/ THE MEMPHIS BRIDGE. A REPORT GEORGE H. NETTLETON, PRESIDENT OF THE KANSAS CITY AND MEMPHIS RAILWAY AND BRIDGE COMPANY, GEORGE S. MORISOR, CHIEF ENGINEER OF THE MEMPHIS BRIDGE. NEW YORK: JOHN WILEY & SONS, 53 East Tenth Street. 1894. Chicago, March 1st, 1894. George H. Nettleton, Esq., President Kansas City and Memphis Railway and Bridge Company. Dear Sir:— I submit the following Final Report in relation to the bridge acr< Tennessee. Yours truly, George £ iss the Mississippi River at Memphis, 1. Morison, Chief Engineer Memphis Bridge. CONTENTS. SUBJECTS. Page I. Preliminary Narrative. 5 II. General Description. 7 III. Substructure. g IV. Superstructure. j g V. Viaduct. 05 VI. Approaches. 26 VII. Shore Protection. 27 VIII. Cost. os APPENDICES. A. List of Engineers, Employees and Contractor. 29 B. Act of Congress, approved February 26, 1885 . 30 C. Act of Congress, approved April 24, 1888. 31 D. Contract with War Department. 32 E. Report of February 15, 1887. 33 F. Report of August 2, 1888. 37 G. Argument for Amendment of Charter. 39 H. Ordinance of Taxing District, passed March 23, 1891. 42 I. Cost of Sinking Foundations ... 45 J. Progress of Sinking Foundations. 54 K. Specifications for Masonry. 33 L. Specifications for Superstructure. 65 M. Supplementary Specifications, May 6, 1890. 70 N. Supplementary Specifications, January 1, 1891. 71 O. Tests of Full Sized Eye Bars... 72 P Report of Testing Committee .... 74 LIST OF PLATES. 1. General Map. 2. Bridge and Immediate Vicinity. 3. Profile and Alignment. 4. General Elevation and Plan. 5. Profile showing Stratification on Bridge Line. 6. Water Record at Government Gauge, seven years. 7. Water Record, Government and Bridge Gauges, four years. 8. Record of Soundings, seven typical dates. 9. East Abutment. 10. Anchorage and Small Piers. 11. Pier I. 12. Caisson, Pier I. 13. Pier II. 14. Pier III. 15. Position of Mats at Piers II and III. 16. Caisson, Pier IT. 17. Caisson, Pier III and Cutting Edge. 18. Stratification of Clay at Pier III. 19. Pier IV. 20. Caisson, Pier IV. 21. Pier V. 22. Weaving Barges. 23. Anchorage of Caisson III. 24. Launching Ways. 25. Clay Hoist and Sand Pump. 26. Special Hoist and Lock. 27. Concrete Mixing Plant. 28. Diagram of Sinking Progress. 29. Elevation, Anchorage Span. 30. Elevation and Section, Anchorage Span. 31. Elevation, Cantilever Arm. 32. Elevation, Central Span. 33. Elevation and Section, Central Span. 34. Elevation, Intermediate Span. 35. Elevation and Section, Intermediate Span. 36. Viaduct East of Anchorage. 37. Anchorage Connection. 38. Bearings, Piers I and III. 39. Expansion Bearing, Pier II. 40. Bearing, Pier IV. 41. Joints in Chords, Central Span. 42. U 0 Panel Point, Central Span. 43. Expansion Joints, Intermediate Span. 44. Adjustment at Ends, Intermediate Span. 45. Adjustments at Center, Intermediate Span. 46. Elevation, Deck Span. 47. Elevation and Section, Deck Span. 48. Details, Deck Span. 49. Floor. 50. Strain Sheet, Intermediate Span. 51. Strain Sheet, Cantilever Arm. 52. Strain Sheet, Anchorage Arm. 53. Strain Sheet, Central Span. 54. Strain Sheet Details, Central Span 55. Strain Sheet, Deck Spau. 56. West Approach Viaduct. 57. West Approach Piers. 58. Details, West Approach Viaduct. 59. Viaduct Floor and Girders. 60. Highway Approach. THE MEMPHIS BRIDGE. 5 THE MEMPHIS BRIDGE. i. PRELIMINARY NARRATIVE. The construction of a bridge at Memphis lias been a matter of pro¬ fessional interest among American engineers for many years. In 1867 the bridge across the Missouri River at Kansas City, the first bridge across that river and the bridge whose construction led to the building of the railroad of whose system the Memphis Bridge now forms a part, was begun. At this time a bridge at Memphis was talked of as one of the works of the future. Like other works which were considered far in the future, the difficulties of the problem were overestimated: the depth of the river was overstated and other conditions were considered much more difficult than they really were. At that time, however, the con¬ struction of a bridge at Memphis would have been a matter of great expense, and the changes which finally rendered the building of this bridge a comparatively simple affair represent the advances which bridge engineering has made in twenty years. The Kansas City Biidge was begun in 1867 and opened in 1869. The Memphis Bridge was begun in 1888 and was opened for traffic in 1892. The Act of Congress under which the Kansas City Bridge was built was approved July 25th, 1866; the Act of Congress under which the Memphis Bridge was built was approved April 24th, 1888. The two bridges were really about twenty-two years apart. The first definite action looking to the construction of a bridge at Memphis was the passage by Congress of an Act approved February 26th, 1885, conferring on two corporations the right to construct and maintain a bridge across the Mississippi River from or near Memphis in the State of Tennessee to or near the town of Hopefield in the State of Arkansas. The physical requirements of this charter were favorable, and the people who obtained it hoped that it would prove a profitable enterprise. As it is of interest to compare this charter with the one subsequently granted to your company it is printed in Appendix B. Some months after the granting of this charter Mr. Simon Stevens of New York, who represented the parties holding the charter, called at my office in New York to consult me in regard to the construction of a bridge under its provisions, and at that time I made some crude estimates and prepared some crude plans. The plan which at that time seemed to me the best contemplated crossing the river with two long spans having a double pier on a single foundation in the middle of the river. This plan, however, was prepared without .surveys, the data being obtained from some old maps. When actual surveys were made, the width of the river was found to be materially greater than these maps showed and the plan became impracticable. The matter was one which interested me greatly from the start, and I also thought that if a bridge was to be built there it should be in the interest of the Kansas City, Ft. Scott & Mem¬ phis System of railroads. On the 15th of January, 1886, I called upon you in Kansas City and we had our first conversation in relation to this bridge. It is from this date that the connection of your system with the scheme really began. I left Kansas City that night and reached Memphis on the afternoon of the following day. The river was full of ice and it was difficult to go about; but I made a short trip on the transfer-boat Charles Merriam and climbed up the bluff on the Memphis side of the river. On this day I se¬ lected the location for a bridge, this location being fixed by the top of a rude staircase on the Memphis side and by a log cabin in the bottom-land on the Arkansas side. I never had occasion to alter this location and the bridge was built upon it. Nothing definite was done for several months thereafter, but towards the end of the year you authorized me to make an examination of the site and a report on the cost of a bridge on this location. On the 23d of November, 1886, I again visited Memphis, taking with me Mr. E. Pur- yea, Jr., as my assistant, to make borings in the river. Mr. Duryea con¬ tinued at Memphis till the spring of 1887 and during this time a careful set of borings were made. These borings gave results more favorable than I had expected, as they showed that a layer of hard clay was to be found entirely across the Mississippi River at depths within the limits to which foundations could be sunk by practical methods. The results of these borings and examinations were embodied in a report dated February 15th, 1887, which I addressed to you and which I have thought best to attach to this report as Appendix E. This report contemplated crossing the river with three equal independent spans of about 660 feet each, which the charter of 1885 permitted, and which after a careful examination seemed to me the best arrangement. It also considered a 1300 feet span of cantilever construction. The charier of 1885 was found to be unsatisfactory, in various par¬ ticulars, to the interests which you represent, and in the winter of 1886— 87 a bill was introduced in Congress granting another charier to a cor¬ poration in your interest. This bill did not pass. During the following season another bill was introduced which be¬ came a law: this is the Act under which your bridge has been con¬ structed ; it was approved April 24th, 1888 and is given in Appendix C. This Act fixed the minimum length of the channel span at 700 feet or 150 feet more than the length of clear spans specified in the previous Act. A more serious difference, however, was that it fixed the height above high water at 75 feet instead of 65. The Act also required that provision should be made for highway traffic. I was at that time in quarantine at San Francisco, but plans were prepared by my partner, Mr. E. L. Corthell, and submitted to the Secretary of War for approval. The Act provided that the Secretary of War should order three en¬ gineer officers from the Engineer Bureau to examine by actual inspection the location where the bridge was to be built and report what should be the length of the main-channel span and of other spans. A board was appointed consisting of Col. W. E. Merrill, Major O. H. Ernst, and Cap¬ tain D. C. Kingman. It met at Memphis in May, 1888. On the 25th day of that month I arrived at Memphis; Mr. Corthell was already there. We met the board and explained the situation while various gentlemen representing the steamboat interests were also present. The full proceedings of this board and the action of the Secretary of War are given in Appendix WW 22 of the Report of the Chief of En¬ gineers, U. S. Army, for 1888 (pp. 2514-2525). The board did not agree in their report, the two junior officers recommending a minimum channel span 1000 feet long, while the senior officer, whose professional standing made his opinion of unusual weight, considered 700 feet in the clear enough. The board was unanimous in locating the channel span next to the Tennessee shore and this location was accepted. The findings of this board were overruled by the Secretary of War, who decided that if a clear width of 730 feet, at all stages of water, could be provided under the channel span it would be enough, and who THE MEMPHIS BRIDGE. intimated that if this length of span could be increased to 770 feet by placing the east pier 40 feet back from the low-water line, it would be unnecessary to provide any special fenders to keep tows from striking this pier. As the requirements of the new charter and the conditions imposed by the Secretary of War made essential modifications in the plan of the bridge which affected the cost, you asked for another estimate. This es¬ timate was made and is embodied in a report dated August 2d, 1888, which is attached to this report as Appendix F. The last suggestion of the Secretary of W ar was adopted. On the 3d of August, 1888, I submitted personally to the Hon. William C. Endi- cott, Secretary of War, in Washington, the plans of a bridge meeting these conditions. These plans were approved in a contract between the War Department and the Bridge Company, which is printed in Ap¬ pendix D. The charter required that provision should be made “for the passage of railway trains, and wagons and vehicles of all kinds, (and) for the transit of animals.” The Secretary of War insisted that the plans should show provisions of this character; and as he considered it possible that a provision for highway traffic on the same floor with the railroad traffic, the arrangement which has been in use for twenty years at Kansas City and at other places, might prove inadequate, a special clause was inserted in the contract under which the Bridge Company agreed to run ferry trains, similar to those formerly run between Omaha and Council Bluffs, whenever the accommodations afforded for highway traffic should prove inadequate. As the financial arrangements for the construction of the bridge were not then completed, I advised you to put in the foundation of Pier IY during the low-water season of 1888, in advance of any final action as to the construction of the bridge, believing that the information to be obtained by sinking this pier might be of great assistance in preparing the plans for. the other piers. The authority to put in this formdation was given. On the 1st day of October I appointed Mr. Alfred Noble, who was then Resident Engineer of the Cairo Bridge, Resident Engineer of the Memphis Bridge; it being understood that he should divide his time between the two bridges until the Cairo Bridge was done. Lines were retraced, the axis of the bridge was definitely marked, and on the 7th of November-, 1888, actual construction was begun by framing timber for the caisson of Pier IV. Meanwhile the steamer JOHN BERTRAM, fitted with a complete pneumatic plant, and which had been used on the Rulo and Nebraska City bridges, had been bought and brought to Memphis. The work continued during the fall and winter, though it was con¬ fined entirely to the foundation of Pier IY. The foundation of this pier was completed in February, 1889, and about the time of its completion the plans were worked up for the large caissons of the two river piers. In January I was authorized to proceed with construction in the hope that the bridge could be finished in 1891. To accomplish this it was necessary to put in the foundations of the two river piers (II and III) during the low-water season of 1889. If the season had been favorable this could have been done. But the season was too short, and the foundation of Pier II had to be abandoned before it was completed. No harm was done, but two seasons instead of one were required for the formdation work. In June, 1889, a special building adapted to the requirements of an engineer’s office was erected on the bluff at the foot of Virginia Avenue a little north of the bridge line. This office served a very useful pur-pose during the whole construction of the bridge, and its situation was such that it was a comfortable place to work in at all seasons of the year. The original estimates contemplated building the piers of limestone. It was decided, however, to make the face stone of granite. On the 3d of April, 1889, a contract was execrrted with Lewis M. Loss to build the masonry of the piers. On the 24th of January, 1890, a contract was entered into with the Union Bridge Company for the manufacture of the super-structure. On the 10th of May, 1890, a contract was entered into with the firm of Bair Brothers for the erection of the superstructure. On the 6tlr of March, 1891, a contract was entered into -with the Pennsylvania Steel Company for the manrtfacture of the viaduct on the west approach. These four contracts were the only important contracts let during the entire work. All other work was either done by the company’s own forces working under the direction of the Resident Engineer, or consisted of small work let to local contractors. In the early part of 1890, during the long session of the Fifty-first Congress, an attempt was made to have the charter amended so as to permit the bridge to be built sixty-five feet above high water, the height peimitted by the Act of February 26th, 1885, and a bill to accomplish this was introduced in the United States Senate by the Hon. Isham G. Harris. I had a careful set of measurements made of the heights of smoke-stacks and pilot-houses of nearly every important steamboat run¬ ning on the lower Mississippi River and embodied the results of these measurements in a printed argument which, as it contains many valuable facts which may otherwise be lost, is printed in Appendix G of this report. The bill failed to pass and the bridge was built of the elevation required by the charter. The result is a heavy grade on the east ap¬ proach which could otherwise have been avoided, a disturbance of street levels, and the constant hard working of locomotives within the city limits. An ordinance of the Taxing District of Shelby County, passed March 23d, 1891, authorized the crossing of streets and alleys along the line of the east approach. A copy of this ordinance is printed in Appendix H. The erection of the superstructure began in January, 1891, with the anchorage span. This erection continued without interruption, the last part of the superstructure erected being the central portion of the channel span. This was connected through on the 8th of April, 1892, sixteen days before the expiration of the time limited by the charter for the completion of the work and finally swung clear on the 23d of April, one day before the expiration of the charter time. The small amount of work then remaining to be done to open the bridge for the passage of trains was rapidly completed, and on the 12th of May, 1892, the bridge was formally tested by the passage of a train of eighteen locomotives and was immediately thereafter opened to railroad traffic, since which time it has been a source of revenue to your company. The opening of the bridge was made the occasion of a great public celebration in Memphis on the 12th and 13th. The deflections and other movements under the passage of the test trains were carefully observed by a committee of engineers especially selected as a testing committee, whose report will be found in Appendix P. The same appendix contains a list of the eighteen locomotives. There still remained a considerable amount of work, the principal features being the sloping and paving of the east bluff, additional riprap protection around the river piers, and the construction of the highway approaches, so that the bridge could be opened to highway traffic as required by its charter. Mr. Noble left Memphis on the 1st of June, 1892, and Mi-. M. A. Waldo was given the title of Resident Engineer, though Mr. Noble con¬ tinued to assist me in the supervision of the work. The highway approaches and floor were completed so that the bridge THE MEMPHIS BRIDGE. was opened for highway traffic January 26th, 1893; blit the amount of highway traffic has not proved enough to pay the expenses of collecting the tolls or in any way to interfere with railroad traffic. On the 31st of December, 1892, all work, except the pavement of the east bank and some riprap protection, being completed, the care of the bridge was turned over to Mr. W. A. Nettleton, Superintendent of Terminals. On the 1st of May, 1893, this other work also being com¬ pleted, everything was placed in his hands. II. GENERAL DESCRIPTION. The Memphis Bridge and approaches, being the entire line of rail¬ road owned by the Kansas City and Memphis Railway and Bridge Company, extend from the connection with the main line of the Kansas City, Ft. Scott ier. Superstructure. Live loud 791 ft. at 4000 lbs. . Total weight on foundation. Deduct for buoyancy 257 500 cu. ft. below elevation 182 at 02.5 lbs. Immersed weight. 0 502 050 lbs. 450 180 “ 12 772 020 *' 17 027 400 " 37 352 250 *■ 4 908 000 " 3 164 000 “ 45 424 250 lbs. = 10 505 lbs. per sq. ft. 16 093 750 lbs. 29 330 500 lbs. = 6 783 lbs. per sq. ft. It is expected that at least 40 feet of this foundation will be perpetually buried in the sand, and to obtaiu the in¬ creased pressure on this area of foundation the weight of this sand in water should also be deducted, this weight being 172 960 cu. ft. at 58 lbs. 10 032 000 lbs. Fatigue weight on bottom of foundation. 19 298 500 lbs. = From this may be deducted the skin friction on 40 vertical feet of caisson, which is assumed to be at least 400 lbs. per square foot on 11 120 sq. ft. 4 448 000 lbs. Actual probable fatigue measure. 14 850 500 lbs. = 4 403 lbs. per sq. ft. 3 434 lbs. per sq. ft. It would, therefore, appear that with no allowance whatever for ■buoyancy the pressure on the foundation is within the strain borne by the unsupported cubes experimented on without material compression and with no deformation of shape; while the actual fatigue pressure, without allowance for skin friction, is less than one half what these cubes bore. Furthermore, it must be remembered that this foundation is 40 feet below the bottom of the river, -and that the mats around the piers are expected to maintain the bottom where it now is. During the progress of the work the river at the bridge line showed a gradual tendency to deepen. This is illustrated by the seven different lines of river bottom shown on Plate 8. It will be observed that the tendency to deepen has been much greater in the western half of the river than in the eastern, and it will also be noted that elevation 125, or about 40 ft. above the bottom of the foundation, is the probable limit of scour. Of course this scour may be very greatly increased by local disturbances, but it is hardly conceivable that even with great neglect the bottom of the river should ever be less than 20 feet above the bottom of the founda¬ tions. Should this deep scour occur, the value of the breadth of the foundations will be evident. The soundings show the effects of the mats around the pier sites. The working of the mats was so satisfactory that it was thought best to reinforce them with an additional mat of the same dimensions as one of the original ones, and to make this mat the foundation of a heavy rip¬ rap protection. This foundation mat was put in in September, 1892, weaving having been begun on the 4th of that month, and the sinking of the mat completed on the 15th of September; 1228 cords of brush and 879 tons of riprap were used in it. The riprap was put in in February, 1893. It was of a comparatively heavy character and was brought from quarries on the Ohio River near Rose Claire. The total amount of rip¬ rap placed was 2504 gross tons. This additional work is included in the statement of cost given above. PIER III. The plans for Pier III were worked up in connection with those for Pier II. Soundings had shown the bottom of the river to be at elevation 160 at the site of Pier III, and borings had found clean river sand at elevation 108 where clay was reached. The caisson for Pier III is shown on Plate 17. It is 39.6 feet high, 47 feet wide, and 92 feet long, and in construction was similar in all respects to the caisson for Pier II. The outer pockets were left empty for 14 THE MEMPHIS BRIDGE. a height of 11.0 feet, and the upper 10.4 feet of the whole 39.6 feet were built of solid timber. Pier III contains 1085 M B.M. of timber and 367 000 pounds of iron. Precisely the same machinery was used here as at Pier II. The cut¬ ting edge of the caisson was placed on the 30th of July on the same launching ways from which the caisson for Pier II had been launched, and this caisson was itself launched on the 26th of October. The situation of Pier III had been considered less exposed than that of Pier II, and one mat only was woven for this pier. The caisson was brought into position without serious trouble on the 28th of October and the concrete filling begun on the 5th of November. It was none too early ; the river had already begun to rise, and it continued to rise till the 25th, when it attained a 23 feet stage. These three weeks formed perhaps the most critical time of the entire work. During this rise the current in this part of the river made an angle of about 10 degrees with the axis of the pier and tended to move the caisson towards the west; on the 19th of November the caisson was 20 feet out of place; finally, by the aid of two tugs and of five lines leading to Pier II, the caisson was brought back into position five feet east of where it belonged; four days later all the lines leading east and one of the northeastern lines parted, and the caisson was carried 50 feet west of its true position. Five coils of wire rope were ordered and brought down on a passenger train from St. Louis (350 miles) in one night. Additional anchors were put on until the caisson was held by 18 wire ropes leading up stream and five leading eastward. The arrangement of the anchorage at this time is shown on Plate 23. With these lines the caisson was brought into practically correct position and held there until it ■was finally landed on the 10th of Decem¬ ber, at elevation 157, in 44 feet of water; on the following day the caisson and upper works were completed. It had been necessary to build up the sides of the caisson before putting in the solid timber and to cany it up four to six feet above the intended height by false sides. If the water had been five feet deeper it would have been impossible -to land this caisson. The caison had been saved and no loss experienced. Its safety may be ascribed to two things : first, the mat, which alone prevented the deep¬ ening of the bottom; and second, the strength of the anchorages. The credit for the former is due to the Chief Engineer, that of the latter to the Resident Engineer. Air pressure was applied on the 16th of December, the first work done being to cut through the mat, which occupied six days. Sinking was conducted in the same manner as at Pier II, and the clay was reached at elevation 109.0 on the 7th of February, 1890; one week later work was suspended until the river should be at a more favorable stage. Before stopping work borings had been made below the edge of the cais¬ son and a well sunk into the clay. The character of the clay was less substantial than had been expected, and it was evidently not prudent to stop at elevation 103 as originally intended. During March and April the river attained a height exceeding any¬ thing before observed, the maximum height at the bridge site being 216.2 feet on the 25th of March. By the middle of June the Avater had fallen enough for it to be safe to resume work, which was done on the 18th of that month. The prog¬ ress of sinking through clay was slow, especially as three of the five clay hoists proved to be of inferior workmanship. On the 18th of August the cutting edge reached its final position at elevation 85.39, eighteen feet lower than had originally been intended. An experimental Avell was sunk to elevation 78.15 and a boring carried from the bottom of this well to elevation 72.15. On the 4th of September this foundation was completed. Full detailed records of the cost and progress of sinking are given in Appendices I and J. The rate of progress of sinking is shown graphi¬ cally on Plate 28. For twenty-five days in August and September, 1890, the Avork was carried on in over 100 feet of water; the actual maximum depth at Avhich men worked Avas about 108 feet. The detailed cost of the entire pier was as folloAvs: Total Foundation.$184 672.15 Masonry (4870 cubic yards). 124 679.77 Total Foundation.$184 672.15 Masonry (4870 cubic yards). 124 679.77 Total cost of Pier.$309 351.92 The total volume of the foundation is 47 feet by 92 feet by 39.6 feet, equal to 171 230 cubic feet; so that the cost of the foundation, not including sinking and placing, was $0,424 per cubic foot and the cost including everything $1,078 per cubic foot. The entire pier, including the masonry, was completed on the 23d of January, 1891. The pier had been sunk 18 feet deeper than originally intended, this increase of height being made entirely in the masonry and the pier kept to its proper dimensions by a reduction of batter, which is shown on Plate 14. Three samples of the same character as those taken from Pier II were taken from the clay on whicli Pier III rests and tested Avith the following results: First sample.Broke under 503 pounds Second “ “ “ 503 “ Third “ “ “ 603 “ The first and second samples had small cracks in them and the third sample appeared sound. The Aveights and pressures for Pier III are as follows: 90 458 cu. ft. limber @ 50 lb9. 4 522 900 Ironwork. 366 970 2379 cu. yds. concrete @ 8780 lbs. 8 992 620 4870 cu. yds. masonry @ 4200 lbs. 20 454 000 Total weight of pier. 34 336 490 Superstructure. 4 908 000 Live load. 3 164 000 Total weight on foundation. Deduct for buoyaucy 212 700 cu. ft. below elevation 182 @ 62.5 lbs. Deduct for sand displaced as above Fatigue weight . Deduct skin friction as above. 42 408 490... .9 808 lbs. per sq. ft. 13 293 750 29 114 740... .6 733 " “ •' *• 10 032 000 19 082 740... .4 413 “ “ " 4 448 000 Actual probable fatigue pressure. 14 634 740... .3 385 ' The fatigue pressure, therefore, on this foundation is a little less than on Pier II. As already stated, it would have been wiser to make both caissons alike and both 50 feet high instead of 40 and 60 feet. The foundation of Pier III is sunk 21 feet below the surface of the clay; but as the last nine feet of clay were of a sandy character, this foundation is, if anything, inferior to that of Pier II. The clay which it rests on, however, is entirely solid and free from sand. In August, 1892 an additional mat was placed around this pier in the same manner as was done at Pier II: 1550 cords of brush and 8ff9 THE MEMPHIS BRIDGE. 15 tons of riprap were used in it. In March, 1893, 2504 tons of heavy rip¬ rap, brought from the Ohio River, was placed upon this mat. PIER IV. The foundation for Pier IV was the first one put in. It was made in a measure an experimental foundation, and the greater part of the work upon it was done before the construction of the entire bridge was authorized. The caisson, including the upper works of concrete and timber, is 26 feet wide, 60 feet long, and 50.43 feet high. The details of this cai&son are given on Plate 20. The caisson was built on launching ways on the west bank of the river, about 100 feet below the bridge line. The framing of the timber for this caisson, which was realty the beginning of the construction of the Memphis Bridge, began November 7th, 1888. The cutting edge was set up on the launching ways Novem¬ ber 23d, and the caisson launched on the 15th of December and placed at the site of the pier two days later; it was launched with a false bottom which was then removed. The concrete filling was begun on the 22d of December and air pressure applied and sinking actually begun on the 27th. The timber and concrete work were completed January 5th, 1889. As this foundation was put in before any arrangements had been made for building the masonry of the bridge, it was surmounted by a tight curb made of 12" by 12" timbers planked on the outside with one course of three inch plank. This curb was made 20 feet high, and when the foundation was completed the top of it was about 12 feet above low water. During the progress of the work the river rose 23 feet above low water, and a rough timber crib was built above the curb to protect the shafts and pipes from floating drift. When air pressure was first put on the cutting edge of the caisson was at elevation 172.09. The material excavated was clean sand which was handled easily by the sand pumps, and progress was rapid until January 27th, when clay was reached at elevation 126.56. A clay hoist was then brought into use, and the sinking continued until February 5th, when the caisson was brought to its final position at elevation 122.94. The clay was tested in the same manner as was afterwards done at Piers II and III, the average crushing strength of two-inch cubes being 440 pounds, or 110 pounds per square inch. To determine better the nature of the material, especially with reference to the river piers, a well was sunk thirteen feet below the bottom of the caisson, or to elevation 109. This well passed through six feet of hard sandy clay similar to that on which the caisson rests, and penetrated seven feet of hard tough clay nearly free from sand, which when tested showed a crushing strength in two-inch cubes of 408 pounds. The sealing of the working chamber with concrete was begun on the 6th of February and finished four days later. The clay on which this foundation rests, a strong hard clay, not entirety free from sand, is not as well fitted to resist scour as that found at the bottom of the well. Tliis pier, however, is a shore pier and stands behind the line of shore protection hereafter described. It is, therefore, entirety secure. Nothing further was done for six months; but in August 1889, con¬ struction of the bridge being fairly in progress, the curb was pumped out, the mud which had collected in it during high water was removed, and laying of masonry was begim. The first stone was laid on the 27th of August 1889, but the work was not prosecuted continuously and the pier was not finished until September 3d, 1890. The rate of progress of sinking the foundation is shown graphically on Plate 28. Detailed tables showing the cost and progress of sinking of the foimdation are given in Appendices I and J. The total cost of the entire pier is given in the following table: Material. Labor. Total. Total. Launching ways. Caisson. Concrete above chamber. Concrete in chamber. $927.42 14 856.94 6 744.71 845.21 $716.87 6 210.02 2 070.94 445.85 $1 644.29 21 066.96 8 815.65 1 291.06 Cost, not including sinking, protection, etc.. $23 374.28 $9 443.68 $32 817.96 $32 817.96 Sinking. Pumping and removing coffer-dam. Riprap. Insurance. $3 053.72 120.78 1 366.98 1 062.99 415.75 $11 543.35 1 183.77 1 782.73 210.99 Sinking, protection to foundation, etc. $4 752.47 $9 968.37 $14 720.84 14 720.84 Total Foundation. $47 538 _ 80 Masonry (2761 cu. yds.). 71 828.21 Total Foundation. $47 538.80 Masonry (2761 cu. yds.). 71 828.21 Total cost op Pier . $119 367.01 The total volume of the foundation is 26 feet by 60 feet by 50.43 feet, equal to 78 671 cubic feet; so that the cost of the foundation, not including sinking, etc., was $0,417 per cubic foot and the cost including everything $0,604 per cubic foot. PIER V. Pier V is located in the bottom land west of the shore line. The construction of this pier was not originally contemplated, it having been intended to extend the iron viaduct to Pier IV, but as the west shore was cut away during the high water of 1887 and 1888, it was thought best to replace the eastern portion of the viaduct by a deck span, which called for Pier V. This pier differs from the other piers in not being a masonry struc¬ ture. The lower portion is of timber and concrete, and the upper portion consists of two cylinders of soft steel f inch thick, which extend well into the concrete mass below and are covered by copings of Bedford stone. This pier is illustrated on Plate 21. The caisson is 22 feet wide by 40 feet long and the total timber- work is 80 feet high. The first timber was framed February 21st, 1890; the cutting edge was set up on blocking at the site of the pier April 25th, 1890; and the lower section of the caisson was completed so that the blocking was removed on the 7th of May and air pressure was applied the following day. The timber work with its concrete filling was completed May 30th and the clay was reached at elevation 126 on the 7th of June. The cais¬ son reached its final position with the cutting edge at elevation 124.93, about one foot below the top of the clay, on June 8th, 1890. The work¬ ing chamber was at once sealed with concrete, the sealing being completed on the 12 th of June. The clay on which the caisson rests was tested in the same manner as that under the other piers, four two inch cubes showing an average strength of 180 pounds, or 45 pounds per square inch. . The clay was of a somewhat sandy character but entirety satisfactory for a foundation at this location. A well was sunk eight feet below the cutting edge and a hole was bored with an auger 8£ feet further. At elevation 109 a hard tough clay, like that found under the bed of the river, was reached, but it was not considered expedient to go to the additional expense of sinking this foun¬ dation to that elevation. The steel cylinders were put in position soon after the completion of the foundation, but the concrete filling and the coping were not hurried, and the pier was not finally finished till May 15th, 1891. The detailed tables showing the cost and progress of sinking of this foimdation are given in Appendices I and J. The actual cost of the pier is as follows: 16 THE MEMPHIS BRIDGE. Total cost op Pier. : The total volume of the foundation is 22 feet by 40 feet by 80 feet, equal to 70 400 cubic feet; so that the cost of the foundation, not includ¬ ing sinking, etc., was $0,347 per cubic foot, and the cost, including every¬ thing, $0,470 per cubic foot. GENERAL. The total cost of the Substructure of the Memphis Bridge was follows: East Abutment. Pier A. Pier B. Anchorage Pier . Pit. I - II. "Ill. "IV. " V. Total. The four large piers (I to IV) are really the only portion of the Sub¬ structure which are of special interest, and it is desirable to compare the quantities and cost of these piers. The total quantities in the several piers are as follows: $11 872.87 485.82 600.58 36 267.79 141 035.94 309 617.43 309 351.93 119 367.01 40 388.69 II III. IV. Timber, Iron, Ft. B.M. Pouuds. Granite Masonry, Cu. Yds. 336 768 1 560 492 1 085 496 206 472 187 206 450 187 366 967 145 147 3 079 3 379 2 379 2 065 2 459 2 868 I 1 403 1738 2 002 1 004 Total. 