Seepage in Small Steam Engines: Difference between revisions

From IBLS
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with "Category:Steam Locomotive Parts Seepage in Small Steam Engines by R.G. Neff <i>The Live Steamer</i>, March-April 1951 The subject of this article ...")
 
No edit summary
Line 50: Line 50:
any effect on 1/2 inch scale models, but have had not chance to ask any of the
any effect on 1/2 inch scale models, but have had not chance to ask any of the
builders in this size.
builders in this size.
== L.B.S.C.'s Reply ==
<i>[[The Live Steamer]]</i>, May-June 1951
by [[LBSC|L.B.S.C.]]
With all due respect to [[Roll Neff|Brother Neff]], whose work I very much admire, my experience tells me he is entirely on the wrong track with his piston valve leakage.  All he wants to do is to fit an efficient mechanical lubricator which will keep a constant film of oil between the valve bobbins and the liners.  This will form a perfect seal - kind of a liquid packet - and there will be no more need to cut the clearances so fine, reducing friction to a minimum.  He will also then be able to give his valves the correct amount of lead, which is necessary to get the full pressure of steam on the piston heads at the instant the crank has passed the dead centre point.
The reason his engine with longer laps showed increased efficiency, was not because of the later admission, but the earlier cutoff.  If that locomotive had my arrangement of ports, valves and valve setting, fifteen cars would be just so much chicken-feed to it.  It would take Brother Neff for a ride quite easily.  I have here at the present minute, a coal fired O gauge 4-6-2 which I built in 1925, when everybody said it couldn't be done.  At the MRC Exhibition at the Kingsway Hall, London, in that year, she hauled an adult weighing just under 160 pounds, and we kpet here in steam for an hour or more and gave a ride to about every kid in the show.  She still can do it after 26 years, and the valves have proper leads.  She doesn't "buck" when starting, for the simple reason that when the port on one side opens to lead, the port on the other side is wide open and the crank in the position of maximum thrust, which is sufficient to neutralize any tendency to "backfire", even if the steam got to the piston-head in time to exert enough effect, which it doesn't.  Everything on this earth takes time, even a flash of lightning, and steam doesn't move <u>quite</u> as fast as that.

Revision as of 22:43, 26 September 2014

Seepage in Small Steam Engines

by R.G. Neff

The Live Steamer, March-April 1951

The subject of this article is probably an old story to many of the readers of The Live Steamer, but it may prove helpful to others who are building steam models, especially the very small ones, such as O gauge size, and are having difficulty in getting them to run as well as they think they should.

I never tried to use lead on O gauge steamers because it would be only a few thousandths and very hard to set evenly at all four points of steam admission. Instead, I set the valves to admit steam to the cylinders as near as possible to dead center. The models ran nicely, but not quite as slowly as I thought they should and seemed to "buck" slightly at low speeds. By watching the valves carefully, with chamber heads off (note: piston valve type cylinders) I could see there was a slight seepage of steam around them, not enough to hear it, but enough to show small bubbles although the valves were lapped in with kerosene and had only enough clearance to move freely, which would be only 1 or 2 tenths.

I have discussed this matter with several men who know steam engines, including the division master mechanic of D&H RR, and all agree that in any engine there is a slight seepage of steam to the ports before the actual port opening occurs, regardless of how well the valves are fitted. The volume of steam reaching the cylinders is small and has not effect on an engine of any sice, but when we get down to O gauge cylinders and the tiny clearance at the end of the stroke, just a little bit of steam getting into them too soon will have the same effect as pre-admission in larger engines.

After figuring this out, I built the next model with a longer steam lap, so that the port opening occurred after dead center, about one spoke of the drivers. As soon as this model limbered up, it showed the result of the change in smoother running at lower speed. Another result that I hadn't looked for was a notable increase in the efficiency of the engine. Previous models had run 2-1/2 to 3 minutes per ounce of water, but this model ran 4 minutes per ounce, under normal operating conditions, pulling 15 cars at a scale speed of 45 to 50 MPH. This in turn meant that a lower fire would keep the pressure on the head. The latter result is due to the absence of bucking, in which the engine has to use up part of its power to overcome the effect of pre-admission.

To me the above results proved that seepage could affect the running of an O gauge steamer, and that an allowance should be made for valve design. It doesn't seem to affect 3/4 inch scale models. I drove Ed Bergh's 3/4 inch Hudson and it ran very smoothly at very low speed. Ed said that he had made the lead in exact proportion to that of the B&A prototype. I wonder if it has any effect on 1/2 inch scale models, but have had not chance to ask any of the builders in this size.

L.B.S.C.'s Reply

The Live Steamer, May-June 1951

by L.B.S.C.

With all due respect to Brother Neff, whose work I very much admire, my experience tells me he is entirely on the wrong track with his piston valve leakage. All he wants to do is to fit an efficient mechanical lubricator which will keep a constant film of oil between the valve bobbins and the liners. This will form a perfect seal - kind of a liquid packet - and there will be no more need to cut the clearances so fine, reducing friction to a minimum. He will also then be able to give his valves the correct amount of lead, which is necessary to get the full pressure of steam on the piston heads at the instant the crank has passed the dead centre point.

The reason his engine with longer laps showed increased efficiency, was not because of the later admission, but the earlier cutoff. If that locomotive had my arrangement of ports, valves and valve setting, fifteen cars would be just so much chicken-feed to it. It would take Brother Neff for a ride quite easily. I have here at the present minute, a coal fired O gauge 4-6-2 which I built in 1925, when everybody said it couldn't be done. At the MRC Exhibition at the Kingsway Hall, London, in that year, she hauled an adult weighing just under 160 pounds, and we kpet here in steam for an hour or more and gave a ride to about every kid in the show. She still can do it after 26 years, and the valves have proper leads. She doesn't "buck" when starting, for the simple reason that when the port on one side opens to lead, the port on the other side is wide open and the crank in the position of maximum thrust, which is sufficient to neutralize any tendency to "backfire", even if the steam got to the piston-head in time to exert enough effect, which it doesn't. Everything on this earth takes time, even a flash of lightning, and steam doesn't move quite as fast as that.