File:Revision of the Niagara Railway Arch Bridge (1920) (14596544047).jpg

Identifier: revisionofniagar00char (find matches)
Title: Revision of the Niagara Railway Arch Bridge
Year: 1920 (1920s)
Authors: Charles Evan Fowler
Subjects: Bridges
Publisher: (New York) : American Society of Civil Engineers
Contributing Library: Brock University
Digitizing Sponsor: Brock University - University of Toronto Libraries

View Book Page: Book Viewer
About This Book: Catalog Entry
View All Images: All Images From Book
Click here to view book online to see this illustration in context in a browseable online version of this book.

Text Appearing Before Image:
e cables, with no stiffening trusses,carrying a single 7-ft. roadway. That no disaster occurred due to theheavy winds up and down the Gorge may be considered miraculous, assuch a disaster did befall the Wheeling Suspension Bridge, whichwas built by the same engineer, Charles Ellet, whose fame resultedfrom his work in the development of long-span suspension bridges.Doubtless the study of the faults of this very primitive bridge overthe Niagara Gorge led the late John A. Roebling, M. Am. Soc. C. E., toplan the railway suspension bridge with heavy stiffening trusses, andwith guys to the cliffs as well. That there was much competition between the suspension type andthe tubular continuous girder, is evidenced by the remark in Mr.Roeblings final report to the effect that as regards the success ofyour work more has been accomplished than was promised. The ideaof a perfectly rigid structure, such as a tubular bridge, was never heldout. • Transactions, Am. Soc. C. E., Vol. XL (1898), p. 125.
Text Appearing After Image:
REVISION OF NIAGARA RAILWAY ARCH BRIDGE 1923 The design for a tubular continuous girder bridge for this site wasmade in 1850, by James Hodges. This is shown in Fig. 2, and isundoubtedly one of the most pleasing, artistic and chaste designs evermade for a bridge with wholly rectangular lines. One is also led towonder if it would not, with some reinforcement, have been in usenearly up to the present, had it been built instead of the suspensiontype. The reason for its not having been adopted, as may be inferredfrom Mr. Roeblings remark just quoted, was due almost entirely tothe question of cost. There may also be some question as to whethersuch heavy stone piers would long have stood so close to the watersedge, especially in view of the fact that the side slopes under waterhave scoured out as much as 30 ft. near this site, during the lasttwenty years. The statement may be safely made, however, that if an engineerwere considering the various phases of the problem of bridging theGorge at trevisionofniagar00char

Note About Images