Steel Design – Maximum Pitch of Rivets in Members For both compression and tension members in riveted steelwork, what overall limit should the maximum pitch of rivets not exceed (choose the governing upper bound commonly adopted in practice)?

Introduction / Context:
Riveted (or bolted) built-up members require limits on the spacing, or pitch, of fasteners to ensure adequate force transfer between connected elements and to prevent plates from buckling away from each other under axial force. The question checks knowledge of the customary upper bound for maximum rivet pitch in tension and compression members in steel design.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Member type: built-up steel members subject to axial tension or compression.
• Symbols: t denotes the thickness of the thinner connected plate.
• Design intent: ensure shear lag and plate buckling are controlled by suitable fastener pitch limits.

Concept / Approach:

Fastener pitch is limited by two kinds of criteria: a dimensional limit proportional to plate thickness (multiples of t) and an absolute dimensional cap in millimetres. The governing value is obtained by taking the smaller of the two limits so that both thin and thick plates remain adequately stitched together over the member length.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:

Connection detailing handbooks, classic steel design texts, and long-standing specifications use similar dual limits to keep plate panels adequately stitched. While specific codes can impose additional limits for special cases, the 32 t/300 mm envelope is a widely taught maximum cap for general members.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• 32 t (alone): Misses the millimetre cap; can be too large in thick plates.
• 200 mm: Too stringent as a general upper cap in many traditional riveted cases; the taught envelope uses 300 mm.
• 40 t: Too permissive for thicker plates and not a standard taught value.
• 300 mm (alone): Misses the thickness-based proportionality that controls thin plates.

Common Pitfalls:

Applying only a single limit and ignoring the combined “lesser of two” rule; overlooking that special members (e.g., cover plates, gastight seams) may attract tighter limits.

Final Answer:

Both 32 t and 300 mm (use the lesser)