Antique Steam Engine from Doorknob

[HopperParticipant @hopper]

Maybe the end of a plastic pen body carefully held into the filler hole would suffice for "tube"?

Keep us posted.

[Michael Hudson 6Participant @michaelhudson6]

That might work, I'll give it a go!

[SillyOldDufferModerator @sillyoldduffer]

Now there's no evidence of a coaxial crank I've gone off the idea in favour of this suggestion:

The missing 'needle eccentric' connected via the notch and behind the crank to a lever mounted in that mysterious hole.

The needle might have been ornamental, adding to the interest of the engine with more movement. Inside the engine is a dual valve that controls when steam is admitted to push the piston whilst at the same time allowing the other side to exhaust. The engine won't run without a properly timed valve. If the engine runs without the needle, the real valve gear must be inside. Might be helpful – an ornamental needle waggling a fake lever is easily replaced.

I'd be very wary of stripping it down. I wonder is a friendly vet would x-ray it for you?

Difficult to value, it's an attractive antique with engine collector appeal. I've seen much more basic model engines with £800 price tags.

Given what you've found about Richard Westerman, I think he made this item for display in his shop and at exhibitions. It shows he was skilled, imaginative and capable of attractive work in miniature. That chuffing away would have made him more interesting and memorable than other clock-makers – good advertising.

Dave

[Michael Hudson 6Participant @michaelhudson6]

quick update: I tried the pen idea and although it is not quite small enough to fit in the filler hole i was able to cover the hole and apply some air pressure to the boiler. I promptly figured out that the steam inlet valve/tap (below the cylinder) is closed, and it is not turning with a moderate amount of pressure.

I also blew into the exhaust and got some movement at the flywheel (no more than half a stroke of the piston I would say) and also a little movement if I blew into that small hole near the crank.

But the question now is how best to open the steam inlet. I wanted to check here before proceeding – what is a good penetrating oil to use, if any?

[HopperParticipant @hopper]

WD40 might help. It's quite possibly a tapered plug cock so applying a little pressure from the rear to unseat the taper might help, but I'd be very, very careful.

[Nicholas FarrParticipant @nicholasfarr14254]

Hi, maybe a little Viakal or other limescale remover, using something like an eye dropper or a pipette may help loosing the valve/tap up.

The illustration that SOD has made with his red line, is the sort of idea I had in one of my earlier posts.

Regards Nick.

[Michael Hudson 6Participant @michaelhudson6]

Thanks for the tips. I'm wary of inadvertently (breaking it!) cleaning it or leaving a deposit behind, I know wd40 can leave a residue so just wanted to check that wasn't going to harm the brass or clean it up too much.

[SillyOldDufferModerator @sillyoldduffer]

Posted by Nicholas Farr on 21/05/2019 09:24:39:

…

The illustration that SOD has made with his red line, is the sort of idea I had in one of my earlier posts.

Regards Nick.

Apologies Nick, I should have given you full credit because it was your idea I'd picked up on. I typed "this suggestion" instead of "Nick's suggestion", my bad.

My contribution was the clarifying picture and the suggestion that needle and lever may be ornamental.

Dave

[Nicholas FarrParticipant @nicholasfarr14254]

Hi SOD, no apology required, I wasn't having a dig at yourself, just pointing out that you had shown what I meant as I wasn't sure if Michael fully understood my idea and I think you made it clearer to everyone.

Regards Nick.

[HopperParticipant @hopper]

Posted by SillyOldDuffer on 20/05/2019 11:54:39:

Now there's no evidence of a coaxial crank I've gone off the idea in favour of this suggestion:

I'm not convinced on this exact set-up, but rather something similar but different, for several reasons. One being that the stroke of the cross-head is significantly longer than allowed by the small crank in red. In fact it would be the same dimension as the main crank, which obviously would clang into the main crankshaft. The other being that there is no facility for the "needle" to pivot at the top, as would be required in a crank and rod type situation. The notch in the brass flange where the needle would run tends also to indicate it does not move from side to side.

