Engineers and their triumphs: the story of the locomotive, the steamship, bridge building, tunnel makingHolmes, F. M. (Frederic Morell)
History
Engineers and their triumphs: the story of the locomotive, the steamship, bridge building, tunnel making
Holmes, F. M. (Frederic Morell)
Engineering; Engineers
“From coast to coast the span of the Strait is some 1100 feet, with
that rock in the centre. Now the problem is, to build a bridge across
that gulf of surging water strong enough to bear heavy trains at high
speeds, and sufficiently above the water to prevent any interference
with navigation.”
“And how will you manage it?”
“First I thought of large cast-iron arches, but they will not do. I
doubt if they would stand the strain; and moreover we should impede
navigation by raising scaffolding during the building. At length I came
to the idea of a tube bridge.”
“What! a tube bridge! I’ve never heard of it!”
“No, it is a new idea. By reconsidering a design I had made for a small
bridge over the Lea at Ware in 1841, and thinking over the matter, I
came to the idea that a bridge consisting of a hollow beam or tube
might solve the difficulty.”
“A huge hollow girder, so to speak!” exclaimed his friend.
“Exactly so. Accordingly,” the engineer continued, “I had drawings
prepared and calculations made, by which to ascertain the strength
of such a bridge, and they were so satisfactory that I decided on
attempting one.”
“It is like constructing one huge hollow beam of iron by rivetting
plates together. Can it be done?” remarked his friend.
“The making of the high-level bridge over the Tyne, in which I had
a part—the bridge between Newcastle and Gateshead, you know—was a
transition between an arched bridge and a girder bridge. A girder of
course is a beam, it may be of iron or wood, and the little bridge at
Ware has been built of girders made of plates of wrought-iron rivetted
together. Therefore, you see, I am not unused to wrought-iron girders,
and what they will bear.”
“Why, it is like a huge extension of the primitive log-bridge of our
ancestors.”
“If you like,” replied the engineer, laughing.
Robert Stephenson—for he it is whom we suppose to be speaking to his
friend on this gigantic engineering enterprise—became satisfied by
reflection that the principles involved in constructing an immense
tubular beam were but a development of those commonly in use; and Sir
William Fairbairn was entrusted with the duty of experimenting as to
the strength of tubes, the directors of the Railway Company voting a
sum of money for the purpose.
Sir William, then Mr., Fairbairn concluded that rectangular tubes were
the strongest, and a model was made of the suggested bridge. It proved
successful, and indicated that the tube would be able to stand the
strain of a heavy train passing rapidly over it.
In September, 1846, Mr. Fairbairn read a paper on the subject at
the meeting of the British Association at Southampton, as also did
Professor Hodgkinson, a mathematician, who had verified Fairbairn’s
experiments. Not long afterwards Stephenson became satisfied that
chains were not needed to assist in supporting the bridge, and that his
tubes would be strong enough to support themselves entirely between the
piers.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account