Rivets


ed_mines
 

I don't want to argue with Dennis Storzak who has done so much for the
hobby but I think .010" is too big for "rivets" on box car sides.

Where does it say that they are "rivets" anyway? Could they be bolts?
Is there more than one type of rivet?

Could you imagine heating up all of those "rivets" to assemble a
freight car side? Or is there a rivet applied cold?

Do you really need 1/2" diameter rivets to hold sheet metal (or thin
metal plates) to a frame? And so many of them? With sheet metal in
particular freight would break through the side before a 1/2 bolt would
break.

There are bolts with 1 inch diameter heads on a railroad underpass I
see. There aren't too many of them either and the service is much more
severe than holding on freight car siding.

Ed


Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Ed Mines wrote:
I don't want to argue with Dennis Storzak who has done so much for the hobby but I think .010" is too big for "rivets" on box car sides.
Where does it say that they are "rivets" anyway? Could they be bolts?
In wood-sheathed cars and stock cars, yes, they often are bolts. So you make a good point, Ed, that modelers sometimes refer to "rivets" on wood attachments. But on steel car sides, they are rivets. And yes, they were applied hot.

Do you really need 1/2" diameter rivets to hold sheet metal (or thin metal plates) to a frame? And so many of them? . . . There are bolts with 1 inch diameter heads on a railroad underpass I see. There aren't too many of them either and the service is much more severe than holding on freight car siding.
Loading may be greater, but a freight car experiences bending and twisting in a way that bridges do not, so you cannot directly compare the fastener needs; and the numerous rivets on the car sides are to seal the seam of the panels, not just to attach them together. It's probably true that they would be adequately ATTACHED by a rivet every foot, but the seal would not be very good under that twisting, etc.

Anthony Thompson
Dept. of Materials Science & Engineering
University of California, Berkeley
thompsonmarytony@...


Dennis Storzek <destorzek@...>
 

--- In STMFC@..., "ed_mines" <ed_mines@...> wrote:


Do you really need 1/2" diameter rivets to hold sheet metal (or thin
metal plates) to a frame? And so many of them? With sheet metal in
particular freight would break through the side before a 1/2 bolt would
break.

Ed,

As a rule, the size of the rivets is chosen based on the material
thickness to be joined. Bridges can use big rivets on wide spacing
because that material fastened is so thick. Freightcars use smaller
rivets on closer spacing because the material is thinner. Airplanes
use tiny rivets on really close spacing because the material is
thinner yet.

Machinery's Handbook gives this general rule for selecting rivet
sizes, and I quote:

"The rivet diameter D commonly falls between D=1.2 X &#8730;T and D=1.4 X &#8730;T
where T is the thickness of the plate."

The steel side sheets of the AAR standard boxcars I'm looking at the
drawings of are specified as .1". Using the extremes of the range
above, the calculated diameter of the rivet shanks should be between
.379", slightly over 3/8", and .443", slightly over 7/16". Therefore,
I would suppose that at least some cars could have been built using
3/8" rivets having 11/16" diameter heads. These would scale out to
.008 dia. in HO. However, as I said, the drawings I was looking at had
the side rivets drawn the same as the door post gusset rivets; they
just weren't specified. The ones that were had 7/8" dia. heads, which
scale to .010".

I just looked at a Standard Railway Equipment Co. drawing for an
Improved Dreadnaught end. It specifies "9/16" holes unless otherwise
specified." That's the clearance hole for a 1/2" rivet, which will be
covered with a 7/8" diameter head. Certain holes, where ladders,
grabs, and brackets will be attached are specified 11/16" for 5/8"
rivets. This makes sense, as IIRC all safety appliances must be
attached with either 5/8" bolts or rivets. The top flange of this end,
which is designed for a car with "ZU" eaves and overhanging roof
panels, is specified to have 7/16" holes, which would be the size for
3/8" rivets with 11/16" diameter heads. I also looked a the
fabrication drawing for a YSDCo. steel side, but it STILL doesn't
specify the rivet diameters; just the Part No. and Drg. No. for each
panel and post. I'd need those drawings to see what size rivet holes
are specified.

Dennis


Dennis Storzek <destorzek@...>
 

--- In STMFC@..., "Dennis Storzek" <destorzek@...> wrote:


Machinery's Handbook gives this general rule for selecting rivet
sizes, and I quote:

"The rivet diameter D commonly falls between D=1.2 X &#8730;T and
D=1.4 X &#8730;T
where T is the thickness of the plate."
I guess Whahoo doesn't like displaying Bill Gates' square root symbol.
That should read "… 1.2 X the square root of T and 1.4 X the square
root of T."

Dennis


Kurt Laughlin <fleeta@...>
 

----- Original Message -----
From: Anthony Thompson

In wood-sheathed cars and stock cars, yes, they often are bolts.
So you make a good point, Ed, that modelers sometimes refer to "rivets"
on wood attachments. But on steel car sides, they are rivets. And yes,
they were applied hot.
----- Original Message -----

Tony, do you think that the "small" rivets (actual nomenclature for rivets under 1/2-inch) were driven hot? I would think that by WW II if not earlier they would be cold formed. (I have a photo somewhere of an M3 tank of 1941 vintage being assembled with an enormous riveter and bucking bar. The holes are 49/64 dia -
.765 - so I imagine they were using 3/4-inch rivets, "large" in the terms of the trade.)

