diff options
Diffstat (limited to '21083-0.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | 21083-0.txt | 3355 |
1 files changed, 3355 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/21083-0.txt b/21083-0.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..14ea1e8 --- /dev/null +++ b/21083-0.txt @@ -0,0 +1,3355 @@ +The Project Gutenberg EBook of Transactions of the American Society of +Civil Engineers, vol. LXVIII, Sept. 191, by F. Lavis + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + + +Title: Transactions of the American Society of Civil Engineers, vol. LXVIII, Sept. 1910 + The Bergen Hill Tunnels. Paper No. 1154 + +Author: F. Lavis + +Release Date: April 15, 2007 [EBook #21083] + +Language: English + +Character set encoding: UTF-8 + +*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS *** + + + + +Produced by Louise Hope, Juliet Sutherland and the Online +Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net + + + + + + + [Transcriber’s Note: + + Two other papers from ASCE _Transactions_ LXVIII (September 1910) are + referenced in this paper: + + No. 1150, “The New York Tunnel Extension...” by Charles W. Raymond, + available from Project Gutenberg as e-text #18229. + + No. 1151, “The North River Division” by Charles M. Jacobs, e-text + #18548, generally cited as “the paper by Mr. Jacobs”. + + The word “Figure” is used in two ways. It refers either to individual + numbered Figures (1-21), or to any of the four pictures that make up + each Plate, identified in the form “Fig. 2, Plate XXI”. Figures 1-4 + are always discussed as a group. + + Single letters in boldface are shown as =A=. Typographical errors are + listed at the end of the text.] + + * * * * * + * * * * + * * * * * + + American Society of Civil Engineers + Instituted 1852 + TRANSACTIONS + + Paper No. 1154 + + THE NEW YORK TUNNEL EXTENSION OF THE PENNSYLVANIA RAILROAD. + THE BERGEN HILL TUNNELS.[1] + + By F. LAVIS, M. Am. Soc. C. E. + + [Footnote 1: Presented at the meeting of April 6th, 1910.] + + +_Location._--That section of the Pennsylvania Railroad’s New York +Tunnels lying west of the Hudson River is designated Section “K,” and +the tunnels are generally spoken of as the Bergen Hill Tunnels. Bergen +Hill is a trap dike (diabase) forming the lower extension of the Hudson +River Palisades. + +There are two parallel single-track tunnels, cross-sections of which are +shown on Plate VIII of the paper by Charles M. Jacobs, M. Am. Soc. C. E. +The center line is a tangent, and nearly on the line of 32d Street, New +York City, produced, its course being N. 50° 30' W. The elevation of the +top of the rail at the Weehawken Shaft (a view of which is shown by +Fig. 2, Plate XXII), on the west bank of the Hudson River, is about 64 +ft. below mean high water; and at the Western Portal, or Hackensack end, +the rail is about 17 ft. above; the grade throughout is 1.3%, ascending +from east to west. The length of each tunnel between the portals is +5,920 ft. + +A general plan and profile of these tunnels is shown on Plate I of the +paper by Charles W. Raymond, M. Am. Soc. C. E. At Central Avenue a shaft +212 ft. deep was sunk. It is 3,620 ft. from the Weehawken Shaft. + + [Illustration: Plate XXI. + Fig. 1: K 94. P.R.R. Tunnels, N. R. D. Section K. (Bergen Hill + Tunnels.) from Hackensack Poral, North Cut and Cover Section, and + Portal looking East from Sta. 323. Dec. 8, 05. + Fig. 2: K 71. P.R.R. Tunnels, N. R. Div. Sect. K. (Bergen Hill + Tunnels) Method of using Cross-Section Rod in getting Sections of + Tunnel. Aug. 30, 06. + Fig. 3: K 115. P.R.R. Tunnels, N. R. Div. Sect. K. (Bergen Hill + Tunnels) Weehawken Shaft, North Tunnel Conveyor used by King Rice + and Garney for handling and placing concrete. June 3, 07. + Fig. 4: K 116. P.R.R. Tunnels, N. R. Div. Sect. K. (Bergen Hill + Tunnels) Weehawken Shaft, North Tunnel. View of conveyor for placing + concrete, with bucket suspended over hopper above belt. Steel forms + in fore ground. June 4, 07.] + + +_History._--The contract for this work was let on March 6th, 1905, to +the John Shields Construction Company; it was abandoned by the Receiver +for that company on January 20th, 1906, and on March 20th, of that year, +was re-let to William Bradley, who completed the work by December 31st, +1908. + +The progress of excavation and lining in the North Tunnel is shown +graphically on the progress diagram, Fig. 9, that of the South Tunnel +being practically the same. + + +_Geology._--Starting west from the Weehawken Shaft, the tunnels pass +through a wide fault for a distance of nearly 400 ft., this fault being +a continuation of that which forms the valley between the detached mass +of trap and sandstone known as King’s Bluff, which lies north of the +tunnels, and the main trap ridge of Bergen Hill. + +The broken ground of the fault, which consists of decomposed sandstone, +shale, feldspar, calcite, etc., interspersed with masses of harder +sandstone and baked shale, gradually merges into a compact granular +sandstone, which, at a distance of 460 ft. from the shaft, was +self-supporting, and did not require timbering, which, of course, had +been necessary up to this point. + +A full face of sandstone continued to Station 274 + 60, 940 ft. from the +shaft, where the main overlying body of trap appeared in the heading. +The full face of the tunnel was wholly in trap at about Station 275 + +30, and continued in this through to the Western Portal, where the top +of the trap was slightly below the roof of the tunnel, with hardpan +above. The contact between the sandstone and the overlying trap was very +clearly defined, the angle of dip being approximately 17° 40' toward the +northwest. + +The sandstone and trap are of the Triassic Period, and the trap of this +vicinity is more particularly classified as diabase. + +The character of the trap rock varied considerably. At the contact, +at Station 275, and for a distance of approximately 200 ft. west, +corresponding to a thickness of about 60 ft. measured at right angles to +the line of the contact, a very hard, fine-grained trap, almost black in +color, was found, having a specific gravity of 2.98, and weighing 186 +lb. per cu. ft. The hardness of this rock is attested by the fact that +the average time required to drill a 10-ft. hole in the heading, with a +No. 34 slugger drill, with air at 90 lb. pressure, was almost 10 hours. +The specific gravity of this rock is not as high as that of some other +specimens of trap tested, which were much more easily drilled. This rock +was very blocky, causing the drills to bind and stick badly, and, when +being shoveled back from the heading, as it fell it sounded very much as +though it were broken glass. + +The remainder of the trap varied from this, through several changes of +texture and color, due to different amounts of quartz and feldspar, to a +very coarse-grained rock, closely resembling granite of a light color, +though quite hard. The speed of drilling the normal trap in the heading +was approximately 20 to 25 min. per ft., as compared with the 60 min. +per ft. noted above, the larger amounts of quartz and feldspar +accounting for the greater brittleness and consequently the easier +drilling qualities of the rock. The normal trap in these tunnels has a +specific gravity varying from 2.85 to 3.04, and weighs from 179 to 190 +lb. per cu. ft. + +The temperature of the tunnels, at points 1,000 ft. from the portals at +both ends, remained nearly stationary, and approximately between 50° in +winter and 60° in summer, up to the time the headings were holed +through, being practically unaffected by daily changes in the +temperature outside. At the western end, after the connection with the +Central Shaft headings was made, there was almost always a current of +air from the portal to the shaft, and ascending through the latter. This +tended to make the temperature in this part of the tunnel correspond +more nearly with the outside temperature; in fact, the variation was +seldom more than 5° Fahr. + + +_Timbering._--These tunnels have been excavated entirely by the center +top heading method, almost invariably used in the United States. +Timbering, where required, was of the usual segmental form with outside +lagging, as shown in several of the photographs. In a few places it was +necessary to hold the ground as the work progressed, and, in such cases, +crown bars were used in the headings. + +There was some little trouble at the Western Portal, where the top of +the rock was very near the roof of the tunnel, as shown by Fig. 1, Plate +XXI. A side heading was driven at the level of the springing line until +a point was reached where the roof was self-supporting, and the +timbering was brought out to the face of the portal from that point. + + [Illustration: Plate XXII. + Fig. 1: K 26. P.R.R. Tunnels, N. R. D. Sect. K. (Bergen Hill + Tunnels,) Weehawken Shaft. Scaffold car in South Tunnel at Sta. + 267+60. Jan. 11, 06. + Fig. 2: K 31. P.R.R. Tunnels, N. R. Div. Sect. K. (Bergen Hill + Tunnels) Weehawken Shaft. Headhouse at ? elevator frame work, + looking West. Oct. 17, 06. + Fig. 3.--Round Holes in Concrete Forms. + Fig. 4.--Round Holes in Concrete Forms Completed.] + + +_Drilling._--Where no timbering was required, several different methods +were used in drilling and excavating the solid rock, though in all cases +a center top heading was driven. The four diagrams, Figs. 1, 2, 3, +and 4, give typical examples of these methods and show, in the order of +their numbers, the general tendency of the development from a small +heading kept some distance ahead of the bench, to a large heading with +the bench kept close to it. The notes on each diagram give the general +details of the quantity of drilling and powder used, methods of +blasting, etc., and on the progress profile, Fig. 6, is indicated those +portions of the tunnels in which each method was used. + +All the drills used throughout the work by Mr. Bradley were Rand No. 34 +sluggers, with 3⅝-in. cylinders, and the steel was that known as the +“Black Diamond Brand,” 1⅜-in., octagon. It was used in 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, +and 12-ft. lengths; toward the end of the work it was proposed to use +14-ft. lengths, but owing to some delay in delivery this length was +never obtained. The starters, 18 to 24 in. long, were sharpened to 2¾ to +3-in. gauge, which was generally held up to depths of 6 ft.; then the +gauge gradually decreased until it was 1¾ to 2¼ in. at the bottom of a +12-ft. hole. Frequently, as many as three or four starters were used in +starting a hole, and generally two sharpenings were required for each +2 ft. drilled, after the first 6 ft. It is estimated that about ¼ in. of +steel was used for each sharpening, and that there was an average of one +sharpening for every foot drilled. + +The total quantity of steel used up, lost, or scrapped on the whole work +was almost exactly 1 ft. for each 10 cu. yd. excavated, equal to 1¼ in. +of steel per yard, distributed approximately as follows: + + Sharpening ¾ to ⅞ in. + Other losses ½ to ⅜ ” + --------------- + Total 1¼ in. per cu. yd. + +An “Ajax” drill sharpener was used, and proved very satisfactory. Rubber +and cotton hose, covered with woven marlin, was used for the bench +(3 in. inside diameter, in 50-ft. lengths), for drills (1 in. in +diameter, in 25-ft. lengths), and for steam shovels (2½ in. in diameter, +in 50-ft. lengths). Hose coverings of wound marlin, and of woven marlin +with spiral steel wire covering were tried, but were not satisfactory, +owing to the unwinding of the marlin and the bending of the steel +covering. + + [Illustration: Fig. 1. {Drilling Method No. 1} + CROSS-SECTION, LONGITUDINAL SECTION, PLAN] + + Drilling Method No. 1: Small heading, 60 to 80 ft. long. Two columns + used in heading, with two drills on each. Drills on sub-bench and + main bench mounted on tripods. + + +--------------------------------------------------+ + | Per Round | + +---------+---------+---------+----------+---------+ + | | Total | No. of | Pounds | | + | | Depth | Cubic | of | Advance | + | | Drilled | Yards | Dynamite | | + +---------+---------+---------+----------+---------+ + | Heading | 140-155 | 18-21.6 | 93-131 | 5-6 | + +---------+---------+---------+----------+---------+ + | Bench | 110-120 | 53-60 | 76-97 | 3½-4 | + +---------+---------+---------+----------+---------+ + + +---------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ + | | Per Cubic Yard | Per linear Foot of Tunnel | + | +---------+----------+-------+---------+-----------+ + | | Linear | Pounds | Cubic | No. of | Pounds | + | | Feet | of | Yards | Feet | of | + | | Drilled | Dynamite | | Drilled | Dynamite | + +---------+---------+----------+-------+---------+-----------+ + | Heading | 8-9 | 5-6 | 3.6 | 29.-32 | 18-22 | + +---------+---------+----------+-------+---------+-----------+ + | Bench | 2 | 1.4-1.6 | 15.4 | 30.-31 | 21.5-24.6 | + +---------+---------+----------+-------+---------+-----------+ + | Total | 19 | 59.63 | 39.5-46.6 | + +------------------------------+-------+---------+-----------+ + | Per cubic yard, whole tunnel section | 3 to 33 | 2.1-2.5 | + +--------------------------------------+---------+-----------+ + + +---------------------------------------------------+------------+ + | | Number | + | Blasting Notes: | of Sticks | + | +------------+ + | Heading: First Round: 6 sticks, 60% in each cut | | + | hole, cut generally blasted twice | 36 to 72 | + | Second Round: 3 side holes each side, | | + | 5 sticks, 40% ea. | 30 | + | Third Round: Rest of side holes and dry | | + | holes, 5 sticks, 40% each | 40 | + | Stub holes, say | 5 to 15 | + | +------------+ + | Total Sticks | 111 to 157 | + | +------------+ + | Total Pounds | 93 to 131 | + | +------------+ + | Sub-bench: 4 widening holes; 2 to 3 sticks, | | + | each, 40% | 10 to 12 | + | 6 down holes; 5 to 7 sticks, each, 40% | 30 to 42 | + | Bench: 6 holes; 6 to 8 sticks each, 40% | 36 to 48 | + | Taking up bottom, average, say | 15 | + | +------------+ + | Total Sticks | 91 to 117 | + | +------------+ + | Total Pounds | 76 to 97 | + +---------------------------------------------------+------------+ + + + [Illustration: Fig. 2. + CROSS-SECTION, LONGITUDINAL SECTION, PLAN] + + Drilling Method, No. 2: Five drills in heading, mounted on three + columns; the holes marked with a cross (X) were drilled with the + drills on the center column. + + +--------------------------------------------------+ + | Per Round | + +---------+---------+---------+----------+---------+ + | | Total | No. of | Pounds | | + | | Depth | Cubic | of | Advance | + | | Drilled | Yards | Dynamite | | + +---------+---------+---------+----------+---------+ + | Heading | 190-220 | 35-42 | 134-196 | 6½-8 | + +---------+---------+---------+----------+---------+ + | Bench | 110-130 | 55 | 79-106 | 4 | + +---------+---------+---------+----------+---------+ + + +---------+--------------------+-----------------------------+ + | | Per Cubic Yard | Per linear Foot of Tunnel | + | +---------+----------+-------+---------+-----------+ + | | Linear | Pounds | Cubic | No. of | Pounds | + | | Feet | of | Yards | Feet | of | + | | Drilled | Dynamite | | Drilled | Dynamite | + +---------+---------+----------+-------+---------+-----------+ + | Heading | 5.4-6.0 | 3.9-5.0 | 5.3 |28 to 32.| 20.7-26.5 | + +---------+---------+----------+-------+---------+-----------+ + | Bench | 2.-2.4 | 1.4-2.0 | 13.7 | 27.-33. | 19.2-27.4 | + +---------+---------+----------+-------+---------+-----------+ + | Total | 19 | 55.-65. | 39.9-53.9 | + +------------------------------+-------+---------+-----------+ + | Per cubic yard, whole tunnel section | 2.9-3.4 | 2.1-2.8 | + +--------------------------------------+---------+-----------+ + + + +---------------------------------------------------+------------+ + | | Number | + | Blasting Notes: | of Sticks | + | +------------+ + | Heading: First Round; 2 to 3 relieving holes | | + | sprung with 4 to 5 sticks each | 8 to 15 | + | 8 cut holes, 7 sticks each | | + | (sometimes shot twice) | 56 to 112 | + | First side round, 6 holes, 6 sticks | | + | each | 36 | + | Widening and dry holes, 10 to 12, | | + | 6 sticks each | 60 to 72 | + | +------------+ + | Total Sticks | 160 to 235 | + | +------------+ + | Total Pounds | 134 to 196 | + | ----------------+------------+ + | Sub-bench: 8 holes, 4 to 6 sticks, each | 32 to 48 | + | | | + | Bench: 8 holes, 6 to 8 sticks, each | 46 to 64 | + | Taking up bottom, average | 15 | + | +------------+ + | Total Sticks | 95 to 127 | + | +------------+ + | Total Pounds | 79 to 109 | + +---------------------------------------------------+------------+ + + + + [Illustration: Fig. 3. + CROSS-SECTION, LONGITUDINAL SECTION, PLAN] + + Drilling Method No. 3: Heading same as second method, but larger lift + taken off bench, and lift holes drilled in bottom bench in order to + get down to grade in floor. Bench kept closer to heading. + + +---------------------------------------------------------+ + | Per Round | + +---------+------------+-----------+------------+---------+ + | | Total | No. of | Pounds | | + | | Depth | Cubic | of | Advance | + | | Drilled | Yards | Dynamite | | + +---------+------------+-----------+------------+---------+ + | Heading | 190 to 220 | 35 to 42 | 134 to 196 | 6½ to 8 | + +---------+------------+-----------+------------+---------+ + | | | | | | + | Bench | 145 ” 190 | 90 to 110 | 118 ” 167 | 6½ ” 8 | + +---------+------------+-----------+------------+---------+ + + +-----+-------------------------+----------------------------------+ + | | Per Cubic Yard | Per linear Foot of Tunnel | + | +------------+------------+-------+-----------+--------------+ + | | Linear | Pounds | Cubic | No. of | Pounds | + | | Feet | of | Yards | Feet | of | + | | Drilled | Dynamite | | Drilled | Dynamite | + +-----+------------+------------+-------+-----------+--------------+ + | Hd. | 5.4 to 6.0 | 3.9 to 5.0 | 5.3 | 28 to 32 | 20.7 to 26.5 | + +-----+------------+------------+-------+-----------+--------------+ + | B. | 1.6 ” 1.9 | 1.3 ” 1.8 | 13.7 | 22 ” 36 | 17.8 ” 24.7 | + +-----+------------+------------+-------+-----------+--------------+ + | Total | 19 | 50 ” 58 | 38.5 ” 51.2 | + +-------------------------------+-------+-----------+--------------+ + | Per cubic yard, whole tunnel section | 2.6 ” 3.1 | 2.0 ” 2.6 | + +---------------------------------------+-----------+--------------+ + + +---------------------------------------------------+------------+ + | | Number | + | Blasting Notes: | of Sticks | + | +------------+ + | Heading: First Round: 2 to 3 relieving holes | | + | sprung, with 4 to 5 sticks each | 8 to 15 | + | 8 cut holes, 7 sticks each | | + | (sometimes shot twice) | 56 to 112 | + | First side round, 6 holes, 6 sticks | | + | each | 36 | + | Widening and dry holes, 10 to 12 holes, | | + | 6 sticks each | 60 to 72 | + +---------------------------------------------------+------------+ + | Total Sticks | 160 to 235 | + +---------------------------------------------------+------------+ + | Total Pounds | 134 to 196 | + +---------------------------------------------------+------------+ + | | | + | Sub-bench: 4 widening holes, 4 to 5 sticks each, | | + | 2 rounds | 32 to 40 | + | 6 down holes, 5 to 7 sticks each, | | + | 2 rounds | 60 to 84 | + | | | + | Bench: 4 down holes, 5 to 7 sticks each | 20 to 28 | + | 6 to 8 lift holes, 5 to 6 sticks each | 30 to 48 | + +---------------------------------------------------+------------+ + | Total Sticks | 142 to 200 | + +---------------------------------------------------+------------+ + | Total Pounds | 118 to 167 | + +---------------------------------------------------+------------+ + + + [Illustration: Fig. 4. + CROSS-SECTION, LONGITUDINAL SECTION, PLAN] + + Drilling Method No. 4: 8 drills on 4 columns used in heading. Bench + taken off in one lift. Bottom taken up with lift holes. + + +--------------------------------------------------+ + | Per Round | + +---------+---------+---------+----------+---------+ + | | Total | No. of | Pounds | | + | | Depth | Cubic | of | Advance | + | | Drilled | Yards | Dynamite | | + +---------+---------+---------+----------+---------+ + | Heading | 310-320 | 63-71 | 215-257 | 8-9 | + +---------+---------+---------+----------+---------+ + | Bench | 190-210 | 89-100 | 107-155 | 8-9 | + +---------+---------+---------+----------+---------+ + + +---------+--------------------+------------------------------+ + | | Per Cubic Yard | Per linear Foot of Tunnel | + | +---------+----------+-------+----------+-----------+ + | | Linear | Pounds | Cubic | No. of | Pounds | + | | Feet | of | Yards | Feet | of | + | | Drilled | Dynamite | | Drilled | Dynamite | + +---------+---------+----------+-------+----------+-----------+ + | Heading | 4.5-5.1 | 3.4-5.7 | 7.9 | 35.6-45. | 26.9-45.0 | + +---------+---------+----------+-------+----------+-----------+ + | Bench | 1.9-2.2 | 1.2-1.7 | 11.1 | 21.1-24. | 13.3-18.9 | + +---------+---------+----------+-------+----------+-----------+ + | Total | 19 | 56.7-69. | 40.2-63.9 | + +------------------------------+-------+----------+-----------+ + | Per cubic yard, whole tunnel section | 3.