Saturday, April 7, 2012
WERE MATERIALS AND SCIENCE ENGINEERS PARTLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FAILURE OF THE TITANIC WHEN IT STRUC THE ICEBERG? post by Amber Castle
With the 100th anniversary of the
Titantic’s tragic sinking approaching, I thought it would be interesting to do
some research on the materials used to construct the ship. When the Titantic
was constructed in 1911 and 1912 engineers claimed that the ship was designed
to be “virtually unsinkable.” Scientists today are stating that one of the
reasons failure took place was because of the selection of poor quality
materials used to build the ship. Many believe that the cracking of the steel
hull plates was a primary cause, but after slow bend testing the plates proved
to have an average toughness of 55 MPA –m1/2 at 0° C, which was
reasonable. Apparently all the evidence
of failure pointed to problems with the iron rivets. They contained more slag
than steel rivets, and tests proved that the iron rivets were already near
their ultimate strength when installed. Another problem with the rivets was that the wrought iron was one level below that
generally specified for rivets. Apparently pressure to finish Titanic caused
the company to order a level below. We learn in our engineering classes that
communication is important. Should the engineers have communicated better in
the final weeks of the Titantic’s construction in order to prevent the wrong
materials being constructed on the ship? Apparently, the most damage found on
the Titantic occurred in the hull of the ship in the seams of wrought iron
rivets. It is said that it
sank in less than three hours, would less compartments of the ship been flooded
if it were for the use of the right rivets?
Would the use of different materials saved so many more lives that
night?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
You wouldn't think such a widely documented event would still be surrounded with so much uncertainty. We were talking about this very subject in my mechanical design class. Our professor was talking about how the effect of the cold water on the materials ductility wasn't properly taken in to account. With the water being so cold, it actually made the metal fail in much more of a brittle manner than the expected ductile. This created a lot more damage to the hull. Very interesting post.
ReplyDeleteThank you Daniel! I did not even realize that the ductility of the material could have changed the outcome. Do you think that would have changed the outcome of the entire sinking or prolonged the life of the ship after it struck the iceberg so that more lives could be saved?
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAs someone who has seen the movie Titanic my fair share of times growing up, it's hard to believe that behind all the "movie magic" the story behind The Titanic actually illustrates the failure of true engineering practice. In my Freshman Year Engineering Exploration Course, our class spent time during the semester on Engineering Ethics and its importance in future work-related decisions. After reading this post, I question whether the designers and builders of the Titanic truly practiced engineering ethics. As stated, pressure to build the Titanic caused the company to order a level below the required wrought iron rivets. With that being said, if the builders knew that the ship was not built to specifications, wasn't it their responsibility as engineers to warn the general public especially the passengers that day? After reading this post, I truly believe this story of the Titanic may be a perfect example perhaps of the consequences of failing to practice engineering ethics.
ReplyDeleteI agree Alex, it was the responsibility of the engineers to warn passengers, and to take their time in constructing the ship for the safety of the public. Do you think the importance of ethics wasn't a priority of the engineers? I think maybe it was not a primary topic in the engineering classrooms. In our time, we have learned of many tragedies that could have been caused by engineering ethics. I feel that our generation is taking responsibility for poor engineering actions and trying to better them. After all, we do like to make things better.
ReplyDelete