Buch 
Tracts on vaults and bridges : containing observations on the various forms of vaults; on the taking down and rebuilding London Bridge : and on the principles of arches: illustrated by extensive tables of bridges : also containing the principles of pendent bridges, with reference to the properties of the catenary, applied to the Menai Bridge : and a theoretical investigation of the catenary / Samuel Ware
Entstehung
Seite
35
JPEG-Download
 

85

TENSION.

Modulus of frac-ture or length of

Weight

lbs. avoirdupois

a rod one quar-

Material.

of a cubic

required to

ter of an inch

draw asunder a

square in section

ounces.

bar six inches

of the material

long \ of an

equal in weight

inch square.

to the tensileweight.

-

Feet .

Cast iron bar, horizontal -

-

7113

1166

6043

Ditto vertical

-

7074

1218

6347

Hard gun-metal, mean of twotrials - - - f

7033

2273

11914

Cast steel previously tilted

-

7113

8391

43492

Cast copper

-

8788

1192

5000

Fine yellow brass

-

8396

1123

4931

Cast tin

-

7291

296

1497

Cast lead

-

11352

114

370

English iron reducedper hammer I

7788

f 3492

16529

Swedish iron ditto ditto

-J

\ 4504

21319

Shear steel ditto ditto

-\

7840

/ 7977

37508

Blister steel ditto ditto

18322

39131

Wrought copper ditto ditto

8879

2112

8769

Rondelet, page 208. Vol. I. has given a table, in which is indicatedthe specific gravity, weight per foot cube, and weight required to crush acube of 25 centemetres base, and one 4 inches base of 180 different kindsof stone, and of 18 different kinds ofBasaltes, porphyries, granites, anddifferent kinds of marbles.

He observes, that the heaviest stones are not the strongest. With anequal or less specific gravity, those of the finest grain, most compact tex-ture, and deepest colours, will support the greatest weight. The strengthof ordinary stones of the same kind, colour, and grain, augments with thespecific gravity. He says, page 97. Vol. III. All these experiments provethat the strength of stone, of the same nature and form, increases verynearly in the ratio of the area of its base. Gauthey, Vol. I. page 275 and276, says, the results reported by M. Rondelet, agree in general withmine, (see table 4, Gauthey, Vol. I.) and that it is convenient and safe inthe application to assume, that it does so increase.

Mr. George Rennie, page 132. Phil. Trans. 1818. remarks, In ob-serving the results presented by the preceding table, it will be seenthat little dependence can be placed on the specific gravities of stones,so far as regards their repulsive powers, although their increase is cer-tainly in favour of their specific gravities. But there would appear to besome undefined law in the connection of bodies with which the specificgravity has little to do. Thus statuary marble has a specific gravity aboveAberdeen granite, yet a repulsive power not much above half the latter.Again hardness is not altogether a characteristic of strength, inasmuch asthe limestones which yield readily to the scratch, have nevertheless a re-pulsive power approaching to granite itself.

It is a curious fact, in the rupture of amorphous stones, that pyramids