KL


Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Kurt Laughlin wrote:
Tony, do you think that the "small" rivets (actual nomenclature for rivets under 1/2-inch) were driven hot? I would think that by WW II if not earlier they would be cold formed. (I have a photo somewhere of an M3 tank of 1941 vintage being assembled with an enormous riveter and bucking bar. The holes are 49/64 dia -.765 - so I imagine they were using 3/4-inch rivets, "large" in the terms of the trade.)
Cold-driven rivets are much stronger, while hot ones hold the seam tighter. Depends on what you want. With a tank, I can guess the priority <g>.
Certainly as late as the 1950s, PFE reefers were still assembled with hot rivets. I can't speak for freight car production in general. Ed Kaminski might know what AC&F practice was.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@...
Publishers of books on railroad history


Brian J Carlson <brian@...>
 

In bridges (many carried steam era freight cars) the rivets were driven hot,
through the 1950's, since the connection design was slip critical.
Brian J Carlson P.E.
Cheektowaga NY


Schuyler Larrabee
 

Ed Mines wrote:
I don't want to argue with Dennis Storzak who has done so much for the
hobby but I think .010" is too big for "rivets" on box car sides.
Where does it say that they are "rivets" anyway? Could they be bolts?

Tony Thompson:
In wood-sheathed cars and stock cars, yes, they often are bolts.
So you make a good point, Ed, that modelers sometimes refer to "rivets"
on wood attachments. But on steel car sides, they are rivets. And yes,
they were applied hot.
Do you really need 1/2" diameter rivets to hold sheet metal (or thin
metal plates) to a frame? And so many of them? . . . There are bolts
with 1 inch diameter heads on a railroad underpass I see. There aren't
too many of them either and the service is much more severe than
holding on freight car siding.

Tony Thompson:
Loading may be greater, but a freight car experiences bending
and twisting in a way that bridges do not, so you cannot directly
compare the fastener needs; and the numerous rivets on the car sides
are to seal the seam of the panels, not just to attach them together.
It's probably true that they would be adequately ATTACHED by a rivet
every foot, but the seal would not be very good under that twisting,
etc.
There is another aspect to this besides sealing the panels together against weather. These panels
work together to provide some of the strength of the car body. You have all seen the photos in
which you can see the "oil-canning" of the side panels due to stresses. If you had but 12" spaced
rivets, that would simply come apart at the seams (to coin a phrase). By spacing them much closer,
they make the side panels work together as a larger sheet, as a diaphragm.

SGL


W. Lindsay Smith <wlindsays2000@...>
 

Professor please! Your discussion of prototype rivets is accurate.
However, since the human eye resolves about a mil (1 foot at range
1,000 feet) and the effect of shadows makes small projections appear
larger, the model maker cannot make automatic scaling. The late Dick
Kurtz made the original Milepost 310 trailer rivits to scale and they
did not apear on the model. He redesigned the rivet row and we
thought they looked more like the trailers we saw in TOFC service.
Love ya Tony!
Lindsay
--- In STMFC@..., Anthony Thompson <thompson@...> wrote:

Kurt Laughlin wrote:
Tony, do you think that the "small" rivets (actual nomenclature
for
rivets under 1/2-inch) were driven hot? I would think that by WW
II
if not earlier they would be cold formed. (I have a photo
somewhere
of an M3 tank of 1941 vintage being assembled with an enormous
riveter
and bucking bar. The holes are 49/64 dia -.765 - so I imagine
they
were using 3/4-inch rivets, "large" in the terms of the trade.)
Cold-driven rivets are much stronger, while hot ones hold the
seam
tighter. Depends on what you want. With a tank, I can guess the
priority <g>.
Certainly as late as the 1950s, PFE reefers were still
assembled
with hot rivets. I can't speak for freight car production in
general.
Ed Kaminski might know what AC&F practice was.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@...
Publishers of books on railroad history


Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

W. Lindsay Smith wrote:
Professor please! Your discussion of prototype rivets is accurate. However, since the human eye resolves about a mil (1 foot at range 1,000 feet) and the effect of shadows makes small projections appear larger, the model maker cannot make automatic scaling.
It was Kurt Laughlin who provided rivet dimensions, not me. And though I happen to agree that rivets (and other features) may have to be other than scale size to "look right," I didn't discuss that either, in the current thread. Whether you offer praise or blame, Lindsay, it doesn't come to me <g>.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@...
Publishers of books on railroad history


Kurt Laughlin <fleeta@...>
 

----- Original Message -----
From: Anthony Thompson To: STMFC@... Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 2:26 AM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: Rivets

. . . It was Kurt Laughlin who provided rivet dimensions, not me.

----- Original Message -----

Umm, only for M3 medium tanks though, not rail cars.

KL


Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Kurt Laughlin wrote:
Umm, only for M3 medium tanks though, not rail cars.
Good point. Wonder which post Lindsay was referring to?

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@...
Publishers of books on railroad history


Lindsay smith <wlindsays2000@...>
 

Sorry about that Tony. I have really appreciated your accurate answers and descriptions of Engineering Materials or Refrigerator cars. Please bear with me. I was a BSCE in 1953 in Water Supply and Sewerage Disposal so I am probably full of it.
Lindsay Smith


____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