-3.6 | 2.1-3.4 | + +--------------------------------------+----------+-----------+ + + +---------------------------------------------------+------------+ + | | Number | + | Blasting Notes: | of Sticks | + | | | + | All holes of whole round are cleaned and loaded | | + | before blasting is started | | + | | | + | First Round: 5-6 lift holes, 7 to 9 sticks each | 35 to 54 | + | First row, sub-bench, 6 holes, 6 to 8 | | + | sticks each | 36 to 48 | + | | | + | Second Round: Second row, sub-bench and widening | | + | holes, 8 to 10 holes, 6 to 8 sticks each | 48 to 64 | + | Stub holes | 10 to 20 | + | | | + | Bench: Total Sticks | 129 to 186 | + | Total Pounds | 107 to 155 | + | | | + | Third Round: 8 cut holes, 7 sticks each, often | | + | requires 3 to 4 charges | 112 to 224 | + | Fourth Round: 8 holes, First side round, 5 to 7 | | + | sticks each | 40 to 56 | + | Fifth Round: 8 holes, Second side round, 5 to 7 | | + | sticks each | 40 to 56 | + | 2 dry holes 5 to 7 sticks each | 10 to 14 | + | Sixth Round: 4 to 6 widening holes and dry holes, | | + | 6 sticks each | 36 to 48 | + | Stub holes | 20 to 30 | + | | | + | Heading: Total Sticks | 258 to 428 | + | Total Pounds | 215 to 357 | + +---------------------------------------------------+------------+ + + +The average quantity of powder used on the whole work was about 2.9 lb. +per cu. yd. The tables on the diagrams, Figs. 1, 2, 3, and 4, show that +the quantity actually used in making the advance at the main working +faces was about 2.5 lb. The difference is accounted for by the larger +percentage of powder used for trimming the sides, breaking out the +cross-passages between the tunnels, and the excavation of the ditches, +the latter operation not being done until the concrete lining was about +to be put in. + +There was some time, too, during the earlier stages of the work, when it +is believed that an excessive quantity of powder was used; for one or +two months it ran up to 4 lb. per cu. yd. + + [Illustration: Fig. 5. + MUCK CAR USED AT WEEHAWKEN SHAFT] + +The dynamite used was “Forcite.” At first, both 40% and 60% were used, +the 60% generally only for blasting the cut in the headings; during the +latter part of the work, however, the 60% was used exclusively. + +The rock as a rule broke very well, and only a comparatively small +quantity could not be handled by the shovels without being broken up +further by block-holing. In the sandstone the quantity of powder per +cubic yard was much more than for any of the trap. + +In drilling the Central Shaft, a 6-hole cut was made approximately on +the center line, east and west, the enlargement requiring about 18 more +holes, which were generally about 6 ft. deep, the average advance being +about 4 ft. per day of 24 hours. + + [Illustration: Fig. 6. + PROGRESS PROFILES OF NORTH AND SOUTH TUNNELS SHOWING MONTHLY + EXCAVATION] + +The drills were run by steam until a depth of about 150 ft. had been +reached, air from the plant at Hackensack being available after that +time. Four drills were used most of the time, and six later when air was +available. This work was done entirely by the John Shields Construction +Company, and a depth of 205 ft. was sunk in 6 months (from July 15th, +1905, to January 15th, 1906). A derrick was used for hoisting and +lowering men and tools during the sinking, elevators being put in later. + + + [Illustration: + PLATE XXIII.] + +_Drilling Data._--During the progress of the work, both general and +detailed observations were made of the drilling, the results of which +are shown in the tables. Table 1 has been compiled from the records as +platted daily on the chart from the inspectors’ reports, as shown by +Plate XXIII, and described on page 113. Table 2 contains some data +relating to the drilling in the headings. + +The general results of these observations show that the average time the +drills were “actually working” was 5.2 hours per shift, and that they +were actually “hitting the rock” about half of this time, or about 2.5 +hours per shift. The average depth drilled per hour, during the time the +drills were “actually working,” was 2.66 ft. + +The “actual working time,” as noted above, covers the period from the +time the drills were first set up in the heading after blasting until +they were taken down for the next blast; it does not include the time +occupied in setting up or taking down, which would probably average 30 +min. more per shift. It is believed that this figure will also apply +very closely to drills working on the bench, though no actual +observations were taken to determine this, on account of the +irregularity with which they were worked. + +The actual working time of the drills in the 736 shifts (7,360 hours) +covered by Table 1, was 3,826 hours, or 5.2 hours per shift. The average +depth drilled per yard, as shown in the last column of Table 1, agrees +fairly well with the figures on the diagrams, Figs. 1, 2, 3, and 4. + +Table 2 has been compiled from detailed timed observations of individual +drilling of down holes in the bench, for periods of 7 or 8 hours each, +in January, 1907. The work at that time was in fairly normal condition +at all points. + +The figures in the third column of Table 2 include the time required for +moving from one hole to another, when this occurred during the +observation, the time required for changing bits, oiling drills, etc., +and all delays of all kinds. A close record of the delays was kept, and +it was considered that, of the 93 hours, 48 min., in Table 2, the +unnecessary delays amounted to 5 hours, 7 min., or about 5½ per cent. + + TABLE 1. + + #S. Number of shifts covered by observations. + #Hrs Average number of hours worked per shift. + D/Hr Average depth drilled per hour per drill. + D/Yd Average depth drilled per yard. + Hack. Hackensack + Whk. Weehawken + CS Central Shaft + + ----------------+-----------+----+-----------+------+------+------ + Method. | Date. | #S | Place. | #Hrs | D/Hr | D/Yd + ----------------+-----------+----+-----------+------+------+------ + {| Aug. ’06 | 44 | Hack., N. | 5.69 | 2.78 | 10.1 + {| Sept. ’06 | 38 | ” N. | 5.80 | 3.77 | 11.1 + No. 1-- {| Aug. ’06 | 43 | ” S. | 5.60 | 2.89 | 9.1 + 4-drill {| Sept. ’06 | 36 | ” S. | 6.18 | 2.65 | 8.7 + {| Jan. ’07 | 16 | CS E. N. | 5.99 | 2.99 | 8.2 + {| Jan. ’07 | 20 | ” S. | 6.05 | 2.9 | 7.1 + {| Apr. ’07 | 48 | CS W. N. | 4.92 | 3.3 | 6.7 + {| Apr. ’07 | 48 | ” S. | 5.00 | 3.2 | 7.7 + | | | | | | + {| Dec. ’06 | 54 | Whk., N. | 4.95 | 2.16 | 4.52 + Nos. 2 and 3-- {| Dec. ’06 | 54 | ” S. | 5.23 | 2.14 | 4.54 + 5-drill {| Dec. ’06 | 52 | Hack., N. | 5.03 | 2.2 | 5.77 + {| Dec. ’06 | 54 | ” S. | 5.90 | 1.82 | 5.67 + | | | | | | + No. 4-- {| June ’07 | 56 | Whk., N. | 4.77 | 2.55 | 4.23 + 7-drill {| June ’07 | 58 | ” S. | 4.82 | 2.26 | 3.88 + | | | | | | + 8-drill {| May ’07 | 60 | Hack., N. | 4.67 | 2.44 | 5.00 + {| May ’07 | 60 | ” S. | 4.54 | 2.57 | 4.80 + ----------------+-----------+----+-----------+------+------+------ + + + TABLE 2. + + Hrs. _Hours._ + Min. _Minutes._ + + ----------------+----------+---------------+---------------- + Date. | Place. | Total | Number of feet + | | working time. | drilled. + ----------------+----------+---------------+---------------- + | | Hrs. Min. | + Jan. 14th, 1907 | Whk. N. | 8 0 | 15 + ” 15th, 1907 | ” N. | 7 32 | 12 + | ” N. | 7 22 | 14 + ” 12th, 1907 | ” S. | 8 0 | 20 + | ” S. | 8 0 | 11 + | ” S. | 8 0 | 10 + ” 11th, 1907 | Hack. N. | 8 0 | 13 + ” 17th, 1907 | ” N. | 7 10 | 10 + | ” N. | 7 5 | 11 + | ” N. | 7 10 | 10 + ” 16th, 1907 | ” S. | 4 20 | 10 + | ” S. | 6 9 | 10 + | ” S. | 7 ... | 8 + ----------------+----------+---------------+--------------- + Totals. | | 93 48 | 154 + ----------------+----------+---------------+--------------- + Average: 36.6 min. per ft. drilled, or 1.64 ft. drilled per hour. + +As a check on the average figures obtained from various sources, the +following estimate of the cost of drilling per cubic yard was made up +from these average figures, for comparison with the actual average cost +on the whole work. The cost records show this to be about $2.25 per yd., +exclusive of power for running the drills, almost exactly what the +following estimates give for theoretical average conditions, although no +effort was made to have this latter compare so closely. + + _Estimated Cost per Drill per Day._ + + Drill Runner 1 at $3.50 per day, $3.50 + Helper 1 ” 2.00 ” ” 2.00 + Nipper 1/5 ” 1.75 ” ” 0.35 + Heading foreman 1/12 ” 5.00 ” ” 0.42 + Walking boss 1/50 ” 7.50 ” ” 0.15 + Blacksmith 1/12 ” 4.00 ” ” 0.34 + Blacksmith helper 1/12 ” 2.00 ” ” 0.16 + Machinist 1/12 ” 3.00 ” ” 0.25 + Machinist helper 1/24 ” 1.75 ” ” 0.07 + Pipe fitter and helper 1/50 ” 5.00 ” ” 0.10 + Oil, waste, blacksmith coal, etc. 0.24 + Drill steel, 6 in. per shift 0.20 + ----- + $7.78 + + Average number of feet drilled per cubic yard 3 to 3.5 + Number of feet drilled per drill, per shift 10.5 to 12 + Number of yards per drill, per shift 3.5± + Cost of drilling, per yard, $7.78/3.5 $2.22± + +In all the foregoing tables and computations, the quantities used have +been those paid for. The quantity taken out, however, has been 10% more +than that paid for, and 28% more than the contractor was actually +required to take out. + +The specifications required that the excavation should be taken entirely +outside of the neat line, as shown on Plate VIII of the paper by Mr. +Jacobs, but not necessarily beyond this line, but that the contractor +would be paid for rock out to the standard section line, which is 1 ft. +larger on the sides and top and 6 in. deeper in the bottom than the neat +line. + +A great deal of the extra quantity was due to rock falling from the +core-wall side whenever one working face was behind the other. Blasting +at the face behind generally loosened more or less rock on the core-wall +side of the tunnel which was ahead, in one or two instances breaking +entirely through, as shown in Fig. 2, Plate XXVI, the hole in the +core-wall in this case being utilized by building a storage chamber in +it. + +Table 3 gives some of the statistics of drilling in the Simplon Tunnel, +as compared with the drilling on this work, the figures for the Simplon +being taken from papers read before the Institution of Civil Engineers +of Great Britain. + + TABLE 3. + -------------------------------------------+--------------+---------- + | | + | Bergen Hill. | Simplon. + -------------------------------------------+--------------+---------- + Drills set up in heading, percentage of | | + total elapsed time | 50% | 60% + Actually drilling the rock, percentage of | | + total elapsed time | 25% | 50% + Average advance per round (attack) | 8.5 ft. | 3.8 ft. + Average time for each attack | 36 hours. | 5 hours. + Average advance per day of 24 hours | 5 ft. | 18 ft. † + Depth of holes | 10 ft. | 4.6 ft. + Diameter of holes | 2¾ in. | 2¾ in. + Linear feet drilled per hour, per drill | 2.7 | 7.0 + Linear feet drilled per cubic yard | 5.0 | 6.0 + Pounds of dynamite per cubic yard | 3.4 to 5.7 | 8½ + Average depth drilled with one sharpening | 12 in. | 6½ in. + Total number of men per day of 24 hours* | 450 | 3,300 + -------------------------------------------+--------------+---------- + + [* On Bergen Hill Tunnels, for two full working faces at the + Hackensack end, about 3,000 ft. in from portal (March, 1908). At + Simplon, two full faces and two headings, at a distance of about + 5,000 ft. in from the portal (January, 1900). These both include + lining as well as excavation. The lining of the Bergen Hill Tunnels + progressed about twice as fast as the excavation; it is inferred + that on the Simplon it progressed at about the same rate as the + excavation.] + + [† At the Italian end, in Antigoric gneiss, which is stated to be + very hard rock.] + +The figures in Table 3 are for “heading only” in both cases, except for +the last item (number of men), the heading in the Simplon Tunnels being +about 60 sq. ft., as compared with the heading of Method No 4 (which has +been used for comparison), of 210 sq. ft. + + +_Mucking and Disposal._--The conditions affecting the disposal of the +muck, after blasting, were quite different at the two ends, the grade +descending in the direction of the loads at Weehawken and ascending at +the Hackensack end. At the Weehawken end the mouth of the tunnels was at +the bottom of a shaft some 80 ft. deep, Fig. 2, Plate XXII, the muck in +the tunnel cars being hoisted by elevators to a platform at the top from +which it was dumped into standard-gauge cars supplied by the Erie +Railroad, as shown by Fig. 7; or later hauled to the crusher or storage +pile, some 500 ft. distant, on the north side of Baldwin Avenue. At the +western end, the cars were hauled directly to the surface through the +approach cut, and the material, except that required for concrete and +rock packing, was deposited in the embankment across the Hackensack +Meadows, a haul of from 1,000 to 3,000 ft. beyond the portal. + +All disposal tracks were of 3-ft. gauge, the main running tracks being +generally laid with 60-lb. second-hand rails, although some of lighter +weight were used. + +Except for about 1,000 ft. in each tunnel at the Weehawken end, where +the muck was loaded by hand, four steam shovels, operated by compressed +air, were used, one at each working face. One of these was a “Marion, +Model No. 20,” weighing 38 tons, the others were “Vulcan Little Giant,” +of about 30 tons each. All these shovels were on standard-gauge track, +and were moved back from 300 to 500 ft. from the working face during +blasting. + + [Illustration: Fig. 7. + METHOD OF EMPTYING DUMP CARS AT WEEHAWKEN SHAFT: + FRONT VIEW, SIDE VIEW] + +At Weehawken, previous to the time the shovels were installed, the muck +was shoveled by hand into the cars from the bottom of the bench, and the +heading muck was dumped into them from the movable platform (Jumbo) +shown by Fig. 1, Plate XXII. There were three loading tracks at the +face. The cars used at that time were similar to that shown by Fig. 5, +but were about two-thirds the size and had no end door; stop-planks were +supposed to be placed in the ends but seldom were. The loads averaged +about ½ cu. yd. (measured in place). After the shovel was installed the +cars shown by Fig. 5 were used, and the loads averaged nearly 1 cu. yd. + +The empty cars were pushed up to the shovel by hand from the storage +track. When loaded, they were given a start with the bucket of the +shovel, and were then allowed to coast by gravity out to the storage +track near the shaft, where they were stopped by placing rolls of cement +bags or burlap on the rails. After the lining was started, the loaded +cars were stopped on the inside of the lining and only sent out over the +single track through this latter at stated intervals, when several cars +followed in close succession, with a long interval which permitted the +concrete to be brought in. The empty cars were hauled back to the +storage track near the working face by mules, one mule usually hauling +two cars at a time. + +Up to the time the trap rock was reached, about 1,100 ft. from the +shaft, the excavated material was disposed of by loading it on flat +cars. All the trap, however, was stored to be used later for concrete +and ballast. + +When the tunnels were in full working order, sixty muck cars of the type +shown by Fig. 5, were in use, about evenly divided between the two +tunnels. For some time the work was greatly hampered by lack of cars, +and even with the sixty finally obtained, there were many times when +extra cars could have been used to advantage to keep the shovel working. + +When mucking by hand, the mucking gangs consisted of from 15 to 20 men. +The maximum output was 50 cu. yd., and averaged about 35 cu. yd. per +shift; there was a great deal of trouble in keeping the gangs full, as +labor at that time was very scarce, and the tunnels were quite wet. The +maximum output of either of the shovels was 159 cu. yd. in one shift, +and the best average in any month--which was between July and December, +1907, during which time only the enlargement and bench of the Central +Shaft headings was being taken out from the western end--was 60 cu. yd. +per shift. As the shovels were generally idle for one shift out of +three, the quantity actually handled averaged 90 cu. yd. per shift +during the shifts the shovel worked. All these quantities were “measured +in place,” and, as previously noted, would be about equal to twice as +much measured loose in the cars. + +The shovels at both ends were usually worked with three crews for the +two tunnels; two day crews, one at each shovel, and a night crew which +was used in either tunnel as occasion required. The day crews generally +averaged from 45 to 60 hours overtime during the month, one of them +working during the early part of the evenings in the opposite tunnel to +the night crew. For a short time, when the ventilation at the western +end was very bad, four crews were worked, day and night crews in each +tunnel; but, as a general rule, the method of working three crews was +preferred by the men, and was less expensive for the contractor. + +At the Hackensack end, 4-yd., Allison, one-way, dump cars were used, +being handled by “dinky” locomotives, of which there were three in use +up to October, 1907, and four after that. One 15-ton Porter engine, with +10 by 16-in. cylinders, was used outside the tunnels for handling the +trains (from 6 to 8 cars) on the dumps and to the crusher; the other +three, 12-ton Vulcans, 9 by 14-in., were used in the tunnels. About 30 +dump cars were in use, and of these there were generally from 3 to 6 +under repair. + +Generally, 4 cars were hauled out together, although 5 and occasionally +6 were handled. The work was generally arranged so that the heavy +mucking shift alternated in the two tunnels, the two engines being +worked there and a single engine in the other tunnel. + +The tunnel engines left the cars on a track just outside the portal, +from which they were made up into trains of from 6 to 8 cars and taken +to the dump or crusher by the large “dinky.” + +The muck from the Central Shaft headings was loaded by hand into cars +similar to that shown by Fig. 5, but smaller and having no door at the +forward end. A double elevator took the cars to a platform about 20 ft. +above the surface, where they were dumped by revolving platforms, +similar to those at Weehawken, into storage bins or directly into +wagons. The muck was all hauled away in wagons; part of it was used to +fill some vacant lots, and part was hauled to the crusher at the Western +Portal. + +The method under which the best results were obtained was that in which +a full round was blasted every 36 hours, securing an advance of +practically 9 ft. of full section. During the first shift of the three, +as soon as the blasting had been completed and lights strung, the shovel +was moved forward, and cleaned up the floor to the main pile of muck, +the material from the blast being scattered from 150 to 300 ft. back +from the face; during this shift, also, the drillers mucked the heading +and set up their drills, the muckers helping to carry in the columns and +drills. During the second shift the main pile of muck was disposed of, +leaving not more than 2 or 3 hours’ work for the shovel on the third +shift. This left nearly the whole of the third shift for drilling the +lift holes. + + +_Ventilation._--At Weehawken considerable difficulty was caused by fog +and smoke accumulating in the tunnels after blasting. This was generally +worse on days when the barometric pressure was low outside, and worse in +the North than in the South Tunnel. A 6-ft. fan, driven by an electric +motor, was installed in the cross-passage at Station 274, 900 ft. from +the shaft, the headings at that time being about 300 ft. in advance of +this point, to force the air from the South