LIST
OF
REPORTS AND OTHER ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS.
| PAGE | ||
| 1. | Extract from Mr. Brunel’s Diary (December 26, 1835) | [78] |
| 2. | Letter on the Box Tunnel (June 21, 1842) | [81] |
| 3. | Extract from Report to Directors of the Great Western RailwayCompany on Break of Gauge (December 13, 1838) | [105] |
| 4. | Extract from Report to Directors of the Great Western RailwayCompany on the Permanent Way (February 1837) | [109] |
| 5. | Letter on various Points relating to the Broad Gauge (August 4,1845) | [120] |
| 6. | Extract from Letter on Atmospheric System (April 8, 1844) | [137] |
| 7. | Report to the Directors of the South Devon Railway Company,recommending them to adopt the Atmospheric System(August 19, 1844) | [138] |
| The question had been frequently considered by him (p. 138)—Stationarypower is cheaper and otherwise better than locomotivepower (p. 138)—The Atmospheric System is a good, economicalmode of applying stationary power (p. 138)—Reasons for consideringit applicable to the South Devon Railway (p. 139)—Inthe construction of the line (p. 140)—In the subsequent working(p. 141). | ||
| 8, 9. | Letters on giving Evidence before the Select Committee of theHouse of Commons on the Atmospheric System (March 31,1845; April 3, 1845) | [145] |
| 10. | Report to the Directors of the South Devon Railway on theState of the Atmospheric Apparatus (August 27, 1847) | [149] |
| Regret at postponement of working (p. 149)—Which has beencaused by delay in completion of the engines (p. 149)—Experimentaltrains have run (p. 149)—Difficulties have exceeded alljust anticipations (p. 150). | ||
| 11. | Report to a Committee of the Directors of the South DevonRailway Company on the Causes of the Failure of the AtmosphericSystem (August 19, 1848) | [159] |
| The first difficulty has been in the stationary engines, whichhave consumed an excessive amount of fuel (p. 159)—The difficultiesin the working of the longitudinal valve have been morenumerous (p. 161)—The principal evil might be remedied in anew valve (p. 162)—An extension of the system beyond Newtoncannot be recommended (p. 162)—The delay in obtaining thetelegraph has been a great disappointment (p. 163). | ||
| 12. | Letter on the Design of Engineering Works (December 30, 1854) | [178] |
| 13. | Extract from Letter on the Use of Cast Iron in Bridge Construction(April 18, 1849) | [190] |
| 14. | Extract from Letter on the same Subject (March 13, 1848) | [192] |
| 15, 16, 17. | Extract from Letters on Bridges of Large Spans(January 31, 1852; December 1, 1852; May 30, 1854) | [212] |
| 18. | Extract from Report on the Cornwall Railway as to makingthe Saltash Bridge for a Single Line (February 5, 1852) | [214] |
| 19. | Report to the Directors of the Great Western Steam-ShipCompany on the Selection of the Builders of the Enginesfor the ‘Great Western’ Steam-ship (June 18, 1836) | [235] |
| Every means must be taken to secure the best engines possiblein this the boldest attempt yet made (p. 235)—The peculiar conditionsrequired in these engines (p. 235)—They must, as far asis possible, be perfect in all their details from the moment oftheir completion (p. 235)—The machinery required is by nomeans an ordinary steam-engine (p. 236)—Modifications necessaryin designing engines of so large a size (p. 236)—Reasonsbased on these considerations for preferring Messrs. Maudslayand Field as builders of these engines (p. 236). | ||
| 20. | Letter on the Engines for the ‘Great Britain’ Steam-ship(June 12, 1839) | [249] |
| Both the plans of Messrs. Maudslay and Field and Mr. Humphrysare adapted to the case, and the choice will depend uponthe relative cost and advantages of forming an establishment tobuild the engines, and that of having the skill of experienced manufacturers(p. 249). | ||
| 21. | Letter to T. R. Guppy, Esq., on the Construction of Iron Ships(August 3, 1843) | [259] |
| 22. | Extract from Letter on the ‘Great Britain’ Steam-ship (December11, 1844) | [261] |
| 23. | Letter to Captain Claxton on the State of the ‘Great Britain’Steam-ship (December 10, 1846) | [264] |
| 24. | Report on the Condition of the ‘Great Britain’ Steam-shipwhen stranded in Dundrum Bay (December 14, 1846) | [267] |
