1842.] 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECT'S JOURNAL. 



157 



ON BEAM AND DIRECT ACTION ENGINES. 

 " Non omnia possumus omnes." 



Sir — Perceiving in your excellent journal a controversy of conside- 

 rable importance, relative to the Beam and tlie Gorgon engine, I am 

 induced to offer a few remarks thereon, placing thera at your per- 

 fect disposal ; and at the same time allow me, in mere good humour, 

 to beg that we conduct our arguments in gentlemanly style, and avoid 

 as much as possible cause for irritation, especially all harsh expressions 

 not necessary to the elucidation of the subject. I allude to the open- 

 ing paper of Vulcan, and reply of Mr. Pole, whose terras " misrepre- 

 sentation and fallacy," I object to, especially in his first paragraph; 

 he should allow your readers to draw their conclusions on these points 

 and not prejudge the question. 



As a dispassionate member of the profession, one not more wedded 

 to the beam engine than other constructions, when such can be shown 

 advantageous in their application, I pen the following remarks without 

 prejudice, and will endeavour to carry out the principles recommended 

 in my first observations, and to argue upon nothing but facts which 

 have been published upon good authority, and which, I believe, cannot 

 be disputed with fairness. After a careful perusal of both papers, and 

 full consideration of their contents, I have come to the conclusion that 

 Mr. Pole has not materially affected the position of Vulcan, or denied 

 his chief points; wliy, it shall (with your permission; be my object 

 to show. Vulcan's position appears to me to be this: — 



1st. That the Gorgon engine is not new, as it regards the direct 

 application of the power, and further that the credit due to the Messrs. 

 Seaward is not equal to their claim, considering the chronology of its 

 introduction. 



2nd. That a saving of nearly one-half in space is not correct. 



3rd. That a saving of 25 per cent, on the beam engine in weight 

 is not founded on fact, and also that the weight given to the Govern- 

 ment has been considerably exceeded. 



4th. That the guaranteed consumption of fuel at GJ lb. per horse 

 per hour, is far from fact exhibited in practice. 



With regard to the first point, Mr. Pole (am I right in supposing 

 he writes " by authority"?) grants that the application of the "direct 

 action" is not new, having been applied in the Tourist and United 

 Kingdom, and the only question remaining is the comparative im- 

 provement of the Gorgon's on these, I may say at that time the only 

 generally known (in this country) constructions of direct engines. 

 Now, in my humble judgment, in considering this we should take into 

 account the period at wliich they were brought forward, and make 

 allowances for the infant state of marine engineering when Gutzmer 

 designed his 5U-horse engines subsequently placed in the Tourist, and 

 that we should not omit to consider the great experience and practice 

 we have all obtained from that period up to the year 1S37, when the 

 great light of the Gorgou engine burst in upon us. 



Apart from the early period in which Gutzmer brought forward his 

 direct engine, it should be recollected that the Tourist was a very 

 small vessel — I say nas, for she has been considerably lengthened — 

 very shallow in her hold, quite flat in the bottom, and small draft of 

 •water, circumstances the very opposite of the Gorgon and Cyclops. 

 The engines, in plan, were like Mr. Penn's osciUating engines, having 

 one air pump and one condenser, the former wrought by a cranked 

 shaft; so far Vulcan is right, for I feel assured Mr. Pole does not 

 suppose the similarity was assumed, in workmanship or proportion. 

 The stroke was 3 feet, and cylinder 40 inches, and the connecting rods 

 were 2 feet 'J inches long, — less than twice the crank. I apprehend 

 little ditference of opinion will exist as to the cause of their imperfect 

 action. It may be asked, why was this ? I answer, Gutzmer had no 

 alternative, other than making his wheel much too large for the 

 stroke, and had he even put aside this objection, he must have brought 

 his shaft on deck, which, in those times, would have raised a host 

 of prejudices, and somewhat risked the insurance of the vessel. 

 He had to contend with imperfect machinery, bad lathes and tools, 

 and men unacquainted with their work, and many other things too 

 numerous to mention, but too well known to projectors of olden time. 

 It is not too much to say that the principal of these difficulties have 

 been overcome for some years. Thanks to the late Mr. Maudslay, to 

 Nasmyth, to Whitworth and others, we have arrived at a vvondrous 

 perfection in the executive department. 1 am almost tempted to say, 

 the difficulty now lies not in the execution, but in the invention. How- 

 many schemers can tell a contrary tale I 



Possessing these views, in conjunction with Vulcan, I cannot give 

 to the revivifiers of a dormant scheme any credit of "conception or 

 invention" ; but that some merit is undoubtedly theirs, let us see how 

 far it goes. 