10 902 7 770 6 747 The total volume and cost of the several piers are given in the fol¬ lowing table: Timber, cubic feet, Concrete, “ " , Masonry, “ “ . Voids, " " 130 041 72 767 113 812 444 48 145 90 458 64 223 131 492 30 518 22 206 55 751 74 501 714 270 769 294 350 79 821 Total. Cost. Cost per cubic foot. 184 414 $141 035.94 $0,765 382 785 $309 017.43 $0,809 816 691 $309 351.92 $0,977 158 232 $119 367.01 $0,779 1 037 072 $879 372.30 $0,848 This table does not take into account concrete below cutting edge or clay left in chamber above cutting edge of the several caissons. This includes the entire cost of everything except the equipment. The original cost of the equipment was kept in a separate account called “ Tools and Machinery,” but the repairs were charged to the several foun¬ dations on which the equipment was being used at the time those repairs were made. The Tools and Machinery account was subsequently cred¬ ited with the amounts received from the sale of the plant. The balance remaining charged to equipment was $30 865.54, of which $23 341.80 belongs to the Substructure of these piers, amounting to $0.0225 per cubic foot for all the piers. If this is included, the total cost per cubic foot of all the piers would be as follows: 153 232 $122 815.8' $0,801 Total cubic feet.... Cost. Cost per cubic foot. IV SUPERSTRUCTURE. The Superstructure may be divided into two parts : the Continuous Superstructure, which reaches from the East Abutment across the river to Pier IV, and the deck span, between Pier IV and Pier V. The Con¬ tinuous Superstructure covers the whole length of the bridge which affects navigation and so came under the requirements of the general charter and the findings of the Secretary of War. The deck span is en¬ tirely west of what was the shore line at the time of my visit to Memphis, in January, 1886, and of the restored shore line as it will exist when the west rectification works have had their full effect. CONTINUOUS SUPERSTRUCTURE* The plans which were submitted to and approved by the Secretary of War provided for a channel span 770 ft. long in the clear and two spans 600 ft. each in the clear, these three spans crossing the entire navi¬ gable river, the long span being next to the Tennessee shore. Adding to each span the estimated thickness of the piers at low water, the design called for one span 790 ft. and two of 620 ft. each, measured between centres of piers. The arrangement which would have been most, satisfactory to the engineer would have been three equal spans of about 675 ft. each. If, however, one span of extra length was required, it would have been pref¬ erable to place it at the centre, making this central span a cantilever struc¬ ture, the cantilevers projecting from the ends of two heavy side spans. The arrangement required by the War Department, however, placed the long span next to the east shore, so that if this span was built as a canti¬ lever span it was necessary to provide an independent anchorage on the Memphis bluff. This course was adopted. The length fixed for the channel span was 790 ft., or 170 ft. more than either of the other spans. By projecting a cantilever 170 ft* long from Pier I (on the Tennessee shore), the distance between the end of this cantilever and Pier IV (on the Arkansas shore) was divided by the two other piers into three equal spaces of 620 ft. each. By making the central span a fixed span with continuous chords and projecting a canti¬ lever 170 ft. long from each end of this fixed span, there remained two spaces, each 450 ft. long, to complete the bridge, one of these being be¬ tween two cantilevers and the other between a cantilever and Pier IV. With this arrangement the bridge would consist of a central span 620 ft. long, of three 170 ft. cantilevers precisely alike, of two 450 ft. spans also alike, besides the anchorage span east of Pier I. In order to simplify construction it was desirable to make the panels of uniform length throughout, and this required that the panel lengths should be common divisors of the lengths of the cantilevers, of the sus¬ pended spans and of the central span. No such common divisors existed for 170 ft. imd 450 ft.; but by shortening the length of the cantilevers to 169 ft. 4£ in. and increasing the length of the suspended span to 451 ft. 8 * This account of the Continuous Superstructure iB reprinted, with some very slight changes, from the Transactions of the American Society of Civil Engiuecrs, September, 1893. THE MEMPHIS BRIDGE. 17 in., 56 ft. 5 A in. became a common divisor. The lengths were, therefore, slightly changed, and a panel 56 ft. 5 A in. long was made the unit for the entire bridge, this panel being divided into two panels in the door sys¬ tem. Each cantilever arm was divided into three panels, each suspended span into eight panels, and the central span into 11 panels. As the bluff rose rapidly back of Pier I a long anchorage span was not required, and it was thought best to limit it to such length that there would be no reversal of strains; it was made four panels, or 225 ft. 10 in., long. The anchorage span consists of four panels; the channel span of 14 panels, three in each cantilever and eight in the suspended span; the cen¬ tral span of 11 panels; and the west span of 11 panels, of which three are in the cantilever and eight in the suspended span. The total number of panels is, therefore, 40; and the total length of the continuous super¬ structure is as follows: Anchorage arm. 225 ft. 10 in. Channel span. 790 “ 5 “ Central span. 621 “ 0J" West span. 621 ** 0J “ Total. 2 258 ft. 4 in. The arrangement of these spans is given on Plate 4. As each truss panel is divided into two floor panels, there are 80 panels in the floor system. Moreover, the floor system is extended east¬ ward on a viaduct of three floor panels beyond the anchorage pier, and a deck span of 12 floor panels reaches from the shore side of Pier IV to Pier V which is located back of the shore line. The entire floor system of the bridge, therefore, consists of 95 panels and is 2681 ft. 9j in. long. The lengths of the spans being fixed, the next thing to determine was the width. The principal limit in determining this was the length of the central span. In the matter of transverse stiffness the position of this span corresponds with the separate spans of a common bridge, whereas the longer span by its cantilever construction was held rigidly at the ends. The central span being 620 ft. long, it did not seem wise to make the width between trusses less than 30 ft. This coiTesponded with widths which have been adopted with good results in shorter spans. The channel spans of the Cairo bridge are 518.5 ft. long and the trusses placed 25 ft. between centres, the ratio between length and width being almost exactly the same as between 621 ft. and 30 ft. A width of 30 ft. was adopted. The next feature to determine was the depth of the trusses, and in determining this other considerations than economy of metal work governed. The difficulties of erection made it important to keep the dimensions within limits to which ordinary falsework could be adapted. The mag¬ nitude of the. structure and its cantilever design made it important to use such proportions that vibrations would be reduced to a minimum. It was not thought best to make the depth at any part of the superstructure much more than two and one half times the breadth of base. The breadth of base could not be increased without increasing the length of the piers, which would have added to the already excessive cost of the foundations. By fixing the depth of both the central and the suspended spans at one eighth of the span and making all three of the cantilevers alike, the depth of the structure over each of the piers and for the whole length of the central span became 77 ft. m in, and the depth of the suspended spans, 56 ft. 5j- in. These dimensions were adopted. It was at one time proposed to make the central span in eight panels of greater length than those used elsewhere, but as the plans matured this seemed unwise, and a uniform panel length was adopted throughout. The form of trusses adopted was the double triangular or double Warren girder. It was intended to erect the channel span without false¬ work, building out from either end, and this form of truss was thought to have advantages in the manner in which it sustained the upper chord from which the work would be done. The floor system is suspended from the intersection points of the two systems of web members, and the upper chord is supported from the same points by struts. As the depth of the cantilevers over the piers corresponds to the depth of the central span, while their outer ends correspond to the depths of the' suspended spans, the chords are not parallel. The same may be said of the anchorage arm. In order to keep the floor panels uniform, it was necessary to keep the points of intersection of the web members over the panel centres. This made the panel lengths of the upper chord irregu¬ lar, but as these chords were formed of eye bars the irregularity was not material. The cautilever construction made it possible to bring the weight of the spans on each side of each pier together in a single point and transfer this weight directly to the centre of the pier, instead of taking it nearer the edge of the pier, as is always done with separate spans. This al¬ lowed the use of somewhat lighter piers than would otherwise have been needed, and the increased cost of the superstructure design over three equal separate spans was in a measure balanced by the decreased cost oi the substructure. The only span which is continuous from pier to pier is the central span, and provision had to be made at one end of this span for expansion and contraction. All other expansion was taken up by sliding joints at the ends of the cantilevers. As there are two sliding joints in the chan¬ nel span and only one in the west span, there was a double chance to take up expansion in the chords and floor system of the channel span. For this reason the west end of the central span was fixed and the east end placed on expansion rollers. Principal Details.— The general dimensions and form of truss having been adopted, it next became necessary to fix the character of the principal details. The American form of construction with pin connec¬ tions was adopted from the first. The chords of the central span, being subject to reversals of strains from the action of the cantilevers, were necessarily both made stiff, and the same stiff bottom chords were neces sarily extended out as the bottom chords of the cantilevers. The top chords of the cantilevers being always in tension were made of eye bare. As the east suspended span (in the channel span) was to be erected with¬ out falsework, the two halves being built out as continuations of the can¬ tilevers, it was necessary that the bottom chord of this truss should also be made stiff for the greater part of its length, while the top chord, beiu" in compression in the finished structure, was of course stiff. It was de¬ termined to sacrifice some materia] and to make the bottom chord of the suspended span stiff throughout, and to make both suspended spans (or intermediate spans, as they were called on the drawings) with stiff chords throughout. The chords of the anchorage arm correspond to those of the cantilevers. The bottom chord is therefore stiff throughout the entire length of the superstructure, and the only portions of the top chord which are made of eye bare are in the anchorage and cantilever arms and in the end half panels of the central span, this special arrangement being adopted from the difficulties of packing a stiff chord into an eye bar chord at the extreme ends of the span. The stiff chord provision undoubtedly adds to the lateral stiffness of the bridge and, to a certain extent, to its vertical stiffness. The sliding joints at the ends of the cantilevers are carefully fitted, and in spite of its cantilever construction the bridge is veiy free from vibration. The lateral bracing is formed of diagonal rods attached to pin plates riveted to the chords and so placed that the axial lines intersect at the centre of each chord. The lateral bracing is adjustable, and is the only 18 THE MEMPHIS BRIDGE. adjustable portion of the bridge. It would have been preferable to make it stiff, but the plan was adopted in conformity to the practice hitherto followed by the Chief Engineer of the bridge, he not being satisfied with the detail connections of any stiff system which he had worked out at the time these plans were prepared. The transverse bracing is rigid throughout and is made in the form of lattice frames, so as to stiffen, not merely the centre of each post, but intermediate points above. The principle which led the engineer to adopt this form of bracing was his belief that the two trusses of a bridge should be made as nearly as possible a single truss. So far as the chords are concerned this cannot be done; but if the compression members of the web are united by stiff frames they become in a large degree a single compression member of the full width of the truss, this single compression member transferring its strain to two chords at the top and two chords at the bottom. This principle of transverse bracing was followed through¬ out the whole superstructure. In the end posts of the intermediate and central spans and the posts of the cantilevers which carry the weight of the intermediate spans the stiffening was carried further by extending portal plates down the sides of each separate post, thereby increasing the width of the posts and uniting the two sides with a stiff portal. In the case of the large vertical post over the piers, these portal frames were united with the floor beams below, so that the two posts form from top to bottom practically a single member. The floor system consists of two stringers placed eight feet between centres, these stringers being riveted to the webs of the floor beams at each panel and half panel point. At the full panel points the floor beams are supported on short posts to which they are riveted, which posts rest directly on the pins. At the half panel points the floor beams are sus¬ pended from the web intersections above. Although the width between trusses is sufficient for a double track bridge, the bridge, being designed but for a single track, has but two lines of stringers. (The management did not feel justified, at the time the bridge was built, in bearing the additional expense which a double track structure would have entailed.) It should, however, be mentioned that the Memphis Bridge, though designed for a single track only,.is at least two and one half times as strong as some important single track bridges built less than fifteen years ago. The charter from the General Government required that the bridge should be adapted to the passage of vehicles and animals. This provision is met by making a tight floor 20 feet wide ; on each side of the floor are steel fences supported at the panel points, these fences being in fact lat¬ tice girders which carry the ends of the ties and so make practically four lines of stringers. The ties are planked longitudinally with 3-inch pine plank sized to 2f inches, and diagonally with 2-inch oak plank sized to 1 £ inches, this making 4 A inches of solid planking. Between the rails the oak plank is laid longitudinally. It is doubtful whether this expensive highway floor - will be much used. In many respects the design of the superstructure may be criticised as not strictly economical. This is admitted ; but such criticisms are ill considered unless they include, not merely the metal in the superstruc¬ ture, but all the material in the piers and masonry. The substructure of the bridge, which under the present design cost more than the superstruc¬ ture, would have been rendered much more expensive by those changes which mere economy of superstructure design called for. In the design attention was everywhere given to stiffness as well as to strain. This is a matter to which too little attention has been given and which has often been overlooked in competitive design. It is per¬ fectly possible to design a structure in which no metal under any ordi¬ nary supposition will be overstrained, and yet without such overstrain vibrations can exist which would be utterly inadmissible. This may occur iu trusses of extreme depth and also in structures with cantilever- details in which loose fitting is permitted at expansion joints. It was with a view to avoid vibrations as much as possible that stiff chords were adopted throughout, and that the principle was followed of uniting the compression member's of opposite trusses as far as possible into single members. For the same reason, the sliding joints at the ends of the cantilevers were so carefully fitted that lost motion in these places practically does not exist. While these ideas undoubtedly made the structure more expensive than a competitive design might have been, the engineer believes that the results fully justify his work; but in studying details these facts should be remembered. Special Details. —With these conditions stated, attention is called to a few of the special details of the superstructure. 1. The stiff chords of the central span, including one full panel of the bottom chords of each adjoining cantilever - , were made with four webs. This form of construction was adopted for - two reasons. First, to reduce the thickness of the metal and so to reduce the lengths of tire rivets in the splices. With the present arrangement the maximum length of rivets is 3$ inches between heads, and the larger part of the rivets are in double shear, the splices being balanced on the two sides of each web, this being the condition under which the rivets are least likely to get loose and least likely to cause trouble if they become loose. The second object was to reduce the bending strains on the pins; the connections with the web members are all made in the narrow spaces between the outside and the interior webs, so that the pins, by which the whole hori¬ zontal strains are transferred to the chords, are supported at four points, and the unsupported length is reduced to a minimum. The objection to high theoretical bending strains in pins is not so much the danger to the Structure from the failure of the pins as the fact that by the distortion of the pins the strains may be distributed unequally among the several pieces attaching to them. With the arrangement adopted here, this danger is reduced to a minimum. The four web chords are confined to 10 full (20 half) panels of the top chord of the central span, to 11 full panels of the bottom chord of the same span, two full panels of each cantilever arm and two full panels of the anchorage arm. Two web chords were used in the remaining bot¬ tom panels of the cantilever and anchorage arms and throughout the whole length of the suspended spans. In the bottom chords of the sus¬ pended spans the rivets became objectionably long. The sections of the stiff chords were generally made in full panel lengths, 56 ft. 51 in. long, the riveted joints being placed midway between the panel points and over the intermediate points ; the only ex¬ ceptions to this rule were in the upper chords of the intermediate spans and the lower chords of the cantilever arms and anchorage span. The details of the riveted joints are given on Plate 41. 2. The shortness of the anchorage arm insures the connection being always in tension and never in compression. The details of the anchorage are given on Plate 37. (Under each truss there are 16 rods in the ma¬ sonry, these rods connecting with eight blocks which cany the single pin on which four anchor bars connect.) The anchor bars are simply flat bare of steel -with pin holes at top and bottom. (After the adjustment of the structure, folding wedges were placed between the steel plate and the blocks and tightened up so as to prevent any possible horizontal bending strain on the anchor rods.) On the centre of the pier was placed a tetra- pod of steel, the four corners of which were anchored to the masomy, and the apex of which fits into a guide at the centre of the end floor beam, the connection being such that no weight can be thrown upon it, but a full horizontal stiffening is obtained. The general arrangement of the anchorage is such as to place all THE MEMPHIS BRIDGE. 19 adjustable or movable parts in tlie open air above the masonry in plain sight, there being no unexposed portions and no ironwork buried in chambers, the only iron out of sight being the long rods and the I beam platforms, which being buried solid in Portland cement are protected from oxidation, while there is a large excess of material in the rods. 3. The superstructure and moving load throw on each of the two points of support on Piers I, II and III a weight of about 2000 tons, this weight, however, being thrown directly over the axis of the pier. To distribute this weight properly on the masonry requires an area of about 100 square feet and a sufficient height between the masonry and the chords of the superstructure to distribute it with some degree of uni¬ formity. On Piers I and III the bearings are fixed. They are shown on Plate 38. In each instance the weight is transferred first to a 14 inch pin, passing through the centre of the chord. The three posts, one vertical and two inclined, rest on this pin, being made with semicircular pin bear¬ ings at the ends, no pin plates passing around the pins, this arrangement being adopted partly for convenience in erection and partly because the weight always carried here is so great that nothing approaching to tension can ever exist. This 14 inch pin rests on a steel casting cast with ribs placed directly under the bearings of the posts on the pin. The inclined posts are two-web posts and the vertical posts four-web posts, but they are so packed that the whole weight is transferred to six ribs in the cast¬ ings. The steel casting rests on two iron castings which are packed with long bolts and locked together with a grooved steel plate between them. These two castings rest again on four castings which are locked together in the same manner at the centre. The whole was fastened together by turned bolts passing through drilled holes. The actual weight of each pedestal casting between the pin and the masonry is about 45 tons. The centre of the 14 inch pin is 9 ft. 10 in. above the masonry, which brings the top of the stringer of the bridge 13 ft. above the masoniy. 4. On Pier II the bearing, which carries the same weight as those on Piers I and III, had to be made an expansion bearing to allow of the expansion of the central span, temperature alone here representing an expansion of about eight inches. It is shown on Plate 39. The piers are slender' and the expansion great; it was, therefore, deemed necessary to provide a joint which would move with the least possible friction, and which should not be liable ever 1 to become clogged or stopped by the col¬ lection of dirt. The joint must also be so arranged that the structure would be held laterally and the motion limited longitudinally. It was therefore determined to use rollers 15 in. in diameter-, and to make these segmental roller's of a pattern resembling the European practice, the rollers being placed 6 in. between centres. Each expansion bearing as constructed consists, first, of a steel casting precisely similar to those used at the fixed ends. This steel casting rests on a bolster composed of a horizontal top plate, then of eleven 12 in. I beams running transversely, of a second horizontal plate, of sixteen 12 in. I beams running longitudinally, and of a third and thicker horizon¬ tal plate, the lower surface of which is polished smooth. It had origi¬ nally been intended to make this bolster of two steel castings with a planed steel plate between them, and this arrangement would have been preferred; but the delays in getting the castings and the uncertainty of securing the finished product iu time made it necessary (after three cast¬ ings had been made and rejected) to change the plan. Under the bolsters came the roller's. The rollers are in two lengths, and are separated by two steel guide plates, one of which is built in between the polished bottom plates of the bolster and the other between the iron castings below. These serve as the transverse guides. There are thirty rollers in each joint, fifteen on each side of the central guides. The rolling surfaces of these rollers are polished, and each roller has two holes drilled completely through it, through which pass turned rods, so that the rollers on one side of the centre must always work with those on the other, while the distances between the rollers are kept constant by two side plates dialled to fit the rods, the rods being held in place by nuts outside the side plates. The upper side plates are made with hooked ends, which, striking against the ends of the lower side plates, limit the possible motion of the rollers and prevent any possible overturning. Under the rollers is the bearing plate (commonly called the rail plate). This is of the pattern which the engineer has used universally for the last ten years. It is formed of T rails riveted on a plate below, the tops of the rails being about j in. apart and the top surfaces planed and polished. This arrangement makes a stiff surface for the rollers to roll upon and provides adequate means for cleaning. The rail plates are iu two parts, divided by the centre plate which guides the rollers. The motion of the top bearing is further limited by a lock plate which is fitted over the lower guide plate, the upper jaws of which would strike the edges of the top beaiing plate before a motion could occur which might cause the top plate to slide on the rollers. Under the rail plates are the castings, which bear directly on the masonry and are like the lower sections of the fixed end castings. The result of this arrangement is a very sensitive and very powerful expansion bearing. For convenience of observation it was fitted with vernier scales, and the record, which has been kept of the motion so far, indicates that this bearing works practically without friction. 5. A somewhat different form of support was used at the end of the intermediate span over Pier IV. This is shown on Plate 40. Here, also, the weight is distributed on the masonry by iron castings, and the weight is transferred to the iron castings through a pin on a steel casting; but the pin is placed below the level of the chord, the whole weight being transferred by a small upright support, which also holds the floor beam. While this works fairly well, it is not as satisfactory a detail as the other bearings. It was adopted with a view to keeping the construction of this particular panel point as nearly uniform as possible in the four places where it occurs, this supported upright taking the place of the suspended uprights at the other three points. 6. The expansion between the cantilevers and the suspended spans is taken up by sliding joints in the top and bottom chords, the long sus¬ pender swinging. No special addition was made to this suspender in consequence of this swinging motion, the extra strain which can possibly be produced in this way being less than that which is usually produced in horizontal eye bars by their own weight. The sliding joint in the bottom chord is placed in the last panel of the cantilever. The sliding joint in the top chord is placed in the first panel of the suspended span. As the end web members of cantilever and suspended spans are parallel compression members, both of these sliding joints come where no strain exists. The sliding joint in the bottom chord is shown on Plate 43. It slides between polished steel surfaces with a play of only -fa in. This joint is placed near a floor beam and the lateral system of the cantilever arm ends at this floor beam, which forms the lateral strut. The lateral system of the suspended span ends on the other side of the sliding joint, there being an independent strut to hold the two chords in position; this strut, was put in after the erection of the superstructure, the pin holes being reamed in position. There is no observable lost motion at this joint. The top lateral strains are transferred at the ends of the suspended spans to the bottom chord by the portal bracing, and there is no lateral system in the top chord of the end panels of the suspended spans. The sliding joint in the top chord is made, therefore, simply an oblong pin hole between two sets of stiffened tension members. The same oblong pin hole was used in the bottom chord joint, but principally for necessi¬ ties of erection. 20 ; THB MEMPHIS BRIDGE. 7. The large expansion existing at the ends of the suspended spans made some special expansion arrangement necessary in the connection be¬ tween the stringers and the floor beams. An ingenious arrangement to accomplish this end was designed by Mr. Ralph Modjeski, Assistant Engineer, and is shown on Plate 43. It dispenses entirely with a long sliding surface and supports the end of the stringer perfectly. 8. As the end of the anchorage arm consists only of tension mem- bers, it was difficult to make a satisfactory form of portal which would at once resist vibrations and have the substantial appearance which seemed important in the most conspicuous part of the bridge. The re. suit was accomplished by making a stiff frame, entirely independent of the tension members, consisting of posts placed between the inclined eye bars of the end panels, these posts being connected by a stiff stmt at the center, and the rectangular panel above divided by stiff diagonals. This stiff frame is attached to the pins of the truss, but the pin holes in the stiff posts are made one inch larger than the diameters of the pins, so that the tensile strains should not be disturbed. Loads. —The views of the Chief Engineer have long been opposed to proportioning bridge superstructure for precise wheel-base loads, these precise loads being always those of a special locomotive, either actual or assumed, and subject to constant change. The superstructure of the Memphis Bridge is proportioned in accordance with the practice now fol¬ lowed by that engineer, the load per foot on a length of 20 ft. being taken as twice the load per foot on a length of 120 ft. and upwards, and the load per foot being increased by one per cent for each foot in length less than 120 ft. The excess variation in web members, being the differ¬ ence between the strains produced by a moving load and by a fixed load of equal intensity, is taken on a basis one half greater than the uniform moving load. In the case of the Menfphis Bridge the unit load was taken at 4000 pounds per foot of track, and the wheel-base load on 20 ft. was consequently 8000 pounds per foot of track, while the stringer load, the panels being a little more than 28 ft., was taken [4000 X (1 + 0.92) = 7680] at 7680 pounds per foot of track. These weights were used in calculating the live loads given on tlie strain sheets shown on Plates 50 to 54, inclusive. In the central span the dead load was assumed in the strain sheet at 4000 pounds per lineal foot of truss, or 8000 pounds per lineal foot of bridge, being just double the assumed live load. In point of fact, the actual weight of this span is 8300 pounds per lineal foot, exclusive of end posts which stand directly over the piers. This excess of weight amounts to less than four per cent, and is no greater than the difference in weight between the kind of floor used on this bridge to accommodate highway traffic and the usual railroad floor. In the intermediate or suspended span the dead load was assumed at 5400 pounds per lineal foot. In point of fact it is 5660 pounds, or a little less than five per cent in excess of the calculated weight, the actual difference being almost exactly the same as in the central span. In the anchorage and cantilever arms no fixed rate of dead load was assumed, but the strain sheet was made by assuming the estimated weights of the different members as concentrated at the separate panel points, these concentrations, of course, being greatest nearest the piers. In every case the weight of a tension member was supposed to be carried at the upper end of that member, and the weight of a compression mem¬ ber to be carried at the lower end of that 'member, this, of course, onl\ applying to the resultant portion of that weight which moved in the direction of the axis of the member. The panel point loads are given on the strain sheets. The upper lateral system is proportioned to resist a horizontal press¬ ure of 300 pounds per lineal foot of bridge. The bottom lateral system is proportioned to resist a horizontal pressure of 600 pounds per lineal foot. In both instances the whole horizontal pressure is treated as a moving load. This differs from the usual practice; but the allowance made for moving loads is inadequate rather than too great, as it is among the possibilities that when half of a span is exposed to a wind pressure in one direction, the other half may be exposed to a wind pressure in precisely the opposite direction. No allowance is made in the strain sheets for the disturbances of the distribution of weight by wind pressure. A simple calculation showed this to be unnecessary. The lateral pressure on the top chord will exer¬ cise its greatest disturbing effects in the central span. Taking this press¬ ure at 300 pounds per foot, multiplying it by the depth of the truss, and dividing it by the distance between truss centers, we have a resultant of 800 pounds as the possible increase of weight on one truss due to this cause, this being 20 per cent of the estimated dead load and 13 per cent of the total estimated load. If we take a wind pressure of 400 pounds per lineal foot applied on a train of maximum weight at an average elevation of 8 ft. above the rails, the effect of this wind pressure is to move the center of gravity of the moving load 0.75 ft. from the center of the track; as the center of the track is 15 ft. from the center of each truss, this in¬ creases the moving load carried by one truss five per cent and diminishes that earned by the other five per cent, thus actually increasing the weight thrown on one truss 100 pounds. Taking these two disturbances to¬ gether, the total extreme weight which can be thrown on one truss amounts to 900 pounds per lineal foot, or 15 per cent above the assumed calculations. No addition was made to the chord sections to provide for lateral strains. The assumed lateral force on the bottom chord is 600 pounds per lineal foot; the assumed total weight carried by each truss is 6000 pounds per lineal foot; the depth of the trusses is 2.6 times the distance between center's of trusses, so that the strain thrown into the chord by the lateral system is equal to 26 per cent of that thrown in by weight. In the top chord the effects of the lateral strain would be one half this amount, or 13 per cent. As the effect of the disturbance in weight by wind pressure is to in¬ crease the tension in the leeward bottom chord 15 per cent, while the effects of the strain in the lateral system are to increase the tension in this chord by 26 per cent, tlie total effect is an increase of tension of 41 per¬ cent in the leeward chord and a corresponding reduction of tension on the windward chord. In the top chord the effeots are much less. With the unit strain allowed, these strains are well within safe practice. Proportioning of Materials. —The entire superstructure of the Memphis Bridge is of steel, and it was all worked as steel, the rivet holes being drilled in all principal members and punched and reamed in the lighter members. The tension members were proportioned on the basis of allowing the dead load to produce a strain of 20 000 pounds per square inch, and the live load a strain of 10 000 pounds per square inch. In the case of the central span, where the dead load was twice the live load, this corre¬ sponded to 15 000 pounds total strain per square inch, this being the greatest tensile strain. The compression members were proportioned on a somewhat arbi¬ trary basis. They were generally designed so as to make them of sym¬ metrical section, and almost always so as to make them symmetrical about the line dividing the least transverse dimension. No distinction was made between live and dead loads in proportioning compression mem¬ bers. A maximum strain of 14 000 pounds per square inch was allowed on the chords and other large compression members where the length did not exceed 16 times the least transverse dimension, this strain being reduced 750 pounds for each additional unit of length. In long compres¬ sion members the maximum length was limited to 30 times the least transverse dimension, and the strains limited to 6000 poimds per square inch, this amount being increased by 200 pounds for each unit by which the length is decreased. THE MEMPHIS BRIDGE 21 The form of the structure is such that reversals of strains occur in the web members of both central and intermediate spans and in the chords of the central span. Wherever this occurs the member was pro¬ portioned to resist the sum of compression and tension on whichever basis (tension or compression) there would be the greatest strain per square inch; and, in addition, the net section was proportioned to resist the maximum tension and the gross section to resist the maximum com¬ pression. The floor beams and girders of the floor system were calculated on the basis of the moment of inertia, the strain being limited to 10 000 pounds per square inch in extreme fibres. In the floor beams the rivet holes in cover plates and flanges were deducted. In the stringers, where there are no cover plates, and pains were taken to avoid rivet holes in the flanges, the gross section was used. The rivets, all of which are of steel and in drilled or reamed holes, were proportioned on the basis of a bearing strain of 15 000 pounds per square inch and a shearing strain of 7500 pounds per square inch, and special pains were taken to get the double hear in as many rivets as possible. This was the requirement for shop rivets. In the case of field rivets the number was increased one half. In the splices of the chords of the central span, which is strained both in tension and compression, but in which the faced ends of the several sections were carefully fitted to close bearings, the number of rivets was based on the sum of the tw< strains; but the increase in the number of field rivets over what would have been required for shop rivets was made 25 instead of 50 per cent. The chords of this span are of uniform section throughout, and all the riveted joints are alike. The pins were proportioned on the basis of a bearing strain of 18 000 pounds per square inch and a bending strain of 20 000 pounds per square inch in extreme fibre, the diameters of the pins being never made more than one inch less than the width of the largest eye bar attaching ,o them. Special pains were taken in packing the pins to divide the strains from the members on one side among those of the members on the other side, the general principle being to take the strain in each eye bar by itself, and consider that one half of it goes into the eye bar on either side leading in the other direction. With this system of packing the bending strain in extreme fibre is a matter of little importance. The weight on the rollers of the expansion joint on Pier II is 40 000 pounds per lineal foot of roller, or 3333 pounds per lineal inch, the rollers being 15 inches in diameter. DECK SPAN. The deck span is a single triangular truss divided into six panels, the floor being sustained at the half panel points by vertical posts. The floor is kept uniform throughout, the east pair of stringers being riveted to the end floor beam of the Continuous Superstructure, this floor beam being directly over the centre of Pier IV. As the length of the floor panels is the same as in the Continuous Superstructure (27 ft. 2f in.), the length of this span is 338 ft. 9 in. The only peculiarity about this span is the fact that the support is taken in niches on the west side of Pier IV; this made it necessary to shorten the end post and to deflect the bottom chord bars upwards. At the west end the full depth of the truss is main¬ tained, and an expansion bearing on rollers similar to those used over Pier II is used. The actual weight of the deck span, including the floor system and excluding end bearings, etc., is 3600 pounds per lineal foot, this being somewhat in excess of the weights estimated in the first calculation. The strain sheet given on Plate 55 is calculated on this basis. It will be ob¬ served that the actual sections are in some instances slightly less than the theoretical, but the maximum aggregate strains in tension never exceed 13 000 pounds per square inch, and those in compression never exceed 15 000 pounds per square inch. MATERIAL. As the sections of the superstructure were necessarily unusually heavy, and the strains from dead load were greatly in excess of those from moving load, it was thought best to use a slightly higher steel than is now generally used for lighter structures, and to work this steel without punching, all holes being drilled. A somewhat softer steel was used in the floor system, lateral connections, and other lighter parts. The details of the requirements both for steel and manufacture are given in the Specifications dated January 4th, 1890, which accompany this report, marked Appendix L. The principal requirements which were to be obtained as the results of tests on samples cut from finished material were as follows: Maximum Ultimate Strength, lbs. per sq. in... Mimimum “ “ “ " "... “ Elastic Limit, lbs. per sq. in. “ Percentage of Elongation in 8 in_ “ “ “ Reduction at fracture. High-grade Medium Soft Steel. Steel. Steel. . 