| The ship is, apart from mere local damage, perfectly sound,which would not have been the case had she been built of timber(p. 267)—Description of her injuries (p. 268)—Consideration ofthe best means of recovering the property invested in her—Itwould not be profitable to break her up (p. 268)—How, then, isthe vessel to be got into port? (p. 269)—This question issecondary to that of how she is to be preserved until she can beremoved (p. 269)—A stiff timber breakwater would not stand,even if it could be safely constructed (p. 269)—The best plan isto form under the stern and along the exposed side of the ship amass of fagots (p. 270)—And in order to preserve the ship, thismust be done without delay (p. 270)—As to floating her off, sheshould be lifted and made water-tight (p. 271)—But she must firstbe preserved (p. 272). | ||
| 25. | Letter to Captain Claxton on the Breakwater (December 29,1846) | [272] |
| 26. | Report enclosing Captain Claxton’s Account of the Proceedingsat Dundrum (February 27, 1847) | [273] |
| Success achieved by Captain Claxton in constructing the breakwaterof fagots (p. 273)—Introduction by him of several importantalterations and improvements in the plans proposed(p. 274). | ||
| 27. | Report on the proposed Means of Floating the ‘Great Britain’Steam-ship (May 4, 1847) | [278] |
| The ship has been successfully protected and lifted, and madewater-tight, so that the operation of floating by camels becomesmore practicable (p. 279)—The Directors would do well to call inMr. Bremner to advise them (p. 280). | ||
| 28. | Extract from Letter relating to Proceedings at the Admiraltyas to the Screw Propeller (July 8, 1842) | [283] |
| 29. | Extract from Letter on the same Subject (August 6, 1842) | [286] |
| 30. | Statement of Project for a Line of large Steam-ships (June 10,1852) | [292] |
| The principle advocated is that of making the vessel largeenough to carry her own coal for the voyage, just as the ‘GreatWestern’ steam-ship did in 1838 (p. 292)—The size beinglimited only by the extent of demand for freight, and by thecircumstances of the ports to be frequented (p. 292). | ||
| 31. | Extract from Letter describing the Project of the Great Ship(July 1, 1852) | [293] |
| 32. | Letter to J. Scott Russell, Esq., on the Form and Dimensions ofthe Great Ship (July 13, 1852) | [294] |
| 33. | Report to the Directors of the Eastern Steam Navigation Companyon mode of Proceeding (July 21, 1852) | [296] |
| 34. | Report on Enquiries relating to the Draught and Form of theGreat Ship (October 6, 1852) | [297] |
| 35. | Report on the Dimensions of the Great Ship (March 21, 1853) | [299] |
| 36. | Report on the Tenders for the Ship and Engines (May 18,1853) | [301] |
| A short specification was drawn up for the engines, and detaileddrawings and specifications for the ship (p. 301)—Tendershave been received for the engines from Mr. J. Scott Russell,Messrs. Watt and Co., and Mr. Humphrys (p. 302)—After frequentcommunications with these gentlemen, Messrs. Watt and Co.’sdesigns are preferred for the screw engines, which will be thelargest yet made, and on which will mainly depend the performancesof the ship (p. 302), and Mr. J. Scott Russell’s for thepaddle engines (p. 302)—As regards a tender for the ship, aftercommunications with several parties, the result is a tender fromMr. J. Scott Russell (p. 303). | ||
| 37. | Extracts from Mr. Brunel’s Memoranda relating to the ‘GreatEastern’ Steam-ship (July 11, 1852, to November 18, 1853) | [304] |
| July 11, 1852: Dimensions of the ship (p. 304)—Division ofpower between the screw and paddle engines (p. 305)—Everyknown means must be adopted to ensure efficiency (p. 305)—Jacketingof steam pipes, &c. (p. 305). July 17, 1852: Conferencewith Mr. Field as to division of power between the screwand paddle engines (p. 305)—Pressure of steam (p. 305)—Nothinguncertain must be risked (p. 305)—Jacketing (p. 305). July 19,1852: Strong bulkheads every 30 feet or thereabouts, and themain ribs, and even at least two main deck beams, to be longitudinal,instead of transverse (p. 305). February 2, 1853: Presentviews as to the construction of the ship and engines (p. 306)—Boilers(p. 307)—Advantages of oscillating engines for both screwand paddle engines (p. 307). February 21, 1853: Proper dimensionsfor the Calcutta line (p. 308)—Gas (p. 308)—Ventilation(p. 308)—Steering (p. 308). March 14, 1853: Dimensions nowdetermined on (p. 308). March 22, 1853: Various dimensionssettled (p. 308). April 28, 1853: Tenders are being sought for(p. 308)—Arrangements for measuring the coal (p. 309)—Useof clean water (p. 309). August 7, 1853: Memoranda for engines(p. 309). November 18, 1853: Governors (p. 309)—Auxiliaryengine and boiler (p. 309). | ||
