Jump to content
 

The marvellous, fantastic and truly wonderful Brunton 'Horse to go by steam'...


Recommended Posts

The cylinder appears to be embedded in the boiler. If that is the case then it is a major weakness, both in disrupting the form of an ideal circular section shell as a pressure vessel; and by introducing cyclic flexing to the combined assembly as the engine operates, right where the structure is most compromised by the design. I'd tend to the thought that failure of the pressure vessel was inherent to the design, the risk increasing as more power output was demanded.

 

Yes that's correct, the cylinder was embedded in the boiler.

This may have been true of of quite a number of early 'engines', possible in a desire to conserve heat and prevent condensation.

For example Rees in the post above refers to the 'water jacketing' of Puffing Billy's cut down Trevithick cylinder.

 

It seems the pressure of these early boilers was quite low 40-50 psi - with widely varied fabrication. There is an interesting read here  with some typically canny squirreling up of know-how by George Stephenson mentioned in the design of Rocket's boiler

 

dh

Edited by runs as required
Link to post
Share on other sites

True.

The North Pennines are really exciting with a history of Roman mining and drift coal mines dug by Lanercost Priory monks.

Particularly interesting is the Brampton Railway. It began as a wooden waggonway off the high moors, then Lord Carlisle had George Stephenson re-engineer and re-gauge it.

Later it was partially incorporated into the Newcastle & Carlisle (1838) from Brampton Junction into Brampton Town (later the NER).

Lord Carlisle's colliery railway got connected at its eastern end to Lambley station on the Alston branch at the south end of the South Tyne viaduct.and the NCB operated it until 1953. There are still private commercial drift mines still producing today in the Alston S Tyne valley.

 

Jim Rees of Beamish explains how all the early engines were being constantly re-built, components re-used and bits adapted. The Geordie Armstrong Brothers were doing just the same at Wolverhampton developing their GWR tank engines

The only reason Puffing Billy survives unmolested Rees reckons is that Wylam was 5' 0" not standard gauge

 

In making his Puffing Billy replica, Jim Rees recognised the Science Museum cylinder castings he was copying (made new from the original Puffing Billy components) had Trevithick detailing.

Further investigation revealed that Puffing Billy incorporated an original Trevithick 36” long cylinder cut down to 24” so it could be water jacketed. This had been sourced from an 1805 Trevithick engine engine built in Gateshead for Blackett at Wylam – but turned down as ‘too heavy for wooden track’. This survived as a stationary engine in Gateshead until 1860.

The cylinder component in turn, Rees argues, leads to the emergence of the 2 ft long Stephensonian cylinder.

 

dh

 

I like the Brampton, which had a great variety of wonderful locos, including old long-boiler tender engines, and, as you say, an eastern connection with the Newcastle & Carlisle's Alston branch at Lambley.  I want to model Lambley, but from an unconventional viewpoint behind the station, so that you see the branch train crossing the viaduct in the distance before curving round to arrive at the front of the layout.  One day!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the Brampton, which had a great variety of wonderful locos, including old long-boiler tender engines, and, as you say, an eastern connection with the Newcastle & Carlisle's Alston branch at Lambley.  I want to model Lambley, but from an unconventional viewpoint behind the station, so that you see the branch train crossing the viaduct in the distance before curving round to arrive at the front of the layout.  One day!

Brampton Town station is on the long list of places I'd like to model  one day...

Edited by CKPR
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've brought my understanding of the leg mechanism on in development of the General Arrangement posted earlier.

My avatar is based on the well known engraving but drawing an end elevation made me realise how unstable the machine would be with such a high pitched boiler. The loco profile drawing sets it on 30" carrying wheels (similar to Outram's Crich & Peak Forest tramway waggons) so I've followed this.

 

post-21705-0-75779200-1521797969_thumb.jpg

 

Gauge and flanged/unflanged seems irrelevant since the carrying wheels could be easily altered by a blacksmith at each location the SHs worked in their 2 year existence.

 

Like British Rail used to claim "We're getting there"...

 

dh

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi All,

 

Great to see this thread. I'm the guy the built the 1/32nd Brunton style model on U-tube. I will be exhibiting it at Sawston 31A railway show on 14th April 2018 if anyone is interested.

 

For you other mad folks wanting to build one of these things, the following may be of assistance.

