There is nothing inherently wrong with iron as a bridging material, just as there is nothing inherently wrong with virtually anything used to make a bridge, not excluding fiber ropes and wood used by the Incas. Cast iron was plentiful and easy to work and was used in many types of bridges from the 18th well into the 19th Centuries. Some beautifully crafted iron bridges are still in use today. Technically, steel is just iron with more of the impurities removed. Steel has greater tensile strength (resistance to breakage) than iron but until the Bessemer process was invented in the mid-19th Century it was harder to make, so iron was the material of choice. Iron and steel do rust, but paint helps to resist weathering, and any material exposed to weather will eventually deteriorate unless maintained.
Corrosion and rust could be problems with iron bridges.
why bridges are not electrplated
iron is used to make bridges (i think)
they were not as strong
they were not as strong
The problem with iron bridges was that the material was not as reliable as carbon steel, so it was replaced starting in the late 1800s and was completely unavailable for bridge building by the early 1900s. Bridges in the late 1700s were made of cast iron, but, by the early 1800s, cast iron gave way to wrought iron.
iron and steel
iron is used to make bridges (i think)
iron ore
hemalite
hemalite
John W. Fisher has written: 'Fatigueand fracture in steel bridges' -- subject(s): Bridges, Iron and steel, Fatigue, Fracture, Iron and steel Bridges, Steel, Structural, Structural Steel