COLLAPSE OF TEXAS TOWER NO. 4 199 



Novv', the bigger waves, the waves around 10 or 12 feet, do make 

 it move more, and the larger ones move it more, so there is a general 

 correlation between the tower and the wave motion. There is very 

 little damping. 



Mr. Feekcii. I believe that in your report you stated, in effect, 

 that if the motion of the tower were objectionable it could be rectified 

 by the installation of above-water X-bracing. 



Are you acquainted with the fact that the tower was so designed 

 to keep the resistance to wave passage to a minimum, and would not 

 the instaUation of above- water X-bracing mitigate against the origi- 

 nal design assumptions? 



Mr. Brewer. I believe it woukl mitigate it. You stated "rectify" 

 in your statement. I don't believe I made that statement. 



Mr. French. N'o, I am sorry. This was just my term. 



Mr. Btewer. Yes, mitigate, I would say. I would feel that X- 

 bracing woukl mitigate the motions. I did, however, say this was 

 only a suggestion on my part that should be followed by an engi- 

 neering investigation, because the addition of the X-bracing, of course, 

 would present a greater plan form to the wave which might actually 

 impart greater forces and, therefore, the integrity of the tower might 

 be endangered. 



So my suggestion was that the X-bracing be investigated from an 

 engineering standpoint to see if, indeed, it would reduce the motions 

 v.'ithout endangering the tower. 



Mr. French. Would that require a complete reanalysis of the design 

 computations ? 



Mr. Brewer. I would think so. 



Mr. French. Would you have an opinon as an engineer as to what 

 the probable net gain in structural integrity would be achieved 

 by the installation of X-bracing ? 



Mr. Brewer. Well, if you installed the X-bracing, it is conceivable 

 that you might reduce the integrity of the structure. But you would, 

 under the conditions as we did measure them, you would reduce the 

 motions. 



If we are speaking of motions, by putting in the X-bracing it 

 would reduce tlie motions somewhat, but it might increase the loading 

 in very lieavy seas on the tower, which might be harmful rather than 

 beneficial. 



This is what I meant by having an investigation made before this 

 was done. But I am quite confident that the X-bracing would reduce 

 somewhat the motions of the tower, so if that was objectionable from 

 a radar standpoint, that would be good. 



But if it presented a greater profile to the advancing waves so 

 that the tower was then overloaded, that would be bad. 



So this is something that would have to be determined by com- 

 putation investigation. 



Mr. French. We had testimony yesterday that pins were loose in 

 the minus 25 and minus 7.5 foot levels. 



Do you feel that those should have been corrected prior to the in- 

 stallation of X-bracing above water? 



Mr. Brewer. Well, I would certainly not be qualified to answer 

 that. 



I would think that, first of all from an integrity standpoint, I would 

 feel that the underwater bracing should be repaired, and then to re- 



