Traction Engine Identification Help Please….

[JasonBModerator @jasonb]

Yes, comes up about 5.2mm so araond 5g

Certainly is rail practice with the feed going down to the cylinders

[Nigel Graham 2Participant @nigelgraham2]

Bill –

Unfortunately being a coded welder would not be enough. That boiler is essentially irrepairable because the worst welds are in the least accessible place, and raise doubts about the condition of those elsewhere.

The engine is recoverable but only with a lot of expensive work(new boiler), and a lots of designing and sometimes-heavy machining to replace the lost mechanical parts.

 

Dave –

That blower arrangement is normal on a railway locomotive because it has to be operable from the footplate. A locomotive is not good at natural draught, unlike a traction-engine with its tall chimney. Further, the official handbook that was issued by British Railways to their crews makes starkly clear that the blower is necessary at certain times during the journey, to prevent blow-backs that would engulf the driver and fireman in flames. This was particularly so in tunnels, where the roof impedes the exhaust rising from the chimney.

On the other hand, literature dating from road steam vehicles’ commercial days does advise the “steam jet” be used sparingly, to avoid undue strains on the boiler by over-enthusiastic fire-drawing. I am not sure I understand that but it is not for me to argue with the vehicles’ manufacturers – may they Rest in Peace! Though autobiographies by former operators suggest many road engine-men received only very basic training, unlike on the railways, and they and the owners frequently abused and neglected what were after all only tools of the trade, some sold with typically ten-year write-down costs in mind.

So the blower valve was put in about the least accessible place available, without even a reach-rod back to the man-stand. Safely away from wandering hands.

…….

This saga of Bill’s engine is a sad one indeed, and I have been party to condemning a brand-new boiler built faithfully by a skilled metalworker but novice engineman, to shockingly bad drawings.

The builder was a retired copper-smith, a friend of a club member, and he had decided to build a miniature locomotive of (from memory) 3.5″ gauge. He started with the boiler as matching his professional experience.

The pair turned up to give the boiler a hydraulic test. After the social introductions, everyone, including the best craftsmen in the society, complimented the builder on his beautifully silver-brazed boiler with its perfect jointing.

Then when I turned it gently over on a clean blanket so we could observe its innards, we had a cruel shock.

Of LNER pattern, the arched inner firebox was more MacDonald’s ‘M’ than anything Darlington. There were a few stays in the throat-plate and backhead, but none in the water-legs, no sign of any crown, rod or girder stays.

The unfortunate builder had thought to bring the drawing, and we all studied it carefully.

Yes, he had worked exactly to it – including no stays. We also saw no designer’s or publisher’s name on the rather poor photocopy. Goodness knows what the engine’s other drawings were like.

What was odder still, he would not reveal the source of the drawings. We wanted to write to ME to warn others of this disastrously bad “design”.   Sadly assured it could not be repaired and fitted properly, he left with his armful of now-scrap copper, and we never heard from or of him, again.

[Author]

Posts