SE Class 10 Science: What Steel Was Used in the Titanic?

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter CaptainBlack
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Rms titanic
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the steel used in the construction of the Titanic and its implications for the ship's sinking. Participants explore historical accounts, design decisions, and the mathematical aspects of the ship's survivability following the collision. The conversation touches on both theoretical and historical perspectives related to the Titanic and its sister ship, the Britannic.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Historical
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants reference an article discussing the steel used in the Titanic and its implications for the ship's structural integrity.
  • One participant questions the mathematical certainty of the Titanic's sinking after six compartments were breached, suggesting a need to explore whether there was any chance to delay the sinking or save lives.
  • Another participant notes that the Titanic was designed to survive the flooding of four compartments, implying that breaching six compartments would lead to inevitable sinking.
  • There is mention of the Britannic, which was designed with improvements over the Titanic, suggesting it should have been better able to survive underwater damage.
  • Concerns are raised about the quality of materials used in the Titanic's construction, specifically regarding the rivets made with steel of questionable purity, which may have contributed to the disaster.
  • A comparison is drawn between the Titanic and the USS Thresher, highlighting how construction pressures can lead to compromised safety and quality control.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of the Titanic's design and the role of the materials used. While some agree on the number of compartments that could be flooded without sinking, others raise questions about the potential for survival and the decisions made during construction. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing views.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference historical figures and decisions that influenced the Titanic's design, as well as the impact of material quality on its fate. There is an acknowledgment of the complexity surrounding the events leading to the sinking, including the mathematical and engineering considerations that were not fully appreciated at the time.

CaptainBlack
Messages
801
Reaction score
0
I know that some of our members have an interest in the loss of the Titanic in 1912. So I am posting a link to an article in/on Science Daily on the steel used in the Titanic. Also look at the related stories links on the right of the page for more related material.

CB
 
Science news on Phys.org
Very interesting the article of Richard Corfield The perfect storm from which I report...

... the Titanic's designer Thomas Andrews was on board and was asked by Capt. Smith to accompany him to assess the damage immediately after the collision. The impact had been on the for'ard starboard side below the water line and once Andrews had discovered the extent of the damage he warned Smith that since more than four compartments had been ruptured (six in fact had been breached) "it was a mathematical certainty that the ship would sink"...

A first 'surprise' of me is the number of breached compartments [six] instead of five that I remembered, but it not the main detail. The sentence of Andrews has been: it is mathematical certainty that Titanic will sink. Now we are in a mathematical site and it would be ‘natural’ to arise the questions...

a) with the first six compartments flooded really there was no 'mathematical chance' to save the Titanic?...

b) with the first six compartments flooded really there was no 'mathematical chance' to delay the sinking of the Titanic and save most possible people?...

Kind regards

$\chi$ $\sigma$
 
chisigma said:
Very interesting the article of Richard Corfield The perfect storm from which I report...

... the Titanic's designer Thomas Andrews was on board and was asked by Capt. Smith to accompany him to assess the damage immediately after the collision. The impact had been on the for'ard starboard side below the water line and once Andrews had discovered the extent of the damage he warned Smith that since more than four compartments had been ruptured (six in fact had been breached) "it was a mathematical certainty that the ship would sink"...

A first 'surprise' of me is the number of breached compartments [six] instead of five that I remembered, but it not the main detail. The sentence of Andrews has been: it is mathematical certainty that Titanic will sink. Now we are in a mathematical site and it would be ‘natural’ to arise the questions...

a) with the first six compartments flooded really there was no 'mathematical chance' to save the Titanic?...

b) with the first six compartments flooded really there was no 'mathematical chance' to delay the sinking of the Titanic and save most possible people?...

Kind regards

$\chi$ $\sigma$

IIRC the Titanic was designed to survive four compartments flooding. With six the top edges of the next bulkheads would not stay above water.

CB
 
I suppose also of interest is the loss of the Titanic's (half-)sister the Brittannic to a submarine laid mine in the Kea Channel off of Attica.

The Britannic should have been better able to survive underwater damage than Titanic as the post Titanic improvements (raising some of the watertight bulkheads and double bottom/hull under the machinery rooms, and better lifeboat facilities) were built in, rather than retro-fitted as in the Olympic.

In principle it should have been survivable, except for damage to what should have been watertight doors rendered some of them otherwise... Commercial vessels are rarely designed with mining-effect in mind even today. The mining-effect was not really appriciated until the early '40s (and then only partially) when HMS Belfast (just) survived mining and a proper assessment of the damage made.

View attachment 133
 

Attachments

  • Britannic.JPG
    Britannic.JPG
    19.7 KB · Views: 129
Last edited:
CaptainBlack said:
IIRC the Titanic was designed to survive four compartments flooding. With six the top edges of the next bulkheads would not stay above water.

CB

That is exact and about the 'compartments flooding' I have in mind to do some consideration later. About the figure of Thomas Andrews [the 'Titanic's designer'...] some line has to be written. First Titanic's designer was Alexander Caslisle but he was substituted because 'not particularly susceptible' to Harland & Wolff's recommendations in terms of 'cost and shipbuilding time reduction'. Andrews succeeded to Carlisle and, in order to comply to the directives, had the brilliant idea to reduce from 64 to 16 the number of lifeboats [the Titanic by definition was 'unsinkable'...] and to 'lighten' considerably the quality control procedures so that most of the used rivets were made with steel with excessive degree of impurity and therefore breakable. Under this point of view the Titanic's story is similar to the USS Thresher's story. The USS Thresher was the first of a new class of nuclear submarines with extremely advanced performance. It was launched in July 1960 and was a very 'quality jump' of the underwater weapon of the US Navy. Its long range missiles and its extremely advanced passive sonar system made it a formidable killer of the Russian SSBN submarines of the Hotel and Golf classes. As in the case of Titanic, the necessity to arrive 'as soon as possible' conditioned the construction and several steps of quality control were 'neglected'. The consequence of that was that on 10 April 1963, during the deep-diving test, the failure of a joint in a salt water piping system caused high-pressure water spraying that shorted out one of the many electrical panels, which in turn caused a shutdown of the reactor, with a subsequent loss of propulsion and subsequent loss of the submarine. On the sea as on the land history doesn't teach enough...

Kind regards

$\chi$ $\sigma$
 

Similar threads

  • Sticky
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
611
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K