English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Open

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Insights

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

The Author. was the case at home. The  remarks of Sir Benjamin Baker upon the  Britannia  Bridge were of especial interest. Mr. Fairbairn, whilst condemning the use of chains as a permanent auxiliary support for the tubes, had yet admitted their possible value as a temporary aid in the construction, and this consideration, apart from Mr. Hodgkinson's advice, might have warranted the carrying up of the piers to their present height. Without altering the design of the masonry, he had endeavoured in Figs. 52 to show, in the one case (B), what might have been the appearance of the bridge had auxiliary chains been employed, and in the other (c), its possible appearance had the employment of the chains never been suggested. It was perhaps fortunate, all things considered, that the bridge had been left in its present state, as the presence of the chains, although creating a by no means ugly impression, could scarcely be reconciled with the type of girder to be supported. On the other hand, had the piers been built as in Figs. 52 (C), or more probably been terminated at the level of the lower boom, nothing would have redeemed the structure from taking rank with the very large class of ordinary supportedgirder bridges.

CORRESPONDENCE. THE AESTHETIC TREATMENT OF BRIDGE STRUCTURES.