I'm thinking there must have been something that allowed the "needle" to move straight up and down. So something more like a pushrod pushing a lever, in effect a rocker arm, without the two being firmly joined. Or perhaps a short crank arm as shown in red but the pushrod passing though a loose hole in the end of it, with two collars on the pushrod that allow it to move the crank arm a short distance at the end of each stroke, but slide through without moving the crank until the other end of the stroke. You thus have a lost-motion linkage in effect. So it provides a sort of "switching" motion at TDC and BDC rather than a continous cranking motion. This would be consistent with switching the valves from open to closed and vice versa at the end of each stroke, as required for a single-acting cylinder.

Just a thought.

[Nicholas FarrParticipant @nicholasfarr14254]

Hi Hopper, yes I was aware of the restraints that a lever would have, but thought that maybe a curved one might accommodate the problem. I hadn't thought of the push rod solution, but I think that your solution is more likely to work with a lever and of course the collars can be adjustable on the rod to get the timing correct. A mechanical version of a flip/flop.

Regards Nick

Edited By Nicholas Farr on 22/05/2019 09:01:05

[roy entwistleParticipant @royentwistle24699]

If it's brass, and it looks like it, do NOT use WD40, WD40 is not a penetrating oil. Use something like Plus Gas

Roy

[SillyOldDufferModerator @sillyoldduffer]

Posted by Hopper on 22/05/2019 08:22:46:

Posted by SillyOldDuffer on 20/05/2019 11:54:39:

Now there's no evidence of a coaxial crank I've gone off the idea in favour of this suggestion:

I'm not convinced on this exact set-up, but rather something similar but different, for several reasons. One being that the stroke of the cross-head is significantly longer than allowed by the small crank in red. In fact it would be the same dimension as the main crank, which obviously would clang into the main crankshaft. The other being that there is no facility for the "needle" to pivot at the top, as would be required in a crank and rod type situation. The notch in the brass flange where the needle would run tends also to indicate it does not move from side to side.

I'm thinking there must have been something that allowed the "needle" to move straight up and down. So something more like a pushrod pushing a lever, in effect a rocker arm, without the two being firmly joined. Or perhaps a short crank arm as shown in red but the pushrod passing though a loose hole in the end of it, with two collars on the pushrod that allow it to move the crank arm a short distance at the end of each stroke, but slide through without moving the crank until the other end of the stroke. You thus have a lost-motion linkage in effect. So it provides a sort of "switching" motion at TDC and BDC rather than a continous cranking motion. This would be consistent with switching the valves from open to closed and vice versa at the end of each stroke, as required for a single-acting cylinder.

Just a thought.

I like it!

It's true the crank suggestion isn't convincing. A reason I suggested ornamental was because I can't imagine how a crank would communicate sensibly with whatever valve is inside. (Might be because I don't know enough about valve gear and there is a simple solution!) And ornamental doesn't fit well with the maker going to the trouble of drilling that large hole – surely it has purpose.

Hopper's suggestion of a mostly up down movement using collars to flip the valve is much better than any of my over-complicated musings. Something like the valve trip arrangement on James Watt's early engines perhaps. I'd love to know what's inside!

Dave

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Posted by roy entwistle on 22/05/2019 09:15:52:

… Use something like Plus Gas

.

+1 for that

Plus Gas Formula A, in a good old-fashioned can, is effective and economical.

MichaelG.

[HopperParticipant @hopper]

Posted by SillyOldDuffer on 22/05/2019 09:16:55:…

…Something like the valve trip arrangement on James Watt's early engines perhaps. I'd love to know what's inside!

Dave

I'm thinking some kind of simple (yet cunning) rotary valve. Something like a piece of round bar inside a hole drilled in a solid block. The block has two small ports drilled right through it, each port connects to the cylinder above. Below, one port to the steam inlet pipe, the other to the exhaust. Two small holes drilled crossways through the round bar, at 90 degrees to each other, would allow through-flow through one port at a time. The round bar is rotated through 90 degrees by the "needle" and crank arm at the end of each stroke.

Or offset the ports slightly and file flats on the round bar to give finely tuneable valve timing and perhaps less than 90 degrees of rotation needed to make it work. My mental CAD abilities end about there. I need the back of a fag packet and a burnt match to take the concept any further.

