The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Steam Engine Explained and Illustrated (Seventh Edition), by Dionysius Lardner

(101.)

If the law of Mariotte were strictly applicable to steam, its mechanical effect would be the same as has been already explained in all states of density; but since its temperature will rise and fall as its density is increased or diminished, a corresponding change will be produced in its [Pg174] mechanical efficacy. It is therefore necessary in the calculation of the mechanical effect of steam, whether it be used at a uniform pressure without the principle of expansion, or with the application of that principle to any given extent, to take into account the combined operation of the laws of Mariotte and Dalton. Formulæ exhibiting the relation between the temperatures, pressures, volumes, and densities of steam, and the mechanical effect produced by the evaporation of water, whether acting with or without expansion, together with the tables necessary for the practical application of these, will be found in the Appendix.

(102.)

One of the methods of equalising the varying force of expanding steam, would be to work it at the same time in two cylinders connected with the same beam; so that while its force in one would be augmented, its force in the other would be diminished, the combination of the two producing a uniform effect. Soon after the expansive principle was promulged by Mr. Watt, this expedient was accordingly resorted to by an engineer named Hornblower.

Let C, fig. 30., be the centre of the great working-beam, carrying two arch heads, on which the chains of the piston rods play. The distances of these arch heads from the centre C must be in the same proportion as the length of the cylinders, in order that the same play of the beam may correspond to [Pg175] the plays of both pistons. Let F be the steam-pipe from the boiler, and G a valve to admit the steam above the lesser piston. H is a tube by which a communication may be opened by the valve I, between the top and bottom of the lesser cylinder B. K is a tube communicating by the valve L, between the bottom of the lesser cylinder B and the top of the greater cylinder A. M is a tube communicating, by the valve N, between the top and bottom of the greater cylinder A; and P a tube leading to the condenser by the exhausting valve O.

At the commencement of the operation, suppose all the valves opened, and steam allowed to flow through the engine until the air be completely expelled, and then let all the valves be closed. To start the engine, let the exhausting valve O and the steam valves G and L be opened, as in fig. 30. The steam will flow freely from the boiler, and press upon the lesser piston, and at the same time the steam below the greater piston will flow into the condenser, leaving a vacuum in the greater cylinder. The valve L being opened, the steam which is under the piston in the lesser cylinder will flow through K, and press on the greater piston, which, having a vacuum beneath it, will consequently descend. At the commencement of the motion, the lesser piston is as much resisted by the steam below it, as it is urged by the steam above it; but after a part of the descent has been effected, the steam below the piston, in the lesser cylinder, passing into the greater, expands into an increased space, and therefore loses part of its elastic force. The steam above the lesser piston retaining its full force by having a free communication with the boiler by the valve G, the lesser piston will be urged by a force equal to the excess of the pressure of this steam above the diminished pressure of the expanded steam below it. As the pistons descend, the steam which is between them is continually increasing in its bulk, and therefore decreasing in its pressure, from whence it follows, that the force which resists the lesser piston is continually decreasing, while that which presses it down remains the same, and therefore the effective force which impels it must be continually increasing. [Pg176]

On the other hand, the force which urges the greater piston is continually decreasing, since there is a vacuum below it, and the steam which presses it is continually expanding into an increased bulk.

(103.)

The use of two cylinders was revived by Arthur Woolf in 1804, who, in this and the succeeding year, obtained patents for the application of steam raised under a high pressure to double-cylinder engines. The specification of his patent states, that he has proved by experiment that steam raised [Pg177] under a safety-valve loaded with any given number of pounds upon the square inch will, if allowed to expand into as many times its bulk as there are pounds of pressure on the square inch, have a pressure equal to that of the atmosphere. Thus, if the safety-valve be loaded with four pounds on the square inch, the steam, after expanding into four times its bulk, will have the atmospheric pressure; if it be loaded with 5, 6, or 10 lbs. on the square inch, it will have the atmospheric pressure when it has expanded into 5, 6, or 10 times its bulk, and so on. It was, however, understood in this case, that the vessel into which it was allowed to expand should have the same temperature as the steam before it expands.

