Worcester Railway Viaduct

1877. The original bridge over the River Severn

The replacement bridge over the Severn

Constructed for the Worcester and Hereford Railway.

The railway was carried through Worcester on a masonry viaduct and crossed the River Severn on a two-span cast iron arch bridge constructed in 1860. This required strengthening by the addition of an additional timber structure, but was replaced in 1903-4 by a steel bridge with Warren truss girders.

A 1.5 mile curved embankment and viaduct connects Henwick on the west bank with Worcester Shrub Hill station. The 68 arch viaduct is 855m (2085 ft) long. A skewed arch crosses Croft Road. Towards the east end of the viaduct are the remains of the arches of The Butts branch line, which left the main line on a viaduct that descended steeply to the level of the river. It was intended to go to Diglis but did not get permission to pass the Cathedral.

Newspaper Reports

1859 '.... Colonel Yolland, after explaining the circumstances under which the inspection was made, notwithstanding the withdrawal of the notice, goes on to describe the line generally stating that it is on the narrow gauge, with longitudinal baulks, and bridge rails screwed down, the latter having iron plates to support them at the ends. There are ten under and ten over bridges besides viaducts. He then goes on to say:— The whole of the masonry of these works substantially executed, aud the girders are sufficiently strong by calculation, and did not exhibit any unusual deflection. There are four viaducts respectively ot 29, 935, 12, and 68 yards. The long viaduct through the town of Worcester is a very important one, built principally of brick arches; the largest span being 35 feet on the square and 44 1/2 on the skew. There is one cast iron girder arch of 55 1/2 feet span over Foregate-street, and there are two openings of 120 feet each over the river Severn, also spanned by cast iron girders. The bridge over the Severn is still incomplete, and some of the arches of the viaduct on the east side of the river have only just had their centres lowered, so that they are not yet taken away. The masonry appears to be very substantially built, and the foundations are good. The cast iron arched girders over Foregate-street are sufficiently strong, and exhibit very little deflection, but there are other parts of the bridge which I shall have to comment on. As only one line of railway was laid down over this bridge the centre girder could not be tested by having weights on each side. There are no unauthorised level crossings on the line. Engine turntables at Henwick and Malvern stations are being erected." In making his inspection, Colonel Yolland notices on that portion of the line between the junction with the Oxford, Worcester, and Wolverhampton Railway and the east bank of the Severn certain requirements, which the following are the only ones of importance :— "The wooden platforms for carrying the rails over the wrought-iron bridge (Lowesmoor), and the arch girder bridge over Foregate-street, are far too slight. Six-inch transverse beams are now used, and they should be replaced by eight-inch beams, and bear a longitudinal sleeper under the rails, so as to distribute the weight. The cast-iron girders at the present time oscillate considerably the horizontal direction, probably owing to the slightness of the platform." With respect to the line on the west bank of the river, the inspector remarks that the roadways leading to the turntables Henwick and Malvern were not laid, owing to some delay the supply of points and crossings. He then goes on to say: " The platform of the wrought-iron girder bridge over the Bromyard turnpikeroad is too weak. It has six-inch beams suspended from the girders, but it is not so weak as the two other girder bridges, and might be safely worked over by light engines, the rails were laid on longitudinal baulks, spanning the whole opening, until eight-inch beams can be supplied. The parapets at the end of this bridge were too close to the line, and instructions were given to remove them." The conclusion he comes to is as follows:— "I have therefore to report my opinion that by reason of the incompleteness of the works, the opening of that portion of the Worcester and Hereford railway between the junction with the Oxford, Worcester, and Wolverhampton railway and the East bank ot the Severn cannot be sanctioned, and that as soon as the roadways to the turntables Malvern and Henwick are complete, and the platform of the wrought-iron bridge over the turnpike-road has been strengthened, the portion of the line between the West bank of the Severn and Malvern Station may be opened for traffic provided their lordships' receive an undertaking that only light tank engines shall work on this part until the platform of the bridge has been renewed, and that only one engine in steam or two or more coupled together and forming part of one train, be upon the line at one and the same time." ....'

