and other American ports for the largest vessels afloat. 

 As long as timber is available and can be protected from 

 marine borers, or can be used where borers are not destruct- 

 ive, it possesses advantages both economical and structural, 

 that commend themselves to the engineer. 



Reinforced concrete wharves and jetties, such as have 

 been built, so far, in Australasia, do not in my opinion 

 afford a solution of the berthing building problem. Person- 

 ally, I am disposed to deprecate the copying of timber pile 

 construction in reinforced concrete. A timber pile 

 possesses a high degree of resilience and in any lengths in 

 which it can be obtained will bear the bending moment of 

 its own weight while being lifted. A reinforced concrete 

 pile, on the other hand, of 18 inch section, when beyond a 

 comparatively short length, cannot be lifted without danger 

 of fracture unless slung in two or three places. Indeed, 

 the resistance of a reinforced concrete pile however well 

 made is so low that it should never be called upon to resist 

 either flexion or shock, or to sustain a transverse load. 

 Experiments have shown that a reinforced concrete beam 

 is only about a fourth or even less of the strength of au 

 Ironbark beam of the same section. Reinforced concrete 

 piles that can only be lifted without fracture from a recum- 

 bent to a vertical position for driving, by slinging them in 

 two or three places, certainly do not impress me as the 

 most suitable support for wharves which often have to 

 withstand shock and heavy side thrust from a vessel while 

 berthing. 



The use of ferro-concrete in work of this class has yet to 

 stand the trial of time, and many well-known engineers in 

 England are still sceptical as to its efficiency and lasting 

 properties owing to the danger of the concrete becoming 

 detached by shock and leaving the steel bars exposed to the 

 corroding action of the water. It is very difficult to detect 