| 38. | Extracts from Mr. Brunel’s Memoranda relating to the ‘GreatEastern’ Steam-ship (February 25 to March 10, 1854) | [310] |
| February 25, 1854: Thought and labour involved in thedetails of the construction both of the ship and engines (p. 310)—Cabinarrangements (p. 310)—Economy of material in the constructionof the ship (p. 310)—A matter generally neglected inshipbuilding (p. 310)—All this misconstruction forbidden (p. 311).March 3, 1854: Details of screw engines (p. 311). March 10,1854: Details of ship (p. 311). | ||
| 39. | Letter to the Secretary of the Eastern Steam Navigation Company,on Position as Engineer of the Company (August 16,1854) | [311] |
| His unusual stake in the undertaking, and the heavy responsibilityhe has incurred (p. 311)—The work is one which requiresthat it should be entirely under his individual management andcontrol (p. 312)—And therefore there must be no other adviseror source of information on any question connected with the constructionor mode of carrying out the work (p. 312). | ||
| 40. | Letter to the same on an Article in a Newspaper (November16, 1854) | [313] |
| His general rule is not to notice newspaper articles, but this onebears the stamp of authority (p. 313)—Marked care is shown indepreciating his former efforts in advancing steam navigation, andin representing him, in the present case, as the passive approverof the project of another (p. 313)—Whereas it originated solelywith him, and has been worked out by him with great thoughtand labour (p. 314). | ||
| 41. | Report to the Directors of the Eastern Steam Navigation Company,describing the Nature of the Undertaking (February 5,1855) | [315] |
| Labour of preparing the preliminary designs for the ship(p. 316)—[Proposed arrangements for launching]—Principalpeculiarities in the construction of the ship (p. 316)—Water-tightcompartments (p. 316)—Transverse bulkheads (p. 316)—Doubleskin (p. 317)—Longitudinal bulkheads (p. 318)—Economy inmaterials (p. 318)—Engines (p. 318)—Boilers (p. 319)—The bestadvice has been sought on every point (p. 319)—The positionand design of the paddlewheels (p. 319)—The screw propeller—(p.320)—Protection from fire (p. 320)—Masts and sails (p. 320)—Astronomicalobservations (p. 320)—Lightning conductors (p. 321)—Adjustmentof compasses (p. 321). | ||
| 42. | Letter to G. B. Airy, Esq., Astronomer Royal (October 5,1852) | [321] |
| As so much depends on perfect navigation, every means is to betaken to ensure a constant determination of the ship’s position andcourse (p. 321)—It is proposed to have an observatory and staff ofobservers to be constantly engaged in taking observations (p. 322)—Whatshould be the nature of these observations and of theinstruments required? (p. 322). | ||
| 43. | Memorandum on the Management of the Great Ship (October1855) | [324] |
| The principles to be followed in the use of this new machine, andthe qualifications of the commander, have long been a subject ofanxious consideration by him (p. 324)—This ship requires a totallydifferent management from that suited to ordinary vessels (p. 325)—Examplesof this proposition (p. 326)—Size of the great ship (p.326)—By no possibility must she be allowed to touch the ground(p. 327)—Probable effects of the great size and mass of this vessel(p. 329)—And of her speed (p. 330)—The proposed system of continuousobservation (p. 330)—The exact course the ship is to takemust be determined previously to the voyage, and must be strictlyadhered to (p. 331)—Economy of fuel another consideration of thehighest importance (p. 332)—Proper speed of the engines (p. 332)—Useof the sails (p. 333)—Peculiarities of the position of the commander(p. 333)—His attention must be devoted exclusively to thegeneral management of the system by which the ship is to be madeto go like a piece of machinery (p. 333)—His assistants (p. 334)—Fourchief officers (p. 334)—A master at the head of a staff of observers,who are to make continuous observations upon the positionand performances of the ship (p. 334)—The chief engineer (p. 335)—Theprinciples herein set out are to be adopted by the commanderas the guide of his conduct in working this machine(p. 335). | ||
