The evolution of the steam locomotive (1803 to 1898)

Although Walker and Rastrick had reported to the directors of the Liverpool and Manchester Railway in favour of stationary engines, there were some of them who were enlightened enough to be desirous of giving steam locomotives a fair trial. The Stephensons being locomotive engine builders, naturally were not behindhand in fully and frequently describing the superiority of locomotive traction. Finally, at the suggestion of Mr. Harrison, the directors offered a prize of £500, to be awarded to the locomotive that at the trial appeared to be the best machine competing. The following is a copy of the notice detailing the conditions of the competition:—

At this period there were but few men who understood even the outlines of locomotive construction, and unfortunately all of these did not take part in the competition. The fifth condition, limiting the weight of the loaded locomotive to six tons, probably deterred some makers from competing. Others had commenced constructing locomotives for the competition, but were unable to finish them by the date mentioned in the conditions.

The actual entries were as follows: 1. Braithwaite and Ericsson’s “Novelty”; 2. Timothy Hackworth’s “Sanspareil”; 3. R. Stephenson’s “Rocket”; 4. Burstall’s “Perseverance”; and 5. Brandreth’s “Cycloped.”

The “Novelty” (Fig. 13) was far and away the favourite engine at Rainhill, its neat appearance and smartness attracting universal attention. It was a “tank” engine, and probably the first locomotive constructed to carry its supply of water and coal on the engine, being thus complete without a tender. This raised a difficulty in apportioning the load, as in the conditions it was arranged that the tender was to be counted as part of the load hauled. The machine with water and coal weighed 3 tons 17 cwt. 14 lb.; the allowance made for the tender and fuel reduced the theoretical weight of the “Novelty,” as an engine only, to 2 tons 13 cwt. 2 qr. 3½ lb.; the gross weight hauled, including the locomotive, being 10 tons 14 cwt. 14 lb.

The “Novelty” was first tried upon October 10th, 1829—she had not previously been upon a railway—and it was found necessary to make some alterations to her wheels. Timothy Hackworth, although he had an engine running in competition with the “Novelty,” generously offered to repair the defect, and he personally took out the broken portion, welded it, and replaced it in position with his own hands.

The trials were conducted upon a level portion of line at Rainhill, on a course only one and a half miles in length, and at either end an additional eighth of a mile was allowed for the purpose of getting up the speed and stopping after the run of a mile and a half. The engines had to make forty runs over the course, or a distance of sixty miles, in all, which was computed to be equal to a return journey between Liverpool and Manchester.

After running two trips of one and a half miles each, the pipe from the pump to the boiler burst, in consequence of the cock between the boiler and pump having, by accident, been closed. The “Novelty” and train covered the first trip in five minutes thirty-six seconds, and the return in six minutes forty seconds; being at the rate of 16.07 and 13½ miles an hour respectively. After being repaired, the engine, with its train, made an unofficial trip, and developed a speed of 21 ⅙ miles an hour. Without a load the “Novelty” attained a speed of nearly thirty miles an hour.

The “Novelty” was again tried on October 14th, but upon its third trip part of the boiler gave way, and it was decided to withdraw the locomotive from competition.

The boiler of the “Novelty” was partly vertical and partly horizontal; the latter portion was about 12ft. long and 15in. in diameter. In the former was the fire-box, surrounded by water, coke being supplied through what at first might be mistaken for the funnel of a steam fire-engine. This was, however, kept air-tight, the fuel being introduced by means of a descending hopper. The area of the fire-grate was 1.8 sq. ft., the fire-box heating surface 9½ sq. ft., and the heating surface of the tubes, 33 sq. ft.

The air entered below the fire-bars by a pipe traversing the length of the engine, and connected with bellows fixed above the frame at the other extreme of the engine. The bellows were worked by the engine, so that the “Novelty” was provided with a forced draught. The heated air was forced through a tube, which made three journeys through the horizontal portion of the boiler, and was consequently 36ft. in length. It was 4in. in diameter at the grate end, and 3in. at the other extreme, where it was turned up as a chimney. The cylinders were located over the pair of wheels at the bellows end of the machine. They were fixed vertically, the diameter being 6in., and length of stroke 12in. The piston-rods worked through the top covers, and by means of cross-heads, side-rods, and bell-cranks the motion was conveyed to the crank axle beneath the vertical portion of the boiler, although, as previously mentioned, the cylinders were over the other pair of wheels. The wheels were 4ft. 2.1in. in diameter, and chains were provided for coupling the wheels together; but these were not used at Rainhill.