78 500 72 500 63 000 . 69 000 64 000 55 000 . 40 000 37 000 30 000 A piece of each sample bar was also required to be bent 180°, and to close up against itself without showing any crack or flaw on the outside of the bent portion. The specifications as originally drawn provided for a preliminary test ona | inch round bar, and allowed the steel to be made by either the open-hearth or Bessemer process. So much difficulty was experienced, however, in getting a satisfactory Bessemer steel, and the requirements for the preliminary test on the round bar were so much reduced as to amount to little, that all steel was required to be made by the open-hearth process. These requirements appear in the supplementary specifications dated May 6th, 1890, which is attached to this report and marked Ap¬ pendix M. After the first tests had been made on full-size eye bars it appeared expedient to adopt for this purpose a steel midway between the high grade and medium steel of the former specifications, and steel of the fol¬ lowing requirements, denominated Eye-bar Steel, was prescribed there¬ after : Eye-bar Steel Maximum Ultimate Strength, lbs. per sq. in... 75 000 Minimum •• •• .. 66 000 '■ Elastic Limit, lbs. per sq. in. 38 000 " Percentage of Elongation in 8 ins. 20 " .... induction at fracture. . 40 These requirements were provided for in a supplementary specifica¬ tion dated January 1st, 1891, which accompanies this report, and is marked Appendix N. The results showed that this material was thoroughly satisfactoiy for most of the purposes for which it was wanted. It was specially so in the 10 in. eye bars which form the tension members of the anchorage and cantilever arms, and of the webs of the central span. The smaller eye bars which suspended the intermediate points did not give quite as satis¬ factory results. Tests were made of 56 full-size eye bars and the results are given in Appendix O attached to this report. An inspection of this list shows the excellent character of the 10 in. bars. Owing to the difficulty of getting satisfactory small bars, the sizes of the suspenders which support the floor beams at the intermediate points were increased from 6 X 1^- in. to 7 X 1^ in., and from 6 X 1| in. to 7 X l^V in., and a softer steel was accepted than the specifications re¬ quired. A corresponding change was made in the diagonal eye bars of the intermediate span last manufactured, the width of these bars being in¬ creased from 8 to 9 in., with no other change. The results of these tests and observations on other work seem to in- 22 THE MEMPHIS BRIDGE. dicate that in large bars a comparatively high steel gives the best results, and, if they are well annealed, is quite as soft as it is desirable to have. On the other hand, in small bars as low a steel as is consistent with sound ingots is probably the best material, but it must be remembered that in hying to get a very soft and ductile steel the chance of blow holes and other unsound features is increased. For one other reason the use of a higher steel for heavy eye bars seems wise, as where heavy bars are used it may generally (though not always) be assumed that the strain due to live load is small in proportion to that due to dead load. In the west intermediate span, being the one which was built by A. & P. Roberts & Co., the riveted members were made of medium steel throughout, the work being punched and reamed. In the other interme¬ diate span the requirements of the specifications were adhered to. CONTRACTORS. The contract for all the material for the superstructure was origi¬ nally taken by the Union Bridge Company, and about five eighths of* the whole was actually manufactured by them at their shop at Athens, Pa., the remaining three eighths being made at various other places. The largest contract placed elsewhere was with A. & P. Roberts Co., who built one of the intermediate spans and the deck span west of Pier IV, except the eye bars, the Union Bridge Company relinquishing this por¬ tion of their contract and a new contract being made with A. & P. Rob¬ erts & Co. The other shops generally did their work as sub-contractors for the Union Bridge Company, though in.some cases special tilings were ordered direct. The actual weights and percentages manufactured by the different shops were as follows: Pounds. Per cent. Union Bridge Company. 10 432 020 63.9 A. & P. Roberts & Co. 3 113 250 19.07 Elmira Bridge Works. 1 127 584 6.94 Lassig Bridge and Iron Works. 806 617 4.94 Scaife Foundry and Machine Co. 423 963 2.59 Keystone Bridge Co... 310 585 1.90 Pittsburg Steel Casting Co. 61 935 0.37 New Jersey Steel and Iron Co. 40 712 0.25 Pittsburgh Bridge Co. 7171 0.04 16 323 837 100.00 The work manufactured by the Elmira Bridge Works consisted principally of web members of the central and intermediate spans. The Lassig Bridge and Iron Works furnished the four vertical posts and portals at the ends of the central span besides some other web members. The Scaife Foundry and Machine Company furnished the large cast¬ ings on the piers. The Keystone Bridge Company furnished the anchor rods within the masonry of the anchorage pier, a quantity of eye bars, and the bearing plates upon the rollers on Pier II. The Pittsburgh Steel Casting Company furnished the steel castings over Piers II, III and IV. The 15 in. expansion rollers, which were very finely finished, were made by the New Jersey Steel and Iron Company. All the steel used in this bridge (except a small portion of that man¬ ufactured by A. & P. Roberts & Co.) was made by Carnegie, Phipps & Co., Limited (now the Carnegie Steel Company). It was all open-hearth steel and a large portion of it was made in basic furnaces. The work was manufactured in the several shops named, according to working plans prepared by the engineer of the bridge, and shipped to the bridge site ready for erection. ERECTION. A contract was executed on the 10th day of May, 1890, with William Baird and Andrew Baird, comprising the firm of Baird Brothera, for the erection of the superstructure for a fixed sum, this sum being divided between the several spans. The contractors received the material as it arrived, took responsible care of it and erected it in position. The requirements which governed this erection are contained in the specifica¬ tions which form Appendix L. All of the bridge except the suspended span between the cantilevers of the channel span was erected on falsework. This suspended span was projected from the ends of the cantilevers, connected at the center and then swung free. Bents were placed under the panel points of the trusses. Each bent had nine posts, the centre post and the third post from each side being plumb throughout, the other posts battered. All posts were of 12" X 12 ' timber, and the bents were built in three stories. The falsework was braced longitudinally by girths at each story, the girths at the ends being bolted to the stone piers; Each bent rested on IS piles, these piles generally being cut off at elevation 205, or 11.2 ft. below high water. On the top were placed 20 lines of stringers, four at the center and eight on each side, to cany the traveler tracks. This falsework terminated at the proper level to receive the bottom chord. Four lines of rails, two on each side, were laid to carry the traveler which was made long enough to reach over one and one half full panels, or three floor panels. The material for the anchorage arm and the adjoining cantilever was received on cars at the top of the bluff east of Pier I. All other super¬ structure material was received in a yard under the bluffs, where it was stored and subsequently handled by barges. Erection was begun on the east shore, and the traveler was set up on the ground back of Pier I; on the 31st of March, 1891, this traveler was completed and ready to begin work, the falsework at that time only extending as far as Pier I. The first piece of bottom chord section was placed on the 3d of April, and the anchorage arm was virtually completed on the 6th of May. Meanwhile the falsework had been extended west¬ ward to the end of the east cantilever arm, and the erection of this canti¬ lever arm was practically completed on the 20th of June, though the falsework and traveler were maintained in this position, and some further work was done on the last panel as late as July 31st. The driving of the falsework for the central span was begun in July. The work was begun west of Pier III, the piles for six bents being driven west of that pier. The two westward bents were placed close together, and on top of these were erected derricks by which the material was lifted from barges. The entire falsework between Piers II and III was completed by the end of August. This falsework was placed in the middle of the Mississippi River immediately after the flood season. It was very heavy and expensive, the piles generally being from 90 to 100 ft. long and driven about 20 ft. in hard sand below the bottom of the river. When this falsework was completed the traveler which had been used on the east side was taken down and set up on the falsework. It was in itself a pretty large structure, standing 97 ft. above the track on which it ran and nearly 200 ft. above the surface of the water. This traveler when completed consisted of four bents, only three of which had been used on the east side. Two derricks were set up at the west end of the falsework west of Pier III, and all the members of the central span were taken by barges from the material yard under the bluff on the east side of the river to the west end of the falsework, where they were raised by the derricks to the THE MEMPHIS BRIDGE. 23 floor level, there placed on push cars, and carried out to the traveler by which they were put in position. Everything was handled by steam, the engines being placed near Pier III. The erection began with the placing of the first piece of the bottom chord on September 13tli, 1891, the castings and the expansion bearing on Pier II having been previously erected. The entire bottom chord was put together and riveted up, the riveting being generally done by air riveters carried on a special small traveler. These riveters were of two patterns, one designed by Mr. Charles Vogel under the direction of the Chief Engineer, and the other by the Allen Riveting Machine Company of New York. On the 25th of September the erection of the web members began. The erection was begun one panel east of the centre and the traveler moved westward. On the 3d of October the end posts at the west end of the span were placed; the traveler was then moved eastward, and on the 11th of October the end posts at the east end were placed. The span was swung on the 15th of October, 1891. The erection from the placing of the first chord section to the swinging of the span occupied 32 days. This span, the total weight of which is 5 122 252 pounds, is believed to be the heaviest and longest span that was ever erected on falsework. A single member, the section of top chord between panel points Ul U3, weighed 61 944 pounds. On the completion of the erection of this span the falsework was driven for the cantilever which projects from the east end of it, and this cantilever was also raised with the traveler, it being completed on the 31st of October. The traveler was then moved to the west end of the span; the false work was removed from under the east projecting cantilever and the eastern end of the span to the span between Piers III and IV. On the 24th of November the western cantilever was completed. On the 7th of December the entire falsework was finished so that the erection of the suspended span reaching to Pier IV could begin. The bottom chord of this span had to be riveted before it was swung, but the connections were all made by December 16th. This completed the erection of the continuous superstructure except the suspended span over the channel. The traveler which had done its work was now taken down and the falsework removed. The actual erection of the last suspended span, the only portion of the Memphis Bridge which was erected without falsework, was begun on the 9th of February. A traveler of simple character, which consisted of a platform resting on the top chords aud carrying two derricks guyed to a stiff frame, was set up at the east end of the west cantilever of this span (this being the cantilever which projects from the east end of the central span). The material was taken out in a barge under these der¬ ricks and lifted into position. The weight of this suspended span was so great that the Chief Engineer hesitated about employing the adjustable wedges which have been used on similar structures at the connection between the cantilever arm and a suspended span. Oblong holes, each carrying two pins, were placed at the sliding joints (see Plate 44), and by placing adjustable wedges between these pins the position of the end of the projecting span could have been raised or lowered, or the span could have been moved backward. The Engineer, hov'ever, decided to erect the west end with¬ out any adjustment and the east end with a hydraulic adjustment, and to make the connection between the bottom chords with eye bars, which, acting as a toggle joint, could take up variations of length. The 'En¬ gineer now admits that this was an error in judgment. Wedges could have been used to better advantage than the fixed connections at the west end or the hydraulic connection at the east end. The hydraulic connec¬ tion at the east end was used only in the bottom chord, a double wedge arrangement being used in the top; the double wedge is not as good as the single wedge. After the cantilever arms had been built out, the opening between them, which had been carefully triangulated, was measured direct with a steel wire. Computations were made showing the changes in length of the members of the central span, the anchorage span and the cantilever arms resulting from the building out of the half spans of the intermedi¬ ate span. The positions of the ends of the cantilever arms at the adjust¬ ment point under that condition were then calculated, as well as the form of the half span when built out. These calculations gave data for fixing the distance between the adjustment pins of the first half span (the west one) that was built. The distance between these pins, which determined the position of the free end of the half span when built out, was fixed by stationary castings (shown in Plate 44) ; these were made in two parts for convenience in handling. After the erection of the half span had been commenced no change could be made in its final position. When calculating the final position of the half span it was assumed that the erecting outfit of traveler, engines, lines and scaffolds would remain on it until the span was swung. This was .an error; the unusual weight of the span insured much difficulty in swinging, and it should have been assumed in the first place that all appliances not absolutely necessary in swinging the span would be removed as soon as the half spans were built out. They were removed, and the free end of the west half span, after their removal, was 5 inches above the elevation intended; this added materially to the subsequent difficulties. The adjustment pins and castings for the west half span were placed February 9th and 12th. Erection was proceeded with and the half span erected to within one panel of the center of the span during the next twenty days. The traveler used for this purpose was then removed and the erection engine, lines, etc., run back to the end of the cantilever arm. The distance fixed between the adjustment pins had been based oq calculations of extensions or contractions due to the increased strain resulting from the building out of the half spans; these computed changes in length were applied as corrections to the measured distance across the opening between the cantilever arms. The corrections to the upper chord opening depended, oq computed changes in length of chord members for a distance of 1863 feet; the corrections to the lower chord opening depended -upon computed changes in length for a distance of 1411 feet. A slight error in the assumption as to loading would pro¬ duce an appreciable difference in the total extension or contraction in these distances; moreover, the members were in the main riveted mem¬ bers with heavy splice plates, tie plates and lattices, all of which in¬ creased the average cross-sections, so that with a correct strain sheet the calculated changes in length might be to a considerable extent inexact. It was therefore thought necessary to provide for a small adjustment for the east half span. Wedges (shown in Plate 44) were made for the upper chord adjust¬ ment. They provided for a total variation in distance between pin cen¬ ters of only 1 in. Some small variations from plan dimensions reduced this range to about £ in. The removal of all appliauces from the west half span not only caused the free end to rise above the elevation intended, but, by reducing the strains in all members, caused the free end of the upper chord to be about 1 in. west of the place expected. On the other hand, the time re¬ quired for erecting the span was greater than had been expected, so that the connection at the center was made later in the season and at a higher temperature than had been assumed. These two changes in condition almost balanced each other. It was expected that the wedges would be immovable after the half span had been built out its full length; they were to be used, however, 24 THE MEMPHIS BRIDGE. for a final adjustment after the half span had been built out half its length. Before beginning the erection of the half span, the distance across the opening was again measured and the wedges placed at nearly mid-position, the measurement having checked previous measurements and computations within a small part of an inch. After the wedges had been placed and the erection of the half span commenced, the adjustment was not changed until the span had been released at the adjustment points at the west end. When an attempt was made to move these wedges, the double wedge was found defective. One of the wedges would move first; the immediate result was a great increase of pressure on the other wedge applied at its small end; this fixed it in place, and as the screw was turned to continue the withdrawal, the movement of the first wedge con¬ tinued until some means were used to prevent its movement. For the lower chord adjustment at the east end of the span a hydraulic jack (Plate 44) was provided for each truss. Each jack had a plunger 14 in. in diameter, with a stroke of 3f in. One force-pump was provided for operating these jacks; it was of special design and very simple in construction. The ordinary leather cup-packing proved in¬ adequate and was replaced by soft lead. The adjustment in the lower chord was simply the thrusting out of the hydraulic jacks to the proper distance to give the end of the half span, when built out* the same eleva¬ tion as the end of the west half span already built. The stroke of the jacks was not enough for this, but this was provided for by placing cres¬ cent-shaped fillers in the elongated pin holes between one of the pins and the webs of the chord. When the half span was built half its length, the jacks were used to increase the distance between the adjustment pins £ in. With this adjustment the limit of the capacity of the pump was reached ; and as the erection proceeded, this half span, like the west one, became unadjustable. When the half spans met at the center they were so nearly the same elevation that little difficulty was met in driving the center pins of the upper chords which closed the span and completed the connection between the upper chords and the web systems. To supply the place of the end adjustments ordinarily provided for swinging the span, the Chief Engineer decided to depend mainly on ex¬ pansion by temperature to extend the upper chord, and on a toggle joint to shorten the lower chord, so that the adjustment pins could be with¬ drawn. For one full truss panel of the lower chord there were substi¬ tuted two lengths of eye bars connected to adjoining sections of bottom chord by temporary pins and to each other by short coupling bars. A shoit vertical rod 2 in. square, having a nut at the lower end and an eye at he upper end, passed between each pair of coupling bars and through a washer which took bearing on the lower edge of the coupling bars. The toggle joint was completed by lifting on the 2 in. square rods. The eye bars and couplings were placed to permit the insertion of the riveted lower chord sections after swinging the span, the top flange angles being removed and riveted back again after placing. The arrangement of the bars is shown on Plate 45. The eye bars were called the toggle bars, the joint at center was called the toggle joint, and the rods by which the toggle joint was pulled up were called the toggle rods. As the ends of the half spans were too high, the opening in the lower chord between the ends of the riveted sections (one section at the center being left out), when the joints in the upper chord were just brought into bearing, was nearly 4 in. less than the length of the closing section. It was necessary to raise the toggle joint 3 ft. before the toggle bars became taut. By loading the adjoining cantilever arms the lower chords were compressed so that the toggle bars became taut when the toggle joint was lifted If ft. The erection of the east half span ready for the closing sections was completed April 8th; the traveler and all superfluous material were re¬ moved ; a derrick was erected on the end of each arm to handle the clos¬ ing sections. The season was well advanced, and for several days the temperature had been too high to close the upper chord sections, if all preparation had been made; but cooler weather came opportunely, and at 9 a.m. of April 10th they were inserted with an opening of only in. more than required. During the next three days the inclined rods (Plate 45) for lifting the toggles were placed; in addition, two pairs of heavy triple blocks rove with manilla line 2 in. iu diameter were placed in each truss, con¬ necting the upper and lower chords at the center of the span, each pair of blocks having a capacity of 25 tons. The derricks were taken down and all was in readiness to swing the span; but the weather became cold when heat was wanted. During the swinging of the span changes in strain causing changes in length must occur. The total shortening thus caused in the upper chords amounted to about 4f in. The distance between the fixed points on Piers I and III was 1411 ft. 5f in. The change in length for 1° Fahr. was 0.0095 ft. To produce a change in length of 4f in. re¬ quired a change of 41°. The top chord at the center of the intermediate span became closed at 56°. A temperature of 97° was necessaiy to re¬ lease the adjustment pins in the upper chord. This natural temperature could not be had, and various means were tried to swing the span at a lower one, all tending to increase the length of the upper chord. During the several days of cool weather which followed the connec¬ tion of the top chords at the centre of the span, the cantilever aims be¬ tween Piers I and II were loaded with timber, rails, locomotives, etc., to about 6000 pounds per lineal foot. The toggle rods were screwed up daily and the adjustment pins watched closely, but there was no sign of loosen¬ ing. The resident engineer, Mr. Alfred Noble, adopted the expedient of heating the upper choid of the intermediate span with steam. A If inch pipe was placed in each chord for the entire length of the span. Canvas was placed under the pipe on the lacing to retain the heated air in the chord; on the 19tli of April steam from the locomotives was turned on the pipes, the toggle rods were screwed up, and as heavy a strain as they would stand was put on the lines, and blocks placed to assist in raising the toggle joint. As the temperature approached its maximum for the day it was found that Piers I and III were being pushed apart, the movement of Pier I being f in. and of Pier III, If in.; the possibility of this motion had been considered, both in its effects on the masonry of the piers and iu swinging the span. Masonry, like all other construction, is elastic; the piers could move much more than these amounts without injury. The motion of the piers, however, worked against the shorten¬ ing of the top chord by compression, and this attempt to swing the span failed. It almost succeeded, however, as was shown by the fact that some of the upper chord web bearings could be moved on the pins. During the next two clays four rods, each If in. round, were placed on each truss, to connect the toggle joints with the center of the upper chord and aid in lifting the toggles; steam pipes were laid in the upper chords of the central span extending half way from Pier II to Pier III. Clamps (shown on Plate 44) were placed at the adjustment points in each of the upper chords at the west end of the intermediate span ; each clamp consisted of four rods, 2f in. diameter, with upset ends and nuts, bearing against pieces of rail and through oak blocks bearing against the edges of the tie plates of the chord sections. On the morning of April 2 2d the operation of lifting the toggle joints began ; there were 24 toggle rods, and the work of turning up the nuts required several hours of steady work; the joint was finally raised 3.75 feet above the line of the lower chord. At 4 p.m. the steam pipes were connected to the locomotives aud a heavy strain put on the clamps; in an hour the adjustment pins at the west end of the upper chords be- THE MEMPHIS BRIDGE. 25 came loose and were taken out; the adjustment wedges in the upper chord at the east end of the span were loosened; the upper chord being now released at both ends, all difficulties were over and the span was practically swung. Night had come and work was suspended until morning, when the hydraulic jacks in the lower chord at the east end of the span were slackened oft’ and taken out, the wedges were removed, the castings in both chords at the west end of the span taken out and the pins put back in place. The toggle rods and lines were then slacked off, allowing the lower chord to assume its normal position, and the per¬ manent sections of bottom chord were inserted. During the erection and swinging of the intermediate span the ad¬ joining cantilever arms had been subjected to strains exceeding those due to the loading assumed in proportioning the members, but not exceeding safe limits. Twelve days were spent in swinging this span. The erection of the channel span completed the continuous super¬ structure of the Memphis Bridge. The floor system was put in, the riveting was continued, and the entire structure was ready for the pas¬ sage of trains on the 12 th of May, when the bridge was formally opened. Approach from Abutment to Anchorage Pier, including fence.... Anchor rods and plates in Anchorage Pier. Anchorage bars, blocks, etc., below lower chord. Tetrapod and castings. Anchorage Span, exclusive of posts L 0 L' 0 and castings on Pier I Posts L 0 U 0 . portal between same and castings on Pier I. East Cantilever Arm. East Intermediate Span. Cantilever Arm. Pier li. Posts 1,„ U„. portal for same, rollers, etc., and castings on Pier II Central Span, exclusive of end posts, castings, etc. Posts Lq U 0 . portal for saute, castings, etc., on Pier III. Caoliiever Arm Pier III . West Intermediate Span, exclusive ol castings. Castings ou top of l M .er 1V. . Deck Span Castings in niches of Pier IV. Deck Spao, exclusive of end supports ami posts L 0 U 0 W. Castings Pier V and posts L 0 U 0 W. Total. The weights per foot referred to in this paper are calculations on the basis of .this table. These several tables give the weight of the steel in the structure. The weight of the wooden floor is additional and was estimated to weigh 630 pounds per lineal foot, this including rails and connections. 4 757 9S7 . 340 041 . 1 090 431 2 269 340 WEIGHTS. COST. The following table gives the weight of the superstructure classified by spans. In this table the vertical posts over Piers I, II, and III, and the supports on the piers, are divided between adjacent spans: East Approach.. 66 812 Anchorage Span. I 606 727 Cantilever Pier I.. 1 252 365 East Intermediate Span. 2 329 759 Cantilever Pier II. 1 284 674 Ccotral Spao . 5 122 252 Cantilever Pier III . 1 260 452 West Intermediate Span .. . 2 327 845 Deck Span.. 1 072 951 16 323 837 The total cost of the Superstructure was as follows: Steel work... Erection.... Painting.... $275.76 78.96 8.24 Total. $ 959 972.25 The total cost of the floor was $20 018.81, or $7.46 per lineal foot. These are the actual shop weights, and the sum is the total amount of metal in the bridge. The following table gives the weights as divided in estimating the strains. The portions directly over the piers, which are carried by the piers instead of by any portion of the trusses, are eliminated from the weights of the spans: V. VIADUCT. The West Approach Viaduct begins at Pier V and extends to Pier 54, a total length of 2268.5 feet. An iron girder 22.125 feet long reaches to the east bent of the timber trestle thus making the entire length of the ironwork 2290.625 feet. Between stations 144 and 146 the line of the viaduct crosses the tracks of the Kansas City, Ft. Scott & Memphis Railroad and the St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway, and to prevent interference with these tracks it was decided to put in two spans each 75 feet long in clear of masonry. The angle of the crossing is 49° 1', and this leugth of span left abundant room for three tracks for each railroad. As a precau¬ tion against possible accidents from derailment on the lower tracks these two spans were placed on masonry piers. The location of these three masonry piers was fixed by the position of the lower tracks, and this fixed the length of the viaduct spans. The general plan of viaduct selected was the usual one of a plate girder superstructure resting on iron towers, the spans between the towers being made twice the length of the spans over the towers. The spans over the towel's measure 29.5 feet long between centers and the spans between the towera 59 feet, this length briuging the east masonry pier in proper posi¬ tion. The whole viaduct is shown ou Plate 56. The numbering of the piers of the main bridge was continued through the viaduct but designated by Arabic instead of Roman numer¬ als, the three masonry piers being 44, 45, and 46, and the west pier of all 54. As each of the piers under the towers is built in the form of two small piers, there are in all 95 piei's under the viaduct. The viaduct piers are s\iown on Plate 57. Each pier rests on seven piles which were driven in pits excavated to elevation 205; these pits were filled with hexagonal blocks of concrete into which all piles except the center piles extend four feet. The piers are nine feet high above the concrete foundation, the lower four feet of which are built of brick in all cases and the upper five feet of which are in piers 6 to 11 made of con¬ crete enclosed in a shell of $ inch steel plate five feet high, in piers 12 to 27 of concrete enclosed in a shell of \ inch iron plate 4J feet high and iu the other piers of brick; there is little reason for preferring one form of construction to the other. These piers are covered with cast iron caps, and in each pier are two U-shaped anchor rods of iron 1£ inches in diam¬ eter which extend from the concrete foundation to a height 10 inches above the caps. Long screws were cut on these rods so as to permit of adjustment in case of settlement which is always liable to occur with so large a number of small foundations. After the completion of the via¬ duct an embankment 50 feet wide was built around these piers, finishing at elevation 218, this being above high water and, therefore, preventing 26 THE MEMPHIS BRIDGE. any flow of water between the piers. The hexagonal concrete block was made of Louisville cement concrete; Portland cement was used every where else in the small piers. Piers 44, 45 and 46 are also shown on Plate 57. They have pile foundations, the piles being enclosed in a block eight feet high of Louis¬ ville cement concrete surmounted by eight feet of Portland cement con¬ crete, above which they are built of limestone masonry. The limestone used ill these piers is from southwestern Missouri; it is an inferior stone having bad crowfoot seams, but it was thought that in this posi¬ tion, where it was away from the river, it would prove durable. A recent examination shows that this confidence was misplaced; the stone already is weathering badly, and it would have been much wiser to have used Bedford stone, the cost of which would have been less. The details of the ironwork are given on Plate 58. They require but little explanation. All the bracing of the towers was made stiff and without adjustment, but the diagonals were calculated as tension mem¬ bers. The spans are not divided over the center of the posts but in such position that the aggregate weight of the long and short spans shall come over the axis of each post. Provision for expansion aud contraction is made at the upper (eastern) end of each long gilder. The viaduct is of iron, though soft steel is used in the wide web plates of the girders and in some other unimportant places. A contract for this material was let to the Pennsylvania Steel Com¬ pany, but the greater part of the work was manufactured at the shops of Cofrode & Saylor at Pottstown, Pa. The longer spans of plate girders were made by A. & P. Roberts & Co. of Pencoyd, Pa. They are shown on Plate 59. The floor system is of the form usually used by the Chief Engineer on permanent structures. It is also shown on Plate 59. At the east end of the viaduct a plate girder span 60 feet long reaches from the first long span to a timber trestle which forms the high¬ way approach. This span is shown on Plate 60. The quantities of the various kinds of material in the viaduct are given in the following tables: SUBSTRUCTURE. Pili-9, in work. Coucri-'.e :r. foim.li.’ i.ir.i " cylinder Piers 6-27.... Steel In cylinder shells. Piers 6-11. . lineal feet -cubic yards 24 040 1 837 Wrought iron in cylinder shells, Piers 12-27.pounds 48 663 Cast iron in caps. “ 123 830 Wrought iron in U rods. " 31739 Brick masonry.cubic yards 665 Stone masonry in Piers 44, 45 and 46. " “ 668 SUPERSTRUCTURE. Iron and soft steel in towers.pounds 1 482 273 Steel in girders, Pier V-6. " 47 175 Iron and soft steel in girders ou towers. “ 1 595 262 “ “ “ “ “ " “ Piers 44, 45 and 46. “ 179 549 Cast iron pedestals and anchor bolts on Piers 44, 45 and 46. " 12 023 Total.. “ 3 316 282 The average amount of metal in the superstructure per lineal foot of viaduct from Pier V to the end of the ironwork is 1 448 pounds. If the special girders over the St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern and Kansas City, Fort Scott & Memphis Railways be omitted, and also the half spans on either side of these girders aud the half spans next to Pier Y, the average amount of metal per lineal foot becomes 1 509 pounds. The first work done on the foundations of the viaducts was on the 28th of June, 1890. The small piers were all finished on the 19th of August, 1891. The larger piers (44, 45 and 46) were finished Septem¬ ber 5, 1891. The earth embankment around these piers was finished December 21, 1891. The ironwork was erected by the company’s own men. A traveler which ran on a track placed on the ground was set up at the west end of the viaduct and everything was handled with this traveler, an illustration of which taken from a photograph is given on the accompanying plate. The erection of this viaduct was completed on the 7th of May, 1892. The total cost of the viaduct was as follows: Substructure. Excavating aud Backfilling. Pile work . Concrete in Foundations.. Iron work. Brick Masonry. Concrete in Cylinders. Masonry Piers 44, 45 nnd 46....... Tolu! Foundation's. Superstructure. Iron and Steel. Erection . Painting. Floor . Total Superstructure. Total Cost of Vi $ 2 740.85 II .351 13 11 448.94 1 356.70 11 427.66 $112 155 55 16 657.63 3 42-1 81 10 793.90 $143 031.89 00616 The average cost of each of the two small piers under one bent of the viaduct was $432.57 and that of the masonry piers 44, 45 and 46 was $6 392.57. The cost of viaduct complete, including painting and floor, was $88.19 per liueal foot of gross length. The cost of the floor was $4.71 per lineal foot and that of painting $1.50, or $2.07 per ton. Omitting again the special structures as before the cost per foot of viaduct, including floor and painting, becomes $84.18. VI. APPROACHES. The