| 44. | Letter on the Responsibility of his Position (sent with last) | [324] |
| 45. | Letter on the Duties of the Chief Engineer of the Great Ship(March 19, 1857) | [335] |
| The success of the ship as a steamboat will depend entirely uponthe amount of power developed by the engines in proportion to thefuel consumed (p. 336)—The peculiar duties of the chief engineerwill be to obtain the largest amount of steam from the defined expenditureof fuel, and the use of this steam so as to obtain thelargest amount of power and the largest amount of result (p. 337)—Accuratemeasurements required of fuel expended and resultsobtained (p. 337)—Economy in every department may make thedifference between the success and failure of the ship (p. 337)—Thechief engineer should, if possible, superintend the erection ofthe engines (p. 338). | ||
| 46. | Extract from Report to the Directors of the Eastern Steam NavigationCompany, describing the proposed Arrangements forLaunching (February 5, 1855) | [341] |
| Reasons for deciding to launch the ship sideways (p. 341)—Andprobably gradually (p. 342). | ||
| 47. | Extract from Memorandum as to Power required to move theShip (September 26, 1857) | [352] |
| 48. | Letter to Captain Harrison on the River Tackle (September 30,1857) | [354] |
| 49. | Letter to the Directors of the Eastern Steam Navigation Companyon the Nature of the Launching Operations (October 23,1857) | [355] |
| The date is uncertain (p. 355)—The ship is to be lowered downand floated off by a slow and laborious operation (p. 355)—Shemay stop or not move at all (p. 356). | ||
| 50. | Memorandum on General Arrangements and intended Mode ofProceeding in the Launching Operations (October 30, 1857) | [356] |
| 51. | Letter to the Directors of the Eastern Steam Navigation Companyon the State of the Operations (November 26, 1857) | [366] |
| 52. | Letter to the Directors, and Memorandum on the State of theOperations (December 17, 1857) | [377] |
| 53. | Letter to W. Froude, Esq., describing the Floating of the ‘GreatEastern’ (February 2, 1858) | [389] |
| 54. | Extract from Report to the Directors of the Bristol Dock Companyon the Condition of the Floating Harbour (August 31,1832) | [423] |
| 55. | Extract from Report on the same subject (January 31, 1842) | [424] |
| 56. | Extract from Report on Portishead Pier (December 26, 1839) | [427] |
| 57. | Letter on the Distribution of Prizes, addressed to the Chairmanof the Committee of the Section of Machinery of the Exhibitionof 1851 (March 11, 1850) | [445] |
| 58. | Extract from Report of the Jury of Class VII. of the Exhibitionof 1851 on Sir Joseph Paxton’s Design for the Building | [447] |
| 59, 60, 61. | Letters to Westley Richards, Esq., on the Polygonal Rifle(October 25, 1852; February 7, 1853; November 26, 1858) | [450-1] |
| 62. | Extract from Letter to James Nasmyth, Esq., on the Constructionof Large Guns (April 2, 1855) | [452] |
| 63. | Extract from Letter to W. G. Armstrong, Esq., on the WireGun (June 8, 1855) | [454] |
| 64. | Memorandum on the Floating Gun-Carriage (December 20,1855) | [455] |
| The principle is fixing a very heavy gun in a floating shot-proofchamber (p. 455)—Mode of working the gun (p. 455)—Mode ofmanœuvring the vessel (p. 456)—Mode of attacking the Balticforts with a fleet of such vessels (p. 457)—Thickness of iron requiredto make the vessel shot proof (p. 458)—Best manner ofconstructing the vessels (p. 458). | ||
| 65. | Letter to the Secretary of the Admiralty on the Floating Gun-Carriage(July 27, 1855) | [459] |
| 66. | Memorandum on Renkioi Hospital Buildings (March 1855) | [463] |
| Necessary conditions in designing these buildings (p. 463)—Generaldescription of them (p. 463)—Closets and lavatories(p. 464)—External and internal covering (p. 464)—Ventilation(p. 464)—Kitchens (p. 465)—Drainage (p. 466)—Officers’ quarters(p. 466)—Transport of materials (p. 466)—Portable baths (p. 467)—Costof buildings (p. 467). | ||
