Charles Evan Fowler.

The coffer-dam process for piers : practical examples from actual work online

. (page 1 of 15)
Online LibraryCharles Evan FowlerThe coffer-dam process for piers : practical examples from actual work → online text (page 1 of 15)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


REESE LIBRARY

OF THE

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA.

Deceived J^<su~< , i$Q9



*/// } (n 3. ri y< c" \// )

I U LI U 1?



Accession No.



3obn Mile? & Sons.



THE COFFER-DAM PROCESS
FOR PIERS.



FOWLER,



THE



COFFER-DAM PROCESS
FOR PIERS.



PRACTICAL EXAMPLES FROM
ACTUAL WORK.



CHARLES EVAN FOWLER,

31 ember American Society of Civil Engineers ,
Bridge Engineer.



" Much of the success of any one in any kind of work, and especially in
work subject to the peculiar difficulties of that we are considering, depends
upon the spirit in which it is undertaken. "-ARTHUR MELLEN WELLINGTON.



FIRST EDITION.
FIRST THOUSAND.




NEW YORK:

JOHN WILEY & SONS.

LONDON: CHAPMAN & HALL, LIMITED.
1898.



Copyright, 1898,

BY
C. E. FOWLER.

6 2.



ROBERT DRUMMOND, ROBERT^DRUMMOND,

P. H. RANCKPUB. CO., 444 PBARL STREET,



Electrotypes.



NEW YORK.



INTRODUCTION.



THE greater part of foundation work is of an ordinary character. And
while difficult foundations have been quite fully treated by engineering writers,
ordinary ones have too often been passed over with mere mention, or treated in
such a general way that the information proves of little value in actual practice.

Many valuable examples of work of this character have been described in
current engineering literature, and it is hoped that by bringing them together
a real service will be rendered the profession, as well as much valuable time
be saved for considering other and equally important problems.

The history of the coffer-dam process would seem to indicate that engineers
of nearly a century ago gave more consideration to the smaller problems than
the engineer of to-day, who has apparently passed to the consideration of the
larger and of course more interesting ones.

That this is deplorable, is proven by the many cases where money has been
wasted in the after effort to make good the mistakes that have become appar-
ent where cheap construction of coffer-dams has been resorted to. The saving
in original cost, as between an indefensible method and a defensible one, is
often so small as to seem absurd when it has become necessary to make large
expenditures to rectify the errors.

Errors of judgment are more easily excusable with regard to foundations
than with any other class of construction, but where definite limits can be set,
economy will result by keeping as closely as possible within them.

Reference is made in the following pages to the splendid construction of
foundations by the Romans, where they could be built outside the water.
The Pont du Gard, illustrated in the frontispiece, is the most notable example
of this extant. It is interesting also as indicating their knowledge of the better
form of piers and methods of arch construction.

Although constructed during the reign of the Emperor Augustus, at the
beginning of the Christian era, it is in a remarkable state of preservation, aside
from repairs that have been made from time to time.

Probably the earliest recorded examples of the use of coffer-dams which
give details of construction are those constructed under the engineers of the
Fonts et Chaussees.



IV IN TROD UCTION.

Those built under Perronet at the bridge of Orleans were large and exten-
sive, and references made to the pile drivers and the pumps used on the work,
serve to illustrate the great amount of attention paid to planning the details of
construction.

The same engineer completed the piers of the bridge at Mantes, where the
coffer-dams were constructed to enclose both the abutment -and the nearest
pier within one dam, making the dimensions about 150 feet by 200 feet in the
extreme!

Hardly less notable were the coffer-dams at Neuilly, where the interiors
were so large, that the excavation did not approach near the inside wall of the
dam.

All of these were constructed prior to the year 1775, and the details as
shown in the elaborate drawings are of much interest to the engineer engaged
on similar works.

The coffer-dams constructed about 1825 by Rennie on the new London
bridge were the prototypes of those used at Buda-Pesth, but were elliptical in
form. They were designed with as much care, apparently, as any other feature
of the bridge, and from the fact that the water was pumped to twenty-nine feet
below low water and the work found tight, the details must have been very care-
fully executed.