1860 'WORCESTER AND HEREFORD RAILWAY.— THE BRIDGE OVER THE SEVERN.
We are now a position to satisfy the natural curiosity of our correspondent "P. C. H.," as well as of other Worcester and Hereford shareholders, and the public at large, in regard to the precise defects of the railway bridge over the Severn, and the actual reasons why the Government Inspector, Colonel Yolland, declines to certify for its being used for passenger traffic. This, we believe, is the gist of his original report, addressed to Captain Douglas Galton, R.E., the head of the Railway Department of the Board of Trade.
"The bridge is constructed to carry a double line of railway. It consists of two arches of 120 feet, with an intermediate pier in the centre of the river 9 feet thick. These openings are spanned by four cast-iron arched girders, one under each rail — the versed sine of the arch being 14 feet, a continuous girder resting on the crown of the arch and on the uprights springing from the arch throughout the whole length: six-inch planking is laid and spiked transversely to these girders, and the rails are carried by four longitudinal sleepers, placed on a thin bed of gravel lying on the six-inch planking, each longitudinal sleeper being directly over an iron girder."
The Inspector then, we are informed, proceeds to say:—
"A train of three locomotive engines and tenders was placed on one line and a ballast train sufficiently long to cover one of the spans on the other, and it was stated to average one ton per foot lineal in weight for the purpose testing the stability of the bridge. But as the deflections produced by these weights were largely in excess of what I had expected to find, and as the deflection of the east arch nearly doubled that of the west arch—such deflections being accompanied with considerable horizontal movement in the direction of the length of the girders — I requested Mr. Richards (the engineer) to cause the iron-work to be thoroughly overhauled, to ascertain that the bolts which fasten the separate portions of the arched girder were tightly screwed up, and when that is completed I propose carefully to examine and test the bridge again. In the meantime I have to report that, by reason of the incompleteness of the works, the opening of the permanent bridge for carrying the Worcester and Hereford Railway over the river Severn cannot be sanctioned without danger to the Public using the same."
The engineer, Mr. Liddell, in his report (embodied in that of the directors laid before the shareholders at their annual meeting on the 16th inst.) treated the matter with considerable nonchalance, making more light of it than Colonel Yolland's report seems to warrant. " The bridge,"- says Mr. Liddell, "exhibited a greater amount of flexibility than he (the Government Inspector) had observed in other bridges of a similar class." This, it will be seen, is not an exact representation. The Inspector said nothing about bridges of a similar class, and he used much stronger language than flexibility. "The deflections produced," he says, " were largely in excess of what I had expected to find." " The deflection of the east arch nearly doubled that of the west arch;" and these varying deflections "were accompanied with considerable horizontal movement in the direction of the length of the girders." All this Mr. Liddell discreetly masks under the description "a greater amount of flexibility" than is usually observed. The idea danger apparently did not associate itself in Mr. Liddell's mind with the extraordinary flexibility of the bridge or the incompleteness of the works, as testified by the Inspector. The latter, however, it will be seen, came to the decided conclusion that on this account the opening could not be sanctioned without danger to the public.
The screwing-up and other operations calculated to correct this unusual flexibility and give firmness and rigidity to the work having been effected, the Inspector made a further examination, but with no more satisfactory result. It was found that when one arch was loaded, the deflection of the crown of such arch was about an inch and a half, which might not have been thought extraordinary considering the width of the span - 120 ft - had it not been accompanied by the rising of the other arch to the same extent. The second arch beng loaded in turn, and the first left free, the like results were manifested, the loaded arch sinking, and the unloaded arch rising, as before. This phenomenon could only take place by the yielding of the central pier to the load put upon the imposts. Accordingly a careful observation was made by the Inspector, which showed that this pier oscillated laterally to a serious extent; the difference between its position at the summit, when one arch was loaded and then the other, being three-quarters of an inch or thereabouts. A brick-work pier (the Inspector is error in calling it stone), which possesses not an atom of elasticity, could only yield in this manner from want of stability the foundation. When it was put in we expressed our apprehensions on this head, and they are borne out by the result. This second inspection resulted in Col. Yolland coming to the conclusion that, as constructed the bridge was too weak, and again declined to certify for its opening on the ground that, by reason of the incompleteness of the work, it would be attended with danger to the public using it. We believe we may state, without fear of contradiction, that after this it was admitted on the part of the company that the bridge was too weak and that the only question remaining was as what should bedone with it. Mr. Hawkshaw was then requested to call upon the Inspector, and submit certain plans with reference to the bridge, and these, we believe, are being carried out. We understand that Mr. Hawkshaw proposes to tie the arched girders in such a manner that those of one arch may afford rigidity to the other. If the bridge should come down, this will at least ensure its coming down altogether and not piecemeal, but how it will give stability to the central pier we are not railway engineers sufficient to understand, though doubtless Mr. Liddell will be able satisfactorily to explain it his next report to the Directory. The base of the pier, from the foundation to the water level, consists of a mass of cement, protected from the action of the stream by iron piles and sheathing. The piles and casing were first driven into the bed of the river, the mud scraped out of the interior by the "bag and spoon" process, and the concrete poured into the case amongst the water until it reached a point above the ordinary level of the river. Nothing but solid stone can be more stable than a mass of concrete, manufactured under proper conditions but, when it is poured into water even through the medium of a tube, there is every risk of a portion of the lime being washed from the rest of the material, and the perfect congruity of the mass destroyed. We do not, therefore, feel the profoundest confidence in the stability of the submerged portion of the central support, Any oscillation, caused by the pressure of the imposts above, must tend alarmingly to the disintegration of a mass of concrete accumulated under such circumstances. Unlike brick-work, which shows premonitory symptoms in the shape of settlement and cracks before falling into ruin, concrete crumbles down once without warning.
It much concerns the interests of the shareholders to be informed whether they are to be saddled with all the loss, represented we imagine by some thousands of pounds, which will be occasioned by their engineers setting up a bridge which the Government Inspector refuses to pass as weak, incomplete and dangerous, and which is subsequently admitted on the part of the company to be too weak. Is it fair or right that the expenses of Mr. Hawkshaw, who has been called in to reinforce Mr. Liddell, and devise means for making his too weak bridge safe and stable, should be saddled on the shareholders. Is it fair or right that they should have to bear all the cost of the repairs — the rebuilding or strengthening or whatever may be necessary? Is it right or fair that they should undergo the heavy loss consequent upon the long suspension of the opening of the bridge owing to its confessed weakness? Assuredly they have their remedy, and now they know the rights of the matter, they will hardly, we expect, remain quite so unconcerned and quiescent as they showed themselves at the recent meeting.'

