When each cylinder had been by this means sunk low enough to ensure a
good foundation, it was filled with concrete in the following manner. A
mixture formed of Thames ballast and Portland cement, in the proportions
of 8 to 1, was put into a canvas bag; this was lowered inside the
cylinder to the bottom, and, by pulling a rope, the mouth of the bag was
opened, and the concrete deposited under water in the bottom of the
cylinder. Whenever the work was interrupted, great care was taken before
recommencing it to clean off any deposit, in order that the new concrete
might adhere well to the old. When the cylinder had been filled to such
a height that there was no danger of its floating up when emptied, the
water was pumped out. The inside was then filled with concrete in the
ordinary manner. On the top were placed oak platforms, which support the
trusses of the bridge.
One of the outside trusses was tested at Bristol in July 1849, by
loading it gradually with iron rails, beginning from one end, until the
whole truss was uniformly weighted with 270 tons, or 1½ tons per
foot-run, observations on the deflection of different points of the
bottom girder being made both during the loading and unloading. The
results of this test were perfectly satisfactory.
The superstructure of the bridge was erected on scaffolding, and the
line was opened on October 8, 1849.
* * * * *
It will be desirable here to notice one or two important features in
this as in almost all Mr. Brunel’s bridges.
The ordinary permanent way was laid over the bridges with ballast of
sufficient thickness to enable the road to be kept in repair in the same
manner as the other parts of the line. As there was no change in the
nature of the support given to the rails, no concussion was caused on a
train entering or leaving a bridge. The ballast took off from the
structure the vibration of the train; and, in the event of carriages or
even engines getting off the line, it helped in a great measure to
prevent their ploughing through the flooring. Where the flooring was of
timber the ballast protected it from fire. Also in long bridges there
was no necessity for any contrivance of sliding rails to allow for the
effects on the structure of changes of temperature. On the other hand,
the ballast added to the weight on the bridge. With the timber viaducts
this was an advantage, since it kept the various parts of the framework
in close contact, and prevented sudden jars being brought on them by the
rapidly applied load of a passing train. Even on the large bridges the
cost of the extra material requisite to support the weight of the
ballast was more than compensated for by the advantages above referred
to.
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