into the North Tunnel, +drawing it in at the mouth of the South Tunnel and discharging it at the +mouth of the North Tunnel, thus insuring a circulation in both tunnels, +as shown in plan by Fig. 8. + + [Illustration: Fig. 8.] + +This necessitated, of course, that the cross-passages between that in +which the fan was placed and the mouths of the tunnels should be blocked +tight. There was some difficulty in keeping this blocking tight, owing +to the force of the blasting blowing out the bulkheads. The fan, +however, did good service when it and the bulkheads were in good order. +The compressed air discharged from the drills kept the headings fairly +clear, as well as that part of the tunnel between the headings and the +fan. The fan was moved ahead to the next cross-passage at Station 277 +when the work had progressed far enough, and was used there for some +time; it was found, however, that by the time the excavation had reached +Station 280, about 1,500 ft. from the shaft, there was practically no +further difficulty from fog and smoke. No satisfactory explanation was +found for this, as it would rather be expected that the ventilation and +trouble with smoke and fumes from blasting would be worse as the +distance increased between the mouth of the tunnel and the working face. +One explanation was offered: That the blasting of the softer sandstone +tended to create more and lighter dust than the heavier trap rock; +whether or not this was so, it is a fact that there was far less trouble +with fog and smoke after the sandstone was passed. + +At Hackensack, the principal cause of trouble was the smoke from the +“dinky” locomotives. As the tunnels progressed, this gradually became +worse, until a connection was made with the Central Shaft headings. +A fan was installed in the cross-passage at Station 316 (700 ft. in from +the portal), but was never worked properly. Apparently, the men, at +least the walking bosses and foremen, had little faith in the fan as a +means of ventilation; no real attempt was made to keep it in order or +operate it properly, and a great deal of time and money was lost groping +around in the smoke and fog, the density of which increased, not only +with the state of the atmosphere, but also with the direction of the +wind. On some days the tunnels easily cleared themselves, and on others +the smoke was so thick that a candle held at arm’s length could not be +seen. At this end, the South Tunnel was generally worse than the North. +After the headings were holed through between the portal and the Central +Shaft there was very little trouble, there being usually a strong +up-draft through the shaft. This was so pronounced when the wind was +blowing toward the portal, that the moisture-laden air, as it ascended +from the mouth of the shaft, presented the appearance of a heavy +rainstorm with the rain ascending instead of descending. When the wind +was blowing away from the portal, that is, from the southeast, the +effect of the shaft as a chimney was neutralized, and, consequently, the +smoke accumulated in the tunnels. To overcome this, a large blower, with +a fan 9 ft. in diameter, and with blades 4 ft. wide and 2 ft. 3 in. +long, operated by a vertical 12-h.p. engine, was installed at the top of +the shaft, and this kept the tunnels reasonably clear of smoke at all +times. After the bench and enlargement had passed the bottom of the +shaft, the use of the fan was abandoned, as it was found that the +tunnels cleared themselves fairly well, probably owing to the larger +cross-section reaching all the way to the Shaft. What little fog and +smoke there might be did not cause enough trouble to warrant the cost of +running the fan, which, owing to its location, required the whole time +of a mechanic in attendance day and night. + + +_Lighting._--During the earlier stages of the work, gasoline lamps and +Kitson lights were used. The former, of the familiar banjo type, and a +modification of this, with a section of wrought-iron pipe for the +reservoir, were very unsatisfactory, and were out of repair and leaking +a large proportion of the time. The Kitson lights were given only a +short trial, but were found unsatisfactory, owing to the necessity of +moving them frequently and having to set them up in insecure positions. +Electric lights were installed by Mr. Bradley, on his assumption of the +contract. + +The number of lamps maintained in each of the tunnels for the excavation +was approximately as follows: + + At the main working face From 8 to 10 + On and around the shovel ” 9 to 12 + Between the portal and the working face ” 60 to 80 + +The cost of lighting for the whole work averaged about 15 cents per +cu. yd., which is quite large. This was mainly due to the fact that +current was bought from outside sources during a large part of the time +(one-third of the yardage). Part of this current cost 5 cents per +kw-hr., and there were fairly heavy charges for connecting the tunnel +wiring system with the source of supply. Current bought from the Public +Service Corporation cost from 10 to 12 cents per kw-hr. delivered at the +mouth of the tunnel. + + +_Pumping._--The quantity of water encountered during the excavation of +the tunnels, measured somewhat roughly, was approximately as follows: + + At Weehawken 74 gal. per min. + At Central Shaft 1 ” ” ” + At Hackensack 18 ” ” ” + +The water at the Weehawken end had to be pumped from the bottom of the +shaft, a lift of about 90 ft., while at the Hackensack end it had to be +pumped back from the face up grade to the portal. + +The cost of pumping was about $100 to $125 per month for labor for the +whole work, besides the cost of the plant (about $1,200) and the power +for running it. + + +PROGRESS. + +The total time elapsed from the time of starting work at the Weehawken +end, in May, 1905, to the completion of the excavation, in May, 1908, +was almost exactly three years. Of this time about 40 days were lost in +February and March, 1906, when work was stopped by the Receiver of the +Shields Company, the total number of days actually worked being about +940, giving an average progress of 6.26 ft. per working day in each of +the two tunnels, which, omitting the Central Shaft headings, gives an +average rate of progress for each working face, of 3.13 ft. per day. + +These 940 days include practically all the time elapsed, except Sundays +and such few holidays as were observed. For some of this time, work was +being carried on at only one or two points; the time, therefore, +represents practically the total possible working time during the period +covered. + + +_Progress at Weehawken._--At Weehawken the total number of days worked +was 763, divided as follows: + +186 days in timbered section, about 426 ft., an average rate of 2.3 ft. + per day in each tunnel; + +176 days in hard sandstone, about 563 ft., an average rate of 3.2 ft. + per day in each tunnel; + +112 days in hard trap, about 267 ft., an average rate of 2.4 ft. per + day in each tunnel; + +289 days in ordinary trap, about 1,316 ft., an average rate of 4.55 ft. + per day in each tunnel. + + +_Progress at Central Shaft._--At Central Shaft the average length driven +per day in each of the four headings is shown by Table 4. + +TABLE 4. + + -----------+----------------+-----------------+---------------------+ + Location. | Number of days | Total length of | Average length of | + | worked. | heading, in | heading driven per | + | | feet. | day worked, in feet.| + -----------+----------------+-----------------+---------------------+ + | | | | + N.E. | 227 | 446 | 1.96 | + S.E. | 168 | 346 | 2.06 | + N.W. | 272 | 768 | 2.82 | + S.W. | 234 | 698 | 2.98 | + -----------+----------------+-----------------+---------------------+ + + +_Progress at Hackensack._--At Hackensack the total number of days worked +on the tunnels proper, all in trap rock (omitting the cut and cover) was +about 792, divided as shown in Table 5. + + TABLE 5. + + ------------------------------+----------+----------+----------+ + |Number of | | Average | + Location. | days | Advance. | advance | + | worked. | | per day. | + ------------------------------+----------+----------+----------+ + Station 323 to Central Shaft | | | | + headings | 492 | 1,450 | 4.5 | + Bench and enlargement of | 159 | { 1,150* | 7.2* | + Central Shaft headings | | { 906† | 5.7† | + Central Shaft headings to | | | | + Weehawken headings | 141 | 620 | 4.4 | + ------------------------------+----------+----------+----------+ + + [* Actual advance.] + + [† Equivalent linear feet of full section tunnel.] + +The best month’s work in each location was as follows, the actual +yardage excavated and paid for being reduced to equivalent linear feet +of full section. The tunnels were generally taken out to full section, +except for a small amount left in the bottom, which latter reduced the +equivalent linear feet of full section to about 95% of the actual +advance at the face. + + _Weehawken._-- + Feet + Linear per + feet. day. + Full timbered section, North Tunnel Nov., 1905, 87 = 3.0 + Sandstone ” ” May, 1906, 109 = 3.9 + Trap (normal) South ” July, 1907, 144 = 5.3 + + + _Hackensack (All trap)._-- + Feet + Linear per + feet. day. + + Portal to Central Shaft headings, + South Tunnel May, 1907, 139 = 5.0 + * Enlargement of headings, + ” ” Nov., 1907, 175 = 6.0 + Central Shaft headings to Weehawken + headings, North Tunnel Apr., 1908, 145 = 5.2 + + [* The actual advance of the bench this month was 202 lin. ft.] + + +_Central Shaft Headings._--During April, 1907, 122 lin. ft. of heading, +averaging 3.8 cu. yd. per lin. ft., were taken out in the South Tunnel, +west of the shaft. This was equal to 5.0 ft. per day for the 24 days +worked. + + +_The Best Week’s Work._--The best week’s work at either of the main +working faces, when the full section was being excavated in trap rock, +was 803 cu. yd., equal to 41.8 lin. ft. of full-section tunnel, or an +average of 6.0 lin. ft. of full section per day; this was from the South +Tunnel at Hackensack for the week ending January 11th, 1908. + + +_The Best Yardage._--The largest number of yards taken out in any one +week from one working face was 1,087, equivalent to 56.6 lin. ft. of +full section, or an average of 8.1 lin. ft. of full section per day. +This was bench and enlargement only (Central Shaft headings) in the +North Tunnel, Hackensack, for the week ending October 19th, 1907. + +The largest yardage for the whole work in any one week was 3,238 cu. yd. +from four working faces--two at Weehawken in full section and two at the +Hackensack bench and enlargement (Central Shaft headings). This was +equivalent to 168.4 lin. ft. of full-section tunnel, or an average of +6 ft. per day from each working face. + + +_The Best Month’s Work._--The best month’s work with each of the four +methods of drilling the headings, as shown in Figs. 1, 2, 3, and 4, +where the work was straight forward and the full section was being taken +out, was as follows: + + Method No. 1 About 90 ft. in sandstone. + ” No. 2 ” 100 ” in trap. + ” No. 3 ” 137 ” in trap. + ” No. 4 ” 145 ” in trap. + +In regard to these figures it should be noted, as stated previously, +that the organization of the men and plant was not properly completed +until near the time Method No. 4 was put in operation. + +In Fig. 9 is shown graphically the relation of the progress to the time +elapsed in the North Tunnel, the diagram for the South Tunnel being +almost exactly the same. + + +PLANT. + +The plant installed by the John Shields Construction Company, and taken +over by Mr. Bradley, was composed very largely of second-hand material, +and eventually most of it had to be replaced. Insufficient and +inefficient plant and delay in installation were largely responsible for +the small progress made by the Shields Company, and Mr. Bradley’s +endeavor to utilize this plant not only caused much delay during the +first 8 or 10 months after he started work, but also involved large +expense. + + +_Power Plant._--At Weehawken the plant installed by the Shields Company +consisted of three old locomotive boilers, each having a nominal +capacity of about 125 h.p., and one Rand and one Ingersoll-Sergeant +compressor, each of a rated capacity of about 1,250 cu. ft. of free air +per min. compressed to 100 lb. + +To this Mr. Bradley added two more second-hand locomotive boilers, and +another Rand compressor of the same type and capacity as the first. The +theoretical steam capacity of each of the five old locomotive boilers +was about 4,250 lb. per hour, or a total capacity of 21,250 lb. per +hour. + + [Illustration: Fig. 9. + PROGRESS PROFILE--NORTH TUNNEL] + +Theoretically, the demand on this steam was: + + Pounds per hour. + + Three compressors, about 5,600 lb. per hour each 16,800 + One dynamo About 1,000 + One 500-gal. pump ” 1,000 + One hoisting engine for elevators ” 2,000 + ______ + Total 20,800 + +Actually, there was considerable deficiency of steam when an endeavor +was made to work the three compressors at their full capacity. +A separate boiler was afterward installed to run the hoisting engine +for the elevators and the pumps, thus leaving a requirement of only +approximately 18,000 lb. of steam per hour, but even this was beyond the +capacity of the boilers, especially as one was almost always out of +commission. + +The two Rand compressors were 24 by 24 by 30-in., straight-line, +one-stage, steam-driven, with a nominal capacity of 1,250 cu. ft. of +free air per min. at 80 rev. per min. The Ingersoll-Sergeant was of +similar type and capacity. Therefore, the theoretical quantity available +was 3,750 cu. ft. of free air per min. + +The theoretical air requirements (as taken from manufacturers’ +catalogues) were: + + Cubic feet of free + air per minute. + + 20 Rand slugger drills (12 by 174) 2,088 + 2 Little Giant shovels + (taking air two-thirds of the time) 1,100 + ----- + Total 3,188 + +This estimate, based on the assumption (given in the catalogues) that +the drills would be working about three-fifths of the time, and the +shovels about two-thirds of the time, left apparently an ample margin +between the full capacity of the compressors and the requirements for +the drills; as a matter of fact, however, it was seldom that more than +80 lb. of air was available, and the pressure often dropped to 60 or 50 +lb. at the compressors. During the time this plant was in use the +greatest distance to the drills was about 1,500 ft. + +As this plant proved to be entirely inadequate to the demands, an +arrangement was made with the O’Rourke Construction Company on August +17th, 1906, whereby they agreed to supplement the air supply by 1,000 +cu. ft. of free air per min. at 100 lb. pressure. This arrangement was +not altogether satisfactory, and finally (on December 5th, 1906) an +arrangement was made with the same company to supply air up to 4,000 cu. +ft. of free air per min. at 100 lb., and the old plant was shut down. + +The new plant had been in use previously in the construction of the +River Tunnels. The air from it was compressed to 40 lb. by low-pressure +machines, one being used all the time and two when necessary. These +machines were built by the Ingersoll-Sergeant Company, the engines being +of the Corliss duplex type, cross-compound steam, with simple duplex air +cylinders, each compressor having a capacity of nearly 4,000 cu. ft. +of free air per min. This air, at 40 lb., was delivered to an +Ingersoll-Sergeant high-pressure machine, having Corliss cross-compound +engines, 14 by 26 by 36-in., with air cylinders of the piston inlet +type, 13¼ by 36-in., which compressed it to 100 lb. The capacity of this +latter machine, taking air at normal pressure, is 920 cu. ft. of free +air per min. working at 85 rev. per min.; by taking the air at 40 lb., +and working at a somewhat higher speed, this machine alone supplied all +the air used at the Weehawken end (approximately 4,000 ft.) from +December, 1906, to November, 1907, and, with very few exceptions, the +pressure was steadily maintained at from 90 to 100 lb., there being no +break-down of any kind. + +At Hackensack the plant taken over by Mr. Bradley consisted of six old +locomotive boilers and four Rand compressors, all of the same type as +those at Weehawken. To this he added two second-hand marine boilers, +each of a stated capacity of about 350 h.p., and two more Rand +compressors of the same type and capacity as the others, making the +total theoretical steam power available approximately 1,450 h.p., with a +compressor capacity of approximately 7,500 cu. ft. of free air per min., +equal to about 1,500 h.p., allowing for 15% of loss. + +Nowhere near the theoretical steam power was ever developed from the +boilers. The tubes of the old locomotive boilers were filled with mud in +many cases, and were always leaking. The marine boilers were not +properly installed to give the best results, and it was seldom possible +to work more than four compressors at once, or to keep the air pressure +at the power-house much greater than from 70 to 80 lb. at any time. + +This plant had been built by the Shields Company on the meadows +alongside the Erie and New York, Susquehanna and Western Railroads, and +the foundations were not made sufficiently strong to resist the effect +of the vibration caused by the passing trains. It was impossible to keep +the steam connections tight, and there was not only the loss of steam +due to leaky joints, but positive danger of one of the main steam lines +breaking entirely. After attempting to operate this plant for nearly 5 +months, Mr. Bradley determined to abandon the site and the boilers, and +build a new plant, farther back from the railroad, on solid ground, in +such a position that a spur track could be built to a coal trestle in +front of the boilers. + +Two pairs of Stirling boilers, with a total capacity of 2,000 h.p., were +installed. As a rule, at times of maximum demand, three of the boilers +were in use; after the Central Shaft was stopped, two were generally +sufficient, until, toward the latter part of the excavation, the losses +in the transmission of the air made it necessary to keep three going. + +Eight compressors (the six old ones with two brought from Weehawken), +were installed in the new power-house. All were of the same type, +namely, Rand, straight-line, steam-driven, 24 by 24 by 30-in., each with +a nominal capacity of 1,250 cu. ft. of free air per min. Seven of these +were generally worked to their full capacity in order to keep up the +necessary supply of air. + +The maximum requirements of air at this end were primarily estimated as +follows: + + Central Shaft, four headings 24 drills. + Hackensack, two working faces 20 drills. + ---------- + Total 44 drills. + + Cubic feet of free + air per minute. + + 44 Slugger drills (25 by 174) require 4,350 + 2 Steam shovels 1,600 + Pumps and machine-shop, say 1,000 + 4 Hoisting engines, placing concrete 2,000 + 4 Derricks 2,000 + ------ + Total 10,950 + +The theoretical capacity of the whole eight compressors was: + + 1250 × 8 = 10,000 cu. ft. of free air per min. + +It was considered that not more than two-thirds of the above equipment +would be working at the same time; the actual requirement, therefore, +was taken at about 8,000 cu. ft. of free air per min., thus leaving a +margin of one spare compressor. + +As actually worked out, there were probably never more than eight drills +working at any one time at the Central Shaft, and this work was entirely +suspended in June, 1907, before there was any demand for power in +connection with the tunnel lining. The heaviest actual requirement, +therefore, was approximately as follows: + + (_A_) _Previous to June 25th, 1907:_ + + Cubic feet of free + air per minute. + + 40 Drills (22 by 174) 3,828 + 2 Shovels 1,600 + Pumps and machine-shop, say 1,000 + 2 Derricks 1,000 + ----- + Total 7,428 + + (_B_) _After November, 1907_ (_after completion of enlargement of + Central Shaft headings_): + Cubic feet of free + air per minute. + + 32 Drills (17 by 174) 2,958 + 2 Shovels 1,600 + Pumps, etc 1,000 + 3 Hoisting engines on concrete, + each working one-third time 500 + 2 Derricks 1,000 + ----- + Total 7,058 + +The average number of drillers per shift was about 25 at the two main +working faces. There were also from 5 to 10 drills trimming and cleaning +up for concrete, say an average of 7, making 32 in all. + +After November 1st, it actually required three boilers under steam all +the time, and not less than seven compressors running at full capacity, +to