• Welcome to this forum . We are a worldwide group with a common interest in Birmingham and its history. While here, please follow a few simple rules. We ask that you respect other members, thank those who have helped you and please keep your contributions on-topic with the thread.

    We do hope you enjoy your visit. BHF Admin Team
  • HI folks the server that hosts the site completely died including the Hdd's and backups.
    Luckily i create an offsite backup once a week! this has now been restored so we have lost a few days posts.
    im still fixing things at the moment so bear with me and im still working on all images 90% are fine the others im working on now
    we are now using a backup solution

Birmingham Water Company.

Would the late Fred Dibnah have approved?

It all looks a bit of a contraption to me, but certainly seems to support the “workshop of the world” image that Birmingham earned during this period. I do wonder, though, if a Lancashire boiler could have done the job more efficiently.
 
The boiler didn’t travel far. Safe and Sure Turbulous Steam Boiler, Root's patent. The Patent Steam Boiler Co. 28, Heanage St. The one shown could have been one of the first produced. By the mid 1880s they advertised as largely exported to South America, India, and the Colonies.

Grace Guide

Patent Steam Boiler Co - Graces Guide

www.gracesguide.co.uk www.gracesguide.co.uk
 
It’s interesting to see the size of the boilers classified by horsepower, presumably there was some sort of expectation of a standard of performance for the turbines of the day. Really, another world presents itself, 150 years is a long time!
 
Johnfromstaffs said:
It’s interesting to see the size of the boilers classified by horsepower, presumably there was some sort of expectation of a standard of performance for the turbines of the day. Really, another world presents itself, 150 years is a long time!
Click to expand...
John, I think that 150 years ago it was about getting the job done, and you are correct, it does look like a contraption! But it took a big first step!
 
With labour costs relatively low, the biggest cost for a waterworks was the cost of pumping. Hence why Birmingham eventually opted for a gravity system. Coal for steam boilers was a significant cost, so savings in efficiency here were quite effective. Water tube boilers were the next step up the ladder from the Cornish and Lancashire boiler. Higher efficiency or duty were obtained through high pressure steam and super heaters.
 
Thanks for this. So it seems that I was thinking back to front, and the gain came from water tube boilers permitting higher advantage to be taken from the energy in the combustion. It would be interesting to know more of the techniques of building such a design in 1870, did they have any form of welding that we might recognise these days, and what about cast iron? Was that material usable at the higher pressures?
 
The limiting factor of Lancashire boilers was they were made from wort iron, so the design limited the amount of surface heating area. They basically had just the two fire tubes with some cross syphons. By about 1850 we were able to product steel in large quantities due to the Bessemer process being perfected. This meant thinner and stronger seamless tubes that gave a larger surface heating area that could withstand higher pressures and therefore increased thermal efficiency. Most tube boilers had the tubes swaged in place as you now see in locomotive boilers.

I don’t honestly know much about when welded boilers first appeared, but there is a welded Lancashire boiler at the museum of water in London but do not know the date of manufacture.
 
Thank you. While I understand the feasibility of a swaged water tube, where the steam pressure would tend to expand the swaged joints to effect a tightening of the seal, a swaged locomotive type boiler tube would seem to suggest the opposite unless the high temperature of the gases passing through the tubes caused thermal expansion that opposed the effect of the steam pressure within the boiler. No doubt it worked as we see from the numbers of steam locomotive boilers that either did or do exist.
 
Last edited:
Johnfromstaffs said:
Thank you. While I understand the feasibility of a swaged water tube, where the steam pressure would tend to expand the swaged joints to effect a tightening of the seal, a swaged locomotive type boiler tube would seem to suggest the opposite unless the high temperature of the gases passing through the tubes caused thermal expansion that opposed the effect of the steam pressure within the boiler. No doubt it worked as we see from the numbers of steam locomotive boilers that either did or do exist.
Click to expand...
John, it would seem that there would be limitations to a swaged joint even where the joint was designed to tighten. I would expect with continuous thermal cycling it would loosen.
Steel as Mort suggests would facilitate welding and the puddling of both joined materials. It is though, to your point a very interesting topic (at least for some) that I would enjoy learning more if someone can direct.
 
Johnfromstaffs said:
Thank you. While I understand the feasibility of a swaged water tube, where the steam pressure would tend to expand the swaged joints to effect a tightening of the seal, a swaged locomotive type boiler tube would seem to suggest the opposite unless the high temperature of the gases passing through the tubes caused thermal expansion that opposed the effect of the steam pressure within the boiler. No doubt it worked as we see from the numbers of steam locomotive boilers that either did or do exist.
Click to expand...
Agree, it’s a fair point you make. The problem is that there are not many of those water tube boiler set up left now to have a look at. I do know of one in Cambridge that would be worth a look at
 
The Birmingham Waterworks Company was established by Act of Parliament as early as 1826, with authorization to raise an initial capital of £150,000 and to supply 'good wholesome water' to 'the parishes, hamlets, or places of Birmingham, Aston, Duddeston, Nechells and Edgbaston' The company's source of water was to be the River Tame, and by 1831 the Salford Reservoir and Aston pumping station had been opened, with supplies being pumped from there up to the smaller storage reservoir off Monument Lane, Edgbaston. At first there were few customers, availability was inter-mittent and confined to certain districts only. But by 1853 water was not merely being raised from Salford Reservoir (297 feet) to that on Monument Lane (532 feet), but also from this last up to the High Level Reservoir on the Hagley Road (602 feet). And this meant that, using gravity flow, a constant water supply was thereafter available throughout the entire borough. There were soon serious problems with the quality of the River Tame's water, most of which had its origin in the ever more heavily polluted Black Country. But three Acts of Parliament between 1855 and 1870 enabled the company to construct 7 further reservoirs, including one on the River Blythe at Whitacre. Meanwhile, the district it served was expanded to embrace Handsworth, Yardley, King's Norton, Northfield and parts of Harborne. In 1875, on the eve of its purchase by the corporation, the Birmingham Waterworks Company had a gathering area of 190 square miles, 10 storage reservoirs covering 85 acres, 16 pumping engines, and 266 miles of street mains. A further 3 reservoirs, covering 92 acres, were under construction or prospected.

The Making of Victorian Birmingham by Skipp, Victor (1983)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top