| 67. | Letter on the Direction of Railway Works (March 4, 1845) | [475] |
| 68. | Letter on the Position of Joint Engineer (October 16, 1843) | [476] |
| 69. | Letter on the Position of Consulting Engineer (December 30,1851) | [477] |
| 70. | Letter on the Position of the Engineer in relation to the Contractors(May 26, 1854) | [477] |
| 71, 72, 73. | Extracts from Letters on the Relations between the Engineerand the Directors (April 15, 1850; December 6, 1851;Jan. 22, 1857) | [478-481] |
| 74, 75, 76. | Extracts from Letters on Interference of Directors withthe Assistant Engineers (January 19, 1842; January 28, 1842;December 12, 1851) | [481-3] |
| 77. | Extract from Diary (May 5, 1846) | [485] |
| 78. | Letter to an Inventor (September 17, 1847) | [486] |
| 79. | Letter on the Royal Commission on the Application of Iron toRailway Structures (March 13, 1848) | [486] |
| 80. | Letter on a Proposal to obtain Recognition in England of Decorationsconferred at the Paris Exhibition of 1855 (Feb. 9,1856) | [489] |
| 81. | Memorandum for Evidence before the Select Committee of theHouse of Lords on the Patent Laws, A.D. 1851 | [490] |
| He has had large experience of the patent laws (p. 490)—Hasnever taken out one, and is of opinion that the system is productiveof immense evil (p. 491)—Reasons for this belief (p. 491)—Conditionsnecessary for a successful patent (p. 493)—Disadvantages ofpatents (p. 494)—Impediments in the way of improvements(p. 495). | ||
| 82. | Extract from Observations on the Patent Laws made by Mr.Brunel at a Meeting of the Society of Arts (March 28, 1856) | [497] |
| 83. | Letter from Philæ, describing the Ascent of the Cataracts(February 12, 1859) | [517] |
| 84. | Report to the Directors of the Great Western Railway Companyon the Broad Gauge, &c. (August 1838) | [525] |
| He is desirous of combining his views into one report (p. 525)—Thedifficulties have been overcome, or are gradually diminishing(p. 525)—And the result justifies the attempt which has beenmade (p. 526)—The gradients of the Great Western Railway arefavourable (p. 526)—Advantages of the broad gauge (p. 527)—Reasonsfor adopting it (p. 528)—Additional cost in constructionis very slight (p. 529)—Weight of carriages (p. 530)—Freedomfrom accidents (p. 531)—Greater space for works of locomotives(p. 532)—The greater width gives scope for improvement in everypart (p. 532)—Speed obtained (p. 532)—Design of the engines(p. 533)—The continuous system of permanent way is best adaptedto high speeds (p. 535)—Calculations as to its cost compared withthat of a well constructed line with stone blocks (p. 537). | ||
| 85. | Report to the Directors of the Great Western Steam-ShipCompany, recommending the Adoption of the Screw Propellerin the ‘Great Britain’ Steam-ship (October 1840) | [539] |
| This subject will be considered under two heads: 1. Theefficiency of the screw propeller, compared with the paddlewheel. 2. The advantages or disadvantages attending its use (p. 539)—Thefirst question involves the consideration not merely of theeffect produced, but also of the proportionate power absorbed inproducing that effect (p. 539)—Observations on the slip of thepaddlewheel and screw in the ‘Great Western’ and ‘Archimedes,’respectively (p. 540)—The result of the comparison being, thatwith similar areas the screw will meet with at least equal, if not agreater resistance, and will consequently slip as little as or lessthan the ordinary paddle-board (p. 542)—Refutation of the commonerror, that the action of the screw is a very oblique one, andthat it imparts a considerable rotatory motion to the water (p. 543)—Descriptionof the action of the screw (p. 543)—The resultof the experiments is that, as compared with the ordinarypaddlewheel of sea-going steamers, the screw is, both as regardsthe effect produced and the proportionate power required toobtain that effect, an efficient propeller (p. 548)—Objections tothe use of the screw propeller (p. 548)—Answered seriatim(p. 549)—Statement of the principal advantages peculiar to theuse of the screw (p. 552)—The result of these enquiries is a strongand decided opinion in favour of the screw propeller being adoptedin the ‘Great Britain’ steam-ship (p. 557). | ||
LIST
OF
ILLUSTRATIONS.