keep the air at proper pressure, the theoretical capacity of the +compressors being 8,750 cu. ft. of free air per min., as against 7,000 +to 7,400 cu. ft., the theoretical maximum requirement. + +Some of this deficiency was due to losses in transmission, part also was +due to the fact that the actual was probably considerably below the +theoretical capacity of the compressors. + + +ACCIDENTS. + +Two accidents occurred to the powder magazines, the causes of which were +never absolutely determined. The first occurred on January 10th, 1907, +when the dynamite burned up without exploding. The second accident was +on March 3d, 1907, when an explosion occurred which damaged property +over a very large area, but did not involve any serious injury to +persons, only one man being slightly hurt. + +The only serious blasting accident in the tunnels occurred on January +26th, 1908, and was due to a premature blast, the cause for which could +not be ascertained. + + +_Contractor’s Organization._--The work was in general charge of a +superintendent, and, during the time it was being carried on at both +ends, an assistant superintendent had charge at night. At each end there +was a day and a night walking boss, who had general supervision of the +men in the tunnels, the day walking boss being the superior, and +responsible for the general conduct of the work at his end, both day and +night. Two 10-hour shifts were worked, thirteen shifts every two weeks, +no work being done on alternate Sundays and Sunday nights. With the +exception of the walking bosses and the master mechanic, all the men +changed from the day to the night shift every two weeks. + +The organization was approximately as follows, for each shift: + + _General_--_Both Tunnels._ + + 1 Master mechanic (days only), + 1 Machinist, + 1 Engine runner, + 2 Firemen, + 2 Oilers, + 1 Electrician and helper, + 1 Drill machinist and helper, + 3 Blacksmiths and helpers, + 1 Powderman, + 1 Walking boss, + 4 Locomotive engine runners, + 4 Brakemen, + 1 Switchman, + 1 Foreman on dump, + 6 Men on dump, + 1 Foreman on track, + 6 Men on track. + + _In Each Tunnel._ + + _Drilling and Blasting._ + 1 Foreman, + 12 Drillers, + 12 Helpers, + 1 Nipper, + 1 Pipe-fitter. + _Mucking._ + 1 Shovel engineer, + 1 Cranesman, + 1 Muck boss, + 12 Muckers. + + +RECORDS. + +The records of the work have been based largely on the reports of the +day and night inspectors, which were made out on regular forms. + +A daily report card was made out each morning and forwarded to the +office of the chief engineer. It covered the work done for the previous +24 hours, up to 6 o’clock each morning. + +A telephone report was made to the resident engineer by the inspectors +each day at 8.30 A.M., giving the conditions, number of men, etc., at +the opening of the day’s work. + +A daily progress profile, on 10 by 10 to the inch cross-section paper, +covering the whole length of the tunnels, was kept in the office of the +resident engineer. This was mounted in sections, on a piece of +composition board, and hung on the wall for convenient reference. The +information, showing the progress up to 6 o’clock each morning, was +shown on the report of the night inspector, and was plotted on this +profile at 7 o’clock each morning. The plotting was left in pencil, and +each month’s work was colored in. A progress profile was taken by the +men of the alignment corps each Saturday morning and plotted by them, +alternate weeks being in red and blue ink on the same profile. + +A chart showing the number of drills working, time worked, blasting +periods, etc. (Plate XXIII), was plotted each morning and was extremely +useful, not only in keeping in touch with the work, but in compiling +many of the statistics used in the preparation of this paper. These +cross-section sheets were ruled 12 by 12 to the inch, thus giving one +space per hour horizontally. In the top vertical space are shown the +heading drills, their time of stopping and starting, and their number, +each heavy line representing one drill. In the next space below are +shown the drills on the bench, lift holes, etc. + +The blasting time is shown by the portion hatched (shown in red on the +original), which covers the whole vertical space when a complete round +of both heading and bench is blasted, and only part, top or bottom, as +the case might be, if only one or the other. The number of drillers and +muckers at the main working face is shown, and below that (in red ink on +the original) the number of cubic yards handled each shift. The time the +shovel is working is shown by the heavy line filling a whole space; and +the air pressure, platted from the recording gauge charts, is shown in +the space below. + +A combination daily and weekly report, showing the total number of men +working on each section, and the number of cubic yards excavated, was +entered every day and kept on a filing board in the office of the +resident engineer, and a copy was sent to the main office at the end of +the week, with such notes on the back as might be necessary, or of +interest. + +A report was made out weekly and sent to the contractor’s +superintendent, showing any deviations from grade, any tight places, and +the station of bench and headings. + +A monthly report was made to the chief engineer, giving detailed +statistics of the amount of work done, etc., plant installed, and short +notes of any matter of interest affecting the work in any way. + + +TUNNEL LINING. + +_Preliminary Considerations._--For the placing of the concrete lining, a +sub-contract was given to Messrs. King, Rice and Ganey, by Mr. Bradley, +which provided substantially that all materials should be supplied by +him, and delivered to the sub-contractors at track level, at or near the +point in the tunnel at which they were to be placed, and that he would +supply light and power; the sub-contractors were to supply the plant, +forms, and labor necessary for placing the concrete and water-proofing, +building the conduit lines, manholes, etc., etc., to complete the +lining, the general form of which is shown on Plate VIII of the paper by +Mr. Jacobs, and in Fig. 10. The latter also shows the different sections +into which the lining was divided for purposes of construction, and the +nomenclature adopted for each. It may be noted, incidentally, that the +cubic contents of the lining per linear foot of tunnel is almost exactly +half the quantity excavated, out to the standard section lines, and as +there was some excavation outside of these lines, all of which had to be +replaced, the actual quantity of material which had to be brought back +into the tunnel was quite a little more than half the quantity taken +out. It will be evident, therefore, that the question of transportation +was an important one. + + [Illustration: Fig. 10. + SKETCH SHOWING DIVISION OF LINING FOR PURPOSES OF CONSTRUCTION, + AND NAMES OF SECTIONS] + +An essential part of the agreement with the sub-contractors provided +that the operations incident to the placing of the lining should be +carried on so as to provide at all times space for a single track of +3-ft. gauge, running through the work, and the necessary clearance for +the locomotives and cars used in hauling out the muck. A clearance +diagram of one of the “dinkys” used in the tunnels, and its relation to +the forms used, is shown by Fig. 12 and also by Fig. 16, the 4-yd. +Allison cars, used for handling the muck, taking practically the same +width, although they were not quite as high. This requirement and the +limited space available must be kept in mind in considering the design +finally adopted for the forms and plant required in placing the lining. +It should also be kept in mind that, with the rolling stock used, there +was only room for a single track through that part of the tunnel where +any concrete had been built. As the concrete progressed, therefore, the +length of single track was necessarily lengthened, and the problem of +transportation was made increasingly difficult. + +In working out a design for the bench-wall forms, another highly +important and controlling factor, which had to be considered, was the +arrangement of the conduit lines, as shown in the general +cross-section.[2] + + [Footnote 2: Plate VIII of the paper by Mr. Jacobs.] + +The quantities of the various materials in the lining, per linear foot +of tunnel, were as follows: + + Concrete 7.64 cu. yd. + Rock packing: Paid for 1.48 cu. yd. + Outside standard section line 1.74 ” ” + ------------ 3.22 ” ” + Iron and steel 44.2 lb. + Vitrified conduits 84.0 duct ft. + Water-proofing 13.0 sq. ft. + Flags 3.3 ” ” + + +_General Methods._--The lining was started at both ends of the tunnels +before the headings were finally holed through, so that there was +practically a separate organization at each end, each in charge of one +of the members of the firm. The work at the Weehawken end was started +first, and the plant and scheme of working adopted there was thoroughly +tried out before the plant for the western end was built, consequently, +the latter was somewhat more efficient, being designed in the light of +the experience gained at the Weehawken end. + +The general sequence of the plan first adopted in placing the concrete +is shown by Fig. 10. The concrete was first placed in the foundations up +to the elevation of the bottom of the conduit bines, this work, of +course, being kept well in advance; next followed, in the order named, +the sand-walls, water-proofing, conduits, bench-walls, and finally the +arch. The foundation was built in any convenient lengths, multiples of +16 ft., the length of one section of form, the sand-walls in lengths of +from 25 to 35 ft., the bench-walls in 25-ft. lengths, and the arch in +10-ft. lengths. Concrete was placed during the day shift only, the forms +being moved partly at night, and partly on the alternate days when +concrete was not being placed in them. + +Five gangs were organized at each end, the first placed concrete in the +foundations in both tunnels, as the excavation was ready. In each tunnel +there was a gang which built sand-wall one day and bench-wall the next, +the two tunnels alternating so that only one bench-wall was built each +day, and finally a gang in each tunnel building arches, a 10-ft. section +being completed each day. During the night shift, the arch forms and +travelers were moved, and all other forms, etc., were made ready for the +concrete to be placed the following day. Some of the conduit laying was +done by the night shift, but part of it was necessarily done during the +day, as the concrete was built up. A small gang was kept busy in both +tunnels, during the day shift, laying conduits and water-proofing. The +latter two operations were generally performed by the same gang. + +This organization, of course, required considerable regularity in the +work, and this was finally attained, but at the beginning many sections +were often not finished on time, thus creating considerable confusion. +The progress possible with this organization (finally maintained with +great regularity) was 75 ft. of bench-wall and 60 ft. of arch per week +at each of the two working faces in each tunnel. This allowed the +bench-wall to gain considerably on the arch, and therefore at a suitable +point, as shown on the progress diagram, Fig. 9, a third pair of arches +was started, one in each tunnel, increasing the progress on the arches +to 180 ft. per week in each tunnel. + + +_Mixing and Transportation._--All the concrete used on this section was +mixed in Hains mixers, one being at each end. At the Weehawken shaft the +mixer was installed in the framework supporting the head-house and +elevators; and storage bins were arranged above, as shown by Fig. 11, +_A_, the whole structure being somewhat strengthened to allow this to be +done. At the western end the mixer was placed immediately under the bins +of the stone crusher, as shown by Fig. 11, _B_, the track below being +connected directly with the tunnels. The stone bin under the screen of +the crusher plant at the Hackensack end was divided into three parts, +the center being filled with sand by a derrick having a clam-shell +bucket, the other two with stone directly from the screen above. + +This type of mixer proved very efficient on this work. The largest +number of full batches (0.8 cu. yd.) mixed in one plant per hour was +about 35; the largest number per day of 10 hours was about 240; but the +apparatus was never worked to its full capacity, the quantity of +concrete which it was possible to use being limited by other +considerations. + + [Illustration: Fig. 11. + _A_ CROSS-SECTION OF HAINS MIXER INSTALLATION, AT WEEHAWKEN SHAFT + _B_ CROSS-SECTION OF HAINS MIXER INSTALLATION, + STONE AND SAND BINS ABOVE AND SCREEN OF CRUSHER, AT HACKENSACK + PORTAL] + +The concrete for the foundations was hauled in steel, =V=-shaped, +dumping cars holding about 1 cu. yd., and the concrete for the +bench-walls and arches in Stuebner, 1-yd., bottom-dumping buckets placed +on small flat cars, as shown by Fig. 1, Plate XXIV. Rock packing was +handled in Allison 4-yd. cars and also in the cars shown by Fig. 5, +as well as in the Stuebner buckets, the latter, however, being most +generally used. Mules were used for a short time at the Weehawken end to +haul the concrete in, but proved entirely inadequate to haul the loaded +cars up the 1.3% grade, and locomotives were substituted after the +headings were holed through. At the western end the cars were allowed to +coast in, and, up to the time the headings were holed through, were +hauled back by mules; after that they were pushed out by a locomotive +which had gone in ahead of them. As a rule, from 8 to 10 cars of +concrete and rock packing were sent in, one after the other, in proper +order, a boy riding on each car and stopping it at the proper place; all +these cars were pushed out together when empty. + + [Illustration: Plate XXIV. + Fig. 1: K 131. P.R.R. Tunnels, N. R. Div. Sect. K. (Bergen Hill + Tunnels) Weehawken Shaft, North Tunnel. Rear view of conveyor for + concrete, showing method of hoisting bucket from car on track in + hopper over belt. June 7, 07. + Fig. 2: K 130. P.R.R. Tunnels, N. R. Div. Sect. K. (Bergen Hill + Tunnels) Weehawken Shaft, South Tunnel. View showing waterproofing + (extreme left) portion of completed sand wall, sand wall forms, + traveller and end of conveyor overhead. July 22, 07. + Fig. 3: K 148. P.R.R. Tunnels, N. R. Div. Sect. K. (Bergen Hill + Tunnels) Weehawken. View showing method of placing concrete in + forms. Hoisting apparatus and bucket in background. Sept. 24, 07. + Fig. 4: K 154. P.R.R. Tunnels, N. R. Div. Sect. K. (Bergen Hill + Tunnels) Weehawken Shaft, North Tunnel. Method of placing concrete + in bench walls. Top of waterproofing suspended from top of sandwall. + Oct. 21, 07.] + +During the time the excavation was being carried on simultaneously with +the lining at the Weehawken end, the rock packing was loaded at the +working face and sent out to the point where it was to be used; after +that the rock packing was sent in from outside from the reserve pile on +the north side of Baldwin Avenue. + +At the western end the larger part of the rock packing was sent in from +outside, but occasionally, during the time the excavation was going on, +the cars from the heading were stopped at convenient points, generally +under the gantries, where the lining was being placed, and whatever +stone could be utilized was sorted from the top and passed up to the +platforms above. + +After the headings were holed through, there was considerable difficulty +at times in getting a sufficient supply of concrete and rock packing +into the tunnel at the time it was required, and while undoubtedly the +transportation facilities may have had some influence in this, the +principal trouble lay in the difficulty of securing a sufficient supply +of proper stone for rock packing, and for the crusher. + +While the excavation was progressing, the cars of muck, as they came +from the headings, were taken directly to the crusher and dumped into +it, the proportion of fine material being fairly constant and the supply +regular. At this time, also, a portion of the rock not required at the +crusher was dumped along the edge of the bank on the south side of the +approach, the larger stones rolling to the bottom where they were easily +available to be loaded into cars for rock packing, being entirely free +from the fine material; as this stone at the bottom of the bank was used +up, the supply was renewed, the rock suitable for rock packing being +automatically separated from the fine material as it rolled to the foot +of the slope. + +After the excavation was completed, however, it was necessary to go into +the bulk of the storage piles to get material for the crusher and for +rock packing, and then the difficulties were materially increased by the +large quantity of fine material encountered, the proportion remaining +after the rock packing had been sorted out being too large to send +through the crusher. It was not only the handling over of this fine +material which caused delay, but the difficulty of disposing of it. On +rainy days the trouble was increased by the difficulty of getting men to +work in the open. + +The delays due to transportation were usually caused by derailments, +which were more numerous than they should have been, and were due to the +condition of the rolling stock rather than to that of the track. These +delays, especially when they occurred in the early part of the day, +greatly increased the cost, by necessitating over-time work; a delay of +1 hour in the forenoon generally meant 2 hours’ work after 6 o’clock to +finish the day’s work. + +The average number of cars handled (round trips of 1 car) during a day +(two 10-hour shifts) at the Hackensack end during January, 1908, when +the excavation and lining were in full swing, was about 125 cars of muck +and 200 cars of lining material, the former being hauled by locomotives +and the latter by mules. + + +_Methods of Handling Concrete in the Tunnels._--The concrete for the +floor, ditches, and foundations, was brought into the tunnel in +=V=-shaped steel, dumping cars, and dumped as near as possible to the +place it was to occupy. + +The concrete for the arches and bench-walls was loaded at the mixers +into 1-yd., Stuebner, bottom-dumping buckets which just held a 4-bag +batch. These buckets were placed on small flat cars, hauled into the +tunnel, placed beneath the traveling gantry, as shown by Fig. 1, Plate +XXIV, and hoisted to the platform above. + +These traveling gantries, the details of which are shown by Fig. 12, +consisted essentially of platforms at each end of which an =A=-frame was +erected; the latter supported at their apexes two =I=-beams, from the +lower flanges of which was suspended a traveling block, shown at _A_, +Fig. 12, and through which the hoisting rope was rigged. The buckets +were hoisted through an opening in the platform and then moved along to +where they could be dumped. The platforms were supported on wheels +traveling on rails laid on the concrete of the foundation (for the +bench-wall gantries) or on top of the bench-wall (for the arch +gantries). + +Each of the first two of these traveling gantries used was equipped with +a belt conveyor working on a cantilever arm, as shown by Figs. 3 and 4, +Plate XXI, and Figs. 1 and 2, Plate XXIV. In using these belt conveyors, +the concrete was dumped from the Stuebner bucket into a hopper, Fig. 1, +Plate XXIV, with an adjustable slot in the bottom, under which the belt +ran. + + [Illustration: Fig. 12. [Full Page] + DETAILS OF TRAVELING GANTRY USED IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE TUNNEL + LINING: + SECTIONAL ELEVATION + CROSS-SECTION + A. DETAIL OF TRAVELING BLOCK + B. DETAIL OF TOP SHEAVE + C. DETAIL OF LOWER SHEAVE.] + +It was the original intention, in designing the conveyor, that the end +of the cantilever arm should be swung from one side of the tunnel to the +other, and that the traveler should be moved backward or forward, as +might be required, and thus deliver the concrete from the end of the +belt directly over the place in which it was to be deposited in the +bench-walls. As a matter of fact, it was found impractical in operation +to move the gantry readily, owing to its great weight, which was +supported on only four ordinary car wheels and their bearings, and it +was found more convenient to leave the arm in one position near the +center, letting the concrete drop on the platform above the bench- or +sand-wall forms, whence it could be shoveled into place, than to attempt +to move it as had been intended. Both of these difficulties might +possibly have been overcome by modifications in the design of the gantry +and conveyor, had this method of handling the concrete seemed otherwise +desirable. + +The principal difficulty with its use, however, was the inability to +take care of more than one batch of concrete at a time. When one batch +had been dumped into the hopper, a second could not be disposed of until +the first had nearly all run through on the belt, and this took from 7 +to 20 min., varying with the consistency of the concrete, etc. In a few +instances, where there happened to be some fairly dry batches, the +concrete could not be started through the slot at all, and had to be +shoveled out of the hopper. On the other hand, it is stated that some +batches, under favorable conditions, passed through in about 2 min., but +this was quite exceptional, and the operation was irregular and +uncertain. + +Before the final method of handling the concrete was adopted, a trial +was made of two forms of cars and buckets, to be used on the top +platform, as shown by Figs. 3 and 4, and Plate XXIV. In the method shown +by Fig. 3, Plate XXIV, the concrete was hoisted in the regular Stuebner +buckets, one of which can be seen suspended in the background of this +photograph, and dumped into the car shown, which was mounted so that it +could be revolved in a horizontal plane. It was intended to move this +car on the tracks to the point at which the concrete was required, and +dump it directly through a chute into the bench-walls. This car was +abandoned, as there was a great deal of difficulty in turning it when it +was loaded, and in several instances it had to be dumped straight ahead +in the middle of the platform and the concrete shoveled into the forms. +This method was also objectionable when the bucket was dumped, inasmuch +as the force of the impact of a whole batch of concrete dumped from such +a height into the forms, not only tended to throw the conduits out of +line, and to break them, but also caused considerable strain on the +forms. + +The bucket shown by Fig. 4, Plate XXIV, was next tried. It had a +slanting bottom and a door opening at the side. It was filled at the +mixer, came into the tunnel on a small flat car, and was hoisted and +placed on a similar car on top, as shown. This bucket was not +successful, as its great weight made it difficult to handle, and it +generally required a man to shovel the concrete out, which latter, of +course, had been pretty well compacted in the bottom of the bucket by +its trip from the mixer. All these cars were hauled backward and forward +on the top platform by a rope running to the winch on the hoisting +engine on the traveling gantry. + +Aside from the fact that neither type was a success, neither of these +schemes was much improvement over the belt, inasmuch as only one batch +could be handled at a time, owing to the necessity of using the engine +to haul the cars back and forth on the platform. The final solution was +found in the use of the traveling gantry, shown by Fig. 12 and Fig. 1, +Plate XXVI, the latter being one of the arch gantries. The gantry used +for the bench- and sand-walls was supported on framed bents on wheels +running on rails laid on the foundation; that for the arch was the same, +except that the high-framed bent was dispensed with, the side-sills +resting directly on the journals of wheels traveling on rails on top of +the finished bench-wall. + +These gantries were used only as a means of hoisting the buckets and +moving them along to where they could be dumped directly on the +platform, whence the concrete was shoveled into wheel-barrows, which +could be dumped directly into the bench-walls; or, in the case of the +arches, shoveled from the platform of the gantry to the intermediate +platform on the arch ribs, and thence directly into the arch. This use +of wheel-barrows, though apparently a somewhat crude method and a +retrogression from the use of the belt conveyor, proved very successful, +and really involved no more labor than did the conveyors, although this +might not have been the case had these latter worked as they were +originally designed to. + +The method finally adopted allowed as many as four buckets to be dumped +on the platform on one end of the arch gantry at one time, and eight on +one end of that used for the bench-walls, the workmen handling about +three of these latter into the forms by the time the last of the eight +was dumped. It required about 1½ min. to place a car under the gantry, +hoist the bucket, dump, close it, and return it to the car below. + +Rock packing was stored at the other end of the platform, for use as +required, when it was not handled directly from the end nearest the +work. This method allowed the concrete and other materials to be brought +in in trains at infrequent intervals, and provided a sufficient supply +of material on hand so that the men handling it on top could be kept +steadily at work. + +Each hoisting engine on these gantries had 7 by 10-in. cylinders, and a +double drum; some of them were Lamberts and some Mundys, operated by +compressed air. + + +_Ditches, Floor and Foundations._--The first method of building the +foundation was that shown by Fig. 13, _A_; no attempt was then made to +build the ditch, or floor, the intention being to leave these until the +completion of the remainder of the lining. In building the bench-wall on +this foundation, however, it was found difficult to secure the bottom of +the forms properly (Fig. 2, Plate XXV), so as to prevent any give, as +the material under the track was not solid enough to brace against. It +was decided, therefore, to build the whole of the ditch (see Fig. 13, +_B_) so that the bottom of the forms could be braced against the solid +concrete. At the beginning of the work, the face of the bench-wall was +built up to the level of the bottom of the conduits with the foundation; +if, therefore, in placing the concrete above this level, extreme care +were not taken to get a tight fit between the bench-wall form and the +lower face, and then to hold it rigidly in place, the result was a +rather unsightly horizontal joint high enough to be plainly visible. The +position of this joint may be seen in Fig. 2, Plate XXV, which shows the +first section of bench-wall built. Several subsequent sections showed an +overhang above this joint, amounting in one or two cases to as much as ½ +in., due to the fact that the bench-wall form moved or did not fit +tightly. This defect was obviated by building the foundations with an +offset on the face, shown by Fig. 13, _B_, so that the joint came at the +level of the top of the flagging over the ditches, and therefore was +almost entirely concealed; at the same time this allowed a sufficient +surface, on the plane of the face of the bench-wall, against which the +bench-wall forms could be braced and lined up. + + [Illustration: Fig. 13. + PLAN SHOWING VARIOUS METHODS OF BUILDING FLOOR AND FOUNDATION, + AND DETAILS OF FORMS] + +The ditch forms were set very carefully to line and grade by the +alignment corps, as this formed the starting point of all the rest of +the work, the only other thing which was necessary was to give a level +at the front end of the bench-wall form, after it was set, for the +elevation of the top of the bench, and to check up the stations of the +ends of the sections occasionally to see that they were at the even +25-ft. points (that is +08, +33, +58, and +83). + +After a short length had been built with the ditches only, it was +thought desirable to try and put in the floor as well, so that the whole +of the concrete would be put in place as the lining advanced, and leave +less cleaning up to be done over the end of a single track, in the +restricted spaces between the bench-walls. Fig. 13, _C_, shows the +method finally adopted. In this may be seen the three stages in which it +was put in, the details of the ditch forms being shown by Fig. 13, _D_. + +In that part of the tunnel where sand-walls were built, a hollow tile +drain was built into the foundation, as shown in Fig. 13, _A_ and _B_, +along the foot of the water-proofing and connected at intervals with the +drains by 4-in. cast-iron pipes. When the sand-walls and water-proofing +were not built, however, the concrete of the foundations was sloped from +the neat line back to the rock, as shown by Fig. 13, _C_3, so that in +case any water found its way down through the rock packing, its tendency +would be to flow back against the rock, or to follow the low part of +this concrete to 4-in. cast-iron pipes leading to the side ditches, +rather than to find its way through the joint between the foundation and +the bench-wall and so into the lower duct lines. + + +_Sand-Walls._--The sand-wall forms first used are shown in Fig. 2, Plate +XXIV, with a section of the finished sand-wall. As this work was only +intended to give a comparatively smooth surface against which to place +the water-proofing, no particular care was taken with the surface, +except to avoid sharp projections which might cut through the felt and +pitch used for this purpose. A rather porous concrete (with all the rock +which could be safely embedded in it and have the wall stand) was used, +so that it would not act as a dam, but rather tend to allow the water to +find its way to the bottom of the tunnel, and so into the drains. + +The traveling gantry for placing the concrete in the sand-walls, as +first designed, with the belt conveyor, could of course only deliver the +concrete at one end. Before setting the forms for a new section, it was +necessary, therefore, to move the gantry ahead, before the cross-bracing +between the tops of the forms, which also held the top platform, could +be placed in position. Fig. 2, Plate XXIV, shows the end of the conveyor +over the top of the cross-braces. In order to hold the bottom of these +forms, small wooden blocks were embedded in the foundation concrete, +against which they could be wedged, as shown by Fig. 13, _A_; these +blocks were cut out after the sand-wall had been built. + +After the forms had been filled, the conveyor could not be moved back to +the bench-wall until the concrete had set sufficiently so that these +cross-braces could be removed, and, on account of the overhang at the +top, the set had to be fairly good in order to prevent this overhang +from breaking off. This arrangement, therefore, for placing the concrete +was found to be impractical, if the proposed schedule of a section of +bench-wall and a section of sand-wall to be built on alternate days, was +to be carried out. In a few instances, where the sand-wall was finished +fairly early in the afternoon, the forms were released next morning, and +the conveyor was moved back, but, even then, 2 or 3 hours at least were +lost at the beginning of the shift. The conveyor, however, was +abandoned, for the reasons previously given, and the traveling gantry +was rearranged to allow concrete to be delivered at either end; it was +then only necessary to move it backward and forward between the bench- +and sand-wall forms instead of through these forms. This permitted the +construction of the much more substantial type of forms shown by Fig. +14. + +After being moved ahead on the track on top of the foundation, the form +was first blocked up to grade, and then adjusted to line by the screws +and slotted cleats shown at _B_, Fig. 14, after which it was secured by +the braces from the ditches, as shown. The face lagging was placed in +separate pieces and held against the uprights by lightly nailing every +third or fourth piece; the whole was removed each time the form was +moved, and built up again as the concrete was placed. + +Considerable care was taken to slope the top of the sand-wall back +toward the rock, as shown by Fig. 14, and to allow free drainage along +the top (which ran parallel to the grade of the tunnel) to the 4-in. +cast-iron drain pipes which carried the water from the rock packing +above the arch to the drains beneath the track. + +Sand-walls were built for a length of about 1,100 ft. in each tunnel at +the Weehawken end, and about 700 ft. in each tunnel at the western end, +the remainder of the work, with the exception of a few short stretches, +not being considered wet enough to require water-proofing. + + + [Illustration: Fig. 14. + TRAVELING FORM FOR BUILDING SAND-WALL; + DETAIL SHOWING METHOD OF HANGING WATER-PROOFING FROM TOP OF SAND-WALL] + +_Conduits._--The arrangement of the conduit lines is shown in the +general cross-section.[3] On the core-wall side there are 48 lines for +telegraph and telephone cables, built of 4-way multiple conduit, each +piece of which is 3 ft. long and about 10 in. square outside. On the +other side there are the high- and low-tension lines, built of single +conduit 18 in. long and a little more than 5 in. square outside. +Manholes or splicing chambers are built every 400 ft., and are about +8 ft. long and 4 ft. wide. General views of the conduits as built are +shown in Fig. 4, Plate XXV, which shows all the lines in one tunnel, and +in Fig. 1, Plate XXV, which shows the telegraph and telephone lines, +with the expanding mandrels used in laying them. + + [Footnote 3: Plate VIII in the paper by Mr. Jacobs.] + + [Illustration: Plate XXV. + Fig. 1: K 173. P.R.R. Tunnels, N. R. Div. Sect. K. (Bergen Hill + Tunnels.) Hackensack Portal and Approach. Telephone and Telegraph + ducts and mandrels. Nov. 20, 08. + Fig. 2: K 125. P.R.R. Tunnels, N. R. Div. Sect. K. (Bergen Hill + Tunnels) Weehawken Shaft, North Tunnel. View showing general + construction of tunnel lining forms, and clearance to allow disposal + of excavated material. June 17, 07. + Fig. 3: K 156. P.R.R. Tunnels, N. R. Div. Sect. K. (Bergen Hill + Tunnels) Weehawken Shaft, South Tunnel. North side looking East, + showing method of placing waterproofing. Oct. 22, 07. + Fig. 4: K 147. P.R.R. Tunnels, N. R. Div. Sect. K. (Bergen Hill + Tunnels) Weehawken. General view showing center and first section of + arch and completed lining, North Tunnel. Sept. 24, 07.] + +In attempting to plan the work of placing the lining, two methods of +building the bench-wall were considered. One was to build the wall in +longitudinal sections, each section separated by a line of ducts; and +the other was to attempt to build the wall in the manner called for by +the specifications, which required the concrete to be carried up in +layers as the conduits were laid. In this latter method, it was proposed +to bond the concrete together with the forked bonds, the details of +which are shown by Fig. 15, _A_, but, as it might have been impractical +to use these if the wall had been built in sections, provision was made +in the contract to place expanded metal, as shown by Fig. 15, _B_, if +this was thought advisable. The method of construction necessary, if the +wall had been built in sections, is shown graphically by the five +sketches, Fig. 15, _B_, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. + +The form and details of the expanding mandrel which was finally designed +to meet the conditions, and proved so satisfactory in every way, are +shown by Fig. 15, _C_. The mandrel consisted of two triangular pieces of +hard pine, separated by wedges attached to one piece which fitted into +slots in the other; these, when expanded, practically filled the whole +of the inside of the ducts. One of these mandrels was placed in each +line of single ducts and two in each 4-way duct, placed diagonally, as +shown in Fig. 1, Plate XXV. This required 60 mandrels at each working +point, or 240 for the whole work. The mandrels were 35 ft. long, so that +they easily covered the whole of a 25-ft. section, projected +sufficiently far back into the previously finished work to assure the +continuity of the alignment, and allowed the ends to be racked out at +the forward end to secure proper breaks between the joints. + +In laying the single conduits, as a rule, the (collapsed) mandrels were +pulled ahead from the previous section as each line was laid, and the +conduits were strung on it until the whole length was completed; the +conduits were then pushed up tight together, so as to close the joints +as tightly as possible, and then the mandrel was expanded. The conduits +were thus held firmly in position, and the forward end of the line was +lifted slightly so that the wraps could be placed around the joints. The +4-way conduits were generally laid in the ordinary way, except that no +laying mandrel was necessary. One dowel was used between each of the +pieces of conduit, at the center, and the joints were wrapped. When a +line was finished, two mandrels were placed diagonally in each line and +expanded simultaneously, so that any inequalities in the ducts +themselves were divided as far as possible. In connection with the use +of these mandrels, one of the points which was most carefully watched +was that they projected back into the last completed section, thus +insuring the continuity of the alignment. + +It was originally intended to wrap the joints of the 4-way ducts only, +but it was found to be impractical to keep the grout from the wet +concrete entirely out of the single ducts, and, after a short trial, it +was decided to wrap these also. The expanding mandrel kept out a great +deal of the cement, and, in the sections laid without wraps, the only +difficulty from this cause seemed to be that a slight film of grout, +from 1/16 to ⅛ in. thick, was deposited on the bottom of the inside of +the ducts at some places, and although this was not considered a serious +defect, it was thought that the slight extra cost of placing the wraps +would undoubtedly be justified by the practically perfect results +obtained by using them. + +Considerable attention was given to breaking the joints of the ducts +properly, so as to maintain throughout the conduit lines the greatest +break possible. The joints in each superimposed line were broken at half +the length of the individual pieces of conduit, the joints in lines in +the same horizontal plane being broken at one-quarter the length, thus +preventing any joints from touching one another either at the sides or +corners, which tended to prevent a burn-out on one line from being +communicated to another. There was some little difficulty at first in +maintaining the breaks, owing to slight variations in the lengths of the +conduit, but after a very short time both the workmen and the inspectors +became very expert at this and in the proper use of short lengths to +maintain the spacing; after the first few weeks there was little if any +difficulty in attaining at all times almost perfect results. The method +of making the breaks is shown in the photographs and by the isometric +sketch at _F_, Fig. 15. + +All the conduits used on this work were furnished by the Great Eastern +Clay Company, and were made at its factory at South River, N.J., where +they were inspected before shipment. + +The mandrel used in the final rodding was made as shown at _G_, Fig. 15, +the larger size being used for all lines. The rods for pushing it +through the conduit lines were made of 6½-ft. lengths of ordinary 1-in. +wrought-iron pipe with extra long (3-in.) couplings. The lines were +rodded in both directions from alternate manholes, thus avoiding +uncoupling the rods and allowing every pull to be effective in pushing +the mandrel through the ducts. + + [Illustration: Fig. 15. [Full Page] + ELECTRICAL CONDUITS: METHODS OF LAYING, RODDING, ETC. + A. FORK ENDED STEEL BONDS FOR CONDUITS. + B. SEQUENCE OF METHODS OF BUILDING BENCH-WALL PROPOSED WHEN USING + EXPANDED METAL BONDS. + C. ISOMETRIC DRAWING OF EXPANDING MANDREL. + D. DETAILS OF “WEASEL” Used for gripping disconnected pipe rods in + conduit + E. CUTTER FOR REMOVING OBSTRUCTIONS IN CONDUITS. + F. ISOMETRIC SKETCH SHOWING METHOD OF BREAKING JOINTS AND POSITION + FORKED BONDS. + G. PLAN AND SECTIONS OF EXPANDING MANDREL. + + INDEX + +-----+------------+-------------+ + | | Multi-Duct | Single-Duct | + | | Mandrel | Mandrel | + +-----+------------+-------------+ + | _A_ | 3¼” | 3⅜” | + | _B_ | ¾” | ⅞” | + | _C_ | 2½” | 2⅝” | + +-----+------------+-------------+ + + Note + + End pipe connections may be changed to suit connections of rodding + outfit, care being taken to use a connection which will not split