"GRANVILLE BANTOCK (1868-), English musical composer, born in London Aug. 7 1868, was intended for the Indian civil service and later for the career of a chemical engineer, but abandoned both for music; he entered the Royal Academy of Music in 1889. There he gained many prizes and was the first holder of the Macfarren scholarship. In 1893 he founded the New Quarterly Musical Review, a pioneer publication on modern lines, and during the following two years he toured America and Australia as conductor of a Gaiety company, after which, in 1897 he became musical director at the Tower, New Brighton. Three years subsequently he was elected director of the school of music at the Midland Institute, Birmingham, and in 1908 he succeeded Elgar as professor of music at Birmingham University. A prolific composer in nearly all forms, among his best known works are The Great God Pan (1903); Omar Khayyam (1906); Pierrot of the Minute (1908); the truly choral symphony Atalanta in Calydon (1912); Fifine at the 2 1862, 1921.
1920 1ST Bart.
Navy Shipbuilding (1902) 2 29 (1886); (1887); (1891); (1916); (1916); (1917).
.. - .
Great Britain Fig.
I, 2, T a shortly after the work was finished (not so serious, however, as the original one), and the buildings were quite unaffected.
? ??t. I ?? 1
The barracks were rapidly erected. Although all the materials, except the roof-covering and the ballast for the concrete, were sent from England, the troops were in occupation of their new quarters in Nov. 1907, ten months after the earthquake, and 8'--- ------- FIG. 2.
FIG. 3. FIG. 4.
the universal opinion was expressed that the new barracks which cost £77,000 were a great improvement in comfort and convenience on the old ones which had cost, in days when building was relatively cheap, £95,000.
So far, then, the principle of light construction had been justified, but it did not follow that a type which was suitable to a hot climate like that of the West Indies would be equally applicable to Great Britain. At that time, however (1908), a small barrack was urgently required at Bordon, near Aldershot, for a field company of R.E., 150 men, with some accessory buildings such as sergeants' mess, recreation rooms, stables, etc., the estimated cost of which in " permanent " construction was £16,000; in " light construction " the estimate was £9,000, and this sum was sanctioned, and the work was carried out within the time estimate.
The plan of this building, shown in figs. 5 and 6, shows the same principles, formerly described, of to -12 men in one room, with ablution room, etc., in close proximity, with a room for one N.C.O. between two barrack rooms, and with a company store under the same roof. The walls were built, between steel stanchions, of brick 5 in. thick, rendered with ordinary plaster inside, and rough cast outside, the steel stanchions carrying the weight of roof, windows, etc. It was found that the building was warm and airy, and that the cost of maintenance was at least not greater than would have been the case with permanent construction. While the saving in cost lay mainly in walls and foundations, endeavour was made at the same time, by using some of the modern types of light roof-covering, to effect saving in the roof timbers. With all these economies in design there was a substantial reduction in cost, especially in the case of those military buildings where the walls and roof formed a large part of the whole. Thus stables, which had formerly cost about FIG. 7.
£60 per horse, were built on the new principle for about £32 - £35, without any reduction of efficiency. Figs. 7 and 8 show the exterior and interior of such a stable and indicate the general style of building.
A large riding-school built at Netheravon, Salisbury Plain, which was constructed on the " light-construction " principle, cost less than 2d. per cub. ft, as against 6d. to 7d. for a riding-school on the " permanent " principle. This is no doubt the most conspicuous example of saving in relative cost, as the building consists of little else than walls and roof.
Barracks on this principle, some of them double-storeyed, were built with satisfactory results at places as far distant from one another as Jersey, Worcester and Glasgow.
Another administrative change about this period also affected the design of important accessory buildings. Up to about 1909 it was laid down that the regimental institute (coffee bar, recreation room, etc.) should be separate from the " wet " canteen, used for malt liquor only. and also from the dining-rooms. In 1909, however. it was decided that, in any new construction, the wet canteen should be abolished, being replaced by a liquor bar in the institute, that there should be no restriction to the moderate use of malt liquor in connection with food, but that there should be no place for the sale of liquor only. The effect of this amalgamation of the institute and canteen was extended, where circumstances made it possible, to the amalgamation of the dining-rooms and supper bar, the men thus having all their meals served in the same room but with separate kitchens, one dealing with the regulation rations, and the other with the varied forms of refreshment purchased by the soldier voluntarily. This new departure was first embodied in the R.E. barracks at Bordon, and there found to be so satisfactory that it was followed in the new barracks at St. Peters, Jersey, where the combined dining and recreation rooms were made overlooking a cricket ground, with a large veranda forming a pleasant position for spectators of the game. It was possible, by the economies afforded by the light construction principle, to give these improvements without excessive la _ ? i?; ,,, ?V?!??.: ?? ? i?
