- Joined
- Apr 21, 2006
- Messages
- 5,610
One thing to keep in mind is that the chart above is most likely made with a Charpy V notch test. Cutlery steel toughness is measured typically using the C notch or un-notched samples. A value of 100 J in a V notch sample is much tougher than 100 in a C or un-notched sample. This is still a SWAG, but the Titanic steel at 25 C in a C notch test would probably be close or slightly tougher than many modern cutlery steels with cutting tool appropriate heat treatments. FWIW, modern bridge girder plate used in VDOT work has to meet 15 ft-lbs. at -40 deg. F., just as a comparison.
I've read that samples of Titanic ( and her sisters) steel showed inclusions, poor grain structure and some signs of over heating. It makes sense as it was a huge project for it's time and put a strain on regular supply sources. When you are buying steel by the tens of thousands of tons especially if something is new to a foundry, or pushes the limits of the foundries ability to make deadlines causes problems.
I was reading about the problems the Navy had sourcing very thick class A and B armor castings when building capital ships restarted in 1937-39 after 20 years of not making them. They had to improvise and change things, moving to Class B for the NC/Washington battleships. Within a couple of years they were then able to produce higher quality plate than the stuff in the 20's on the Colorado class. IIRC, they stayed with Class B on all Capital ships and used class A on the cruisers as they found there were reasons it worked out better. Even so, castings for different battleships in the same class sometimes differed from each other due to the foundries differing abilities. Some could make solid 19 inch castings. Others could only do 17 inch and had to laminate the rest on which doesn't provide the same level of invulnerability.
As far as A36 steels it's not likely to show up on the larger or more sophisticated ships or subs. HY80, HY 100, etc. are better equipped to handle the demands involved.