I was watching this clip that showed a riveting team during the construction of the Chrysler building in 1920. A guy throws a red hot rivet to another who catches it and puts it into the joint and a third man hammers the second head into shape.
Are any buildings hot riveted together anymore? The rivet wikipedia article says:
Until relatively recently, structural steel connections were either welded or riveted. High-strength bolts have largely replaced structural steel rivets. Indeed, the latest steel construction specifications published by … no longer covers their installation. The reason for the change is primarily due to the expense of skilled workers required to install high strength structural steel rivets. Whereas two relatively unskilled workers can install and tighten high strength bolts, it normally takes four skilled workers to install rivets (warmer, catcher, holder, basher).
Understandable in Dubai but is this used in US cities like New York where union labor has remained strong? Bridges? Train locomotives? Large boilers?
Boilers No. Ships, you bet. In WWII through the 60’s every now and then a completely welded ship would crack in half. I was on a T-2 tanker that was launched without rivets. In several places in the hull a slice was cut into the hull and a butt strap was riveted in place over the slice. The problem was with completely welded ships if crack were to start in the hull it could travel completely around the ship. With the slice and butt strap any crack can only travel so far until it reaches hte slice.
I would doubt any buildings are riveted. Timing is important in riveting. The rivet needs to be hammered while still at the proper temperature. And the strenght of rivets are not constant. But a tempered bolt is a tempered bolt no matter which box they came from. That is unless they came from China, then it is a hopping game.
I was hoping for someone in the business to give a technical answer. The same question had occurred to me recently. Watching videos of the progress SpaceX is making building its new launch and production facilities the use of bolted construction it remarkable.
I wondered when the change in technology took hold.
One would imagine that the point made above is a critical one. The heat profile of a rivet being set is hard to control in the same manner as factory production of a high tensile bolt. Bolts are vastly easier and faster to install.
But the story of the change in the industry would be interesting.
As to ships. The Liberty ships were the poster child for the pros and cons of early welded construction. But the bugs were sorted out a long time ago.
Submarines are an interesting case. Their life is limited by the number of refits the hull can endure. A refit requires slicing the hull to gain access, and rewelding once done. This can only be done so many times. But it is done.
I don’t know about tall buildings, but I have been watching a large warehouse near me being built as I drive past almost daily.
It took them a while to clear the land, put in groundworks and lay the concrete slab. I saw the steel arrive, and in two days the structure was pretty much assembled with the aid of four cranes and a small army of people on cherry pickers bolting things together. Once that was up, they just hung panels on it to make the walls.
Could the use of modern powered tools have anything to do with that switch from rivets to bolts? Something light enough to use easily, powerful enough to tighten it fully, but also could ensure a proper and consistent torquing of the bolt.
The changover from hot rivets to bolts seems to have occurred from early work in the 40’s to codified established practice in the early 70s.
I note that the NASA’s Vertical Assembly Building, built in the early 60’s is bolted.
I found what it probably the definitive book. Guide to Design Criteria for Bolted and Riveted Joints
A handful of years ago, a bridge just down the river was rehabbed, and the process involved hot riveting. The riveting team put on a public demonstration using some sample iron, and I got to form a rivet head with the pneumatic riveter. They were doing this to preserve the historical nature of the bridge, though.
My brother was on a bulk ore carrier that had a split on the deck that opened and closed with the waves.
They were taking iron ore to Germany and were not allowed to sail up the River Ems to the POrt at Emden until repairs were carried out. He didn’t see what they did as he went on leave while they were anchored off shore.
Moot, but no it’s not. All steel (or mostly steel, usually the floors are still poured concrete over metal pans) skyscrapers can be more expensive in material than reinforced concrete, but the columns take up less space and they can be built faster depending on the contractors available. They’re also better suited for high-wind and seismic environments. Choosing which way to go is a delicate balance of real-time material and labor costs, contractor availability, delivery scheduling, and leasable floor plate geometries. It’s definitely not a case of “we don’t do this anymore”.
Regarding rivets, I wonder if the noise associated with their installation is another factor in their demise. While construction in general is never quiet, the hum of a concrete pumper, welding, and tightening of bolts is a lot less offensive than the relentless hammering of multiple welding crews. About the only worse thing I can think of that’s still done is pile driving.
And then there’s hydrogen embrittlement, which doesn’t care what continent the parts came from. Two “headliner” cases of it are the SF-Oakland Bay Bridge, and the Cheesegrater building in London.
A method was developed (WWII?) to set rivets with giant “pliers” but I can’t come up with a photos I have seen before. They used hydraulic cylinders to squeeze the rivets tight and could reach far away from the edge of a plate - 10 or 15 feet I guess.