WATER AND THE ENGIXEEH. (Joi> 



Volumes have been and many more might l^e written on the 

 dealings of the engineer with water — and of water with the engineer 

 — but in thi.s necessarily short paper I must coniine my remarks to a 

 few detached aspects of the question that have come more pro- 

 minently under my personal observation, whilst the formulae that 

 are given are such as I have found useful or have personally evolved 

 in my practice. 



Water and the Railway Ea-giiseeh. 



One of the first problems that confronts an engineer engaged 

 in the survey and design of railways is the question of waterways. 



Except in the very exceptional case where a railway is located 

 along the summit of a watershed or divide, the railway engineer is 

 continually confronted with the question of how to deal with, or 

 how best to dispose of, the water that he knows, after each heavy 

 rain storm, nmst cross the line of route here and there. What shall 

 be the height and lengtli and best location of this bridge? What 

 shall be the sectional area of that culvert or drain I Shall this minor 

 stream be diverted to a larger watercourse, or shall the water of the 

 former be passed directly under the rails? Shall he allow, and to 

 what extent may he safely allow, flood water to cross the line above 

 the i-ails? What shall be the character as well as the dimensions of 

 the opening? Shall it be constructed of wood, stone, brick, concrete, 

 or iron? Are the foundations satisfactory, and what steps should be 

 taken to discover their nature? Unless these questions are dealt 

 with in the light of technical knowledge and trained experience the 

 railway engineer is sure to make one of two possible mistakes — 

 either he will underestimate the works, and, therefore, make insuffi- 

 cient provision for the safe disposal of storm water to the imminent 

 risk of life and property, or, on the other hand, he may overestimate 

 the provision required in the way of waterways, and thus load the 

 works with unnecessary and useless expenditure. 



I could quote instances that have come under my personal 

 observation where the grossest ignorance, if not the most culpable 

 negligence, was shown in dealing with these important questions, 

 and I could name at least one case where loss of life and great 

 destruction of property was the result. 



I know a case where on the same section of railway and only a 

 few miles apart, under identical climatic conditions, 10 ft. diameter 

 circular brick culverts were provided at two places, one of which 

 drained an area of 200 acres and the other 4,000 acres, whilst in 

 the case of the lesser area the culvert was so situated that under any 

 circumstances it could never run more than half full, as, at any 

 greater height, the water would eticape elsewhere down the line. The 

 engineer responsible for such work would be hard put to it to justify 

 his practice on any reasonable or technical grounds. 



When, more than thirty years ago, I was placed in charge of the 

 railway surveys of the Southern Divison of this State, there were 

 only 2-tO miles of railway in the division, and less than -'560 miles 

 in the whole of Queensland. One of the principal duties assigned to 

 me was the determination of waterAvays on all lines to be con- 

 structed in the Southern Division. At that time, although I had 

 had considerable experience as a sun^eyor, both in the Northern 

 and in the Southern Divisions of the colony, I had had no previous 



