Grace's Guide To British Industrial History

Registered UK Charity (No. 115342)

Grace's Guide is the leading source of historical information on industry and manufacturing in Britain. This web publication contains 147,919 pages of information and 233,587 images on early companies, their products and the people who designed and built them.

Grace's Guide is the leading source of historical information on industry and manufacturing in Britain. This web publication contains 147,919 pages of information and 233,587 images on early companies, their products and the people who designed and built them.

Difference between revisions of "Flowerpot Railway Bridge, Exeter"

From Graces Guide
(Created page with "This may not be the official name for the railway bridge between Exwick Playing Fields and Flowerpot Playing Fields. See [https://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/633491 here] for p...")
 
Line 7: Line 7:
A point of interest lies in the fact that at some point one of the arches was removed and replaced by a plate girder bridge. This would have imposed thrust loading on the remaining potion of the pier. For this reason, and perhaps to increase the load rating of the bridge, additional brick arches were constructed beneath the original masonry arches. The gaps (spandrels) between the old and new arches were infilled with brickwork at the exposed faces, and by some other method within. The spandrels are not symmetrical on opposite sides of the arch.  
A point of interest lies in the fact that at some point one of the arches was removed and replaced by a plate girder bridge. This would have imposed thrust loading on the remaining potion of the pier. For this reason, and perhaps to increase the load rating of the bridge, additional brick arches were constructed beneath the original masonry arches. The gaps (spandrels) between the old and new arches were infilled with brickwork at the exposed faces, and by some other method within. The spandrels are not symmetrical on opposite sides of the arch.  


The arch brickwork is in three layers, which were laid parallel (rather than in helical courses, which would be difficult in this situation). An open formwork would have been needed for the new arches, with supportingplanks inserted as bricklaying progressed.
The arch brickwork is in three layers, which were laid parallel (rather than in helical courses, which would be difficult in this situation). An open formwork would have been needed for the new arches, with supporting planks inserted as bricklaying progressed.


Thanks to # for pointing out that this is a more interesting bridge than might first appear.
Thanks to the author of [https://billharvey.typepad.com/Bridges%20final%20with%20front%20page%20and%20map%20links.pdf this article] for pointing out that this is a more interesting bridge than might first appear.<ref>[https://billharvey.typepad.com/Bridges%20final%20with%20front%20page%20and%20map%20links.pdf] Devon Buildings Group: 23rd Annual Conference, 14 June 2008: Devon Bridges, p.13</ref>




Line 18: Line 18:
<references/>
<references/>


* [https://billharvey.typepad.com/Bridges%20final%20with%20front%20page%20and%20map%20links.pdf] Devon Buildings Group: 23rd Annual Conference, 14 June 2008: Devon Bridges.
{{DEFAULTSORT: }}  
{{DEFAULTSORT: }}  
[[Category: Town - Exeter]]
[[Category: Town - Exeter]]
[[Category: Bridges and Viaducts]]
[[Category: Bridges and Viaducts]]
[[Category: Skew Bridges]]
[[Category: Skew Bridges]]

Revision as of 20:05, 18 November 2021

This may not be the official name for the railway bridge between Exwick Playing Fields and Flowerpot Playing Fields.

See here for photo and map.

It was originally a three-arch masonry bridge carrying the railway line between St. Thomas and St David's Station in Exeter over a waterway (cutwaters survive on the piers). The waterway is long gone, and the topography has been changed by the deposition of spoil.

A point of interest lies in the fact that at some point one of the arches was removed and replaced by a plate girder bridge. This would have imposed thrust loading on the remaining potion of the pier. For this reason, and perhaps to increase the load rating of the bridge, additional brick arches were constructed beneath the original masonry arches. The gaps (spandrels) between the old and new arches were infilled with brickwork at the exposed faces, and by some other method within. The spandrels are not symmetrical on opposite sides of the arch.

The arch brickwork is in three layers, which were laid parallel (rather than in helical courses, which would be difficult in this situation). An open formwork would have been needed for the new arches, with supporting planks inserted as bricklaying progressed.

Thanks to the author of this article for pointing out that this is a more interesting bridge than might first appear.[1]


See Also

Loading...

Sources of Information

  1. [1] Devon Buildings Group: 23rd Annual Conference, 14 June 2008: Devon Bridges, p.13