„?? ?; i a ?1.
??w..??_.t.,.?., - / 10 ' '?,a,e1e0,s cost, more especially as there was substantial saving in having the three buildings, canteen, institute and dining-rooms, combined in one.
As the light-construction principle became more established in favour for buildings, including hospitals, in country districts especially, designs were contemplated for larger schemes (e. g. for the cavalry brigade barracks at Chiseldon, Wilts., and for an artillery brigade barracks near Fermoy), at the time of the outbreak of the war in 1914, and were in part carried out. In 1912-4 this principle of design was mainly adopted in connexion with aviation buildings, required by the new R.F.C. The variety of new buildings, aeroplane sheds, workshops, instructional buildings, etc., that were involved was great, and the urgency for their provision very pressing. A system of construction, therefore, which would lend itself to quick completion, not involve heavy expenditure, and be capable of expansion, was obviously suited to a service of which the full requirements were still conjectural.
Allusion may be made to one particular development, for it applied to other branches of the service as well as to aviation. This was the construction of officers' messes and quarters. Hitherto, in permanent barracks everywhere, these had been combined in one continuous building, and, when enlargement or alteration of the mess became necessary, the problem was difficult. With the new arrangement for the R.F.C.: the mess-house was designed separately, generally built on a site fairly central for groups of officers' cottages erected near it. Each cottage contained rooms for four single officers or two field officers, with an annex behind, containing servants' rooms, store-rooms, bath-room, etc. If the establishment of officers increased, more cottages could be built; if the numbers were reduced, one or more buildings could be shut up or reappropriated. This form of accommodation was very popular.
Married Soldiers' Quarters. - Accommodation for the married soldier had in earlier years been brought up to a reasonable standard of comfort and decency. The standard plans of married quarters, however, were neither economical in first cost nor pleasant in appearance. Frequently built in long and monotonous rows, they resembled the mean streets of an industrial town, and occupying, as they often did, some lovely spot in rural England, they were an eyesore and reproach. Hence, during the decade 1904-14, much attention was paid to (a) reduction in cost, and (b). improvement in external treatment. As regards (a) the average cost of the standard design was £400 per quarter of four rooms, and it was found that by rearrangement in constructive details, reducing height of rooms, rearrangement of chimneys, etc., the price could be reduced to about £ 220-f250 without sacrifice of comfort or authorized accommodation. Greater attention to (b) was possible also, in combination with economy; and the grouping of rows of quarters round gardens, playgrounds, etc., gave an impression of home life in country districts. Some groups of such cottages at Farnborough, Hants., were visited in 1917 by the Local Government Board Committee on the National Housing Problem, and elicited their full approbation.
1 ' ' i .,4.
Hutting during the War. - When accommodation for the new armies first came to be considered by the British War Office in the first io days of the World War, it was definitely decided to adopt some cheap design of hut which could be readily erected, and also easily adapted to any form of temporary material and to any reasonably level site. But there were many other considerations, e.g. what nature of accessory accommodation should be given, in view especially of recent rules regarding dining and recreation rooms, what sort of sanitary provision should be made, what method of lighting should be adopted, etc. As a result of consultation between the various War Office departments concerned the following points were settled: (a) That huts to hold 25 men (including one sergeant) should be constructed, giving 48 sq. ft. floor area per man (about 400 cub. ft. of interior space); (b) that there should be two principal spans of huts, viz. 20 ft. and 28 ft., and that as far as possible all the various buildings should be planned to fit one or other of these, so as to simplify the construction; thus, men's barracks, officers' quarters, regimental offices, quartermaster's stores, officers' mess and ante-room and kitchen, sergeants' mess and kitchen, were all planned to fit into the 20-ft. span, while men's diningrooms, cook-house and regimental institute were on the 28-ft. span; (c) that there should be a battalion cook-house, fitted with the best known pattern of cooking-range and boilers for i,000 men, and that there should be on either side of it diningrooms for Soo men each, allowing 5 to 6 sq. ft. for each man on a total floor space of 2,800 sq. ft. Between the cook-house and the dining-rooms there should be sculleries; (d) that there should be in each battalion a bath-house with a central heating boiler and hot and cold water laid on to the showers, which should be in the proportion of 5 to every ioo men; (e) that there should be a regimental institute of three rooms, viz. supper room, games room, and corporals' room; the bar and beer cellar to be between the supper room and corporals' room so that central serving could be arranged. There was also provided a kitchen and scullery in an annex. There was to be no " wet " canteen (though as a matter of fact some commanding officers made a canteen out of the corporals' room - an arrangement which was FIG. 12.