However great the amount of care bestowed, there will be cases undoubtedly
where the difficulties cannot be foreseen, and it will become necessary to adopt
some of the many expedients cited to overcome them ; or they might better be
employed from the start, where any suspicion is had that trouble may ensue.

The question as to whether it will be best to use a crib or a sheet-pile cof-
fer-dam will most always be decided by the character of the bottom, the loca-
tion, and the character of the foundation to be built. It is advisable, whichever
type is selected, to make the size large enough, so that the excavation may be
completed without approaching too close to the inside wall of the dam, and so
that plenty of room may be had for the laying of the foundation courses.

The unit stress adopted for timber construction is believed to be as large as
will give good results in the majority of cases, both on account of the possibil-
ity of the construction having to undergo more severe usage than is expected,
and on account of the grade of timber which is most often made use of for tem-
porary works.

Where it is permissible from the standpoint of true economy, it is believed
that steel construction will commend itself for use. In most localities it will
not be long until metal construction will be found cheaper than timber for build-
ing coffer-dams, and in many places this is already true.

A great mistake is made, in nearly nine cases out of ten, by trying to use old
machinery, such as hoisting engines, pumps, and the like, which are ill adapted to
the purposes tor which they are intended, on account of lack of capacity and
only too often on account of having outgrown their usefulness.



IN TROD UC TION. V

The engineer would avoid many unpleasant situations by demanding that a
proper outfit be provided, and in the end gain the thanks of the contractor for
increased profits.

Extended acquaintance with Portland cement is increasing the use of con-
crete in construction, and this is a great gain for the engineer, as it is not only
superior to much stone that is used, but is better adapted to use in difficult
situations. It also lends itself more readily to use for ornamental details in pier
construction. That truly ornamental piers are not, however, those with need-
less and frivolous details, has been clearly set forth in the last article. Sim-
plicity and beauty are near relatives.

The best locations cannot always be chosen for piers, but careful examina-
tion will often be the means by which bad locations may be avoided.

The methods for determining the economic division of a given crossing of a
river, have not come into general use, probably on account of lack of easy ap-
plication. The method given is an accurate one and very simple to use, es-
pecially if the results are tabulated for a given loading.




TABLE OF CONTENTS.



ARTICLE I.

HI STL 1RICA L DK I 'EL O/>MEN T.

PAGE

Relation of Foundation to Bridge Design. Roman and Other Ancient Founda-
tions. Bridge at Shuster, Persia. Roman Arch at Trezzo. Four Ancient
Methods for Foundations. Method of Open Caissons. Method with Piles and
Concrete Capping. Method of Encaissement. Method of Coffer-dams.
Caesar's Bridge over the Rhine. Pneumatic Caissons and Coffer-dams appli-
cable to Different Cases. Origin of Coffer-dams and Primitive Types. The
Hutcheson Bridge at Glasgow. Robert Stevenson's Specifications for Coffer-
dams on Hutcheson Bridge. Old Directions for Triple-puddle Coffer-dam in
Forty Feet ( !) of Tide-water. W. Tierney Clark's Account of the Great Coffer-
dams for the Buda-Pesth Suspension Bridge. Character of Puddle used. Class
of Work to which Coffer-dams should be applied. Value of Actual Examples.. i



ARTICLE II.

CONSTRUCTION AND PRACTICE. CAY/. 1 COFFER-DAMS.

Definition of Coffer-dam. Simple Clay Bank. Drag Scraper for removing Soft
Bottom. Excavating Spoon. Larger Dredges mentioned. Crib and Embank-
ment used on Chanoine Dams on Great Kanawah River. Improvised Na-
smyth Sheet-pile Hammer. Failure on Ohio River because of Porous Bottom.
Crib Coffer-dam with Puddle Chamber, C., B. & Q. R. R. Cribs without
Puddle Chambers, Can. Pac. Ry. Cribs of Old Plank, Santa Fe Ry. Crib for
Arkansas River, St. L. and S. F. Ry. Sheet Piles used on Santa Fe. Sheet
Piles used on Union Pacific Ry. Coffer-dam on Grillage, Union Pacific Ry.
Circular Coffer-dam of Staves at Fort Madison, la. Circular Coffer-dam
pailure at Walnut St., Phila. Probable Cause of Failure. Form of Construc-
tion to adopt. Use of Puddle. Cutwaters. True Economy of Construction. . 13

ARTICLE III.