The water was carried in a tank located between the axles below the frame. The construction of the “Novelty” was only decided upon on August 1st, 1829, but so expeditiously was the work carried out that she was constructed in London, and delivered in Liverpool—a lengthy journey at that time—by September 29th, 1829. Her distinguishing colours at Rainhill were copper and blue.

After the conclusion of the Rainhill Competition several alterations were made in the design of this engine, the position of the cylinders being altered from vertical to horizontal by Watson and Daglish, and in 1833 she was working on the St. Helens and Runcorn Gap Railway.

Although, through an accident, the “Novelty” had to be withdrawn from competing for the prize at Rainhill, the directors of the Liverpool and Manchester Railway were so well satisfied with her performances that they gave Braithwaite and Ericsson an order for some locomotives of the same design. A description of these will be found in Chapter IV.

The engine next in order was Timothy Hackworth’s “Sanspareil,” (Fig. 14), now preserved in the South Kensington Museum.

The engine-shops at Shildon were not in a position to construct the whole of this locomotive; consequently Hackworth was forced to obtain the boiler and cylinders from other makers. The former was constructed at Bedlington Ironworks, and was of cylindrical form, 6ft. long, 4ft. 2in. diameter, with one end flat and the other hemispherical. The heating surface was provided by means of a double return tube, the fire-grate and chimney being both at the same end.

The area of the fire-grate was 10 sq. ft., the heating surface of same 15.7 sq. ft., the remaining heating surface 74½ sq. ft.

The cylinders were constructed by B. Stephenson and Co., and six had to be made before two perfect ones were obtained, the sixth one, indeed, only being fitted at Liverpool when the contest was in progress.

It has been stated that these cylinders were purposely constructed in a faulty manner to prevent the “Sanspareil” beating the “Rocket.” This may or may not be true, but it is very evident that, save for Stephenson’s imperfect workmanship in this respect, the “Sanspareil” would have won the £500 prize. When the “Sanspareil” was competing for the prize, one of the cylinders supplied by Stephenson and Co. burst, and it was found that the metal was only one-sixteenth of an inch thick! A nice state of things certainly! The cylinders were 7in. diameter, the stroke being 18in. The engine was carried on four wheels, 4ft. 6in. diameter. Total weight of engine, 4 tons 15 cwt. 2 qr.

She was, of course, fitted with Hackworth’s exhaust steam blast.

During some preliminary trips at Rainhill, Stephenson was greatly surprised to see how well the “Sanspareil” ran, and he noticed she always had a good supply of steam, so he got upon the engine and had a ride on her. During this trip he said to Hackworth, “Timothy, what makes the sparks fly out of the chimney?” Hackworth touched the exhaust pipe near the cylinders, and answered, “It is the end of this little fellow that does the business.”

After Stephenson got off the engine, John Thompson, the driver (he was Hackworth’s foreman at Shildon), said to Hackworth, “Why did you tell him how you did it, sir? He will be trying to fit up the ‘Rocket’ in the same way.” Hackworth said he did not think so, but Thompson determined to watch the “Sanspareil” all night. He therefore locked himself in the shed containing the engine that night, but towards daybreak sleep overcame him, and when he awoke he saw two men getting out of the window of the shed, and he found the chimney door of the “Sanspareil” open, and some materials inside the chimney. The secret of the exhaust steam blast was stolen! The next evening the “Rocket” again appeared; this time she was fitted with a similar contrivance. The above is Hackworth’s foreman’s version of the theft, but the “Practical Mechanic’s Journal” for June, 1850, gives the tale as told by the man who committed the theft.

When in repair, the “Sanspareil” ran faster, took a heavier load, and consumed less coke than the “Rocket,” and whilst the latter was remodelled within twelve months of the Rainhill contest, the former worked with practically no alteration until 1844. In 1864 she was presented to the South Kensington Museum by Mr. John Hick, M.P., Bolton.