East Approach calls for no special description. It is simply a line of railroad built within the limits of the city, the only stracture on which is a double track plate girder bridge across Delaware Avenue. Delaware Avenue was depressed to pass under this bridge and an eight inch vitrified sewer pipe laid eastward from the lowest point in the depression, the street under the bridge being paved with brick; at some future date it will probably be expedient to turn this drainage towards the river; until this is done special care will be required to keep the drainage pipe clean. From the west end of the viaduct to station 181 + 06 the West Ap¬ proach is built in the form of a timber trestle. Of this 2507 feet are a framed structure on pile foundations and the remaining 605 feet a simple pile trestle. Special care was taken in the selection of the timber for this trestle. The piles are of oak and the timber is all of long leaf southern pine. The position, however, is one in which timber decays rapidly, and the whole trestle ought to be replaced by a solid earth em¬ bankment before the end of 1898. This will require 310 000 cubic yards, or, if the filling should begin with the year 1894, an average of 62 000 cubic yards per year, the estimated cost of which would be $20 000 a year, the haul being very long. From the end of this trestle to the west end of the Approach the track is laid on a solid earth embankment, excepting that there is a pile trestle 300 feet long between stations 213 and 217. This trestle will probably have to be kept open. THE MEMPHIS BRIDGE. The track is laid throughout with SO pound steel rails of what is kuowu as the Michigan Central pattern, or Pattern 8001 of the Illinois Steel Company by which they were rolled. The Highway uses the same floor as the railroad from the East Abutment to Pier V. At the east end of the bridge the Highway Ap. proach is a solid earth embankment, finished with a granite pavement laid on Portland cement concrete foundation and 30 feet wide between curbs; this paved approach is on the line of Virginia Avenue, and it descends with a 13 per cent, grade from the abutment, reaching the street grade near the east line of Delaware Avenue. At the west end the High¬ way Approach makes two rectangular turns. A 60 feet plate girder span, supported at the south end on the first viaduct span and at the north end on an iron bent, connects the bridge floor with a wooden trestle; this wooden trestle, which is parallel to the viaduct and 80 feet from it between centers, is a simple cheap structure 20 feet wide on top, descending towards the west with an eight per cent grade. The quantities of the principal materials in the approaches are as follows: EAST RAILROAD APPROACH. Earthwork.cubic yards 15 076 Delaware Avenue Bridge, Concrete. " “ 216 *' “ “ Masonry. “ “ 408 “ " “ Iron iu Superstructure.pounds 87180 “ “ “ Brick paving under.square yards 209 EAST HIGHWAY APPROACH. Earthwork.cubic yards 1 140 Granite paving.square “ 368 WEST RAILROAD APPROACH. Earthwork.cubic yards 69 525 Pile* i" work.lineal feel 27 267 Timber in work.feet B.M. 976 092 lrou, boils, etc.pounds 69 844 WEST HIGHWAY APPROACH. Iron iu girders and support for same.pounds 60 430 Timber io trestle. feet B M. 238 000 Piles '• “ .lineal feel 8 128 Iron " “ .pounds 14 518 Earthwork. . cubic yards 876 VII. SHORE PROTECTION. While comparatively little shore protection was done at Memphis, that little was very important. It was put in with reference to two things; to hold the bluff which forms the east shore both from abrasion by the river and from surface-wash, and to restore the west shore to something like its position iu 1886. The east shore protection consisted; first, of a mat, tbe upper edge of which was near the high water mark; and second, of grading the bank to a uniform slope from the east abutment to Pier I and paving this slope. The mat was of the character used by the Mississippi River Com¬ mission in its shore protection work. It is 365 feet wide and 1320 feet long, extending from 240 feet below the axis of the bridge to 1080 feet above it. This mat was put in in September to December 1890. It consists of brush and poles and is heavily covered with riprap. The portion below low water is secure. The portion above low water may require repairs and will at all events require watching, or it will be destroyed by the negroes who would steal the poles for fuel. There were used in this mat 6520 cords of brush and poles and 9304 tons of stone. The sloping of the bluff was done with special reference to prevent¬ ing surface water cutting in around the edge of the small piers and so undermining the foundations. This work was postponed till after the completion of the bridge. The ground was graded to a uniform slope of one vertical to four horizontal; and this inclined surface was not made a true plane, but sloped slightly from the center and each edge so as to form two parallel valleys 120 feet apart, the total width of the above slope being 180 feet. This slope was then paved with limestone blocks laid rather roughly and bedded in sand. This pavement will require some little repairs from year to year, and these should be made immedi¬ ately whenever it shows sign of settlement. They should be made by removing the stones which have settled, filling the cavity underneath with well packed gravel, and replacing the original stones. The protection of the west shore was of an entirely different char¬ acter and consisted principally of a screen dike which was intended to form a deposit behind Pier IV; the general location of this screen dike is shown on Plate 2. It is 1155 feet long, of which 1080 feet are above the axis of the bridge and 75 feet below. It was constructed by first placing a mat 150 feet wide, 50 feet inside and 100 feet outside of the center line, on the bottom of the river; this mat extended below the lower end of the screen dike 155 feet and 370 feet above the upper end of the screen dike; for a length of 550 feet from the upper end, the mat was made 250 feet wide extending from the bank of the river outward. Two lines of piles, 14 feet apart and 15 feet between centres iu each line, were driven through the mat, waling pieces were bolted to the piles, aud the bents were braced. A second mat, 76 feet wide, was woven, the upper edge of which was attached to the top of the piles and the lower edge allowed to fall on the foundation mat; this was held in position by putting riprap on the lower edge. The upper end of the screen dike was connected with the shore line by a short dike- built of brush and stone, the top being at the same elevation as the top of the screen dike itself. This structure forms a current deadener, and with each successive flood an additional deposit is made behind it, so that in due time the whole space should be filled to the level of the bottom land. When this has occurred the new shore line should be heavily riprapped. Some trouble was experienced by tbe river cutting behind the upper end of the screen mat, and to meet this condition the short brush and stone dike was raised to the level of extreme high water and extended inland about .200 feet to a point where the natural surface of the ground is within a few inches of high-water level. This dike may require re¬ pairs from time to time. Two other dikes of a more or less temporary nature were put in to hasten the silting action back of the screen. There were used iu the screen mat and the auxiliary work 14 476 lineal feet of piles, 67 M. ft. B.M. of timber, 23 500 pounds of bolts and washers, 5040 cords of brush and poles, 19 900 pounds of wire and 6466 tons of rock. 28 THE MEMPHIS BRIDGE vni. COST. The cost of the Memphis Bridge is given in the following table East Abutment. Small Piers. Anchorage Pier. Pier I. Foundation. Masonry. Pier H. Foundation. Masonry. Pier III. Foundation. Masonry. Pier IY. Foundation. Masonry. Pier Y. Foundation. Cylinders. Total SUBSTHUCTUBE. Steel work. Erection. Painting. Floor. Total Superstructure. East Shore. West Shore. Total Protection. East Approach. Grading. Masonry. Bridge Superstructure. Highway Approach. Wes*. Approach. Viaduct. Timber Trestle. Grading. Highway Approach. Total Approaches.. Permanent Track. Engineering. . Tools and Machinery. Service Tracks... Buildings. Unused Material.. Total Sundries.. *202 006.10 33 561.76 21 631.51 10 785.50 *209 952.04 *2 542 365.45 This includes everything done under the direction of the Chief En¬ gineer to January 1, 1894. The item of Tools and Machinery is the net balance remaining in that account after crediting it with all sales. The expenses of running and repairing the machinery were charged to the several pieces of work on which the tools were in use at the time such expenses were incurred. The charge for Engineering includes all the salaries and expenses of engineers and inspectors. The table may be briefly condensed into the following: Substructure. *968 987.55 Superstructure. 979 991.04 Total Bkiixie proper. *1 948 978.59 Approaches. $289 751.38 Permanent Tn.ck . 38 895.33 Protection. 93 683.44 464 863.74 Engineering.. . 128 523.12 TOTAL COST. *2 542 365.45 This statement is the cost of construction as expended under the direction of the Chief Engineer. It does not include land purchases nor the various other expenses in the way of interest during construction aud the like with which the capital account was properly chargeable. These items, as reported by the Comptroller, are given in the following table: To.ol rVn,|mri) nn „„ „ Wp *2 542 365.45 218 369.94 7 425.47 206 409.86 23 573.33 Vol „ to Additional sidings, signals, water station, taxes, insurance, etc., Tntarool nn„Bt rll rHnn *2 998 144.05 TOTAL COST, APPENDIX A. LIST OF ENGINEERS, EMPLOYEES, AND CONTRACTORS. ENGINEERS AND COMPANY’S EMPLOYEES. Name and Occupation. Time op Service. George S. Morison, Chief Engineer, RESIDENT STAFF. A. Noble, Resident Engineer,.Oct. 1,1888, to May 31, 1892. M. A. Waldo, Assistant Engineer,.Oct. 24,1888, « Dec. 31, 1892. J. M. Heiskell, « “ .Oct. 22,1888, “ Oct. 31,1891. W. E. Angier, “ • .Feb. 10, 1889, “ May 14, 1892. E. H. Mayne, “ « .Nov. 8, 1889, “ June 5, 1890. D. A. Molitor, « “ .Sept. 8, 1890, “ May 31, 1892. C. Vogel, Draughtsman,.Nov. 30, 1891, “ May 30, 1892. E. K. Barrett, Rodman,.Jan. 5,1890, “ Apr. 17,1893. Geo. Reynolds, Inspector of Masonry, . . . Aug. 15,1889, “ Oct. 14,1889. Joshua Dixon, “ “ “ ... Sept. 15, 1889, “ Apr. 30, 1891. Aug. T. Holmgren, Inspector of Cement, . . . June 16,1889, “ Nov. 28,1891. D. A. Kelsey, Clerk,.Feb. 8,1889, “ Dec. 31, 1892. Sanford Morison, Clerk,.Apr. 21,1889, “ June 5, 1892. H. C. Churchill, “ Jan. 1, 1890, “ Sept. 19, 1890. R. F. Thayer, Time-keeper,.May 20,1889, “ June 3, 1892. Julius Thompson, “ Nov. 11, 1888, “ May 16, 1891. L. S. Stewart, General Foreman,.Oct. 26, 1888, “ Apr. 25,1892. D. Leonard, Foreman of Pressure Work, . . . Nov. 17, 1888, “ Oct. 24, 1890. D. Brophy, Master Mechanic, .Nov. 17, 1888, “ Oct. 25, 1890. C. H. Wilson, Foreman of Mattress Work, . . July 17,1889, “ Jan. 23,1891. J. E. Griffin, Foreman of Carpenters, . . . Jan. 25,1892, “ Apr. 12, 1893. Geo. W. Fenton, Master of Steamers Bertram and Lincoln, ...Nov. 1, 1888, “ July 7,1890. W. P. McNeely, Master of Tug Welcome, . . Mar. 31, 1889, “ Mar. 24, 1893. NON-RESIDENT STAFF. E. Gerber, Office Engineer. B.Mo w »z I J 01,ie,Dr ‘" E “ sm “’. Apr. 30,1890. ( Chief Inspector of Superstructure, Nov. 7,1890, to Jan. 31,1892. Irving Dickinson, Draughtsman. 'O. E. Hovey, “ E. H. Connor, Inspector of Superstructure, . . W. S. Macdonald, Inspector of Superstructure,. _ T „ _ l Rodman,. W. R. Edwards, \ ( Asst. Insp. of Superstructure, . „ ^ ( Rodman,. R. Khuen, -j (Asst. Insp. of Superstructure, . . W. A. Hill, Asst. Inspector of Superstructure, . W. L. Smith, Asst. Inspector of Superstructure, Jan. 27,1890, to Nov. 30, 1890. Oct. 1,1891, “ Dec. 24,1891. May 27, 1889, “ Apr. 14,1890. Apr. 15, 1890, “ Jan. 2,1892. July 16,1890, “ Sept. 4, 1890. Jan. 1, 1891, “ Aug. 10, 1891. Mar. 9,1891, “ Dec. 28,1891. Aug. 10, 1891, “ Dec. 9, 1891. F. H. Joyner, Inspector at Limestone Quarries, May 1, 1889, “ Dec. 21,1890. N. Joyner, Assistant Inspector at Limestone Quarries,.May 19, 1889, “ Mar. 31,1890. O. T. Geese, Inspector at Granite Quarries,. . May 13,1889, “ Aug. 31,1891. CONTRACTORS. Lewis M. Loss,. Union Bridge Co.,. Elmira Bridge Works,. Lassig Bridge and Iron Works, . . Scaife Foundry and Machine Co., . Keystone Bridge Co.,. Pittsburg Steel Casting Co. New Jersey Steel and Iron Co., . . A. & P. Robert’s & Co.,. Pittsburg Bridge Co.,. Baird Brothers,. Pennsylvania Steel Co.,. Cofrode it Saylor,. William Kelley, .. William O’Mara,. James Saguin. Speers & Freeman,. Masonry. Superstructure. Sub-contractor. Superstructure. Erection. Viaduct Superstructure. Sub-contractor. Earthwork, West Approach. West Approach Trestle. Sloping and Paving, East Approach. 30 ACT AN ACT TO AUTHORIZE THE CONSTRUCTION OF A BRIDGE ACROSS THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER AT MEMPHIS, TENNESSEE. Be it Enacted by the Senate and House op Representatives of the United States of America in Congkess Assembled, That the Tennessee and Arkansas Bridge Company, a corporation organized and created under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Arkansas, and the Tennessee Construction and Contracting Company, a corporation organized and created under and by virtue of the laws of Tennessee, be, and the same are hereby, jointly authorized and empowered to erect, construct, and maintain a bridge over the Mississippi River from or near Memphis, in the State of Tennessee, to or near the town of Hopefield, in the State of Arkansas. Said bridge shall be constructed to provide for the passage of railway trains, and. at the option of the corporations by which it may be built, may be used for the passage of wagons and vehicles of all kinds, for the transit of animals, and for foot passengers, for such rea¬ sonable rates of toll as may be approved from time to time by the Secretary of War. Sec. 2. That any bridge built uuder this act and subject to its limitations shall be a lawful structure, and shall be recognized and known as a post-route, upon which also no higher charge shall be made for the transmission over the same of the mails, the troops, and the munitions of war of the United States, or for passengers or freight passing over said bridge, than the rate per mile paid for the transportation over the railroad or public highways leading to the said bridge ; and it shall enjoy the rights and privileges of other post roads in the United States. Sec. 3. That said bridge shall be made with unbroken and continuous spans; two spans thereof shall not be less than five hundred and fifty feet in length in the clear, and no span shall be less than three hundred feet in the clear. The lowest part of the superstructure of said bridge shall be at least sixty-five feet above extreme high-water mark, as understood at the point of location, and the bridge shall be at right angles to and its piers parallel with APPENDIX B. OF CONGRESS APPROVED FEBRUARY 26, 1885. the current of the river. No bridge shall be erected or maintained under the authority of this act which shall' at any time substantially or materially obstruct the free navigation of said river; and if any bridge erected under such authority shall, in the opinion of the Secretary of War, obstruct such naviga¬ tion, he is hereby authorized to cause such change or alteration of said bridge to be made as will effectually obviate such obstruction; and all such altera¬ tions shall be made and all such obstructions be removed at the expense of the owner or owners of said bridge. And in case of any litigation arising from any obstruction or alleged obstruction to the free navigation of said river, caused or alleged to be caused by said bridge, the case may be brought in the circuit court of the United States in which any portion of said obstruction or bridge may be located. Provided further, That nothing in this act shall be so con¬ strued as to repeal or modify any of the provisions of law now existing in reference to the protection of the navigation of rivers, or to exempt this bridge from the operation of the same. Sec. 4. That all railroad companies desiriug the use of said bridge shall have and be entitled to equal rights and privileges relative to the passage of railway trains or cars over the same, and over the approaches thereto, upon payment of a reasonable compensation for such use; and in case the owner or owners of said bridge and the several railroad companies, or any one of them, desiring such use shall fail to agree upon the sum or sums to be paid, and upon rules and conditions to which each shall conform in using said bridge, all matters at issue between them shall be decided by the Secretary of War, upon a hearing of the allegations and proofs of the parties. Provided, That the provisions of section two in regard to charges for passengers and freight across said bridge shall not govern the Secretary of War in determining any question arising as to the sum or sums to be paid to the owners of said bridge by said railroad companies for the use of said bridge. Sec. 5. That any bridge authorized to be constructed under this act shall be built and located under and subject to such regulations for the security of navigation of said river as the Secretary of War shall prescribe; and to secure that object the said companies or corporations shall submit to the Secretary of War, for his examination and approval, a design and drawings of the bridge and a map of the location, giving, for the space of two miles above and two miles below the proposed location, the topography of the banks of the river, the shore-line at extreme high and low-water, the direction and strength of the currents at all stages, and the soundings, accurately showing the bed of the stream, the location of any other bridge or brigdes, and shall furnish such other information as may be required for a full and satisfactory understanding of the subject; and until the said plan and location of the bridge are approved by the Secretary of War the bridge shall not be built; and should any change be made in the plan of said bridge during the progress of construction, such change shall be subject to the approval of the Secretary of War. Sec. 6. That the right to alter, amend, or repeal this act is hereby ex¬ pressly reserved ; and the right to require any changes in said structure, or its entire removal, at the expense of the owners thereof, whenever Congress shall decide that the public interests require it, is also expressly reserved. Sec. 7. That it shall be the duty of the Secretary of War, on satisfactory proof that a necessity exists therefor, to require the companies or persons owning said bridge to cause such aids to the passage of said bridge to be con¬ structed, placed, and maintained at their own cost and expense, in the form of booms, dikes, piers, or other suitable and proper structures for the guiding of rafts, steamboats, and other water-craft safely through the passage-way, as shall be specified in his order in that behalf ; and on failure of the company or persons aforesaid to make and establish such additional structures within a reasonable time, the said Secretary shall proceed to cause the same to be built or made at the expense of the United States, and shall refer the matter without delay to the Attorney-General of the United States, whose duty it shall be to institute, in the name of the United States, proceedings in any circuit court of the United States in which such bridge or any part thereof is located for the recovery of the costs thereof ; and all moneys accruing from such proceedings shall be oovered into the Treasury of the United States. 31 AN ACT TO AUTHORIZE THE CONSTRUCTION OF A BRIDGE ACROSS THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER AT MEMPHIS, TENNESSEE. Be it Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress Assembled, That the Kansas City and Memphis Railway and Bridge Company, a corporation created and organized under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Arkansas, its successors and assigns, be and the same are hereby authorized and empowered to erect, con¬ struct, and maintain a bridge over the Mississippi River, from or near the town of Hopefield in the State of Arkansas, to or near the taxing district of Shelby County, commonly known as the city of Memphis, in the State of Tennessee. Said bridge shall be constructed to provide for the passage of railway trains and wagons and vehicles of all kinds, for the transit of animals, and, at the option of the corporation by which it may be built, for foot-passengers, for such reasonable rates of toll as may be approved from time to time by the Secretary of War. Sec. 2. That any bridge built under this act and subject to its limitations shall be a lawful structure, and shall be recognized and known as a post-route, upon which also no higher charge shall be made for the transmission over the same of the mails, the troops, aud munitions of war of the United States, than the rate per mile paid for the transportation over the railroad or public highways leading to the said bridge, and it shall enjoy the rights and privileges of other post-roads in the United States. Sec. 3. That the said bridge shall be made with unbroken and continuous spans. Before approving the plans for said bridge the Secretary of War shall order three engineer officers from the Engineer Bureau to be detailed to the duty of examining, by actnal inspection, the locality where said bridge is to be built, and to report what shall be the length of the main channel span aud of the other spans. Provided, That the main channel span shall in no event be less than seven hundred feet in length, or the other spans less than six hunderd feet each in length ; and if the report of said officers shall be approved by the Secretary of War, the spans of said bridge shall be of the length so required. The lowest part of the superstructure of said bridge shall be at least seventy-five feet above extreme high-water mark, as understood at the point of location, and the bridge shall be at right angles to and its piers parallel with the current of the river. No bridge shall be erected or maintained under the APPENDIX C. ACT OF CONGRESS APPROVED APRIL 24, 1888. authority of this act which shall at any time substantially or materially ob¬ struct the free navigation of said river ; and if any bridge erected under such authority shall, in the opinion of the Secretary of War, obstruct such naviga¬ tion, he is hereby authorized to cause such change or alteration of said bridge to be made as will effectually obviate such obstruction; and all such altera¬ tions shall be made and all such obstructions be removed at the expense of the owner or owners of said bridge ; and in case of any litigation arising from any obstruction or alleged obstruction to the free navigation of said river caused or alleged to be caused by said bridge, the case may be brought in the circuit court of the United States within whose jurisdiction any portion of said obstruction or bridge may be located. Provided further. That nothing in this act shall be so construed as to repeal or modify any of the provisions of law now existing in reference to the protection of the navigation of rivers, or to exempt this bridge from the operation of the same. Sec. 4. That all railroad companies desiring the use of said bridge shall have and be entitled to equal rights and privileges relative to the passage of railway trains or cars over the same, and over the approaches thereto, upon payment of a reasonable compensation for such use ; and in case the owner or owners of said bridge and the several railroad companies, or any one of tliem> desiring such use shall fail to agree upon the sum or sums to be paid, and upon rules and conditions to which each shall conform in using said bridge, all matters at issue between them shall be decided by the Secretary of War, upon reasonable notice to the parties in interest and upon consideration of such allegations and proofs as may be submitted to him. But the last foregoing provision shall not be held to exclude the ordinary jurisdiction of the courts of the United States in such cases. Sec. 5. That any bridge authorized to be constructed under this act shall be built and located under and subject to such regulations for the security of navigation of said river, as the Secretary of War shall prescribe ; and to secure that object, the said companies or corporations shall submit to the Secretary of War, for his examination and approval, a design and drawings of the bridge and a map of the location, giving, for the space of two miles above and two miles below the proposed location, the topography of the banks of the river, the shore-lines at extreme high and low water, the direction and strength of the currents at all stages, and the soundings, accurately showing the bed of the stream, the location of any other bridge or bridges, and shall furnish such other information as may be required for a full and satisfactory understanding of the subject; and until the said plan and location of the bridge are approved by the Secretary of War, the bridge shall not be built or commenced ; and should any change be made in the plans of said bridge during the progress of construction, such change shall be subject to approval of the Secretary of War, and shall not be made or commenced until the same is so approved. Sec. 6. That it shall be the duty of the Secretary of War, on satisfactory proof that a necessity exists therefor, to require the company or persons own¬ ing said bridge to cause such aids to the passage of said bridge to be con¬ structed, placed, and maintained at their own cost and expense, in the form of booms, dikes, piers, or other suitable and proper structures for the guiding of rafts, steamboats, and other water-craft safely through the passage-way, as shall be specified in his order in that behalf; and on failure of the company or persons aforesaid to make and establish and maintain such additional struct¬ ures within a reasonable time, the said Secretary may cause the said bridge to be removed at the expense of the owners thereof, or may proceed to cause the same to be built or made at the expense of the owners of said bridge, and in that case shall refer the matter without delay to the Attorney-General of the United States, whose duty it shall be to institute, in the name of the United States, proceedings in any circuit court of the United States within whose juris¬ diction such bridge or any part thereof is located, for the recovery of the amount so expended by the Government and all costs of such proceedings; and all moneys accruing from such proceedings shall be covered into the Treasury of the United States. Sec. 7. That if the construction of the bridge hereby authorized shall not be commenced within one year from the time this act takes effect, and be com¬ pleted within four years after the same date, then this act shall be void, and all rights hereby conferred shall cease and determine. Sec. 8. That an act entitled “ An act to authorize the construction of a bridge across the Mississippi River at Memphis, Tennessee ” approved February twenty-sixth, eighteen hundred and eighty-five, be, and the same is, hereby repealed. Sec. 9. That the right to alter, amend, or repeal this act is hereby ex¬ pressly reserved, and the right to require any changes in said structure, or its entire removal, at the expense of the owners, whenever the Secretary of War shall decide that the public interests require it, is also expressly reserved. 32 Whereas, By an act of Congress, approved April 24, 1888, entitled “An act to authorize the construction of a bridge across the Mississippi River at Memphis, Tennessee,” it was enacted that the Kansas City & Memphis Rail¬ way and Bridge Company, a corporation created and organized under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Arkansas, its successors and assigns, be, and the same are hereby authorized and empowered to erect, construct, and maintain a bridge over the Mississippi River from or near the town of Hopefield, in the State of Arkansas, to or near the taxing district of Shelby County, commonly known as the city of Memphis, in the State of Tennessee; and, Whereas, It is provided by section 5 of the act of Congress aforesaid, That any bridge authorized to be constructed under this act shall be built and located under and subject to such regulations for the security of navigation of said river as the Secretary of War shall prescribe ; and to secure that object, the said companies or corporations shall submit to the Secretary of War, for his examination and approval, a design and drawings of the bridge, and a map of the location, giving, for the space of two miles above and two miles below the proposed location, the topography of the banks of the river, the shore lines at extreme high and low water, the direction and strength of the currents at all stages, and the soundings, accurately showing the bed of the stream, the location of any other bridge or bridges, and shall furnish such other information as may be required for a full and satisfactory understanding of the subject; and until the said plan and location of the bridge are approved by the Secretary of War, the bridge shall not be built or commenced; and should any change be made in the plans of said bridge during the progress of construction, such change shall be subject to approval of the Secretary of War, and shall not be made or commenced until the same is so approved; and Whereas, The original plans were submitted to a board of Engineer Officers APPENDIX D. CONTRACT WITH WAR DEPARTMENT. for examination and report, as provided in section 3 of the act of Congress aforesaid; and, Whereas, The report submitted by said board was not approved by the Secretary of War ; and, Whereas, The Kansas City & Memphis Railway and Bridge Company aforesaid has accepted the .provisions of the act of Congress aforesaid, and in compliance therewith has submitted to the Secretary of War for his ex¬ amination and approval a design and drawing of a proposed bridge across the Mississippi River, the main channel span of which is not less than seven hundred feet in length, and the other spans not less than six hundred feet in length, and the lowest part of the superstructure is seventy-five feet above extreme high-water mark, and has also submitted a map of the location thereof; Now, therefore, I, William C. Endicott, Secretary of War, having examined and considered the plans of said bridge, and the map of the location thereof, submitted by the Kansas City & Memphis Railway and Bridge Company aforesaid, and which are hereto attached, do hereby approve the same, subject, however, to the following conditions, viz.: 1. That the Kansas City & Memphis Railway and Bridge Company shall provide an independent roadway for wagons and animals on each ap¬ proach of said bridge, and, for the entire length of the bridge proper, a road¬ way of sufficient width for wagons to pass each other without inconvenience, to be used by wagons and animals in common with the railroad. 2. That said bridge shall be open for the passage of wagons and animals at all times except when trains are actually crossing. 3. That reasonable signals shall be given when trains are approaching the bridge, and no train shall be permitted to enter the common roadway until the wagons which are on the roadway when the signal is given have passed off of said common roadway. 4. That whenever in the opinion of the Secretary of War the roadway above provided for does not afford ample means for the passage of wagons and vehicles of all kinds, and the transit of animals, the Secretary of War may require the Railway and Bridge Company aforesaid to furnish a Ferry Train, consisting of such a number of large box cars with continuous floor, sides, and top, as he may deem necessary for the transportation of said wagons and vehicles, and the transit of animals across said bridge, and may require said company to receive and land said wagons, vehicles, and animals at such point as he may designate on each side of said river; and may prescribe the intervals at which said Ferry Train shall cross said bridge for the accommodation of said wagons, vehicles, and animals. 5. The right to require changes in said structure, if the public interest demands them, being reserved to the Secretary of War in section 9 of said act. 6. That the Engineer Officer of the United States Army in charge of the district within which the bridge is to be built may supervise its construction so far as may be necessary in order that the plans herein approved shall be complied with and the bridge built accordingly. Witness my hand this twenty-third day of August, 1888. Wm. C. Endicott, Secretary of War. This instrument is also executed by the Kansas City & Memphis Rail¬ way and Bridge Company, by George H. Nettleton, its President, thereunto lawfully authorized, this twenty-third day of August 1888, in testimony of the acceptance by said company of the provisions of the act of Congress aforesaid, aud of the conditions herein imposed. Kansas City & Memphis Railway and Bridge Company. In presence of ^ By Geo. H. Nettleton, F. H. Damon. ) President. 33 APPENDIX E. REPORT OF FEBRUARY 15, 1887. New York, Feb. 15, 1887. George H. Nettleton, Esq., Kansas City <(•■ Memphis Railway and Bridge Co., Kansas City, Mo. Dear Sir : At your request I went to Memphis on Nov. 23, 1886, accom¬ panied by my assistant, Mr. E. Duryea, Jr., and made arrangements for Mr. Duryea to begin work as early as possible in making borings on the location of the proposed bridge across the Mississippi River. I returned on the evening of the following day, leaving Mr. Duryea at Memphis, where he still remains. I again went to Memphis on the 28th of December, reviewed the ground and examined specimens obtained from the borings. The borings were continued until stopped by the flood of the present month. While not as complete as I could wish to have them, they are enough to show in all essential features what the character of the bottom is. The place selected for the crossing of the river is near the foot of Broad¬ way, the axis of the bridge to be at right angles to the current, and the ap¬ proach from the east being through Alabama Street (Virginia Avenue), the angle between the axis of the bridge and the street line being about 42°. In our notes the point where the bridge line intersects the center line of Alabama Street is called Station 100, the station numbering running westward from there. In this report I have assumed that the bridge would be so designed as to give a clear head room of 65 feet above high water, the bottom of tie on the bridge to be 70 feet above high water. The ground on the Memphis side is a level bluff, the height of which corresponds almost exactly with this required elevation : the track can be laid on the surface of the ground almost as it now is. The river at this place is practically 2000 feet wide, varying from 1900 feet at extreme low water, to 2100 feet when bank full. The ground on the west side is a low bottom land, the average elevation of which is about 5 feet below extreme high water. In our levels we have called the low water of the United States Engineer’s gauge zero; high water is 35.15 feet above this gauge, and extreme low water is 0.98 feet below this gauge. The elevation of tie on bridge would be 105. The elevation of your tracks on the West side of the river is 37, so that the West Approach must descend 68 feet. I should propose to make this descent with a 1.25 grade (66 feet per mile), which will require a distance of 5440 feet, all of which would be on a straight line. Of this, I have estimated on building the 3200 feet next to the bridge in the form of a permanent iron viaduct, and the remainder as a timber trestle to be subsequently filled, unless available material can be found for building an embankment at once. Although the West Approach is long, its construction is very simple. All the difficulties of building a bridge at Memphis are concentrated in the bridge itself, 2000 feet long. The channel of the river is as well fixed here as it is ever found on the Mississippi River, and the work proposed by the Mississippi River Commission for the preservation of the harbor of Memphis, much of which is already com¬ pleted, will secure the permanency of the channel where it now is. The long continuance of the channel in one place has probably reduced the width of the river here to that actually required for its discharge, as is always the case when the channel of a silt-bearing river remains fixed for a long period. The main discharge of the river occupies the eastern two thirds of its width, the current in the western one third being decidedly lighter and the depth of water less. The water is deepest and the current strongest about one third of the way over from the east shore. The east bluff is the east boundary of the alluvial delta of the Missis¬ sippi. It is composed of clay and layers of sand and gravel, with a thin stratum of ferruginous sandstone, but practically is entirely without rock. The material below water is generally well adapted to bearing the weight of a foundation, but not wholly safe to resist the erosion of the river without arti¬ ficial protection. The location of the bridge, a few hundred feet below a pro¬ jecting point of the bluff, is one in which the necessary artificial protections can be made very cheaply. The first boring made was on the west shore. This boring found sand to a depth of —52, when a hard blue clay was encountered. This clay changed to a very light-colored clay at a depth of —72, which changed again to a brown clay at a depth of —98, which brown clay changed to a blue clay at —114.5, and this continued to —122, when the boring was abandoned. The lower part of the cream-colored clay was sandier and softer than any of the others. The second boring was made in the river 660 feet east of the first boring, or about at the westerly limit of the strong current. At this boring the upper clay was not found, the light-colored clay being found at —75.6 and the brown clay at —101, the material being evidently identical with that found on the west side. The next boring was made 650 feet farther east, or a little west of the strongest current. In this boring clay was struck at —84, and resembled in character the softer and sandier portion of the cream-colored clay. The boring was discontinued at —104^ being then apparently on the surface of the brown clay, though we were driven out by the flood before this could be positively determined. These clays are in all probability alluvial clays which have been de¬ posited by the river. The two lower clays are evidently continuous for a large distance, and I believe are entirely safe for foundations. The upper clay (found only on the west side) is probably a later pocket much less in extent, but safe for a foundation at the location of the west shore pier. These allu¬ vial clays probably meet the older formation of the east bluff about 200 feet from the east shore, but I have as yet no facts to verify this probability. It is possible that the lower clays are identical with strata which exist under the bluff. I should propose to found the piers of a bridge at this place on caissons which should be sunk to the clay and a few feet into it, the caissons to be of such size that the fatigue pressure on the base should not exceed 34 tons per square foot. I should also wish to place on the bottom of the river around each pier a woven mat (such as is used by the Mississippi River Commission for shore protection) about 300 feet square; this woven mat to be sunk upon the bottom of the river and to form the basis of a moderate riprap protection, the object being to prevent scour around the pier, and so give to the founda¬ tions the stability due to the lateral support of 40 or 50 feet of sand in addi¬ tion to that due to the bearing on the base. The difficulties of building a bridge here would lie iu the eastern two thirds of the river. A pier could be built on the western edge of ttis two thirds without serious difficulty. If piers are to be built iu the eastern two thirds there is not much choice of location. As a single pier in the middle of this two thirds would make two spans of about 660 feet, which is not more than an economical length of span, the choice would seem to lie between crossing this portion of the river with two spans or with one. In the former case the bridge would consist of three spans of about 660 feet each, spanning the whole 2000 feet of the river. In the latter case the bridge would consist of one main span of 1300 feet (to be built on the cantilever principle) spanning the eastern two thirds, with anchorage arms extending over the east shore and the western part of the river. These two plans have been considered separately and estimates made. 34 APPENDIX E.