It is very unaccountable how a person of Mr. Woolf's experience in the practical application of steam could be led into errors so gross as those involved in the averments of this patent; and it is still more unaccountable how the experiments could have been conducted which led him to conclusions not only incompatible with all the established properties of elastic fluids, but even involving in themselves palpable contradiction and absurdity. If it were admitted that every additional pound avoirdupois which should be placed upon the safety-valve would enable steam, by its expansion into a proportionally enlarged space, to attain a pressure equal to the atmosphere, the obvious consequence would be, that a physical relation would subsist between the atmospheric pressure and the pound avoirdupois! It is wonderful that it did not occur to Mr. Woolf, that, granting his principle to be true at any given place, it would necessarily be false at another place, where the barometer would stand at a different height! Thus, if the principle were true at the foot of a mountain, it would be false at the top of it; and if it were true in fair weather, it would be false in foul weather, since these circumstances would be attended by a change in the atmospheric pressure, without making any change in the pound avoirdupois.[21]

(104.)

For several years after the extension of Watt's first patent had been obtained from parliament, he was altogether engrossed by the labour of bringing to perfection the application of the steam-engine to the drainage of mines, and in surmounting the numerous difficulties which presented themselves to its general adoption, even after its manifold advantages were established and admitted. When, however, these obstacles had been overcome, and the works for the manufacture of engines for pumping water, at Soho, had been organised and brought into active operation, he was relieved from the pressure of these anxieties, and was enabled to turn his attention to the far more extensive and important uses of which he had long been impressed with the conviction that the engine was capable. His sagacious mind enabled him to perceive that the machine he had created was an infant force, which by the fostering influence of his own genius would one day extend its vast power over the arts and manufactures, the commerce and the civilisation of the world. Filled with such aspirations, he addressed his attention about the year 1779, to the adaptation of the steam-engine to move machinery, and thereby to supersede animal power, and the natural agents, wind and water.

The idea that steam was capable of being applied extensively as a prime mover, had prevailed from a very early period; and now that we have seen its powers so extensively brought to bear, it will not be uninteresting to revert to the faint traces by which its agency was sketched in the crude speculations of the early mechanical inventors.

(105.)

Papin, to whom the credit of discovering the method of producing a vacuum by the condensation of steam is due, was the earliest and most remarkable of those projectors. With very limited powers of practical application, he was, nevertheless, peculiarly happy in his mechanical conceptions; and had his experience and opportunities been proportionate to the clearsighted character of his mind, he would doubtless have anticipated some of the most memorable of his successors in the progressive improvement of the steam engine.

In his work already cited, after describing his method of imparting an alternate motion to a piston by the atmospheric [Pg179] pressure acting against a vacuum produced by the condensation of steam, he stated that his invention, besides being applicable to pumping water, could be available for rowing vessels against wind and tide, which he proposed to accomplish in the following manner.

Paddle-wheels, such as have since been brought into general use, were to be placed at the sides, and attached to a shaft extending across the vessel. Within the vessel, and under this shaft, he proposed to place several cylinders supplied with pistons, to be worked by the atmospheric pressure. On the piston-rods were to be constructed racks furnished with teeth: these teeth were to work in the teeth of wheels or pinions, placed on the shaft of the paddle-wheels. These pinions were not to be fixed on the shaft, but to be connected with it by a ratchet; so that when they turned in one direction, they would revolve without causing the shaft to revolve; but when driven in the other direction, the catch of the ratchet-wheel would act upon the shaft so as to compel the shaft and paddle-wheels to revolve with the motion of the pinion or wheel upon it. By this arrangement, whenever the piston of any cylinder was forced down by the atmospheric pressure, the rack descending would cause the corresponding pinion of the paddle-shaft to revolve; and the catch of the ratchet wheel, being thus in operation, would cause the paddle-shaft and paddle-wheels also to revolve; but whenever the piston would rise, the rack driving the pinion in the opposite direction, the catch of the ratchet wheel would merely fall from tooth to tooth, without driving the paddle-shaft.