The following is an extract from her history, as supplied by Mr. Hick to the Museum authorities:—

“After the Rainhill trial the engine was purchased by the Liverpool and Manchester Railway Company, and used by them for various purposes. In 1831, the engine was purchased by Mr. John Hargreaves, of Bolton, and was employed by him in the conveyance of passengers and general traffic on the Bolton and Leigh Railway for several years. In 1837, Mr. Hargreaves had the engine thoroughly repaired, and put on a pair of new cylinders of larger dimensions than the old ones, so as to increase the power. The original wood-spoked wheels were also removed at this time, and replaced with cast-iron hollow-spoked wheels.

“One pair of these are under the engine at the present time. The engine continued regularly at work in conveying coals, general goods, and passengers until 1844, when, being found much too small and short of power for the rapidly increasing traffic, Mr. Hargreaves took her to his colliery at Coppull, near Chorley, Lancashire, where the engine was fixed near a coal-pit. One axle and one pair of wheels were removed, and upon the other toothed gear was fitted, in order to give motion to winding and pumping apparatus, and the engine commenced its work as a regular fixed colliery engine, pumping and winding in the most satisfactory manner until the end of the year 1863; having raised many thousand tons of coal and many million gallons of water, and even at the time above named was in fair working order, and only removed because the coal in the pit was exhausted.

“I hope the old engine will now find a permanent resting place in the Kensington Museum, where her end will be peace, if not pieces. Mr. Hargreaves has kindly given me the old engine, in consequence of my having told him of my intention with regard to her. And having restored her as far as possible by collecting and putting together the available materials, I have pleasure in presenting this interesting relic to the Museum.”

The “Rocket” (Fig. 15), was entered in the name of Robert Stephenson, and was constructed at the Forth Street Works, Newcastle-on-Tyne, in 1829. Her distinguishing colours were yellow and black, with a white chimney. She was the first engine to be tried at Rainhill. Her weight was 4 tons 5 cwt.; load (including tender), 12¾ tons; total, 17 tons. During the first twenty trips she attained a maximum speed of 24.43 miles an hour, the average being 13.42 mile’s an hour; during the second twenty trips an average speed of 14.2 miles an hour was the result, with a maximum speed of 24 miles an hour. These short trips of one and a half miles each just suited the design of the “Rocket,” as the steam raised before starting on each trip was sufficient to work her the one and a half miles; had the trips been longer, she—not then being furnished with a proper blast, but with that illustrated on Page 25—would probably have stopped for want of steam. Of this Z. Colburn significantly states: “The ‘Rocket,’ on the first day of her trial, derived but little benefit from the discharge of the exhaust steam up the chimney; and, indeed, made steam nearly as freely when standing as when running.” Without a load, or tender even, she attained a speed of 29½ miles an hour. The authority just quoted says: “The real power of the ‘Sanspareil’ is to be estimated by its rate of evaporation, which was one-third greater than that of the ‘Rocket,’ and thus the ‘Sanspareil,’ after allowing for its greater weight, was the most powerful engine brought forward for trial.... As far as it had gone, the mean rate of speed (of the ‘Sanspareil’) was greater than that of the ‘Rocket’ up to the same stage of the experiment.”

The boiler of the “Rocket” was cylindrical, with flat ends, 6ft. long, 3ft. 4in. diameter; the fire-box was 3ft. long, 2ft. broad, and about 3ft. deep; between the box and the outer casing was a space of 3in. filled with water. The cylinders were placed at an angle of 45 degrees at the fire-box end, the connecting-rod being attached to a pin on the leading wheels, which were 4ft. 8½in. diameter, that of the cylinders being 8in.; the stroke was 16½in.

The “Rocket” had a great advantage over other engines because she was supplied with a tubular boiler, containing 25 tubes of 3in. diameter. The idea of the tubular boiler did not originate with the Stephensons. Mr. Booth, the Secretary of the Liverpool and Manchester Railway, suggested their use in the “Rocket”; but before this the tubular locomotive boiler had been patented by a Frenchman (M. Sequin), on February 22nd, 1828. Mr. Booth, however, states that he was unaware of the French patent, and, so far as he was concerned, the tubular boiler was an original discovery. The use of these tubes increased the evaporating power of the boiler three-fold, and at the same time reduced the consumption of coke 40 per cent.; yet the “Rocket,” with this great advantage, was not equal to the “Sanspareil,” until the former was fitted with Hackworth’s blast. When this had been done, the “Rocket” was capable of hauling 20 tons (engine included) up an incline of 1 in 96, at 16 miles an hour, for a distance of one and a half miles. The prize of £500 was divided between Robert Stephenson, the constructor of the “Rocket,” and Mr. Booth, the suggester of the tubular boiler, which enabled that locomotive to be entitled to the prize. Tubular boilers had been successfully used in steam road coaches as early as 1821.

