Why Are Robertson Screws So New To America? 1

[Johnsim]

On the occasions that I have worked in the US, (several) I have noted with surprise that square drive screws are not nearly as familiar to American tradespeople as they are to Canadians. The race to patent every conceivable screwhead design was won by a Canadian in the sense that he got the best one. The square drive screw was patented by P.L.Robertson in 1911 and is still manufactured in the small Ontario city, Milton, where he established his factory, now Robertson-Whitehouse. These fasteners and the matching screwdriving tools are always referred to as Robertsons or "Robbies" by the trades up here but always advertised in US supply catalogues as "square drive", sometimes with the addition of adjectives like "revolutionary" I have heard that there was great opposition to their introduction into the US back in the day by the American makers (because they didn't hold the patents and the screws were better in use than theirs) and that there were even legislative measures taken to exclude Robertson screws. I have never known whether to credit this or not. I tend to think there is something to it, since the American trades that use them for the first time, love them. They stay on the driving tool when driven by hand or with a screwgun. Slot heads are rubbish to anyone who installs large numbers of fasteners and drivers on Phillips fasteners cam out very easily, usually making a mess of the screwhead, which doesn't matter in drywall screws but does when the screws are soft brass and are securing hinges that cost fifty bucks a set. Is anyone aware of why these excellent little devices have appeared in the world's most developed economy only in the last twenty or so years?

 

[CoryPad]

In my experience, the square drive (Robertson) is really no better than the cross recess (Phillips) and so the expense of changing to it was unwelcome by industry. If an application required a drive system that actually performed well, a better system such as the hexalobular (Torx) was chosen.

Regards,

Cory

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.

 

[CorBlimeyLimey]

the square drive (Robertson) is really no better than the cross recess (Phillips)

You've got to be kidding! I have found the same as johnsim ... that when I have introduced the Robertson to people in or from the US, they think they are great & far superior to the Phillips. One visting customer even went out & bought a few sets of square drivers & selection of screws to take back with him to show his colleagues.

I agree with you though, the Torx system is good, but I will have to look up the specs to see which is actually better.

& all the best.

 

[unclesyd]

CorBlimeyLimey,
If you are going to lookup Torx, look up Torx Plus.

I have an article on the non use of Sq. drive screws in US except by the casket, furniture and mobile home industry. I'll try to find it.

 

[CoryPad]

No, I wasn't kidding. I don't like cross recess at all, but square drive doesn't really offer much better performance, especially considering what Torx/Torx Plus offers.

Here is a good place to start with Torx/Torx Plus information:

http://www.textronfasteningsystems.com/products/torxplus/index.html

Regards,

Cory

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.

 

[Screwman]

One of the things that I have found with Robertson drive screws is that the recess is so deep in the heads that it is very difficult to get a structurally sound head design (under load the head breaks off through the bottom of the recess). This is because it has a small cross section and requires quite a bit of depth to get high torque capability.
I would agree that compared to cross recess, that Robertson is better, but like the others have said, if you are trying to get high torque levels, then you want Torx or Torx Plus. There was some testing done driving screws to about 75% of proof and Torx Plus lasted something like 10 times longer than Robertson drive.

Dick

 

[AFab]

As a guy with lots of experiance with every screw type going, the Robetson has been the most efficient I have used.
The amount of torque that the screw can take befor the head breaks off means very little to the tradesman as long it does the job.
With the "Robby" you can simply put the screw on the end of a screwdriver or screwbit and it doesn't fall off. "NO fancy clips or Magnets required"
Now days time is money. Robertsons are cheaper than torx and faster to use.

 

[yates]

Agree with screwman. We don't make Robertson heads anymore since the depth and width of the square socket do not leave enough material to resist the head coming off - the screw cannot benefit from all its tensile strength since the head snaps prematurely. It is obvious AFab is an installation man and not a maintenance man, for while he's right in saying they are a doddle to install, since ' who cares about heads breaking off as long as it does the job' just try explaining that to the maintenance guy who has just snapped off the head while dismantling a repair job which is very urgently needed back in service. I don't believe in planned obsolescence !

 

[AFab]

Yates I have been in maintenance most of my life. Pulp & Paper, Automotive to name a few. I never said anything about experencing heads breaking off as long as the right screw was used for the right application. One company I worked for made windows for oil rigs and passenger trains.
Robersons were used however they were S/S.

 

[Johnsim]

unclesyd
Thanks for your reply. I would like to see that article.

 

[Johnsim]

Guys, I was not asking about fasteners for finnicky high torque applications as in aerospace or reactor designs. The simple fact is that the Robertson head screw is better than anything else for a wide class of mundane but necessary applications and the doggone thing stays on the driver where other designs don't. Put down two thousand square feet of deck planking, half with Robbies and half with any other screwhead. You will get the message. That is if the screws and drivers are made in Canada or the US. The Asian products are made to one standard only, price.
I want to know why a modest product with a good design was actively resisted by the United States, a country which has produced workplace tools and equipment that are second to none. Ridgid makes the best pipeworking gear around. Lincoln welders, Milwaukee drills, Why did sixty years go by before US mechanics even saw Robertson fasteners? Don't tell me about screwheads twisting off. I have twisted off enough Tapcon Phillips heads to pave a street with them.

