Opening of the London and Birmingham Railway.—“Wallace,”
with feed-water heating apparatus.—Dr. Church’s tank
engine, “Eclipse.”—Balanced locomotives.—Smoke-consuming
locomotives.—Opening of the London and Southampton
Railway.—“Soho,” a locomotive without eccentrics.—A double
flanged wheel engine.—Hancock’s attempts to supply railway
locomotives.—American engines for England.—Particulars
of the engines and their working.—Gooch commences to
design engines for the Great Western Railway.—His patent
steeled tyres.—Gray introduces expansive working.—Trial of
his valve gear.—The “long boiler” fallacy.—Stephenson’s
design for the York and North Midland Railway.—Rennies
build a powerful locomotive.—Inventor of the link
motion: Howe, Williams, or Stephenson?—America claims
the credit for the improvement.—Beyer’s single-plate
frame engines.—Early Crewe engines.—Robertson fits a
steam brake to a locomotive.—Engines for working the
Cowlairs incline.—Bodmer’s reciprocating or “compensating”
engines.—Tried on the Sheffield and Manchester, South
Eastern, and London and Brighton Railways.—They prove
failures.—McConnell’s “Great Britain.”—Dewrance’s
coal-burning “Condor.”
Edward Bury, the celebrated locomotive engineer, of Liverpool,
contracted to supply the London and Birmingham Railway with
locomotives. The first portion of the line was opened on June 20th,
1837, and four-wheel Bury engines of his well-known types hauled the
trains. Fig. 30 shows one of his standard passenger engines for the
London and Birmingham Railway.
In 1838 Kimmond, Hutton, and Steele, of Dundee, built a locomotive,
named “Wallace,” for the Dundee and Arbroath Railway, at a cost of
£1,012, including the tender. This engine had inside frames and
inclined horizontal outside cylinders, 13in. diameter, 18in. stroke;
the driving wheels were 5ft. 6in. diameter, the leading and trailing
being 3ft. 6in. diameter; the valve chests were on top of the
cylinders. The exhaust steam was turned into the tender for the purpose
of heating the feed-water. The “Wallace” was described as being,
“without exception, one of the most splendid and beautifully finished
pieces of mechanism; indeed, all present who had seen the ‘Scorpion,’
‘Spitfire,’ and other celebrated English engines, gave the preference
to the ‘Wallace.’” The gauge of the Dundee and Arbroath Railway was
5ft. 6in.
[Illustration: FIG. 30.—BURY’S STANDARD PASSENGER ENGINE FOR THE LONDON
AND BIRMINGHAM RAILWAY]
Dr. Church, a celebrated scientific experimentalist of Birmingham,
constructed a four-wheel tank engine in 1838, named the “ Eclipse.”
This locomotive was used in the construction of the London and
Birmingham Railway. The cylinders were placed outside in a horizontal
position, and were 11½in. diameter, the stroke being 24in. The leading
or driving wheels were 6ft. 2½in. diameter, and are said to have been
the largest used up to that time on the narrow-gauge, being 2½in.
larger than the 6ft. wheels of the original “Liverpool.” The trailing
wheels were 3ft. diameter. The water-tanks were placed beneath the
boiler, and when loaded the driving wheels sustained a weight of 9
tons, and the trailing 5 tons. The “Eclipse” hauled a load of 100
tons, and when running “light” attained a speed of 60 miles an hour.
It will be observed that for the size of the driving wheels, weight of
engine, design, and speed, the “Eclipse” was a considerable advance on
the narrow-gauge practice then obtaining. The “Eclipse,” after being
rebuilt, was at work at Swansea in 1861.
In 1838, two important improvements were introduced in locomotive
construction—viz., the balancing of the reciprocating parts of the
engine, and the partially successful use of coal in place of coke as
fuel. Heaton, an engineer of Birmingham, introduced the balancing of
locomotive wheels. This was in August, 1838, when he made a model
engine on the suggestion of a director of the London and Birmingham
Railway. The “Brockhall,” one of the engines of the Company, was
repaired at the Vulcan Works, Birmingham, early in 1839, and was then
fitted with Heaton’s improvement. Sharp, Roberts and Co. had, in the
previous December, supplied an engine to the London and Southampton
Railway fitted with balancing weights just within the wheel rim; while
Heaton’s weights took the form of an extension of the crank-throws
on the opposite side of the axle, a method still employed in modern
engines. The first locomotive that ever burned coal in a satisfactory
manner, without the smoke causing a nuisance, was the “Prince George,”
a six-wheel engine belonging to the Grand Junction Railway. In 1838 it
was fitted with Chanter’s patent furnace, the fire-bars of which sloped
from the fire-box door to the tube-plate at an angle of 45 degrees;
over the fire-bars was a deflector. The motion of the engine caused
all the fuel to fall to the lower end. Early in 1839 another six-wheel
engine belonging to the Grand Junction Railway, the “Duke of Sussex,”
with cylinders 13in. by 18in., was fitted with a Chanter furnace. This
time the fire-bars did not slope so much, and on a trip from Crewe
to Liverpool the engines covered several consecutive miles at the
speed of 60 miles an hour, the officials of the company at the same
time declaring that the engine emitted no more smoke than the engines
burning coke.
