Did Weak Rivets Help Do In The Titanic?

Authors Point To Them As Reason Ship Sank As Quickly As It Did

(CBS/AP) 

"You need the slag but you need just a little to take up the load that's applied so the iron doesn't stretch," Foecke said. "The iron becomes weak the more slag there is because the brittleness of the slag takes over and it breaks easily."

Foecke said the main question was not whether the Titanic would sink after hitting the iceberg, but how fast the ship went down.

He believes the answer is provided by the weak rivets. His analysis showed the builders used stronger steel rivets where they expected the greatest stress and weaker iron rivets for the stern and the bow, where they thought there would be less pressure, he said. But it was the ship's bow that struck the iceberg.

"Typically you want a four bar for rivets," Foecke said, using the measurement for the strongest rivets. "Some of the orders were for three bar."

Harland and Wolff spokesman Joris Minne disputed the findings. "We always say there was nothing wrong with the Titanic when it left here," he said.

When the iceberg hit the Titanic, it scraped alongside the ship. Foecke said this affected a number of seams in the bow and the weak rivets let go, putting more pressure on the strong rivets.

"Six compartments flooded. If the rivets were on average better quality, five compartments may have flooded and the ship would have stayed afloat longer and more people would have been saved," Foecke said. "If four compartments flooded, the ship may have limped to Halifax."

The company does not have an archivist, but it refers scientific questions on the Titanic to retired Harland and Wolff naval engineer David Livingstone, who also has researched the ship's sinking.

He said he largely agrees with the authors' findings on the metallic composition of the rivets, but added their conclusions that the rivets were to blame for the sinking are "misleading and incorrect" because they do not consider the ship's overall design and the historical context.

"You can't just look at the material and say it was substandard," Livingstone said. "Of course material from 100 years ago would be inferior to material today."

He said he has found no document to support the argument that Harland and Wolff knowingly used substandard material. He pointed out that the Olympic, a ship the company built at the same time using the same materials, had a long life with no troubles. The third vessel turned out in the early 1900s was attacked and sunk in World War I.

Livingstone said he is not sure why iron rivets were used in the bow and the stern but believes it may have been because a crane-mounted hydraulic rivet machine could not reach those points. He said the iron rivets were wider to compensate for the difference in strength.

Contrary to Foecke's theory, Livingstone said, the Titanic did not go down fast compared to other ships that have sunk.

He said the Titanic did not capsize - as do most sinking ships - but maintained an even keel until the last moment, going down after about 2 1/2 hours when the weight of the water it took on became too much.

William Garzke, chairman of the forensics panel of the Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers based in New Jersey, said wrought iron was commonly used at that time, but steel was the newer, stronger choice.

Garzke, who also has studied the Titanic sinking, said the two scientists made a good point about the variability of the rivets, but "the problem is not the metallurgy of the rivets, it was the design of the riveted joints."

He said that the company used only two rivets at the site of impact, when three would have provided more strength and durability.

[titanicjulie]

i think its great that they are still reporting on the titanic. i just read 3 great books on the subject. ghosts of the abyss by ken marshall and don lynch, the night lives on by walter loyd and titanic by charles pelligreno. check these out if you want interesting reads about titanic. its great to read about everyones different takes on this disaster.

[hbevis]

FROM WHAT I HAVE READ OVER THE YEARS THE TITANIC SUNK BECAUSE THE COMPARTMENT WERE NOT WATER TIGHT. IT SEEMS THAT THERE WAS NO TOP ON THE COMPARTMENTS. SO WHEN ENOUGH WATER GOT INTO THE SHIP IT SUNK. REMEMBER WHEN THE TITANIC WAS FOUND ON THE OCEAN FLOOR IT WAS IN TWO PIECES SOME DISTANCE APART. SO THE PEOPLE THAT WERE SURVIVORS WERE RIGHT WHEN THEY SAID THE SHIP BROKE APART JUST BEFORE IT WENT DOWN. THAT WOULD SEEM TO INDICATE THAT THE SEAMS IN THE PLATES WERE NOT STRONG ENOUGH. WHETHER IT WAS FROM RIVET STRENGTH OR THERE BEING TWO INSTEAD OF THREE RIVETS AT EACH POINT. YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER THAT WHEN A BOLT OR RIVET IS UNDER A SHEAR CONDITION IT IS AS STRONG AS IT WOULD BE UNDER TENSION.

[jaykay3141]

OK, it was almost a century ago and the ship and its passengers are gone, but that doesn''t mean we still can''t learn from it. To paraphrase Santayana, ignoring something because it''s "old news" makes it likely to become "new news" (!)

It''s surprising that no one mentioned the major reason for so many deaths: NOT ENOUGH LIFEBOATS. And why? The same cost-cutting, the same "it meets specs so that''s enough" mindset, the same antiquated rules that led to the use of substandard metal.

If death caused by technological hubris is "old news", please inform the families of the Challenger astronauts, the I-35 victims, the Meridian building firemen, and on and on.

P.S. "NAVAL" has to do with ships. "NAVEL" is your belly button. Sheesh.

[newsterl]

...shipwreck beyond belief. The shipwreck Soul can be found at http colon slash slash www dot phuxjezus-lighted dot blogspot dot com. This site addresses the reason to look ahead in life.

Posted by SPY-VS-SPY


Still spamming with your gezus site I see RICK

[marcpcbs]

I think that a high-speed collision with an iceberg may have weakened the rivets.

I don''t believe this article.

