This was posted over at the DU 9/11 forums by zforce. I hope he does'nt mind me reposting it here.


The NIST had found themselves in quite a pickle after the NIST's Metallurgical Results had attested to temps of less than 250c in Oct of 2004. The reason: the findings had contradicted their initial findings that the steel was adequate (representative) for the needs of the investigation (whole technical investigation), and more importantly, at the same time the findings had contradicted their "Fire Weakening" hypothesis.

So what did the NIST do?


They, with a slight of hand, had changed their "adequate steel sample" from being adequate for the investigation (whole), to it only being adequate in determining the quality of the steel (final report).

The NIST did this even though in June 2004, before the "Steel temperature results" the NIST had clearly stipulated..

The collection of steel from the WTC towers is adequate for purposes of NIST’s investigation (i.e., chemical, metallurgical, and mechanical property analyses as well as a substantial damage assessment and failure mode examination) to examine why and how WTC 1 and WTC 2 collapsed following the impact of the aircraft and ensuing fires.

As you can clearly see above, the NIST clearly states, the collection of steel was adequate for the needs of the investigation (whole) - Chemical, Metallurgical,and Mechanical property analyses as well as a substantial damage assessment and failure mode examination.

Moreover, the NIST details exactly what the Metallurgical Investigation consists of in other papers describing their investigation..

Collection and Analysis of Forensic Evidence: structural steel, material specimens and other forensic evidence to the extent they have been collected or are otherwise available; metallurgical and mechanical analysis of steel to evaluate quality and estimate maximum temperatures; analysis of fire and elevator control panels.

Hence, "The collection of steel is considered adequate for the needs of the investigation above"

Just in case more evidence is needed to ascertain the details of the investigation...

NIST is implementing its technical plan to address these issues (see A primary objective of the investigation is to determine why and how the towers collapsed after the initial impact of the aircraft. As part of this investigation, the Materials Reliability and Metallurgy Divisions in MSEL are studying more than 200 structural steel pieces from the WTC site. Progress in this study is outlined here..............

.......Task 3: Property data to support studies of structure performance and airplane impact modeling. Fourteen grades of steel were specified in the design of the WTC towers. All grades have been characterized for room-temperature mechanical properties, and initial high-temperature test results are complete. Testing at high strain rate is underway to determine the effects of strain rate on the mechanical properties of the outer columns, the inner columns and the spandrels. Chemical composition and metallographic examinations have been completed on the majority of the steels. Creep, or time-temperature-dependent behavior of some steels will be studied after the high temperature properties are developed.........

Task 5: Metallographic analysis of steel to estimate temperature extremes. Microscopic, macroscopic and metallographic analyses are under way to determine the maximum temperature excursions seen by the steel.

Hence as was stated before regarding task's 3 and 5...

---The collection of steel is considered adequate for the needs of the investigation above"---

So, as you can clearly see, the Metallurgical aspect of the investigation which the steel was adequate for, had consisted both of determining quality, and determining steel temperatures.

Last but not least, lets turn to the NAIL in the coffin.
The "Nail in the coffin" is evidence of the fact that the NIST had actually discussed changing their initial findings from the steel being adequate for the investigation to it being adequate to only part of the investigation (determining quality).

Note, this discussion had taken place on the very same day the results of the steel being less than 250c had been presented - Oct 19th 2004.

C: As John Barsom said, the statement is not accurate. The validity of the model question from yesterday speaks to this issue. I do not believe that we have enough forensic evidence. It may be okay to establish steel quality. There was no effort by the Building Performance Study team to systematically look at the steel.

C: The use of the term “adequate” needs to be revisited. There is no core column test to support the hypothesis. The floors came down, the slabs were pulverized. This was unprecedented. Exterior columns and core remained. The floors group will attack this finding

In summary, the NIST had only focused on one, and only one conclusion throughout its entire investigation, and that one conclusion being the assumption that fires were the cause of the two buildings collapsing.

That is the sole reason the NIST had ignored the metallurgical analysis results of the WTC structural steel . Over and over again, the wtc steel indicated temps of less than 250c, which inturn naturally indicated fires not being the cause for the collapses, yet the NIST kept on with their assumptions and computer generated simulations via their assumptions, that the steel had attained temps of 550c, even though there was not one piece of metallurgical evidence in support thereof..even going so far as tweaking their initial findings of the steel being adequate to it being inadequate in the final report, thus bolstering their POS, lying computer generated garbage.