[Illustration: FIG 31.—“GARNET,” ONE OF THE FIRST ENGINES SUPPLIED TO
THE LONDON AND SOUTHAMPTON RAILWAY]
The first portion of the London and Southampton Railway (now the London
and South Western) was opened on May 12th, 1838, from London to Woking.
The original locomotives were, with four exceptions, six-wheel “single”
engines, with driving wheels 5ft. 6in. diameter. Fig. 31, “Garnet,” is
an illustration of one of these locomotives; the cylinders were 13in.
diameter, and the stroke 18in. The leading and trailing wheels were
3ft. 6in. diameter. The “Garnet” weighed 13 tons empty.
In 1839, Peel, Williams, and Peel, of Soho Works, Ancoats, sent the
first locomotive constructed by them to the Liverpool and Manchester
Railway. This engine was named “Soho,” and took a train of 25 loaded
wagons, weighing 133 tons 18 cwt. 2 qrs., from Liverpool to Manchester;
whilst for a fortnight before this she was running with the ordinary
passenger trains, and “no failure had taken place, and the trains
having usually been brought in before their time.” The improvement
introduced into this engine consisted of a new method of working the
valves. The “Soho” had no eccentrics, but in place of them were two
spur wheels, staked on to the crank axle, driving two other wheels of
equal diameter placed immediately over them, so as to preserve the
distance between the centres constantly the same, and unaffected by the
motion of the engine on its springs. The wheels last mentioned were
attached to a short axle, carrying at each end a small crank-arm, which
drove a connecting-rod attached to the valve spindle.
Fenton, Murray, and Jackson, of Leeds, in 1839, supplied a six-wheel
engine named “Agilis” to the Sheffield and Rotherham Railway. We have
only very meagre details relating to this locomotive, but she is said
to have had flanges an each side of the wheels, and also “that if
either one or all the eccentrics which move the valves were broken,
disarranged, lost off, or taken away, she is still under the control of
the engineer, who can safely conduct her along the railway nearly as
well as if those parts had remained entire.” No explanation is given as
to “how it was done”!
In 1840, Walter Hancock, of Stratford, Essex, who was well known as
a steam road-coach builder, constructed a locomotive on somewhat the
same system as his steam coaches. This engine was tried on the Eastern
Counties Railway. The boiler was of peculiar design, containing a
number of separate chambers, each enclosing several tubes. Each chamber
or set of tubes connected with two general reservoirs, one at the
bottom for the supply of water, the top one being a reservoir for the
steam. The connection from each chamber to the water, steam pipes, and
reservoirs had self-acting valves, so that should an accident happen
to any one chamber the self-acting valves were closed by the pressure
of the steam above, or the water beneath, so that the remainder of the
boiler retained its efficiency, the only result of the accident being
a reduction of the heating surface. An accident of this kind was not
so serious as a burst tube, as the damaged portion was automatically
thrown out of use. Another advantage of this locomotive was the great
heating surface contained in a comparatively small space; a further
improvement was a reciprocating set of fire-bars. The cylinders were
vertical, and actuated an independent crank-shaft; the progressive
motion was conveyed to the wheel axle by means of endless chains
working over pulleys fixed on the driving wheel axles, the diameter of
the pulleys being graduated, so that the engine could be geared up or
down, as either speed or power was required.
As the machinery did not directly drive the wheels, it was possible
to put that portion out of gear when it became necessary to work the
feed pumps, etc. This was a considerable improvement on the usual
locomotive, which upon such occasions either had to make a few trips
for the purpose of supplying the boiler with water, or else perform
over a “race.”
In 1839, Norris, the locomotive builder of Philadelphia, U.S.A., made
an offer to the directors of the Birmingham and Gloucester Railway to
provide engines for working the severe gradient known as the Lickey
Incline, 2 miles 3.35 chains in length. The agreement stipulated
that the “locomotive engines were to be of a higher power, greater
durability, and less weight than could be obtained in this country.
They were to be subjected to 15 trials within 30 days, and prove their
capability by drawing up a gradient of 1 in 330 a load of 100 tons
gross weight, at a speed of 20 miles an hour, and up a gradient of 1
in 180 a load of 100 tons at the speed of 14 miles an hour.” If the
American locomotives fulfilled these conditions the Birmingham and
Gloucester Railway were under a contract to accept ten of the engines,
at a price not exceeding £1,600 each, including the 20 per cent. import
duty. Captain Moorsom, the engineer of the railway, stated that the
“engines had not strictly complied with the stipulated conditions, yet
he considered them good, serviceable engines.” It will be observed that
no guarantee was given as to what work these engines would accomplish
on the Lickey Incline.