-CONTINUED. THKEE SPAS BRIDGE. The four piers of the Three Span Bridge would be numbered from east to west. Pier I would be located on the bench at the foot of the bluff where the elevation of the ground is about 8 and at station 104; Pier II would be at station 110 + 60, in the deepest water of the river ; Pier III would be at station 117 + 25, or at the west edge of the strong current; Pier IV would be at station 123 + 85, close to the west bank and about at the low water shore line. I have estimated on sinking the foundation of Pier IV to —55, or about three feet into the blue clay ; on sinking the foundation of Pier III to —79, or about three feet into the light-colored clay ; and on sinking the foundation of Pier II to —105, or through the light clay to the brown clay. The borings at the base of the bluff are not yet complete, but I have estimated on sinking this foundation to the same depth as that of Pier IV. The foundation of Pier IV offers no special difficulties, it being in very shallow water and the depth being materially less than foundations I have lately put in on the Missouri River. The same may be said of the foundation of Pier I. The depth to which the foundation of Pier III must be sunk is no greater than that of our deep foundations at Omaha, but the foundation and the pier would be very large. At Pier II tne difficulties are undoubtedly great, especially if it is found necessary to go as deep as I have estimated, namely, to —105, which is deeper than any foundation I know of which has been car¬ ried to any hard material, though by carefully choosing the time of year it might not be necessary to work in any deeper water than was done at the east abutment of the St. Louis Bridge. For the present I have thought it best to estimate on putting in all four foundations by the pneumatic process, as I feel certain that this can be done. It is possible, however, that after we have put in the foundations of Piers III and IV and thereby learned more than we now know of the character of the clays, a better and cheaper method of handling Pier II may be devised. The great length of span which it is proposed to use will require large masonry piers, and these piers will require foundations of correspondingly large size, especially as they are to rest on clay and not rock. I have esti¬ mated on making Piers II and III 14 feet thick and Piers I and IV 12 feet thick under the coping; the piers to be of limestone and of the form which experience has shown presents the least obstruction to the current and catches the least amount of driftwood, the caissons for Piers I and IV to be of rectangular form 36 feet by 82 feet; the caissons for Piers II and III to be octagonal, the area of base being 3936 feet in Pier II and 3357 feet in Pier III. In pneu¬ matic foundations of ordinary size it is usually desirable to get all the weight possible to facilitate sinking. In foundations of the size we are now consider¬ ing the reverse will be the case, and it will be desirable to reduce the weight as much as possible. I should propose to build the caisson entirely of oak, to surmount this caisson with a cribwork structure which should terminate at _31 ) on which the masonry should rest. The cribwork would be built of timber and concrete, with three large wells, which wells would extend up into the masonry; these wells to be filled with concrete after the foundation is completed. In this way the weight on the roof of the caisson and the weight to be handled while sinking would be reduced to very comfortable limits. Both Piers II and III should have protection mats around them, which mats should be subsequently riprapped. The only protection required at Piers I and IV would be the protection which must at any rate be given to the shores. In my estimates I have provided for all these protections in one item and at a liberal figure. The superstructure of this bridge would consist of three spans of 656 feet each (200 metres) between end pins, the trusses to be 77 feet deep and 33 feet between centers, and to be built entirely of steel. "While these dimensions are greater than those of any trusses yet built, they are entirely within practicable limits and not so great an undertaking now as 400 feet spans were twenty years ago. I have estimated on simple trusses with straight chords, though it is probable it would be expedient to use a curved upper chord. The details of one of these spans have been studied and a careful estimate made of the weights, showing that the weight of such a span will not exceed 3 600000 pounds, or a little more than 5000 pounds per foot. To connect the east end of the bridge with the top of the bluff will require a short iron viaduct 240 feet long, the details of which will be similar to that of the longer viaduct on the west side. The estimated cost of this bridge complete will be as follows: Three 656 ft. Spans, 10 800 000 lbs. at 6 cts. $648 000 15 000 $1 546 800 East Approach. $12 000 West Approach. $120 000 ~ 400 000 lb». Imu i t 3 000 c. j. Masonic at ¥ f T V’ Snrt 3 -00 ft. 170 000 207 000 $1 753 800 Tin ac $1 929 180 50 000 $1 979 180 This is the entire estimated cost of the bridge ready for rails from the edge of the bluff at Memphis to the foot of the grade on the west side of the river. It includes nothing for real estate damages, and I do not think these ought to amount to anything. It is perhaps entitled to a credit for tracks, as the amount of track which will be required is very much less than that now used in the connections with the transfer landings. The prices used for caissons and cribwork are those for which experience has shown me this work can be done on the Missouri River. I think there should be a large reduction in these prices at Memphis. The same may be said of the cost of the masonry, but I have not yet examined any stone quarries. The price for the superstructure (six cents per pound erected) is at least 20 per cent higher than this work could have been contracted for a year ago. I should hope that the item of contingencies could be saved, and the actual cash cost of the bridge could be kept within $1 800 000. If your company should decide to build on this plan the matter of-time is an important one. The foundations for Piers III and IV should be put in dur¬ ing the low water season of the present year. These piers should be finished during the Spring of 1888. The foundation for Pier II should be put in in the Fall, during the low water season of 1888. Pier I can be put in at almost any time. The masonry of Piers I and II should be finished in the Spri ng of 1889. The west long span should be raised in the Fall of 1888 and the other two spans in the Fall of 1889. The approaches should be built in the Spring of 1889. The bridge could be opened for traffic before the end of 1889. It might be possible to save one season in the construction of this bridge, but in view of the time required to make preparations for a work of this mag APPENDIX E. —Continued. 35 nitude I do not think it would he wise to attempt to do so. It must be remem¬ bered that the season which can be depended on for working in the river at Memphis is only five months long. CANTILEVER BRIDGE. The main span of the Cantilever Bridge would occupy the portion of the river spanned by the two easterly spans of the Three Span Bridge, the length of this span being 1300 feet. This is one half greater than the span of any railroad bridge now in existence, but 300 feet less than the East River Suspen¬ sion Bridge and 400 feet less than each of the two main spans of the Forth Bridge now building in Scotland. I have estimated on making the cantilevers 150 feet deep at the ends and building them with curved upper and lower chords, the masonry to finish ten feet above high water. This arrangement is not strictly in accordance with the requirements of the charter hitherto granted ; it gives the required height (65 feet) for a distance of about 400 feet at the center, but this height is reduced at either side. It would, however, accommodate the navigation interests of the river perfectly, as there is abundant room iri the center for the upper works of large boats and abundant width for tows which are never high. There can be little doubt that if this design should be decided on there would be no difficulty in getting the authority to build it. To secure lateral stability I have proposed to put the cantilever trusses 75 feet apart at the base and to build them in inclined planes, these planes to be put 15 feet apart at the highest point. To avoid concentrating too much weight on one point I should put the support of the anchorage span 75 feet from the support of the main span. The result of this arrangement would be that the cantilever structure would be supported on each side of the main span by a group of four piers, these piers to occupy the corners of a 75 feet square. This arrangement is similar to that adopted for the Forth Bridge in Scotland. In the structure I have estimated on, the center of the easterly group of piers is placed at station 104 +12.5, and the center of the westerly group of piers at station 117 -f- 87.5, the length of the span, measured from centers of piers next to the channel being 1300 feet, the distance between centers of towers 1375 feet and the distance between centers of piers including towers 1450 feet. The design provides for shore or anchorage arms 375 feet long, which places the east anchorage 240 feet back of the edge of the bluff and places the west anchorage at station 122, or about 150 feet from the low water shore line. It would probably be economical to shorten the east shore arm and to lengthen the west shore arm. With the arrangement as it is now designed, a 225 foot span will be required to reach from the west anchorage to the end. of the iron viaduct. The substructure of this Cantilever Bridge will consist of (1) the east anchorage pier, (2) the group of piers under the east tower, (3) the group of piers under the west tower, (4) the west anchorage piers and (5) a small pier under the west end of the approach span. The east anchorage pier will be of the simplest kind, being merely a piece of masonry built in the bluff and of sufficient size to give the weight required for the anchorage. I have estimated on 1200 yards of masonry, but of less expensive character than that of the piers in the river. The group of piers under the east tower would consist of four piers, each 16 feet in diameter under the coping, resting on caissons 36 feet square and founded at the same depth (— 55) as Pier I of the Three Span Bridge. The group of piers under the west tower would be similar to those under the east tower, except that the caissons would be 40 feet square and the foun¬ dations sunk to — 79. The west anchorage pier would be founded on a caisson 35 feet by 75 feet at a depth of — 55, and though of considerable dimensions would offer no special difficulties in construction. A small pier would be required back of the shore line to support the heavy bent at the end of the trestle, which would sustain the shore end of the 225 feet span. The same shore protection would be required for the east tower as for Pier I of the Three Span Bridge, the same protection around the west tower as around Pier III and the same amount of protection on the west shore as with the other design, the total cost of protection being perhaps two thirds of that required in the Three Span Bridge. A general plan and strain sheet have been made for this structure, and an approximate estimate of weights. This design, however, has not been worked out with the same degree of detail as the design for the Three Span Bridge, and the estimates, though probably ample, are not as accurate. The estimated cost of this bridge complete would be as follows: East Anchorage Pier. $20 000 Kail 1 n»nr : 750 c. y Masonry at $20. $15 000 10 000 c ft. Cribwnrk "40 018 . 26 000 Caisson "SO cts. 20 800 Sinking. 7 500 $49 700 Group of 4 Piers. West Tower: 910 <•„ y. Masonry at $20 18 200 32 000 c. ft. Cribwork •' 40 ris . 12 800 32 000 ““ Caisson "60 cts. 25 600 Sinking. 10 000 $06 KOO Group of 4 Piers. 266 400 Wes: Anchorage Pier 3 300 c. y. Masonry at $20. 66 000 27 (100 c. ft Cribwork " 40 cts. 10 800 52 000 " " Caisson "60 cts.. 41 600 Sinking. 12 000 130 400 West Approach Pier. Outfit for Foundation Work... Protection Work. Total Substructure . Cantilever Superstructure.14 000 000 lbs. One 225 ft. Spun. 400 000 “ 14 400 000 lbs. at 6 cts. Floor and Painting. Total Superstructure. Total Bridge Proper. West Approach as for Three Span Bridge. Total Bridge and Approaches. Add 10 per cent for Contingencies. This is the entire estimated cost of the bridge ready for the rails from the bluff at Memphis to the foot of the grade on the west side of the river. Com¬ paring it with the estimate of the Three Span Bridge, there is but a slight difference in the cost. The main cost of this bridge is the great cantilever superstructure, the accurate weight of which can only be determined after working out a careful design in detail. While I fully believe that the estimate now made is ample, I think the chances of saving the 10 per cent contingency allowance are much less in this last plan than in the former, and that it is probable that the Cantilever bridge would cost $200 000 more than the Three Span Bridge. In the matter of time the cantilever structure could probably be built a little quicker than the Three Span Bridge. The foundations for the east tower and anchorage could easily be put in this year and the east half of the structure erected during the Spring of 1888. The foundations for the west tower and anchorage could be put in in the low water season of 1888, the west half of the superstructure erected immediately thereafter and the bridge opened for traffic in the early Summer of 1889. CONCLUSION. Comparing the two structures when once completed, I think the Three Span Bridge would be the better one for the railroads. It would be a per¬ fectly simple structure, the expense for maintaining which would be a mini¬ mum. It would involve no complicated details, and as it consists simply of straight trusses resting on masonry piers, would be subject to a minimum degree of disturbance should any slight settlement occur in the foundations. In brief, it would fulfill the universal requirement that the simplest structure is the best. 36 APPENDIX E— CONTINUED. The Cantilever Bridge, though not conforming to the present requirements of charters, would be the better for the interests of navigation. Both bridges, however, are good enough. The spans of the Three Span Bridge would be nearly 640 feet clear, which is greater than the entire width of many important navigable rivers. The chief difficulty in building the Three Span Bridge is in the foundation of Pier II. This must be handled at the proper season of the year and handled by men who thoroughly understand their work: that it can be put in satis¬ factorily admits of no doubt. The nest difficulty is the erection of the three great spans. There are several solutions of this. The first is to erect in the usual way on falsework, simply having more powerful machinery than is com¬ monly used. The difficulty of maintaining falsework here during the low water season of the fall months is no greater than at some other points where great bridges have been erected. Another method of erection would be to erect the trusses on floating falsework at a low elevation and then lift them up by hydraulic power into position. I have looked into this matter enough to satisfy myself that it can be done without serious difficulty. Under any arrangement the sinking of the foundations of Piers II and III and the erection of the three long spans must be done during the low water season. The only real difficulty in the building of the Cantilever Bridge is the manufacture and erection of the superstructure, and the difficulties of this are simply questions of magnitude ; the material will have to be handled in very large pieces, requiring powerful machinery and skillful men. As this work will be self sustaining as it goes on, it can be done at any season of the year. I have directed Mr. Duryea to make careful observation of the high water and should recommend that he continue at Memphis for the present. When I have more (nll reporta of the borings at the site of Ker I and other data con¬ cerning the action of floods, I shall hare a farther communication to mate to J °” Mr. Duryea in a letter dated Feb. lltli advises me that the west shore on the bridge lino has been cntting rapidly, this being apparently due to the action of waves and surface water rather than a deepening of the bottom. I think it might be expedient to build a short and inexpensive piece of dike work a little above the bridge line very soon, this being designed to prevent further cutting and to form a sand bar at the site of Pier IV. I hope to visit Memphis again within the nest three weeks and shall try to see you very soon thereafter. Very respectfully. Geo. S. Horison. New Yoke, Aug. 2, 1888. Geo. H. Nettleton, Esq., President Kansas City & Memphis Railway & Bridge Co. Dear Sir : On February 15th, 1887,1 made to you a report on the pro¬ posed bridge to be built by your Company across the Mississippi River at Memphis, Tenn. In this report it was assumed that a bridge might be built according to the requirements of the charter then in existence, which allowed the construction of spans of a less length than appeared economical and provided for a head room of 65 feet in the clear above high water. The Act of Congress approved April 24th, 1888, repeals the charter above referred to and authorizes your Company to build a bridge at Memphis on somewhat different conditions, there being three important changes in the requirements. First. The minimum length of the channel span is fixed at 700 feet, sub¬ ject to a report to be made by three officers from the Engineer Bureau, such report to be approved by the Secretary of War. Second. The height in the clear above high water is fixed at 75 feet instead of 65 feet; and Third. The bridge must be constructed to provide for the passage of wagons and vehicles of all kinds and the transit of animals. The three engineer officers detailed for this purpose failed to agree, the senior officer recommending a clear span of 700 feet and the two junior officers of 1000 feet. All three agreed that the channel span should be next to the Tennessee shore, that the height should be 75 feet above high water and that the location described in my report of Feb. 15th, 1887, was a satis¬ factory location. The Secretary of War has added a long indorsement to the report of these engineers, the substance of which is covered by the last para¬ graph but two, which is as follows : “ Plans may be submitted by the Railway and Bridge Company, giving a main channel span on the Memphis side of the river 730 feet long in the clear at low water, and two other spans 600 feet long in the clear at low water; the end piers to be placed at low water on either shore so that the three spans will cover the entire width of the river at low water. All the neces¬ sary aids to navigation in passing under the bridge cannot now be deter¬ mined ; but the Railway and Bridge Company may consider the question of a guiding pier with proper guards to the bridge pier on the Memphis side for protection to navigation, or that of placing the pier on the Memphis side in 9 feet of water at the highest stage, making the long span 770 feet.” For the present, therefore, we will assume that the conditions thus pre¬ scribed by the Secretary of War are those under which the bridge will be built. 37 APPENDIX E. REPORT OF AUGUST 2, 1888. At first it appeared to me that the wiser method would be to build a 730 feet span and the “ proper guards ” on the Memphis side of the river. This would require a span of 750 feet between centers of piers on the east side of the river and two spans of 620 feet between centers further west. The ar¬ rangement of superstructure which then seemed most advisable was a fixed span between the two central piers, with cantilever arms projecting eastward from Pier II and westward from Pier III, the space between the west end of the west cantilever arm and Pier IV (the west pier) to be occupied by a span of about 400 feet. A similar span would extend eastward from the east end of the cantilever arm east of Pier II; but the east end of this span, instead of resting on Pier I, would be carried on the west end of a cantilever arm project¬ ing from Pier I, this cantilever arm being balanced by an arm east of Pier I held down by an anchorage on the shore. After laying out the plan, I found that this would involve either the con¬ struction of an unnecessarily long shore arm for the East cantilever, or the placing of the anchorage pier on the slope of the bluff, where its construction would be expensive and its security imperfect. It appeared, therefore, that the second alternative provided by the Secretary of War, namely, the 770 feet span, would not only relieve your Company of the necessity of building the guiding pier and guards, but would make the construction of both Pier I and the anchorage pier much less expensive than they would be if the 730 feet span were used. I have, therefore, prepared a design of a bridge of this character, the east anchorage pier being located at' the top of the bluff and a safe distance back from its face. The east pier (Pier I) is located so as to stand in nine feet of water at the maximum stage ; that is, at station 103+30 (stations being the same as those used in my report of February, 1887). Pier II would be 790 feet west of Pier I, or at station 111+20, Pier III 620 feet farther west or at station 117+40, and Pier IV 620 feet farther on, at station 123+60, which is practi¬ cally the west edge of the river. This arrangement places Pier I 70 feet farther east than Pier I of the three span bridge covered in report of February, 1887, which will somewhat reduce the cost of the pier. Pier II will be 60 feet far¬ ther west than Pier II of the former plan, which gives very slight advantage in construction. Piers III and IV are virtually unchanged. Piers I, II and III will carry the equivalent of over 700 feet of superstruct¬ ure each ; but the weight of this superstructure would be concentrated on the axes of the piers, so that the piers may be made of minimum thickness. Pier IV will simply carry one end of a 450 feet span, or 225 feet of superstructure, and may be made thinner than the other piers. I have therefore estimated on making Piers I, II and III 12 feet thick, 36 feet between shoulders and 48 feet long over all under the coping, and building them with a half inch batter throughout; Pier IV to be 10 feet thick, 38 feet between shoulders, 48 feet long over all and built with the same batter. It has seemed to me best to start the masonry of Piers II and III below the ordinary bed of the river, the model form of pier having a minimum scouring effect. The result of this change of plan is to increase somewhat the amount of masonry in Piers II and III and to reduce the amount of masonry in Piers I and IV. After our experience at Cairo it has seemed best to build caissons with vertical sides, surmounted by cribwork of the same dimensions and similar construction. The foundations of Piers I and IV present no special difficulties. I have estimated on making the caisson for Pier I 30 feet by 70 feet and 60 feet high, including cribwork; this caisson to be sunk to elevation — 45 (the zero being the U. S. Engineer’s Gauge), stopping in a substantial clay. The caisson for Pier IV would be 26 feet by 70 feet and 70 feet high, including cribwork, and would be sunk to an elevation of — 55. Piers II and III require larger caissons and much deeper sinking. The caisson for Pier II would be 45 feet by 90 feet and 55 feet high, including cribwork, and would be sunk to an elevation of —100, and that of Pier III, 40 feet by 90 feet, 50 feet high, including cribwork, and sunk to an elevation of — 83. In the estimate given hereafter the same prices have been used for this work as in my report of February, 1887. Pier I would contain 2650 yards of masonry; Pier II, 5400 yards; Pier III, 4800 yards, and Pier IV, 2100 yards, besides which there would be about 750 yards in the Anchorage Pier, making the total amount of masonry 15 600 yards, which has been carried into the estimates at $20 per yard, though I think we could undoubtedly save one dollar and probably two dollars on this price. It will be observed that the changes in the plans have somewhat increased the cost of Piers II and III, while diminishing that of Piers I and IV. Approximate estimates have been made of the weight of the superstruct¬ ure. In these estimates no provision is made for the weight of highway traffic crossing the bridge, as it is assumed that the bridge will be closed to highway traffic while trains are crossing, but the weight of the floor will be 300 pounds more per lineal foot than that of a plain railroad floor. The approxi¬ mate estimates show that the weight of the entire structure from the anchorage to Pier IV will not exceed 11 000 000 pounds. This is but little more than the weight of the three independent spans of 656 feet each ; but being of a more complicated character, the cost of the shopwork would be perhaps a little higher. On the other hand, erection becomes more simple, as no falsework will be required in the channel span. At present prices the cost erected could be safely estimated at 5^ cents per pound, but I have carried it out at the same price as before ; namely, 6 cents. The matter of the arrangement of the highway which you are now required 38 APPENDIX F.— Continued. to provide can be settled most economically by putting it on the same floor with the railroad ; making this floor wide enough for two teams to pass, pro¬ viding a substantial railing on each side and excluding carriages, teams and animals when trains are crossing. This arrangement is recommended only on the score of economy, but as the highway travel will be exceedingly light it is not thought that it will give you any serious trouble. I am not at all clear but what the requirements would be met by running a ferry train, but have not thought best to estimate on this. The total estimate shows that the cost of a timber floor adapted to highway traffic, with railings, etc., will be $10 per foot, or just double the cost of a roadway floor, besides which there will be the additional 300 pounds per foot added to the dead weight of the bridge. In the matter of approaches, the East Approach, which was formerly very simple, being on the surface of the ground, is rendered much more troublesome and expensive by raising the grade ten feet. The difficulties, however, will principally relate to street crossings and the purchase of the property, the grade being generally about eight feet above the surface of the ground. As I am unable to estimate the value of the real estate required for this approach, the entire cost has been placed, as you suggested, at $100 000. The West Approach has, as before, been supposed to be built on a grade of 1| per cent (66 feet per mile). The elevation of the top of the stringer at Pier IV is 114, or 80 feet above extreme high water at the bridge site. I have estimated on using an iron viaduct 4 800 feet long, the grade at the west end of it being 54, or 17 feet higher than the grade of your level track across the bottom laud. West of this trestle the approach can be made in the form of an earth embankment and would connect with the present line of the Kansas City, Ft. Scott & Memphis Railroad about two miles from the end of the viaduct. At present I should advise building this viaduct in spans of 30 feet, the con¬ struction being of the simplest possible kind. For foundations I have esti¬ mated on using small masonry piers four feet square at the smallest place, the top of the masonry to be at the elevation of 39, resting on blocks of concrete nine feet square, the bottom of the concrete being at elevation 24 and being farther supported by nine piles under each pier. The estimated cost of each of these little piers, including iron anchor rods passing from concrete to top, is $285. When the piers are finished I should propose to fill around them to a uniform elevation of 37, or two feet above high water, so as to protect the foun¬ dations, piles, etc., from the action of frost and water. This would amount to building an embankment 40 feet wide and averaging perhaps eight feet high under the whole of the trestle. The roadway approach on the east side would amount to little. On the west side, however, it will be necessary to rise from the level of the bottom land. It seems wise to do this in the cheapest possible way. This would be on a timber trestle, which, if built with a grade of six per cent., need not be more than 1200 feet long, and its cost would not exceed $10 000. On this basis the following estimate has been prepared of the cost of the bridge as now proposed, this estimate being as nearly as possible in the same form as the estimate accompanying the report of February, 1887: l»ler L 2 850 c. y. Masonry al *20. 42 000 c. ft. Caisson " 80 els. 84 000 '• Cribwork •'40 cis. Slaking. Pier II *.53 003 88 600 15 030 *135 200 64 800 m non Pier HI. 4 800 c. y. Masonry al *20.. 72 000 c. 'ft. Oaissou •• 80 els. 108 OllO ” Cribwork ■ 40 els . Sinking. *96 000 57 600 43 200 25 000 Pier IV. *42 000 24 960 31 200 10 000 Outfit for Foundation Work. Protection Work, including Mats and Riprap of Piers 11 and III, and Shore Protection at Piers I and IV.. .. 50 000 100 000 Sloping and Finishing. 2 000 *902 660 *660 000 6 000 *1 590 660 East Approach. West Approach : 3 400 000 .bs. of iron nt 5 cis . 320 Piers - |265. 4 800 ft. floor • 5.. Painting. . 75 030 c. y. Embankment nt l-asc . Earthwork, 2 miles of road. *170 000 91 200 24 000 9 600 15 000 $100 000 324 800 Total Approaches. 424 800 9 600 20 000 *2 045 060 50 000 *2 299 566 This estimate is $320 186 more than the estimate without providing for contingencies, $291 260 more. of February, 1887, or, Under the present plan the bridge proper reaches to the east anchorage, and its length includes the east approach viaduct of the former plan, so that the cost of the bridge proper as now estimated is $31 860 more than the former estimate. The former estimate was from the edge of the bluff at Memphis to the foot of the grade on the west side of the river. The present estimate is from a connection with the Kansas City, Fort Scott & Memphis Railroad track in Fifth Street to a Connection with the same railroad on the west side of the river, the present estimate including the following items which were not in the former estimate : East Approach. West Approach : Two miles of Earthwork Four miles of Track. Total. Add 10 % Contingencies. $100 000 15 000 20 000 $135 000 13 500 Total. $148 500 So that the cost of the bridge as now designed, including all allowances, is $171 686 more than the former estimate. This practically represents the addi¬ tional cost of the requirements which Congress and the Secretary of War now insist upon. I have prepared a revised plan of the bridge which I expect to submit personally to the Secretary of War on Friday the 3d inst. A copy of this plan accompanies this report. Of course you will not be ready to begin work until this plan has been formally approved, and it will then be too late to do much work in the river this season. If, however, yo.u have determined on building the bridge, I would ask you to give us the authority to put in the foundation of Pier IV this year, and to purchase the steamer Behtkam, now furnished with a complete pneumatic outfit, which has been used at Rulo and Nebraska City Bridges. The total amount which would be expended for this foundation and the steamer would be less than $100 000. My idea would be to sink this foundation to the final depth and then sink a test pit within the caisson (as was done at Rulo) and thus determine the character of the lower clays on which the river piers are to be founded. The result of this examina¬ tion might lead to a very material saving in the cost of the river foundations, as this proved to be the case at Rulo. If this authority is given, I should propose to do no other work at Memphis until 1889, but to prepare the plans of the two river piers with the utmost possible care, and to put in these two foundations during the low water season in the latter part of 1889. The foundation of Pier I could then be put in at any time and the masonry completed by the summer of 1890. The central span (from Pier II to Pier III) should be erected during the low water season of 1890, and the remainder of the work would be independent of stages of water. I should hope to open the bridge in the early part of 1891. As to the conduct of the work, my present judgment is that it would not be wise to put in any of the foundations by contract, as the contingencies (that is, in the matter of cost) are so great that any contractor would feel obliged to make his estimates on a basis which would leave him very large profits should everything work well. After the completion of the foundation for Pier IV, it may appear wise to do the work by contract, but my impression is otherwise. All other parts of the work, including both masonry and superstructure. I should advise letting by contract. Very respectfully yours, Geo. S. Mobison. 