After running a year or so, the “Rocket” was rebuilt, the cylinders being placed in a slightly inclined position over the trailing wheels, but still working the leading wheels; a smoke-box was added, and other improvements introduced.

The “Rocket” was bought in the year 1837, from the Liverpool and Manchester Railway, by Mr. J. Thompson, of Kirkhouse, the lessee of the Earl of Carlisle’s coal and lime works.

Here the engine was worked for five or six years on the Midgeholme line—a local line belonging to Mr. Thompson—for forwarding his coals from the pits towards Carlisle.

Soon after the engine was placed on this line the great contest for East Cumberland took place, when Sir J. Graham was superseded by Mayor Aglionby, and she was used for conveying the Alston express with the state of the poll from Midgeholme to Kirkhouse. Upon that occasion the “Rocket” was driven by Mr. Mark Thompson, and accomplished her share of the work, a distance of upwards of four miles, in 4½ minutes, thus reaching a speed nearly equal to 60 miles an hour. On the introduction of heavier and more powerful engines, the “Rocket” was “laid up in ordinary” in the yard at Kirkhouse. This historic steam locomotive is now preserved in the South Kensington Museum. It must not be forgotten, however, that the “Rocket” has been rebuilt, and its design considerably altered, since the Rainhill competition of 1829.

The last of the steam locomotives entered for trial at Rainhill remains to be described. The “Perseverance” was constructed by Mr. Burstall, of Edinburgh. He was already known as a maker of steam road coaches. Unfortunately for the success, or rather want of success, of the “Perseverance,” Mr. Burstall designed his railway locomotive on much the same lines as his steam coaches.

The “Perseverance” had the misfortune to have some damage done to its wheels, etc., when being unloaded at Rainhill off the wagon on which it had been conveyed from Liverpool. A preliminary trial was made, and Mr. Burstall, finding the engine was unable to attain a higher speed than about six miles an hour, withdrew his locomotive from competition.

The boiler was horizontal, and the water was admitted to shallow trays placed over the fire, and in this way was immediately converted into steam. The cylinders were vertical, and worked horizontal beams placed above them; the wheels were worked by cranks fixed on the beams about half-way between the cylinders and the centre pivots of the beams. The second pair of wheels was driven by means of an axle with bevel wheels at each end, which conveyed the motion from the one axle to the other.

This engine was distinguished by having the wheels painted red.

Although not “steam” locomotives, we think it right to give a few details of the “Cycloped,” (Fig. 16), and also of Winans’ manumotive carriage, both of which were exhibited at Rainhill. The former was worked by a horse or horses fastened on a frame supported by four wheels; the horses walked at a speed of one and a quarter miles an hour, on an endless platform formed of planks of wood. The horses being firmly attached to the frame could not go forward when they essayed to walk, and the consequence of their using their legs was the revolving of the floor, which worked round drums geared to the driving wheels. This motion caused the vehicle to move forward on the rails at a speed of about three miles an hour, with a load of fifty passengers. Had the horses moved at a quicker rate, the speed of the “Cycloped” would have been increased in a proportionate ratio.

Winans’ carriage was worked by two men, who turned a windlass, which actuated the wheels. It accommodated six passengers, and it was facetiously proposed that those passengers who worked at the windlasses should be conveyed by such vehicles at reduced rates. Although we now smile at the simplicity of such vehicles ever having been suggested for working on a railway, the Directors of the Liverpool and Manchester Railway were considerably taken with the idea of Winans’ man-propelled carriages, and they engaged two well-known engineers to report on their adaptability for passenger traffic on the railway. As might be expected, the experts reported against the proposed use of Winans’ machines; but, despite this adverse report, the Directors of the Liverpool and Manchester Railway actually bought twelve of these “manumotive” carriages of Winans. The purchase was made prior to March, 1830, and as we do not read of their being used after the railway was opened in September, 1830, we may conclude that during the six months that elapsed between the purchase and the opening of the line the Directors had come to the same conclusion regarding the machines as did the engineers who reported against their use on the railway.