| ENGRAVINGS. | ||
Portrait (engraved with permission of Messrs. Graves and Company byT. O. Barlow, from a portrait by J. C. Horsley, R.A., in the possessionof Mrs. Brunel) | Frontispiece | |
| PLATE | to face PAGE | |
| I. | Clifton Suspension Bridge | [49] |
| II. | The Hungerford Suspension Bridge | [59] |
| III. | The Royal Albert Bridge at Saltash. General View. | [171] |
| IV. | The Newport, Windsor, and Chepstow Bridges. Elevationsand Sections | [206] |
| V. | The Royal Albert Bridge at Saltash. Elevations and Sections. | [218] |
| WOODCUTS. | ||
| FIG. | PAGE | |
| 1. | Maidenhead Bridge (longitudinal section) | [174] |
| 2. | Bourne Viaduct (outline elevation) | [181] |
| 3. | Ivybridge Viaduct (the same) | [182] |
| 4. | Landore Viaduct (the same) | [184] |
| FIG. | PAGE | |
| 5. | St. Pinnock Viaduct (outline elevation, transverse section, andplans of piers) | [187] |
| 6. | Experimental Girder (transverse section) | [193] |
| 7. | Girder on South Wales Railway (the same) | [194] |
| 8. | Girder on Eastern Bengal Railway (the same) | [195] |
| 9. | Cumberland Basin Swing Bridge (transverse section of girder) | [196] |
| 10. | Windsor Bridge (transverse section of truss) | [200] |
| 11. | Chepstow Bridge (the same) | [208] |
| 12. | Saltash Bridge (the same) | [219] |
| 13. | Transverse Section of the ‘Great Britain’ Steam-Ship | [256] |
| 14. | Copy of a Sketch in a Letter on Iron Ships | [259] |
| 15. | Transverse Section of the Cradles and the Launching Ways ofthe ‘Great Eastern’ Steam-Ship | [347] |
| 16. | Longitudinal Section, Plan, and Midship Section of the ‘GreatEastern’ Steam-Ship | [397] |
| 17. | Monkwearmouth Dock Gates | [421] |
| 18. | Bristol Dock Gate | [430] |
| 19. | Plymouth Great Western Dock Gates | [435] |
| 20. | Briton Ferry Dock Gate | [439] |
| 21. | Brentford Dock Gate | [441] |
| 22. | Renkioi Hospital | [470] |
LIFE
OF
ISAMBARD KINGDOM BRUNEL.
CHAPTER I.
EARLY LIFE.
A.D. 1806—1828.
BIRTH OF MR. BRUNEL, APRIL 9, 1806—SIR MARC ISAMBARD BRUNEL—THE BLOCK MACHINERY—MR. BRUNEL’S SCHOOL LIFE—THE THAMES TUNNEL—SINKING OF THE ROTHERHITHE SHAFT—DESCRIPTION OF THE SHIELD—EXTRACTS FROM SIR ISAMBARD BRUNEL’S JOURNALS FROM THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE THAMES TUNNEL TO THE DATE OF THE SECOND IRRUPTION OF THE RIVER, JANUARY 12, 1828—NOTE A: THE BOURBON SUSPENSION BRIDGES—NOTE B: EXPERIMENTS WITH CARBONIC ACID GAS.