39 The Kansas City & Memphis Railway & Bridge Co. is now constructing a bridge across the Mississippi River at Memphis, Tenn. The construction of this bridge was authorized by an Act of Congress approved April 24,1888, and the bridge is being built in accordance with plans which were approved by the Secretary of War in the same year. The bridge crosses the Mississippi River with three spans, the span next to the Tennessee shore being 770 feet long in the clear and the other two spans 600 feet long. The actual length of the spans betweeu centers of piers is 790 feet and 5 inches and 621 feet. These spans .are without precedent for rail¬ road bridges, except in the single case of the Forth Bridge in Scotland and the Suspension Bridge across the Niagara River, both bridges constructed under circumstances so unlike those of the Memphis Bridge that they canuot be con¬ sidered as precedents. The long span of 770 feet in the clear is about 100 feet longer than the National Capitol at Washington. The charter requires this bridge to be 75 feet above high water, which is 22 feet higher than has ever been required for any bridge previously built across any of the western rivers, the greatest height being the requirement for the Ohio River, which is 53 feet above high water. The four piers of the bridge are now in process of construction. The shore pier on the Tennessee side is begun. The caisson for the first channel pier (the deepest foundation) lias been sunk more than 84 feet below low water to the hard clay which underlies the alluvial deposit and is now within 12 feet of its final depth. The caisson for the second channel pier is completed and is now being sunk, being already 50 feet below low water. The foundation of the fourth pier near the Arkansas shore is finished and the masonry has been built above high water. No objection is raised to the length of span required. The plans of the superstructure are nearly completed, and the work has been contracted for on the basis of the length of spans named above. In spite of the extraordinary length of these spans and the consequent additional cost, no attempt will be made to have the lengths reduced. The condition of the foundation work is conclusive evidence of this. The height of 75 feet above high water seems, however, to be an unneces¬ sary requirement, and it is earnestly desired to have this height reduced from 75 to 65 feet, which last height it is believed will accommodate the river traffic- as well as the greater height now required. The Kansas City & Memphis Railway & Bridge Co. therefore desires that the following amendatory act should be passed: APPENDIX Gr. ARGUMENT FOB AMENDMENT OF CHARTER. AMENDATORY ACT. An Act amendatory of an act to authorize the construction of a bridge across the Mississippi River .at Memphis, Tenn., approved April twenty-fourth, eighteen hundred and eighty-eight. Be it enacted by the Senate and House op Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, that Section 3 of the Act entitled “An Act to Authorize the Construction of a Bridge Across the Missis¬ sippi River at Memphis, Tenn.,” approved April twenty-fourth, eighteen hun¬ dred and eighty-eight, be, and the same is hereby amended by striking out the words “ seventy-five,” and substituting the words “ sixty-five,” so as to make said section read as follows: “Sec. 3. That the said bridge shall be made with unbroken and con¬ tinuous spans. Before approving the plans for said bridge the Secretary of War shall order three engineer officers from the Engineer Bureau to be detailed to the duty of examining by actual inspection the locality where said bridge is to be built, and to report what shall be the length of the main channel span and of the other spans: Provided, That the main channel span shall in no event be less than seven hundred feet in length, or the other spans less than six hundred feet each in length; and, if the report of said officers shall be approved by the Secretary of War, the spans of said bridge shall be of the length so required. The lowest part of the superstructure of said bridge shall be at least sixty-five feet above extreme high water mark, as understood at the point of location, and the bridge shall be at right angles to and its piers parallel with the current of the river. No bridge shall be erected or main¬ tained under the authority of this act which shall at any time substantially or materially obstruct the free navigation of said river; and if any bridge erected under such authority shall, in the opinion of the Secretary of War, obstruct such navigation, he is hereby authorized to cause such change or alteration of said bridge to be made as will effectually obviate such obstruction; and all such alterations shall be made and all such obstructions be removed at the expense of the owner or owners of said bridge; and in case of any litigation arising from any obstruction or alleged obstruction to the free navigation of said river caused or alleged to be caused by said bridge, the case may be brought in the circuit court of the United States within whose jurisdiction any portion of said obstruction or bridge may be located: Provided f urther. That nothing in this act shall be so construed as to repeal or modify any of the provisions of law now existing in reference to the protection of the navigation of rivers, or to exempt this bridge from the operation of the same.” Sec. 2. The right to amend or repeal this act is hereby expressly reserved. OBJECTIONS TO 75 FEET HEAD ROOM. Besides the increased cost involved, there are two very serious objections to the requirement of 75 feet clear head room. The first of these lies in the fact that it involves the lifting of the entire traffic which will cross the bridge ten feet higher than a head room of 65 feet would require, and that this represents so much increased expenditure for power and fuel, with a corresponding increase in cost, which must ultimately be borne by the shipper and producer. The second objection, which is a more serious one, lies in the fact that this height will bring the eastern approach to the bridge about ten feet above the level of the bluff on which the city of Memphis is built, which will interfere with the existing arrangement of streets, and also require a grade on the approach up which it will be necessary to work engines in a manner which is objectionable and disagreeable within a city, and is a source of danger to frame buildings, of which there are many in this part of Memphis. If the height of the bridge could be fixed at 65 feet instead of 75 feet, all these difficulties would be entirely avoided. FIRST MEMPHIS BRIDGE CHARTER. The first charter for a bridge across the Mississippi River at Memphis was granted by an act to authorize the construction of a bridge across the Missis¬ sippi River at Memphis, Tennessee, approved February 26th, 1885. This charter fixed the length of the channel spans at not less than five hundred and fifty feet and required the height of the lowest part of the superstructure to be at least sixty-five feet above extreme high water mark. Section 3 of this act reads as follows: « Sec. 3. That said bridge shall be made with unbroken and continuous spans; two spans thereof shall not be less than five hundred and fifty feet in length in the clear, and no span shall be less than three hundred feet in the clear. The lowest part of the superstructure of said bridge shall be at least sixty-five feet above extreme high water mark, as understood at the point of location, and the bridge shall be at right angles to and its piers parallel with the current of the river. No bridge shall be erected or maintained under the 40 authority of this act which shall at any time substantially or materially obstruct the free navigation of said river; and if any bridge erected under such authority shall, in the opinion of the Secretary of War, obstruct such naviga¬ tion, he is hereby authorized to cause such change or alteration of said bridge to be made as will effectually obviate such obstructions, aud all such alterations shall be made and all such obstructions be removed at the expense of the owner or owners of said bridge. And in case of any litigation arising from any obstruction or alleged obstruction to the free navigation of said river, caused or alleged to be caused by said bridge, the case may be brought in the circuit court of the United States in which any portion of said obstruction or bridge may be located: Provided further, That nothing in this act shall be so con¬ strued as to repeal or modify any of the provisions of law now existing in refer¬ ence to the protection of the navigation of rivers, or to exempt this bridge from the operations of the same.” Had the Kansas City & Memphis Railway & Bridge Co. built its bridge under this charter, the longest span which it would be required to build would have been fifty feet shorter than the shortest span in the bridge it is now building, and the head room of the bridge would have been ten feet less than the height now required. REPORT OF BOARD OF ENGINEERS UPON GENERAL BRIDGE LAW. A bill was introduced in the Fiftieth Congress known as “Senate Bill 275,” to authorize the construction of bridges across the Missouri between its mouth and the mouth of the Dakota or James River, and across the Mississippi River between St. Paul, Minn., and Natchez, Miss., and across the Illinois River between its mouth and La Salle, Ill. This bill was referred to a Board of Engineers who made their report on February 23d, 1888. This report is printed, being Senate Executive Document No. 120, 50th Congress, 1st Session. It is also printed in full in the Report of the Chief of Engineers, U. S. A., for 1888. In this report (page 9) they say : “The Board feel well assured that, by the use of well known appliances, the upper portions of steamboat chimneys can be lowered to the level of the pilot houses, and as the clear head room they have recommended will pass the pilot houses of the largest boats on the river, they consider that the slight delay which may accompany this operation of lowering the chimneys will be far less onerous to navigation than the great danger and difficulty which must of necessity attend an attempt to pass through a narrow draw opening at high stages of water.” In other words, the Board recognized the fact that smoke stacks can be so easily lowered that it is unwise to insist on bridges being built so as to give the height necessary for boats to pass without lowering their smoke stacks. In the same report three lists of boats are given (pages 36, 40 aud 41) in which the heights of pilot houses and of smoke stacks are noted. APPENDIX G.—Continued. The first is a list of Ohio River coal tow boats. In this list the greatest height of pilot house is 55 feet, the greatest height of chimney 88 feet. These boats pass through bridges 53 feet above high water, aud though complaints have been made of the length of spans, no complaints are made of the height above water. The second list is a list of the St. Louis and New Orleans Anchor Line boats, the largest passenger packets now running on the Mississippi River. The highest pilot house is 65 feet and the highest smoke stack 92 feet. As a matter of fact the height of the pilot house would be reduced to 60 feet by the removal of unnecessary ornamentation, and the smoke stacks are only four feet higher than the smoke stacks of boats on the Ohio River which pass under 53 feet bridges. The third list is a list of the tow boats of the St. Louis & Mississippi Valley Transportation Co., the highest pilot house being 52 feet and the highest smoke stack 75 feet. These boats are among the most powerful boats which ever ran on the Mississippi River. The Board of Engineers returned the proposed Grneral Bridge Law with certain amendments, Section 18 of the bill as recommended by this Board reading as follows : “ Sec. 18. That all bridges authorized by this act over the Mississippi River between the mouth of the Ohio River and Natchez, Mississippi, shall be high bridges with unbroken and continuous spans, having at least one channel span of not less than six hundred and fifty feet clear channel way, all other spans over the water-way to have a clear channel way of not less than five hundred feet; and all said spans shall have a clear head room of not less than seventy feet above high water mark.” It appears to have been the conclusion of this Board that a height of five feet more than the height of the highest pilot house of which they had any record was ample for any portion of the Mississippi River. The Report of this Board of Engineers was based on a height of pilot house measured to the top of ornamentation instead of to the top withorrt ornament, which is the correct measurement. This discrepancy probably occurred from the fact that the Board of Engineers, having a limited time,at their command, took the heights as given by the steamboat owners instead of having them specially measured, and the character of the upper five or six feet was thus overlooked. OBSERVATION OF HEIGHTS OF STEAMBOATS. With the view of obtaining the most recent information, a special agent was sent down the Mississippi River from St. Louis to New Orleans and return with instructions to examine every boat on the river and report upon her prin¬ cipal dimensions. This trip was made in November and December, 1889. While the report of this special agent only covers those boats which were in actual service at the time of his trip, it practically includes every boat now running on the Mississippi River except the Ohio River boats, all of which pass under bridges only 53 feet above high water. A list of the boats measured by this agent with their principal dimensions is given in the Appendix, the boats being arranged in the order of the height of their pilot houses without including ornaments. The pilot houses of the western river boats as now built are surmounted by a wooden ornament of absolutely no use, several feet higher than the flat roof of the pilot house. The smoke stacks are also ornamented on top, the ornamentation being often in the form of an open work resembling the feath¬ ered head dress of an Indian. In some instances this ornamentation is of solid form, and may be considered an extension of the smoke stack; generally it is only ornamental. The results of this agent’s examinations show that there are only about six steamboats on the Mississippi River whose pilot houses including ornamen¬ tation are more than 60 feet high, and that there is not a single boat on which the pilot house without ornamentation is 60 feet high, while there are only six boats in which the height of pilot houses without ornamentation is more than 55 feet. COMPARISON WITH REQUIREMENTS ON TRIBUTARY RIVERS. The laws under which the two bridges at St. Louis have been built require a head room of 50 feet in the clear above high water, which high water has been interpreted as the height of the St. Louis City Directrix, with an allow¬ ance in the case of the new Merchants’ Bridge for the slope of the river. The St. Louis City Directrix is 7.6 feet below the extreme high water of 1844, thus making the actual requirement above extreme high water 42.4 feet. The bridges on the lower Ohio River were built under the provisions of an Act supplementary to an act approved December seventeenth, eighteen hundred and seventy-two, entitled “ An Act to authorize the construction of bridges across the Ohio River and to prescribe the dimensions of the same. Approved, February fourteenth, 1883.” The closing part of Section 2 of this Act reads as follows: “ Provided, further. That in lieu of the high draw prescribed above, bridges over the Ohio River below the Covington and Cincinnati Suspension Bridge may be built as continuous bridges with a clear height of fifty-three feet above local highest water, measured to the lowest part of the channel span.” The bridge across the Ohio River at Cairo within four miles of the mouth of the Ohio River, under which every boat passing from the Ohio River to the Mississippi must go, is built in accordance with this law. It is 53 feet above high water, and the range between high and low water at the site of the bridge as determined by the Chief of Engineers is 52.2 feet, making the total height of the bridge 105.2 feet above low water. At Memphis the range between low and high water is 36 feet, and the requirement of 75 feet head room is not only 22 feet more than is required at Cairo .bo™ high water, but correspond, to 5.8 feet more tb.n i. required at Cairo above low water. APPENDIX G-.—Continued. 41 CONCLUSIONS. The general conclusions which may be drawn are: First. It is an established fact that the lowering of smoke stacks is a small matter, which is so easily accomplished that it is unjust to require bridge com¬ panies to raise their bridges to a sufficient height to enable boats with high stacks to pass through without lowering. Second. The boats on the Ohio River are now fitted with hinges for lower¬ ing their stacks, and the boats on the Mississippi River could easily adopt the same appliances. Third. The greatest height of pilot houses is ten feet less than the height required for the Memphis Bridge; and the greatest height of pilot houses with¬ out ornamentation, which is the only proper measurement, is fifteen feet less than the height now required. Fourth. The Kansas City & Memphis Railway & Bridge Co. is building a bridge which from length of its spans and the other general features will form less of an obstruction to navigation than any bridge yet built on any western Fifth. The plan of this bridge in the matter of spans meets the conditions of the General Bridge Law recommended by the Board of Engineers in their Report of February 23d, 1888. The requirements of the act under which the bridge is being built call for five feet more head room than was deemed neces¬ sary by such Board of Engineers, and the Report of this Board of Engineers was based on a height of pilot house measured to the top of ornamentation instead of to the top without ornament. Sixth. A height of Sixty-Five feet would meet all reasonable requirements of navigation and remove from the bridge certain features which are very objectionable both to the bridge company and to the residents of the adjacent portion of the city of Memphis. GEO. S. MORISON, Ch. Engr. K. C. & M. R. & B. Co. Chicago, Jan. 4tli, 1890. APPENDIX. TABLE OF STEAMBOATS ON LOWER MISSISSIPPI RIVER DEC. 1889, ARRANGED ACCORDING TO HEIGHT OF PILOT HOUSE. ALE HEIGHTS ON BASIS OF BOATS BEING LIGHT. Port When Built. Kind of Tonnage. Length. Height of without Height of Slack with Height of Pilot House Height of Pilot House Port. When Built. Kind of Tonnage. Length. Height of Stack without Height of Stack with Height of Pilot House Height of Pilot House Wheel. Ornament. Ornament. Omni Ornament. Wheel. Ornament. Ornament. Ornament. Oriiainent. FEET. FT. IN. FT. IN. FT. IN/ FT. IN. FEET. ISSfi Side. 83 64 Whisper. ic,.,.. n,i„„„« SlBpi , T^niQ City of New Orleans.. City of Baton Rouge... M. *¥,„! to 71 45 las; 1603.96 83 3 90 3 57 62 Butil Engle. St. Louis. St. L. & C. Pk. Co. 1879 Stcru. 454. 202. 50 7 55 7 44 10 47 10 St. L. & Miss. R. Pk. Co... Anchor. 9 Assumption. Vow Orloonc 10 10 6 f /.. ■ iuuil 4 4 44 6 City of Providence.. 1880 1303.81 79 3 86 3 54 8 57 8 My Choice. St- Louis. St. L. & Miss. V. T. Co.... 1872 462.23 183. 63 0 66 0 44 0 47 0 Pargoud. Louisville. Planters Pk. Co . 1884 Stern. 711.94 242. 70 11 77 11 54 4 59 3 Citv of Florence. St. L. &Tenn. R. Pk. Co.. 1882 358.31 165. 59 0 63 6 43 9 45 9 Inh St. L. & Miss. V. T. Co.... 1 1 43 4 45 4 City of Monroe . C K> ,„t , 1880 54 1 X 43 8 (’Iiifinnflli Sella Wilds. Ruth. Carnal Goldman. W , , 4 4 City of Cairo. Anchor. 1' | Te It p 58 XX xx r, jA „„, M y 52 Mo. 63 0 0 42 4 Tfalo A.lumo .! 1 Spread Eagle. 50 4 4 1 4K 1 Warren 184. 67 1 72 202. 53 8 55 8 41 8 44 3 Sn it]) g City of Savannah. T „ 69 10 10 41 2 44 9 rpyi'd ‘■t, 1 nnio St. L. & Miss. V. T. Co... St. L. & Miss. V. T. Co... 57 6 61 6 41 0 43 0 I mr. T NT.,,, n-l» ,.,o 900 M, ■ Orleans 60 6 62 6 40 7 44 7 St. L. & Miss. V. T. Co... 1888 622.30 218. 63 1 65 48 9 51 Mem. & Ark. Pk. Co. 175. 57 6 58 6 40 0 45 0 2 2 51 60 11 62 11 7 42 7 Afornpl.,'. Mem. & White R. Pk. Co. issq j ci n ki ^ 49 10 51 10 39 4 42 4 Now Hrli'fiiK U 1 Mi,bio Comeaux.. H. J. Dickey. u , | . 0 51 0 38 2 AO. 9 . ft N - _ •• 56 9 57 0 37 6 39 6 .. 8 54 8 37 8 4i a 0 74 0 48 0 52 165. 53 5 55 5 36 1 39 1 Flltitro CJ»y < .< 38 1 3 6.00 528 132.00 3.00 7 1 82 7 2 0.04 0.57 139 26.15 8.80 24 7.20 24 4.80 48 i'io 48 7.20 16.08 45.52 0.22 .. 3 0.18 269.14 0.64 “ “ “ 41 94 36 Sacking out gravel. Started clay hoist. 3 6.0C 532 133.0C 2 3.00 7 1.82 6 0.38 8 0.07 2 0.56 18.45 28 8.81 24 7.21 24 4.80 7.21 48 7.20 15.34 43.48 0.18 260.36 0.53 • i « <■ “ 22 5.0( 4.01 3 9.00 3 6.0C SIS 123.00 3.00 7 0.44 2 0.05 0.67 92 18.45 28 8.8C 24 7.20 24 4.80 48 7.21 48 7.21 74.76 0.22 .. ■1 0.24 287.26 " 23 1 5.00 1 4.00 3 9.00 3 6.00 500 125.00 2 3.00 7 1.82 6 0.38 1 0.03 2 0.56 92 18.45 30 9.60 24 7.20 24 4.80 48 7.20 48 7.20 24.40 69.08 3 0.18 278.72 1.62 [pan Sand, gravel, lmrd- 6.00 512 128.00 ?l 3.00 7 1 8? 6 0.38 ! 0.02 2 0.57 87 17.45 28 8.80 24 7.20 24 4.80 48 7.20 48 7.20 19.08 54.05 2 n o.o. 3 0.18 264.89 n no. 22.58 38 71 40 4.0( 9.00 3 6.0C 472 118.0C 3.00 1.56 7 0.44 0.04 2 0.56 92 18.45 28 8.8C 24 7.2(1 24 4.SO 48 48 7.21 19.94 56.48 0.22 .. 3 0.18 258.13 1.43 Fine sand 3 6.0C 504 126.00 3.00. 6 0.31 3 0.07 0.57 9? is.i;, 2S 8.81 34 4.80 48 7.21 48 7.20 22.24 62.97 0.18 272.79 II.:.; Sandy clay or sedi- Stopped siukiug to catch up with 4.0( 3 9.00 3 6.0(1 264 66.00 3.00 7 1.82 3 0.07 0.56 18.45 30 9.01 24 7.2C 12 2.40 48 7.21 48 14.05 89.85 2 0.22 .. 3 0.18 188.13 1.23 5.00 72.00 3.00 0.31 0.04 104 21.85 24 7.20 0.21 planking. 1 4.00 9.00 3 6.00 49? 123.00 2 3.00 6 1.56 5 0.32 1 0.02 1 0.29 92 18.45 ?,S 8.80 34 7.20 ?4 4.80 48 7.20 48 7.20 19.94 56.48 a 0,22 1.11 4 0.24 263:89 0.58 40.24 37 77 35 Water pumps started in night. 9.00 3 6.0C 130.00 3.00 2.34 0.44 2 0.05 0.28 92 18.45 23 8.81 24 5.40 ■IS 48 7.2i 84 8 6.0C 521 130.00 3.00 7 0.44 0.07 9? 18.45 8.81 24 7.2C 24 5.40 48 7.2i 70 11.05 26.50 75.18 0.22 .. 0.24 293.86 4.0< 9.00 3 6.0C 504 126.00 3.00 9 2.34 7 0.44 0.03 0.28 4.90 28 8.80 24 7.2C 24 5.40 48 7.21 70 15.92 45.13 0.22 .. 4 0.24 246.23 0.20 4.00 0.22 .. T 1 : 9.00 3 6.00 528 132.00 2 3.00 7 0.26 , 0,02 ! ?8 8.80 24 7.20 24 4.90 48 7.20 70 11.05 22.67 64.21 2 0.18 265.14 0.24 Sand}' clay or sedi- 46.75 40 85 20 9.00 3 6.0C 492 128.01 3.00 2.3c 7 0.44 7 0.16 1 0.28 8.81 24 7.2C 24 4.90 48 7.2( 70 11.01 21.09 2 252.49 Caisson completed. Finished concreting caisson. Begun laying masonry. Put on second clay hoist. 5.00 0.44 24 24 4.90 3.60 34 'os o'00 “ 10 i 4.00 6.00 0.44 0.29 24 48 15.48 0.18 231.03 41.66 1 j 6.0C 43,‘ 122.00 2 3.00 10 2.50 4 0.26 0.03 1 6C 10.95 ■IS 8.81 24 7.21 24 4.80 48 48 7.2C 65.43 2 4 0.24 264.20 0.87 85 4 3 6.4C 495 181.80 4.50 9 2.34 6 0.38 4 0.10 0.28 91 16.90 8.8( 4.80 48 7.21 48 7.2C 16.35 46.33 2 0.22 .. 3 0.18 316.13 0.36 13 « 14 “ 15 5.00 13.00 15.75 16.90 48 7.21 48.00 48.00 1 5.00 1 4.00 5 2 4.80 555 222.00 3 4.50 9 2.33 0.50 4 0.09 2 0.57 144 25.30 28 4.80 48 7.20 17.21 48.76 2 0.22 .. 0.18 369.20 1.17 41 8o 31 “ 16 “ 17 1 5 00 1 4.00 P IK 75 75° 10 2 09 7.2( 24 » n oo 86 . g 15.75 2 KIR 48 0 1 1 4.80 537 214.80 3 4.50 9 2.33 8 0.50 2 0.04 0.56 19? 34.30 8.80 24 7.20 24 4.80 48 7.20 7.20 20.09 56.90 2 0.22 .. 0.18 376.33 0.18 46.01 44 80 31 j i 4 215.60 3 4.50 2.34 8 0.50 6 0.14 2 0.57 34.30 8.8( 24 7.21 4.80 48 48 7.2< 17.93 50.81 2 8 0.18 371.16 1.24 " 20 1 6.00 1 4.00 4 13.00 4.80 528 211.20 3 4.50 7 1.82 8 0.50 6 0.14 2 0.50 192 34.30 28 8.80 24 7.20 16 3.20 48 7.20 48 7.20 15.20 43.09 2 0.22 .. 3 0.18 356.91 1.16 Hard clay “ 21 14.12 15.75 175.20 4 50 0.50 0.26 0.19 2 0.57 33.70 15 15 A sn 12 3.60 3.60 8.15 23.17 n is 981 ns 5^00 5.00 4.80 1 t 2 0.22 .. 2 41 4.00 4.00 10.59 •• 1 5.00 15.75 4.80 4.50 0.31 0.07 0.57 192 33.70 15 4.80 12 24 3.60 24 3.60 34.95 0.18 APPENDIX I. — Continued. TIME, COST AND MATERIALS USED IN FOUNDATIONS. PIER I— Continued. Days Amount. 80 410 104 80 303 15? 80' 41? 100 90. 520 257 410| 250 Coal for Boilers. 435.001109.05 3120.22 Olay, hard and pure Stopped water pump. Hoisting out clay. Began sealing at 5 p.m COST OF SINK1NO CAISSON L Amount ns tabulated above... M il!!. ' ■ • i'|i!'.' ■. Sundry small supplies. Electric light. . Medical attendance. Maintenance of plant . Hire of tug. Labor, not included in lab'e. Total. Material. $3 308 20 016.92 130 04 88 ?. 08 54.40 1 777 74 1.17 $6 566.05 1 342.53 $21 300.91 $22 084.36 916.92 130.04 287.58 54.40 3 049.96 1.17 1 342.53 $27 800.09 47 APPENDIX I— Continued. TIME, COST AND MATERIALS USED IN FOUNDATIONS. PIER II. »*"■ Principal Foreman. Foreman. Foremen. Tenders. Pressure House Men. Coffee. Sdoar. Candles. House Boat. Sacking Out, and Elevator Master Mechanic Engineers. Engineers. M™ P Firemen. Passers. Coal for Boilers. Cylinder Waste. T for LS Feet Material. of Air Remarks. Rev. ,S. 18S9. Days Amt. Days Amu Days Amount. Daysj Amt. | Hrs. Amount. ■ay- Amt. Lbs. Am,. Lte. Am,. No. Am,. S&Sl, Amt - Hrs. Amount. Hrs. Amt. Hm. Ami. Hrs. Amt. Hrs. Am. Hrs. Amt. Tons. Amount. Gals. Amt inis. Amt. Lbs. Amt. Mny 17 [cutting edge. June 27 Lnunclied at 4.30 p.m. Sept. 23 Oct. 10 3 1 14 j 5.00 j 4.00 0 op - v 12 46 [tram at 8 n.m. i 182 00 2 3.Of 89 13.20 32 10.40 24 7.21 12 2.41 48 7.21 48 7.21 10.79 36.05 2 .18 1 .37 6 .31 301.02 1.04 16.00 35 34 “ sand pumps at 4, p.m. 1 21.50 6.00 179.00 2 3.00 8 •• 91 9 2 Ji7 103 15.45 32 10.40 24 7.20 4.80 48 7.20 48 7.20 15.53 ft .18 6 .33 0.71 .. 48.00 35 26 l 76 1 3 i „ 258.00 3 4.50 13 29 ,, .67 88 13.20 34 11.20 24 7.20 24 4.80 48 7.20 48 7.20 10.79 36.06 2 .18 J .37 .33 403.69 0.40 44 20 ?if( 4.5( 48 2.12 .6’ 91 13.75 10.4( 24 7.21 94 48 7.21 48 .18 .81 420.52 6.82 40.31 40 30 4.01 3 276.00 3 4.51 4.27 1.51 48 2.12 .61 9: 14.32 32 10.4( 24 7.21 4.81 48 7.21 48 7.21 32.24 107.71 .18 495.49 24.01 31 34 08 “ 24 1 5.00 1 4.00 12 82.00 3 6.00jl507 801.40 3 4.50 17 4.27 2.27 2.25 2 .6-7 86 5.40 32 10.40 24 7.20 24 4.80 48 7.20 48 7.20 21.59 72.14 2 .18 1 .37 6 .33 477.58 2.22 47.66 40 29 4.50 51 2.25 2 .67 31 4.90 a?, 10.40 24 7.20 24 4.80 48 7.20 48 7.20 21.05 70.37 2 .18 6 .33 466.92 2.49 .. «. ,< 24.00 40 1 31 4.5( .67 > 11.95 10.41 24 7.21 24 48 7.21 48 7.21 .18 ■16 61 39 4.01 3 300.90 3 4.51 3. 2 3( 4.75 34 11.21 24 7.21 4.81 7.21 48 7.21 23.95 80.0; .18 6 .31 486.07 3.00 44. of 119 81 3 4.6( 1.21 .67 8( 4.75 82 19.41 24 7,2< 48 7.21 .13 “ .i .. 48.01 27 “ 29 1 5.00 1 4.00 12 35.00 3 7.2011443 340.32 3 4.50 19 4.78 30 2.00 40 1.76 2 .67 31 4.25 32 19.40 24 7.20 24 48 7.20 43 7.20 19.75 6.1.98 2 .18 1 0 .33 519.20 3.23 48.00 41 j 25 ft 4.50 n 26 1.14 2 .07 20 3.25 39. 10.40 24 7.20 24 4.80 48 7.20 48 7.21 20 67 69.07 2 .18 6 33 515.32 309 44. S7 42 30 '• 31 1 5.00 1 4.00 12 35.00 3 7.201475 354.00 3 4.50 i; 4.27 24 1.65 2 .67 41 6.2:) 81 11.20 24 7.20 24 48 7.20 48 7.21 22.50 o.23 3 i • 18 0 .33 535.88 2.73 . 39.42 47 | 29 3 -- j . g 24 42 1 2 Oj n nio.111 poo run cnnil 4.00 18 1 00 il 7.201480 ft 4.50 20 5.03 2.27 M 2 .67 40 0.25 10.40 24 7.20 24 48 7.20 48 7,20 23.16 77.42 2 .18 1 .37 6 .88 556.58 2.74 and gravel 48. (K 20 29 3 4.50 ^ 98 9. .67 40 6.25 80 9.60 7.20 24 4.80 7.20 48 7.20 20.66 69.07 .18 .29 595.61 1.73 " 4606 53 R , no rr nr I rn o 0(1 „ 51 * ft? 1 3.00 28 8.8( 7.21 24 4.81 48 7.21 48 7.21 21.32 71.27 2 .21 589.76 1.84 gravel 45.81 55 “ 10 1 5.00 1 4.00 17 59.10 4 10.151370 383.60 3 4.50 15 3.77 34 2.34 94 4.15 .67 24 6.00 28 8.80 24 7.20 24 4.80 48 7.20 48 7.20 38.29 128.02 2 .14 5 .29 48.00 48 31 3 4.50 .67 6.60 ! 28 8.80 24 7.20 24 4.80 48 7.20 48 7.20 18.03 60.27 2 1 .37 5 .28 564.37 1.75 48.00 50 26 J j o 1 04 on 7 9(1 Stopped water pumps on Lincoln 1 ■1 3 4.50 1 9' .67 24 6.00 30 9.60 24 7 20 24 4.80 48 7.20 48 7.20 5.40 18.04 2 .14 5 .28 483.58 0.51 24.00 51 27 .67 •I 6.00 :;n 9.61 24 7.21 4.81 48 7.21 48 7.21 5.13 17.1' .14 ■ 2t 23.51 50 27 [nt 4.30 n.m. 16 1 1 4.01 13 10.75 815 244.51 3 4.51 3.52 23 1.5! 43 1.91 .0' 2 - 6.00 30 9.61 24 7.21 24 4.81 48 7.21 48 7.2 4.08 13.6: 2 .14 382.57 20 30 26 Slopped wider pumpsou Bertram 40.2r 1.87 " 19 14 53.00 ft 101(1 304.80 ft Rft il] 27 .07 or- 99 inn n no „1 “ 22 53.00 1.79 31 1.37 14 12 •. | ■, - 24 4.00 {5 11.00 950 31 4.00 15 56.00 11.00 19 •i on ft rr 11 97 2 •M 5 00.00 15 653 26 3 " 30 1 5.00 1 4.00 3 9.00 2 3.00 12 3.02 2~4 1.6: 0.13 .67 15 4.80 12 3.60 3.60 24 3.6C 8.95 29.91 2 .28 72.40 0.01 Dec. 1 1 5.00 1 4.00 3 9.00 20 6.50 2 3.00 3 0.75 4 0.27 3 ■ O’- 15 4.80 12 3.00 24 3.60 3.6C 3.69 12.32 .07 5 .28 57.53 0.05 26 Took oil air nt 4.40 p.m. •• 3 008 Carried 220.50 72.32 30.15 556.12 450.00 320.40 151.20 320.40 324.0 2902.82 8.15 4.44 16.12 23161.13 forward. APPENDIX I.— Continued. TIME, COST AND MATERIAL USED IN FOUNDATIONS. PIER III. 49 29.50 26.50 32.00 32.00 29.00 32.00 27.00 32.25 35.00 35.00 35.00 74.00 74.00' 67.00! 74.00 71.17 81.67 107.25 186.371 379.00 379.00 373.00 Sackino Oot Clay Hoist and Elevator 9.60 24 11.20 24 9.00! 24 7.20.. 7.20 I. 7.20 . . 7.20 24 7.20 24 7.20 24 7.20 24 7.20 24 4.80 48 4.80 48 4.20! -18 7.20 48 7.20 48 7^20 48 27.57 21.05 54.07 54.81 68.23 49.30 42.82 45.35 33.03 21.77 18.87 15.62 49,70 66.05 89.65 Totals 292.24 581.45 41.05 40.60 36.3(1 35.53 41.77 88.79 40.02 37.73 592,21 561.78 586.60 302.46 35.29 33.21 [p.m., pumps at 1.00 n.m Slarted compressors oil Bertram at 12.5! Sucking out Mat. [compressors at 4.00 p.m Started pumps on Lincoln at 12.15 p.m. Sacking out Mat. Mat all out. Stopped pumps on Lincoln at 4.45 p.m, [on Bertram at 11.20 p.m led pumps on Bertram and Lincoln [at 6.00 p.m. Waiting for Masonry. 36 I [on Bertram at 6.25 p 21 Stopped pumps on Lincoln at 6.20 p.m., 18 Slopped compressors on Lincoln at 8.10 21 iWailing for masonry. [p “ [pumps at 11.45 a.m. Slarted comp, on Bertram at 11.05a.m., Started compressors on Lincoln at 12.05 Clay on west side of cutting edge. Stopped water pumps on Bertram at 6.50 Bertram at 7 10 Stopped compressors on Lincoln at 9.80 APPENDIX I. — Continued. TIME, COST AND MATERIAL USED IN FOUNDATIONS. PIER III— Continued. Principal Foreman. Foreman. Foremen. Tenders. Pressure House Men. Coffee. SUO.R Candles. House Boat. Sacking Out, , Clay Hoist iLEVATOH Men. Master Mechanic Engineers. Engineers. M™- Firemen. Passers. Coal for Boilers. ■ST Cylinder Totals iS Material. Air p’ps. rT - auit. Days Amt. Days Amount. Days Ain, Hrs. Amoutit. Days Aint. Lbs. Amt. Lbs. Amt. No. Amt. K: Amt. | Amount Hi*. Amt. Hrs A»t. Hrs. Amt. H Hr. Am,. Tons. An, imt ' nils Amt. GaU. Amt. Lbs. Am,. a*. 2 36 12 2 and clny 1 1 fi u n 98 1 5.0( 4.0( 10 37.75 2 6.01 271 271.01 3 4.5( 6 1 58 13 .81: 6 .21 120 22.80 16 5.20 12 3.60 94 4.8( 24 5.41 3.6( 12.98 a 24. (X 56 70 35 1 5.0C 4.0( 39.91 6.01 292 292.01 3 4.5' 7 1.81 .71 6 .2f 12(1 22.80 16 3,61 21 5.4( 3.01 6.13 18.49 22.92 78 .10 O [ 18 1 2 16 "1 07 GO 1 5.00 1 4.00 35.25 2 6.00 333 333.00 3 4.50 9 2.81 11 .71 5 .24 i .31 216 16 5.20 12 3.61 6.40 24 3.60 11.30 34.12 2 .18 1 .37 2 .10 482.44 0.12 54 aiY 1 68 14 1° 24 o n oi ■>! 2 61 1 5.00 1 4.00 9 32.91 2 6.00 291 291.00 3 4.51 9 2.37 11 .71 1 .05 i .31 132 25.60 24 8 80 16 4.80 18 3 tin 7.20 5.40 7.69 23.21 ] 78 0.36 6.33 1 u 0 - oi „ K ,1 7ft g 5.01 4.01 41.75 2 6.01 35- 354.00' 3 2.3* .91 21 f 28 8.81 24 7.2( 48 7.21 48 7.2( 20.30 61.33 .18 in 4.00 ll 41.71 o.oi 361 366.00 3 .It 1 5.00 1 4.00 11 41.75 2 6.00 385 385.00. 3 4.50 to 2.63 13 .83 10 .48 i .32 203 35.90 28 8.80 24 7.20 7 1.40 48 7.20 48 7.20 19.70 59.49 2 .18 .10 577.98 0.00 6.30 59 91 38 1 5.00 1 4.00 11 41.75 a 6.01 371 371.00 3 4.51 a 11 12 77 4 .19 i .31 216 38.50 ?8 8.80 24 7.20 48 7.20 48 7.20 18.75 56.61 .18 as 11 .37 .10 1 5.00 1 4.00 10 37.75 2 6.00 351 351.00 8 4.50 9 2.36 13 .8- 6 29 i .32 210 38.50 34 11.20 2-1 7.20 48 7.20 48 7.20 18.14 54.78 a 44 .10 1 5.00 1 11 41.75 2 6.00 339 339.00| 3 4.50 « 12 1 .05 i .31 216 38.50 28 8.80 24 7.20 48 7.20 48 7.20 15.02 45.35 2 .18 3 517.54 1.05 35 1 5.00 4.00 32.42 2 6.00 352 352.001 3 4 50 1.84 n .71 3 .14 i .32 216 as so 28 8.80 2-1 7.20 48 7.20 48 7.20 16.22 48.98 2 .18 0 1 41.71 2 6.0 36- 2.1 14 .21 i .81 2K 38.50 28 8.Sl 24 7.21 ... 48 7.21 U 7.21 12.98 39.20 .18 5.0( 1 4 01 11 a 6.00 368 368.01)1 8 4.51 10 2.63 13 .84 5 .24 i .32 120 22.60 28 . 8.80 7.20 ... 48 8.00 48 7.20 11.54 34.84 GO 1 5.00 J- 4.00 11 41.75 2 6.00 365 365.00 3 4.50 9 2.87 13 .84 6 .29 i .31 128 22.40 28 8.80 24 7.20 48 8.00 48 7.20 10.10 30.49 2 .18 1 .37 .10 514.80 0.00 33 1 5 00 1 4.00 10 37.75 2 6.01 391 396.00 3 4.50 8 a 11 13 .84 5 .24 i .32 216 38.50 28 8.80 24 7.20 48 8.00 48 7.20 12.13 36.04 0 05 5.01 4.01 41.75 2 6.01 401 406.00 3 4.51 9 2.3( 15 .9 * 1 ; 4 .1! i .31 21( 37.50 28 8.81 24 7.2( 48 8.01 48 7.2( 12.01 36.27 5.00 1 4.00 41,75 2 6.00 390 390.00 ( 3 4.50 to 2.63 15 .97 5 .2- i .32 216 38.50 28 8.81 24 7.21 48 8.01 48 7.21 9.13 27.57 2 .18 3 .15 39 1 11 41.71 8S If- 2 .87 2 .10 1 11 - 3 1 .32 210 38.50 .4 48 J 2 .15 527.86 0.00 37 1 5.00| 1 4.00 11 41.75 2 6.00 381 381.00| 3 4.50 9 2.36 15 .96 .29 i .31 210 38.50 28 8.80| 24 7.20 48 8.00 18 7.20 13.10 39.56 2 .18 2 .10 555.71 1.54 2,11 . 14 534.30 1 5.00 1 4.0t 11 41.75 2 6.00 382 382.00 1 3 8 2.11 14 .91 .32 216 38.50 8.8( 24 7.20... 48 8.01 48 7.21 16.34 49.34 1 5.00 1 4.00 11 41.75 2 6.00 362 302.00 3 4.50 9 2.37 14 .90 14 .67 1 .31 214 38.10 28 8.80 24 7.20... 48 8.00 « 7.20 21.14 03.84 .18 .10 560.92 0.00 Sand and clay 21.75 55 91 38 1 5.001 1 4.00 105 40.42 2 6.00 337 337.00' 3 4.50 8 2.11 13 .84 .. 1 .32 216 38.50 28 8.80 24 7.20!. - - 48 8.00 48 7.20 18.14 54.77 2 .18 3 .15 524.99 1.58 9.36| 49 92 38 Started water pump 01 4'.’ Stopped pump on Bertram at 11.25 a.ir [stopped at 11.25 p.n: [comp. Slopped pump in Lincoln at 0.35 p.m i Bertram at 5.00 p.m, in Bertram at 2.35 p.m [slopped at 4.00 p.m n Bertram at 9.30 a.m. Started pump on Lincoln at 2.00 p.m, Stopped pump on Lincoln at 7.05 p.m APPENDIX I—Continued. 51 TIME, COST AND MA TED,TAPS USED IN POUNDATIONS. PIER III.— Continued. Sacking Oct, Clay Hoist nd Elevator Hrs. Amount. Hrs. Amount. Engineers. Coal for Boilers. 41.75 45.25 47.2.' 47.25 47.25 47.25 47.25 47.25 47.25 47.25 299.00 328.38 372.17 377.16 7.20'.. 7.201.. 7 20 , 8.00 48 8.00, 48 8.00. 48 8.00 48 8.00, 48 8.00 48 525.70 525.90 518.54 514.60 445.25 391.37 432.77 445.85 557.33 520.27 519.62 519.05 603.01 593.99 599.34 537.01 525.80 424.17 Started pump on Bertram at 8.00 a m. [started Lincoln 8.00a.ill Stopped pump on Bertram at 7.00a.m, Slopped puiup ou Lincoln at 1.40 p.m. Cleaning out caisson and sealing Sealing. COST OF SINKING CAISSON III. Material. Amount as tabulated above. *6 297 90 Miscellaneous supplies. 1 692.08 Sundry small supplies. 520.51 Electric light. 398.51 Medical attendance, etc. 1 313.98 Maintenance of plant. 5 570.27 Hire of tug and derrick. 1 049.56 Labor, not included in table. Total.$16 842.81 7 016.97 2 672.65 *59 773.08 *56 881.36 1 692.08 520.51 898.51 1 313.98 1 049.56 2 672.65 *76 615.89 52 APPENDIX I.— Continued. TIME, COST AND MATERIALS USED IN FOUNDATIONS. PIER IV. I’RINCII'AI. FOREMAN. Foreman. Foremen. Tenders. Pressure House Men. Coffee. Candles. HEATING. Mechanic Engineer. mT Firemen. Passers. Coal fo Boilers. Cylinder Totals FEET "" Rev of Remarks. En F,™ F,™ P'PS 18SS. Days A,nt Days Amu Days Amount. Days Amt. Hrs.j Amount. Days Amt. Amt. Lbs Amt. No. Amt. SSt Am,. Amount. Hrs Tuns. Amount. pv Amt. P'ts Amt Lbs Amt. DAY. Rum R.. p '“ Nov. 24 Culling edge placed on launching ways. Caisson launched. Pul on air at 8 p.m. Started pump at 2 a.in. "j 5.00 1 iris 9.00 12 3.60 3.60 24 2.4 12 2.40 12 24 24 24 24 2.10 2.42 6.24 4.49 9.03 23.27 16.75 0.15 2 0.13 0.32 53.38 Fine river saud 6.00 16.00 42 75 ■' 29 1 5.00 1 3.22 6.75 4.8C 24 4.20 49 go j 5.00 1 1 3.23 1 12 3.60 3.60 0.07 0.15 '• 31 1 5.00 1 3.23 6.00 3 4.00 136, 34.00 22 7.60 24 4.81 24 4.80 4.20 7.27 27.12 j 5 v. A ' emge N.E. “ w - S-E. S.W. Caisson. Masonry Sand. Water. Total. Indicated. Calculated May 17 Tons. Tons Tore Tone Lbs. Lbs Tone. Teas. 8q. Ft Lbs Caisson built on shore. Placing cutting edge. Began building caisson. Caisson ready to launch. July 27 Sept. 23 Caisson towed to posiliou at 1 p.m. Oct. 7 :;>2 9 149.19 149.87 149.66 149.30 149.20 150 4 187 4 150.5 1 .>0.9 7892 7950 17 50 Started air compressors on Lincoln at 10.02 a.in Removing mat. 0.07 . I.t !l 8169 53 8224 19.00 215 '• 13 148.72 149.32 148.42 149.20 148.91 0.11 0.29 150.9 150.6 150.7 150.9 150.8 149.8 j.89 186.4 37.49 8274 6 51 8330 0.25 149.7 52 8434 148.01 0.78 149.3 148.8 2.52 37.28 8432 20.50 16.18 Started air compressors on Bertram at 8 a m. Started sand pumps at 4 p.m. Hoisting out mat. .. 17 146.74 140.40 147.43 U 7 'flR 146.96 0.42 2.24 149.4 38.14 l 17.75 17.75 16.54 16.55 5157 3594 694 10357 Coarse sand " 18 145.60 145.30 147.11 146.98 146.25 0.71 2.95 148.4 148.S 148.5 148.7 148.6 9 35 184.9 q r „ Q 3SJS 617 11895 150.0 149.1 149.0 3.14 184.6 88.74 9114 9 3943 865 51 18.25 18.50 19.50 16.94 17.30 17.03 5272 8190 6548 " 21 1-14.86 144.55 144.86 144.28 39.86 13 " 22 142.81 141.42 144.61 143.46 143.08 1.56 0.12 150.4 152.4 151.9 8.12 184.4 9429 48 9499 5580 3919 2236 " 28 141.32 140.57 140.39 139.61 144.09 110.40 143.34 139.66 142.28 140.06 0.80 6.92 9.14 150.8 150.3 150.2 149.9 151.8 154.0 151.3 151.7 9.02 11.64 184.2 184.2 41.92 9429 25 19.75 18.19 5661 3841 2484 2294 1815 1760 1310 Mat all out. 11.63 153.2 154.9 151.9 184.1 3947 0.55 12.18 153.0 149.0 156.2 152.1 184.1 3.00 15.18 154.3 149.6 158.0 152.9 18.88 184.1 50.08 9429 040 46 10167 23.00 21.78 6762 3405 5200 •' 28 131.71 131.44 132.40 132.36 131.98 2.04 17.22 148.4 154.6 147.3 159.0 152.3 20.32 184.2 52.22 9429 640 46 00 fiR '• 30 24.65 184.3 55.55 125.15 27.34 184.5 58.94 9429 144.29 122.83 153.0 30.17 184.6 61.77 9429 1226 83 286 27.50 26.81 8343 2681 8310 645 Nov. 1 120.52 120.32 121.55 131.57 120.99 1.84 148.6 149.7 9429 Coarse sand and gravel 118.25 30.95 147.7 148.0 149.4 163.1 152.0 33.75 184.7 66.45 30.00 113.75 155.5 155.2 39.90 184.8 69,50 9429 561 " 4 170.1 150.6 43.03 185.1 71.53 " 5 161.0 167.6 156.4 44.50 185.6 73.70 9429 2117 1471 13140 33.75 31.98 9952 3188 12256 520 Sand, gravel and mud Clean, coarse sand in north and south ends. Mud in middle " 6 109.09 109.76 109.99 110.01 109.94 1.96 39.26 149.9 149.9 103.9 167.9 157.9 505 504 521 [chambers. 1.93 41.19 148.4 165,1 “ 9 106.24 106.07 106.12 106.17 106.15 0.02 41.21 146.4 148.4 164.4 155.9 47.91 187.4 79.41 9429 2550 2048 14159 36.00 34.46 10724 3435 3455 3544 13196 Through mud. coarse sand and " 10 104.10 104.22 104.19 1.96 45.01 146.4 147.4 162.4 162.4 154.7 50.51 189.4 85.21 9429 2831 139 2653 15052 38.25 36.98 11508 13912 509 " 12 102.43 102.26 102.31 102.56 102.44 1.75 46.76 144.4 145.4 160.4 158.4 152.2 49.76 190.4 87.96 9429 3006 2944 37.00 9P3Q 137ns 531 158.2 15623 12015 13760 Clay 0.86 47.82 146.9 149.9 155.9 155.9 152.2 191.9 90.52 9429 Average elevation top of clay 101.3. 156.6 155.6 149.9 192.6 91.73 501 529 lo 0.23 48.50 148.3 158.3 158.3 153.3 52.66 193.3 92.66 9429 3344 145 3435 16353 39.75 12513 3840 14504 " 17 100.44 100.27 100.56 100.61 100.47 0.17 48.73 145.4 144.4 158.4 150.4 151 1 50.63 194.4 93.93 9429 3344 •wm 157.5 156.5 153.5 53.17 95.17 9429 148.3 157.3 161.3 154.5 54.77 196.3 96.57 9429 8344 151 " 20 99.31 99.09 99.39 99.39 99.30 0.10 49.90 143.0 152.6 150! 6 147.9 54.70 48.60 197.3 198.6 97.90 99.30 9429 9429 3504 3504 151 162 4132 17105 41.00 40.25 42.49 43.10 13222 13412 3883 3815 13386 515 570 Took Bertram ashore in p.m. 99.23 99.10 0.14 50.04 145.8 143.8 155.8 146.8 148.1 48.94 199.8 100.64 98.82 159.8 143.8 148.6 49.59 200.8 101.79 9429 571 601 146.7 146.7 145.7 46.69 201.7 144] 7 148.4 147.4 48.23 202.4 103.43 9429 3669 133 4588 98.8. 50.29 143.7 143.5 44.59 202.7 103.79 9429 3669 123 4631 17852 43.00 45.04 14016 3836 12281 624 " 26 98.91 98.73 98.96 99.00 98.90 0.01 50.30 144.3 141.3 144.3 145.3 143.8 44.90 202.8 103.90 9429 3669 124 4643 17865 12367 '• 28 9s. id 656 145.0 1 “ 30 141.6 140.6 41.22 201.6 102.72 9429 3669 114 98..0 140.5 41.63 201.7 102.83 9429 3669 115 4532 17745 43.00 44.63 13888 8857 11466 672 Dec. 1 •• 2 3 98.32 98.16 98.14 97.98 98.37 98.18 98.41 98.82 98.31 0.05 0.51 50.38 50.89 139.1 141.7 140.1 143.7 144.7 142.1 145.7 140.8 144.0 ' 41.98 45.69 103.28 104.39 9429 3669 , 4363 .. 17775 42.50 44.82 13947 ““ 11562 6.2 Stopped air compressors on Lincolu at 4.40 p.m. APPENDIX J— Continued. RECORD OP SINKING CAISSONS. PIER II— Continued. 57 8 OF Cott „„ Fn „, E.FX Ravi. A,a Pa ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEE, SENE IN Total Oriqina Elevatic N = 181.6. mA^wTur d oet° W 2L M.TFa,., . 