The first three engines to arrive were the “England,” “Columbia,” and
“Atlantic,” and, according to the arrangements between the builder
and the Birmingham and Gloucester Railway, they underwent a series
of trials, on the Grand Junction Railway before the directors of
the Birmingham and Gloucester Railway accepted the engines. These
trials took place during April and May, 1839, between Birmingham and
Liverpool, a double journey of 156 miles being frequently made in one
day. The requisite load could not always be obtained, and it then
became necessary to add empty wagons to the train to make up the right
weight. The trains on some of the occasions exceeded 220 yards or ⅛
mile in length. With a steam-working pressure of 62lb. per square
inch, the results tabulated were as follows:—On a rising gradient of 1
in 330, with a load ranging between 100 and 120 tons, the speed ranged
from 13⁴/₅ miles to 22½ miles an hour; on an incline of 1 in 177, with
a load of 100 tons, the variation in speed ranged between 9⁴/₅ miles
and 13⁴/₅ miles an hour. Twenty-one trial trips were made, and in only
five were the stipulated performances carried out, in five others doubt
existed as to the work performed, but in eleven the engines failed to
do the required amount of work.
These experiments showed a curious result with regard to the fuel
consumed. The aggregate rise of the gradients from Liverpool to
Birmingham is about 620ft.; that from Birmingham to Liverpool in
about 380ft. (exclusive in both cases of the Liverpool and Manchester
Railway); the difference, therefore, up to Birmingham is about 240ft.
In seven journeys of 596 miles up to Birmingham, the engine conveyed
682 tons gross, evaporated 12,705 gallons of water, and consumed 177
sacks of coke (1½ cwt. each). In seven journeys of 596 miles down from
Birmingham, the same engine conveyed 629 tons gross, evaporated 12,379
gallons of water, and consumed 177 sacks of coke. It would thus appear
that the consumption of fuel was the same in both cases, and the only
difference was the evaporation of 326 gallons of water more in the
journey up than in the journey down, conveying nearly the same load
both ways. The construction of these engines was very simple, and the
work plain. The boiler was horizontal, and contained 78 copper tubes
2in. diameter and 8ft. long, with an iron fire-box. The cylinders,
10½in. diameter, were inclined slightly downwards, and so placed that
the piston-rods worked outside the wheels, thus avoiding the necessity
of cranked axles.
The framing of these American engines was supported by six wheels;
the two driving wheels of 4ft. diameter were placed close before the
fire-box; the other four wheels, of 30in. diameter, were attached to
a truck, which carried the front end of the boiler, and was connected
with the frame by a centre-pin, on which it turned freely, allowing the
truck to accommodate itself to the exterior rail of the curve, and,
with the assistance of the cone of the wheels, to pass round with very
little stress upon the rails.
Tons cwt.
The weight of the engine with the boiler and
fire-box full was 9 11¼
That of the tender with 21 cwt. of coke and 520
gallons of water was 6 4¼
-----------
Total weight 15 15½
===========
These engines, when empty, weighed only eight tons each.
Another of the American bogie engines supplied to the Birmingham
and Gloucester Railway was named the “Philadelphia.” She was a more
powerful locomotive than the three mentioned above, and Captain
Moorsom, the engineer of the railway, in a letter dated from Worcester
on June 22nd, 1840, gives an interesting account of her trial on the
Lickey Bank. “Seventy-six chains in the incline of 1 in 37½ were made
ready with a single way, and three chains nearly level were laid
temporarily to rest upon before starting. The road was quite new, and
consequently not firm or well gauged, and the works going on close at
hand occasionally covered the rails with dirt. The wagons used were of
a large class, like those on the Manchester and Leeds line, and weighed
when empty rather more than 2½ tons, and at first worked very stiffly.
They were loaded with 4 tons, and generally weighed, including persons
upon them, about 6¾ tons. The ‘Philadelphia’ weighed (as she worked)
about 12 tons 3 cwt., and her tender weighed nearly 7 tons, being in
all 19 tons. She had 12½in. cylinders, 20in. stroke, 4ft. driving wheel
not coupled. The weight on her driving wheels was 6⅓ tons (as weighed
at Liverpool) without water.
“The usual load she took was eight wagons, engine, and tender, with
persons, equal to 74 tons gross weight, in ten minutes, or nearly 6
miles per hour, the last quarter of a mile being at the rate of 9¾
miles per hour. Seven wagons, etc., equal to 67¼ tons gross weight,
in about 9 minutes, or 6½ miles per hour mean speed. Six wagons,
etc., equal to 61 tons gross weight, in sometimes 5¼ and sometimes 6½
minutes, say in 6 minutes average, or 9 miles per hour mean speed, the
last quarter of a mile usually giving a speed of nearly 11 miles an
hour. Five wagons, equal to about 53 tons gross, were usually taken at
a speed of 13 miles per hour for the last half-mile up. The foregoing
results occurred generally during fine weather, but sometimes the rails
were partially wet, and this occasioned a difference of speed in the
ascent of half a minute to a minute and a half. One day when showery
the men walked over the rails with marl on their boots, rendering the
way very greasy and slippery, also the lower part of the plane had been
formed only a few hours, and was very soft and badly gauged.
“Under these circumstances the ‘Philadelphia’ took five wagons, self,
and tender, being a gross weight, including persons, of about 53 tons,
up at a mean rate of rather more than 5 miles per hour, and the last
quarter of a mile was passed at the rate of 8 miles per hour. Two
wagons were then taken off, and the ‘Philadelphia’ took the remaining
three wagons, self, and tender, being a gross weight, including
persons, of 40 tons, up at a mean rate of 12 miles nearly per hour, her
maximum speed being nearly 16 miles per hour.”
