[Illustration: Fig. 16. [Full Page] DETAILS OF TRAVELING FORMS USED IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE BENCH WALLS A’. CROSS-SECTION OF STEEL FORM A. LONGITUDINAL SECTION AND ELEVATION OF STEEL FORM USED AT WEEHAWKEN END B. DETAILS OF SCREW-JACKS FOR ADJUSTING FORM TO LINE C. SECTION _C_-_D_ SHOWING CONNECTION OF FACE PLATES TO I-BEAM UPRIGHTS D. DETAILS OF WOODEN FORMS USED AT WESTERN END: CROSS-SECTION, PART LONGITUDINAL SECTION No chutes were used with these forms, the wheel-barrows being dumped from the runways on the sides.] The design was controlled very largely by the necessity of providing the requisite clearance for the locomotives and muck cars, and the principal feature was the support of the forms on two trusses, one at either side, the front ends of which were supported from the foundation on a long leg, as shown in Fig. 3, Plate XXV, and the rear ends directly on the journal-boxes of wheels traveling on a rail on the top of the finished bench, as shown in Fig. 2, Plate XXV. Although it had been decided to substitute concrete for brick in the arch before any of the lining was actually placed, two sets of forms for the Weehawken end had already been ordered and delivered, so it was decided to use them as designed, and place the side-wall with the bench. The forms were designed so that 30-ft. lengths could be built, and this was done at the start, but owing to the occurrence of the refuge niches, ladders, etc., at 25-ft. intervals, it was soon seen that it would be advisable to build the bench-wall in sections of that length (25 ft.), or multiples of it, and as the clearance conditions seemed to preclude the possibility of making the forms 50 ft. long, 25 ft. was adopted. This permitted the removal of one of the panels, 4 ft. 6 in. wide, and at the same time it was decided to remove the side-wall forms. This decreased the load on the trusses considerably, but being still a trifle weak, they were strengthened by the substitution of 1¼-in. truss rods instead of the ¾-in. rods used originally. The top platform and the cross-bracing were also stiffened a little and tightened up to prevent racking. The construction of the side-walls in conjunction with the bench-wall was abandoned for three reasons: First, it was found that there would be a much more even distribution of the work by including the side-wall with the arch rather than with the bench; second, there was difficulty in getting a good finish for the top of the bench-wall, as of course a top form for the latter had to be placed to prevent the concrete from squeezing up when the side-wall was built above it, which prevented troweling; the third reason was the weakness of the whole form as designed, and the increasing difficulty of adjusting it to line as the work progressed, the principal difficulty being with the curved side-wall forms.