It is evident that by such an arrangement a single cylinder and piston would give an intermitting motion to the paddle-shaft, the motion of the wheel being continued only during the descent of the piston; but if several cylinders were provided, then their motion might be so managed, that when one would be performing its ascending stroke, and therefore giving no motion to the paddle-shaft, another should be performing its descending stroke, and therefore driving the paddle-shaft. As the interval between the arrival of the piston at the bottom of the cylinder and the commencement [Pg180] of its next descent would have been, in the imperfect machine conceived by Papin, much longer than the time of the descent, it was evident that more than two cylinders would be necessary to insure a constantly acting force on the paddle-shaft, and, accordingly, Papin proposed to use several cylinders.

In addition to this, Papin proposed to construct a boiler having a fireplace surrounded on every side by water, so that the heat might be imparted to the water with such increased rapidity as to enable the piston to make four strokes per minute. These projects were promulged in 1690, but it does not appear that they were ever reduced to experiment.

(106.)

Savery proposed, in his original patent, in 1698, to apply his steam engine as a general prime mover for all sorts of machinery, by causing it to raise water to make an artificial fall, by which overshot water-wheels might be driven. This proposal was not acted on during the lifetime of Savery, but it was at a subsequent period partially carried into effect. Mr. Joshua Rigley erected several steam engines on this principle at Manchester, and other parts of Lancashire, to impel the machinery of some of the earliest manufactories and cotton mills in that district. The engines usually raised the water from sixteen to twenty feet high, from whence it was conveyed to an overshot wheel, to which it gave motion. The same water was repeatedly elevated by the engine, so that no other supply was necessary, save what was sufficient to make good the waste. These engines continued in use for some years, until superseded by improved machines.[22]

(107.)

In 1736, Jonathan Hulls obtained a patent for a method of towing ships into or out of harbour against wind and tide. This method was little more than a revival of that proposed by Papin in 1690. The motion, however, was to be communicated to the paddle-shaft by a rope passing over a pulley fixed on an axis, and was to be maintained during the returning stroke of the piston by the descent of a weight which was elevated during the descending stroke. There is no record, however, of this plan, any more than that of Papin, ever having been reduced to experiment.

(108.)

During the early part of the last century the [Pg181] manufactures of this country had not attained to such an extent as to render the moving power supplied by water insufficient or uncertain to any inconvenient degree; and accordingly mills, and other works in which machinery required to be driven by a moving power, were usually built along the streams of rivers. About the year 1750 the general extension of manufactures, and their establishment in localities where water power was not accessible, called the steam engine into more extensive operation. In the year 1752, Mr. Champion, of Bristol, applied the atmospheric engine to raise water, by which a number of overshot wheels were driven. These were applied to move extensive brass-works in that neighbourhood, and this application was continued for about twenty years, but ultimately given up on account of the expense of fuel and the improved applications of the steam engine.

About this time Smeaton applied himself with great activity and success to the improvement of wind and water mills, and succeeded in augmenting their useful effect in a twofold proportion with the same supply of water. From the year 1750 until the year 1780 he was engaged in the construction of his improved water mills, which he erected in various parts of the country, and which were imitated so extensively that the improvement of such mills became general. In cases where a summer drought suspended the supply of water, horse machinery was provided, either to work the mill or to throw back the water. These improvements necessarily obstructed for a time the extension of steam power to mill work; but the increase of manufactures soon created a demand for power greatly exceeding what could be supplied by such limited means.

