On 23/06/2017 13:46, Martin Brown wrote:
On 23/06/2017 12:43, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/06/17 11:34, Martin Brown wrote:
On 23/06/2017 09:23, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/06/17 09:09, Martin Brown wrote:


If it is decomposing and oxidising it produces heat at a rate that is
determined by the mass loss per unit time and how completely it is
oxidised.

No. Google endothermic reaction

Endothermic oxidation reactions are incredibly rare (are there any apart
from the formation of ozone?). To the best of my knowledge burning
Celotex certainly isn't one of them.

Burning PVC is one as are many other plastics.


The FR5000 version is closer to your ideal but even then I expect it
still gives out some heat but is harder to get alight to start with.

BBC now agrees with Gruniad that the insulation burnt more fiercely than
the outer cladding (like you I find this surprising if it is Celotex).

The BBC is reporting the same source so they would agree.


"Preliminary tests on the samples of insulation showed it burned soon
after the test started, and more quickly than the cladding tiles.
However, they both failed the police's safety tests - which are similar
to those being carried out by the UK government"

from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40380584

mass loss has nothing to do with heat.

It does when you are burning a block of organic fuel in air.

Not everything that gets burnt is fuel.


As can be shown by burning say iron. It gains mass, but is exothermic.

But iron doesn't have gaseous products of combustion.

Thermic lances aren't going to work too well if they don't produce hot gas.

You are being
deliberately perverse to try an win this argument by sophistry.

That's probably true of everything TNP.


Your scientific understanding appears stuck in the age of phlogiston...

Very funny!