Sir D. Gooch was not at all satisfied with the original broad-gauge
locomotives, and in 1839 he obtained the sanction of the directors of
the Great Western Railway to design two classes of locomotives for the
railway. These engines were known as the “Firefly” class and the “Fury”
class, the former having 7ft. driving wheels, cylinders 15in. diameter,
18in. stroke, and 700ft. of heating surface; the latter had 6ft.
driving wheels, cylinders 14in. diameter and 18in. stroke, and 608ft.
of heating surface.
[Illustration: FIG. 32.—“HARPY,” ONE OF GOOCH’S “FIREFLY” CLASS OF
BROAD-GAUGE ENGINES]
One hundred and forty-two locomotives of the “Fury” and “Firefly”
design were constructed. Sir D. Gooch states that the best were built
by Fenton, Murray and Jackson, of Leeds. The sixty-two of the “Firefly”
class were built as follows:—Twenty, by Fenton, Murray and Jackson,
Leeds; sixteen, by Nasmyth, Gaskell and Co., Manchester; ten, by Sharp,
Roberts and Co., Manchester; six, by Jones, Turner and Evans, Newton;
six, by Longridge and Co., Bedlington; two, by Slaughter and Co.,
Bristol; and two, by G. and J. Rennie, London.
It will be observed that most of these were built in the North
of England, and it is a significant fact that these broad-gauge
locomotives were conveyed on narrow-gauge trucks for some hundreds of
miles to the Great Western Railway, thus showing that it would have
been quite possible to widen the existing narrow-gauge railways, by
simply decreasing the space between the two roads, comparatively at a
small expense.
All these engines were built from the specifications and drawings
supplied by the Great Western Railway to the makers, and thin
iron templates were also supplied of those parts which were to be
interchangeable. Fig. 32 illustrates the “Firefly” type.
The “Firefly,” built by Jones and Co., Viaduct Foundry, Newton, was
the first of these engines delivered. On March 28th, 1840, she made
an experimental trip from Paddington to Reading, with a load of
two carriages, containing 40 passengers, and a carriage truck; she
performed the journey in 46 minutes 25 seconds from start to stop. A
spring of one of the tender wheels broke on the journey, necessitating
careful running. On the return trip, between the 26th and 24th mile
posts, a speed of 56 miles an hour was reached, and the average speed
from Twyford to Paddington was over 50 miles an hour. On the occasion
of the Queen’s accouchement in August, 1844, the news was brought to
London by a special messenger travelling on one of these engines.
The journey from Slough to Paddington, 18¼ miles, was accomplished
in 15 minutes 10 seconds, or at the rate of 75 miles an hour. The
illustration (Fig. 33) shows the interior of the old Paddington engine
shed, and amongst the locomotives to be seen are the “Ganymede” and
“Etna.” All the engines had domed fire-boxes, and outside frames,
the principal dimensions, in addition to those already given, being:
Leading and trailing wheels, 4ft. diameter; boiler barrel, 8ft. 6in.
long, 4ft. diameter; 131 tubes, 2in. diameter, 9ft. long; weight, in
working order on leading 4¾ tons, driving 11 tons 13 cwt., trailing 7
tons 16 cwt.; total, 24 tons 4 cwt.
On November 20th, 1840, Daniel Gooch obtained a patent for steeled
tyres, and the locomotives of the “Fury” and “Firefly” classes were
fitted with these patent tyres. Although the tyres only contained
one-fifth part of shear steel, yet the use of Gooch’s tyres did not
become general, as 56 years ago steel was an expensive commodity, and
consequently railway rolling stock generally was not fitted with steel
tyres; indeed, the Great Western Railway went no further than using the
improvement for their locomotive and tender wheels. Many locomotives
fitted with these patent tyres ran nearly 300,000 miles before new
tyres were required.
[Illustration: FIG. 33.—INTERIOR OF PADDINGTON ENGINE HOUSE, SHOWING
THE BROAD-GAUGE LOCOMOTIVES OF 1840]
These first essays of Daniel Gooch as a locomotive designer at once
placed him at the very head of locomotive engineers, and Gooch himself,
usually so modest, says of these locomotives, “I may with confidence,
after these engines have been working for 28 years, say that no better
engines for their weight have since been constructed, either by myself
or others. They have done, and continue to do, admirable duty.” This
candid eulogium of these engines by their designer certainly did not
go beyond the truth in describing their good points. Gooch’s first
design of broad-gauge goods locomotives had six-coupled wheels 5ft. in
diameter, inside cylinders 16in. diameter, and a stroke of 24in. The
fire-box was of the domed pattern. Fig. 34 (“Jason”) represents one of
these engines.