1. k.l,.L N.E. N.W. S.E. S'V. Average. N.E. N.W. S.E. S.W. Average Caisson. Masonry. sand. Friction. ! Tnn-c Tons. Tons. Tons. Lbs Started air compressors on Lincoln nl 11.35 a.m. 4 98.08 149.1 149.5 151 1 152 8 150.6 52.52 191.8 93.72 9429 3069 145 3581 16824 40.50 40.67 12656 4108 14465 Clay 150.1 153.4 153.4 152.1 54.02 192.1 94.02 14878 98.08 150.4 150.4 151.7 53.62 94.32 14708 502 7 98.11 97.93 98.13 98.17 98.08 0.00 51.12 149.5 149.4 158.5 155.2 151.9 53.82 192.7 94.62 14823 559 Started air compressors on Bertram at 10 a.in. 97 99 149.6 153.9 153.6 1(51 (t 53.52 192.9 94.82 9429 3669 148 3698 16944 42.00 41.15 12805 4139 IA7A1 192.9 94.82 9429 12805 4139 98.17 149.3 150.6 150.6 155.9 151.0 53.52 192.6 94.52 9429 3069 148 42.00 41.02 4148 14741 11 12 98.11 148.2 148.9 149.5 156.9 150.9 192.2 94.12 4156 14548 97.93 98.13 98.17 98.08 0.00 51.12 150.1 150.8 150.8 150.8 150.6 52.52 191.8 93.72 9429 3669 145 40.67 12656 4168 14465 576 148.6 157 P 151.8 53.72 191.6 93.52 9429 3669 148 3558 16804 42.00 40.59 12631 4173 14796 149.0 149.3 150.3 156.0 191.3 93.22 9429 40.46 12591 4180 14603 149.6 149.6 151.6 150.9 150.4 52.32 190.9 92.82 4193 14410 1(1 97.66 97.07 148.2 150.2 156.2 151.1 53.27 190.9 93.07 12509 4186 14072 97.27 97.22 97.26 97.21 0.62 51.99 147.3 149.3 149.3 155.3 150.3 63.09 191.6 94.39 9429 147 41.75 40.96 12746 4151 14622 568 149.6 153.0 151.6 151.1 54.03 192.3 95.23 9429 3669 149 3740 10987 42.25 41.33 12861 4126 14881 149.6 150.9 154.9 150.9 53.91 192.9 95.91 12952 4109 14848 152.1 149.6 150.4 153.7 151.4 54.47 193.4 96.47 15002 150.2 153.5 154.9 152.2 55.36 194.2 97.36 13148 4070 22 96.77 96.59 96.72 90.76 96.71 0.13 52.49 148.5 149.5 149.9 150.2 149.5 52.79 195.2 98.49 146 42.75 42.74 13300 4037 14540 555 146.3 150.0 149.6 148.3 R1 KQ 196,3 99.59 9429 3669 142 4213 17453 42.50 43.20 13443 4010 14209 149.2 148.2 149.9 147.5 148.7 52.10 197.2 100.00 43.00 43.00 13587 3976 14350 25 149.6 148.9 150.1 53.67 197.0 3963 14782 148.4 150.0 149.7 149.4 197.7 101.27 13677 3959 14589 27 96.50 96.32 96.42 90.46 96.43 0.00 52.77 147.3 147.7 148.7 149.7 148.3 51.87 198.0 101.57 9429 143 43.00 44.08 13717 3950 14286 553 Ofl 53.48 147.7 146.7 149.0 148.0 147.8 52.08 198.0 102.28 9429 3669 144 4503 17745 43.50 44.39 13814 3931 14344 548 142.8 143.8 147.5 150.7 197.8 18903 560 80 95.79 95.61 95.73 95.77 95.72 0.00 53.48 144.3 146.6 149.0 151.3 147.8 52.08 197.3 13717 3952 14344 551 Oct RA so 148.3 1KR S 155.0 150.6 50 99 190.6 102.20 0429 3669 155 4498 17751 43.50 44.39 13814 3937 15504 508 Clay 152.6 151.9 149.7 55.39 195.9 13720 3955 15256 56.11 143.5 152.9 157.9 150.0 56.91 195.2 43.75 44.32 13792 3841 15674 490 4 147.6 149.6 158.9 4113 16393 5 93.17 92.99 93.08 93.12 93.09 0.00 56.11 143.2 146.6 153.9 152.6 149.1 50.01 193.9 44.25 13615 4095 15426 531 143.0 146.3 152.3 154.3 149.0 55.91 193.3 100.21 9429 3788 154 4358 17729 42.75 43.49 13534 4195 15399 544 147.2 155.6 155.9 151.1 58.01 192.9 13481 4124 15977 159.0 152.7 59.61 192.7 43.50 43.23 13453 4159 149.4 156.0 159.4 153.2 61.57 192.7 101.07 9429 3788 532 17902 43.75 43.80 18649 4253 16713 509 10 91.71 91.53 91.62 91.60 91.63 0.00 57.57 146.1 148.8 156.1 149.5 150.1 58.47 192.8 43.25 13664 4088 16104 508 v so an 146.8 147.1 147.5 148.5 147.5 57.54 192.8 102.84 9429 3788 159 4556 17932 43.25 44.63 13888 4044 15848 510 147.4 149.0 140.0 58.44 192.7 44.59 13876 4040 16096 503 0.00 149.8 148.8 147.7 57.74 192.5 44.00 44.50 13848 4055 as v-r 149.6 161.0 03.20 192.3 9429 870 4339 18432 43.00 44.80 13900 15 89.04 88.86 88.92 88.96 88.94 0.00 60.26 147.8 150.8 151.1 154.1 150.9 61.90 192.1 103.16 9429 3788 593 4347 18157 43.00 44.77 13932 4225 16781 504 61.11 148.7 148.3 150.7 157.0 151.2 63.11 192.0 103.91 9429 3788 850 4317 18384 44.25 45.10 14035 4349 10979 512 Began sealing at 10.30 a.m. 61.11 142.7 146.0 150.0 150 7 Sealing caisson. 88.07 61.11 145.9 146.6 144.1 150.1 20 88.19 88.07 88.11 88.09 0.00 61.11 147.2 146.8 152.5 157.5 62.91 0.00 61.11 147.6 148.3 151.0 161.0 152.0 63.91 191.3 103.21 43.25 61.11 145.4 88.19 88.01 61.11 146.3 147.6 24 88.07 88.11 88.09 0.00 61.11 146.9 150.6 154.9 65.51 j Bertram — Stopped compressors at 6.45 a.m. 58 APPENDIX j— Continued. RECORD OP SINKING CAISSONS. PIER III. APPENDIX j— Continued. RECORD OP SINKING CAISSONS. PIER ill— Continued. Average Caisson. 61.85 62.45 63.91 64.11 64.55 68.41 66.11 65.71 191.0 191.0 191.4 191.8 105.31 105.51 105.51 105.61 105.61 106.01 Caisson. Masonry. Air Pressure. Indicated. Calculated. 42.00 42.00 42.75 42.25 42.25 42.00 46.00 45.00 42.08 42.67 42.58 43.20 Reaction Pressure. 13026 13011 13188 13148 13120 13095 13278 13250 14073 14193 14100 14267 14297 14371 14461 14678 14708 14773 14964 15219 15322 15078 15477 Surface Exposed to Friction. Hoisting out clay and pumping saud. Started pump on Bertram at 3.30 p.m. Hoisting out clay and pumping sand. Ditching along cutting edge. Sealing along cutting edge. “ Stopped pump on Bertram at 7a.m. " Lincoln at 7.40 a.m. caisson and scaling. Scaling. Cutting edge 2 ft. below clay in north end. Sand cleaned out to clay, which is 2.5 ft, below cuttiug edge in Sealing. [south end. Stopped air compressors on Lincoln at 6 a. Sealing. Stopped air compressors on Bertram at 6 a. APPENDIX J— Continued. 61 RECORD OE SINKING CAISSONS. PIER IV. - Elevation Ikan Sea Leveu° E Hoeas. Original Elevatio S =T76.85. T Ca™ Gauge. Depth AlH FitKSSUHK. Reaction Preesuke. w.“. Surface Contact. Weight per Sq. Ft. of Friction. Material. H.W. s.«. ... Average. ».w. S.E. ,.w. Sand. Total. Indicated. Calculated. Tnn, Tons. Tons. Tons. Lbs. Lbs. Tons. Tons. Sq. Ft. Lbs. 175.85 170.1 176.1 168.7 172.7 178.7 172.95 4.13 191.7 22.88 2416 2416 8.0 9.93 1115 1301 710 3665 ltiG.sa 1 GO! 0-4 165.80 165.34 165.94 .06 9.91 170.6 166.6 173.6 177.6 172.10 6.16 192.0 2622 2622 9.5 11.57 1300 1322 1059 2497 IRQ 7Q ,7Q 9 173.7 176.7 172.95 10.20 193.2 30.45 2918 2918 13.0 13.22 1485 1433 1754 1634 Fine river sand 167.6 167.6 178.6 177.0 171.00 11.35 193.6 3232 Mud 167.7 178.7 178.7 14.96 193.7 15.82 107.7 174.7 178.7 172.20 15.61 193.7 154.03 154.09 154.15 154.10 2.49 21.75 167.5 166.5 180.0 176.5 172.02 18.52 193.5 160.6 173.1 173.1 169.98 17.58 193.1 40.70 4092 4092 15.0 17.66 1984 2108 3024 1394 105.8 172.8 184.3 172.42 21.83 192.8 103.0 170.6 182.0 172.60 24.62 145.14 2.84 30.71 100.9 166.9 170.9 ISO.9 174.40 29.26 192.9 144.87 144.91 Coarse sand and gravel 164.2 174.7 185.7 172.45 27.82 194.2 49.07 4165 4105 20.0 21.30 2392 1773 4699 755 165.1 165.1 183.0 173.22 28.10 1754 168.6 108.0 185.6 170.85 27.41 107.0 173.0 183.0 172.00 29.53 139.11 139.18 139.55 139.72 139.39 3.08 36.46 104.0 166.5 171.5 181.5 170.87 31.48 199.5 HH 99 165.7 171.7 181.7 170.70 33.07 200.7 63.07 4190 520 4710 25.0 27.37 3074 1636 5688 575 174.4 181.4 172.15 35.42 201.4 on 187.7 171.20 30.11 201.7 104.4 180.4 169.15 35.45 3349 1599 Mud 133.54 133.01 133.71 133.90 133.09 .01 42.10 161.9 164.9 168.9 178.9 168.65 34.96 202.9 lqq ^ 163.4 108.4 17S 4 168.90 35.23 203.4 69.73 4217 793 5010 28.5 30.26 3399 1611 6060 531 177.1 107.85 34.30 176.6 167.85 35.59 204,6 1678 10Q OR 30.11 204.8 3649 1082 129.98 129.94 129.82 129.94 129.92 .02 45.93 161.6 163.0 165.6 175.6 106.60 36.68 204.6 74.08 32.41 3640 1704 0309 540 19S IQ 107 HQ 19H 09 164.2 105.70 37.64 204.2 76.14 4232 224 1001 5457 32.0 33.04 3711 1746 6474 539 10R qq 160.5 170.0 103.37 37.05 77.IS 3763 1778 0373 558 Clay 164.35 38.29 202.0 163.0 103.5 170.5 104.02 38.08 201.5 922 1733 125.84 125.91 125.80 125.87 125.80 .08 49.99 101.0 161.5 168.5 171.0 165.50 39.64 ..396 6818 125.70 125.83 125.72 125.78 125.75 .11 50.10 161.3 160.8 169.3 169.8 165.30 39.55 200.8 75.05 4234 260 898 5392 32.0 32.57 3658 1734 6802 509 1->- IC tot rn 19t HO 1‘>7 47 108.9 109.9 IRS KO 40.07 200.9 75.45 4234 260 917 5411 32.0 32.75 3678 1733 6892 503 Clay } OB 107 HQ 1 9 7 qq 105 68 40.30 201.3 1732 I-'” RR 42. SO 201.8 78.11 33.90 3808 1726 171.9 169.4 100.77 43.09 34.16 1725 7411 465 122.90 123.03 122.98 123.05 122.99 .69 52.86 162.9 162.4 169.9 109.9 160.28 43.29 202.9 260 1124 32.5 3895 1719 ,09 nr 161.2 177.2 169.2 167.20 44.21 203.2 80.21 4230 200 1138 5628 33.0 34.81 3910 1718 7604 452 159.1 161.1 109,1 169.1 104.00 41.06 203.1 1717 52.91 159.8 158.8 122.90 122.96 122.88 123.03 122.94 .00 52.91 101.1 160.1 167.6 Caisson launched. Caisson placed in position. Began concreting. Put ou air at 8 p.m. Started sand pump ul 2 a. in. All timber of caisson proper in place. Let oil air at i Took off clay hoist. Began sealing at 10.30 a.m Stopped air pumps at 10.50 a. 62 APPENDIX j— Continued. RECORD OP SINKING CAISSONS. PIER V. 63 BIERS. There will be four piers numbered from east to west and an Anchorage Pier. The Anchorage pier will stand on the east bluff and back of the present face of that bluff. It will contain approximately 700 cubic yards. Pier I will be on the East side of the river, standing in nine feet of water at high water. It will contain approximately 2 300 cubic yards. Piers II and III will be in the river. They will each contain approxi¬ mately 4400 cubic yards. Pier IV will be near the west bank. It will contain approximately 2 800 cubic yards. Piers I, II and III will finish 12 feet thick, 35 feet long between shoulders and 47 feet long over all under the belting course. Pier IV will finish 10 feet thick, 37 feet long between shoulders and 47 feet long over all under the belting course. The lower portions of Piers II and III will not be solid, but will con¬ tain three hollow spaces extending from the bottom of the masonry to high water. The piers shall be built in all respects to conform to the plans which will be furnished by the Engineer. The Anchorage Pier must be built around the anchor rods, which will extend from the bottom to the top of the masonry. FOUNDATIONS. The foundations will be put in by the company. The foundation for Pier I will finish at elevation 201, or 20 feet above low water, and the masonry will be started after the foundation is com¬ pleted. The foundation for Piers II and III will finish at elevation 141, or 40 feet below low water. The contractor will be required to lay the masonry for these piers while the pneumatic foundations are being sunk, and to keep up with the rate of sinking, and must be prepared to lay four feet of vertical masonry per day. The foundation of Pier IV is now finished at elevation 173, or eight feet below low water mark. It is surmounted by a water-tight curb, and the contractor will begin laying masonry on the completed foundation. APPENDIX K. SPECIFICATIONS FOR MASONRY. STONE. The masonry below elevation 180 and the footing courses of Pier I may be of limestone. The masonry of Pier I above the footing courses, and of Piers II, III and IV above 180 and in each case below elevation 229 shall be of granite with limestone backing. The masonry above elevation 229 shall be of limestone or of granite with limestone backing, as may be directed by the Engineer. The limestone used shall be that known as Bedford limestone from the quarries near Bedford, Indiana, unless some other limestone is expressly accepted by the Chief Engineer. The granite shall be a granite specially accepted by the Chief Engineer. All stone of each class shall be subject to the approval of the Engineer. MASONRY. The masonry shall be first class work, laid in regular courses. Copings, starling copings included, shall have the upper beds, wash, face and a width of six inches from face on lower beds six cut with true lines and surfaces. Belting shall have a like proportion of the lower bed bush ham¬ mered and shall have a face margin draft of four inches along the lower edge. The face of the upstream starling of Piers II and III shall be fine pointed with no projection exceeding one half inch. There shall be a draft of four inches on each side of the point of the pier on both the upstream and downstream ends of all piers below the starling coping. All other parts of the work shall have a rock face with no projections exceeding three inches from the pitch line of the joint and no hollows back of that pitch line. The interior faces of the walls in the hollow portion of Piers II and III shall have no projections exceeding six inches and no hollows exceeding two inches from the true dimensions of the plans. The stones shall be cut and coursed out at the quarries, every dimension stone being marked for its place, and full course plans shall be furnished to the Resident Engineer before shipment. No course shall be less than 20 inches thick nor more than 36 inches thick, and no course, except the main belting and coping, shall be thicker than the course below it. The backing shall be of the same thickness as the dimension work and with beds of precisely the same character. The bottom beds of the face stones shall never be less than 36 inches in either direction. Headers shall be at least six feet deep measuring from pitch line of the face, and stretchers shall measure at least five feet long in the wall. Every header shall retain a width of at least 24 inches at the full specified depth from the face. Every stretcher shall retain a length of at least four feet 36 inches back from the face. The beds of the principal pieces of backing in each course shall average at least eight square feet. The bottom bed shall always be the full size of the stone. The top bed shall nowhere be more than six inches less than the bottom bed. There shall be not less than three nor more than four headers between the shoulders on each side in each course. In the hollow portions of Piers II and III there shall be at least one stone in each course bonding three feet each way between the cross walls and the face walls of the pier. The upper and lower beds shall be parallell and dressed closely to true planes with no projections above those planes. The face edges shall be pitched to true lines. The cutting of joints for a distance of 12 inches from the face shall be the same as that of the beds. Joints shall be at right angles with face and beds unless otherwise shown on special plans. The hollows due to plugging must not exceed eight per cent of the surface of the bottom bed nor fifteen per cent of the surface of the top bed of any stone. No plug hole to be more than nine inches across nor more than one inch deep. Hollows due to plugging will not be allowed in limestone. Joints shall be broken at least 15 inches on the face. The stones for the coping shall be cut according to special plans to be fur¬ nished by the Engineer; all the beds shall be the full size of the stones, and special pains shall be taken with the bearings on the belting course below the coping. All stones shall be laid in full mortar beds. They shall be lowered on the bed of mortar and be brought to a bearing with a maul, no spawls being allowed. Thin mortar joints will not be insisted on, but the joints shall be properly cleaned on the face to a depth of one inch and a half and pointed in mild weather, the pointing to be driven in with a calking iron. The open¬ ings in the backing shall never exceed a maximum of six inches or an average of two inches between adjacent stones; these openings shall be filled with small stones thoroughly bedded and well packed in mortar. The face stones of every seventh course shall be dowelled into those of the course below with ronud dowels of one and one eighth inch iron, extending six inches into each course; the dowels shall be placed from eight to twelve inches back from the face and eight inches on each side of every joint. The stones of the upper course shall be drilled through before setting, after which the drill hole shall be extended six inches into the lower course; a small quantity of mortar shall then be put into the hole, the dowel dropped in and driven home and the hole filled with mortar and thoroughly rammed. 64 appendix K.— Continued. The four courses under the coping shall have the joints bonded with cramps of one inch round iron twenty inches long between shoulders, the ends being sunk four inches into each stone. MORTAR. The cement used in masonry will be furnished by the Bridge Company, but the contractor will be required to take care of the cement and will be held responsible for any waste. The mixture of mortar and the selection of the cement shall be directed by the Resident Engineer. The contractor will be required to furnish his own sand, which shall be subject to the approval of the Resident Engineer. CONDITIONS. The contractor will be required to furnish all necessary tools and materials of every description whatsoever excepting only cement. No material shall be measured or paid for which does not form a part of the permanent structure. No free transportation will be furnished, on the lines belonging to the Kansas City, Ft. Scott and Memphis R. R. system. The freight rates for this work will be at the rate of four mills per ton per mile. On other railroads contractors will make their own arrangements for freight. Approximate estimates will be made monthly as the work proceeds. In these approximate estimates the cost of the freight will be deducted from the contract price on all material not yet delivered at the bridge site. Stone quarried but not cut shall be estimated at one third the price of finished masonry. Stone quarried and cut shall be estimated at two thirds the price of finished masonry. Payment shall be made on these approximate monthly estimates deducting ten per cent as security for the completion of the work. TIME. The contractor must be prepared to begin laying the masonry on Piers II and III by August 1st, 1889, and to lay up at least 5000 yards of the lower portion of these two piers as fast as the foundation work proceeds. He will be held responsible for any delays in sinking these foundations which may be due to his failure to lay four vertical feet of masonry per da}’ whenever required. The remainder of the masonry shall be completed during the winter and spring of 1890, and the entire masonry shall be finished by July 1st, 1890, unless otherwise ordered. The right is reserved to suspend the work, and no stone shall be prepared for any portion of the masonry above elevation 229 until special orders to this effect are given by the Chief Engineer. (Signed) Lewis M. Loss. (Signed) Kansas City and Memphis Railway and Bridge Company. By Geo. H. Nettleton, President. 65 APPENDIX L. SPECIFICATIONS FOR SUPERSTRUCTURE. I. GENERAL DESCRIPTION. 1. The superstructure is divided iuto two parts: First, the Coutinuous Superstructure of the maiu bridge ; Second, the Deck Span at the west end. 2. The Continuous Superstructure will consist of a central span (resting on Piers II and III), 621 feet 0J- inches long, from each end of which will project a cantilever arm, 169 feet 4i inches long; of an anchorage span (from the Anchorage Pier on the Tennessee shore to Pier I), 225 feet 10 inches long, from which will project a cantilever arm precisely like those projecting from the central span; of two intermediate spans 451 feet 8 inches long (one of which will be suspended from the cantilever arms projecting from Piers I and II, and the other will be suspended at the east end from the cantilever arm projecting from Pier III and will rest at the west end on Pier IV), the entire continuous superstructure being 2258 feet 4 inches long, divided into one span of 225 feet 10 inches, one of 790 feet 5 inches and two of 621 feet 04 inches. 3. This Continuous Superstructure will be rigidly fastened to Piers I, III and IV, but will rest on expansion rollers on Pier II. Slip joints will be pro¬ vided for expansion at the suspended ends of the independent spans. 4. The trusses will be placed 30 feet between centers and will be divided into panels 28 feet 2f inches long, the right being reserved to shorten the panels by an amount not exceeding one half inch at any time before the work is actually manufactured. 5. The Deck Span at the west end will be 338 feet 9 inches long from the center of Pier IV to the center of the pin on Pier V, divided into twelve panels of 28 feet 2f inches each, the trusses being placed 22 feet between centers- The east end of the span will be carried in niches on the west side of Pier IV; the west end will have roller bearings over the center of Pier V. This span will include a vertical bent which will carry the west end of the west pair of stringers. 6. The estimated approximate weight of the Continuous Superstructure is 13 000 000 pounds; that of the Deck Span 1 000 000 pounds, making the total estimated weight of the superstructure of the bridge proper 14 000 000 pounds. PLANS. 7. Full detail plans showing all dimensions will be furnished by the engineer. The work shall be built in all respects according to these plans. The contractor, however, will be expected to verify the correctness of the plans and will be required to make any changes in the work which are necessitated by errors in these plans, without extra charge, where such errors could be discovered by an inspection of the plans. II. MATERIAL. 8. All parts, except nuts, swivels, clevises and wall-pedestal plates, will be of steel. The nuts, swivels and clevises may be of wrought iron, but shall have sufficient strength to break the bodies of the members to which they are attached. The pedestal plates will be of cast iron. 9. All material shall be subject to inspection at all times during its manu¬ facture, and the engineer and his inspectors shall be allowed free access to any works in which any portion of the material is made. Timely notice shall be given to the engineer so that inspectors may be on hand. STEEL. 10. Steel will be divided into three classes: first, High Grade Steel, which shall be used in all the principal truss members; second, Medium Steel, which shall be used in the floor system, laterals, portals, transverse braciug and the lacing of the truss members; third, Soft Steel, which shall be used only for rivets and at the option of the contractor where wrought iron is permitted. 11. The bolsters which carry the large pin bearings on Piers I, II and III shall be of cast steel. 12. In any case where it seems doubtful what quality of steel is required, High Grade Steel shall be used. 13. Steel may be made by the open hearth or by the Bessemer process, but no steel shall be made at works which have not been in successful opera¬ tion for at least one year. 14. All steel shall be made from uniform stock low in phosphorus, and the manufacturer shall furnish reports of the analysis of every melt certified by a chemist satisfactory to the Chief Engineer. 15. In the finished product of open hearth steel the amount of phosphorus shall not average more than y| T of one per cent and never exceed T ' 5 of one per cent. 16. In the finished product of Bessemer steel, the amount of phosphorus shall not average more than of one per cent and never exceed ^ of one per cent. 17. A sample bar three quarters of an inch in diameter shall be rolled from every melt, the method of obtaining the piece from which this bar is rolled to be the same in all cases, and the amount of work on this sample bar to be as nearly as practicable the same as on the finished product. The first laboratory test shall be made on this sample bar in its natural state without annealing. 18. A second sample bar having a cross section of one square inch shall be cut from the finished product of every melt. The second laboratory test shall be made on this sample bar in its natural state without annealing. 19. In the laboratory tests all observations as to elastic limit, ultimate strength, elongation and reduction shall be made on a length of eight inches. 20. A piece of each sample bar shall be bent 180 degrees and closed up against itself without showing any crack or flaw on the outside of the bent portion. 21. The first laboratory test shall meet the following requirements: High grade Steel. Medium Steel. Maximum Ultimate Strength, pounds per sq. iucli- 78 500 78 500 Minimum “ *■ “ “ '* .... 71 500 65 500 •• Elastic Limit, " “ “ 42 000 38 000 “ Pcrcenlage of Elongation in 8 incites .... 20 24 ** " ” Reduction at Fracture .... 40 45 22. The second laboratory test shall meet the following requirements: Maximum Ultimate Strength, pounds per sq. iucli.... 78 500 72 500 Minimum " “ .... 69 000 64 000 Elastic Limit. . .... 40 000 37 000 11 Pcrcenlage of Elougaliou in 8 inches .... 18 22 " “ “ Reduction at Fracture 38 44 30 000 28 50 23. If the ultimate strength comes within five hundred pounds of the maxi¬ mum or minimum limit, a second test will be made, and both tests will be required to come within the limits. 24. Every melt which does not conform with these requirements shall be rejected. 25. A full report of the laboratory tests shall be furnished certified by an inspector accepted by the Chief Engineer. 26. The broken aud bent specimens shall be preserved subject to the orders of the Chief Engineer. 27. Three notices of the acceptance of each melt shall be mailed on the day of such acceptance, stating the number of the accepted melt and quality of steel. Two of these notices shall be sent to the Chief Engineer at his Chicago and New York offices respectively and one to the shop inspector at the works. 66 APPENDIX L.—Continued. 28. Analyses shall be made by the manufacturer of every melt, showing amount of phosphorus, carbon, silicon and manganese, and certified copies of these analyses shall be furnished to the mill inspector, who will forward them to the Chief Engineer. 29. Weekly reports in full detail, including reports of chemical analyses, shall be sent to the Chief Engineer at his Chicago office not later than the end of the week succeeding the week in which such tests are made. 30. Three notices of the shipment of manufactured material identifying the melts and dimensions shall be mailed on the day after such shipments are made, in the same manner as the notices of acceptance of material. 31. Every finished piece of steel shall be stamped on one side near the middle of the bar and also on both ends of the bar with a number identifying the melt. 32. The finished product shall be perfect in all parts and free from irregu¬ larities and surface imperfections of all kinds. 33. The cross sections shall never differ more than two per cent from the ordered cross sections as shown by the dimensions on the plans. 34 All sheared edges shall be planed off so that no rough or sheared surface shall ever be left on the metal. 35. Steel for pins shall be sound and entirely free from piping. All pins in the main trusses shall be drilled through the axis. CAST STEEL. 36. A sample bar 1J inches in diameter and 16 inches long shall be cast from every melt. This sample bar shall then be turned down to three quarters of an iuch in diameter and the laboratory tests made upon it. 37. These laboratory tests shall show an ultimate strength of at least 70 000 pounds, an elastic limit of at least 40 000 lbs., an elongation of at least 15 per cent, in 8 inches and a reduction of 18 per cent, at point of fracture. 38. Steel castings shall be sound and as free as possible from blow holes. 39. If on the fin i .bed surface the blow holes cover more than , ^ ^ 0 0 part of the entire surface, and if any blow hole exceeds one eighth of an iuch in diam¬ eter, the casting shall be rejected. CAST IRON. 40. Cast irou shall be the best quality of dark gray charcoal iron of a quality suitable for car wheels, the castings to be entirely sound and free from blow holes. III. MANUFACTURE. 41. The work shall be done in all respects according to the detail plans furnished by the Chief Eugiueer. 42. Where there is room for doubt as to the quality of work required by the plans or specifications, the doubt shall be decided by using the best class of work which any interpretation would admit of. 43. All workmanship, whether particularly specified or not, must be of the best kind now in use. Past work done for the same chief engineer will never be recognized as a precedent for the use of other than the best kind of work. 44. Ragged edges or any kind of irregularities or unnecessary roughness will be sufficient ground for rejection. 45. All surfaces in contact shall be cleaned and painted before they are put together. 46. All work shall be finished in the shop and ample time given for inspection. 47. No material shall be loaded on cars until accepted by the inspector. 48. The finishing of work after loading will not be permitted. SOLID DRILLED WORK. 49. All riveted members which are made of High Grade Steel and all other pieces connecting with such members shall be solid drilled, no punching what¬ ever being allowed, excepting lacing bars which may be punched and reamed. 50. All plates, angles and shapes shall be carefully straightened at the shops before they are put together. Mill straightening will not be considered to meet this requirement. 51. The pieces shall be then assembled and held in position by clamps and bolts. 52. Where bolts passing through the metal are used, the holes shall be drilled in all metal more than three quarters of an inch thick, the diameter of the drilled hole to be at least one eighth of an inch less than the diameter of the finished hole. 53. In metal not more than three quarters of an inch thick punched holes may be used for fitting up, the diameter of the punched hole not to be more than three quarters the diameter of the finished hole, and the number of punched holes never to exceed eight in any one plate or four in one flange of any one angle. 54. After assembling, the work shall be drilled, the rivet holes being care¬ fully spaced in truly straight lines and at the exact distances shown on the plans. 55. After the drilling is completed a special reamer shall be run over both edges of every hole, so as to remove the sharp edges and make a fillet of at least -jJj of an inch under each rivet head. 56. The assembled parts shall then be riveted up without taking apart, unless specially directed by the Chief Engineer. 57. In general, all holes which are to pass through several thicknesses of metal shall lie drilled with all those pieces of metal assembled in the exact relative position they are to hold in the bridge. 58. In the case of connections between members having four webs, one member may be finished complete with the splice plates riveted on. The two inside webs of the adjoining member, one end being already faced, may then be fitted up separately in their true position and the rivet holes in the splices drilled. These inside webs may then be removed; the member to which they belong shall be assembled, riveted up complete and the ends faced, the facing to agree exactly with the two ends already faced. (See § 67.) The member shall then be fitted to the adjoining member and the rivet holes in the splices connecting the outside webs shall be drilled. 59. The size of rivets shown on the plans is the size of the cold rivet before heating. 60. The diameter of the finished hole shall not be more than -fa of an iuch greater than the diameter of the cold rivet. It is intended that the heated rivet shall not drop into the hole, but require a blow from a hammer to force it in. If it is found that rivets will drop easily into the holes, the inspector will con¬ demn those rivets and order a larger size. 61. In all cases where riveting is to be done in the field, the parts so to be riveted shall be fitted together in the shops and the rivet holes drilled while they are so assembled. 62. The riveted connections of the portals, cross frames and floor beams with the posts and chords shall be drilled with the several parts fitted together, excepting in the case of interchangeable floor beams. 63. An iron templet not less than two inches thick may be used instead of the floor beams when drilling the holes in the chords, and the same templet instead of the chords when drilling the holes in the floor beams ; a templet may be used in the same manner in drilling the connections between the floor beam and the supported upright at panel points where two inclined members come together; but the connection between the floor beam and the vertical sus¬ penders at panels point L„ and L, of the intermediate spans shall be drilled with the parts actually assembled and marked. With this arrangement two floor beams at each end of the intermediate spans, making eight in all, become special; the other floor beams are classed as interchangeable. 64. All rivets shall be driven by power wherever this is possible. 65. All rivets shall be regular in shape, with hemispherical heads concen¬ tric with the axis and absolutely tight. Tightening by calking or recupping will not be allowed. This applies to both power driven and hand driven rivets. 66. All pin holes and holes for turned bolts passing through the whole width of a riveted member shall be bored or drilled after all other work is completed. 67. All surfaces la contact shall be carefully faced, the facing to be done after the entrre member is assembled and riveted up, escept that in the case of chord sections vrith four webs, the inside webs may have on. end faced before they are assembled, these two faced ends to be carefully held against a plane surface when assembled and the corresponding end. of the other two webs to be faced after riveting and to agree with the ends already faced. 68. When two chord pieces are fitted together complete in the shop there shall be no perceptible wind in the length of the two sections. The chords are generally made in two panel lengths, or 56 feet 5£ inches long. In the case of shorter lengths a sufficient number of pieces shall be put together to make a continuous length equal to two of the long sections. 69. All chord sections shall be stamped at each end on the outside with letters and numbers designating the joints in accordance with the diagram plan furnished by the Chief Engineer. 70. The posts shall be fitted together for their entire length and bolted up and when so fitted shall be perfectly straight and free from wind. 71. The same rule shall apply to the marking of the posts as to the marking of the chords. 72. Pin holes shall be bored truly and at exact distances, parallel with one another and at exactly right angles to the axis of the member. 73. Pin holes in the posts shall be truly parallel with one another and shall be at right angles to the axis of the post. 74. Pin holes shall be bored with a sharp tool which will make a clean, smooth cut. Two cuts shall always be taken, the finishing cut never to be more than -J inch. Roughness in pin holes will be sufficient reason for re¬ jecting a whole member. 75. Measurements shall be made from an iron standard of the same tem¬ perature as the member measured. PUNCHED AND REAMED WORK. 76. All riveted members which are composed entirely of Medium Steel may be punched and reamed, but this does not apply to the connections between such members and High Grade Steel members, which connections shall be solid drilled throughout. 77. All plates, angles and shapes shall be carefully straightened at the shops before they are laid out. Mill straightening will not be held to meet this requirement. 78. The rivet holes shall be marked from templets and these templets shall lie flat without distortion when the marking is made. 79. The angles of stringers must be square and straight. The web plate must not project above the angles and the top surfaces of the top angles must be such that the outside edges are never above a true plane and never more than one-sixteenth of an inch below a true plane coincident with the roots of the angles. 80. The outside angle at the root of the angles connecting the stringers with the floor beams or the floor beams with the posts, chords or other mem¬ bers, shall never be less than a right angle, and the excess over a right angle shall never be greater than $ of an inch in the longer leg of the angle; the angle shall be perfectly straight. 81. In fitting these angles to stringers or floor beams they shall be so APPENDIX L— CONTINUED. 67 fitted that the exact length is measured to the root of the angle, the two roots being in exactly the same plane; the entire end of the assembled member shall then be faced. The effect of these requirements will be to prevent any reduc¬ tion of area of the angle at the root by facing and to secure a true surface of the whole width of the connection which will require no strain in the rivets to draw the parts together. 82. After laying out with templets, the rivet holes may be punched with a punch at least 3 S 2 of an inch smaller than the diameter of the rivets as given on the plans and working in a die only ^ of an inch larger than the punch. 83. The several parts of the member shall then be assembled and the holes reamed so that at least -Jj- of an inch of metal is everywhere taken out. 84. After the reaming is completed a special reamer shall be run over both edges of every hole so as to remove the sharp edges and make a fillet of at least j 1 ,,- of an inch under each rivet head. 85. The pieces shall be riveted together without taking apart. 86. All requirements as to size and quality of rivets and manner of rivet¬ ing and measuring shall be the same as the requirements for Solid Drilled riveted work. 87. All bearing surfaces shall be truly faced. 88. All sheared edges shall be planed off and all punched holes shall be drilled out so that none of the rough surface is ever left upon the work. FORGED WORK. 89. The heads of eye bars shall be formed by upsetting and forging into shape by a process acceptable to the Chief Engineer. No welds will be allowed. 90. After the working is completed the bars shall be annealed in a suitable annealing furnace by heating them to a uniform dark red heat and allowing them to cool slowly. 91. The form of the heads of the steel eye bars may be modified by the contractors to suit the process in use at their works, but the thickness of the head shall not be more than inch greater than that of the body of the bar, and the heads shall be of sufficient strength to break the body of the bar. 92. The heads and the enlarged ends for screws in laterals, suspenders and counters shall be formed by upsetting and shall be of sufficient strength to break the body of the bar. 93. Nuts, swivels and clevises, if made of steel, shall be forged without welds ; whether made of steel or wrought iron, one of each size shall be tested and be of sufficient strength to break the bars to which they are attached. 94. Eye bars shall be bored truly and at exact distances, the pin holes to be exactly on the axis of the bar, and at exactly right angles to the plane of the flat surfaces. 95. When six bars of the same billed length are piled together the two pins shall pass through both pin holes at the same time without driving. Every bar shall be tested for this requirement. 96. Pin holes shall be bored with a sharp tool that will make a clean smooth cut. Two cuts shall always be taken, the finishing cut never to be more than | inch. Roughness in pin holes will be sufficient reason for reject¬ ing bars. 97. Twenty full-sized steel eye bars shall be selected from time to time from the bars made for the bridge, by the inspector for testing. 98. No bars known to be defective in any way shall be taken for test bars, but the bars shall be selected as fair average specimens of the good bars which would be accepted for the work. MACHINE WORK. 99. All bearing surfaces shall be faced truly. 