Hi Paul,
Thanks for your response. (I am not sure if you hit the 'reply to
author' button alone, as I got an e-mail but no posting on this group
thread. I did try to reply to you via e-mail, but it bounced; I am
posting this to the group as well, in case PJF missed it.)
>>They brought a deep-sea camera with them so the viewer could
actually see Britannic's rear expansion joint.
The team discovered that it was extensively modified compared to the
original joint design used for the Titanic, leading them to believe
that Harland and Wolff knew of the deficient design and altered the
rear expansion joint on Britannic (and possibly Olympic as well, but
they didn't research it).<<
The Britannic information is very interesting. However, in my view
it's rather speculative to make the link to Titanic, because (as I
understand it) no do***entation whatsoever has been produced to
sup****t that link.
As I explained in my article 'Olympic's Expansion Joints' (2007):
http://www.markchirnside.co.uk/Olympic-Titanic_expansionjoints-achillesheel-_myth.html
, there is reason to believe that Britannic's arrangement was improved
as a result of experience with Olympic prior to the disaster. We have
evidence that H&W knew Olympic's arrangement could be improved, in
March 1912, and so it is far more likely - in my view - that the
changes to Britannic were merely the usual progressive engineering and
improvement. (I first published this new information in 2004 or 2005.)
The do***entary did not seem to mention this im****tant information.
>>They team also found that Titanic's joint was an especially crude
design. It would have been barely able to hold the ****p together if
Titanic encountered unusually high waves in mid-ocean, given the
scenario that one end of the ****p was on a wave crest and the other
end was on an adjacent crest.<<
The expansion joints on Olympic and Titanic were, IIRC, the first they
installed on any White Star Line vessels. Their long superstructures
made them necessary. However, the assertion that Titanic's rear
expansion joint 'would have been barely able to hold the ****p together
if Titanic encountered unusually high waves in mid-ocean' is simply
untrue.
An expansion joint does not hold the ****p together at all. The purpose
of an expansion joint is to divide the superstructure and allow it to
flex on top of the structural hull, thereby relieving the
superstructure (and its lighter scantlings) of the high stresses that
the hull girder below has to endure as a matter of routine. Long
superstructures always 'work' considerably at sea.
Olympic retained her original arrangement of expansion joints
throughout her life. We know, from the storms she encountered over the
winter of 1911-12 (including one in January 1912 that Captain Smith
described as the worst he had encountered in forty years at sea), that
their performance was broadly satisfactory.
Best wishes,
Mark.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Chirnside.
Webmaster: www.markchirnside.co.uk
|
