If you register, you can do a lot more. And become an active part of our growing community. You'll have access to hidden forums, and enjoy the ability of replying and starting conversations.

Francis Webb,good or bad?

Discussion in 'Steam Traction' started by Hermod, Mar 22, 2020.

  1. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    26,103
    Likes Received:
    57,432
    Location:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    In that same light, the steam consumption of live steam injectors seemed to be something that exercised nineteenth century locomotive engineers - though I'm tempted to think that the alternatives either also used steam directly (i.e. a donkey pump) or indirectly (i.e. a feed pump, which will increase the rolling resistance of a loco). With an exhaust steam injector, you do of course recover the latent heat that would otherwise go to waste in that portion of the exhaust steam that is used to drive the injector, which is a small but useful efficiency to have for locos that spend sustained periods working with the regulator open.

    Tom
     
    jnc likes this.
  2. Jimc

    Jimc Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Messages:
    4,052
    Likes Received:
    4,665
    Occupation:
    Once computers, now part time writer I suppose.
    Location:
    SE England
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Cook mentions related issues when talking about the vacuum versus air brake trials he was involved in in the 20s. The Westinghouse system, although more expensive to construct and maintain, used much less steam than a vacuum system with large and small ejectors. To calculate the GWR crosshead pump usage, which turned out to be close to the Westinghouse, they created a rig which powered a GW vacuum pump with an electric motor to calculate the power consumption.

    [corrected injector to ejector!]
     
    Last edited: Apr 20, 2020
    Jamessquared likes this.
  3. MellishR

    MellishR Resident of Nat Pres Friend

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Messages:
    8,068
    Likes Received:
    5,165
    I think you meant ejectors.
     
    Jimc likes this.
  4. bluetrain

    bluetrain Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2019
    Messages:
    1,326
    Likes Received:
    1,460
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Wiltshire
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Perhaps also worth mentioning that Webb was the first to begin large-scale construction of 8-coupled engines for use in Britain, starting with the 111 "Class A" 3-cylinder 0-8-0s from 1893 onward (Only a few 8-coupled engines had previously run in Britain). Webb was almost a decade ahead of his contemporaries in this respect. The LYR, NER, GNR, GCR & GWR began large-scale construction of 8-coupled types in 1900-3.

    At the Grouping of 1923, the LNWR had by far the country's largest numbers of 8-coupled types on its books - 66 2-8-0s, 550 0-8-0s and 30 0-8-2Ts. (Although I should add that several hundred ROD 2-8-0s were either on-loan or in-store).
     
  5. LMS2968

    LMS2968 Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    2,987
    Likes Received:
    5,084
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Lecturer retired: Archivist of Stanier Mogul Fund
    Location:
    Wigan
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Another surprising thing mentioned by John Chacksfield is FWW's patent number 167 of 12 January 1877 for a system to automatically apply the brakes should a train pass a signal at danger - possibly the first ever idea of ATC and thirty years before Churchward and the GWR. He doesn't say how this system would work, and given that many engines, let alone rolling stock, of the time were devoid of brakes I cannot see how it could function. But Frank Webb was an ingenious and far-sighted man.
     

Share This Page