 

[TBP]

Robertson took his fastener to Europe, with the hope of manufacturing it in England with some business partners there, and selling it across the continent. Unfortunately, this was just before WWI broke out. He and his English partners did OK producing war related goods, but fastener sales to Germany and Russia were, well, non-existant. After the war ended, there was a falling out among the partners, and it ended badly all around. Robertson swore he'd never fail to be in full control again. He sold fasteners for a few years to Ford in the US, but Henry Ford wanted to manufacture them himself, under licence. Remembering his British adventure, Robertson refused. He'd sell anybody all of the screws that they wanted, but nobody else would be licenced to make them. Henry Ford also liked to be in full control of things, so that emded that. WWII broke out, and Phillips screws (Phillips bought the screw head design from someone else, and made a couple of minor improvements) were better than slotted, and war manufacturing needed a zillion fasteners, so Phillips took off on the US side of the border.

Any electrician, carpenter, or sheet metal worker who has ever used a Robertson head fastener, isn't happily going back to slotted or Phillips.

 

[CoryPad]

Johnsim,

It isn't only "finnicky high torque applications as in aerospace or reactor designs" that expose the weaknesses of square/Robertson drive. You mentioned decks - Torx/hexalobular/6 lobe/star drive is becoming popular for this application. You can see some products here:

http://www.screw-products.com/

Regards,

Cory

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.

 

[Johnsim]

CoryPad; I won't argue that there can't be a better driver recess in a screwhead than Robertson's. Torx is much more recent. I think TBP's response in this thread is much more to the point. Robertson's penetration of the US market with a very good product was resisted by some heavyweight players. It is interesting to note that Robertson's designs for screwmaking machinery were admired around the world and the machines were widely purchased. I wonder how many Phillips type fasteners were made on Robertson machines that Henry Ford bought.
I have enjoyed the responses, and it is apparent from them that those who are closest to field use of fasteners are fans of Robbies. There are screws out that permit the use of either Phillips or Robertson drivers. I think there should be a driver made specifically for these screws. It would look a bit like a Torx.

 

[CoryPad]

I think TBP's information is only part of the answer. Patents only last for approximately 20 years, so anyone would have been free to make square drive fasteners a long time ago. The fact that they didn't make inroads can be explained by other factors (such as those enumerated above).

I am not sure what to make of your "those who are closet to field use" comment, but I think you would be remiss in not contemplating the words from yates and Screwman - they have huge experience and information in this area.

As far as combination drives, here is one from Phillips Screw Company:

http://www.phillips-screw.com/PSD.htm

Regards,

Cory

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.

 

[Paskenell]

I will refrain from entering the disagreement about which is the "better" drive system, but to add to my fellow history buff's information above (good job TBP), the phillips became very popular in the US because it worked well in the relatively new concept of the "assembly line". With manual screw turning becoming a monotous job on an assembly line, this simple little operation began causing all sorts of head-aches. When the screw driver slipped from its slot, it had a tendancy to damage the material it was being used on. Another notorious problem became screws being over-drive, which either damaged the product or more common - breaking. This put a real crimp in the assembly line productivity philosophy as these screws had to be removed and replaced, or the part replaced. The relatively new phillips concept worked perfectly to prevent this at the Ford Factory. Its recess held the driver much better than the slot, therefore reducing the chance of driver slippage. And the screw would actually cam-out before it broke. For this very reason, most of us curse the phillips drive today, but in its time, it worked perfectly to help alleviate a relatively new problem for a brand new concept.

 

[mshimko]

I'll throw in my 2-cents, strictly from a week-end mechanic/handyman's perspective:

I recall a friend 20 years ago who used the square drive screws all the time around the house and on his van. He was also a Canadian exchange Naval officer!

I built the deck on my house about 10 years ago. I used a combination of phillip head deck screws and spiral deck screws. I seem to recall seeing square drive fasteners back then at your typical home improvement store.

I'm now in the process of modifying the deck to "insert" a hot tub. Removing both spiral deck nails and phillips head screws installed 10 years ago is a difficult pain in the %&$#%.

I've tried to find square drive screws for my re-build portion of the deck, and just can't seem to find them. I have found "special" phillips head screws intended for use in the new pressure treated lumber, and also "special" drives.

It appears that the only difference in the drives is the "special" phillips drives have more blunt at the tip, which may reduce slip. (I call these "special" only because I don't recall te proper term, if there is any).

This I do know - if square drive screws were readily available, I'd be using them.

 

[Johnsim]

Corypad
Check out mshimko's post regarding decks, which I mentioned earlier. He's the kind of guy I mean when I say closest to the fastener's use in the field, a guy who is physically installing (or removing) them.
I am a guy who has put plenty of Robbies and Phillips heads into structures from millwork to fences to steel studs to concrete. The square heads are just plain better. And I have not experienced this twisting off of the heads that you seem to believe is chronic. While being very useful and reliable fasteners, Tapcons lose their heads with a dismaying frequency, Phillips and hex heads both. Torx, to my knowledge, has no broad application in base building construction, although I had to buy a Torx driver to change a sealed beam headlight on my van once. Anyway I'm not comparing Robbies and Torx. I am saying that Phillips head screws suck and have for almost a century when the Robertson square drive was better and readily available. And the answering posts are just what I knew I would see; the guys who get their hands dirty are fans of the square drive. With all respect, guys who measure the twist-off torque limit don't use the screws personally day in and day out.