John Gray, who was in 1840 locomotive superintendent of the Hull and
Selby Railway, introduced a striking improvement into the construction
of locomotives at that time. (Gray had, on July 26th, 1838, taken out
a patent for his valve gear; and whilst on the subject of valve gears,
it will be of interest to note that Dodds and Owen patented their wedge
motion on September 16th, 1839.) In Gray’s improvements in the Hull and
Selby engines, he adopted inside bearings for the driving wheels, an
extended base for the springs, and, of course, his patent valve motion
and expansive working. Shepherd and Todd, of the Railway Foundry,
Leeds, constructed the engines in question. The driving wheels were
6ft. diameter, cylinders 12in. diameter by 24in. stroke, fire-box 2ft.
by 3ft. 6in. (inside), and 94 2in. tubes, 9ft. 6in. long. Two of these
locomotives, “Star” and “Vesta,” were tried in competition with other
engines on Tuesday, November 10th, 1840. Sixteen trips were made by the
“Star” and “Vesta,” the average loads being 55.4 tons, or 1,718 tons
over one mile; coke consumed, 465lb., or 0.271lb. per ton per mile;
water evaporated, 2,874lb., or 1.62lb. per ton per mile.
[Illustration: FIG. 34.—“JASON,” ONE OF GOOCH’S FIRST TYPE OF GOODS
ENGINES FOR THE GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY]
Two other classes of locomotives were tried in competition with Gray’s
patent—viz., the usual kind of engines then in use, and the same with
the addition of Gray’s expansion gear.
The result of the trials is shown in the following table:—
(A) = Loads in Tons Conveyed over 1 mile in lbs.
(B) = Elsecar Coke used per trip of 31 miles in lbs.
(C) = Coke used per mile in lbs. per mile in lbs.
(D) = Coke used per ton per mile in lbs.
(E) = Water used per trip of 81 miles in lbs.
(F) = Water per mile in lbs.
(G) = Water per ton per mile in lbs.
----------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+--------+-----
Class | | | | | | |
of | (A) | (B) | (C) | (D) | (E) | (F) | (G)
Engine | | | | | | |
----------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+--------+-----
Patent | 1649.4 | 446.98 | 14.41 | 0.271 | 2672 | 86.19 | 1.62
Altered | 1649.4 | 686.15 | 22.13 | 0.416 | 4601.6 | 148.43 | 2.90
Unaltered | 1649.4 | 1007.78 | 32.59 | 0.611 | 6432.8 | 207.5 | 3.97
----------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+--------+-----
The financial annual result of the three classes of engines for coke
and boilers, with such a traffic as that of the Hull and Selby line,
was about:—
£4,500 for the unaltered engines.
£3,250 for the altered engines.
£2,000 for the patent engines.
We have now reached the era of another development of the
locomotive—viz. the introduction of “long boiler” engines; but although
the idea was well “boomed,” it never was thought much of by competent
locomotive engineers; indeed, many severely condemned the plan.
In 1841 Robert Stephenson patented a new form of valve gear, with a
top and bottom gab fixed to the valve spindle, and the ends of the
eccentric rods kept apart by a straight link. Here, again, Stephenson
introduced nothing new, his gear being but a clumsy adaptation of
Roberts’s valve gear. An engine of this description (generally known
as Stephenson’s patent “long boiler” engine) was tried on the York and
North Midland Railway in January, 1842, the dimensions being:—
Diameter of Cylinder 14 inches
Length of Stroke 20 ”
Diameter of Driving Wheels 5½ feet
Diameter of small wheels. 3 ”
There are 150 tubes, giving a heating surface of 765 ”
Copper Fire-Box, with a heating surface of 30 ”
----- ------
Total heating surface 795 feet
Length of Boiler, including fire and smoke boxes 17 ”
Weight of the Engine in working order 15 tons
During a journey of 90 miles, a speed of 48 miles an hour was attained,
but the train then consisted of only five carriages of light weight.
The consumption of fuel during the above experiment was 19.2lb. per
mile, with a load of eight coaches over half the distance (45 miles)
and five coaches over the remaining half.
This consumption included the whole of the fuel used in lighting the
fire and raising the steam.
R. Stephenson introduced tubes of wrought-iron instead of brass or
copper, in order that the increased heating surface might be obtained
without a corresponding augmentation in the price of the engine. This
he did not adopt without making several experiments.
During the last twelve months he had several boilers working under his
own eye with iron tubes, for the special purpose of determining how
far he could recommend them for general adoption. The result was all
that he could desire; and owing to this he introduced them with great
confidence. The valve gear is thus eulogised: “In ordinary engines the
mechanism for working the slide-valves was very liable to derangement
and considerable wear and tear.
“This part of the engine he so far simplified that it required only a
simple connection between the eccentrics and slide-valves, thus doing
away with a considerable number of moving parts.
“This was attained by placing the slide-valves vertically on the sides
of the cylinders, instead of on the top as heretofore, so that the
direction of the sliding motion of the valves and the central line of
the valve-rods intersected the central line of the main axle at the
point where the eccentrics were placed. In this case the eccentric-rods
were connected immediately to the prolongation of the valve-rods,
without the usual intermediate levers and weigh bars; the slide
valves of both cylinders were placed in one steam chest, between the
cylinders.” Another improvement was in the working of the feed pumps;
it consisted in connecting the pump-rods to the eccentrics used for
reversing the engine. By this arrangement the velocity of the moving
part of the pump was greatly diminished, by which was secured greater
regularity of action.