 

1/ OO gauge version - bear in mind that my model on 32mm gauge track uses mostly 14BA and quite alot of 16BA screws. I model Scalefour normally, so I thought I was building it plenty large enough but it seriously tried my patience, expecially the feet. You will have fun with the feet; they are really critical to good operation. I recommend Airstick for the soles.

 

2/ My model is actually about 9.2mm = 1ft scale, only approximating to 1/32. Using 32mm track, and the 3' 6" plateway gauge of the Crich loco, but using converting to edge rails. I used Ambis fish belly rail 7mm version now sold by hobby holidays. This is based on Buttlerley Mansfield and Pinxton 1819 iron rail so is just about perfect for the job.

 

3/ I made mine 2 cylinder to make it easier to drive the pistons internally. To do this I enlarged the boiler so the 'cylinders' were totally enclosed so I could drive the piston rods from inside the body and then reduced the wheel size and drawbar height to keep the piston thrust line as per the original. It's a pot bellied Brunton!

 

4/ Back in 1922 L S Pendred suggested a modification to the 'scissors' mechanism between the legs which turns the leg mechanics into Scott-Russell motion by addition of a bracket. I adopted this as from a previous plasticard model I could not see any other way for the thing to work. See also in Dendy-Marshall.

 

5/ It is vital to get to grips with the foot lifting straps. Some later drawings, Nicholas Wood, Clement E Stretton for example, show the leg strap attached to the protrusion at the top of the same leg. It was only when I read the text of Brunton's patent, I found that this was incorrect. He specifically crosses over the straps so that each foot is raised by the action of the opposite leg. Also, there are counter weights, shown in the patent that I made from solid lead for my model. Even using lead, at this scale the frictional resistance of straps was too much so I had to resort to chains which work quite well.

 

6/ At the top of each rear protrusion from the hip joint is a ratchet. I'm no clockmaker and my very crude ratchets - for 1/32nd scale not OO - are made from 10BA nuts. If I wasn't insane before I made them, I sure was by the time I finished!

 

7/ Weight. This thing lifts the back wheels at the slightest opportunity. You will need as much weight as possible on the rear (leg end) axle to keep it on the track. The problem would be reduced by shifting the front (chimney end) axle as far forward on the frame as possible. Like the CAD above, I blindly followed the patent and other drawings with evenly spaced axles.

 

I have written an article on construction of my model but I'm pretty lousy with a camera and have not go around to submitting it to any of the magazines yet. Given where this thread appears, I guess RM should get first refusal.

 

Other useful stuff:

 

Why not join the Railway and Canal historical society and ask Andy Guy for a copy of his paper OP232 on the Newbottle waggonway map and my musings on Brunton's loco in OP231?

 

The Polish railway museum has a large scale possibly working model of a sort of Brunton like loco. I'ts none too accurate, but worth seeking out.

 

Walk on!

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi All,

Great to see this thread. I'm the guy the built the 1/32nd Brunton style model on U-tube. I will be exhibiting it at Sawston 31A railway show on 14th April 2018 if anyone is interested.

 

For you other mad folks wanting to build one of these things, the following may be of assistance......

...I have written an article on construction of my model but I'm pretty lousy with a camera and have not go around to submitting it to any of the magazines yet. Given where this thread appears, I guess RM should get first refusal.

 

Other useful stuff:

Why not join the Railway and Canal historical society and ask Andy Guy for a copy of his paper OP232 on the Newbottle waggonway map and my musings on Brunton's loco in OP231?

The Polish railway museum has a large scale possibly working model of a sort of Brunton like loco. I'ts none too accurate, but worth seeking out.

 

Walk on!

Welcome ! What an Uncanny Surprise !

Your wonderfully helpful post is like 'the Ghost(s) in the Machine' speaking to us

 

You will have already noticed earlier in the thread how many of us have been captivated by your series of videos explaining the building of your model. So whatever you say about  your still photography, you have proved yourself a gifted video communicator (and U-tube has that really helpful 'still' freeze strip along the bottom).

 

Others have their own interests in being drawn to these early locos - increasingly the 'failures' are being regarded as even more instructive than those that set conventional.practice.

I learnt to take the SH seriously from Jim Rees, the Beamish museum engineer, during a series of lectures here in 2013 commemorating the 200th Anniversary of Wylam Colliery's Puffing Billy   As a retired former architect I have enjoyed applying my CAD skills to the mysterious beast ; my grandson and I made a Meccano model of the legs and I've been wanting to advance to a larger (rather "artistic") piece that simulates the legs. 

