Sas ore se T TeLH soe errr otid a itee tee eed i =| ij : H : a ® ; Fi 5 : of h + ba H t Bs o i ‘ D o a — ae) , 4 5 ta S . 5 a Fi ‘ A A ce f A 5 ret fi a ns eee ae ere SERIES ty Fo epee S, is Motu ss Wurtrar ice tel cael Peet nae ste ten Spee Flas Seats pects Risereericna er) aim Steere mma MSU LIBRARIES A RETURNING MATERIALS: Place in book drop to remove this checkout from your record. FINES will be charged if book is returned after the date Stamped below. JANA 1 2003 te eee, ere e "METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION AND COSTS ON CAISSON FOUNDATIONS" Thesis for degree of C.E. ry Y Charles H. Dickinson — 1918, THESIg - INDEX- DESIGN | Discussion of formula Changes and reasons Drawings ,Filis of Material METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION Original plans Reasons for methods adopted Procedure Sketches Handling of materials Excavated dirt Lagging Sand,gravel and Stone Reinforcing steel CONSTRUCTION OF PIERS Concreting Removal of Lagging Inspection Proportions Photographs costs Distribution of Charges Manner of Reporting Records and Curves -FINAL UNIT COSTS- Excavation Lagging Reinforcing Steel Concrete Material ,tripods etc. Price List PAGES. 5-6-7 8-9 10 11-12 12 13 14-15 15 16-17 16-17 18-19920 921 922423224 25 25-26 26-27 28°29230=31932233-54=-37 36 38 38 355 39 95489 - FOREWORD- How many times we find that after some job has been completed,we wish some accurate costs had been kept at the time the work was going on so that we might feel that they were not the result of poorly kept notes with items here and there approximate. It is too often the case. There are always miscellaneous charges which are bound to come sooner or later and these are,in many ine stances ,regarded ina hit or miss method. The following thesis is based upon records which were kept each day as the work progressed. Experience has taught us that it is almost impossible to determine any definite data of cost of this work. The materials may cost the same,labor cost can be pro-= portioned,but the conditions under which the jobs are done are not the same and this is the determining factor, In keeping the costs of the work recorded on the following pages,the time for every man was checked daily and the distribution made for the same every night after hours. It was with the idea of accuracy in mind that we began these records and kept them up until the work was completed. Nothing was considered as belonging to the miscellaneous work orders and everything and every charge was properly made against its respective work order. DESIGN Discussion of formulae From what I say in the following pages about the design and the changes made,apparently without check- ing up on the same,I hope no engineer will belittle the importance of design. The foundation piers were designed by a prominent foundation company which ranks very highly in engineering circles. As the original drawings were not the work of our own office,I cannot do better than accept the word of the *Engineer® for the formula used, I have the word of our office engineer that my supposition as to which formula was used is fairly accurate, I am not permitted to say whose or what - formula it was,but in general,it was the column formula for fixed ends,which takes into consideration lateral deflection. The piers were designed as columns with pro- vision against lateral deflection tho entirely surround- ed by solid clay with a bearing capacity of 3000 lbs. per sq.ft. The total load in taken care of by spread footiggs ,nothing being allowed for the skin friction of the pier. This sure must amount to quite a bit as the ine side of the caissons was very rough and irregular. The original design called for shafts 3'-0" square with l"longitudinal reinforcing bars and +" stay bars. To dig a hole 3'=-0" square,lag it and have room for aman to work in it toegether with a hoisting bucket, which will hold anything at all,we decided,was out of the question. We had a line on some old equipment and some new ideas,which we used as an argument for changing the design;of these more will be mentioned later. Changes and reasons- The design was then changed,due to the fact that we felt that’ 3'-0" square holes couldn't be excavated economically or with any speed. We had equipment if the design was made to suit it,so why not change it and make use of what we had on hand. The contractor had some iron rings 4'-6" in diameter and this was accepted as a good working size for the piers with the lighter loads,the others to have a dia- meter of 5'=6"%, The matter was taken up with the Consult- ing Engineer and finally agreed to,the reinforcing to re- main as before; 8 1" longitudinal bars and +" stay bars every 12", As we were unable to obtain 1" bars ina rea- sonable length of time we were allowed to substitute a DESIGN, Changes and Reasons:-- 7/8" bar,the stay bars being reduced one half by spacing them every 24" instead of 12" apart. The number of 7/8" bars was then reduced to six from eight. In changing from square piers to round ones the area of the shafts increased from 9 sq. ft. to 12.5 sq.ft. These last mentioned changes in the reinforcing steel were made by the Engineer on the job and I am sure without checking up by figures. It may have been possible that the factor of safety was such that these could be made with safety without verifying by figures. Drawings and Bills of Material:-- The larger drawings I have had photostated as they were very awkward to handle. I have noted the impor- tant items of interest on them with ink. The three smaller drawings are interesting sections showing the loading and the s$¥epping up and down of the piers. A final section as the pliers were constructed would appesr very different. This because of the nature of the soil,we had in some cases,to go much deeper than planned, The bills of material need no special mention as I have noted items on then. ’ 6 veriica/ Lors origina), gesrg 17. z | *fOOnp H-* 1” Cleorane 35. ee : —_ ie at os | ~ er St 7 Orginaf Plot. TO" Sevore hols. = ——— 7-0 &-0 o's : —— - ~ - = ~ pe re oe ———— ' f 4 = Oo ve 2 on? nm - oy 4? vi oud: e p als | 7-27 ~ © 9 — + vee @ a . co , “J { @ Me aly ag co s . “A >. 