BOARD RECORDING LOCATION AND CONDITION OF SCOWS

[Transcriber's Note:

This chart was originally presented as an illustration, Figure 10.

It is shown here rotated from horizontal to vertical for readability.

As in the original, only a partial board is shown; the number of Scows

was at least 8.]

+---------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------/

| Scows. | H.S. | H.S. | H.S. | H.S. | H.S. | H.S. /

| | No. 1 | No. 2 | No. 3 | No. 4 | No. 5 | No. 6 /

+---------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------/

| Loading Points | | | | | | /

+--+------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------/

| | Pier No. 72 | | | | | | /

| +------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------/

| | Thirty-third | | | | | | /

| | Street East R. | | | | | | /

| +------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------/

| | Thirty-fifth | | | | | | /

| | Street East R. | | | | | | /

| +------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------/

| | Long Island City | | | | | | /

+--+------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------/

| Unloading Points | | | | | | /

+--+------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------/

| | Greenville. | | | | | | /

| +------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------/

| | Hackensack. | | | | | | /

| +------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------/

| | Passaic. | | | | | | /

| +------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------/

| | Governors Island.| | | | | | /

+--+------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------/

| Stake Boat. | | | | | | /

+---------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------/

| Dry Dock. | | | | | | /

+---------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------/

| | /

| Extra Pins. | Empty. White Pins not in use placed here. /

| | /

+---------------------+-----------------------------------------------/

The scows were all taken from the general service about the harbor; some

of them were practically new, while others had seen much service. They

were of two general types, truss-framed or bulkhead-framed; all were

flat-bottomed, with a rake of about 45° at bow and stern. The

truss-framed scows were built with a cross-truss every 10 to 15 ft., on

which rested, fore and aft, two classes of beams, main and intermediate.

The main beams were built of timbers ranging from 10 by 10 in. to 14 by

14 in., were scarfed at the joints, and trussed with the bottom logs.

The intermediate beams were of timbers varying from 6 by 6 in. to 10 by

12 in., had butt joints, and were dapped at the cross-trusses to give a

convex surface to the deck, which was built of 3-in. and 4-in. plank,

from 8 to 12 in. in width, running athwartship. The sides of the scows

of this class were spiked and bolted to trusses similar to those running

under the main beams. The bulkheaded boats had both sides and two

longitudinal bulkheads placed so as to divide the scow into three

sections of equal width, built of 8 by 8-in. or 10 by 10-in. timbers,

laid one upon the other, and bolted through from top to bottom. The

beams on these boats ran athwartship, rested on sides and bulkheads, and

ranged from 6 by 10-in. to 10 by 12-in., spaced 2 ft. apart, and dressed

to give a convex surface to the deck, which was usually 3 in., in some

cases 4 in., in thickness, and made up of narrow plank from 4 to 6 in.

in width.

[Illustration:

Fig. 11.

DIAGRAM OF DECK SHOWING BAYS]

These boats had all been designed for lighter work than they were here

required to perform, and a large amount of breakage occurred from the

start. In order that the contractors for the excavation should be

unhampered as to method of loading, the contracts provided that they

should pay for all damage done to the scows in loading, other than

ordinary and usual wear and tear, all other damage being at the expense

of the contractor for the disposal. A rigid system of inspection was

necessary to determine and record properly the damage for which each

contractor was responsible; and, as much of the breakage could not be

noticed from the exterior, a thorough examination of the interior of

each scow was made before and after every loading. In order to keep

proper records, the bays of each scow, formed by the cross-trusses, were

numbered, beginning aft with number 1 and going forward to the bow, and

the longitudinal bays formed by the main beams were lettered, beginning

with "_A_" on the port side. A beam broken in "1-_A_," therefore, would

be an intermediate beam in the stern port corner bay, and a beam broken

in "10-_A-B_" would be a main beam at the bow end on the port side. The

underside of each plank was marked with a number beginning with 1 at the

stern and increasing by unity to the bow. Fig. 11 is a diagram of a scow

in accordance with this system. In addition to recording the date,

location, extent, and party responsible for each damage, in a book kept

for that purpose, the injured member was marked with paint, the color of

which indicated the party responsible. The repairs were made by the

contractor for the disposal of material, and the cost was assessed

according to the marking in the boat.

The careful inspection of the damage done to scows and the cost of their

repairs enables a fairly accurate statement to be made of the amount at

different points, and it is here given on the basis of cost of repairs

per cubic yard, barge measurement, of material handled.

Cost, in cents

per cubic yard.

Repairs of damage done in loading material

from the terminal site 2.00

Repairs of damage done in loading material

from cross-town tunnels 1.32

Repairs of damage done in loading material

from under-river tunnels 1.77

Repairs of damage done in transporting and

unloading material from all points 1.81

The above figures do not include the expense due to scows which were

overturned or sunk while in the service, which amounted to 0.4 cent per

cubic yard, additional.

_Ninth Avenue Tunnels._--The two double-track tunnels under Ninth

Avenue, constructed to obtain 100 ft. of additional tail room on each

of four tracks, required an excavation 76 ft. wide, Fig. 12. The rock,

although fair, was not firm enough for so great a span, and, to obviate

the necessity of timbering, the center wall was built before excavating

for the full width. The dip of the rock at this point is almost 90°, and

to prevent blowing away the entire face in excavating for the tunnel,

the pit excavation was not carried west to the final face below the

springing line, a 10-ft. bench being left at that elevation. A top

heading 9 ft. high and 10 ft. wide was started above that bench and,

after penetrating about 10 ft., was widened to 20 ft. A cross-heading

was driven in each direction at the west end of the first heading; the

bench was then shot down, and the first 10 ft. of the longitudinal

heading was widened sufficiently to receive the center wall, Fig. 12.

After the middle wall had been concreted, any voids between its top

and the rock were grouted through pipes left for that purpose; the wall

was then protected by curtains of heavy round timber securely wired

together, and the remainder of the excavation was made by widening

the cross-headings toward the face. The muck was carried out by two

cableways, one on each side of the completed middle wall, each of which

was supported by a tower outside of the tunnel and a large hook-bolt

grouted into the rock at the inner end of the tunnel. Forms were built

for each tunnel complete, and the concrete was delivered by a belt

conveyor, running over the top of the lagging, and moved out as the

tunnel was keyed.

[Illustration:

Fig. 12.

TERMINAL STATION SKETCH SHOWING TWO TRACK TUNNELS

AT NINTH AVENUE AND THIRTY-THIRD STREET]

Transactions of the American Society of Civil Engineers, vol. LXVIII, Sept. 1910 The Site of the Terminal Station. Paper No. 1157 · 第 11 / 12 题