CONSTRUCTION AND PRACTICE. CRIBS AND CANT AS.

Stopping Leaks. Canvas Bulkhead at Keokuk, Iowa. Canvas Funnel for Springs.
Anchoring Cribs and Crib Coffer-dam at St. Louis. Timber Casings cov-

vii



Viil TABLE OF CONTENTS.

PAGE

ered with Canvas, Melbourne. Strength of Water-soaked Timber. Polygonal
Crib for Harlem Ship Canal Pivot Pier. Polygonal Crib for Arthur Kill
Bridge. Octagonal Crib, Coteau Bridge 28

ARTICLE IV.

PILE DRIl'ING AND SHEET PILES.

Historical Forms of Pile Drivers. Simple Sheet-pile Driver. Large Pile-driving
Derricks. Machinery for Pile Driving. Cost of Outfits. Nasmyth Hammers
of Various Types. Loads on Guide and Foundation Piles. Pulling Piles and
sawing off under Water. Forms of Sheet Piles. Wakefield Sheet Piling.
Shoes for Sheet Piling. 40



ARTICLE V.

CONSTRUCTION WITH SHEET PILES,

Water and Puddle Pressure. Calculation of Sheet Piling. Size of Wales and
Struts. Width of Puddle Chambers. Guide Piles and Guides. Ann Arbor
Sheet-pile and Puddle Coffer-dam, M. C. Ry. Failure with Sheet Piles at
Arthur Kill Bridge. Successful Method adopted. Sewer Coffer-dam for
Boston Sewerage System. Wakefield Sheet Piling. Harper's Ferry Coffer-
dam. Momence, 111., Coffer-dam, C. & E. I. Ry. Sheet Piling for Charles-
town Bridge Piers. Polygonal Sheet-pile Reservoir Coffer-dam at Fort
Monroe, Va 54

ARTICLE VI.

CONSTRUCTION WITH SHEET PILES.

Combinations of Various Forms of Sheet Piles. Sheet-pile and Puddle Coffer-
dam, Walnut Street Bridge, Chattanooga. Framing of Cumberland, Md.,
Coffer-dam. Sandy Lake Coffer-dam and Pile-driving Plant. Driving Sheet
Piles with Water Jet. Use of Sheet Piling on Foundations of Main Street
Bridge, Little Rock. Concrete Piers at Little Rock. Removal of Old Pier at
Stettin, Germany. Removal and Repair of Pier in Coosa River, Alabama.
Floating Coffer-dam for P. & R. R. R. Bridge over the Schuylkill. Use of Six-
inch Sheet Piles at St. Helier, Jersey. Stock Rammer to stop Leaks. Single-
pile Coffer-dams, Putney Bridge. Twelve-inch Sheet Piling, Victoria Docks.
Tongue and Groove Sheet Piling, Topeka, Kansas. Use of Dredging Pump
at Topeka - 66

ARTICLE VII.

METAL CONSTRUCTION.

Thin Steel Shells. Hawkesbury Oblong Metal Piers. Vertical and Inclined Cut-
ting Edges. Water-tight Construction. Pivot Pier of Clustered Cylinders.



TABLE OF CONTENTS. ix

PAGE

Double-cylinder Pier. Russian Ornamental Cylinder Piers. Lighthouse
Cylinders. Calculation of Thin Metal Cylinders. Forth Bridge Metal Coffer-
dams. Forth Bridge Circular Granite Piers. Combined Metal Coffer-dam and
Pier Base. Metal Sheet Piles 80



ARTICLE VIII.

PUMPING AND DREDGING.