2.4 ! . . . * | | A53Z yrormsc ee / es noe R’ FOO TING A” fooryng 7A” Fooring N* x t Sho a OM GE & aed eon 8 Ls gto" he te Se i Pete & | | | yl Square ett $39", 7 — : rate | ea : : i Ly > secI077 Lp r 2 sn > ‘ vl }' le Cote 3 : ».) lO gccoug a he Osa — po ia a ‘ : + €eF— : 4 | [ey zteeess ee ot we ® aa, is OF oA rest | ee eg | | Te ae fer being | ; \ > .__ 79" feded here. eter} Ltd : lo" © o0TING CT” ROOTING ke” PooTing A” SoorTing A PooTing N~ fs 90 4. MG-10-6-10-6 B64 ec. 6-5-9@ /0 oc i ; 4 4 SCRE iM ooo} [CE poe 8 Location of Fnhel | ryt" pi Pay See Orng. me 5 : t+4s-+ $+ “(BMC 6-7-6 @ Bt-< is —1-ME 6-7-6 @ Bree , ; L 8:0" | “al sis" 6:6" * a L Reorne s* fooring 8” fooTing B” fooring’N” T40e Ko" uo" Pana OME a> I 8-06 92-< T 't6-8-0@ 9% pb r's-$-6@ os | ‘ | ’ ‘ Y s %) a os : “ o ‘ < , aie é 6-6-6. Mt d ~ | = x ‘ ; yh TING "Gs Reorihg co Pooring C” : | =F 4 } Tb +} — 00-M-7-6@ OF e-€ oma. . 4 2 oy. “ey iv : Sry a | z : . a YS OP ‘ . ® Yer. “t oe +5] tO 3 Se ee —* 74 , Nh % é. 3 4 i 10-96-76 @ Dbe-< Z PR-G-7-3 fae as” il Jeo" . ‘749 | w fooring Ge ROOTING 7,” Fooring E* & \~4-M 6-00-6 @ 9i"c-c - Bsns i To be bp EL Lf —H- 6-0-8& 94 ee | four ALLS. oo ODN teat ot nee {it Ae te, 4 jo} r Pigh Jt Snes] ee Li RE —ait a! , ¢ : Log) oi ba eee +4414 2 7 ape ninctacne spol r te 2. — dee fe, ig es 7 faa * Titi = rh CT PAA es wt hce Tord 1 | CRN foyized! Hor ee Y TT + {1 rT hed = N ee OES dd ‘H-0° Boeaons ee Tonk roorpy Ingide Bottom Line of ae rey (o\R ae = 7404 uss fire) Jannel | Section AA. “? ws son - FLEV. 59, ELEV. 591-2 LEV. $89°8° iF care aq a Cae © a RE ee i ' ass Pe it LE, campus: 3 td sis tnd METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION Original plans | Our first plans did not take into considera- tion the idea of not being able to get just what equip- ment we figured on. We first considered a platform over the entire foundation area upon which the tripods could be erected and on which we could install a railway system for industrial cars.With this method we would be able to work any hole without interfering with the balance of the work. The wagons would all load at one edge of the platfom, empty wagons being used to keep the number of teams down. Concreting was to have been done with small machines that woud handle easily on the platform. The one feature not solved to our satisfaction was that of handling concrete materials. This plan was finally abandoned as being too expensive, We then considered a concrete tower and shutes, the dirt being scraped into a hopper in the alley in which case the teams could be loaded in the alley. We actually Yegan construction on the tower but had to give the idea up as the equipment was needed for another job. The piers being of different depths, some of which required such a short time to excavate, the spool idea for tripods was not considered. Past experience and distance from the river made us cautious about digging adjacent holes but we afterwards found this to be an unecessary precaution, The excavating was to be done by hand, the dirt being hoisted to the surface by lines running over blocks on the tripods set up over the holes.Here a discussion on the handling of excavated material and method of hoisting developed, The m&ter was simply a question of individual lines to the tripod or spool drives for a row of tripods. The individual line proposition worked itself out. This will be mentioned elsewhere, The low platforms, you will notice, were used only on the outside row of hohes. ‘his convinced us that the scraper idea was out of the question and that high platforms on a modified scale would prove most efficient. “ETHODS OF CONSTRUCTION Reasons for methods adopted: --- The final plans adopted were, as we have since found, justifiable. They were the result of the following line of reasoning: --- Platform over the foundations, too expensive, investment in equipment too heavy. Scraper plan, of handling dirt, impossible, as proven by the nature of the excavated material. Spool drive with individual niggerhead for each tripod impractical, vecause of the short length of time required to complete some of the caissons, and the danger of digging adjacent holes so near to the river. Concreting equipment determined by what we could and could not have. After a thorough study of our methods adopted we feel that the work was carried on in the most economical and efficient manner possible with the equipment forced upon us. This equipment consisted of two small * ChicagoMixers" one large and one small electric hoist and one gagusoline hoist The gasoline hoist was not of sufficient horse power , re = quiring too much coaxing, while the large hoist was too vower- ful, almost to the danger point. The most efficient of these figuring speed in hoisting and dependability, was the small electric hoist with a speed of one hundred to one hundred anid twenty-five feet per minute. Procedure e<-<--< Permanent marks for center lines of all rows of caissons were establised with a transit, from these, as wanted,the centers of all holes could be determined. The center of the hole as thus determined, was marked by means of an inch iron pipe driven to a depth of two or three feet to insure permanency. Templets ( see diagram 1 ) of the exact size of the hole were then placed over the pipe as a center and the hole marked out by the diggers, who used the templet with the pipe as a center, to a depth of three or four feet to assure an exact hole from the start. When deep enough, a permanent set of lagging was placed inthe hole, allowing eight or ten inches of the legging to extend above the surface of the surrounding ground to keep the surface water from running into the hoie and to facilitate marking center lines etc, Cross lines were establised on the top of Bais lagging and the exact center of the hole again deter- mined. METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION Procedure aan ne A movable rod, with a nail in the end to act as a hinge and allow swinging the rod on and off the hole ( see diagram 2) was attached and the center of the shaft, when the rod was in position was determined by permanent marks on it. From this center and a plumb line, the cir- cumference of the hole was marked off by the diggers who used short sticks as radii from the plumb ling and scraped off the sides of the hole to the exact size vefore putting in sets of lagging. Movable platforms with tripods, (see diagram 4 ) were so built that an extra dump wagon could be placed along side and loaded by dumping the dirt