[thy1138]

Rivets were replaced by nuts and bolts in steel girder construction, specifically in the WTC maybe one of the first to exclusively use nuts and bolts. "Good better best never let it rest" till your good is better and your better is your best (seen on cast water tanks in Australia) leaves out the "best of best" rivets that went into the center section. I wonder if there was a grading of nuts? (and bolts). There''s a large nut factory "Star" on the NY State Thruway near Harriman that''s been bought by Kiryas Joel the Hasidim town mostly for the wells then the State has to put in a pipe to the aqueduct (Catch 23).

[tucano2]

It''s been pretty well established, decades ago, that the combination of very cold water and an off-spec receipt
of steel contributed to the disaster. But the main reason for the un-necessary tragedy was the idiocy of the ship''s owner pressuring the Captain to take un-necessary risk in waters known to be very dangerous. Vanity and stupidity, far more than steel and temperature, killed, nay murdered, those that perished.

[thgdriver]

This is an extremely interesting point the authors make.

I seem to recall a history channel show about this same theory about a year ago.

It''s a shame corporate greed was partly the cause of this disaster. It''s important that this sort of greed be pointed out no matter how much time passes.

Some have the audacity to log in here and tell the rest of us what should or should not interest us.

They log in here on a story that they say don''t interest them, thats got to be the dumbest thing yet.

[thgdriver]

P.S. The titanic sunk almost 100 years ago and in 1912 they did not have the quality controls or knowledge of metallurgy like we do now. So why is this news?

Posted by sblake63

If the story did not interest you why did you click in here in the first place. You are the third "Fool'' to do this.

[thgdriver]

Well, except today when hard news is too much for the pups and we need to be fed something easier to digest.

Open wide... don''''t look at the world going to hell all around you...

Posted by sincityq

The choice of news story''s is wide open. You did not have to click in here either.

Shut up and go away fool!

[thgdriver]

Can we let this go? I''''m so not interested in the Titanic - haven''''t we played this out far beyond it''''s use by date? Rivets smivets - it sunk - end of story.

Posted by j_flood

Then why did you click on this story in the first place?

Shut up and go away fool!

[downsteamjim]

George Bush has so caused global warming that it has now become retroactive.

[j_flood]

Can we let this go? I''m so not interested in the Titanic - haven''t we played this out far beyond it''s use by date? Rivets smivets - it sunk - end of story.

[spy-vs-spy_]

The Titanic tragedy will always be remembered. The sinking of the titanic is the biggest lesson on what happens when we do not look ahead in life. Its a shipwreck beyond belief. The shipwreck Soul can be found at http colon slash slash www dot pilgrimswaylighted dot blogspot dot com. This site addresses the reason to look ahead in life.

[gce65]

Weak rivets? I thought it was that pesky iceberg! Or simple gravity!

[newsterl]

Corporate greed and cost cutting is a FACT of life, but in 1911 steel was still new and they didn''t have the testing ability we do now.

beamish99- that''s right, the compartments were not sealed to the ceiling- lousy design.


"The popping rivet theory is just that, a theory with weak evidence at that. I''''ve seen the section of the hull of the titanic displayed at an exhibtion.The rivets showed little sign of popping,
Posted by jerkaboner

Ummm if you knew anything about this ship''s hull and steel fabrication- the rivets are the weakest connection- they are like stitching on a pair of pants, you bend over too far the first thing that tears is the SEAM- the weakest part.
You saw *A SECTION* of plate, you did not see the portion buried under the mud still that had failed. The plates themselves made of the same steel being pushed in by the force of a collision- the rivets will fail.

The problem was with the steel- it was basically cast-iron- not maleable- you hit a piece of cast iron like and old bathtub hard with a hammer it will crack and break- you can break up an old tub with a hammer. The issue with steel is make it too HARD to strengthen it- it can break like cast iron, reduce it a bit to make it less brittle and it becomes too soft and easy to BEND and subject to fatigue failure and excess wear.
The ships steel was too brittle to begin with.

[bardesbp]

Until several World War II Liberty ships broke apart in cold (below 40 degrees) water, metallurgists didn''t know that steel gets brittle at low temperatures. I haven''t read the book in question, but if the authors didn''t consider the impact strength of the rivets at 32 degrees, they missed the point of examining the rivets.

[cattlekate]

Posted by jankebenz at 05:07 PM : Apr 19, 2008
Good Post, thank you.

I have heard the same about the head-on theory - that the hard a starboard doomed the ship.

And it took me a while to understand why the ship really turned to port.

Aye Aye, the story is still fascinating!

[sblake63]

Lmao I just had to come look at the comments for this one. I just knew the left wing and yes you so called moderates would find a way to tie this story to Bush.

Next thing you know somebody will come on here and say that corporate greed caused the sinking of the Titanic because they wanted to save money on the rivets etc etc. Get over it, here''s some facts for you wackos!

There will never be universal health care. Face it, learn it and live it. This isnt europe!

There will ALWAYS be poor people, caused for the most part by their own screw ups!

Only one way to heaven - Christ.

Peace on earth? Not till Christ Returns

End of the war in Iraq? Umm no matter who''s right or wrong, we are in too deep. Too many security concerns. Hillary and Obama and LIARS they can not pull troops out!

And finally, there is no utopia LMAO. Protest, vote, scream, make fun of conservatives. Tell 1000 Bush jokes - What ever! The basic nature of man is evil - Period. You have already lost! It does not get any better till you make it to Heaven, assuming you even make it there :)

P.S. The titanic sunk almost 100 years ago and in 1912 they did not have the quality controls or knowledge of metallurgy like we do now. So why is this news?

[hoopersports]

How some of you bring George W Bush into this is beyond me. dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb people