74 COLLAPSE OF TEXAS TOWER NO. 4 



Captain Albers. The other towers do not have any intermediate 

 bracing on the column, which makes quite a bit of difference in your 

 design. 



Senator Jackson. The only trouble is the other two are standing 

 and this one is down. 



Captain Albers. The other two are merely driven into the ground, 

 and you have no support until you get to the top of the tower. 



Senator Stennis. The weight was much greater on No. 4, was it 

 not, the weight of the tower? 



Captain Albers. It was somewhat greater, yes. 



Senator Stennis. What percent greater? 



Captain Albers. I would be estimating, about 15 percent. 



Senator Stennis. And the waves were greater, were they not ; antic- 

 ipated waves ? 



Captain Albers. The same, sir. 



If we take this one leg here and you tend to put it over like a stake 

 driven into the ground, it will flop right out. But if you take a stool 

 with three legs braced together and push it, it tends to slide, rather 

 than to topple over. 



As we use the phrase in engineering, there is very little bending 

 moment on this particular caisson, where you have a structure as that 

 is originally put together. Where you do not have that, you do have 

 a considerable bending moment computed to the bottom of the tower 



Senator Stennis. Well, in great deference to you, it is just shocking 

 to learn that this is only 20 feet deep; that is, shocking to a layman ; 

 to me, at least. 



Captain Albers. It will figure perfectly satisfactory, sir. If I may 

 point out, that is one part of the tower that was not damaged. Those 

 caissons are still there. 



Senator Stennis. It did not give way, where the others did. 



Captain Albers. That is the great difference, the difference in the 

 bracing system. 



Senator Stennis. Senator Jackson ? 



Senator Jackson. As I understand from the interrogation by coun- 

 sel here, it was brought out that the designs were submitted by other 

 competing finns ? 



Captain Albers. Preliminary designs, yes; schemes, I think you 

 would preferably call them. 



Senator Jackson. Well, did the Navy, or you, or other people reaUy 

 review the different approach that these other people made as com- 

 pared to the people who got the contract ? 



Captain Albers. Yes, sir, we studied many other schemes in addition 

 to those two. 



Senator Jackson. I understand, but you say these various schemes 

 or proposals of designs were submitted so that you had an opportmiity 

 to get their philosophy as to how they felt it should be built? 



Captain Albers. Yes, we went out and investigated them, and they 

 are all covered in the feasibility report. 



Senator Jackson. Could you explain briefly how the competing 

 scheme compared with the one that was accepted ? How did it differ ? 

 I understand that it differed. 



Captain Albers. The DeLong system as originally submitted was 

 the one we actually used on tower No. 2. That system was not suitable 