The Tourist was a small vessel of 300 tons, 23 feet beam, and 14 

 feet depth in hold ; draft (loaded for the voyage), about 8 feet (> inches, 

 or 9 feet. Compare this with the Gorgon, a ship of 1050 tons — 37 

 feet beam, IZfut depth in hold, draft about 15 feet. Let us transpose 

 the cases, and suppose Gutzmer to have flourished now and Seaward 

 then: is it not reasonable to suppose that the acute Scotchman, pos- 

 sessing all the knowledge of modern improvements, would have carried 

 out his principle in a very different manner? It should be recollected 

 that large "men-of-war" steamers were not then thought of, and also 

 that the "direct principle" is not, and never can be applied to vessels 

 with a small draught of water, with any useful effect : so far, we are 

 where Gutzmer left us. Powerful steamers are emanations of modem 

 ingenuity, and it does not follow but that Gutzmer would have made 

 his principle as " efficient and applicable on a large scale" as the 

 Messrs. Seaward, had the circumstances of the times been in his 

 favour. 



There is another point in which I wish this question to be viewed. 

 Any claim as to the " direct principle" having been conceded, it only 

 remains to show how far there is originality in the arrangement or 

 mechanical adaptation of the Gorgon engine, and I think I shall be 

 enabled to show that this belongs, equally with the " direct principle," 

 to a time antecedent to the Seawardian age. 



Those of your readers who possess a copy of Gregory's Mechanics 

 are referred to plate 23, fig. 10, and to the letter-press, vol. ii, p. 85, 

 "Parallel Motion." In the former they will see an exact delineation 

 of the Gorgou engine, and in the latter the worthy Professor informs 

 us, after a full exposition of the principle, " that this motion, as well 

 as fig. 8 (the common bridle motion) were devised by Mr. William 

 Dryden, a mechanic, whose ingenuity needs not our encomium." 

 p. 2S(5, art. 3. Now, I am not prepared to say when Dryden invented 

 it, but this is certain, that it was antecedent to Gutzmer, for he copied 

 the motion No. S (the bridle motion) in the Tourist's engines, and by 

 a curious coincidence his other invention was adopted in the Gorgon 

 engine. The merit due to the Messrs. Seaward is that of " adapters" ; 

 to that they are justly entitled; they have shown great tact and 

 judgment therein. 



In criticising Vulcan's remarks upon the dimensions of the 

 Gorgon engine, I scarcely think Mr. Pole is fair in putting forth a 

 small table of the lengths of engine-rooms, as a criterion of space 

 occupied, although his statement is perfectly correct. It is well 

 known in the profession, that the engineer is not always consulted as 

 to the distance between his bulkheads. It is often increased to make 

 room for stores, duplicates, accommodation for engineers, &c. Some- 

 times the distance is increased by the shipwright, by caprice of the 

 engineer, who does not wish to be " cramped" in manipulating his 

 engine. M''e may also say, in large men-of-war it is not advisable to 

 concentrate such great weights, but to spread them as much as is con- 

 sistent with the accommodation of the crew, and the purposes of war. 

 To my personal knowledge, this feeling has lengthened many engine- 

 rooms several feet. In private trading vessels, I grant, the machinery 

 should be as compact as possible, passenger accommodation and hold 

 being of first-rate importance. 



Now, in Mr. Pole's table, the vessels having beam engines are Hydra, 

 Medea, and Vivid, the engine-rooms of Hydra and Gorgon being of 

 equal length, viz. 62 feet, that of the Medea 60 feet; and it should 

 be recollected that these vessels were fitted without the smallest idea 

 of competition in this respect. Had it been so, I have no hesitation 

 in saying that that of Hydra could have been reduced four feet without 

 the slightest inconvenience; and Medea in the same proportion. Those 

 of your readers who know the vessels are aware this is not mere 

 assertion. But I will endeavour to show that the engines of the 

 Hydra might be increased to 160 horses each (now 1 10), without any 

 increase of space ; and more, that a beam engine of the Gorgon's pro- 

 portions may be constructed to occupy space as shown in Vulcan's 

 diagram, and to weigh (with water in boiler) not more than 300 tons. 



Having, therefore, I hope, explained why we should not take length 

 of engine-rooms as conclusive evidence of excellence, we must recur 

 to Vulcan's original position, and take the bare space occupied by the 

 engine, especially as Mr. Pole has thrown aside all other portions of 

 the machinery : on that very ground I am prepared to meet him. 



First, I will show that the engines of the Medea and Hydra may be 

 extended to 160 horses, without longitudinal increase of space in the 

 latter, and a slight lateral increase in the former. The Hydra's engines 

 are 110 horses each; cylinders 55^ in. diameter, and 5 feet stroke ; 

 length between centres of cylinder and shaft 15 feet, or 3 times the 

 stroke. I believe this to be Boultonand Watt's usual practice, exceed- 

 ing in this particular most other makers, (Maudslays, for instance,) 

 and may here observe Mr. Pole appears to have overlooked Vulcan's 

 statement, that he took Mr. Watt's data to prevent cavil, and see his 

 computation of Gorgon power, namely, an assumed pressure of "seven 