Amount of Pumping indicates Success. Bascule for Pumping. Chapelet for
Pumping. Bucket Wheel used at Neuilly. BQX Lift Pump. Metal Lift Pump.
Diaphragm Pump. Steam Siphons. Van Duzen Jet. Lansdell Siphon.
Pulsometer Steam Pump. Maslin Automatic Vacuum Pump. Comparative
Efficiency of Centrifugal and Reciprocating Pumps. Tests of Centrifugal
Pumps. Direct-Connected Engine and Centrifugal Pumps. Use of Electric
Power. Suction-pipe Details. Type and Capacity of Pump. Methods of
Priming. Double-suction Pumps. Dredging Pumps. Clam shell and Grapple
Dredges. Sand Diggers and. Elevator Dredges. Dipper Dredges. Cost of
Dredging 9:



ARTICLE IX.

THE FOUND A TION.

Character of Foundation. ^-Kind of Bottom. Soft Bottom. Pile Foundation.
Soft Material overlying Hard Bottom. Clean Smooth Rock. Sloping Rock.
Rough Rock. Concrete Levelling Course. Concreting under Water. Mono-
lithic Concrete Piers. Concrete Piers at Red River. Monolithic Concrete on
Illinois and Mississippi Canal. Requirements for Good Concrete. Compo-
sition of Concrete. Contractor's Plant. Cableways 106

ARTICLE X.

LOCATION AND DESIGN OF PIERS.

Location at Fixed Site. Location at New Site. Government Requirements.
Examination of Site. Test-boring Apparatus. Mississippi River Commission
Boring Device. Economical Length of Spans. Ottewell's Formula for Eco-
nomic Span. Morison's Design for Piers. Omaha Union Pacific Piers. Rus-
sian Piers. Obstruction caused by Piers. Cresy's Experiments on the
Obstruction caused by Piers. Correlation of Theoretical Form and Archi-
tectural Design 120



TABLE OF COFFER-DAMS.-



, &

X


River and Location.


C-en,. *'


Character of Bottom.


i 5

2 6

3 8
4 9
5 U
6 15

7 17

S 18
9 18
10 18

II 20

12 2O
I 3 20
14 20
15 20
I ( ) 2O
17 20
IS 2 4
I 9 3
20 72

21 33

22 36

23 38
24 39
25 59
2t> 60
27 60
28 62
29 62
30 63
3i ( >3
32 64
33 66
34 67
35 67
36 70
37 72
3S ; 74
39 74
40177
-41 77
42 77
43 78
44|86


River 200 feet wide Ohio


None. 12' -f
Slight. 9' +
Tide. 40'
Swift. 54'
Swift. 34' -
Moderate. 20' -f-
Moderate. 6' +
Swift. 20' -i
Swift. 21' -
None. 15' -)-
Moderate. 7' -j-
Moderate. 6' +
Moderate. 6' -+-
Moderate. 7' -j-
Moderate. 6' -j-
Moderate. 6'
Swift. 19'
Moderate. Deep.
None. 12' -f-
Swift. ; 22'
Swift. 15'
Moderate. 25'
Tide. 28'
Moderate. ! 28'
Moderate. 6' -f-
Tide. 30' -
Tide. 10'
Moderate. 7'
Moderate. 6' -+-
Swift. 6' +
Tide. 6| +
None. 20'
Swift.
Moderate. 10' -(-
Swift. 8' -f
Moderate. 6' -\-
Moderate. 25' -j-
Moderate 10' -j-
Swift. 8' +
Tide. 13' +
Moderate. Deep.
Tide. 35'
Swift. 6' +
Tide. 15' +


Cemented gravel.
Gravel, sand, mud.
Sand & gravel over clay.
Gravel over clay.
Gravel over hardpan.
Gravel.
Soft.
Rock.
Rock.
Sand.
Gravel over rock.
Soft.
Sandy.
Gravel over soapstone.
Rock.
Soft.
Soft.
Mud over rock.
Rock.
Rock.
Rock.
Rock.
Clay over rock.
Rock.
Gravel.
Mud and clay.
Sand and gravel.
Sand and mud.
Rock.
Rock.
Soft.
Soft.
Gravel over rock.
Sand over hardpan.
Sand.
Sand.
Clay.
Gravel over rock.
Rock.
Earth over rock.
Mud.
Rock.
Sand.
Rock.






