ASSESSMENT COMMENTS ON METALLURGICAL ANALYSIS AURORA, TX ALUMINUM
SAMPLE
Anonymous, PA, 2008
1.1 Introduction
In 1973, samples from a mass of aluminum were sent by John F.
Schluesser to several metallurgical labs for analysis. From the
photographs it appears to be an irregular chip-like mass approximately
3 cm x 2 cm by 1 cm. In the published documents, it is claimed to
have been received from Bill Case of Dallas, TX on June 19, 1973. Mr.
Case reportedly found it beneath 4 inches of soil in a field in Aurora
TX, lodged against a limestone rock face.
Figure 1. Photographs of aluminum sample obtained from B. Case, 1973.
Numbers on top scale correspond to 0.1 inch.
As this was an amateur investigation, there is no documentation of
proof that the sample came from this location. Furthermore, as its
provenance is associated with Mr. Schuessler and Mr. Case, both
associated with studies of paranormal phenomena and hoaxes, it is
highly questionable that this sample was found in the location
stated. There is no information regarding the age of the sample.
Nonetheless, the sample did exist in 1973, and was subjected to
seemingly valid metallurgical analysis. It is on these results that
we comment.
1.2 Analytical Results
Figure 2. Sketch of sample and its sectioning into multiple samples
for analysis (Schuessler documentation 1973)
The sample was apparently sectioned and sent to several analysis
labs. The results are tabulated below.
1.2.1 EDAX Analysis
Robert J. Danmeller, Marion Russo, (organization not given)
In the documentation, it states this organization was given sample #2,
but from their sketches, however, it appears they may have been sent
sample #1. Analysis was conducted using SEM imaging and EDAX
composition analysis.Runs 1-4 were taken from the face of a surface
exposed by the sectioning, and correspond to the interior of the
sample. EDAX specra indicates strong Al peak with 2 secondary peaks
labeled Fe. Run 5 was taken from an exterior surface region.
Material Peak Actual (keV) Run 1interior Run 2interior Run 3interior
Run 4interior Run 5surface Reported(keV)
Mg Ka1 1.254 -- -- -- -- --
Mg K-edge 1.303 -- -- -- -- --
Al Ka1 1.487 4000* 4000* 4000* 4000* 4000 1.45 (Al)
Al K-edge 1.560 -- -- -- -- --
Si Ka1 1.740 -- -- -- -- 304 1.70 (Si)
Si K-edge 1.840 -- -- -- -- --
S Ka1 2.308 -- -- -- -- --
Pb Ma1 2.346 -- -- -- -- 194 2.35 (Pb)
Bi Ma1 2.423 -- -- -- -- --
S K-edge 2.470 -- -- -- -- --
Cl Ka1 2.622 -- -- -- -- 122 2.65 (Cl)
K Ka1 3.314 -- -- -- -- 161 3.30 (K)
K K-edge 3.608 -- -- -- -- --
Ca Ka1 3.692 -- -- -- -- 168 3.70 (Ca)
Ti Ka1 4.511 -- -- -- -- 615 4.50 (Ti)
Ti K-edge 4.965 -- -- -- -- 137 4.95 (Ti)
Cr Ka1 5.415 -- -- -- -- --
Mn Ka1 5.899 -- -- -- -- --
Cr K-edge 5.989 -- -- -- -- --
Fe Ka1 6.404 100* 200* 1400* 100* 217 6.40 (Fe)
Mn K-edge 6.538 -- -- -- -- --
Fe K-edge 7.111 -- 30* 200* -- 66 7.05 (Fe)
Ni Ka1 7.478 -- -- -- -- --
Cu Ka1 8.048 -- -- -- -- --
Cu K-edge 8.980 -- -- -- -- --
Zn Ka1 8.639 -- -- -- -- --
Zn K-edge 9.661 -- -- -- -- --
Pb La1 10.55 -- -- -- -- 54 10.55 (Pb)
Bi La1 10.84 -- -- -- -- --
Table 1. Peak intensities from EDAX analysis on metallurgical sample
taken at 4 interior locations (Runs 1-4) and one location on the
exterior surface (Run 5). Data in rightmost column are peak
locations reported, along with the material they were indexed to. (*)
indicates estimate from EDAX screen shots
Energy dispersive X-ray (EDAX) is useful for identifying the presence
of elements in an alloy, but quantitative composition measurement
requires careful calibration to known standards. Nonetheless, there
is no observable Cu or Zn found anywhere in the sample. This suggests
the sample is a pure Al-Fe alloy, with some surface contamination.
1.2.2 MDRL Laboratory
Ronald A. Weiss, Sr. Group Engineer, McDonnell-Douglas Research
Laboratory
The analysis was conducted by J.E. Holliday using X-Ray fluorescence
and soft X-Ray spectroscopy. It is stated they were given sample #1
Material XRay fluorescence Soft X-Ray spectroscopy
Al 0.95 0.98
Fe 0.05 0.01-0.02
Table 2. Composition of metallurgical sample determined by x-ray
analysis
In this analysis, Holliday reports the presence of cavities often
associated with shrinking, and an overall microstructure consistent
with solidification processing. He identifies small crystals of Fe-Al
intermetallic compound. It is noted they are more numerous near the
outer surface than in the interior. The percentage of Fe is higher in
the XRF signal because it samples the enitre cut surface, while the
soft X-ray spectroscopy samples only a 1mm x 3mm spot on the cut
surface, initially located in the interior of the sample. The second
phase inclusions are described as needle-like, but their sizes are not
given.
1.2.3 Spectro-Chemical Research Laboratories
3300 West Lawrence Avenue, Chicago IL 60625, Bernard B. Hauser
This analysis by an independent lab appears to have been ordered by
Art Bethke, (Motorola?). It is not clear if this sample is from the
same where this sample was cut from. Bethke later reported the
composition most closely matched the 2011 alloy. The standard
composition range for this alloy is shown for comparison the Table
below.
Material Sample Alloy 2011
Al balance balance
Cu 5.68 5.0-6.0
Zn 0.02 0.30 max
Fe 0.38 0.7 max
Si 0.26 0.40 max
Mn 0.02 (
- posted
14 years ago