not in accordance with the original intention); (f) that there should be officers' and sergeants' messes planned to accommodate 30 officers and so sergeants respectively, and consisting of one block with mess-room and ante-room joined by a short passage with a kitchen block; (g) that four drying-rooms should be provided in which wet clothing could be hung, fitted with stoves and bars; (h) that the latrines should be on the dry-earth system, and that the ablution rooms and urinals should either lead into soak pits (in the chalk country in France this was invariably done) or into sewage filters; (i) that the lighting should be done by electric lamps and the wires carried on poles, not buried.
Plans of the principal huts designed on the above decisions are shown in figs. 9 to 12.
That these points were speedily settled is proved by the fact that all the type plans in detail for a complete battalion camp were approved io days after war was declared, and three days after it was decided to raise 100,000 men for the new army.
Considering the urgency of the matter, it would not have been a matter for surprise if extensive changes had to be made after the camps, so built, came into use. There were not, however, many changes, though several details were amended. Thus, it was decided to omit some of the accessories, such as the dining-rooms, on the ground that the men could dine in their sleeping-huts if necessary, and dining-rooms were only a recently authorized provision. The drying-rooms were frequently used for purposes other than that for which they were built, and in many camps they were not used at all, as the men found they lost their clothing when mixed up with others. In matters of detail, it was found better to have the huts made up in sections, bolted together in situ, rather than to build up with gangs of carpenters on the spot. This building by sections enabled the work to be done chiefly in central workshops and very rapidly put together on the site. Incidentally, sectional huts fetched a better price after the war than others, for obvious reasons.
As regards materials, the huts were at first founded on brick piers. This was a mistake, and it would have been better from the outset to have had a short stout pile of creosoted wood. The brick piers involved bricklayers and bricks and mortar, and the provision of these meant delay in some cases. The framework of walls, roofs and floors was mainly red fir of market scantlings, but the multiplication of these scantlings caused a famine in the market and much complaint. Yet it is hard to see how this could have been avoided, except by using a material more costly, or else by taking more time in construction. A light steel framework was used in some cases, with expanded metal plastered on one side, and sheet iron painted in the interior of the room, but this was costly compared to timber. For lining match-boarding and 3-ply timber were used. Asbestos sheets were used at first but were found very brittle unless the backing of timbers was fairly (say 18 in.) close, and " S X boarding " and similar fibrous matter was also employed, but not found suitable.
The floors were in most cases of planking, grooved and tongued. In France excellent sectional huts were made up by French workmen, and the carpentry was somewhat on different lines to that employed in England, lighter scantlings in roofs and subsidiary ties and struts being used. Many of the sectional huts there had the sides at a slight angle to the vertical, the sloping side forming like a " mansard " roof, part of the truss supporting the roof-covering.
It was pointed out in the earlier article that military hospitals, where built permanently, are designed on much the same lines as those in civil life.
During the decade before the World War there were two large permanent hospitals built for military needs, at Portsmouth and Dublin, but there were many small " reception stations " for examination, observation, accidents, etc., and one fairly big hospital for women, built of light construction, and found to be most satisfactory in every way.
When the war broke out in 1914 the whole question of suitable hospital design came necessarily into great prominence, and the following were the main points which were then settled: - (a) The wards should contain 25 beds, i.e. 24 ordinary cases and one special case in a separate small room; (b) the nurse's duty room should be adjacent to the entrance to the main ward, divided by the central passage from the special-case ward; (c) beyond the nurse's duty room should be the ward scullery and on the opposite side of the central passage the linen cupboard; (d) beyond this a transverse passage so as to give clear ventilation between the foregoing parts of the ward and the ablution and bath-rooms, which come then at the end of the hut nearest to the main entrance.
This gives a hut 140 ft. long by 20 ft. 8 in. wide (see fig. 13). Of the total area a little more than one-fourth is taken up by accessory accommodation, and it is doubtful whether as much as one case out of 24 requires to be specially treated. However, the above represented what may be called the nucleus typical ward, and hundreds were erected either exactly the same as this or with minor modifications, both in England at the large training-centres, and in France in the area occupied by British troops.
The administrative offices, which are always an important adjunct in a hospital, were combined in a hut 160 ft. by 28 ft., shown in fig. 14. At one end is the out-patient department with consultingroom, waiting-room and dispensary, divided by a corridor from the offices of the principal medical officer, his clerks and registrars, beyond which are the offices of the matron, nursing sisters' duty room, and clinical laboratory. At the rear of these are the orderly medical officers' room and the medical board room.
In the field there was in some cases a reception block where all wounded cases were brought, given temporary treatment, food, etc., and examined by the medical officers prior to being sent to one or other of the special wards for surgical attention, etc.
In a typical operation hut, 51 ft. by 36 ft., a wide double door, to admit a stretcher, leads into a hall, from which open on one side a Röntgen-ray room, an anaesthetic room, and the operation room, while on the other side are the sterilizing-rooms, preparation room, store and photographic rooms. The patient, after X-ray examination, is taken into the anaesthetic room and thence, when unconscious, into the operation room, about 20 ft. square, with windows opening to the north.
The hospital arrangements in the field varied in some nature of detail, but the same general principles were followed.
Hospital kitchens were based on the knowledge that, while some patients could come to a dining-room, there were many who would i 24 BED Ward Fig. 14.
have to be fed in their beds, and that the diets would have to be varied to suit individuals. The cooking and distribution arrangements had therefore to be on a more elaborate plan than is provided for in ordinary barracks.
Other hospital buildings, such as dining-room, supply stores (for bedding and utensils), pack store, officers' quarters, nursing sisters' accommodation, and barrack huts for orderlies, followed the usual lines for ordinary barrack huts and quarters with certain modifications. There were, however, two other adjuncts of importance in field hospitals, viz. mortuary block, and disinfecting block, which deserve a brief description.
The former is a hut 30 ft. by 14 ft. 8 in., with a post-mortem chamber 14 ft. by I I ft. 9 in. at one end, fitted with table, stove, cupboard, sink and shelves, and with wide double doors. Next to it is the body chamber, about 8 ft. square, and beyond that a " viewing chamber," entered by a separate lobby where friends of the deceased can enter and see the corpse prior to burial.
The disinfecting-hut has a receiving-room 11 ft. 9 in. by 14 ft., into which the foul clothing, bedding, etc., is brought, and placed in an air-tight disinfector, one end of which opens into the receiving-room, and the other into an adjacent chamber, the issuing-room, whence, after treatment in the disinfector, the material is removed. There is a small incinerator in another chamber and, for those materials which require liquid disinfectants, there are other rooms provided.
There were many types of portable light huts made of wooden framework and canvas. They were not found satisfactory for prolonged use, although many were found very useful for rapid work and in emergencies. The principles were the same in most cases, viz. framing of wooden scantlings about 2 in. by in., covered with canvas prepared with some sort of waterproof solution, and, when unfolded, fixed in position by light bolts or by hooks. The disadvantages were that they did not afford better protection against cold and heat than tents, and that the edges of the framing caused the parts of the canvas in contact with them to wear rapidly.
Portable huts of corrugated steel bent to a circular form were, however, most useful. The model invented by Lt.-Col. Nissen, R.E., was largely used in the field. These huts were in two patterns, differing from one another only in the fact that in the larger one there was a central ridge opening admitting air and light along the summit above the normal roof level. The huts were formed of light steel ribs of H-section bent in a semi-circular form, and resting on plates for foundations. Over these, corrugated steel in three parts, clipped together at the edges, and fastened to the ribs, is laid. Under the corrugated steel, and fitting into the flanges of the ribs, are light boards to form a lining. The floors, of wood, are made in sections and fit in between the parts of the steel framing that reach the ground. At the ends of the huts are doors and windows, with matchboarding to fill the unoccupied spaces. Thus the corrugated steel covering forms roof and walls, while light and ventilation, etc., is obtained from each end. The great advantage of these huts was that the materials could be packed up together so as to take up little space; and the one disadvantage was that, at a time when steel was much required for other services, it was difficult to get supplies of these huts in large numbers.