directly intothem as it was brought up from below, thus eliminating hand shoveling from the ground. One careful and efficient laborer was stationed on each platform to guide the bucket from the pottom of the hole, signal the engineer, unload the dirt from the bucket, and in general, tend to all the needs of the men below, On this job,an average of seven holes were kept working and besides the men tending on the platform, a small gang were needed on the ground for miscellaneous work such as backing the empty wagons up to the hole etc. Contrivances were made on the top of the tripods so that tarpaulins could be throw over them in case of rain which protected the tender and diggers so that the work could progress in spite of the © weather, The hoisting lines were run directly from the nigger-heads of the hoist engines and the dirt hauled to the surface by the engineer pulling from the nigger-head. In several cases the engineer handled five or six lines but three lines were handled with most efficiency. The holes were dug to the exact diameter gas wanted for the finished concrete and the lagging placed . When placed ( see diagram 2 J], two iron half-hands of the diameter of the inside of the lagging were driven into place and bolted to-egether,. Some nailing of the lagging to these bands was necessary but for the most part they fitted tighily enough to stay solidly in place.It is not advisable to use many nails as it makes the removal of the rings and the lagging, ,when concreting, much more difficult. In some special cases it was found necessary to use short sections of lagging as the banks were too soft to permit digging to the usual depth and caving would have started. METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION Procedure e«xa9n-0<= In case of quicksand, it was found necessary to pack the lagging from behind, as placed, with salt marsh hay to stop the flow of the quicksand and hold the lagging in place. Arbitrary elevations should be established on the top set of lagging from the start so that the depth of the hole can be determined at any time. Two kinds of platforms were used on this jot The first kind tried was a low platform where the dirt was thrown on the ground ground the platform as it was brought to the surface where it was accumulated and later loaded into dump wagons by handeshoveling from the ground. The . second kind with the method already discussed, was found to: be much more efficient and operated at a considerably lower cost in spite of the charges made for extra empty wagons et for evident reasons, Pgr in We; Dregron Vez — 2p Nilo PLDPS Cd KO991109- “Cunmlerence of Yo Xe Ss Rvack|\ conte 70°44 \ For~ p/atibh\| Lae. Pulley s’ clove platlorrre. LUG P77 BP 4; Fue TEria Yo 711208. 2HO N05 . Mose :- Sve of poyverrr Wong wiatele wogds SSLEL2P o07E, Stowe 22 Lo~r-0eS Go YO YC e+e Girr 7ret Tetttag Locke OF S727 B2/0 ee, PloTfortt7 740° high. Joe a Pryv0d Worirg tnevtad of Vl a, Wochta Loach. \ r 7227 ond 10gN a JO 1 Ve/7 won | . | Specia/ == JeinJore. ing. = oie ae rode WF atirre/ Sewed thre the poodle. Beilorced OS showrr. Drove Jer- a7 JOP of Lichel's 27". /0 METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION, Handling of Materialse---- Excavated dirte- So much has been said on this subject in the following pages,that here,I will mention only a few facts of interest. When using the low platforms,the dirt had to be shoveled by hand into the wagons.It was very sticky and made the loading slow work,it also cost more than it ordinarily should. Clay forks are almost a necessity for this work. While dumping the buckets from the high : platforms ,it was impossible to keep the dirt from spilling on the ground,and three men were busy most of the time loading this into the wagons. The haul differed in length,one dump was very close by,a distance of three blocks and the other was about two miles away. The first was not managed well, teams were unable,at times,to make more than three trips in five hours. The second dump was more efficient but the distance too great,the dirt was dropped from the wagons, thru trap doors,directly onto a boat. The charges for dumping privileges were 55¢ and 90¢ respectively. As a rule,the shafts passed thru a fill to a depth of five feet and then thru six to nine feet of yellow sand where they struck a layer of hardpan varying in thickness from two to five feet; the remainder of the shaft was dug thru blue clay of varying consistency but usually rather tough and plastic. Pockets of quicksand and water pockets were struck accasionally. The entire job was of normal character,for caissons of this type. I . METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION Handling of material ----- Lagging <---- Hemlock was used for lagging. The first order calling for material 2" X 6" tongued and groved cut to the radius of the piers 2' - 3*, The length of the pieces being 14' - 0", we cut them up into 4' -8"* pieces and this governed the depth of all excavation where the regular lagging was used. Special lengths were used for the first sections and in such places as needed extra attension. When the diggers were ready to lag four or five pieces were sent down with the iron rings. These were set up and the ringé@ placed, nails being driven in to support them.The balance of the lagging was then set up behind the ring, the last lengths requiring iriving. Where the excavation was irregular, wedges were forced in between the ring and the lagging. It is not good policy to Rave too many nails as the lagging is more difficult to get out when the time comes to remove it. When soft clay or sand with an abundance of water was encountered the lagging was driven down before the excavation was started. As the hole was carried down marsh hay was packed in behind the lagging, this kept the mush confined and provided backing for the rings to work or push against. Only one ring was used, this being placed in the center of the 4'-8" lengths. We found this suffi- cient except where we used the extra long lengths at the top of the holes or where we ran into the soft mushy clay and sand. Never more than two rings were required in either case, In only one instance did we have any trouble with the buckets catching on the ring. This was on account of using a faulty bucket. No damage was done altho there was some excitement as two men were some 40' below at the time the accident occurred, Buckets were carefully inspected after that and kept in good repair. Hemlock can be obtained with fewer knots ad and everyone connected with the work seemed to feel that this was the best material. The idea of having the lagging tongued and groved is not a very good one nor is it neces= sary to have it cut to a radius. After using it once or twice and knocking the concrete off it the tongue, groove and radius features are entirely lost. Where we ran thru fill with water in it the idea proved its worth as the swelling of the lagging prevented the water from dripping into the hole, | l2 METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION Handling of materiale-e--- Lagging ---- The lumber was dressed on all sides but except for the one side which should be inside this was not neces sary. The side next to the ring should be dressed as the rings frequently have to be driven and any unevenness adds to the labor required in setting rings or lagging. Handling of materiale----Sand -Gravel-Stone. The bankrun gravel or more properly the lake gravel which we were able to obtain averaged 67% sand, this percentage passed a +" mesh. For this reason,we never ordered sand but depended upon the percentage of sand in the gravel to make the proper mixtures. Limestone,of a very poor quality,was used in the majority of the work. Gravel was used exclusively for the balance of the time.Feasons for this will be found in the follow= ing subject. Trucks were used entirely for delivery,the space being too limited for handling wagons. Our ability to get quick delivery of materials,did away with any storage bins. Stock piles were built up during the day. When possible,the material was dumped somewhere near the mixers,thus saving a large amount of wheeling. 15 ethods of Construction- Handling of material-----Reinforcing steel. The question of reinforcing steel was not a hard one to solve as we are located in the same city as the plant which furnished all of our steel, Bills of material were written and at first forwarded to the Steel Co. This method proved unsatisfactory for the reason that they furnished the steel that they wanted to and it was many times not what we were in need of. We found the best plan was the have a representative call and give hima list of the sizes and the lengths that we wanted. These were | delivered in a very short time and piled according to sizes and lengths. By following this plan we never hdd a large stock on hand and had that much more room something that we needed very badly. Two men were chosen to handle all of this work,extra help being given them as they required it. They were responsible for the stock on hand and the placing of the steel, All bottom rods were laid on two supporting rods set upon bricks to keep them the required distance up from the bottom of the footing. Soft iron wire was used for fatening the rods toegether. We never experienced any troubaée from displacement the concrete was dumped 55' in some instances down dnto them. The vertical rods were driven into the concrete of footings after the bell of each pier had been poured and the concrete began to fill up the shaft of the pier.The rods being properly spaced with the tops held by nails driven into the lagging. Where the second and third sections of rods were put in the lap was made about two ft. and securely wired the top of the rod below, Mention of concreting around the rods will be made under another subject on the concreting of piers, /4. CONSTRUCTION OF PIERS, Concreting;-=- As mentioned before,the concreting pro= position was the outcome of the equipment that we were forced to use. The stock pile had to be located in one corner as it was the only space available,but instead of having a big mixer with one setup,we had to use the little "ChicageMixers", These had to be shifted with the work and it necessitated wheeling the sand etc. from the stock pile, sometimes across the lot a distance of 75 yards. These small mixers proved to be more economi- cal than we had expected. It ganerally required from one hour to one hour and a half to move and complete the setup of runways and platforms. One setting took care of as many as five piers at one or two different times. The platforms were large enough to allow for the piling of a large supply of cement on them,this did away with moving it back to the cement shed when any amount was left over. Aprotection of some sort had,of course,to be provided. Water was piped to different locations and a hose used between them and the mixers. Two men attended the mixer,one dumping and the other loading;the number of men wheeling differing,depending upon whether we had to wheel from the stock pile or from a posi- tion close by. We found it was impossible to use stone in puoring the bells as it piled up and did not fill out to the cornersof the footings. We tried proportioning the stone and gravel but finally poured gravel exclusively,getting very good results. Frequent inspections were made to be sure the bells were filling up properly. The gravel also filled in around the steel more satisfactorily. As soon as the bell was full,we mixeaé the stone with the gravel and continued this proportion to the top of the pier. The ex- cess water was taken care of by making the mixture more dry. We found that in placing the concrete that dumping it did no harm and the idea of using tremies was discarded. This dumping had a good ramming effect and when it was possible to obtain any large boulders,they were dropped in for the same reason. As it was impossible to lag or shore the bells,we planned to have them excavated and concreted as . goon after as possible; the bottom steel being placed but the vertical rods held until later. This was,invariably,late in the afternoon, and as soon as the bell was poured, the concreting was stopped until the next day. The first sec- tion of steel placed before leaving. Upon continuing the 1) CONSTRUCTION OF PIERS, Concreting:<--= concreting,the latent was never considered as too short a time elapsed between the time of stopping and starting again. As it was sometimes weeks before the anchor bolts were set, it was necessary to chip the latent off the top of the shaft before finishing the final concreting of the pier. On Saturday maroh 17,1917,running both mixers, we were able to make the following record--~ Total time 5 hrs. 55 min. Batches 130 | Average batch 2min. 44 sec. 30.66 cu.yds. computed quantity 6.35 cu.ft. avg. batch checks " " 114 min.per yd. 5.2 yds. per hour One mixer ran at the rate of one yard in 8 min. 53 sec. 6% yards per hour. One mixer ran at the rate of one yard in 13 min. 28 sec. 4% yards per hour. Removal of lagging:--- The chutes used in concreting were covered on the end to prevent the concrete from splashing,tco much, on the lagging. The platforms were moved from over the holes as soon as the excavation was completed and a small tripod was set up to attach the tackle to for lowering the men into the caisson,who removed the lagging and bands and placed the reinforcing steel. Two men took care of the removal of lagging bands and setting of steel. As the concreting went on,these men with hip boots and rubber gloves,waited until the con- crete had almost reached a ring and then went down to remove it and the lagging. After sending these up,the stay bars were sent down and placed. The concrete was very hard on the hands and these,if not protected,soon cracked and got very sore, Where the lagging had been driven on account of mush,the concrete was poured up to a point where the lag- ging was firmly held and then.only the ring removed, the lag- ging being buried in the concrete.About 25% of the lagging was lost in this manner.There were several instances in which the rings and all had to be left in the concrete. The lagging was immediately washed and cleaned and piled away until wanted for use again. 16 CONSTRUCTION OF PIERS, Inspection;:-<-- Every hole was inspected before laying the steel in the bottom,measurements being checked up with the plumb. A box ,holding one cubic foot,was used to measure the proportions and each wheeler instructed as to the amount for his particular wheelbarrow. A sample was taken and allow- ed to set; these were tested later on however but the con- creting was not held up. After dumping a few batches in the hole,an inspection was made to be sure the steel had not been disturbed and that the corners were filling up. | Frequently a man had to be sent down to puddle and ram the mass. When concreting the shaft,this puddling was done by che man,who removed the lagging,walking around in the con- Crete. Gravel,sand and stone was tested for voids by the water displacement method and all proportions made from this basis. The samples,after having time to set thor- oughly ,were broken and note made of the voids and the distribution of aggregates. Special care was exercised with the piers that had the change of section providing for the tunnel. The steel was increased in these piers and it was awkward work to get it set for making connections to the steel where the pier changed from rectangular to cylindrical section. It is interesting to note here that whereever the piers were uncovered afterwards,we never found any steel exposed on the surface of the shafts. During the excavating,frequent inspections were made with the sweeps and the plumb to be sure the holes were not running off center. As a rule the diggers were careful,the discrepency showed up very plainly when the lagging was placed. This can be clearly seen in two of the photos taken looking down into the caisson. Proportions: -<-< The specifications called for 1-2¢-§ mix- ture but the samples of thig proportion proved too lean and a 1-224 mixture was used. The gravel tested 67% sand passing a +" mesh and because of this no sand was used; the proportion sand figured from the above basis proving satisfactory,the balance of the gravel counting in the stone proportion. Samples of this mixture gave excellent tests. 17 CONSTRUCTION OF PIERS, Proportions: -<= The mixture was figured from the following-- 1-2-4 mixture Cement Sand Stone 1.57% 44 % 88% 5.5 sks. 11.9 cu.ft. 23.8 cu.ft. The above proportions being for one cubic yard. Figuring a sack of cement at .9 cu.ft. Sand 1.95 * * Stone 3.9 * *® Inspection; «<-= Under this heading I neglected to mention | the test borings that were made. When the elevation for the bottom of the bell was reached,test borings for twenty feet down were made and then if these proved satisfactory the bell excavation was begun. In one instance it was neeessary to go down twenty feet further. / INTERESTING ITEMS ON OPPOSITE PAGE, View showing the low platforms ,which were tried at first. Big mixer which we were planning on using with a tower, Stock pllee-=- lower center. Absolutely impossible to use a scraper on the excavated material shown beside the platforms, 1 o- INTERESTING ITEMS ON OPPOSITE PAGE, le-=- High platforms -wagon in bwtween. Z--eClose up view of plaSferm e- lower right. 3--- Four wagons loading -one team on job. ye 6 yk 3 re ' 5 i s a . 5 . INTERESTING ITEMS ON OPPOSITE PAGE. le-- Mud buckets-- left center, z--- Conorete mixere- center. S--- Completed caissons-- left. 4--- Contrivances for holding tarpaulins on tripods. Upper right--tarpaulin rigged up. ,5-=2 Grillage for 5'e6" piers,behind template. Upper right. ” Pu Al INTERESTING ITEMS ON OPPOSITE PAGE. View taken thru the trap doors on the platforn. Notice the template for locating exact center of fhe caisson. Shown thrown out of the way. rae aR % a ae io’ 22 A INTERESTING ITEMS ON OPPOSITE PAGE. View taken thru the trap door. The irregularities and unevenness of the lagging. Reinforcement 55't=- 0" below surface,concrete dumped directly onto it without displacement. Shute from mixer on right of caisson. Wedges between rings and lagging. 2/-02-% 1825-W ’ at RON rk Rl ae ida al a5 INTERESTING ITEMS ON OPPOSITE PAGE, This view was taken at the bottom of a shaft. It shows the squaring off for the footing from the round shaft. Reinforcing bars used to measure with. P “ry ‘ ‘ tere yor - ee A (aw A4 INTERESTING ITEMS ON OPPOSITE PAGE, Tunnel which was driven thru between the "E* and "*F* row of caissons. Photostat shows sections of these piers cut out to allow tunnel to pass between them. Clay removed with knives,5 men operating them. Yote jacks and bracing for supporting roof while exe cavating is going on. Note the two creases in the clay where the shoring gave away nearly catching four men under it. Priokwork of the tunnel passed within 13" of inside face of foundation pier. a Ei . ea a ] | / - vaizv Ml hI costs, Distribution of Charges:-- The distribution of charges was kept under the following headings--- Excavation Supervision Tending labor Lagging Diggers laborers Hoisting Engineer laborers Teaming Dumping privileges Extra wagons Miscellaneous Labor Cutting of lagging,cleaning,handling etc. All work on platforms,tripods etc. Miscellaneous charges. Material Lagging Miscellaneous excavation,operating etc. Platforms ,tripods,tackle etc. The above outline will be readily understood when reading over the following pages of costs on the different types. Manner of Reportinge-- The cost keeping clerk checked all of the work done and kept records of the ground thru which the holes were being driven,rate of progress and the number of men - engaged on any enterprize. Separate costs were kept on each hole excavated. One large cost sheet was provided for each hole,the cost of work done under the items as noted above being kept in columns, The cost engineer checked up four times a day and at the close of working hours took measurements. The labor time was checked with the total time for each man and distributed immediately,charges being made against the caisson on which the work was done. 26 costs, Manner of Reporting: «--- No charges were made for time worked less than one half hour. The amount of dirt excavated was recorded daily and this with the labor cost was plotted giving points on the cost curve for that particular caosson. Extensions were made daily,this enabled us to know the unit cost of opere- ation as the work progressed. When a caisson was complete, the sheet for that job was totaled up and the curve plotted. The final cost and the total yardage was noted on the curve and the sheet then filed. All miscellaneous charges were made under their proper headings and this totaled up,the unit charges were then added to the unit cost for excavation. Records and Curves; == As the cost for caissons,which were similar, differed,and there were so many piers,it was decided to groupe these and get an average cost and curve for that particular type of caisson. Where extraordinary efforts were expended on account of irregularities encountered, the cost ran up. These cases were exceptional but neverthee less occurred; the charges being high and the curve abnor- mal. These are not in.the seven types listed nor can they properly be figured in. The classification into types is made according to the varying size of the holes in regard to: diameter of shafts,size of bell and depth of shaft: and is not made according to their location or the character of the soil passed thru etc. Types 1 and 11 are separated from the other five types because of the different methods of digging employed. There are no special-section types or types where special work was necessary other than that snoidental to ordinary digging,included in any of these ypes. BELL TOTAL TYPE DIAM, DEPTH CU.YDS. CU.YDS, 1 4%210" 21.1! 14,29 27.65). 11 " 21.6! 5.41 20.08 slow platforms. 111 5%. 6* 41.58% 13.16 49.6 1V 4%210" 37.6! 3.95 29.4 v " 26.3! 10.88 28,.72;High platforms, v1 " 25,2! 3.85 20.96 Vill " 49,4! 5.80 57.37 SD4 Al Developement of unit cost curve for caissons for TYPE V11l Unit cost per cu.yd. noted only on caisson D5 , 5 4" | S40 | Delf | FS-F7 cu Hb, 5. G0 | Zare/ | watds [ Lazar K TYPE I 28 Dirt delivered by use of low platforms thrown on ground, loaded by hand. Avera of four 4'-10" holes, | _.. ACTUAL LABOR OPERATIONS TOTAL UNIT Digging 1174 digger hrs. $78.00 cu.yd. Lagging 6 " " " 3§¢ labor * 5.17 _ Tending 99 " " 35.22 . Supervision6 foreman * 3.32 ‘ Hoisting 27$ engineer * 12.32 . Teaming @ Tog per * 14.47 yy 14.355 Dumping priveleges 10.04 ( 4. yds. Extra wagons $2.25 / day 3,05 161.60 5.8 MISCELL. LABOR # Cutting lagging and analogous work .154 Building tripods ,plavforms.stc. e 320 Miscell. excavation charges 2287 e761 MATERIAL # Lagging ~ 555 ‘Niiscell. excavation,operating 0035 1429 cu yds latforms, tripods ,rope,tackle etc. az14 & @ 1 -O~ >| Total cost per cu.$d. Bell $7.47 470 #See other sheets for details. ||Diagram is for typical caisson of S this class. | v // Yardage cost curve,showing increase ‘tor decrease in actual digging cost per cueyde excavated. Yardage excavated is proportional to depth of shaft. “Sa, @ 4 i 1 a 6 a ~nNowadrqgay iy E COST TYPE II Same procedure as for Type I Average of six 4'=-10" holes, ACTUAL LABOR OPERATIONS TOTAL UNIT Digging 1764 digger hrs. cu.yd. " 9 labor " $45.29 lagging %% digger " " 6 labor " 6.58 Tending 70% *" " 24.43 ‘y Supervis. 8 foreman "* 4.37 Mb cagds & Hoisting 15% engineer" oS 3 labor " 8.57 { Teaming @ 70¢/nr. 10.17 Dumping privileges 7.05 Extra wagons 12 stor st 5.361 MISCELL. LABOR# . Lagging (cutting) and analogous work .154 I4/ cw. yds, + Building tripods,platforms etc. 2 320 Miscell. excavation charges 2287 e761 k——s—6__| _ Bel// MATERIAL# Lagging 555 Miscell. excavation,operating 0935 $10" | Platforms tripods ,tackle etc. ant4 Q 864 ; TOTAL COST PER CU.YD. $6. 986 $See other sheets for details. Diagram of typical caisson of this class, Yardage cost curve showing increase or decrease in actual digging cost per cu. $d. excavated. Yardage excavated is proportional to the depth of shaft. S 8; Bi | 4 Ni 6 ~ ! t “L --—pese/_ qo ~~ f ~~ a | Bel | £4 | AA enph /- ! | TOTAL Wald. | £008 cu. yds, 3 S TYPE III Dirt delivered from high plat- forms directly into wagons. Hand-shoveling eliminated. Average of six 5'= 6" holes. ACTUAL LABOR OPERATIONS. Digging 126% digger hrs. $76.99 Lagging 16 " " " 9 labor " 13.96 56.5/ cuydt ‘Q Tending 87 " " 30.66 _, Supervis. 7 foreman " 4,41 ~ Hoisting 40 engineer " 20.26 Y Peaming @70¢ per "* 32.86 Dumping privite es 29251 Extra wagons 225 per day 2236 . 215.72 UNIT CU.YD. $4. 340 MISCELL. LABOR# Cutting lagging,etc e154 Building tripods,platforms - 320 - Miscell. excavation charges _,.287 13./6 CUGd5 ‘S 61 -*& MATERIAL# “ lagging «555 Miscell.excavation,cperating .035 Platforms ,tripods,tackie,. 2274 864 y'-0'—+ LBE// S-6 8 | | soma UNIT COST PER CU.YD. $5.965 x a Q Diagram is typical of this class. Yardage cost curve showing increase or decrease in actual digging cost per cu.yd. excavated. Yardage is proportional to depth of shaft. a S SS es Pi} __ 1s fase St} fo Teh o Salt Bell ” I6.5/ 64.405. ! 15.16 cvyes b TOF F368 cu.yé Q Q # See other sheets for details. PSS Feu yds oo -8 SIT cv. yds. sS Tt | —_ 7 0» . LEW 4'-/o- a { . | TYPE IV PROCEDURE SAME AS TYPE III. High platforms. Average of seyen 4'= 10" holes, ACTUAL LABOR OPERATIONS. 5/ Digging 93% hrs. diggers $56.69 Lagging 16$ digger hrs. " 9 labor " 13.09 Tending 708 " " 24.79 Supervis. 6¢ foreman " 3.76 Hoisting 24 ehgineer " | " 2 labor " 11.72 Teaming @ 709 per hr. 20.27 Dumping privileges 15.53 Extra wagons @ $2.25 per day 8.8] $154.82 UNIT COST PER CU.YD. $5.23 MISCELL. LABOR# Cutting lagging and analogous etc Building tripods ,platforms etc. Miscell.excavation charges MATERIALS# Lagging Miscell.excavation,operating Platforms ,tripods,tackle etc, TQ@TAL UNIT COST PER CU.YD. Diagranr is of typical caisson of this class. 0154 - 520 ~287 7761 0555 0035 274 864 $6.855 Yardage cost curve showing increase or decrease in actual digging cost per cu.yd. excavated. Yardage excavated is proportional to the depth of shaft. s fr. Ss ‘ é- 3S x | | 5} — — P940_ _ = T J - |! I 5. Shatt | ef | ' | a a # See other sheets for details, TYPE V 352 Dirt loaded from high platforms, . Dumped directly into wagons. Ave e of fo ta " es ACTUAL LABOR OPERATIONS, TOTAL, Digging 79 digger hrs $ 5 3 labor "* 48.69 Lagging 11 digger " IT64 cu.yds. . 7 labor " 9.42 x Tending 57 ” " 20.23 + Supervis, 5 foreman * 2.81 © Hoisting 20 engineer" ‘ 2 labor " 11.09 Teaming @ 70¢ per hour. 17.89 Dumping privileges 12.55 Extra wagons 38 $2.25 per day 7 S135" a UNIT COST PER CU.YD. $4.64 ‘% MISCELL, LABOR# 10.88 cu yds. - Cutting lagging etc. 154 Building tripods,platforms © 020 Miscell excavation charges 287 e761 | 9o* Belf K- MATERIALS# Lagging 555 Miscell. excavation operating 035 . Platforms ,tripods,tackle etc. 274 t a Y , , 864 4 -/0 ‘ 0) TOTAL UNIT COST PER CU.YD. $6,265 Diagram is of typical caisson of this class. Yardage cost curve showing increase or decrease in actual digging cost per cu.yd. excavated, Yardage excavated is proportional to depth of shaft, d SS SS) SS os es Toe Bell Sot ' 4 ! QSE CO”. YAS (E49 cu yd OOF ! Jara! | | AGE (2cw vds # See other sheets for details. Ak Teuyts|\ 4 ey NY = JEST cu yds.\ S St <7 -o-_+| 4_fo-\ \* | TYPE VI Dirt loaded from high platforms, Dumped directly into wagons. Average of four 4'=- 10% holes, ACTUAL LABOR OPERATIONS. TOTAL. Digging 76 digger hrs. $45.59 Lagging 13 " " " 1% labor " 10.35 Tending 54 " " 19.24 Supervis. 5% foreman * 2.70 Hoisting 19% engineer " " 1g labor " 9.81 Teaming @ 70¢ per hour 14.31 Dumping privileges 10.49 Extra wagons @ $2.25 per day _ 6,60 _ $109.11 UNIT COST PER CU. YD. $5.670 MISCELL. LABOR# Cutting lagging and etc, ~154 Bullding tripods,platforms etc, ° 020 Miscell. excavation charges 287 0761 MATERIAL# Lagging ~ 555 Miscell., excavation,operating 0035 Platforms,tripods,tackle etc, 7 864 TOTAL UNIT COST PER CU.YD, $7.295 Diagram is of typical caisson of this class, Yardage cost curve showing increase or decrease in actual digging cost per cu.yd. excavated, 4, Yardage excavated is proportional to depth of shaft, 8 7 S é oe J: t 4 3 Shalt | Be ' ‘ , TH euyds Me yde' Tora/ JUlds. 4 \ 20.96 cu ys. 55 #See other sheets for details. I'YPE VII Dirt loaded from high platforms. 53 J. fe v.40. 995 — 7 —*K ABO cu. yas. 2 ik} — 6-6 ef —_—— > 4 —/on \ <—__— 6-6 Dumped directly into wagons. Average of six 4'=-10" holes, ACTUAL LABOR OPERATIONS, TOTAL Digging 119 digger hrs. $71.40 lagging 21+ " " " 10 labor e 17.36 Tending 92 " " 32.28 Supervis. %% foreman * 4,24 Hoisting 32 engineer * o- 4 labor " 17.77 Teaming @ 70¢ per hour 26.54 Dumping privileges 19.24 O4 Extra wagons € $2.25 per day 12,48 201.47 UNIT COST PER CU.YD. $5.39 MISCELLANEOUS LABOR# Cutting lagging etc. 2154 Building tripods,platforms etc. e 320 Miscell. excavation,operating 2A87 761 MATERIAL# lagging 555 Miscell. excavation operating 0035 Platforms ,tripods,tackle etc, 224 864 TOTAL COST PER CU.YD. $7.015 Diagram is of typical caisson of thié class. Yardage cost curve showing the increase or decrease in actual digging cost per cu. yd. excavated. Yardage excavated is proportional to the depth of shaft. bp. S SS SS N 7 C S S “ e- _ $9 S u ~ — RE stl OTD Nae — 3. | Bell | O | ,- TAT (cu. yd. | FO6 da /- t f VIL l I 2 7800 FI. WN ou. gOS. ws) SN S #See other sheets for details. COST OF TRIPODS ,PLATFORNS ETC, J0 IABOR# TOTAL UNIT Supervision 80 hrs. @ .56 $44.80 cu.yd. Carpenter 720 =* @ .50 360.00 Laborers 140 * @ .35 49.00 Engineer 55 " @ .650 27.5 $481.30 « 320 MATERIAL# Lumber 5.2M rough @ $20 $104.14 Miscellaneous hardware 21.43 Rope scable etc 20007 250.00 Blocks and accessories 6 $435.57 o274 #labor distributed over 1500 cu.yds. #Material distributed over 1650 cu.yds. NOTES: - The contractor furnished three hoists,the hoist- ing buckets,a small percentage of the operating materials and accessories. The material charges covers the lumber necessary for approximately twenty platforms etc. The tripods and the platforms for Types I and II were located directly over the shafts but were only about two feet above the ground. The dirt was dumped on the ground,as brought to the surface,and,as accumulated,was loaded into wagons by hand-eshoveling. The tripods and platforms for the other types were located directly over the shafts and were about six _or seven feet above the ground and movable. They were so built that an axtra empty dump wagon could be placed along side and filled by dumping the dirt,as it was hauled to the surface,directly into the standing wagon, An extra charge of $2.25 per day,was made for each of the five wagons used,but the labor eliminated by this method greatly offset this cost. Seven of these movable platforms were found sufficient for approximately forty holes,as only three hoists were used. An average of seven holes were kept working and the hoisting lines run from nigger heads on the engine, ellowing two or three lines to each hois$ and engineer. J6 VOST OF LAGGING, LABOR# TOTAL UNIT Supervision 55hrs. @ .56 $30.80 cu.yds. Carpenter 336 "=" @ .50 168.00 labor 51 * @ .35 17.85 Truck 14 " @ 1.00 14,00 $230.65 .154 MATFRIAL# Lumber 26.5 M 2" x 6" x 14'-0" @ $32 $847.81 Miscellaneous hardware 15.30 Operating ,hay ,wedges etc. 12.82 Alterations to extra bands 38 $914.43 555 flabor distributed over 1500 cu.yds. #Material distributed over 1650 cu.$ds. NOTES: = : The lumber used was beveled to allow for the curvature of the shaft. It was delivered in 14 feet lengths and wascut to the needed length on the job. 90% of the lagging was cut into 4'-8" lengths(each 14' length cut to three pieces) and the remainder cut into desired lengths. In concreting,it was necessary that some of the lagging be left to prevent the banks from caving,but the greater part removed and used again. The labor unit for removing the bands and the laggheg during concreting was,in this case $0.232 per cu.yd. the bands or rings used to hold the lagging were furnished by the contractor,a few had to be alter- ed on account of the change in size of a few of the cais-. sons. Approximately 350 of these bands wereused on the job and some were lost in the concreting. The truck time charged to this item is due, mostly,to the transporting of these bands. The miscellaneous hardware charged is for belts,nuts and similar equipment. 57 MISCELLANEOUS EXCAVATION CHARGES, LABOR# TOTAL UNIT Supervision 95 hrs. @ .56 $53.20 CU.YD. Carpenter 145 " @ ,.50 72.50 Laborer 595 "= @ .35 208.25 Engineer 50 "= @ .80 25.00 Truck 50 " @ 1.50 ” Ese . wo oo co MATERIAL# Operating(gasoline,oils,batteries etc.) $52.20 2935 # Labor and material both distributed over 1500 cu.y4ds. NOTES: - These miscellaneous charges are charges which could not be charged directly to either actual labor of digging or to building platforms and tripods. They include the erection and setting up of hoist engines making alterations and repaira to the equipment ,messenger service after oils and material,"safety first" precautions etc., and all other miscellaneous work including truck time for the hauling of materials, Also includes miscellaneous supervision for the laying of the work as well as the labor foreman's time. Allowance has been made for the cleaning up of the job when completed, None of the charges made in this study of the costs include the office organization,or of the material or of tool-room or general up-kKeep costs, Most of the tools and the miscellaneous equipment used were furnished by the contractor and are not included in these reports. Contractor's percentages on labor and materials are not included. As this work was done by a company,which gen- erates electric current, there are no charges for the power used by the electric hoists included in these miscellaneous expenditures, CONCRETING CAISSONS, 1325 cu,yds. at this report. 58 MATERIAL ITEM TOTAL UNIT Cement 1730 bbls @ $1.90 $3287.00 Stone 985.8 T @ 2.00 1971.60 Gravel 566 cu.eyds. @ 3.25 1839.50 Sharp sand 231 "* * @ 2.75 635.25. $7733.35 $5.842 Operating 280 gals. gas. 56.00 " 6.0 M lumber 120.90 . miscellaneous 6.00 182.990 0137 8 LABOR HOURS. Pouring 134 super. @ .56 §$ 75.04 « 2668 labor 2 35 960.48 " 86 engin. 52 44.7 1080.24 817 Move mixer etc. 35¢super. 56 19.88 e | @ @ @ " 375 labor @ .40 169.88 2128 Miscell. 26¢super @ .56 30 @ @ @ " super. expense 14,25 " 290flabor 2 56 104.40 " Slgengr 52 26.78 " 105 truck @1.32 138.69 298,87 2226 TOTAL COST $9464.34 UNIT COST PER CU.YD. $7150 NOTE; = This includes only actual labor time and does not include time of the tooleroom clerk or office organization. Includes charges for transportation and setting up of the mixers and equipment. Most of the truck time charged is for the hauling of cement. Two small "Chicago® mixers were used. REINFORCING STEEL 51,1507 at this report, LABOR Placing 84 super.hrs. @ .60 $ 50.40 " 508¢labor * @ .45 228.82 Miscell. 58 " . @ 45 26.10 TOTAL COST $305.32 UNIT COST PER POUND $0.00597 PRICES OF THE PRINCIPAL MATERIALS USED, SPRING OF 1917, eigen aan Lumber for laggtang (special design) $32.00/M Miscell.rough lumber(mostly 2nd-hand) 20.00/i Other miscell. lumber(average price) 32.00 /i Heavy strap hinges(6"for platform doors) 2.00/doz. Hartz blocks 10* 2.25 @8. Thimbles 13" 06 " Marsh hay (extraordinary lagging) -80/100# Manilla rope 1 1/8" .32/# Manilla rope 5/8" 25/p Gasoline 2-20 l. Motor oil 40/7 * Batteries 205 Ca. Spark plugs 75 * Nails $3.60 & 4.00/kg Wedges (wood) 03 ea. TES DURI CAVAT SPRING 917 Foreman $ .55 - .60 per hp. Diggers 60 " " Carpenters 45 = .55 "* * Laborers 95 = .375 * “ Engineers 045 = .525 * " Team and driver -70 | " " Extra wagons 2.25 per day. Dumping privileges (two dumps) 255 = .90 per load. NOTE: @ Labor scarce and times good,contractor working on a percentage basis, -oa, tem REINFORCING STEEL for SUB- GENERAL DRAWING NO..6 C0 17 <3-4<5 Pt ten STRUCTURS Niel] a @1-19)1-L~ PM 27 hoe 9p JOB “FZ Vat CONGRESS STREET HBATING cineca DATE WANTED IN FIELD SHEET COVERS MATERIAL FOR. Réinfore ae roy ee hs Bae ee Complete. Phe ih MPLETE DESORIS te. | a eed of ae ees ee Ee Me 2054 b SIM ice ITEMS R ys aoa | eee pet —— er eee = at a2 4 | 4* Gavriel Oveid Bars MEDIUM 8 +32 < 0. 32' - O* long. | STEEL | | i eh ) Baek oa ae & | | All bars to be wired in bundlep end tagged with our detail nUuMpe re. All bars shall be in accordance |. with the "Current Standard Speti- fications for Billet Steel” Rein- | ge. forcing Bars as adopted by the) ; : American Society for Testing Es, ne Materials, on @.| « REINFORCING STEEL FOR SUBSTRUC+ GENERAL DRAWING N¢ sMOpSt- " WORK ORDER JOB SONGRHSS STREET HSATING PLANT DATE WANTED IN FIELD ET COVERS MATERIAL FOR Redrife raing Ea 3 er ae a Comp] har Ete Cha Se Concrete eae = iid ITEMS : pas ee . een 1/4" Center Line Wire Stays ies) ae iad) \acas Ll! = 8" long Bates Line Wire Stays eS. 1/4" Gent Bch " ph en os 1/4": Center Line Wire " ok hal " i2t « 4" long SEN a) All wire stays to be wired in oundles and tagged with our letail number... Sh ; Le 5 nese hae ae ye te pitietrn. ae banh BS bi toe el Oho i | Kg | | ees ee Sheet *S se y | Mie : A no On . ™ ag / ’ ' i] ov. HeGsM. Pay ta et kee es ee Ys APPROVED BY. ...o¢~ DATE PRINTED 73.xre REINFORCING STEER Staye for Concre a EET COVERS. MATERIAL FOR 1/4" Diameter Wire 15’ = 3" léng 1/4" Diameter Wire 16' ~ 9" long ib tor Su 8S HEATIN Reinforcing Piers. Stays Stays All wire stays to be wired in bundhe@s and tagged with our Detail Number. This GENERAL DR AWING No 6:C p ae WORK ORDER /OS ZI ST lon SZ ae A DATE WANTED IN FIELD tee! es Ee 8 Boh eae IRON. |. "AM ca g:.3 Peo) o ee: APPROVED BY. DATE PRINTED eer V9 Pass) re Sheet 5, DETAIL DRAWING NO. KIND OF PATTERN NO. OR MATERIAL DETAIL NO. tem No. No. | Required 6 REMARKS bill pe 2S to a nae 3-2-6 / Tana nd +3 to a Mo 3-2-6 3-2-6 i a I6 ore BY. DATEL 2 ce c an —_ - CHECKED BY DATE > gre = e+. eee gt Le ah TR ae “4 ” oe er ant La zeal oe ° vos Ze" awe wee MICHIGAN STATE UNIV. LIBRARIES ITT =e pee ‘= nm rz = Tne