Messrs. G. and J. Rennie, of Holland Street, Blackfriars, S.E., in
1841, constructed a locomotive named the “Lambro” for the Milan and
Monzo Railway. The “Lambro” was built from the design of Mr. Albano,
the engineer to the railway; the cylinders were 13in. diameter, 18in.
stroke, driving wheels 5ft. 6in. diameter, steam pressure 50lb., weight
22 tons. Her average coke consumption with trains weighing 143 tons at
36 miles an hour, was only 22lb. per mile. The locomotive engineer of
the railway reported that “no engine he had seen at all approached the
locomotive engine ‘Lambro’ in any respect whatever, in the economy of
fuel, in her immense dragging power, and in the excellency and solidity
of her framing and working gear.”
The particular evolution now about to be described occupies a foremost
position in locomotive history. Like many other useful inventions, the
link motion has been proclaimed as the production of different people.
Its popular title, the “Stephenson” link motion, is a well-known
misnomer; indeed, Stephenson never appears to have put forward a claim
in which he figured as the inventor of the curved link motion, perhaps,
at first, he did not fully appreciate its value.
The germ of the idea belongs to Williams, of Newcastle, who, in 1842,
designed a form of straight link coupling the two eccentrics together.
Of course, such an arrangement was utterly impossible in practice,
as the crank, in revolving, would soon place the two eccentrics in
such a position that the link would be destroyed. The curved link,
placed half-way between the valves and eccentrics, was soon evolved
from Williams’ crude idea, and up to 1846 it was most generally called
Williams’ motion. In an article describing expansion valves, in the
_Practical Mechanics’ Magazine_ for April, 1846, it is so described;
but in the May number of the magazine a letter appears from William
Howe, a fitter employed by R. Stephenson and Co., Newcastle. In this
communication Howe states that Williams proposed the straight link,
previously mentioned, but that Howe saw its utter impracticability, and
evolved the curved link. Williams made no reply to this communication;
although he may not have seen Howe’s letter claiming the invention. Be
this as it may, Howe was thereafter given the credit for the curved
link. It is, however, significant that he never patented it, and it
is probable that at first neither he nor Stephenson saw its value as
a means of effectually working the valves expansively, or one or the
other would have protected the invention, seeing that Stephenson had
then quite recently patented the top and bottom gab-gear. Then, again,
Howe’s supposed claim may have been a reason for not protecting it.
In the invention of the link motion, this country does not appear to
have been forestalled by the Celestial Empire, as (it is asserted) is
the case with so many useful discoveries. But the glory does not rest
with us, for it has been shrewdly “guessed” that the idea originated
with one of our American cousins, W. T. James, of New York, who, as
early as 1832, constructed the “James” locomotive, which was provided
with link motion. The invention at this period does not appear to have
been considered of any value, for its use was not perpetuated in later
locomotives in America until after it had been re-discovered by the
Williams-Howe experiments of 1842-3.
In 1843, Mr. C. Beyer, then employed with Messrs. Sharp Brothers and
Co., but afterwards of the well-known firm of locomotive builders,
Messrs. Beyer, Peacock and Co., Manchester, introduced the single iron
plate for locomotive frames.
Trevithick’s son directed his attention to the evolution of the steam
locomotive, and while chief engineer of the Grand Junction Railway, the
now world-famous Crewe Works were erected, being opened in 1843. Mr.
A. Allan became manager at Crewe, and under his superintendence a new
class of engines was constructed, the novel points being the coupling
of the driving and trailing wheels—Allan having, in 1863, publicly
claimed this innovation as wholly and solely due to him.
The engines in question are usually described as “the old Crewe goods
class,” and had outside cylinders, 15in. by 14in. The coupled wheels
were 5ft. diameter, and were placed one pair before and the other
behind the fire-box; these wheels had inside bearings, and the small
leading pair had outside bearings. The steam pressure was 120lb. These
useful engines weighed 19½ tons, and were used for goods traffic for
many years. Mr. Ramsbottom afterwards rebuilt several of them as tank
engines, and some, as such, are still in use on the London and North
Western Railway. Alexander Allan, who died as recently as 1891, was
noted for his invention of a straight link motion in 1855.
The need of a powerful brake has always been one of the greatest
necessities of locomotive engineers. For a long time they all agreed
that it was not advisable to brake the driving wheels of locomotives;
but Peter Robertson, the locomotive superintendent of the Glasgow
and Ayr Railway, was of a different opinion, and in April, 1843, he
fitted a locomotive on that railway with his patent steam brake. The
apparatus consisted of a flexible metal band, of a semi-circular shape,
surrounding the upper half of the driving wheel. One end of the band
fastened to a hinge, and the other was fixed to a piston-rod. When
“off,” the piston-rod held the band away from the tyre of the driving
wheel, but when steam was applied behind the piston the band was
tightly pressed against the tyre. Such was the simple, but effective,
application of Robertson’s steam brake. A familiar example of its
action can be seen in the hand brakes still fitted to cranes.