It is probable that sectional huts, either of the pattern alluded to above, or of some modification of the Nissen patent, will be considered as articles of recognized equipment in future and kept in store. (G. K. S. M.) p type was used for certain buildings in the National Guard Camps, in which, however, the troops were housed under canvas. These camps were all situated in the southern states, and required less protection against cold. Actual construction of cantonments began late in June and of camps about a month later. The last cantonment site was chosen July 6. It was necessary that the 32 mobilization centres be ready for the reception of the first contingents within 90 days. The cantonments naturally presented the most difficult construction problem, but by Sept. 4 they were prepared to house 430,000 men and their capacity was increased to 655,000 by the close of 1917 and subsequently expanded to 770,000. The National Guard camps provided quarters for 450,000 officers and men. At the regular army posts provision was made for accommodating 140,000 additional men. The programme of construction included also 4 centres of embarkation, 22 special camps, 30 supply depots and numerous other establishments. At the Armistice, Nov. II 1918, the total capacity of all the military establishments in the United States was more than 1,700,000 troops.
In laying out the cantonments on the chosen sites experts in townplanning gave advice. In general a U-shaped plan was adopted in which the wings could be extended indefinitely. In practice this general plan had to be adapted in each case to the local terrain. Standardized basic units of construction were devised, but these of necessity depended upon the size of the infantry companies to be accommodated. It was known that the original company of 150 men would be enlarged, but it was not known to what extent. For the 16 cantonments plans were issued calling for 2-storey wooden buildings, 43 ft. wide, of varying length, to house a company of 200 men or less, each building to have mess-halls and barracks. In the case of sites in the northern part of the United States, the barracks were lined with wall-board, with interior air space as a protection against the cold; in the South, barracks were merely double-boarded on the outside. Enclosed stables were built in the North; open sheds for animals in the South. As originally designed these barracks provided less than 400 cub. ft. of air space per man, following the regulations then in force for tent quarters. In Sept. 1917, after construction was almost finished, orders were issued calling for at least 500 cub. ft. of air space per man both in wooden barracks and in tents. At the same time it was announced that infantry companies were to be increased to 250 men. It was further ordered that not more than 35 men should be housed in one room and that each room should have four outside walls with windows and should have an independent entrance. This required a complete rearrangement of barrack interiors and much additional construction so that one company could be quartered in two adjacent buildings. For subsequent construction of barracks new plans were drawn, calling for buildings of a maximum size of 30 by 60 ft., 2-storeys high, with accommodations for 66 men. For a single company four such barracks were required, besides separate buildings for mess-halls and lavatories. In the beginning one-storey quarters for officers had been designed and these were retained throughout the period of mobilization. As to the grouping of buildings, a standard block about 450 by 800 ft. as chosen. Each block contained barracks for eight companies of 250 men. Beyond one end of the block were the officers' quarters; at the opposite end were placed the stables. In constructing rows of buildings the general plan was to leave at least 500 ft. between the rows as protection against the spread of fire. In each row not more than two blocks were grouped; further groups were separated by at least 300 ft. Strict regulations were observed in the setting of stoves and heaters, and all electrical work conformed to the National Electric Code. Water connexions were so placed that 16 streams could be thrown upon a large building. At each mobilization centre there was a trained military fire company and full equipment. In addition to quarters for troops a cantonment had a remount station for 10,000 animals, railway sidings, clothing repair shops, steam laundries, bakeries, refrigerating plants, electric power plants, storehouses, halls for instruction, and a base hospital. Camp welfare buildings were also maintained by such organizations as the Y.M.C.A., Knights of Columbus and Red Cross.
A special Hospital Division was organized under the office of the surgeon-general to provide adequate military hospitals at camps and cantonments. In the autumn of 1917 these 32 centres each had fully equipped hospital facilities with a combined capacity of 44,000 beds. The larger base hospitals had a capacity of 1,000 beds, and comprised 60 buildings built at least 60 ft. apart, all connected by enclosed corridors. They had separate steam-heating plants and laundries, and were equipped with modern plumbing. Each ward had a capacity of from 60 to 80 beds and provided usually 1,000 (never less than 800) cub. ft. of air per patient. The buildings were of the 2-storey type. In addition each regiment possessed a medical dispensary and a small hospital containing 20 beds.
