
Oct 12, 2007
6,791
406
126
I am an analyst. I am in no way qualified to give an answer, but since you asked.... In my professional opinion, yes.
 
G

Greenman

Lifer
Oct 15, 1999
21,693
6,133
136
eskimospy said:
You realize there are a lot of reports on this by structural engineers that have examined this very thoroughly, right?

Long story short, jet fuel does not burn hot enough to melt steel. That being said, it not only wasn't the only thing burning, it DOES burn hot enough to weaken steel beams, which is what happened.
Click to expand...

This is exactly right. Major structural damage was a contributing factor as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom