THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECTS JOURNAL. 



[Jan« 



fixed, having one air-pump worked by a crank in the middle shaft ; 

 the condenser was a circular one, fixed before the air-pump in the 

 middle line of ship. The cylinder was 40 inches diara. and 3 feet 

 stroke, pqual to a power of 4U horses, the space occupied was 10 ft. 9 in. 

 in the fore and aft direction, and lift. Gin. athwart ; the vessel was 

 low, and the paddle wlieels being projiorlioiied to the stroke, the con- 

 necting rods were short. The piston rods were fitted with parallel 

 motions. 



Thus, so far as the direct application of tlie poreer goes, the engines of 

 the Tourist, Goigon, Cyclops, &c., are identical. I therefore must 

 object to the Messrs. feeawards' nomenclature, it should be " Gutzmer " 

 not " Gorgon." 



In 182G, Mr. David Napier completed his splendid ship, the 

 "United Kingdom." The engines were upon the direct principle, 

 with, I conceive, considerable improvements; these consisted of se- 

 parate condensers and air pumps, in a half side beam, an additional 

 crossbar, and side rods forming a connecting rod, by which means this 

 latter was doubled in length to what it would have been on the Gutz- 

 mer principle. I cannot give the exact space occupied by these en- 

 gines, but feel assured that with equal powers and capabilities, they 

 have the advantage over the Gorgons. 



Having explained my objections to the claims of the Gorgon engine 

 on the ground of originality, I now come to its intrinsic value as com- 

 pared with its competitor the beam engine, and I beg to premise that 

 I use the term " competitor" in a Royal Navy sense only, for I be- 

 lieve I am correct in stating that, with the exception of the Russian 

 Emperor and Mexican Government, that this government is the only 

 patron of the Gorgon engine. I mean to say that it is entirely ex- 

 cluded from the vast commercial marine of this country. I think I 

 may also say entirely from France, but I am open to correction on this 

 point; at all events, the former fact shows plainly, thit if it has no 

 defects, it at least has not the advantages which are claimed for it. I 

 may observe, with reference to the value of government patronage, 

 and I merely state a plain and well known fact, that they are far be- 

 hind private knowledge and enterprise. 



In a pamphlet published by Messrs. Seawards & Co., the following 

 statements are made, and a drawing given of the Gorgon's engine ; of 

 the latter's accuracy I have no doubt. I dispute the former. They 

 say, 1st, they occupy i less space, and weigh i less than the beam 

 engine. 2nd, that there is less friction, consequently less wear and 

 tear and loss of power. 3rd, that the consumption of fuel does not 

 exceed 64 lbs. per horse power nominal per hour. I purpose taking 

 these as they stand. 1st, the space occupied by the Gorgon and the 

 beam engine can only be shown by a drawing; such accompanies this 

 letter, sketched to the same scale, and placed relatively to each other. 

 The upper is that of the Gorgon, as copied from the above-mentioned 

 pamphlet, the lower is of a beam engine, in sketching which I have 

 not followed the "architecture" of any manufacturer, for obvious rea- 

 sons, having no professional object in view. 



You will therein see that the base of the Gorgon's engine is 20ft. 

 Clin, long by 7ft. lOin. wide, that of the beam engine 20ft. 9in. long by 

 8ft. Gin. wide over the main gudgeons or widest part, being in excess, 

 three inches in length and eight inches in width only I This is an 

 astounding fact, and before publishing this paper (if it is doomed to 

 such fortune), I beg, Mr. Editor, that you will carefully look to this 

 point, and test its accuracy ; I believe it is fair and honest, and, if 

 published, will speak for itself. So much for the boasted Gorgon 

 engine, i less, — 'tis a hacknied phrase. It does not appear that any 

 claim is made for improvement in the boiler. I have a drawing of the 

 Cyclops' ; they are of the common construction, single flue (that is, all 

 on one level) having fires at both ends; they are across 19ft. by 31ft. 

 fore and aft, and 8ft. lOin. high; this is all common-place. I have 

 therefore no remark to make until I speak of their weight, and the 

 reported consumption of fuel. 



I now come to the weight of the Gorgon's machinery, and premise 

 that this is a point of great importance, as I have reason to think its 

 reported small amount was one of the principal causes of the intro- 

 duction of these engines into the navy of Great Britain. 



The engines were stated to the government to weigh 121 tons. 

 Paddle-wheels 24 



Boiler 04 



Water in Boilers 48 



257 tons. 

 A total of 257 tons omitting the coal boxes. 



The weight of a pair of beam engines of 320 horses power of most 

 approved construction, with boilers, paddle-wheels, coal boxes, and 

 water in boiler to working height, would not be more than 290 to 300 

 tons, but say the latter, to put the question on its broadest base, that 

 is '93 of a ton to a horse, which you will find a very ample allowance. 

 Supposing the 257 tons to include coal boxes (although not enume- 

 rated) we have a saving of 300 less 257 == 43 tons and -y^' := | saving 

 by the use of the Gorgon's engines! really, Mr. Editor, this appears 

 " too bad." Can the statement of i saving be made on honourable 

 principles, or wero the manufacturers so far carried away by enthu- 

 siasm as to slightly exceed the bounds of truth ? 



A few words more on this subject; I have reason to doubt the accu- 

 racy of the total weight given to the Admiralty, viz. 257 tons. The 

 following has been handed to me by authority on which I can rely. 

 It may be said it is merely an anonymous statement. Granted ; but I 

 am ready, Mr, Editor, to give you the name of my informant (in con- 

 fidence), and you shall be the umpire as to its value. 



Corrected weight of Gorgon's engines will stand thus ; — 



Tons. c»t. qrs. lb. 

 Engines . . 123 3 13 



Paddle-wheels . 40 3 24 



Boiler . . 68 17 2 5 



Chimney . . 6 3 3 6 



Coal Boxes . 20 2 1 18 



Water in Boiler . 40 8 



*Total 298 15 



10 



I say I believe this to be correct, and leave your readers to form their 

 own conclusions, or to make further enquiries. All I can say is, that 

 it calls loudly for explanation. 



I proceed to the second subject " That there is less friction in the 

 Gorgon's engines, consequently less loss of power, wear and tear, &c. 



This I consider to be merely professional, and fear my inability to 

 make myself fully understood by casual readers; however, avoiding 

 all scientific observation as to the "laws of friction," I shall merely 

 point out the parts generally included in the beam but avoided in the 

 Gorgon engine, and allow your readers to draw a common sense de- 

 duction as to the saving in this particular. 



The following are common to both constructions : the pistons, air 

 pump buckets, hot and bilge water pumps, shaft bearings, crank pins, 

 &c. The connecting rod bearing on cylinder cross bar of Gorgon, is 

 equal to the beam engine connecting rod cross bar; in this latter we 

 have the two main gudgeons, the air-pump gudgeons, the side rod 

 gudgeons, and the parallel motion, to be balanced by the rocking beam 

 and parallel motion of the Gorgon engine ; aud although last, not least, 

 the enormous friction on these parts caused by the short connecting 

 rod, and which I am assured is so great as to equal I the power of the 

 engine passing through them to sustain the piston rod to move in a 

 perpendicular line. 



On this point I am content, that those who are cognizant of the 

 parts of both engines, or can judge from the drawing given, may form 

 their own conclusions. 



3rd. That the consumption of fuel does not exceed 6i lb. per nomi- 

 nal horse power per hour. 



Nothing can be more absurd than to draw any conclusions from the 

 consumption per nominal horse power, the merest tyro in the profes- 

 sion must be fully aware that in the same engine (or generally speaking 

 in engines from the same manufactory), the consumption of coal mill 

 always be as the work done; it matters not how you may turn and twist 



* We must observe that this weight includes chimney and coal boxes, not 

 included in the before-mentioned weight of 257 tons. — Editor. 