I recently completed a Fine Art degree in Sunderland where Brunton's Horse still seems to be tucked away in the history locker as yet more humiliation for the troubled city

Sunderland's great indigenous engineering success of modern times: 'indoor' modular ship construction got forcibly sold off abroad in the 1980,s - afterwards a Franco-Japanese car plant was parachuted in as compensation.

I think Sunderland should make a lot more of their industrial heritage  - particularly along the banks of the Wear up towards present day Washington.

 

Back to the mysteries of the SH:  34C in post #25 above suggests how the design of the boiler was intrinsically unsafe.  There is no hint at all from what I have seen of how the grate and firebox may have been arranged in that return flue boiler - and of course how the valve gear may have been actuated (in both single and two cylinder versions).

 

Please do stay in touch - truly our guiding star

 

dh

Edited by runs as required
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi All,... I'm the guy the built the 1/32nd Brunton style model on U-tube...For you other mad folks wanting to build one of these things, the following may be of assistance...

Walk on!

 

After  AdrianGER's valuable post above about the Steam Horse/ Mechanical Traveller, I have been thinking more about what may be our possible motivations in this thread.

 

1/

It was started by sem34090 because he was seeking a lot more information about the SH  –  and was  already  generating  3D prints models of early (pre 1850s) locomotives to run on 00 gauge (and related scale track).  Present 3D printing technology probably limits these (and maybe brass etched kits) to the smaller scales.

 As noted in AdrianGER's post #30  Brunton’s mechanisms are very difficult  to  ‘animate’ in  the smaller scales

Output maybe small models of significant  early locomotives to collect and display – perhaps in static dioramas.  A good likeness (in excess of 80% ) to the original is important.

 

2/

Myself: as RaR, having ‘borrowed’ it  for my RM avataa few years back

I was attracted originally to  the Steam Horse while a Sunderland Fine Art student, hearing of the Wearside 1815  tragedy at the Napoleonic Celebrations  .  

I'd  hoped  to conceive an animated project commemorating the SH as a “public art” sculpture  piece/animation to be  located in a central part of Sunderland.

Since graduation and with advancing old age, this ambition has morphed into  more modest  sculptural  and  visual  ambitions.  

A high degree of likeness is not essential (30-40%).

 

3/

Those with engineering skills capable of constructing effective and SAFE working replicas. This must imply technical changes to materials, design and technology (with benefit of hindsight and present  day technologies)

But  like the pioneer constructors realised, much of this may be ‘scaleable’ in that development  may be more expediently tested in model form before applying at larger sizes.

It will be impossible  not  to  incorporate  modifications  to  the  original –  so there is need  to retain overall   appearance   (60%).

 

4/

Those that are concerned with robotics may make reference to working versions of Brunton’s Horse as  steps into future trackless  automation  e.g.  Centaurs or cantering galloping// jumping quadroped  Robots

perhaps  a  mere whiff  of vapor equo might be enticing here.

 

dh

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

OK, I am officially mad!

 

I may be attempting this:

Im1839Enc-p399.jpg

https://www.gracesguide.co.uk/images/1/13/Im1839Enc-p399.jpg

 

I hope to possibly have the 'loco-y' bit done by the end of today, with the rest possibly following if I still have any sanity left!

 

For those who don't know, I hope David ('Runs as Required') doesn't mind me copying the information that he sent me last night:

Of course you do know that that couldn't possibly work as illustrated? It has been theorised that there must have been a large bracket coming off the end of the boiler  up to point 'g', where there would be some sort of bearing. Then, it is said, it would work.

 

The rest of the quoted post appears to have gone missing but regarding this machine achieving 30 miles per hour - I would seriously doubt it. According to C.F. Dendy Marshall, in his book  A History of Railway Locomotives Down To The Year 1831, Brunton himself, in communications to Repertory of Arts, stated that the speed achieved was 2 1/2 miles per hour. Other particulars were boiler: 5ft. 6ins. long x 3ft. dia. Cylinder: 6 in. dia. 3ft. stroke. Weight (inc. water) about 45 cwt. Steam pressure 40-45 lb.