In the manufacture of iron, it is of great importance to keep the furnaces continually blown, so that the heat may never be abated by day or night. In the extensive ironworks at Colebrook Dale, several water-wheels were used in the different operations of the manufacture of iron, especially in driving the blowers of the iron furnaces. These wheels were usually driven by the water of a river, but in the summer months the supply became so short that it was insufficient to work them all. Steam engines were accordingly erected to [Pg182] return the water for driving these wheels. This application of the engine as an occasional power for the supply of water-wheels having been found so effectual, returning engines were soon adopted as the permanent and regular means of supplying water-wheels. The first attempt of this kind is recorded to have been made by Mr. Oxley, in 1762, who constructed a machine to draw coals out of a pit at Hartley colliery, in Northumberland. It was originally intended to turn the machine by a continuous circular motion received from the beam of the engine; but that method not being successful, the engine was applied to raise water for a wheel by which the machine was worked. This engine was continued in use for several years, and though it was at length abandoned, on account of its defective construction, it nevertheless established the practicability of using steam power as a means of driving water wheels.[23]

(109.)

In the year 1777, Mr. John Stewart read a paper before the Royal Society, describing a method for obtaining a continued circular motion for turning all kinds of mills from the reciprocating motion of a steam engine. He proposed to accomplish this by means of two endless chains passing over pulleys, which should be moved upwards and downwards by the motion of the engine, in the manner of a window sash. The joint pins of the links of the two chains worked in teeth at the opposite sides of a cog wheel, to which they imparted a circular motion, first by one chain, and then by the other, acting alternately on opposite sides of the wheel. One chain impelled it during the descent of the piston, and the other during the ascent; but one of these chains always passed over its pulleys so as to produce no effect on one side of the cog wheel, whilst the other chain worked on the opposite side to turn it round. For this purpose each chain was provided with a catch, to prevent its circulating over its pulleys in one direction, but to allow it free motion in the other. The cog wheel thus kept in revolution might be applied to the axis of any mill which the engine was required to work. Thus, if it were applied to a flour-mill, the millstone itself would perform the office of a fly-wheel to regulate the intermission of [Pg183] the power, and in other mills a fly-wheel might be added for this purpose.

The hints obtained by Mr. Stewart from Papin's contrivance, before mentioned, will not fail to be perceived. In Mr. Stewart's paper he notices indirectly the method of obtaining a continued circular motion from a reciprocating motion by means of a crank or winch, which, he says, occurs naturally in theory, but in practice would be impossible, from the nature of the motion of the engine, which depends on the force of the steam, and cannot be ascertained in its length. Therefore, on the first variation, the machine would be either broken in pieces or turned back. Such an opinion, pronounced by a man of considerable mechanical knowledge and ingenuity, against a contrivance which, as will presently appear, proved in practice, not less than in theory, to be the most effectual means of accomplishing the end here pronounced to be impossible, is sufficiently remarkable. It might cast some doubt on the extent of Mr. Stewart's practical knowledge, if it did not happen to be in accordance with a judgment so generally unimpeachable as that of Mr. Smeaton. This paper of Mr. Stewart's was referred by the council of the Royal Society to Mr. Smeaton, who remarked upon the difficulty arising from the absolute stopping of the whole mass of moving power, whenever the direction of the motion is changed; and observed, that although a fly-wheel might be applied to regulate the motion, it must be such a large one as would not be readily controlled by the engine itself; and he considered that the use of such a fly-wheel would be a greater incumbrance to a mill than a water-wheel to be supplied by water pumped up by the engine. This engineer, illustrious as he was, not only fell into the error of Mr. Stewart in respect of the crank, but committed the further blunder of condemning the very expedient which has since rendered the crank effectual. It will presently appear that the combination of the crank and fly-wheel have been the chief means of establishing the dominion of the steam engine over manufactures.

(110.)

