Page images
PDF
EPUB

RICHARD WRIGHT, Token-House Yard, London, Nov, 14,

1818.

JOHN PONTIFEX, Shoe Lane, London, Jan. 7, 1819,

JOHN SEAWARD, Kent Road, London, April 3, 1819, For an improved mode of generating steam,

WILLIAM BRUNTON, Birmingham, June 29, 1819.

An account of Mr. Brunton's mode of consuming smoke, will be found in a preceding page,

JOHN OLDHAM, South Cumberland Street, Jan. 15, 1820, For improvements on a previous patent, dated Oct. 10, 1817.

JOHN BARTON, Falcon Square, London, May 15, 1820,

JOHN HAGUE, Great Pearl Street, Spitalfields, June 3, 1820, JOHN WAKEFIELD, Ancott's Place, Manchester, June 6, 1820. For improvements in the construction of furnaces by which a saving of fuel may be effected.

WILLIAM BRUNTON, Birmingham, 1820.

For an improved mode of constructing furnaces.

JOB RIDER, Belfast, Ireland, July 20, 1820.

For improvements capable of producing a concentric and revolving eccentric motion, applicable to steam engines, &c. ̧

JOHN MOORE, Castle Street, Bristol, Dec. 9, 1820.

For an ingenious, though we fear useless, rotatory engine,

WILLIAM PRITCHARD, Leeds, Yorkshire, Dec. 22, 1820, For a saving of fuel by the combustion of smoke.

WILLIAM ALDERSEY, Homerton, Middlesex, Feb. 3, 1821.

THOMAS MASTERMAN, Broad Street, Ratcliffe, Feb. 10, 1821, For a rotatory engine which we have already very fully described.

ROBERT STEIN, Walcot Place, Lambeth, Feb. 20, 1821.

HENRY PENNECK, Penzance, Cornwall, Feb. 27, 1821, For lessening the consumption of fuel.

HENRY BROWNE, Derby, March 16, 1821,

For saving fuel and consuming smoke.

AARON MANBY, Horseley, Staffordshire, May 9, 1821,

THOMAS BENNET, Bewdley, Worcestershire, Aug. 4, 1821,

FRANCIS ARETON EGELLS, Britannia Terrace, City Road, Nov. 9, 1821.

CHARLES BRODERIP, London, Dec. 5, 1821.

JULIUS GRIFFITH, Brompton Crescent, Dec. 20, 1821,
For an improved locomotive engine.

APPENDIX (B).

Abstract of Evidence and Reports made by a Select Committee of the House of Commons, on Steam Engines and Furnaces.

MICHAEL ANGELO TAYLOR, ESQ.

In the Chair.

Mr. JOSEPH GREGSON, Surveyor, called in and examined, Was of opinion that the nuisance that arose from the smoke of steam engine furnaces might be attributed to two causes : one, the putting on the fire or furnace too much crude fuel at one time; the other, from the chimnies being commonly too low, in proportion to the fuel consumed.-Had seen this nuisance effectually removed; but it had generally been attended with an increased consumption of fuel: it was seldom adopted but where the parties had been or were under an indictment.-His own invention consisted in causing all the smoke after it had arisen from the fire, to return into the heat of the fire before it entered into the flue or chimney, and so was consumed; 2dly, By putting on no more fuel at any one time than the smoke of which can be so consumed, and that without opening the furnace door for the purpose; 3dly, By supplying every fire with air, in order to counteract the effect of those winds that operate against

the draft.-Had employed it in the fires and boilers of private houses, under steam engine boilers, and in wealding furnaces, where a number of bits and scraps of iron were packed together, and subjected to an intense heat; they were, in that state, then rolled or hammered into one compact body. The result however in the latter case was, that although every thing acted according to the plans laid down, and the fire was regularly supplied with fuel, and the smoke completely destroyed, yet the heat necessary to weald those scraps of iron together could never be attained, and this was in consequence of the continued repetition of the supply of fuel, damping and preventing that heat coming over which arises after all the volatile parts of the fuel has been driven off; and which heat, being entirely pure, was called a white or wealding heat. The furnaces requiring a white heat and higher degrees, were wealding, melting and smelting furnaces, and vitrifying furnaces, as the making of glass and porcelain. The melting and smelting furnaces were in many instances supplied only with coke, but witness was not aware that a wealding or glass furnace could be at all worked with coke. -Considered that a good effect would be produced by raising the chimneys; as by increasing the draft the smoke would be then more consumed, and by its height more dispersed by the wind. For every fire consuming one bushel of coals per day, the chimney should be at least thirty feet high, and one foot higher for every additional bushel consumed, measuring from the body of the fire.-At the new steam engine of 100 horse power at the East London Water works, Old Ford, there was a method of consuming the smoke; a singular plan was adopted at the corn mills at Islington, Liverpool; at the corn mills Newcastle, Stafford, a steam engine, of 14 horse power, had worked for nearly a whole day without smoke, owing to the quality of the coal, which was only 5d. per cwt.; at the lead mills, Tottenham Court

Road, a small steam engine was worked with coke only; at a brewery in Stafford, a small steam engine, and a large one at the Meddock Mills, Manchester, consumed the smoke on the patent principles; in all, six different engines.-Remarked, however, that under the very best circumstances and contrivances, there were times in which the smoke of crude fuel could not be consumed, viz. at the first lighting of the fire, and at any sudden changes of damping or raising the fire.→ The expense of setting up a six horse-engine, on the witness's plan would be about 167.; and a thirty-six one, about 301. or 327.; an old furnace could be altered for 167., and it would be about one-tenth saving of fuel; it would be upon the gain ing, and not the losing side.-In point of fact, the expense of the application of this patent would be shortly saved by the saving of fuel. The same principle would also apply to the steam packets. The smoking of an ordinary chimney was removed by a common fire constructed on that principle. The expense of altering an old engine of a hundred-horse power, upon the new principle, would not be less than 100/ -In the making of gas, the coal was only subject to a red heat, and the gaseous vapours of which might be considered as distilled over, while the principal part of the fuel remained as coke; but in a common furnace the coal was entirely consumed, leaving only ashes or a vitrified clinker; the smoke containing much ammoniacal matter, could not be burnt but in a very intense heat, approaching to a white or wealding heat; consequently, when the smoke was burnt under the boiler it was very destructive to the metal; but being burnt upon his principle, that destruction was wholly avoided; the smoke was thus subjected to the required heat, an entire change or decomposition taking place, and the product was principally steam; whereas the coal gas never having been subjected to that heat, there was greater difficulty in freeing it from its impurities; therefore the vapour arising from

« PreviousContinue »