Danube at Bud a Pesth . -






Western part United States










Western part United States


Western part United States


Western part United States


Payette and Weiser, Union Pacific.
Mississippi Fort Madison


Schuylkill near Philadelphia, Pa...
U S Canal Keokuk








Arthur Kill Bridge


Coteau Bridge C Pac Ry


Ann Arbor, Mich., M. C. Ry
Arthur Kill Bridge


Boston Harbor sewer


Illinois River La Grange


Kankakee at Alomence


Potomac at Harper's Ferry
C harlestown Bridge Boston






Cumberland Md


Mississippi Sandy Lake


Arkansas Little Rock . .


Parnitz, Stettin, Germany
Coosa, Gadsden, Ala
Schuylkill P & R R R


St. Helier Bridge, Jersey, Eng. . . .
Thames at Putney


Victoria (B C ) Docks


Kaw at Topeka







SYNOPSIS OF EXAMPLES.














Form of Construction.


Inside
Dimensions.


Kind of Puddle. 'Vuddle* 8


Remarks.


i '


Earth bank.


TO' X 60'?


Clay and gravel. 5' 4-


No leaks.


5


Sheet piles.


20' X 58'?


Clay. 3'




6 2


Sheet piles.


Large.


Clay, sand &. gravel. 3~6'


Typical.


8 3


Sheet piles.


72' X 136' +


Clay and gravel. 2-5'


Difficult. 9 4


Earth bank.


90' X 33'


Clay and gravel. 19' 4~


J 4 5


Earth bank.?


200' X 600'


Clay and gravel.


Failed. 15 6


Crib.


Medium.


Clay. 3' 4-


17 7


Crib, single.


24' X 43'


Concrete inside.




18 3


Crib, single.


1 6' X 34'


Concrete inside.




IS Q


Crib, single.


17' X 43'


Clay outside.




Special. 18 10


Crib, single.


Medium.


Clay outside.




20 II


Sheet piles.


Medium.






Typical. 20 12


Sheet piles.


Medium.


Clay outside.




20 13


Sheet piles.


Medium.


Clay outside.


20 14


Sheet piles.


Medium,


Clay. Equal depth.


20 15


Box or crib.


12' X 36'


None.


On grillage. '< 20 16


Staves.


36' diam.


None.




On grillage. 20 17


Sheet piles.


So' diam.


None.




Failed. 24 18


Canvas on plank.


So' long.


Rotten manure.




Bulkhead. 30 19


Crib, double. 28' X 64'


Clay.


3'o"


Canvas used 32 20


Box and canvas.


Square.


Clay outside.




Movable. 33 21


Polygon crib. [47' diam.


Clay.


4' 6 "


36 22


Polygon crib.


44' diam.


Clay and gravel. 5' o"




38 23


Crib, single. i 34' diam.


Concrete inside.




39 24


Sheet piles. 13' X 44'


Clay and gravel. 2' 3"




59 1 25


Sheet piles.


Large.


None.


Two trials.


60 j 26


Sheet piles.


12' wide.


Clay. 6' to 8'




60 27


Sheet piles.


Medium.


None.




62


28


Sheet piles.


Medium.


Gravel.


Two trials.


62


29


Sheet piles.


Medium.


Gravelly clay.




63




Sheet piles.


18' 6" X 119'


Concrete inside.




63


3i


Sheet piles.


44' diam.


Sand and concrete. 7' -f-




64


32


Sheet piles.


Large.


Clay. ()' o"




66


33


Sheet piles.


15' x 50'


None.




67


34


Sheet piles.


829' long.


Clay.


S'




67


35


Sheet piles.


1 6' X 38'


Earth outside.






/o


36


Sheet piles.


23' X 55'


Clay.


2' to 4'


Removal.


72


37


Sheet piles.


28' X 28'


Clay.


12' -4-


Removal.


74


38


Sheet piles.


16' X 42'


Clay and gravel.


8' 4-


Movable.


74


39


Sheet piles.


Medium.


Clay outside.






77


40


Sheet piles.


Medium.


None.






77


4 1


Sheet piles.


500' long.


Clay.


2-7'




77


42


Sheet piles.


18' X 55'


Clay outside.