In 1779, Mr. Matthew Wasbrough, an engineer at Bristol, took out a patent for the application of a steam engine [Pg184] to produce a continuous circular motion by means of ratchet wheels, similar to those previously used by Mr. Oxley, at Hartley colliery; to which, however, Mr. Wasbrough added a fly-wheel to maintain and regulate the motion. Several machines were constructed under this patent; and among others, one was erected at Mr. Taylor's saw-mills and block manufactory at Southampton. In 1780, one was erected at Birmingham, where the ratchet work was found to be subject to such objections, that one of the persons about the works substituted for it the simple crank, which has since been invariably used. A patent was taken out for this application of the crank in the same year, by Mr. James Pickard, of Birmingham. It will presently appear, however, that the suggestion of this application of the crank was derived from the proceedings of Watt, who was at the same time engaged in similar experiments.

The steps by which Watt proceeded to accomplish these objects have been recorded by himself as follows, in his notes upon Dr. Robison's article on the steam engine:—

"I had very early turned my mind to the producing of continued motion round an axis; and it will be seen, by reference to my first specification in 1769, that I there described [Pg185] a steam wheel, moved by the force of steam, acting in a circular channel against a valve on one side, and against a column of mercury, or some other fluid metal, on the other side. This was executed upon a scale of about six feet diameter at Soho, and worked repeatedly, but was given up, as several practical objections were found to operate against it; similar objections lay against other rotative engines, which had been contrived by myself and others, as well as to the engines producing rotatory motions by means of ratchet wheels.

"Having made my single reciprocating engines very regular in their movements, I considered how to produce rotative motions from them in the best manner; and amongst various schemes which were subjected to trial, or which passed through my mind, none appeared so likely to answer the purpose as the application of the crank, in the manner of the common turning lathe; but as the rotative motion is produced in that machine by impulse given to the crank in the descent of the foot only, it requires to be continued in its ascent by the energy of the wheel, which acts as a fly; being unwilling to load my engine with a fly-wheel heavy enough to continue the motion during the ascent of the piston (or with a fly-wheel heavy enough to equalise the motion, even if a counterweight were employed to act during that ascent), I proposed to employ two engines, acting upon two cranks fixed on the same axis, at an angle of 120° to one another, and a weight placed upon the circumference of the fly-wheel at the same angle to each of the cranks, by which means the motion might be rendered nearly equal, and only a very light fly-wheel would be requisite.

"This had occurred to me very early; but my attention being fully employed in making and erecting engines for raising water, it remained in petto until about the year 1778 or 1789, when Mr. Wasbrough erected one of his ratchet-wheel engines at Birmingham, the frequent breakages and irregularities of which recalled the subject to my mind, and I proceeded to make a model of my method, which answered my expectations; but having neglected to take out a patent, the invention was communicated by a workman employed to [Pg186] make the model, to some of the people about Mr. Wasbrough's engine, and a patent was taken out by them for the application of the crank to steam engines. This fact the said workman confessed, and the engineer who directed the works acknowledged it; but said, nevertheless, that the same idea had occurred to him prior to his hearing of mine, and that he had even made a model of it before that time; which might be a fact, as the application to a single crank was sufficiently obvious.

"In these circumstances, I thought it better to endeavour to accomplish the same end by other means, than to enter into litigation; and if successful, by demolishing the patent, to lay the matter open to every body. Accordingly, in 1781, I invented and took out a patent for several methods of producing rotative motions from reciprocating ones; amongst which was the method of the sun-and-planet wheels. This contrivance was applied to many engines, and possesses the great advantage of giving a double velocity to the fly-wheel; but is perhaps more subject to wear, and to be broken under great strains, than a simple crank, which is now more commonly used, although it requires a fly-wheel of four times the weight, if fixed upon the first axis; my application of the double engine to these rotative machines rendered the counterweight unnecessary, and produced a more regular motion."

(112.)

Watt's second patent here referred to, was dated 25th October, 1781, and was entitled "A patent for certain new methods of applying the vibrating or reciprocating motions of steam or fire engines to produce a continued rotative or circular motion round an axis or centre, and thereby to give motion to the wheels of mills and other machines."

All the methods specified in this patent were intended to be worked by the single-acting engine, already described, a counterweight being applied to impel the machinery during the returning stroke of the engine, which weight would be elevated during the descent of the piston. There were five different expedients proposed in the specification for producing a rotatory motion; but, of these five, two only were ever applied in practice. [Pg187]

(113.)