 

I would have thought that rather than the driver weighting the safety valve to go faster as a result of the crowd goading him to go faster, he was more likely to have been weighting it to get more pressure for it to be able to haul whatever load it was attempting.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your post Ruston.

You are absolutely right about the engraving (as grandson and I discovered with our large Meccano model of it some years back)

You don't seem to have watched AdrianGER's videos of his working model. That incorporates the bracket you mention.

 

As to speed - how might anyone at an 1815 celebration have accurately judged? I was seduced into accepting the substance of the myth when listening to the erudite Jim Rees as noted above. Also Adrian comments on his model (propelling not hauling) more smoothly as speed increased. I'm also inclined to 34C's comments about defective boiler design rather than Holywood silent movie antics about holding down safety valves causing the explosion.

 

dh

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your post Ruston.

You are absolutely right about the engraving (as grandson and I discovered with our large Meccano model of it some years back)

You don't seem to have watched AdrianGER's videos of his working model. That incorporates the bracket you mention.

 

As to speed - how might anyone at an 1815 celebration have accurately judged? I was seduced into accepting the substance of the myth when listening to the erudite Jim Rees as noted above. Also Adrian comments on his model (propelling not hauling) more smoothly as speed increased. I'm also inclined to 34C's comments about defective boiler design rather than Holywood silent movie antics about holding down safety valves causing the explosion.

 

dh

Unfortunately I cannot watch videos as there is something wrong with my computer. All I see of youtube videos is a black screen and some tex about HTML5 ,whatever that is! It's all Greek to me.

 

Holding down safety valves wasn't unknown though. That is supposed to have been the cause of the explosion of one of the Matthew Murray rack locomotives, on the Middleton Railway, in 1818.

 

Andy Guy, in the book by him and Jim Rees, regarding the explosion says: "Contemporary accounts disagreed about whether the spectators had come to see the first ever outing of the locomotive or that following a new boiler. The Butterley*  entry confirms the boiler version, as did Brunton himself later".

 

So, it could be that the new boiler was defective, or that the safety valve was weighted down but I doubt that we'll ever know now.

 

*The machines were made by The Butterley Company, The Crich one was completed in March 1814 and the Newbottle one  was transported  and assembled at the colliery in October 1814.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Following up earlier posts concerning the boiler explosion, Brunton was examined by Parliamentary committee in 1817 investigating a steam boat explosion in Norwich. Amazingly, he did not mention the Newbottle /Philadelphia explosion in this evidence at all! But he did say that he had tested wrought iron boiler plate material to 650 psi and hydraulically his boilers to 150 psi, working them at 50 psi. This quite sensible and good practice. What he did not know was that riveted joints were much weaker than the plate. Only in the 1850's did Fairbairn discover that a single line of rivets was only 30% as strong as the plate and even a double line of rivets was only 70% as strong as the original plate. Interestingly, William Chapman's evidence to the steam boat accident committee advocated double lines of rivets. This was ignored. Brunton's safety margins were in line with those advocated by other engineers such as Woolfe. the committee recommended 2 safety valves, one locked and a mercurial gauge. The mercurial gauge arguably also acted as a safety valve as it was open at one end.

 

The press reports of the Philadelphia explosion suggested that a section of the boiler nine feet square was blown off. The boiler plates available at this time would have been much smaller than this. Trevithick quotes the largest available plate in 1813 as being 8.5" x 4'. So a failure at or of the seams appears likely.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...

I see that this thread seems to have run out of steam, a couple of years back - I've been working on an 1/8 scale reconstruction of Brunton's Newbottle engine as an experimental archaeology project . . . Using only written sources, patent drawings and relict evidence from contemporary engines and their remains, I have produced a 15 page paper complete with a series of scale CAD drawings that describe and illustrate the complete workings of this engine.

 

My contribution to the history of this enigmatic machine I hope can be demonstrated with the production of a working model, running on wagonway track. The model is scratch-built and has to be of fairly large scale in order to utilise kinetic energy, necessary to operate the various processes described by William Brunton - all simple concepts, but nonetheless the logic of a problem-solving clockmaker.

 

I'll post further replies after I have the boiler with its working cylinders fitted to the wheeled carriage, which should be some time later this month, if this issue with the pandemic continues, as this is providing the luxury of some free hours to dedicate to construction work.

Edited by A. Pearson
Syntax
  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
  • 9 months later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...