and + expand the mandrel if it should be driven back into it, in attempting + to ram the mandrel back when stuck in a duct. + + Connection at Head End may be dispensed with, if the mandrel is + threaded through ducts by rods attached to the trailing end.] + +Wooden rods were used at first, but proved entirely too light, as the +mandrels used were a close fit, and it required considerable effort to +push them through 400 ft. of conduit. Iron pipe with ordinary couplings +was next tried, but the couplings broke quite often, as the threads +became worn in uncoupling the sections to move the rods from one line to +another, and the break was generally inside a duct line. The long +couplings were finally adopted, and a set of rods was put in each line, +that is, six sets in all, so that when coupled up they remained in the +line until it was finished. The expense of the extra quantity of pipe +thus required was more than offset by the decreased labor cost. + +It was thought necessary at first to run a cutter, Fig. 15, _E_, through +the conduits ahead of the final rodding mandrel, but this was soon found +to be unnecessary except in a very few instances, and, after a short +experience, the cutter was only used at places where an obstruction was +encountered by the mandrel. + +At such times as the pipe became uncoupled inside the duct line, the +part remaining inside was recovered by the use of the tool shown at _D_, +Fig. 15, called a “weasel.” In two instances, the mandrel became stuck +in such a manner that the duct line had to be cut into in order to take +it out. + +The best day’s work of the rodding gang (1 foreman and 4 men) was 20,400 +duct ft. of the 4-way conduit in the telegraph and telephone line, and +19,200 duct ft. of single conduit on the low-tension line, an average +day’s work under ordinary conditions being about 10,000 duct ft. The +cost, including labor, material, and all tools, for rodding for the +whole work was slightly less than 0.2 cent per duct ft. The average cost +of the single conduit was about 0.25 cents per ft., and of the 4-way, +0.15 cents per ft. About 10% of the conduit lines were rodded twice, +owing to partial sections having been rodded once before completion. The +best continuous work on rodding was done between October 22d and 29th, +1908, when in 7 working days, 105,600 duct ft. were rodded, an average +of a little more than 15,000 ft. per day. + + +_Bench-walls._--The original design for the tunnels provided for the +construction of a brick arch above a point 22° above the springing line, +that is, the part above the side-walls (Fig. 10). It was thought +desirable, therefore, in designing the bench-wall forms, to provide for +placing the concrete in the side-walls and bench-walls at one operation. +These forms, as first designed, are shown by Fig. 2, Plate XXV, and the +details in Fig. 16, _A_ and _A’_; they were built of steel, the facing +plates being 5/16 in. thick, in pieces 4 ft. 6 in. wide, and in length +about 6 in. more than the height of the bench-wall. + + [Illustration: Fig. 16. [Full Page] + DETAILS OF TRAVELING FORMS USED IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE BENCH WALLS + A’. CROSS-SECTION OF STEEL FORM + A. LONGITUDINAL SECTION AND ELEVATION OF STEEL FORM USED AT + WEEHAWKEN END + B. DETAILS OF SCREW-JACKS FOR ADJUSTING FORM TO LINE + C. SECTION _C_-_D_ SHOWING CONNECTION OF FACE PLATES TO I-BEAM + UPRIGHTS + D. DETAILS OF WOODEN FORMS USED AT WESTERN END: CROSS-SECTION, + PART LONGITUDINAL SECTION + No chutes were used with these forms, the wheel-barrows being dumped + from the runways on the sides.] + +The design was controlled very largely by the necessity of providing the +requisite clearance for the locomotives and muck cars, and the principal +feature was the support of the forms on two trusses, one at either side, +the front ends of which were supported from the foundation on a long +leg, as shown in Fig. 3, Plate XXV, and the rear ends directly on the +journal-boxes of wheels traveling on a rail on the top of the finished +bench, as shown in Fig. 2, Plate XXV. + +Although it had been decided to substitute concrete for brick in the +arch before any of the lining was actually placed, two sets of forms for +the Weehawken end had already been ordered and delivered, so it was +decided to use them as designed, and place the side-wall with the bench. + +The forms were designed so that 30-ft. lengths could be built, and this +was done at the start, but owing to the occurrence of the refuge niches, +ladders, etc., at 25-ft. intervals, it was soon seen that it would be +advisable to build the bench-wall in sections of that length (25 ft.), +or multiples of it, and as the clearance conditions seemed to preclude +the possibility of making the forms 50 ft. long, 25 ft. was adopted. +This permitted the removal of one of the panels, 4 ft. 6 in. wide, and +at the same time it was decided to remove the side-wall forms. This +decreased the load on the trusses considerably, but being still a trifle +weak, they were strengthened by the substitution of 1¼-in. truss rods +instead of the ¾-in. rods used originally. The top platform and the +cross-bracing were also stiffened a little and tightened up to prevent +racking. + +The construction of the side-walls in conjunction with the bench-wall +was abandoned for three reasons: First, it was found that there would be +a much more even distribution of the work by including the side-wall +with the arch rather than with the bench; second, there was difficulty +in getting a good finish for the top of the bench-wall, as of course a +top form for the latter had to be placed to prevent the concrete from +squeezing up when the side-wall was built above it, which prevented +troweling; the third reason was the weakness of the whole form as +designed, and the increasing difficulty of adjusting it to line as the +work progressed, the principal difficulty being with the curved +side-wall forms. + +The bench-wall forms were set in position, after they had been moved +ahead, by first blocking the bottom against the face of the foundation, +as shown by Fig. 13. As previously noted, this foundation face had been +built very carefully to line. The back end of the form, of course, was +blocked tightly against the end of the previously finished section, and +the top was made plumb by the adjusting screwjacks shown in Fig. 16, +_B_. At first these screws were ¾-in., but they were afterward changed +to 1¼-in. The only points which it was necessary for the alignment corps +to give in setting these forms was a grade at each of the front ends for +the top of the finished bench. + +The steel face forms in both tunnels gave excellent results, as far as +smoothness of finish was concerned, but, owing to the imperviousness of +the steel, small air holes were formed in the surface, though not in +sufficient numbers or size to cause trouble or disfigure the work in any +way. + +The design of the bench-wall forms used at the western end, where this +differs from the steel form, is shown by Fig. 16, _D_. The principal +features in which they differed from those used at the Weehawken end was +in the substitution of 2½-in. tongued and grooved hard pine for the +face. This timber was of the very best quality obtainable, each piece +being especially selected and as nearly clear and free from knots or +other defects as it was possible to get it. The edges of each piece were +planed at the back so as to insure a tight joint on the face, and all +joints were shellacked. These forms were used, without renewal of the +face timber and with only two planings, for a length of 2,500 ft., or +100 separate sections, and gave good satisfaction. + +In order to obtain a surface to which the face lagging could be +fastened, wooden uprights were used and were reinforced on either side +by light channels bolted together through the timber, in place of the +=I=-beams used on the steel forms. The lagging was nailed to these +uprights by 6-in. wire nails driven through the top edges of each piece +as it was placed in position, thus leaving the surface entirely clear +and free from any marks or nail holes, and in condition for planing when +this became necessary. Runways for wheeling the concrete were built one +either side over the bench-walls instead of having a center platform +with chutes, as was used at Weehawken. + +When the original lagging had become too much worn for further use, it +was resurfaced with strips of ⅞ by 2½-in., clear, tongued and grooved, +hard pine, placed vertically, which did fairly well and lasted to the +end (about 1,000 ft.), although it was not altogether satisfactory, and +the last eight or ten sections built had to be rubbed down with a wooden +float in order to obtain a suitable finish. + +In designing the forms for all exposed surfaces in the tunnels, it was +the desire of the contractors to obtain directly from them a surface +which would be satisfactory to the engineers without further finishing +than the patching of minor defects. In this they were generally quite +successful, and excellent results were obtained, as shown in the view of +the finished tunnel, Fig. 2, Plate XXVII. The surface of the bench-walls +was obtained solely by spading the face with a flat spade as the work +progressed. No after treatment was resorted to, except for the few +sections where the forms became worn. The top of the bench-wall was +finished with a float about 2 or 3 hours after the concrete was placed. + +When the work was well organized, a bench-wall was built at each end +each day, one day in the North Tunnel, and the following day in the +South. During the time sand-walls were being built, a sand-wall and +bench-wall were built on alternate days in each tunnel, care being taken +that when a bench-wall was being built in one tunnel, the sand-wall was +being built in the other, this being necessary in order to equalize the +work of the night gang and the conduit layers as well as the +transportation. + +The conduit layers on the day shift, two or three men and a foreman, +required about 2 hours in the forenoon and 1 hour in the afternoon to +lay their portion of the conduits, and usually finished this work by 3 +P.M. At other times during the shift they were utilized at those points +where rock packing was heaviest, and when the packing was brought in in +the large cars, as shown in Fig. 1, Plate XXVI, these men helped unload +it so that the track could be cleared as soon as possible. When +water-proofing was to be done, the number of men in this gang was +increased, so as to enable them to do that work also. + + [Illustration: Plate XXVI. + Fig. 1: K 167. P.R.R. Tunnels, N. R. Div. Sect. K. (Bergen Hill + Tunnels.) View of form for circuit breaker chamber at Sta. 286, and + travelling gantry for placing concrete in arches, looking Easterly + from near Sta. 280+85, South Tunnel. Oct. 3, 08. + Fig. 2: K 166. P.R.R. Tunnels, N. R. Div. Sect. K. (Bergen Hill + Tunnels.) View of forms for storage chamber at Sta. 294+24, looking + Southward. Sept. 17, 08. + Fig. 3: K 163. P.R.R. Tunnels, N. R. Div. Sect. K. (Bergen Hill + Tunnels.) Tunnel lining. Rock packing over arches, South tunnel Sta. + ???+?? end of completed section. May 19, 08. + Fig. 4: K 168. P.R.R. Tunnels, N. R. Div. Sect. K. (Bergen Hill + Tunnels.) Showing method of waterproofing in timbered tunnel section + at Weehawken end. Oct. 21, 08.] + +A gang of four rough carpenters and a foreman was employed on the day +shift; they moved and set the bench-wall forms or sand-wall forms, as +the case might be, and moved the traveling gantry into position. This +was done in the afternoon, and required about 3 hours. They also took +out, cleaned, repaired, and set all ditch forms, all passenger forms, +circuit-breaker forms, and did all other repair work. The ladder forms, +the refuge-niche forms, and overhead conductor pocket forms were +attended to by one man, who set, removed, cleaned, and repaired them. +The carpenters on the night shift set the arch centers and gantries, +also the manhole forms when needed. The conduit layers on the night +shift laid up half the 4-way conduits (3-high) and one-third of the +single ducts (4-high). This one gang laid the conduits in two sections +of bench-wall each night, that is, one section at Weehawken and the +other at the western end. + +In concreting the bench-walls, the concrete was first placed on the side +containing the single conduit until it reached the top of the four tiers +laid, then the concrete gang was turned over to the side with the 4-way +conduits while four more tiers of single conduits were laid, the work +thus progressing, the conduits being laid on one side while concrete was +placed on the other. On the side of the 4-way conduits the concrete was +built in two layers while that on the side of the single ducts was built +in three; the interval between the different layers was not sufficiently +long to prevent a complete bond being obtained, and there were only one +or two instances where there was any mark on the face to indicate a +break. + +After the work had been in progress some time, it was found to be quite +feasible to build all the 4-way conduits at night and half the single +conduits, that is, 6 ducts high, as the mandrels proved amply sufficient +to hold them in place; in fact, had it been necessary, the writer has no +doubt that all the ducts might have been laid and held in place with +very little extra precaution, by the use of the expanding mandrels, +as described under the head of conduit laying. A =V=-shaped joint about +½ in. deep was made between each section of bench-wall so that the +expansion cracks would follow this joint rather than show irregularly on +the face. These joints divided the face into the even 25-ft. panels, and +were very effectual in concealing what few cracks there were. + +After the construction of the sand-walls was discontinued, the space +behind the bench-walls, between the neat line and the rock, was filled +with rock packing, which was generally built, part way up at least, as a +dry wall ahead of the construction of the bench-wall, or it was put in +place simultaneously with the concrete, care being taken to keep it as +free as possible for the drainage of any water there might be. Toward +the latter part of the work, owing to the difficulty of getting +sufficient rock packing during the day, a rough back form for the +bench-wall was built at the neat line, in places where the section was +at all large, and the space was filled with rock afterward, generally at +night or on Sundays. + +In the sections where water-proofing was required, where no sand-wall +was built, the rock was taken out for 2 ft. outside the neat line, +if the excavation was not already that far out (at the expense of the +contractors, who preferred to do this rather than build the sand-walls +for the short sections required), so that there would be sufficient room +for placing the water-proofing on the back of the bench-walls, as shown +by Fig. 18, _E_. The water-proofing of these sections was left until +just before the arch was to be built, and after being placed it was +protected by a single row of brick laid on edge before the rock packing +was filled in. + + +_Arches._--The centering used for the arches is shown very clearly in +Fig. 4, Plate XXV, which is a view of the back end of the first section +built at Weehawken. In this part of the tunnel, the lower part of the +arch, about 5 ft. above the bench-wall, was built first, as previously +referred to, but the centers, as will be seen, were built so that they +could be used for the whole of the arch. The forward bulkhead, and the +shoveling platform on a section being built, are shown in Fig. 3, Plate +XXVI. + +The front bulkheads used were made in nine sections, bolted to a 2½ by +2½-in. angle bent to the radius of the arch, as shown in Fig. 3, Plate +XXVI, and fitting on the end of the lagging; when set they were braced +partly against the rock of the roof and partly against the gantry. After +the ribs and part of the lagging had been set by the night gang for a +fresh section of arch, the braces holding the bulkheads were knocked +out, the concrete placed during the day having set sufficiently by this +time; the whole of the bulkhead was then easily moved ahead, sliding +along the lagging to the forward end, and made ready for the next day’s +work. The middle section at the top was taken out temporarily, to +facilitate working at the sides, until it was needed. + +The traveling gantry used in handling the concrete for the arch is shown +in Fig. 1, Plate XXVI, which also shows the form for the circuit-breaker +chamber, and a car of rock packing on the track beneath. + +The arches were built in 10-ft. sections, the ribs being spaced 5 ft. +apart, the end ribs of each section supporting the end of the lagging on +two adjoining sections. Five sets of lagging and ten ribs were used at +each place where the arch was being built, thus giving each section +practically 4 days’ set before removing the centers. Probably in the +greater part of the work the centers could have been removed in from 40 +to 48 hours after the concrete had been placed, but 3 days was +considered the least time which would certainly be safe at all times, +and the contractors thought that the very slight additional expense +involved in leaving the centers up 4 days was more than warranted by the +additional feeling of security. + +The lagging was made from 3 by 6-in. clear, hard pine, 10 ft. long, +dressed to about 2½ in. in thickness, about 5½ in. in width, and the +sides to radial lines. As it was placed, every third or fourth piece was +lightly nailed to the ribs; when the latter were released and taken +down, the nails pulled out, and the lagging was left in place until one +piece was pried out, allowing the others to fall. A light =A=-frame, +about 8 ft. long, spanning the bench-walls, was placed below, in order +to break the fall and allow the lagging to slide to the top of the +bench-walls rather than fall to the track beneath. + +Cross-passages between the two tunnels were built every 300 ft., their +form being shown on Plate VIII of the paper by Mr. Jacobs. There were +two circuit-breaker chambers, one at Station 286 and the other at +Station 310. Steel doors are provided so that all the openings between +the two tunnels can be closed. At Station 294+24, the core-wall broke +through for a length of about 40 ft., and instead of filling this in, +a storage chamber 34 ft. long and 11 ft. wide, inside, was built there, +the form for which is shown in Fig. 2, Plate XXVI. This photograph, as +well as Fig. 1, Plate XXVI, a form for a circuit-breaker chamber, shows +the method of setting the steel doors in the forms, so that they were +built into the concrete instead of being fastened in with expansion +bolts afterward, thus showing a perfect fit and a much neater job. + +During construction the arches in each tunnel were kept even with each +other, so that when the cross-passages were reached, they, and the +sections of arch which they joined, could be completed at one operation. + +By the methods used on this work, one section of arch was easily built +in a shift, so that the monolithic construction of each section was +easily secured, and concrete, as wet as it was possible to handle with +shovels, could be used for all except the last 5 ft. or so at the top, +thus getting a structure which was as nearly impervious as possible +under the circumstances. + +The gangs placing the arches were paid over-time when they were required +to work after 6 o’clock to finish their section, which was generally +only necessary when the quantity of rock packing to be placed was very +large. If they finished their section before 6 o’clock, however, they +were allowed to quit when this was done, and were given a full day’s +pay. The difference in time, when there was any, was usually due to the +greater or less quantity of rock packing, as the excavation varied from +the standard section line. + +In building the arches, the night gang set the two ribs (one at the +center and one at the forward end of the section to be built), placed +the lagging on the sides, 4 or 5 ft. high, built the shoveling platform +on the horizontal cross-braces of the ribs, and placed the traveling +gantry in position for use. The forward end of the gantry (that is, the +end farthest from the arch being built), as shown in Fig. 1, Plate XXVI, +was loaded with rock packing to be used as