Suppose a rod or bar attached by a pin or joint at the upper extremity to the working end of the beam of the engine, and by a similar pin or joint at the lower extremity to an iron wheel fixed on the extremity of the axis of the fly-wheel. One half of this wheel is formed of a solid semicircle of cast iron, while the other half is constructed of open spokes, so as to be as light as is consistent with strength. The position of the wheel on the axis is such that during the returning stroke of the piston, when the operation of the steam is suspended, the heavy semicircle of the wheel will be descending, and by its weight will draw down the connecting bar, and thereby draw down the working end of the beam, and draw up the piston in the cylinder. When the piston descends and is driven by the power of the steam, the heavy semicircle of the above-mentioned wheel will be drawn upwards, and in the same way the motion will be continued.

(114.)

The second method of producing a rotatory motion, which was subsequently continued for many years in practical operation, was that which was called the Sun-and-planet Wheels. A toothed wheel A (fig. 32.), called the sun wheel, was fixed on the axle of the fly-wheel, to which rotation was to be imparted. The wheel B, called the planet wheel, having an equal diameter, was fastened on the end I of the connecting rod H I, so as to be incapable of revolving. During the descent of the piston, the working end of the beam was drawn upwards, and the end I of the connecting rod travelled from C to D, through the dotted semicircle C I D. The wheel B not being capable of revolving on the centre I, would, during this motion, drive the sun wheel A. During the ascent of the steam piston, the working end of the beam would descend, and the centre I of [Pg188] the planet wheel B would be driven downwards from D to C, through the other dotted semicircle, and would consequently continue to drive the sun wheel round in the same direction.

This contrivance, although in the main inferior to the more simple one of the crank, is not without some advantages; among others, it gives to the sun wheel double the velocity which would be communicated by the crank; for in the crank one revolution only on the axle is produced by one revolution of the crank, but in the sun-and-planet wheel, two revolutions of the sun wheel are produced by one of the planet wheel; thus a double velocity is obtained from the same motion of the beam. This will be evident from considering that when the planet wheel is in its highest position, its lowest tooth is engaged with the highest tooth of the sun wheel; as the planet wheel passes from the highest position, its teeth drive those of the sun wheel before them, and when it comes into the lowest position, the highest tooth of the planet wheel is engaged with the lowest of the sun wheel: but then half of the sun wheel has rolled off the planet wheel, and, therefore, the tooth which was engaged with it in its highest position, must now be distant from it by half the circumference of the wheel, and must, therefore, be again in the highest position; so that while the planet wheel has been carried from the top to the bottom, the sun wheel has made a complete revolution.

This advantage of giving an increased velocity may be obtained also by the crank, by placing toothed wheels on its axle. Independently of the greater expense attending the construction of the sun-and-planet wheel, its liability to go out of order, and the rapid wear of the teeth, and other objections, rendered it inferior to the crank, which has entirely superseded it.

(115.)

Although by these contrivances Watt succeeded in obtaining a continuous circular motion from the reciprocating motion of the steam engine, the machine was still one of intermitting, instead of continuous action. The expedient of a counterweight, elevated during the descending stroke, and giving back the power expended on it in the interval of the returning stroke, did not satisfy the [Pg189] fastidious mechanical taste of Watt. He soon perceived that all which he proposed to accomplish by the application of two cylinders and pistons working alternately, could be attained with greater simplicity and effect by a single cylinder, if he could devise means by which the piston might be impelled by steam upwards as well as downwards. To accomplish this, it was only necessary to throw the lower end of the cylinder into alternate communication with the boiler, while the upper end would be put into communication with the condenser. If, for example, during the descent of the piston, the upper end of the cylinder communicated with the boiler, and the lower end with the condenser; and, on the other hand, during the ascent of the piston, the lower end communicated with the boiler, and the upper end with the condenser; then the piston would be driven continually, whether upwards or downwards, by the power of steam acting against a vacuum. Watt obtained his third patent for this contrivance, on the 12th of March, 1782.

