Railway Construction — John Stuart Mill — John Shaqi
Railway Construction
John Stuart Mill · en
The character of the work to be carried out in the construction of
bridges or viaducts over rivers or valleys must greatly depend upon
the description of materials at command. Where good building-stone is
plentiful, and the price of labour moderate, works of masonry should
be adopted as far as practicable. Brickwork is an excellent substitute
for masonry, provided that specially selected bricks are used for all
facework, or parts exposed to the weather. For water-washed piers and
abutments, the lower portion should be faced with good hard stone.
[Illustration: Fig. 92]
Bridges and viaducts consisting of arches of masonry or brickwork form
the most substantial and permanent works of construction for railway
purposes; once properly built, the expenditure on future maintenance
or repairs is merely nominal. For viaducts the span of the arching
must be regulated by the height of the viaduct. The greater the height
the larger the span. In one case 30-feet spans may be suitable,
whereas in another it may be more economical to introduce spans of 60
feet or more, and so reduce the number of lofty piers. From a cost
point of view there is, however, a limit to the span of arching, and,
except for special cases, where expenditure is of secondary
importance, large spans are very rarely adopted. Arches of large
spans, no doubt, have been built both in masonry and brickwork, and
have been a complete success in every way except expense.
Unfortunately, the quantity and weight of materials in arching, and
the corresponding cost, increase very rapidly as the span increases, 95
and for openings of more than 60 or 70 feet girder-work becomes much
cheaper than arching.
Figs. 92 and 93 are examples of viaducts having piers of masonry, with
girders to carry the roadway. In the one case the roadway is carried
on the bottom flange of the girders, and in the other on the top. The
latter arrangement affords greater facility for securely bracing the
girders together, while for the former it is claimed that the girders
form a massive parapet, which would serve as a protection in the event
of an engine or vehicles leaving the rails.