78


43


Metal.


60' diam.


Concrete seal.




86


44



LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.



NUMBER PAGE

The Pont du Gard, Mimes, France Frontispiece.

1. Bridge at Shuster, Persia, over the River Karun 2

2. Bridge over the Adda at Trezzo Milanese 3

3. Caesar's Bridge over the Rhine 4

4. A Primitive Solution. (Earth-bank Coffet -dam .) 6

5. Coffer-dam in Tide- water. (Sheet Piles and Puddle.} 8

6. Buda-Pesth Suspension Bridge. (Puddle Coffer-dam.} 9

7. Buda-Pesth Suspension Bridge, Plan of Coffer-dam No. 3 n

8. Scraper Dredge. (For Drag Dredging, C. & M. V. Ry.) 14

9. Coffer-dam at Dam No. IT, Gt. Kanawah River. (Earth and Crib.} 15

TO. Crib Coffer-dam, C., B. & Q. R. R. ( With Puddle Chamber.} 16

11. St. Lawrence River Bridge, C. P. Ry. (Crib and Coffer-dam] 17

12. Arnprior Bridge, C. P. Ry. (Crib and Coffer-dam} 18, 19

13. Crib Coffer-dam, A., T. & S. F. Ry. (A'o Puddle Chamber.} 21

14. Coffer-dam on Grillage, Payette and Weiser Rivers, U. P 22, 23

15. Coffer-dam on Grillage, Fort Madison Bridge, A., T. & S. F. Ry 24

16. A Crib Coffer-dam after a Flood. (Showing Plant.} 25

17. Apparatus used to force Clay into Crevice of Rock. (Leak.} 29

18. Details of Canvas and Plank Btilkhead, Keokuk, la 31

19. Inside View of Bulkhead, Lock pumped Dry, Keokuk, la 34

20. Canvas Funnel for closing Leaks. (Springs.) 35

21. Cribs for anchoring St. Louis Coffer-dam. (Crib and Puddle.} 36

22. Polygonal (Crib} Coffer-dam. Harlem Ship Canal Bridge 38

23 Details Coffer-dam, Arthur Kill Bridge. (Crib and Puddle.) 37

24. Coffer dam for Pivot Pier, Coteau Bridge. (Crib.} 38

25. Perronet's Pile Driver. (Historical; Man Power.) 41

26. Perronet's Bull-wheel Pile Driver. (Historical; Horse .Power.) 41

27. Sheet-pile Driver. (Hand-power Derrick.) 41

28. Pile-driver Derrick for Use on a Scow 42

29. Lidgerwood Pile-driving Derrick 43

30. Hammer with Nippers. (For Horse Power.) 43

31. Pile-driving Scow, New York State Canals. (Steam.) 44

32. Warrington-Nasmyth Steam Pile Hammer 45

33. Warrington-Nasmyth Hammer, Fair Haven Bridge 46

34. Cram-Nasmyth Steam Pile Hammer 47

35. Machine for sawing off Piles under Water 48

36. Pile-pulling Lever. (Hand Power.) ' 49

37. Pile-pulling Scow. New York State Canals. (Steam.) 50

xiii



XIV LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.



