On Apr 16, 1:01 am, "Roger Long" wrote:
Yes, the rivet lady. Cute gal.

I presume that's "Doctor" Cute Gal for the likes of us... I suppose
she could be a head case, but isn't the ad hominem a little low?


Stronger seams might have allowed the plates to deform without the seams
opening up but even state of the art steel rivets probably wouldn't have
done this. The heads simply would have pulled through. The degree of
weakness
they are claiming is undoubtedly correct but it simply would not have been
significant
to the outcome.

From the NYT article it sounds like the Dr. Foecke of the NIST
determined that sample rivets were weak and the "rivet lady" [sic],
Dr. McCarty (a historian) tracked down evidence that substantial
numbers of rivets were made from weaker than state of the art
materials. The argument from there seems to be that since the failure
was at the seams stronger seams would have reduced the damage. As I
read it they aren't claiming that the ship would have survived the
impact with better rivets, but that it would have taken longer to sink
which would have given the passengers and crew a better shot at
rescue. I don't have an opinion on the veracity of all that but I'm
curious about yours, Roger. Were rivets pulled through the plates?
Are you convinced that the difference in energy required to pull the
fasteners through the plates rather than popping their heads off was
trivial? Has anybody modeled any of this?

-- Tom.