1860 'The Severn Railway Bridge.— Another inspection of this cast iron structure was made by Colonel Yolland, R.E., on Tuesday. On the first inspection some months sgo, the bridge, which rests on brick abutments, was found too feeble to support the traffic of railway, and the inspector thereupon, will be remembered, refused to sanction its use. In order to give to it strength sufficient for its temporary use, until means could be taken to give it rigidity and prevent vibration, it was resolved to prop up the iron girders with a number of massive piles, which have been placed in three positions beneath each arch, under the crown and under each haunch. At the trial on Tuesday, six locomotive engines and tenders, divided in two trains, and of weight of 150 tons each train, were brought over the bridge at once, running side by side, but the length of the three engines and tenders was greater than the span of each arch, and consequently the first and last wheels stood over the brickwork. Colonel Yolland made a minute inspection, but his report to the Board of Trade has not yet been made. An opinion, however, prevails that the deflection is still so considerable that the Inspector will not give a satisfactory report as to the stability of the bridge. As at present placed, the piles offer a serious obstruction to the navigation of the river, very narrow passage intervening between each tier of piles, or between the piles and the abutments of masonry. To this obstruction, we fear, is to be attributed the lamentable catastrophe of this morning, narrated in another place, and which has consigned four young persons to a premature grave.'

1860 'WORCESTER AND HEREFORD RAILWAY. The expectation announced in our last issue of the opening within a few days of this line from the O.W.W. Company's station at Shrub-hill direct to Malvern was realized on Thursday, Colonel Yolland, the Government inspector, having on Tuesday examined the bridge over the Severn, and afterwards intimated that he should be prepared to recommend the railway department of the Board of Trade to grant a certificate for the immediate opening thus much further. Mr. Wilson, engineer to the O.W.W. Company, accompanied the inspector in the final testing of the bridge, and six engines of forty-five tons each were employed. Thus a total weight of 270 tons was accumulated, which passed to and fro at various rates of speed without producing any perceptible oscillation. Colonel Yolland afterwards inspected the junction of the line with the O.W.W. Railway, and expressed himself perfectly satisfied. ....'

1860 ' The Great Malvern Railwav. — After many months of tedious delay, occasioned by Colonel Yolland, the Government Inspector, refusing to certify the safety of the bridge over the Severn, the Worcester and Hereford Railway has at length been opened from the Oxford, Worcester, and Wolverhampton Station at Worcester, to Great Malvern. The bridge is still under condemnation, but having been shored up by great balks of timber, until the central pier can be rebuilt, the inspector has allowed it to be opened for traffic, and the trains commenced running through on Wednesday week. This will prove a great facility for trips during the Malvern season generally. About ten trains run and fro daily between Malvern and Worcester, and passengers are now set down in Foregate-street.'

1930 'WORCESTER RAILWAY BRIDGE. Improvement of the Decking of the Bridge. There is an account in the current issue of the G.W.R. Magazine of the reconstruction of the Severn Railway Bridge at Worcester.
"Twenty-six years ago," - says the writer, - "the bridge carrying the Worcester-Hereford line over the River Severn, near Foregate-Street Station, was reconstructed. In the work then undertaken, the arched ribs of the old structure were replaced by two trussed main girders in each of the two spans, which were placed directly underneath the outer rail of the up and down lines. The rails were carried by longitudinal timbers laid in between the cross girders, resting on steels on the top boom of the main girders, the inner rails being supported by longitudinal timbers, which were also let in between the cross girders, and carried by rail bearers.
"Considerable difficulty has been experienced in maintaining a good top and alignment to the tracks on this bridge, and when the time came for the latter to be renewed an opportunity presented itself for effecting an improvement by docking the bridge: new decking is laid transversely on the rail bearers, and upon new 17-in. by 7-in. timbers fixed to the stools on the main girders, enabling ballast to be laid on the bridge, and a standard cross-sleeper track substituted for the existing baulk type. The work was carried out under six Sunday ocoupations — three per each track. .....'

Photos here show the bridge through the ages, and include photographs showing various degrees of reinforcement of the 1860 bridge over the river, from extensive timbering at one extreme, to iron chains (eye bars) tying together the abutments and the central pier.

See Also

Loading...