38. Sheet Piles and Sheet-pile Details 51

39. Charlestown Bridge. Driving Wakefield Sluet Piling 52

40. Arrangement and Diagrams of Sizes for Sheet-pile Coffer-dam x 55

41. Sheet-pile Guides and Clamps 57

42. Coffer-dam for Ann Arbor Bridge, M. C. Ry. (Sheet Piles and Puddle.) 58

43. Sewer Coffer-dam, Boston Sewerage System. (Sheet Piles and Puddle.} 59

44. Wakefield Sheet Piling. (Details. ) Ci

45. Type of Momence and Harper's Ferry Coffer-dams. (Sheet Piling.) 62

46. Coffer-dam on Charlestown Bridge. (Sheet Piling.} 03

47. Resevoir Coffer-dam, Fort Monroe, Va. (Sheet Piling.) 65

48. Compound Sheet Pile 67

49. Chattanooga Bridge, Bed-rock Pier No. 3 68

50. Framework of Coffer-dam, Cumberland, Md. (Sheet Piling} 69

51. Sandy Lake Coffer-dam. (Sh^'t Piling.} 7 o

52. Coffer-dam and Concrete Pier, Little Rock, Ark. (Sheet Piling 71

53. Removal of Masonry Pier at Stettin, Germany. (Sheet Piling.} 73

54. Coosa River Coffer-dam. (Sheet Piling.} 75

55. Stock Rammer. (For packing Clay to stop Leaks.) 77

56. Topeka Bridge Coffer-dam. (Sheet Piling.} 78

57. Havvkesbury Bridge, Caisson No. 6. (Metal Shell.') Si

58. Group of Cylinders for Pivot Pier. (Metal Shells.} 82

59. Pier of Two Cylinders, Victoria Bridge. (Metal Shells.} 83

60. Circular Saw for cutting off piles under Water 84

61. Cylinder-pier Bridge, Riga-Orel R. R., Russia. (Metal Shells.) 85

62. Cylinder Piers, with Diaphragm. (Metal Shells.} 86

63. Circular Granite Pier, Forth Bridge 87

64. Forth Bridge. (Metal Coffer-dam } 88

65. Forth Bridge. (Circular Granite Pier and Metal Coffer-dam} 90

66. Old Bascule Pump. (Hand Power.) 93

67. Old Chapelet, Side Eelevation. (Water-power Pump.) 94

68. Old Chapelet, End Elevation. (Water-power Pump.) 94

69. Hand Pump, Soldered Joints 95

70. Hand Pump, Screw Joints 95

71. Diaphragm Pump. (Hand Power.) 95

72. Van Duzen Jet Pump. (Steam Power.) 96

73. Lansdell's Siphon Pump. (Steam Power.) 96

74. Pulsometer Steam Pump 97

75. Section of Pulsometer 97

76. Centrifugal Pump, directly connected to Engine 98

77. Suction Details for Pumps ; 99

78. Centrifugal Pump, Double Suction 100

79. Dredging Pump 100

80. Dredging-pump Piston 101

81. Lancaster Grapple. (Derrick Dredge.) 102

82. Sand Digger. (Light Elevator Dredge. ) 103

83. Osgood Dipper Dredge, New York State Canals IO ^

84. Osgood Dipper Dredge, Details, New York State Canals Io ^

85. Metal Tube for Concreting Io -.

86. Metal Bucket for Concreting TO S



LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. XV



87. Concrete Piers. Red River Bridge 109

88. Concrete Forms, Red River Bridge no

89. Concrete Forms, Illinois and Michigan Canal in

90. Stone Crusher and Concrete Mixer, I. and M. Canal 112

91. Double-drum Guy Derrick, Am. Hoist & Derrick Co 113

92. Single-drum Horse Power, Con. Plant Mfg. Co .' 114

93. Double-drum Hoist Engine, Lidgerwood Mfg. Co 114

94. Crocker-Wheeler Electric Hoist 115

95. Lidgerwood Cableway Carriage and Skip 1 16

96. Lidgerwood Cableway at Coosa Dam. (Span 1012 Feet) n3

97. Hand Drill and Swab 121

98. Steam-power Well Driller 122

99. Test-boring Apparatus, Mississippi River Commission 123

100. Clamp and Maul. (Test Boring.) 124

101. Pier of Omaha Bridge, Union Pacific System 126

102. Russian Pier, Russian State Railways 127

103. Cresy's Experiments on the Form of Piers. 128

104. Cresy's Experiments on the Form of Piers 130




ARTICLE I. NTT =

THE COFFER-DAM PROCESS FORMERS.

~~ HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT.




HE continued increase in the weight of our bridge super-
structures and of the loads they have to carry has led to
increased care, to a very gratifying degree, in the prep-
aration of the foundations for bridge piers and abutments.
An old authority very truly states "The most refined elegance of taste
as applied in the architectural embellishment of the structure; the most
scientific arrangement of the spans and disposition generally of the superior


1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Online LibraryCharles Evan FowlerThe coffer-dam process for piers : practical examples from actual work → online text (page 1 of 15)