To provide water, connexion was made, when practicable, with the mains of existing systems. In other cases it was derived from wells or streams and, if advisable, thoroughly purified. In the cantonments the generous quantity of about 40 gal. a day per man was provided, and in addition about 15 gal. each for animals. In the camps the quantity made accessible was smaller as there was less danger of disastrous fires in quarters under canvas. For each company there was a lavatory with 12 vitreous bowls with wooden seats and a urinal trough 18 ft. long, besides to shower-baths and a wash United States In times of peace the provision and upkeep of quarters for U.S. troops had been the function of the Construction and Repair Division of the quartermaster-general's office. The permanent military posts were small and in the aggregate provided housing for only about 107,340 officers and men. Upon America's entrance into the World War the subsequent drafting of large numbers of men demanded an unprecedented rapidity of construction. Existing facilities were wholly inadequate. As authorized by a letter of the adjutant-general, May 19 1917, a separate Cantonment Division was created in the office of the quartermaster-general, reporting directly to the Secretary of War, and charged with the formidable task of housing the new army. On Oct. to 1917, the old Construction and Repair Division was abolished and its duties given to the new organization, which in Feb. 1918 was placed under the Operations Division of the office of the chief-of-staff. It was thus detached from the office of the quartermaster-general as an independent service. On March 13 1918 its name was changed to the Construction Division.
On May 17 1917, one month after the declaration of war, the commanding generals of the different military departments were ordered to select 16 sites for the erection of cantonments (National Army Cantonments) to receive the troops to be chosen by the selective draft and also 16 sites for camps of the mobilized National Guard (National Guard Camps). Already in April tentative plans had been drawn for barracks and mess-halls, these to be wooden structures one storey in height, 20 ft. wide and of varying length, and this trough 22 ft. long; a storage tank of 560 gal. capacity attached to a heater supplied abundant hot water. Where possible the sewage was discharged directly into running streams; where desirable, septic tanks were installed for its treatment. Steam-heating was provided for all hospitals, and in four instances for the whole cantonment because of rigorous climatic conditions. In 12 cantonments and in the 16 camps stoves for heating were placed in the various apartments. Central power plants furnished electric lighting in all cases. No special type of road was required, but specifications were prepared for brick, cement concrete, bituminous macadam, and waterbound macadam. The width was usually 18 ft., but in some cases 24. Such walks as were built were usually of wood.
Tables I. and II., from official reports of the War Department, give the name and location of each cantonment and camp, the number of buildings erected and the amounts allotted for construction (from July I 191 to June 30 1918 inclusive) TABLE I.-National Army Cantonments.
Battle Creek, Mich.
Des Moines, Ia. .
Fort Riley, Kan. .
Rockford, Ill. .
Columbia, S.C. .
44, 00 9
Petersburg, Va. .
1 ,53 2
Am. Lake, Wash.
Admiral, Md. .
Little Rock, Ark.
1 ,4 88
43, 8 43
Chillicothe, O. .
1 ,37 8
39,9 0 4
Louisville, Ky. .
1 ,5 6 3
45,4 2 4
Ft. Houston, Tex.
Yaphank, N.Y. .
43,5 6 7
Totals. ... .
TABLE II.-National Guard Camps.
Bea uregard .
Alexandria, La. .
Fort Worth, Tex.
44, 8 99
1, 2 99
Fort Sill, Okla. .
Palo Alto, Cal. .
Charlotte, N.C. .
4 8 ,3 0 5
Linda Vista, Cal.
Houston, Tex. .
44, 8 99
Waco, Tex.. .
45, 0 74
Anniston, Ala. .
1 ,55 1
Greenville, S.C. .
1, 2 77
4 1 ,953
1 ,4 1 4
5 6, 2 49
Macon, Ga.. .
Totals. .. .
- Please bookmark this page (add it to your favorites)
- If you wish to link to this page, you can do so by referring to the URL address below.
This page was last modified 29-SEP-18
Copyright © 2021 ITA all rights reserved.