This change in the principle of the machine involved several other changes in the details of its mechanism.

(116.)

It was necessary, in the first place, to provide means for admitting and withdrawing the steam at either end of the cylinder. For this purpose let B and B′ (fig. 33.) be two steam-boxes, B the upper, and B′ the lower, communicating respectively with the top and bottom of the cylinder by proper passages D D′. Let two valves be placed in B, one, S, above the passage D, and the other, C, below it; and in like manner two other valves in the lower valve-box, B′, one, S′, above the passage D′, and the other, C′, below it. Above the valve S in the upper steam-box is an opening at which the steam-pipe from the boiler enters, and below the valve C is another opening, at which enters the exhausting-pipe leading to the condenser. In like manner, above the valve S′ in the lower steam-box enters a steam-pipe leading from the boiler, and below the valve C′ enters an exhausting-pipe leading to [Pg190] the condenser. It is evident, therefore, that steam can always be admitted above the piston by opening the valve S, and below it by opening the valve S′; and, in like manner, steam can be withdrawn from the cylinder above the piston, and allowed to pass to the condenser, by opening the valve C, and from below it by opening the valve C′.

Supposing the piston P to be at the top of the cylinder, and the cylinder below the piston to be filled with pure steam, let the valves S and C′ be opened, the valves C and S′ being closed as represented in fig. 34. Steam from the boiler will, therefore, flow in through the open valve S, and will press the piston downwards, while the steam that has filled the cylinder below the piston will pass through the open valve C′ into the exhausting-pipe leading to the condenser, and being condensed will leave the cylinder below the piston a vacuum. The piston will, therefore, be pressed downwards by the action of the steam above it, as in the single-acting engine. Having arrived at the bottom of the cylinder, let the valves S and C′ be both closed, and the valves S′ and C be opened, as represented in fig. 34. Steam will now be admitted through the open valve S′ and through the passage D′ below the piston, while the steam which has just driven the piston downwards, filling the cylinder above the piston, will be drawn off through the open valve C, and the exhausting-pipe, into the condenser, leaving the cylinder above the piston a vacuum. The piston will, therefore, be pressed upwards by the action of the steam below it, against the vacuum above it, and will ascend with the same force as that with which it had descended.

This alternate action of the piston upwards and downwards may evidently be continued by opening and closing the valves alternately in pairs. Whenever the piston is at the top of the cylinder, as represented in fig. 33., the valves S and C′, that is, the upper steam-valve and the lower exhausting-valve, are opened, and the valves C and S′, that is, the upper exhausting-valve and the lower steam-valve, are closed; and [Pg191] when the piston has arrived at the bottom of the cylinder, as represented in fig. 34., the valves C and S′, that is, the upper exhausting-valve and the lower steam-valve, are opened, and the valves S and C′, that is, the upper steam-valve and the lower exhausting-valve, are closed.

If these valves, as has been here supposed, be opened and closed at the moments at which the piston reaches the top and bottom of the cylinder, it is evident that they may be all worked by a single lever connected with them by proper mechanism. When the piston arrives at the top of the cylinder, this lever would be made to open the valves S and C′, and at the same time to close the valves S′ and C; and when it arrives at the bottom of the cylinder, it would be made to close the valves S and C′, and to open the valves S′ and C.

If, however, it be desired to cut off the steam before the arrival of the piston at the termination of its stroke, whether upwards or downwards, then the steam-valves must be closed before the arrival of the piston at the end of its stroke; and as the exhausting-valve ought to be left open until the stroke is completed, these valves ought to be moved at different times. In that case separate levers should be provided for the different valves. We shall, however, return again to the subject of the valves which regulate the admission of steam to the cylinder and its escape to the condenser.

(117.)

