Scientific American Supplement, No. 561, October 2, 1886Various
Science
Scientific American Supplement, No. 561, October 2, 1886
Various
Science -- Periodicals
hot, the same gas and air will melt a fire-brick.
These are common phenomena, which are familiar, but apt to be
unnoticed; but they logically point to the truth that no furnaces
should present a cooling medium in contact with fuel which is
undergoing this process of digestion, so to speak. It will be very
evident, I think, from these facts that water-legs in direct contact
with a fire are a mistake. They tend to check a fire as far as their
influence extends, as a thin sheet of ice upon the stomach after
dinner would check digestion, and for the same reason, namely, the
abstraction of heat from a chemical process. If fire-brick could be
laid around a locomotive furnace, and the grate, of course, kept of
the same area as before, it is my belief that a very important
advantage would be at once apparent. An old-fashioned cast iron heater
always produced a treacherous fire. It would grow dead around the
outside next to the cold iron; but put a fire-clay lining into it, and
it was as good as any other stove.
If I have now made clear what I mean by making heat, we will next
consider the steam boiler. What is a steam boiler? It is a thing to
absorb heat. The bottom line of this science is the bottom of a pot
over a fire, which is the best boiler surface in the world; there is
water upon one side of a piece of iron and heat against the other. One
square foot of the iron will transmit through it a given number of
units of heat into the water at a given temperature in a given time;
two square feet twice as many, and three, three times as many, and so
on. Put a cover upon the pot, and seal it tight, leave an orifice for
the steam, and that is a steam boiler with all its mysteries.
The old-fashioned, plain cylinder boiler is a plain cylindrical pot
over the fire. If enough plain cylinder boilers presenting the
requisite number of square feet of absorbing surface are put into a
cotton mill, experience has shown that they will make a yard of cotton
cloth about as cheaply as tubular boilers. If this is so, why do not
all put them in? Because it is the crudest and most expensive form of
boiler when its enormous area of ground, brickwork, and its fittings
are considered. Not all have the money or the room for them. To
produce space, the area is drawn in sidewise and lengthwise, but we
must have the necessary amount of square feet of absorbing surface,
consequently the boiler is doubled up, so to speak, and we have a
"flue boiler." We draw in sidewise and lengthwise once more and double
up the surface again, and that is a "tubular boiler." That includes
all the "mystery" on that subject.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account