required. As the concrete was +brought into the tunnel it was hoisted and dumped on the end of the +gantry next the arch, and shoveled from there to the platform on the +ribs and from there into place. The rock packing brought in during the +day was dumped on the front or back end of the gantry, as was most +convenient, and handled into the work in the intervals between batches +of concrete. The concrete and rock packing, with the back-lagging and +water-proofing, where these were used, were placed simultaneously, or +nearly so, and brought up the sides together until the key was reached; +the latter was then worked from the back toward the front. The key was +usually made about 5 ft. wide, the lagging for this width was made 5 ft. +long and put up in two sections. It was found to be more convenient to +have the key of this width than narrower. + +The method used in making the closures where two sections of the arch +came together is shown by Fig. 17. + + [Illustration: Fig. 17. [Full Page] + SKETCH SHOWING METHOD OF MAKING ARCH CLOSURE + CROSS-SECTION OF TUNNEL SHOWING JACK PARTLY EXTENDED + LONGITUDINAL SECTION OF TUNNEL SHOWING JACK PARTLY EXTENDED + PLAN OF BOX; END VIEW + PLAN OF PLUNGER, BOTTOM OF BOX; END VIEW OF PLUNGER, + JACK FULLY EXTENDED] + + +_Water-proofing._--As already pointed out, the original design for the +lining of these tunnels provided for a brick arch. It was intended to +cover this arch with water-proofing, this latter extending over the +whole of the roof and down the sides as far as the bottom of the conduit +lines. The water-proofing was to be placed against the sand-walls on the +sides, up to the top of the side walls, Figs. 10 and 14. Over the arch, +after being placed, it was to be protected by an armor course of brick, +laid flat, the space between the brick and the excavation, which was +required to be not less than 4 in. (and, as a matter of fact, was +actually a great deal more), being filled with rock packing. Besides +filling the space, this latter was designed to allow any water from the +roof of the tunnel to find its way easily to the top of the sand-wall, +from there being carried through the 4-in. cast-iron pipes, shown on +Plate VIII[4] to the side ditches in the floor of the tunnel. + + [Footnote 4: Of the paper by Mr. Jacobs.] + +All the water-proofing placed in these tunnels was of felt and pitch, +six-ply felt and seven layers of pitch. The felt was required to be +Hydrex, or of equal quality, and the pitch, “Straight run coal-tar pitch +which will soften at 60° Fahr., of a grade in which the distillate oils +will have a specific gravity of 1.05.” + +In addition to tests as to the above qualities, the pitch was analyzed +to determine the amount of free carbon it contained, and was not +accepted if this fell below 20 per cent. + +It was considered quite important that there should be absolutely free +drainage on the outer side of the lining, so that there would be no +chance for any water to acquire a head. More than three-quarters of the +length of these tunnels is below the level of mean high water, and while +it was hardly expected that there would be any direct connection between +the water in the Hudson River and the groundwater of the section +penetrated, it was thought wise to provide ample drainage. + +Before the lining was started, however, the excavation had progressed +sufficiently to show that the tunnels, while very wet in places, and +varying from that to quite damp, would be, on the whole, much dryer than +had been anticipated. It was then decided to substitute concrete for the +brick in the arch and omit the water-proofing over the top, except at +places where water came into the tunnels in sufficiently large +quantities to form practically a continuous stream. Three general types +of construction for the arch were decided on, as shown in Fig. 18. The +first, as shown at _A_, was to be used where the tunnel was quite dry. +In this type, the sand-wall was omitted entirely, and the concrete and +rock packing were built up together, the rock packing impinging to a +certain extent on the concrete, and the concrete squeezing somewhat into +the rock packing, as shown by Fig. 4, Plate XXV. The section shown at +_B_ was used where the tunnels were damp, or where there were slight +droppers not forming a continuous stream. The back lagging, of 1-in. +boards, which was left in place, provided a practically smooth outer +surface on the concrete arch, and allowing the concrete and rock packing +to be built almost simultaneously. It was considered that the free +drainage through the rock packing, the surface of the boards, and the +smooth outer surface of the concrete in the arch would allow the +comparatively small quantity of water in these parts of the tunnel to +find its way to the sides, and thence to the ditches at the bottom, +rather than to percolate through the concrete, and this proved to be +very generally the case, as is shown by the dry condition of the tunnel +as built. The back lagging was used over the arch, both where the +sand-wall was built and where it was omitted, as well as being placed +over the water-proofing of the arch as an armor course where +water-proofing was required. Where the sand-walls were built and +water-proofed, and where the water-proofing was not carried over the +arch, the water-proofing was turned in at the top, as shown at _C_, Fig. +18. + + [Illustration: Fig. 18. [Full Page] + VARIOUS TYPES OF ARCHES, AND WATER-PROOFING USED + Method of Lapping Mats over Arch + Method of making joint when work on section was not continuous. Part + of joint on radial line, part sloping slightly toward outside of + arch. + DETAILS OF WATER-PROOFING + One layer of felt with 4" overlap to be nailed to lagging of inch + boards, using tin washers on nails over the whole of the intrados + of the arch before starting any concrete or placing any of the + permanent felt and pitch water-proofing. The water-proofing over + the arch can be laid in mats of three thicknesses of felt properly + joined together with pitch made as shown diagrammatically at “_x_” + Each of these mats of three-ply felt will be overlapped half the + width of the mat, as shown diagrammatically at “_y_”] + +The third method provided for water-proofing the whole of the arch, and +was the same as _B_ except for the addition of the water-proofing inside +the back lagging. In placing this water-proofing, the felt was cut in +strips about 11 ft. long (about 1 ft. longer than the length of a +section of arch), and six thicknesses were cemented together with hot +pitch. These mats were then laid shingle-fashion, as shown at _D_, Fig. +18, up the sides of the arch until a space about 5 ft. wide remained at +the crown; shorter mats were then brought out over this, laying them +perpendicular to the axis of the tunnel. Care was taken in making all +laps, irrespective of the direction in which the arch was built, so that +they would lay with the grade, that is, so that the water would tend to +flow over the edges of the laps rather than against them. + +Most of the wet sections of the tunnel were at the ends, where +sand-walls had been built for the purpose of providing a smooth surface +against which the water-proofing was to be placed; there were several +wet places at isolated points in the tunnels, however, and, in order to +avoid building sand-walls at these points, the method shown at _E_, Fig. +18, was adopted. This involved a slightly larger excavation, 2 ft. +outside of the neat line, up to the height of the top of the bench, +where there was not already that much room. The bench-wall was built +with a back form on the neat line, the water-proofing was placed as +shown, protected by an armor course of brick, and then continued over +the arch when this latter was built. The excavation and refilling with +rock packing were done at the contractor’s expense, which he was willing +to assume rather than build these short sections of sand-wall. + + [Illustration: Plate XXVII. + Fig. 1: K 181. P.R.R. Tunnels, N. R. Div. Sect. K. (Bergen Hill + Tunnels.) Timbered section near Weehawken Shaft, showing method of + placing waterproofing and keying arch. Dec. 8, 08. + Fig. 2: K 184. P.R.R. Tunnels, N. R. Div. Sect. K. (Bergen Hill + Tunnels). View of completed tunnel looking Eastward from Sta. + 323+60. South Tunnel. Feb. 8, 09. + Fig. 3: K 149. P.R.R. Tunnels, N. R. Div. Sect. K. (Bergen Hill + Tunnels) Hackensack Portal, general view of completed Portal, and + arches through cut and cover section looking East. Oct. 15, 07. + Fig. 4: K 190. P.R.R. Tunnels, N. R. Div. Sect. K. (Bergen Hill + Tunnels.) Hackensack Approach. General view, looking East. March 16, + 09.] + +The method of water-proofing that part of the timbered section which was +very wet, is shown at _F_, Fig. 18, and in Fig. 4, Plate XXVI, and +Fig. 1, Plate XXVII. A lagging of 1-in. boards was nailed up the sides +and to the soffit of the segmental timbering, all the spaces outside of +this lagging being carefully filled with rock packing. Before starting +any concrete work, a single thickness of water-proofing felt was nailed +to the inner side of the lagging, which not only served to protect the +finished surfaces of the concrete from the water which fell copiously +from the roof, but also provided a comparatively dry surface to which +the regular six-ply water-proofing could be cemented with pitch and held +in position, while the concrete was placed against it. + +In placing the water-proofing in this section on the sides, the strips +of felt were placed vertically, nailed at the top to the wall-plate, to +support their weight, and lapped and cemented with pitch to the sides as +on the sand-walls, except that there was no trouble from the overhang. +After the bench-wall had been built, the felt was cut just below the +nails and about 2 ft. above the top of the bench, so that the mats which +were placed over the arch could be inserted behind it. The roof was +covered with three-ply mats and lapped over a little more than half, as +shown diagrammatically on the drawing. + +When the upper part of the arch was reached, where the cementing +strength of the pitch was not sufficient to hold the felt in place, the +mats were braced temporarily from the centering, as shown by Fig. 1, +Plate XXVII, until the concrete could be packed against it. + +Where the water-proofing was placed against the sand-wall, the method of +securing the sheets at the top is shown in the small sketch on Fig. 14 +and by Figs. 3 and 4, Plate XXIV. Fig. 3, Plate XXV, shows the laps of +the sheets and the method of hanging. At the start an attempt was made +to stick the water-proofing to the sand-wall, but this could not be done +on account of its dampness and the overhang at the top. + +The sand-wall water-proofing was kept about 35 ft. ahead of the finished +bench-wall, as shown by Fig. 3, Plate XXV. As the bench-wall form was +moved ahead and set, the mat was braced back against the sand-wall from +the forms at a point just above the top of the finished bench, care +being taken to avoid wrinkles, as, if these were once formed, it was +practically impossible to straighten them out. + +The completion of the bench-wall left the upper part of this +water-proofing stretched taut across the curved top of the sand-wall, +forming a chord of the arc. As the arch was built up, the top was +gradually slackened so as to allow the concrete to press the mat back +into place until the top of the sand-wall was reached, when the end was +turned in, as shown at _C_, Fig. 18, or the water-proofing was continued +over the arch, if that was necessary. + +The desire to obtain a dry tunnel, and the methods adopted to secure it, +were responsible in a great measure for the decision to build the arch +in short lengths, as well as the reasons given under the head of arches. +Had the tunnels been dry throughout, the method shown at _A_, Fig. 18, +could have been used exclusively, and, except for the fact that +monolithic concrete might not have been obtained, there would have been +no objection to building longer lengths. + +The quantity of water reaching the tunnel drains and flowing out of +their lower ends after the completion of the lining was about 100,000 +gal. per day, or 75 gal. per min.; of this it is estimated that +considerably less than 1% comes through the lining in the form of leaks. +The very general distribution of this water over the roof is indicated +by the fact that, during the excavation of the first 1,000 ft. of both +tunnels from the Weehawken end, oilskins had to be provided for the +laborers to induce them to work at all. The success, therefore, of the +rock packing as a means of diverting this water to the side drains, is +shown, especially in view of the fact that, excluding the cut-and-cover +section, only 10% of the length of the arch, 1,189 ft., was +water-proofed. + +Considerable care was taken to make all joints in the concrete which +were in such a position that water might follow through them to the +inside of the tunnel lining, in such a manner that they would slope +outward toward the rock. The top of the sand-wall is shown by Figs. 14 +and 18. The slope of the back of the foundation may be noted in Fig. 18, +and the method of making the joint in the arch, in the few instances +where a section was not completed at one operation, is shown at _A_, +Fig. 18. These joints in the arch were not allowed to be made above a +point 60° above the springing line. + + +HACKENSACK PORTAL AND APPROACH. + +The approach cut at the western end is 300 ft. long, the alignment being +a 2° curve, as shown in Fig. 19. The bench-walls and conduit lines built +throughout the length of the tunnels are extended through the approach +cut, the top of the former gradually sloping from the portal to the +mouth of the cut, where they are just level with the top of the rail, +the conduits also being depressed to the same relative position with the +tops of the benches. + + [Illustration: Fig. 19. [Full Page] + BERGEN HILLS TUNNELS. + Hackensack Portal and Approach. + SECTIONS AND ELEVATIONS. + PLAN OF APPROACH. + PROFILE THROUGH APPROACH. + SECTION SHOWING METHOD OF MAKING JOINT BETWEEN COPING AND WALL. + PLAN SHOWING METHOD OF MAKING JOINT BETWEEN ADJOINING SECTIONS. + SECTION OF BENCH AND RETAINING WALLS AND HALF ELEVATION OF PORTAL.] + +The top of the rock at the mouth of the cut, Station 327, was from 4 to +6 ft. below the top of the rail, and gradually rose through the approach +until at the portal it was about 6 or 8 ft. above the roof of the +tunnel. The rock was covered with hardpan. A profile of this part of the +work is shown on Fig. 19. The rock throughout the approach was +water-bearing to a considerable extent, and a face-wall was built at the +sides with free drainage, through rock packing and vitrified and +cast-iron drains behind it, to keep this water from flowing over the +tops of the bench-walls, and also to keep the lines of conduits dry. + +The retaining walls were built in 25-ft. sections, the joints +corresponding to those in the benches, being at the even stations, +08, ++33, +58, and +83. =V=-shaped joints were made down the face, and the +ends of the sections were made as shown by Fig. 19. The back part of the +joint was mopped with hot pitch before the next section was built, so +that there was practically no bond between any two adjoining sections. + +The concrete in these walls was placed late in the season, and the +expansion cracks, which were entirely confined to the =V=-shaped joints, +were quite small even in the coldest weather of the following winter, +nor were there any indications during the past summer of any stresses +due to expansion. The coping and drain at the top of the wall were built +together, but separate from the rest of the wall, the joint being made +as shown in the sketch on Fig. 19. Thus far, there has seemed to be no +seepage through either the vertical or horizontal joints. + +The portal is built of granite, a half elevation being shown on Fig. 19, +the stone being supplied by the Millstone Granite Company, Millstone +Point, Conn. Fig. 3, Plate XXVII, shows the portal and the cut-and-cover +section after the arches were completed but not covered. + +The forms for the concrete in the approach were made of ordinary dressed +lumber, and the surface was rubbed twice after the forms were removed, +which was as soon as possible after the concrete had set. The surface +was first very lightly rubbed with a piece of soft, light-colored, +sandstone to remove any irregularities, being wetted slightly if +necessary while being rubbed. After the concrete had become fairly hard +and dry, it was rubbed a second time and a uniform texture and color +obtained. The completion of this work was delayed until the second week +in January, and considerable difficulty was encountered in obtaining a +good finish of that part which was built after cold weather set in, when +it was necessary to protect it from frost. Unless extreme care was taken +to prevent freezing after the rubbing, the entire surface was likely to +scale off, although no cement or other material was added to it after +the removal of the forms. A general view of the completed approach is +shown by Fig. 4, Plate XXVII. + + TABLE 6. + + ---------------------+----------------------+-----------------------+ + | DAY. | NIGHT. | + Title. +-----+-------+--------+-----+-------+---------+ + | No. | Rate. | Amount.