[HopperParticipant @hopper]

Rotary valve shown here could be something like what's inside there *LINK*

[Michael Hudson 6Participant @michaelhudson6]

A small update from me – have ordered some plus gas, have kept away from the wd40.. Very intrigued regarding the possible valve arrangement. I think I will try and talk to our vet and see if they will oblige with an X-Ray or two

[Michael Hudson 6Participant @michaelhudson6]

And another update – it has been ages so apologies. we took it to Antiques Roadshow and as nice as the experience and expert were, didn't really learn anything. Not sure if it is going to make the TV but we'll see.

I asked our vet if we could try using the x-ray and he said bby all means but it won't help as their machines aren't powerful enough to get through brass. He suggested the repair shop televison program which I was a bit sceptical about at first but I've watched a few episodes now and they do seem to be very aware of the fragility of items and quite happy to leave well enough alone where required.

So I've got in touch with them and we'll see if they're interested in having a go. My application of plus gas didn't seem to help anything that wasn't turning turn. I'll keep you all posted!

[Nicholas FarrParticipant @nicholasfarr14254]

Hi, just seen this on Antiques Roadshow.

Regards Nick.

[Nigel Graham 2Participant @nigelgraham2]

Only just come across this.

What a lovely little machine!

If X-rays don't work for seeing what's inside, and you are understandably reluctant to open it up, if you know someone with access to one, an ultrasonic test-set might, just, help although such devices are really designed to find boundaries within solids, not solids inside cavities. Their transducers also need snug contact with the test area, which might be impossible on this engine with lots of small, curved surfaces.

In that engine's era, engine-builders had to be highly experimental with what was still quite new "technology"; trying all manner of variations on a theme, including different valves and valve-gears. Sometimes it was to circumvent patents, sometimes to be "new improved" – they were as keen on increasing efficiency then, as their professional descendants today. So when considering the "works" within the intriguing styling, it's possible this splendid little engine models some particular very latest idea of the time; or even embodies its own, original, very latest idea.

[AdrianRParticipant @adrianr18614]

The Repair Shop on BBC could be a good place to take it.

[pgk pgkParticipant @pgkpgk17461]

X-ray technology at vet level depends on the system available. CR and DR digital systems will be limited to a single exposure so one becomes dependant on the absolute power of the x-ray generator and it's timers and punching through even thin brass is likely to be unsuccessful. A large animal vet with in-house facilities might have a way more powerful set than a companion vet guy. I did manage to play around with taking images through aluminium cans with the DR set-up I had but the generator was pretty darned powerful for a SA vet (to get down to short exposure times for cardiac pics). Good old fashioned film/developer systems might succeed by taking multiple exposures before developing but you can't just buy three/four sheets and a small amount of dev/fix assuming someone still kept their screened x-ray cassettes. It is possible to buy 'self-developing' x-ray film (it comes in a 2-part pouch) we used for the ocassional intra-oral dental pic but doesnt have intensifying screens so needs longer exposure times again. That type of film is available in a slightly bigger format than just the dental size most will be familiar with – about large enough for a spaniel's foot but I;d guess you'd be through half the pack playing with more and more repeat exposures trying to get lucky. As a newly qualified vet I once managed to x-ray a horses mandible in the field using a low powered newton-victor table top machine (the machine on the right in this image.. link )

But that took about 60 secs of exposure(s) and was just through dense bone. I took 3 pics at different exposure numbers and was lucky that when developed one came out ok.

If using ullrasound it fails to travel well through any air gaps (hence ultarsound gels). To get meaningful results here I'd guess you'd have to fill the item with an appropriate liquid and place in a liquid bath to have a sporting chance….

pgk

[pgk pgkParticipant @pgkpgk17461]

Link above too long

Had to send as second message.

pgk

[Andrew FiderkiewiczParticipant @andrewfiderkiewicz32869]

Didn't your little wonder star on the Antiques Road Show the other day? Surely there aren't two of them!

[Nick Clarke 3Participant @nickclarke3]

Posted by pgk pgk on 07/05/2020 09:15:58:

Link above too long

Had to send as second message.

pgk

Your link doesn't work for me I'm afraid.(using Win10 & Edge)

It looks like your link is to the data of your image and not to a place on the internet where the image has been hosted and is available.

Edited By Nick Clarke 3 on 0

[Author]

Posts