It will be remembered that in the single-acting engine the process of condensation was suspended while the piston ascended in the cylinder, and therefore the play of the jet of cold water in the condenser was stopped during this interval. In the double-acting engine, however, the flow of steam from the cylinder to the condenser is continued, whether the piston ascends or descends, and therefore a constant condensation of steam must be produced. The condensing jet, therefore, does not in this case, as in the former, play with intervals of intermission. A constant jet of cold water must be maintained in the condenser.

It will presently appear that in the double-acting engine applied to manufactures, the motion of the piston was subject to more or less variation of speed, and the quantity of steam [Pg192] admitted to the cylinder was subject to a corresponding change. The quantity of steam, therefore, drawn into the condenser was subject to variation, and required a considerable change in the quantity of cold water admitted through the jet to condense it. To regulate this, the valve or cock by which the water was admitted into the condenser was worked in the double-acting engine by a lever furnished with an index, by which the quantity of condensing water admitted into the condenser could be regulated. This index played upon a graduated arch, by which the engine-man was enabled to regulate the supply.

FOOTNOTES:

[20] These effects are explained in my Treatise on Heat; and they have lately been verified by experiments made with locomotive engines by M. de Pambour, who found that the steam raised from the boiler of a locomotive engine, under a pressure of above 50 lbs. per square inch, was in the state of common steam as it issued from the chimney at a very diminished pressure and at a lower pressure.

[21] It is strange that this absurdity has been repeatedly given as unquestionable fact in various encyclopædias, as well as in by far the greater number of treatises expressly on the subject.

[22] Farey, Treatise on the Steam Engine, p. 122.

[23] Farey on the Steam Engine, p. 297.

CHAP. VIII.

METHODS OF CONNECTING THE PISTON-ROD AND BEAM IN THE DOUBLE-ACTING ENGINE.—RACK AND SECTOR.—PARALLEL MOTION.—CONNECTING ROD AND CRANK.—FLY-WHEEL.—THROTTLE-VALVE.—GOVERNOR.—CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF THE DOUBLE-ACTING ENGINE.—ECCENTRIC.—COCKS AND VALVES.—SINGLE-CLACK VALVE.—DOUBLE-CLACK VALVE.—CONICAL VALVES.—SLIDE VALVES.—MURRAY'S SLIDES.—THE D VALVE.—SEAWARD'S SLIDES.—SINGLE COCK.—FOUR-WAY COCK.—PISTONS.—COMMON HEMP-PACKED PISTON.—WOOLFE'S PISTON.—METALLIC PISTONS.—CARTWRIGHT'S ENGINE.—CARTWRIGHT'S PISTON.—BARTON'S PISTON.

(118.)

In the single-acting engine, the force of the piston acted on the beam only during its descent; and this force was transmitted from the piston to the beam, as we have seen, by a flexible chain, extended from the end of the piston-rod, [Pg194] and playing upon the arch head of the beam. In the double-acting engine, however, the force of the steam pressing the piston upwards must likewise be transmitted to the beam, so as to drive the latter upwards while the piston ascends. This action could not be accomplished by a chain connecting the piston with the arch head of the beam.

Where the mechanical action to be transmitted is a pull, and not a push, a flexible chain, cord, or strap, is sufficient; but if a push or thrust is required to be transmitted, then the flexibility of the medium of mechanical communication afforded by a chain renders it inapplicable. In the double-acting engine, during the descent, the piston-rod still pulls the beam down; and so far a chain connecting the piston-rod with the beam would be sufficient to transmit the action of the one to the other; but in the ascent, the beam no longer pulls up the piston-rod, but is pushed up by it. A chain from the piston-rod to the arch head, as described in the single-acting engine, would fail to transmit this force. If such a chain were used with the double engine, where there is no counterweight on the opposite end of the beam, the consequence would be, that in the ascent of the piston the chain would slacken, and the beam would still remain depressed. It is therefore necessary that some other mechanical connection be contrived between the piston-rod and the beam, of such a nature that in the descent the piston-rod may pull the beam down, and may push it up in the ascent.