The Cowlairs incline at Glasgow is the _bête noir_ of the North British
Railway, and is situate just outside the Glasgow terminus of what was
originally the Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway. When first opened this
incline was (as is, indeed, at present the case) worked by stationary
engines; but towards the end of 1843 Mr. Paton, the locomotive
superintendent, and Mr. Millar, the engineer of the Edinburgh and
Glasgow Railway, designed and built a powerful locomotive for working
this two-mile incline of 1 in 42. The engine was put to work in
January, 1844, and during that year the cost of working the incline
was, with the locomotive, one-third of the amount expended during the
previous twelve months on the stationary engine.
[Illustration: ELEVATION
FIG. 34A.—PATON AND MILLAR’S TANK ENGINE FOR WORKING ON THE COWLAIRS
INCLINE, GLASGOW]
Upon reference to the illustration (Fig. 34A) of this remarkable
locomotive, the first detail that attracts notice is the immense steam
dome. The engine was supported on six-coupled wheels of 4ft. 3½in.
diameter. The cylinders were “outside,” fixed in an inclined position
about half-way up the smoke-box, their diameter being 15½in. The stroke
was 25in. These dimensions, it will be noticed, were considerably in
advance of the general practice obtaining 55 years ago. The valve
chests were above the cylinders, and the eccentrics were fixed on the
driving axle, within the frames; the springs were underhung, and all
the wheels were counterbalanced. Two lever safety valves were provided.
The heating surface of the fire-box was 60 sq. ft., that of the tubes
748ft. The other principal dimensions of this engine were:—Fire-box,
4ft. long by 4ft. 6in. deep; smoke-box, 2ft. 6in. long by 4ft. 4in.
deep; 136 tubes, 2in. diameter, and 10ft. 6in. long. This engine, it
should be observed, was of the “tank” class, 200 gallons of water being
stored in a tank below the smoke-box, that amount being sufficient for
two trips. The water was supplied from a stand-pipe, and not from the
usual columns.
The driving wheels were furnished with brakes, the levers of which were
worked by a screw, the handle of the latter being placed within reach
of the engineer.
The trailing pair of wheels had a steam brake, something like those
applied to the engines of the Ayr line by Mr. Robertson. Sand-boxes
were placed in front on each side of the water-tank for dropping sand
on the rails, which was done by the stoker on the foot-plate, by a
handle and rod from valves or stoppers in the boxes. The most effectual
remedy against slipping was to keep the rails clean, which was done by
means of two jets from the boiler in going down the incline plane. When
very dirty two other jets of cold water were used, a small air vessel
and one of the feed pumps being used for that purpose.
The total weight of the engine was 26½ tons; the rate of speed with 12
carriages of the gross weight of 54 tons was 15 miles per hour; the
rate of speed with 20 trucks of goods of a gross weight of 104 tons was
9 miles per hour, up the Cowlairs incline.
WORK OF ENGINE FOR THE MONTH OF NOVEMBER, 1844.
TOTAL WORK DONE ON INCLINE PLANE.
-----------+-------------+-----------+-------+------+---------+------
Carriage. | Trucks. | Brakes. | Gross |Lifts.|Piloting.|Week
| | | Total.| | |ending
| | | | | | Nov.
-----+-----+-----+-------+-----+-----+-------+------+---------+------
No. |Tons.| No. | Tons. | No. |Tons.| Tons. |Total.| Hrs |
| | | | | | | | |
335 |1,675| 694| 3,817 | 298|1,937| 7,429 | 121 | 120 | 7
344 |1,720| 673| 3,701½| 268|1,742| 7,163½| 107 | 118 | 14
375 |1,878| 658| 3,619 | 248|1,612| 7,106 | 104 | 118 | 21
376 |1,900| 640| 5,525½| 254|1,660| 7,076½| 103 | 118 | 28
-----+-----+-----+-------+-----+-----+-------+------+---------+------
1,430|7,170|2,665|14,663 |1,068|6,951|28,775 | 435 | 474 | —
-----+-----+-----+-------+-----+-----+-------+------+---------+------
The table on page 99 gives the results of one month’s working of a
second locomotive of similar design, the cylinders, however, being
16½in. diameter, and additional heating surface being provided by means
of a water space dividing the fire-box. The second engine was put to
work towards the end of 1844.
These engines were named “Hercules” and “Sampson,” and were built at
Cowlairs, whilst two others of the same general design, and named
“Millar” and “Hawthorne,” were constructed at Newcastle.
Mr. A. E. Lockyer states that these engines “had not run any length of
time, however, before the foreman platelayer complained of the engines
destroying the rails, which, it must be remembered, were only 58lb. per
yard, with the sleepers 3ft. apart.” In consequence of this report the
incline was relaid, the distance between the sleepers being reduced
to 2ft. between the centres. This did not much mend matters, and to
crown all, the Forth and Clyde Canal began to leak, in consequence, no
doubt, of the vibration induced by the constant passage of the heavy
locomotives. A strategic movement to the rear then became necessary,
and an eminent engineer (Mr. McNaught) was appointed by the directors
to strengthen the land engine, and put it in proper working order, so
as to reintroduce the haulage system for working the incline.
