The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1891-01-01
any, purpose where great strength is

a any purpose where great strength is
The following comments on above are
MADE by the correspondent of the NORTH
resteTa Lambermaa, of Chicago, the princi-
PAL trade journal of the lumber business in
the United States:
These experiments, it must be remembered,
were made by the officials OF the Northern Pa
enc railroad for their own purposes in connee.
ton with the construction department, and
without any intention OF having them pub
nsncd. They were not made with any idea OF
booming mr. lumber, but because there had been
statements made athat fir was not as good as oak
Tor bridge purposes, that il would not stand the
same strain, and that therefore it would be
Desler 70 use oak, even If they had to import Il
further tests that viii be made are expected now
20 De fully as decisive on the question or
strength, both tensile and compressiye. The
lenacIty OF mr. is phenomenal, and is equaied py
no other wood.
MORE RAILROAD TESTS.
Copy of report of Mr.. w. A. Grondahl
tenglneer Oregon & California railroad),
on the subject Comparative Strength OF
Sugar Pine and Douglas Fir Timber, both
Good Quality"
/. Crushing Strength.-A piece of Xxi,
~ inch of both woods, with square ends,
gave as results: Fir broke near center at
1881 lbs. pressure, pine broke near center
at 1858 lbs. pressure, both greatly exceed
Hodkinson and c.. S. Smith gave for same
propositions Of breadth and length :, 200
and l,5l5 lbs, respectively. The superior
Ity OF the Oregon timber and the absolute
shortness of the pieces experimental with
may account for this discrepancy.
2. Transverse strength.--A piece Xxi, 2i-
inch between supports, was used for this
experiment. and the center breaking loads
were: For the fir, 4S1 pounds; for the pine,
40 pounds, the hr showing a great deal
better hbre for transverse strains than the
pine, the latter being very brittle, with
short, coarse nbres.
3. Tensile strength-Was tested with
pieces 1-10x1 inch across section, and gave:
For ilr, $50 pounds, or 5000 pounds 10
the square inch; for pine, 1 100 pounds, or
lI,o0o pounds TO the square inch, the
authors giving as an average 10000 pounds
for both woods.
4. Sideways crushing-A piece of iron
OF square inch was pressed against the
side of the different woods, and gave no
impression on either at 500 pounds, bare
ly perceptible one Aat 700, and at loo
pounds pressure the iron pressed about
.02-inch into the fir, and into the pine
about double as much.
5. Sbearing strength, along the fibres of
the FIR (pine not tested) gave as an average
of thirteen experiments, $50 pounds to the
square inch, it varying from 515 to S33
face.
CONCLUSIONS.
From the preceding tabulated tests, all
pointing to the superiority of Pacinc coast
woods, and particularly Douglas tlr, the
following conclusions are inevitable, to-
wit:
First. That the pines used for structural
purposes, and especially for bridges, grid
ers or other uses, where the greatest span
with the least detection is desired, the
white or soft pine obviously should be
eliminated, as deficient in the essential
requisites, and in such respects not being
superior to the inferior grades of PACING
coast woods known as bull pine (Cali-
formal and yellow pine (Arizonal.
Second. That the resinous varieties, the
long-leaved Tor Georgia. pine, admittedly
the superior of the yellow pines, shows
under transverse tests greater detection
with less pressure and less ultimate
strength than Douglas fir, while the COM
preston tests result in even greater ad-
vantages in favor of the latter.
Third. That the weight of Douglas fir is
only about IS per cent. of that of its near
est competitor, Georgia pine, very inn
portant item since the weight of a girder
adds appreciably to its detection, and also
important TO consider in the matter of
handling and transportation, whether by
land or water.
Fourth. That the comparison of the
spruce of this coast with that of the East,
the advantages are likewise in favor of the
former, both as to transverse and compress
sion tests, as also weight, while the red
cedar of Puget sound shows less dehec-
ton under the same weight than either
the white pine (Eastern), bull pine {Caii-
formal, or yellow pine (AriZona), and a
greater ultimate strength than even East
ern white pine.