| No. | Rate. | Amount. | + ---------------------+-----+-------+--------+-----+-------+---------+ + Walking bosses | 2 | $5.00 | $10.00 | | | | + Timekeeper | 2 | 3.00 | 6.00 | | | | + Watchmen | | | | 5 | $2.00 | $10.00 | + Waterboys | 1 | 1.50 | 1.50 | | | | + Carpenter foremen | 2 | 3.50 | 7.00 | 1 | 4.00 | 4.00 | + Carpenters | 14 | 2.50 | 35.00 | 8 | 2.50 | 20.00 | + Pipe-fitters | 1 | 3.00 | 3.00 | | | | + Pipe-fitter’s helper | 1 | 1.75 | 1.75 | | | | + Wheelwright | 1 | 2.75 | 2.75 | | | | + Wheelwright’s helper | 1 | 1.75 | 1.75 | | | | + Blacksmith | 1 | 3.00 | 3.00 | | | | + Blacksmith’s helper | 1 | 1.75 | 1.75 | | | | + Foremen riggers | 1 | 3.00 | 3.00 | | | | + Riggers | 6 | 1.75 | 10.50 | | | | + Foremen trackmen | 1 | 3.00 | 3.00 | | | | + Trackmen | 6 | 1.50 | 9.00 | | | | + Machinist | 2 | 3.00 | 6.00 | | | | + Machinist’s helper | 1 | 1.75 | 1.75 | | | | + Electrician | 2 | 3.00 | 6.00 | 1 | 2.50 | 2.50 | + Electrician’s helper | 1 | 1.75 | 1.75 | | | | + Lampman | 1 | 1.50 | 1.50 | | | | + Pumpman | 1 | 1.50 | 1.50 | | | | + Finishers | 3 | 2.50 | 7.50 | | | | + Hoist engineers | 12 | 3.00 | 36.00 | | | | + Dinky engineers | 5 | 2.75 | 13.75 | 1 | 2.75 | 2.75 | + Brakemen | 5 | 1.75 | 8.75 | 1 | 1.75 | 1.75 | + Switchmen | 1 | 1.50 | 1.50 | | | | + Barnmen | 1 | 2.00 | 2.00 | 1 | 2.50 | 2.50 | + Drivers | 9 | 1.50 | 13.50 | | | | + Foremen ductmen | | | | 2 | 2.50 | 2.50 | + Ductmen | | | | 5 | 2.00 | 10.00 | + Foremen laborers | 13 | 3.50 | 45.50 | 2 | 3.50 | 7.00 | + Laborers | 120 | 1.75 | 210.00 | 20 | 1.75 | 35.00 | + Compressor engineer | 1 | 3.50 | 3.50 | 1 | 3.50 | 3.50 | + Firemen | 2 | 2.50 | 5.00 | 1 | 2.50 | 2.50 | + Oiler | 1 | 1.75 | 1.75 | | | | + Coal passers | 2 | 1.75 | 3.50 | 1 | 1.75 | 1.75 | + ---------------------+-----+-------+--------+-----+-------+---------+ + Totals | 334 | |$469.75 | 50 | | $108.25 | + + Total daily labor expense $578.00 + --------------------------------------------------------------------- + +The water finding its way into the side ditches in the approach, which +of course included all rain falling in this area, was intercepted just +inside the portal and carried back to the mouth of the cut through +24-in. cast-iron pipes laid beneath the conduits in the central +bench-wall, thus disposing by natural drainage of a not inconsiderable +quantity of water which would otherwise have flowed through the tunnels +to the sump at the Weehawken Shaft, from which it would have had to be +pumped to the surface. + +About 100 ft. of the tunnel immediately east of the Hackensack Portal +was built by the cut-and-cover method, and the arch section used in the +tunnel was modified by widening the haunches, the thickness of the arch +at the crown being gradually increased from 22 in. at the portal, +Station 324, to 34 in. at Station 323, where the regular segmental +timbering at the tunnel commenced. A general view of the approach during +construction is shown by Fig. 1, Plate XXV. + + +CONTRACTOR’S ORGANIZATION. + +Table 6 shows approximately the number of men employed daily on the +tunnel lining, by both the contractor and the sub-contractors, their +occupation, the average rate of wages and the total daily expense for +labor when the work was in full swing. + + +ENGINEERING ORGANIZATION. + +The whole of the work of the North River Division was designed and +executed under the direction of Charles M. Jacobs, M. Am. Soc. C. E., +Chief Engineer, and James Forgie, M. Am. Soc. C. E., Chief Assistant +Engineer, the construction of Section “K,” Bergen Hill Tunnels, being +directly in charge of the writer as Resident Engineer. + + [Transcriber’s Note: + The two organizational charts, Figs. 20 and 21, have been reformatted + for space.] + + [Chart: Fig. 20. + + PENNSYLVANIA TUNNEL AND TERMINAL RAILROAD COMPANY, + SECTION “K”--BERGEN HILL TUNNELS. + + Organization of Staff of Resident Engineer. + + Organization Previous to the Holing Through of the Tunnels. + + Resident Engineer. + _______________|________ + | | | + Assistant | Assistant + Engineer. | Engineer. + _________|________ | | + | | | | + Cost and Office Field Inspection. Alignment. + Records. + + Cost and Office Records. + Inspector. + Two Clerks. + Stenographer. + Telephone Operator. + Messenger. + Janitors. + + Field Inspection. + Weehawken. + Chief Inspector. + Inspector, N. Tunnel + ” S. Tunnel. + ” Mixer. + ” Excavation and Force Account. + Inspector, Night. + Cement Warehouseman. + Conduit Inspector. (_one position_) + Hackensack. + Chief Inspector. + Chief Inspector. + Inspector, N. Tunnel + ” S. Tunnel. + ” Mixer. + ” Excavation and Force Account. + Inspector, Night. + Cement Warehouseman. + Conduit Inspector. (_one position_) + + Alignment. + Weehawken. + Chief of Party. + Instrumentman. + Rodman. + Chainman. + Hackensack. + Chief of Party. + Instrumentman. + Rodman. + Chainman.] + + + [Chart: Fig. 21. + + Organization After the Tunnels Had Been Holed Through. + + Resident Engineer. + ________________|_______________ + | | | | + Assistant | | Assistant + Engineer. | | Engineer. + _______|______ | | | + | | | | | + Cost and Office Field Inspection. | Alignment. + Records. _____|_____________| + | | + Tunnels. Conduit Inspector. + + Cost and Office Records. + Two Inspectors. + Two Clerks. + Stenographer. + Telephone Operator. + Messenger. + Janitor. + + Tunnels. + Chief Inspector. + 8 Tunnel Inspectors. + 2 Mixer Inspectors. + 1 Night Inspector. + Conduit Inspector. + Inspector, Hackensack Approach. + + Alignment. + 1 Instrumentman. + 1 Draftsman. + 2 Rodmen. + 3 Chainmen.] + +The general organization of the staff is shown by the two diagrams, +Figs. 20 and 21. Fig. 20 shows the organization previous to the holing +through of the tunnels, during which time a separate office was +maintained at the western end for the use of the men stationed there; +Fig. 21 shows the organization during the latter part of the time, after +the tunnels were holed through. The Assistant Engineer in charge of the +construction was J. R. Taft, Assoc. M. Am. Soc. C. E.; the Chief +Inspector, J. S. Frazer, Jun. Am. Soc. C. E., had charge of about 75% of +the work of the lining of the tunnels. The alignment has been from the +beginning under the charge of R. L. Reynolds, Assistant Engineer. + + * * * * * + * * * * + * * * * * + + Errors and Notes: + + Each Plate was printed with the same header: + PLATE __. + TRANS. AM. SOC. CIV. ENGRS. + VOL. LXVIII, No. 1154. + LAVIS ON + PENNSYLVANIA R.R. TUNNELS: BERGEN HILL TUNNELS. + These headers were omitted for the e-text. Captions beginning in + “K” with a number were printed directly on the photograph; some + readings are uncertain and are indicated by question marks (?). + + In the tables of Figures 1-4, variation between “to” and “-”, and + formatting of table entries, is as in the original. + + [Fig. 1, table] + Per cubic yard, whole tunnel section: 3-33 + _may be error for “3-3.3”_ + [Fig. 1, last line of table] + Total Pounds + _text reads “Pound”_ + Figs. 3 and 4, and Plate XXIV + _apparent error for “Figs. 3 and 4, Plate XXIV” (usual form)_ + [Figure 15 A, B, C...] + _letters other than “B” do not appear in the printed Figure_ + [Figure 15, caption] + DETAILS OF “WEASEL” + _quotation marks look hand-written, but printed text has spaces_ + [Figure 15, “Index” (small table)] + Multi-Duct Mandrel + _text reads “Mult-Duct”_ + which would be satisfactory to the engineers + _text reads “satifactory”_ + + Missing or superfluous punctuation was silently corrected. + + + + + +End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Transactions of the American Society +of Civil Engineers, vol. LXVIII, Sep, by F. Lavis + +*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS *** + +***** This file should be named 21083-0.txt or 21083-0.zip ***** +This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: + http://www.gutenberg.org/2/1/0/8/21083/ + +Produced by Louise Hope, Juliet Sutherland and the Online +Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net + + +Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions +will be renamed. + +Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no +one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation +(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without +permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, +set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to +copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to +protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project +Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you +charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you +do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the +rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose +such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and +research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do +practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is +subject to the trademark license, especially commercial +redistribution. + + + +*** START: FULL LICENSE *** + +THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE +PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK + +To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free +distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work +(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project +Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project +Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at +http://gutenberg.org/license). + + +Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic works + +1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to +and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property +(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all +the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy +all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. +If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the +terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or +entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. + +1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be +used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who +agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few +things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works +even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See +paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement +and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. See paragraph 1.E below. + +1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" +or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the +collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an +individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are +located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from +copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative +works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg +are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project +Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by +freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of +this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with +the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by +keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project +Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others. + +1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern +what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in +a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check +the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement +before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or +creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project +Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning +the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United +States. + +1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: + +1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate +access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently +whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the +phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project +Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, +copied or distributed: + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + +1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived +from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is +posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied +and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees +or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work +with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the +work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 +through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the +Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or +1.E.9. + +1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted +with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution +must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional +terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked +to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the +permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. + +1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this +work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. + +1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this +electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without +prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with +active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project +Gutenberg-tm License. + +1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, +compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any +word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or +distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than +"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version +posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), +you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a +copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon +request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other +form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. + +1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, +performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works +unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. + +1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing +access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided +that + +- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from + the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method + you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is + owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he + has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the + Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments + must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you + prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax + returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and + sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the + address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to + the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." + +- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies + you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he + does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm + License. You must require such a user to return or + destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium + and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of + Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any + money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the + electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days + of receipt of the work. + +- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free + distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set +forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from +both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael +Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the +Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. + +1.F. + +1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable +effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread +public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm +collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain +"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or +corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual +property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a +computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by +your equipment. + +1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right +of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project +Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all +liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal +fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT +LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE +PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE +TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE +LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR +INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH +DAMAGE. + +1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a +defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can +receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a +written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you +received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with +your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with +the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a +refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity +providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to +receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy +is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further +opportunities to fix the problem. + +1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth +in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER +WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO +WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. + +1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied +warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. +If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the +law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be +interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by +the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any +provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. + +1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the +trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone +providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance +with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, +promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, +harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, +that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do +or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm +work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any +Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause. + + +Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm + +Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of +electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers +including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists +because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from +people in all walks of life. + +Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the +assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's +goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will +remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure +and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. +To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation +and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 +and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org. + + +Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive +Foundation + +The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit +501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the +state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal +Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification +number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at +http://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent +permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. + +The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. +Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered +throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at +809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email +business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact +information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official +page at http://pglaf.org + +For additional contact information: + Dr. Gregory B. Newby + Chief Executive and Director + gbnewby@pglaf.org + + +Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation + +Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide +spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of +increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be +freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest +array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations +($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt +status with the IRS. + +The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating +charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United +States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a +considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up +with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations +where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To +SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any +particular state visit http://pglaf.org + +While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we +have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition +against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who +approach us with offers to donate. + +International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make +any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from +outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. + +Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation +methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other +ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. +To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate + + +Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. + +Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm +concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared +with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project +Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support. + + +Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed +editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. +unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily +keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. + + +Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: + + http://www.gutenberg.org + +This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, +including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary +Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to +subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. |