A Newcastle firm (R. S. Newall and Co., the original inventors and
patentees of untwisted iron rope) supplied the railway company with
one of their wire ropes. The land engine was finished by March 4th,
1847, and on trial under the new conditions the haulage system proved
highly satisfactory, so much so that the four locomotives were removed
altogether.
The Manchester and Sheffield line was, in 1845, supplied with four
powerful goods locomotives, built on Bodmer’s patent principle. The
cylinders were 18in. diameter, stroke 24in.; the six-coupled wheels
were 4ft. 6in. diameter; but the weight of these engines was only 24
tons each. They are, however, stated to have been equal to hauling a
gross load of over 1,000 tons. Bodmer’s locomotives deserve recognition
in the evolution of the steam locomotive, because of their curious
construction, and also because other locomotive histories do not
mention these peculiar engines.
The engines are described as “compensating,” the whole strain being
confined to the pistons, piston-rods, connecting-rods, and cranks.
There were two pistons in each cylinder, one being connected with one
crank and the other with the opposite crank of an axle with double
cranks on each side, so that the driving axle was fitted with four
cranks.
The steam was admitted alternately between the two pistons at the time
the pistons met in the middle of the cylinders, also between the ends
or tops of the cylinders and the pistons when the latter arrived at the
other end of the stroke.
Bodmer claimed that by this arrangement the engine was perfectly
balanced, and no oscillation or pitching of the engine resulted, no
matter what speed was attained. Another engine of this description
was supplied to the Sheffield and Manchester Railway, constructed by
Sharp Bros. and Co. The cylinders were 14in. diameter, stroke 20in.
(two strokes of 10in. each in both cylinders), driving wheels 5ft.
diameter, steam pressure 90lb. per square inch. During November, 1844,
the average coke consumption of this engine amounted to only 21.92lb.
per mile.
A larger and more powerful engine on the same principle was supplied
to the Joint Locomotive Committee of the South Eastern and London and
Brighton Railways, and when the Committee was dissolved the engine
was taken over by the South Eastern Railway in 1845, and was numbered
123. The cylinders were 16in. diameter and 30in. stroke, or rather,
two pistons each working a stroke of 15in. Heating surface was: box 73
sq. ft.; tubes 769 sq. ft.; steam pressure 95lb.; weight 18 tons; coke
consumption 15lb. per mile. The driving wheels were 5ft. 6in. diameter.
Shortly after the South Eastern Railway took over this engine it broke
down, and one of the men in charge was killed.
Bodmer also supplied the London and Brighton Railway with one of these
patent reciprocating engines. This was in December, 1845; and she ran
the first 5 p.m. express from London to Brighton. The locomotive in
question was No. 7, and had single driving wheels, 6ft. diameter. The
cylinders were 15in. diameter, and the 20in. of stroke was, of course,
covered by two pistons in each cylinder working 10in. The fire-box was
of the well-known “Bury” type. No. 7 was rebuilt in January, 1850, when
Bodmer’s reciprocating pistons were taken out, and ordinary ones put
in. In later years No. 7 was named “Seaford.”
Bodmer designed another engine on this plan, with outside cylinders
22in. diameter and 24in. stroke—_i.e._, two pistons of 12in. stroke
each. The driving wheels were 7ft. diameter. The boiler pressure of
this extraordinary engine was 100lb. and the coke consumption was
estimated at 10lb. per mile, with trains of 12 coaches. This engine was
fitted with cylindrical slides and expansion valves, under a patent
obtained by Bodmer.
In 1845, J. E. McConnell, then locomotive superintendent of the
Birmingham and Gloucester Railway, determined to construct a more
powerful engine for working the Lickey Incline than the American
engines previously described. The “Great Britain” was the result of
his essay. She was a six-wheel coupled saddle-tank locomotive. The
wheels were 3ft. 1Oin. diameter, and the cylinders 18in. by 26in.
stroke. This powerful “iron-horse” easily hauled trains weighing 150
tons up the Lickey Bank. McConnell also rebuilt one of the American
engines, as a saddle-tank locomotive, for working the Tewkesbury branch
of the Birmingham and Gloucester Railway. This curious specimen of a
saddle-tank engine had outside cylinders 10½in. diameter, 20in. stroke,
single driving wheels 4ft. diameter, and a leading bogie.
Mr. Dewrance, of the Liverpool and Manchester Railway, about this time
turned his attention to the experiments which were, ever and anon,
being made towards the long-wished-for goal of a perfect coal-burning
locomotive. In the “Condor” he tried the effect of two fire-boxes. The
fuel was inserted in the usual manner into the exterior fire-box; the
second, or combustion chamber being designed to consume the gaseous
matter that escaped from the first furnace.
During the period of special attention to the working of the “Condor”
this system of coal-burning appears to have been of a fairly successful
character. The idea of a combustion chamber as a solution of the vexed
question of a successful smoke-consuming locomotive was afterwards
tried by other locomotive designers. The division between the two
fire-boxes of the “Condor” consisted of a transverse water space,
fitted with short tubes. Air was admitted to the combustion chamber by
means of a pipe, with a head perforated with small holes.