100. Chord sections and half-post sections shall be faced after they are riveted up complete, the facing to be perfectly true and square. In the case of four web chords, one end of the two inside webs only may be faced before riveting up. 101. The ends of the stringers and of floor beams shall be squared in a facer. 102. All surfaces so designated on the plans shall be planed. 103. All sheared edges shall be planed off, and all punched holes shall be drilled or reamed out. 104. All pins shall be accurately turned to a gauge, and shall be of full size throughout. 105. Pin holes shall be bored to fit the pins with a play not exceeding of an inch. These requirements apply to lateral connections as well as to any other pins. 106. The plans show the distances between centers of pin holes. Shop measurements, however, shall be made between the bearing edges of the pin holes, that is, between the inside edges of compression members and the out¬ side edges of tension members, with a proper allowance for the diameter of the pin. An iron standard of the same temperature as the piece measured shall always be used. 107. All screws shall have a truncated V thread, United States standard sizes. 108. Special pains shall be taken with the roller bearings on Pier II. The castings shall be accurately fitted together and when bolted up, the top surface shall be a perfectly true plane. 109. The rail plates shall be planed on the bottom after being riveted up, then planed on the top and the surface polished. Any roughness or irregu¬ larity which prevents an uniform opening between the rail heads shall be planed out. 110. The rollers shall have the hollow sides planed and the bearing sur¬ faces turned to a perfectly true cylinder and polished. 111. The rods passing through the rollers shall fit the holes with a play not exceeding of an inch. 68 APPENDIX L—Continued. 112. The side bars connecting the rods shall be drilled to fit the rods with a play not exceeding Jv of an inch, and the upper and lower surfaces of these side bars shall be planed. 113. The lower side bar in each instance shall be fitted with a graduated bronze scale, so divided as to register inches of motion of the top bearing, and the upper bar shall be fitted with a German silver vernier, so divided as to read to sixteenths of inches as graduated on the scale. 114. The two bearings, including everything between the masonry and the fourteen inch pin, shall be set up complete in a level position at the Athens shops and shall not be shipped before they have been examined and approved by the Chief Engineer. They shall be ready for his inspection on or before January 1, 1891. 115. Special pains shall be taken with the slij) joints at the suspended ends of the intermediate spaus; the surface of the joints shall be polished and fitted exactly. MISCELLANEOUS. 116. All material shall be cleaned, and, if necessary, scraped and given one heavy coat of Cleveland iron-clad paint, purple brand, put on with boiled linseed oil, before shipment. This applies to everything except machine fin¬ ished surfaces. 117. The same paint shall be used wherever painting is required. 118. All machine surfaces shall be cleaned, oiled and given a heavy coat of white lead and tallow before shipment. The inspector mnst see that this is a sub¬ stantial coat, such as is used on machinery, and not a merely nominal covering. 119. All small bolts, all pins less than six inches in diameter, the expan¬ sion rollers and .everything with special work on it, shall be carefully boxed before shipment. 120. The contractor will be required to furnish the field rivets for erection, furnishing 20 per cent, in excess of each size over and above the number actu¬ ally required, but this excess will not be estimated, but considered as taking the place of the work which is not done on these rivets. IY. INSPECTION. 121. The mill inspection shall be performed at the expense of the con¬ tractor, by an inspector accepted by the Chief Engineer. 122. This inspector will be required to furnish the certificates and notices in the manner specified above. 123. The mill inspector shall from time to time check the manufacturers’ analyses by analyses made by an independent chemist. 124. The acceptance of material by such inspector will not be considered final, but the right is reserved to reject material which may prove defective or objectionable at any time before the completion of the contract. 125. The inspection at the shops will be under the charge of an inspector appointed by the Chief Engineer, with such assistants as may be required. 126. Such inspector will be considered at all times the representative of the Chief Engineer, and his instructions shall be followed in the same manner as if given by the Chief Eugiueer. TESTS OF FULL-SIZED BARS. 127. The tests of full-sized eye bars shall be made in the large testing machine at Athens. 128. These bars will be required to develop an average stretch of twelve per cent, and a minimum stretch of ten per cent, before breaking. The elonga¬ tion shall be measured on a length of not less than twenty feet, including the fracture. 129. The bars will be required to break in the body. 130. They shall also show an elastic limit of not less than 32 000 lbs. and an ultimate strength of not less than 62 000 lbs., as indicated by the registering gauges of the testing machine at Athens. 131. In the case of bars too long for the machine, the bars shall be cut in two, each half reheaded, and both halves tested in the machine, the two tests, however, to count as a single test bar. 132. If the capacity of the machine (estimated at 1 200 000 lbs.) is reached before the bar is broken, the bar shall be taken out of the machine aud the edges shall be planed off for a length of 10 feet at the center until the section is reduced to the equivalent of 16 square inches of section of the original bar. The bar shall then be placed in the machine and broken ; when this is done the elongation shall be measured on a length of eight feet and an ultimate strength of 60 000 lbs. computed on the 16 inches of original section will be considered satisfactory. 133. In these tests, a failure to meet the required elongation will be con¬ sidered fatal aud be a sufficient cause for condemning the bars represented by the bars so tested, but the Chief Engineer shall examine carefully into the cause of the breakage of any bar which does not meet the requirements aud may order additional tests if he sees fit. 134. The failure of a bar to break in the body shall not be considered suffi¬ cient reason for rejection, provided the required elongation is obtained and not more than one quarter of the bars break in the head. 135. In all requirements and tests the qualities given are minimum or maximum requirements aud not averages unless expressly so stated. V. TERMS. 136. The work will be paid by the pound of finished work loaded on cars at Buffalo. 137. On riveted work and other material shipped from Athens, the differ¬ ence between the freight rates from Athens to Memphis and from Buffalo to Memphis will be borne by the contractor. 138. No material will be paid for which does not form a part of the finished superstructure. 139. All expenses of testing shall be borne by the contractor. 140. All riveted work shall be manufactured at the Athens shop, unless by special permission of the Chief Engineer. 141. Prices will be per pound at separate rates for High Grade Steel and for Medium Steel. 142. To avoid complications, all members the principal parts of which are High Grade Steel shall be estimated as wholly of High Grade Steel, and all members the principal parts of which are of Medium Steel shall be estimated as wholly of Medium Steel. 143. Cast Steel shall be estimated as High Grade Steel. 144. Cast aud wrought iron shall be estimated at the same price as Medium Steel. 145. The anchorage span, the east cantilever arm and one half the east in¬ termediate span shall be completed aud shipped on or before October 1st, 1890. 146. The Deck Span shall be completed and shipped on or before Decem¬ ber 1st, 1890. 147. The central span and the two adjoining cantilever arms shall be shipped complete on or before June 1, 1891. 148. The west intermediate span aud the second half of the east inter¬ mediate span shall be shipped complete on or before August 1st, 1891. 149. Approximate estimates shall be made at the end of each month of the material received and work performed up to that time. 150. In these estimates material received at the shops but not manufactured shall be estimated at 65 per cent of the contract price for finished material. 151. Material manufactured but not shipped shall be estimated at 85 per cent of the contract price. 152. Material completed and shipped shall be estimated at the full con¬ tract price. 153. Payments shall be made on these estimates on or about the middle of the following month, deducting therefrom 10 per cent., which shall be held as security until the completion of the entire contract. 154. In these monthly estimates no material will be estimated as received at the shop more than six months before the date set for the completion and shipment of such material. 155. In these monthly estimates no material will be estimated as manufact¬ ured more than four months before the date set for the completion and ship¬ ment of such material. 156. Tile contractors will-be required to keep tire materiel at their shops insured Irom injury by lire to the Ml amount ol the payments made on such material by the Bridge Company. APPENDIX L.-CQNTINUED. 69 YI. ERECTION. 157. The contractor will be expected to receive all material as it arrives on the cars, to unload this material and store it in a material yard until ready for erection. 158. He will be held responsible for the custody and care of all super¬ structure material after its arrival. 159. The material of the main Continuous Superstructure will be delivered on cars on the east side of the river. 160. When ready for erection, the Bridge Company will switch any cars on which this material has been loaded, to a point where it can be transferred to barges, no charge being made for such switching. 161. All material for the Deck Span at the west end will be delivered on cars on the west side of the river. 162. A track will be laid to a convenient position for unloading material, near Pier V, and no switching will be done after the material has once been unloaded. 163. 'l'he contractor will be required to keep all the material in good con¬ dition, and in case of its becoming dirty or rusty, will be expected to clean it before erecting. 164. The contractor will be required to paint all surfaces which will be inaccessible for painting after erection, the paint being furnished by the Bridge Company. 165. The contractor will be required to furnish all tools, barges and false work of every description, excepting power riveters. 166. The contractor will be required to remove all work which he may put in the river so that there will be nothing left either to interfere with navigation or to catch drift. 167. No holes shall be drilled or bolts placed in the piers without the express permission of the engineer. 168. All bolts so put in shall be removed and the holes carefully filled with Portland cement mortar, and any damages done shall be charged to the contractor. 169. The contractor will be required to erect the superstructure complete in every respect including riveting. 170. Everything is to be completed ready to receive the timber floor. 171. The erection shall include the placing and riveting of the iron hand rail. 172. The contractor will be expected to raise the ties for the central span and the adjoining cantilever arms and distribute them without charge. This does not include any framing; fitting or bolting. The ties will be delivered to the contractor loaded on barges. 173. The central span will be raised on false work. 174. The west intermediate span will be raised on false work. 175. The east intermediate span may be raised on false work, or without, at the option of the contractor. 176. The anchorage arm east of Pier I will be raised on false work. 177. The three projecting cantilever arms will be built out without false work. 178. It is expected that the anchorage arm and the cantilever arms project¬ ing from Pier I can be raised in the fall of 1890. That the deck span at the west end can be raised in the following winter. That the false work for the central span can be put in iu August and September of 1891, and the erection of this span completed in the following month. That the cantilevers can be built out and the entire bridge completed by January 1,1892. 179. All erection shall be done under the direction of the Chief Engineer and in conformity with his requirements. 180. The wall-plate castings shall be set on Piers II and III before the bottom chord is placed. 181. The expansion rollers and the bolster complete shall be set on Pier III. The bottom chords shall then be put together and riveted up complete. The expansion end shall then be adjusted so that the axis of the rollers will be exactly vertical at a temperature of 70 degrees Fahrenheit. This adjustment shall be made at a time when there has been no sun on the steel work for ten continuous hours, and when there has been no sudden change of temperature. The span shall be erected complete and the end rollers shall be examined again, and if any error is found, snail be corrected, the correction being made under the same conditions as to sunshine and sudden changes of temperature as the original adjustment. Special care shall be taken with the rollers while the span is being swung, and if by any accident they get out of place, the span shall be wedged again and the rollers be readjusted. 182. The eye bars iu the end panel of the top chord shall be stiffened so as to resist compression by fitting planks between the bars and bolting the whole together. 183. When the erection of the central span is completed, the two cantilever arms shall be built out and the two intermediate spans erected, thus com¬ pleting the bridge. 184. All rivets shall be regular in shape with hemispherical heads con¬ centric with the axis and absolutely tight. Tightening by calking or recupping will not be allowed. 185. All riveted joints which have to resist tension, this including all joints in both chords of the central span and all joints in the bottom chord of the intermediate spans, shall be riveted by power, except iu such special cases as the engineer may authorize hand-driven rivets. This authority will never be given for rivets in splices of web plates. 186. A power riveter, with air pump or with hydraulic pump and accumu¬ lator, will be furnished by the Bridge Company. The contractor will be required to keep the same in repair and will not be relieved from any respon¬ sibility in this connection, the Bridge Company only agreeing to bear the cost of the machine. 187. No extra bills are to be rendered by the contractor, except for new work not embraced in the contract. Charges for reaming holes, fitting bolts in place of rivets and other small work of this class will not be allowed. 188. The setting of the wall plate castings, including the drilling of holes in masonry for the anchor bolts, the packing of rust cement or lead under the castings and all other work connected therewith, is to be done by the contractor. 189. The contractor will be responsible for any damages which the Bridge Company may be held liable for in consequence of any of his work. January 4th, 1890. GEO. S. HORISON, Chief Eugiueer. APPENDIX M. TO SUPPLEMENTARY SPECIFIACTIONS, MAY 6, 1890. MODIFICATIONS OF SPECIFICATIONS FOR SUPERSTRUC¬ TURE OF BRIDGE ACROSS THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER, AT MEMPHIS, TENN., ACCEPTED APRIL 22d, 1890. STEEL. 10. Steel will be divided into three classes: first, High Grade Steel, which shall be used in all the principal truss members; second, Medium Steel, which shall be used in the floor system, laterals, portals, transverse bracing and the lacing of the truss members; third, Soft Steel, which shall be used only for rivets, and at the option of the contractor where wrought iron is permitted. 11. The bolsters which carry the large pin bearings on Piers I, II and III, shall be of cast steel. 12. In any case where it seems doubtful what quality of steel is required High Grade Steel shall be used. 13. Steel shall be made by the open hearth process, but no steel shall be made at works which have not been in successful operation for at least one year. 14. All steel shall be made from uniform stock low in phosphorus, and the manufacturer shall furnish reports of the analysis of every melt, certified by a chemist satisfactory to the Chief Engineer. 15. In the finished product of acid open hearth steel the amount of phos¬ phorus shall not average more than of one per cent and never exceed of one per cent. 16. In the finished product of basic open hearth steel the amount of phos¬ phorus shall not average more than of one per cent and never exceed T ^ T of one per cent. 17. A sample bar three-quarters of an inch in diameter shall be rolled from a four-inch ingot cast from every melt. The first laboratory test shall be made on this sample bar in its natural state without annealing. 18. A second sample bar having a cross section of one square inch shall be cut from the finished product of every melt. The second laboratory test shall be made on this sample bar in its natural state without annealing. 19. In the laboratory tests all observations as to elastic limit, ultimate strength, elongation and reduction shall be made on a length of eight inches. 20. A piece of each sample bar shall be bent 180 degrees and closed up agaiust itself without showing any crack or flaw on the outside of the bent por¬ tion. Two successful tests out of a total of three will be accepted as satis¬ factory. 21. The first laboratory test shall meet the following requirements: Mxitnutu LT.lmale Slreuglb, [hmioiIh per square inch Mluimuui Elastic Limit, pounds per square iuch. Minimum Percentage of Elougai.ou in S indies. Minimum Percentage of Reduction at Fracture. 22. The second laboratory test shall meet the following requirements : HiRh Grade Medium Soft Steel. Steel. Steel. lm Ultimate Strength, pounds per square inch. T8 500 72 500 63 00i ini Ultimate Strength, pounds per square iuch. 69 000 64 000 55 001 im Elastic Limit, pounds per square inch. 40 000 37 000 30 00' mum Porcenluge of Eloiigaliou in 8 inches. 18 22 21 imum Percentage of Reduction at Fracture. 38 44 51 23. If the ultimate strength comes within five hundred pounds of the maximum or minimum limit, a second test will be made, and both tests will be required to come within the limits. 24. Every melt which does not conform with these requirements shall be rejected. Cases in which the tests are thought not to give fair representations of the character of the material shall be referred to the Chief Engineer. 25. A full report of the laboratory tests shall be furnished, certified by an inspector accepted by the Chief Engineer. 26. The broken and bent specimens shall be preserved subject to the orders of the Chief Engineer. 27. Three notices of the acceptance of each melt shall be mailed on the day of such acceptance, stating the number of the accepted melt and quality of steel. Two of these notices shall be sent to the Chief Engineer at his Chicago and New York offices respectively and one to the Shop Inspector at the works. 28. Analyses shall be made by the manufacturer of every melt, showing amount of phosphorus, carbon, silicon and manganese, and certified copies of these analyses shall be furnished to the Mill Inspector, who will forward them to the Chief Engineer. The phosphorus and carbon analyses shall always be made. Analyses for silicon and manganese shall be made whenever called for by the Inspector. Copies of all analyses, whether made by request of the Inspector or by the desire of the manufacturer, shall be furnished to the Chief Engineer. 29. Weekly reports in full detail, including reports of chemical analyses, shall be sent to the Chief Engineer at his Chicago office not later than the end of the week succeeding the week in which such tests are made. 30. Three notices of the shipment of manufactured material, identifying the melts and dimensions shall be mailed on the day after such shipments are made, in the same manner as the notices of acceptance of material. 31. Every finished piece of steel shall be stamped on one side near the middle of tlie bar and also on both ends of the bar, with a number identifying the melt. If it is found impossible to stamp any particular piece on the ends, the Inspector may authorize the two end stamps to be put on the surface, within one-half inch of each end, the fact of the stamping being done in this way to be specified distinctly on all notices and invoices ; this may be done, however, by an agreed character. 32. The finished product shall be perfect in all parts and free from irregu¬ larities and surface imperfections of all kinds. 33. The cross sections shall never differ more than two per cent, from the ordered cross sections as shown by the dimensions on the plans. 34. All sheared edges shall be planed off so that no rough or sheared surface shall ever be left on the metal. 35. Steel for pins shall be sound and entirely free from piping. All pins in the main trusses shall be annealed before they are turned and shall be drilled through the axes. GEO. S. MORISON, Chief Engineer. 71 APPENDIX N. SUPPLEMENTARY SPECIFICATIONS, JANUARY 1. MODIFICATIONS OF SPECIFICATIONS FOR SITPERSTRUC- 19- I» «» laboratory tests all observations as to elastic limit, ultimate TURE OF BRIDGE ACROSS THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER strength . legation and .sanction shall be made ona length of eight inch.-. auavu v/ i u l u 20. A piece of each sample bar shall be bent 180 degrees and closed up AT MEMPHIS, TENN., ACCEPTED DECEMBER 29TIi, against itself without showing an}' crack or flaw on the outside of the bent 1890. portion. Two successful tests out of a total of three will be accepted as satis- STEEL factory. 21. The first laboratory test shall meet the following requirements: 10. Steel will be divided into four classes: first, High Grade Steel, which High Grade Eye-Bar shall be used in all the principal truss members except eye bars ; second, Eye- »“'■ Hg"** , , - , ,i • i Tvr„K„.„ Qfnnl Minimum Uliimate Strength, pounds per siiunre inch.bo UUU Si UUU bar Steel, which shall be used only in eye bars; third, Medium Steel, which Minimum Elastic Limit, pounds per square inch. 38 000 32 000 shall be used in the floor system, laterals, portals, traverse bracing and the Minimum Percentage of Elongation in 8 inches. 20 28 lacing of the tarns members; fourth, Soft Steel, which eball be need only for Minimum Percentage .1 Reduction at Fracture.:. • 10 rivets, and at the option of the contractor where wrought iron is permitted 22 T]le SBCOnd ] abo „ torJ test shall meet the following requirements: 11. The bolsters which carry the large pm hearings on Piers I, II and Ill shall be of cast steel. HlE 4 G ™ d6 E ^ ar aSST smS. 12. In any case where it seems doubtful what quality of steel is required, Maximum Ultimate Strength, pounds per square inch. 78 500 75 000 72 500 63 000 High Grade Sts.1 shall be used. £"=“ 2™ SS nZ 18. Steel shall be made by the open-hearth process, but uo steel shall be Minimum Percentage of Elongation in 8 inches. 18 20 22 28 made at works which have not been in successful operation for at least oue Minimum Percentage of Reduction ut Fracture. 38 40 44 50 14. All steel shall be made from uuiforra stock low in phosphorus, aud the 23. If the ultimate strength comes within five hundred pounds of the manufacturer shall furnish reports of the analysis of every melt, certified by a maximum or minimum limit, a second test will be made, and both tests will be chemist satisfactory to the Chief Engineer. required to come within the limits. 15 Iu the finished product of acid open-hearth steel the amount of phos- 24. Every melt which does not conform with these requirements shall be phorus shall not average more than of one per cent, and never exceed * of rejected. Cases iu which the tests are thought uot to give fair representations er cent of the character of the material shall be referred to the Chief Engineer, owe per cen^ produol oI ba5ic openie „tI, steel the amount of phos- 25. A full report of tlie laboratory tests shall he furnished, certified by au phorus shall uot average more than * of one per cent, aud never exceed inspector accepted by the Chief Engineer. 1 , , 26. The broken and bent specimens shall be preserved subject to the .j-tj. of one per cent. 1 17 A sample bar three-quarters of au inch in diameter shall be rolled orders of the Chief Engineer, from a four-inch ingot cast from every melt. A laboratory test shall be made 27. Notices shall be sent in duplicate to the Chief Engineer at his Chicago ou this sample bar iu its natural state without auuealing, but this test may be office and to the Shop Inspector at the works. made subsequent to the acceptance of the material and shall be for record 28. Analyses shall be made by the manufacturer of every melt, showing amount of phosphorus, carbon, silicon and manganese, and certified copies of 3 18 A second sample b.r having a cross section of oue square inch shall these analyses shall he furnished to the Mill Inspector, who will forward them be cut from the finished product of every melt. The second laboratory test to the Chief Engineer. The phosphorus and carbon analyses shall always be shall be made on this sample bar in its natural state without annealing. made. Analyses for silieon and manganese shall he made whenever called for 1891. by the Inspector. Copies of all analyses, whether made by request of the Inspector or by the desire of the manufacturer, shall be furnished to the Chief Engineer. 29. Duplicate reports in full detail, including reports of chemical analyses, shall be sent to the Chief Engineer at his Chicago office, and also to the shop Inspector at the works, uot later than the day on which the accepted material is shipped. 30. Two notices of shipment of manufactured material, identifying the melts and dimensions, shall be mailed on the day after such shipments are made, one to he sent to the Chief Engineer at his Chicago office, and one to the Shop Inspector at the works. 31. Every finished plate, bar or angle shall be stamped on one side near the middle with a number identifying the melt, and this stamp shall be surrounded by a heavy circle of white paint. Steel for pins shall have the melt numbers stamped on the ends. Rivet and laciug steel and small pieces for pin plates and stiffeners may be shipped in bundles securely wired together with the melt number ou a metal tag attached. 32. The finished product shall he perfect in all parts and free from irregu¬ larities aud surface imperfections of all kinds. 33. The cross sections shall never differ more than two per cent from the ordered cross sections as shown by the dimensions on the plans. 34. All sheared edges shall be planed off so that no rough or sheared surface shall ever be left on the metal. 35. Steel for pins more than four inches in diameter shall be hammered steel, and tests shall be made on this steel in accordance with the requirements of Section 22. In such tests au elongation of fifteen per cent, and a reduction of area of thirty per cent., given in each of two test bars tested separately, will be accepted as satisfactory, provided the character of the fracture is satis¬ factory. The beuding test required in Section 20 shall be made on pin steel, but pin steel will not be rejected, provided the bar will bend around a circle of a diameter equal to twice the thickness of the bar without cracking. Steel for pins shall be sound and entirely free from piping. All pins in the main trusses shall be annealed before they are turned and shall be drilled through the axes. GEO. S. MORISON, Chief Engineer. January 1, 1891. 72 APPENDIX O. TESTS OF STEEL EYE BARS. 73 APPENDIX o— Continued. TESTS OP STEEL EYE BARS. Tlie first four liars were entirely experimental and did not represent liars which it was intended to use in the structure. They were generally of rather too high a steel, and the result of these tests led to the adoption in the specifications of a special eye-bar steel, midway between the medium and high grade steel. Tests Nos. 5 and 6 were (1 inch bars which showed a weak steel below the requirements of the specifications, and led to the substitution of 7 incli bare for 6 inch bars for all floor-beam suspenders, the 7 inch bars being made of soft steel. Tests 13 and 14 were both of the same bar. The first test was unsatisfactory and showed a flaw in the steel. The second test was a test of a stretched bar reheaded after stretching, and not reaunealed ; as was to be expected, it broke in the new head. Test No. 16 showed a flaw. Test No. 17, of the same liar, when reheaded aud planed down to a reduced section, showed that the steel was excellent. Test No. 18 was good. Tests Nos. 19 and 20 of the same bar broke in heads which had been forged but not reannealed, the last having been forged on a stretched bar. Test 26 falls a little below the requirements of the specifications, and this was explained by a slight flaw at the fracture, the fracture taking place in the head. Test 48 led to the rejection of the bars represented by it, 74 APPENDIX P. REPORT OP TESTING COMMITTEE. Geo. S. Mobison, Esq. Chief Engineer K. C. dc M. By. rfr Bridge Co. Dear Sir : The committee appointed to report on the results of the testing of the Memphis Bridge on the 12tli of May, 1892, submits the accompanying tabulated statement of deflections observed in the different spans of the bridge, under the several test loads applied : The sign — indicates a downward deflection. The sign indicates an upward deflection. The statement gives the deflections for the north and south trusses of each span, and also movements eastward and westward of the north and south roller bearings on Pier II, the other bearings being all fixed. The testing was done with 18 locomotives weighing in the aggregate 1405.7 tons. Load I was applied to the cantilever arm east of Pier I. It consisted of four locomotives covering the entire length of cantilever and weighing 342 tons. Load II was applied to the span between Piers I and II. It consisted of 15 locomotives covering the entire distance between piers and weigh- j n g. 1190.3 tons. Load III was applied to the span between Piers II and III aud to the cantilever arm east of Pier I. It consisted of 12 locomotives covering the entire span (II-III) and weighing. 944 tons; and of four locomotives covering the entire length of cantilever and weigh- j n g. 320.3 tons. Load IV was applied to the adjaeeut spans of span (II-III) and consisted of nine locomotives from Pier II eastward, weighing. 690.2 tons; and of nine locomotives from Pier III westward, weighing. 715.5 tons. Load V was applied to the span between Piers III and IV, and consisted of 11 locomotives covering the entire length of span and weighing-825.2 tons. Load VI consisted of 18 locomotives coupled together, weighing 1405.7 tons. This train, moving at a speed of 30 miles per hour, entered the bridge at the west end and was stopped at the east end within a distance as short as practicable. The deflections under the rapidly moving load did not exceed the maximum deflections under static load. Observations taken on the empty structure immediately after the test showed that no permanent deflections had taken place. The vibrations under the running test were as moderate as could be expected, even from such massive spans. The behavior of the entire structure under the different tests made was altogether very satisfactory. Bespectfully submitted, ROBERT MOORE, C. L. STROBEL, G. BOUSCAREN, The Committee. LOCOMOTIVES USED IN TESTS. Position in Train. Railroad. Number. Kind. Weight in Tons. j K. C„ M. & B. It. R. 34 10 wheel 85.5 23 10 •• 85.5 35 10 85.5 31 10 “ 85.5 32 10 " 85.5 30 10 " 85.5 7 K. C„ Ft. S. & M. R. R. 96 Switch 67.5 97 67.5 89 67.5 10 23 67.5 11 I. C. R. R. 1159 8 wheel 78.5 13 L. N. O. & T. It. R. 55 10 “ 82.5 13 N. N. & M. V. R. R. 605 10 “ 92.3 14 M. & C. R. R. 198 8 •* 71.0 15 T. M. Ry. 201 10 83.0 16 St. L„ I. M. & S. Ry. 475 8 " 74.0 17 L. R. & M. R. R. 14 8 '■ 18 L. & N. R. R. 321 Switch Total. 73.0 1405.7 TABULATED STATEMENT OF RESULTS OF TESTS MADE ON THE MEMPHIS BRIDGE, MAY 12, 1892. Movements op Roller Bearings, in Feet. Points Observed. Plate 1 s K.C.&M.R.&.B.CO. Memphis Bridge General Map. Scale of Feel. Statute Mile. Scale of Meter: >)„ muting ot'S/K i »i tin- I’S.Jingrs. gunge, .itim/i/iis, in Od.lffll maym/iifa to K.C.&. M. R.&. B.Co, Memphis Bridge Bridge and Immediate Vicmily Plated. Pl.t le 0. South Elevation. Section at A. K.O.&. M.R.&.B.OO. MEMPHIS BRIDGE East Abutment. Scale Section at C.L. East Elevation. West Elevation. Plate 10 K.G.&M.R.&B.Oo. MEMPHIS BRIDGE ANCHORAGE AND SMALL PIERS. Scale of Anchorage. Scale of Small Piers. Anchorage Pier. Pier A. Side Elevation. End Elevation. Side Elevation. End Elevation. Plan. -jg Pier B. Side Elevation. End Elevation. Plan. ^£0 Side Elevation. II EndElevation. K.C.&M.R.&B.Co. MEMPHIS BRIDGE PIER I. Scale. Plan. . l>v Dickinson. Plate 12. SECTION AT E.F. K.CAM.R4 B.Oo. MEMPHIS BRIDGE Caisson _ Pier I SECTION AT □. END ELEVATION. SIDE .ELEVATION. SECTION AT C.L. Plate K. C-M. R &, B. C 0 MEMPHIS BRIDGE Caisson, Pier 111. Cutting lodge. Seals of Caisson Scale of Details ' J -? P y P Peei ■ ° ' -£— SIDE ELEVATION. ~S..cSy?7r / Plate 36* £ soo.jQOaoo 0.9 so 0 0 0.0 o 00 00000000 CTO 0 a c. o > |o| /JVate/£&**" SECTION AT B. PLAN OF CUTTING EDGE. PLAN. SECTION AT A. Plate 18. K. G A M. R AS. G 0. MEMPHIS BRIDGE Stmtfflcation of Clay at fier HI. Surface of Intermediate Sandy Material. Surface of Lower Clay A Acroas Center of Caissc 1(3 South of North End. 36 South of North End. Plate SI. SIDE ELEVATION. SECTION AT D K.CAM.RiB-Co. MEMPHIS BRIDGE PierV Scale SECTION AT A SECTION AT B F SECTION AT C SECTION ATEF END ELEVATION K.0.&M.R.&.B.OO. MEMPHIS BRIDGE Weaving Barges. Scale jl i ;i— ft. 2 Feet pier nr. pier n. Plate 23. KGAM.RAB.Oo. Memphis bridge Anchorage of Caisson HI. Scale of Anchorage. Scale of Barges. i \ o 0 O O J o c \ 0 « PL ,0,. „C>, END ELEVATION. ,jtf (fating HALF PLAN. / Wei Plate 60‘i‘ 4.'Singles ff’&'jj 2 Anff/e#G'4 ■ Steel TPeams ofParriegie Pattern. JVo. 30.36. K.O.&.M.R.&.B Go, MEMPHIS BRIDGE /Steel IPer/ms of Carnegie Whiter// JVo. 30.3 6. ELEVATION AT PIER H. /Steel Castir uf END ELEVATION. EXPANSION END. CANTILEVER. ll/on/son /a//era.\" P ^ ' Expansion Bearing, PierS. A-xP Scaie Panel Point L 0 PI ale. 40. Panel, Point L 0 SIDE ELEVATION AT PIER IV. INTERMEDIATE SPAN. FIXED END. .'/Pin Pteel Costing 3-9/ - 3-2i" Hate.41. K.OAM.RA-B.OO. Memphis bridge JointsinGhorda, Central Span. —4-0’- 7Pin Plate 42. *4 K-0.& M.RA.B.OO. MEMPHIS BRIDGE U. Panel Point, Central Span. ...it . .y i It 2 Oorts tidiam. 2-64- PJate 43. K.0.& M.R.&.B 00. MEMPHIS BRIDGE Expansion Joints.- LowerChord and Stringers, Intermediate Span.. s-sy^ MPin SECTION AT AB SECTION AT CD 2 Web Plates 30 ■i 4Angles jH /CoverPlate /4'i 2,-ingles <>'"/'■& /Plate /Si''6 '*> / WebPlate J9-J **4Angles .5 ■ 5 */’ / Web Plate 39' <& -4Angles 5*5 = 0 - UVu/eZ/i-X Scale 3i‘P/n /W>iPPla/cCO'£ -/Angles O'6’S' 7 Pin 2 Web Plates 24 'J A Angles 5*4 *!& SECTION ATAB. / Cover Plate 30*£ /Mb Plate 48 *6 4Angles 5 : 5>,% EXPANSION END 7 Pin, 2 Hods /fidiani. K.C.&.M RAB.Co Memphis bridge Details, Deck Spun. FIXED END Plate 50 . Intermediate Spun -151-6 C to C. EncLI’ine, -'’MeentlO)ludt‘panel* of 28'-2$"each; 20-0 (•.to c. Trusse .»; 50-5fC. to C. Chord*. K.C.&, M.R.&.B.OO- MEMPHIS bridge >S(ruin (Sheet, Intermediate Span. BOTTOM LATERAL SYSTEM. Her Load 2U00 the. per that per trns* ■ 50300 lbs. per half'panel • • 2700 . » - 10273 - • 26500 at top 41113 bottom. 1300(66) t/urmj eruption L 0 , L 1 2 Web Plate* 30*% =35.8’ J_ 4Anglet 0'0*i'*30.2)' 2 Web Plate. .10°*i'-2Or 2 - • _ :)(!■,%'-20.1 4Angle* O'O *| - 30.1 l 7 /OmarPlate jo’-t"- 14.0°. \ dim Plate* 30"*£‘-65.0° \ ZSide • 20.25" }/S5.43nd dAnytes O' 0-3'- :I6.2°.\ 2 Flat* a'-/'- td.O ) K-0.&.M.R&. B.OO. MEMPHIS BRIDGE StminSheet, Cantilever Arm. Plate 5!. cj2. yhmA. , EL. *1907000 /OPtn LL- 1330000 *32(^000 t ,703000 , IS00000 Tsotisooo. ‘40.0 Ml. s'- 4 liar ■41-21 \ 4 Bors. ,r >380000 20 L MSSOOO^ ^Tiol4000,l‘. *s+l(ISOOOOffl lo'pu »■ 13000000483.0° to'Pin 4BanSS"liFlo3(?’ ' Ill'll!' ►5 VL -1403000 ■ill- io/aooo *,DL-I203000 ~‘LL-3.90000 /O Pin 9“Pin 1300000fy 93.0' TOP LATERAL SYSTEM, - 32-H& -i<-- 2S-6& - ^ - 28-2.1 - - -j m*Sb' 624 ' ; e 3 ^rggUL- -2003000r^H HUS 9 Pin J 6 . “5 . “4 “3 , R gmbPtatee 304 -52.532 WebPMes 304-00.0 J 4Web Platen 30’m-97.3 4Angh* 0"> O'S’39.7J 4Any/er G-4'*i'-27.7j ' SAngto G"‘4’A'*5S.4j' " 8 V % »>4 \ s / % $/ \y s «,4 // \ / ® 1 ■$/ Yr.. //¥;• 1 y ,o°/\C »> f/ /'/^v 1 § 51 § § Itottom. Chord.; 30-0 C. to C. otTrusses. Actual Head Loud, fatten im IrainrSheet. A 32000 U a 3/000 L, 32000 M, 25000 U, 42000 1. 30000 (7 40000 A 47000 M 3 27000 17, 25000 L 04000 17, nooo 4/000 12000 c 25000 13000 Litre Land per Truss 2000lbs.per /hot-56500 the. per one ha!/panel. -24/0000 172.6" i^Pin -3262000 R . „ - . L o 4 neb Plato 30 ■ /- /- O.OJ /7J4 “ o g O o o 8Angles 0’4*J S5.4) § ® § ® § Assumed Wind Pressure - 300 l.bs. per foot at top BOTTOM LATERAL SYSTEM. Plate 52. Plate G3. K.O.&. M.B.&.B.0 o. MEMPHIS BRIDGE /Strain Sheet, Central Spart. K.C.S.M.R.S.B.CO. Memphis bridge Strain Sheet, Deck Span. P]ate 55 , U, afVebPMteoS^'fiS13t!^ HL-34Z40D C -trl/iiitv* o “I-ml' • j r.r. -hop. am T T ZWebFldtes 24‘§-r -r *—> - ddngler .7 »-/ - 3 7730 U JJL - 6/0200 XJ. •-> a. /'I K t _ / Cover Plate 30- /) 2 mb Plate* 24-}o\ . . ^Angles 5>4‘/g’\ S Dech&pan- 338-9 O.toO.EndIHns-, hue/ve equal halfpanels o/’28-2*'each; 22-o"c. toC. Trusses-, 42 L 4s'GtoG C/wrde. -Assumed Loads Head Load per panel per truss - 308.10 lbs. Live • • • ... 50500 - Wirul Pressuiv 200 tbs. per lineal foot on Loirer'C/wra OOO ‘ . . r Upper » BOTTOM LATERAL SYSTEM Plate 57. Piers 28-43 and 47-54. K.C.&.M.R&.B.OO. MEMPHIS BRIDGE West Approach Piers. Scale of Piers 6-34. Seale of Pier 44. _1- _ ■ ■ . 1 i —■ - _ " Peer. *.° - a ' 'y*' Elevation. Section atAB. Plan. Plan under cap. Pier 44. Hers 45 and 46, similar. Plan under cap. ■