Im so Valve coded that I thought they were talking about Steam the program and threw a cake in to the machine that powers the servers for everyone to download their game
Assuming there's enough fuel (likely coal) and heat in there, it should be able to evaporate the water content of the cake before the firebox becomes too cold to burn things anymore. At that point, the cake will burn like any other organic material.
We ran a rat (that was already dead from natural causes) through a heat treatment furnace att 890 degrees. That's when we learned that it was not a good way to dispose of bodies. No oxygen means no flame. Came out chared but whole.
Surprisingly not. The heat scorches the surface pretty quickly, but there's enough moisture in a decent cake to delay it igniting for some minutes before it dries out enough to burn.
Ngl, "someone with personal experience chucking pastry foods into a steam loco's firebox" is not the level of extreme specificity I expected in the Imgur comments section today
Reddit in 2010, absolutely. Imgur today, unexpected. Almost irrelevant, I interviewed to drive trains once, but I lived too far to meet their emergency protocols.
The metal body is being cooled by all the water around it, so it basically never reaches higher temperatures than the water around it. Since it is a pressurised system, the steam is in the 200-300 °C range: and so, the steel wall won't get hotter than this.
Expect if you ran out of water, but then that causes a LOT of issues...
Jet fuel burns at like 650C. Steel loses like 2/3rds of its strength by then. Do you think the designers of the WTC were accounting for their steel losing 2/3rds of its strength and also having had an entire jumbo jet slammed into it?
Okay, now add like 1/2-2/3 of the ambient temperature load capacity of the beam on top of it, and raise the temperature of the beam to 650 where it loses 2/3 of its load-bearing capacity. Do the math. :o)
Bonus points for a load supported by a grid of these beams, raising their temperature, and then also violently removing 20% of the beams to simulate damage, see how that goes.
It didn't have to melt, it only had to get glowing hot. The very long horizontal floor beams would get longer as they heated up, gradually losing strength. At a certain temp they'd abruptly sag, going from pushing to pulling and shearing the rivets holding them. Once enough did it the debris pile got so heavy no single floor could hold it and down it went. That's also why the scale model didn't collapse, the effect would only work at full size.
Genuinely did not expect to find a 911 denier in here today. Wild that this was ever a thing and especially this long after. That takes some serious effort to not understand basic information.
consider how i got a -16 i presume its me thats the denier.. im not. just noticing that had the aircraft just slammed into it no fire it would collapse anyway... the fire just made it worse. Also how on earth can someone be a 911 Denier... Like its not like the two tower where out in some random bushwack whit no camera pointed at it.. it was in the middle of NY whit prime time news coverage from the moment if not before the plane hit untill long after it fell.
5knotcans
Sounds like a Friday night babyyy!
TomWest61
Make fun for the oven to have a sugar cust.
WisconsinCentral2714
They almost got fired for this, until someone informed their bosses it would be a PR nightmare because of all the good reactions to it
lonelyrangerofthedreams
The kid went to the birthday for the cake:
Redshadow09
Im so Valve coded that I thought they were talking about Steam the program and threw a cake in to the machine that powers the servers for everyone to download their game
Telemapus
I bet that smelled really good for three seconds.
NickNoltesDrinkingShack
I'm a fan of the fire box myself... More interested in pies then... Poor cake 😞
feltenix
Does, does anyone have this legendary video?
grillinginthenameof
I've never seen a version of this that wasn't this screenshot referencing a video that may or may not exist
Bob122872
Men only want one thing and it's disgusting.
australind
My new favourite phrase 'chucking a chocolate cake into her firebox'
reverendbonobo
"And other old-timey names for kinky sex acts."
petpet3d
Alaskan pipeline
IAmNotNSAsodonotbeparanoid
Is it anything like tongue punching the fartbox?
somethingstupidandclever
Shes not a steam engine but she has a fire box
MoralRectifier
*giggity*
shitheadtookmyname
Title of your Interracial Irish sex tape
Bob122872
Jerome chucked a chocolate cake into Lois's firebox before she met Peter.
BastardMan1977
That doesn't seem smart
FiftyShadesOfCauliflower
It seems like pointless food waste to me. Why not serve the cake to the train crew instead
3Davideo
Assuming there's enough fuel (likely coal) and heat in there, it should be able to evaporate the water content of the cake before the firebox becomes too cold to burn things anymore. At that point, the cake will burn like any other organic material.
