Builders and Year: Robert Stephenson & Co. 1882
last CGR Numbering: 470, 471, 477
Wheel Arrangement: 4-6-0
Driving Wheel Diameter: 3 ft. 6 in.
Cylinders: 2 x 15 in. x 20 in.
Valve Gear: Joy's
Boiler Pressure: 140 lbs per square in.
Grate Size: 11.7 square ft.
Tractive Force: 11,250 lbs @ 75%
Length: 43 ft. 3¾ in.
Weight: 32 tons 1,400 lbs
Axle Load: 8 tons 1,400 lbs
Tank Water Capacity: 600 gallons
Tender Weight: 23 tons 200 lbs
Tender Coal Capacity: 6 tons
Tender Water Capacity: 1675 gallons
by GEORGE PAULING published 1926.
CHAPTER IX PAGES 36-38.
Image from the South African Magazine kindly provided by Ron & Ellen Stanton.
In point of design it has been described as the most graceful in the Colony. It was designed by Mr. Max Am Ende of Westminster, and to my mind it was at the time the strongest and lightest bridge of its kind in the world and so long as it is properly maintained it will continue to fulfill its purpose.
BRIDGE OVER THE BLAAUW KRANTZ RAVINE, CAPE COLONY.
- That, on account of the great height above the ground, and on account of the high price of timber at the site, the structure could be easily erected without the use of scaffolding supporting it as a whole.
- That, on account of the high freights to Port Alfred, the quantity of iron in the structure should be as small as possible.
- That the single parts of the principal span should be easy to lift, and that there should be as few of them as possible. For this latter reason most of them were made in lengths of 20 ft. and more.
The suspension bridge was left out of question as inadmissible.
A girder bridge with small independent spans on rocker piers would probably have been the most economical, even taking into account the great height of the piers near the middle of the ravine, but there would have been some difficulty in holding those piers in position until they could be secured to the girders at the top; and, moreover, such a structure would have been strikingly out of harmony with the character of the site.
On the other hand, a cantilever or continuous girder bridge in three spans—although such structures have been erected in similar localities—could not enter into comparison of simple economy of material, because such a design would entirely disregard the anomaly that the greater part of the structure, viz., the side spans, being necessarily constructed to carry across a large space, would be too near the ground to justify the omission of further supports.
The question was, therefore, narrowed to a comparison between the present arch and a central independent girder of the same span, including the piers on which it rests. The small side spans could obviously be left out in each case. The comparison was made with a view not only to arrive at a decision in this particular case, but also of answering the question of the economy of the arch more generally.
This photo appeared in the April 1898 3rd edition of Grocott & Sherry's Album of Grahamstown. The album is available here on the Internet Archive.
The following table contains the weights of geometrically similar structures of three different spans, of which the second is the one here described. The so-called theoretical weight is that which the structure would have if no part required stiffening, leaving out also all connections and all wind bracing. The moving load is taken at one ton per foot lineal, and the strain on the iron at an average of four tons per square inch. The proportion of the girder is taken at 1 in 8.
|Span in Feet.||Theoretical Weight.||Total Weight.|
- TJ Espitalier & WAY Day - The Locomotive in South Africa - South African Railways & Harbours Magazine Nov 1943
- Jose Burman - Early Railways at the Cape - Chapter 7 - The Midland line - published by Human & Rousseau 1984
- DF Holland -Steam Locomotives of the South African Railways Vol 1 1859-1910 - published by Purnell& Sons (SA) 1971.
- Scientific American Supplement No. 484
- Grocott & Sherry's Album of Grahamstown 1898 available here on the Internet Archive
- Martin Kruger's www.kowietales.co.za