InfocalypseRising
I imagine it probably just burns to ash like everything else they toss in there
MightyIink
I wonder how many murders steam train drivers get away with?
Baalzak
I'm going to guess you probably know the same number of serial killers as you do steam train engineers.
That's not a coincidence.
R100GSPD
I was wondering where my potential went...
lightfoot2
Aw man, that is going to make a mess.....
ddubya42
for a few minutes, at least
lightfoot2
I guess it would carbonize, but still something is going to be baked into the fire bricks. Or maybe I am thinking small.
myeyesthegogglesdonothing
There's fire bricks, it's a steel steam engine
ddubya42
I mean, I'm no rocket surgeon, but I'd think that the cake would be reduced to carbon just like the coal would, and wouldn't behave any differently
Cronos51101
Yeah... Birthday cheer and well wishes. That's the point...
Babomonkey
A locomotive firebox can get up to 2500 degrees F. I expect the cake would be vaporized in seconds.
Swedishbouldering
We ran a rat (that was already dead from natural causes) through a heat treatment furnace att 890 degrees. That's when we learned that it was not a good way to dispose of bodies. No oxygen means no flame. Came out chared but whole.
65454685132465846865163
yeah but that's only about 80 celcius
OdinYggd
Surprisingly not. The heat scorches the surface pretty quickly, but there's enough moisture in a decent cake to delay it igniting for some minutes before it dries out enough to burn.
TeachingClayGuy
It would take a minute. I've thrown doughnuts and stuff in our kiln, at 2300 the sugars still melt then burn.
Feralkyn
Ngl, "someone with personal experience chucking pastry foods into a steam loco's firebox" is not the level of extreme specificity I expected in the Imgur comments section today
swofromtherock
Reddit in 2010, absolutely. Imgur today, unexpected.
Almost irrelevant, I interviewed to drive trains once, but I lived too far to meet their emergency protocols.
stonerhino
Okay, and its made of steel... right? and what else do we know of that apparently melted at lower temperatures? eh? eh?
WienerFart
A horse
SoItGoesQuarantineEdition
Very small stones?
FeedTheNachoMan
A duck!
DoctorEnsignCrusher
exactly.
TheWhiteBarry
7/11 was a part time job
Vortexhelios320
...chocolate frosting? /s
BuiltonSin
Wood!
SirButcher
The metal body is being cooled by all the water around it, so it basically never reaches higher temperatures than the water around it. Since it is a pressurised system, the steam is in the 200-300 °C range: and so, the steel wall won't get hotter than this.
Expect if you ran out of water, but then that causes a LOT of issues...
MrAcurite
Jet fuel burns at like 650C. Steel loses like 2/3rds of its strength by then. Do you think the designers of the WTC were accounting for their steel losing 2/3rds of its strength and also having had an entire jumbo jet slammed into it?
ZackWester
yep.. Like slap a steal beam into the ground. slam a car on fire (no gas) into it and see how it collapses.
Zyrixion
Okay, now add like 1/2-2/3 of the ambient temperature load capacity of the beam on top of it, and raise the temperature of the beam to 650 where it loses 2/3 of its load-bearing capacity. Do the math. :o)
Bonus points for a load supported by a grid of these beams, raising their temperature, and then also violently removing 20% of the beams to simulate damage, see how that goes.
OdinYggd
It didn't have to melt, it only had to get glowing hot. The very long horizontal floor beams would get longer as they heated up, gradually losing strength. At a certain temp they'd abruptly sag, going from pushing to pulling and shearing the rivets holding them. Once enough did it the debris pile got so heavy no single floor could hold it and down it went. That's also why the scale model didn't collapse, the effect would only work at full size.
myeyesthegogglesdonothing
Genuinely did not expect to find a 911 denier in here today. Wild that this was ever a thing and especially this long after. That takes some serious effort to not understand basic information.
ZackWester
consider how i got a -16 i presume its me thats the denier.. im not. just noticing that had the aircraft just slammed into it no fire it would collapse anyway... the fire just made it worse. Also how on earth can someone be a 911 Denier... Like its not like the two tower where out in some random bushwack whit no camera pointed at it.. it was in the middle of NY whit prime time news coverage from the moment if not before the plane hit untill long after it fell.