Welcome! Log In Create A New Profile Recent Messages


Lamont boiler

Posted by dullfig 
Re: Lamont boiler
March 11, 2011 09:08AM
Natural circulation boilers are fine if there is enough downcomer water pressure to get adequate riser circulation. When a natural circulation boiler is first started up it has zero circulation. Large natural circulation boilers like big B&W boilers can have a downcomer pressure of 15-20psi but a micro boiler only two feet high may only have a downcomer pressure of .5-.8 psi and it is much more difficult to get adequate circulation when hard fired and many small hobby natural circulation boilers have had riser tube failures. I would expect an evaporation rate of such small boilers to be in the 5-8#/sq-ft per hour range where a Lamont can easily and safely do 20-25 or even more depending upon design. All of this can be calculated before bending tubing. Any array of small hobby boilers will probably work if the firing raate is low and the heat transfer per saure foot is low. I would agree for Richards large boat and very low pressures(and lots of room) it would be easier to construct a natural circulation boiler that would get the job done.
Re: Lamont boiler
March 11, 2011 05:49PM
You Guys gotta check out this pump. I use one, and have put many "high temperature hours" on it.


Check the pump at the bottom of the page...

Model 809-BR-12DC
1950 rpm
18 watts
Max flow 5.5 GPM
Max head 7.1 Ft

March DC Circulators
Magnetic drive DC hot water circulator pumps can be used for a wide range of applications. Suitable for PV direct power or battery based systems. Motor brush life is a minimum of 20,000 hours. Has a 1/2 inch inlet and outlet and can withstand 500 degrees F and up to 1,000 PSI internal pressure. Extremely reliable.

Model 809-BR-12DC

Im working on a LaMont, (forced circulation) boiler, it uses 4 of these pumps, and operates to 450*f. The feed pump is a seperate circuit. Yes its quite a monster, and uses pellet fuel (soild fuel combustion). A final pass-thru at the hottest part of the combustion stream is also utilized for the superheater.

Re: Lamont boiler
March 11, 2011 10:20PM
Hi Jeremy,

Thanks for the link. The DC circulators have a spec sheet with temp/ rating, but nothing else I could find quickly. Site needs help. First thing they say is very few pumps can go over 120F....but they don't follow up that point point with numbers?? The DC spec is even hard to find. Maybe I just overlooked.

Re: Lamont boiler
March 12, 2011 03:39AM
Hi Keith,

Scroll way down to the bottom of that page.

Hi Jeremy,


Suddenly homebuilt Lamont boilers just got about 10x more "doable"!

Even for the bigger pump on that page, if my math & electric knowledge are working, that's 4 amps for the biggie and 1 amp for the little one? Same electric load as running with an extra headlight. Not too shabby! Great durability and prices too.

How quiet/noisy are these pumps, Jeremy?

Thanks for running this link; real food for thought.

Hmm... back to my M2005 Lamont boiler design?

Re: Lamont boiler
March 12, 2011 09:23AM
Jeremy, great find on the magnetic driven pumps. The 7 feet of pressure(deadhead pressure?) would only be 2.8psi and the Teel pump deadheads at 12psi--we use it at 5psi for 4000# circulation per hour. The 18 watts is so low that I suspect that is open flow without head pressure. Can you find out if they have a chart of flow rate versus pressure head. Designing a Lamont circuit with a maximum pressure drop of 5 psi was a painstaking and lengthy(calculating) experience while keeping the Reynolds number high enough to insure very turbulent flow and low temperature drop across the steam/water film boundaries. Possibly this pump find would be usable for a smaller lower pressure Lamont. On Rods boat Lamont we used 1" od steel tubing with 1/16" wall, this amounts to a tube hoop stress of only 7000psi with a boiler pressure of 1000psi/factor of safety of 4.
Re: Lamont boiler
March 12, 2011 11:44AM
Hi George,

If it is a centrifugal, perhaps it is rated at peak pressure where the current should be the lowest. Current goes up as head goes down unlike positive dislacement,

[stores.mavericksolar.com] (bottom of page for chart)

[www.pumpvendor.com] (seems to be a conflict of specifications between various sites, especially the internal pressure one.) Will research a bit more.

Re: Lamont boiler
March 12, 2011 12:56PM
Hi Guys,

I have one of these, its very quiet, and does not pull much power. The pump does move water at 5.5gpm. That is my main focus in calculating heat transfer (your results may vary). So four seperate circulating circuits, is like 22gpm of forced circulation total.

I first started to use these pumps for my block heating circuits. In that case im using a heat transfer fluid(oil), I have circulated oil at temps over 450*f. Its surprising because this thing has a magnetic drive coupling. But it seems to work okay at those temps (for hours).

I have one of these aleady connected to one of my burners, using water in (open) containment 0psi and can film the pump working, if theres anything in particular you guys would like to see.

The reservoir boils so violently I have to put a rag over the top of it, to keep it from splashing boiling water all over the place.

Re: Lamont boiler
March 12, 2011 02:30PM
You are so right about amperage and pressure relationship--the lowest amperage is when the pump is deadheaded(no flow) and pressure is maximum static pressure. I found the test records on all the test pumps we made 10 years ago and the final Teel boat pump would pump 6700#/hr @ 5psi and drew 7 amperes or about 85 watts. Would be good enough for a 1500#/hr boiler! We ran it down to 8 voltsDC at much lower amperage and it took care of his 5GPH firing rate/400#/hr steam without any trouble.
I do question the pump that Jeremy posted, it is hard to believe that those 4 little phillips head screws could hold the intake plate on @ 1000psi. May we find out more as is such a bargain at its price.
Best, George
Re: Lamont boiler
March 12, 2011 03:00PM
Looks great - but reality check please!

First of all the website only says pumps can be made for up to 500F and 1000psi. The particular pump mentioned only goes to 150psi and if you realise that it is fastened together with 4 No8 x 32 tpi stainless screws you'll not expose it to 1000 psi - the load would exceed the breaking strain of the poor little bolts with no safety margin at all. The casing doesn't look up to it either. So the 1000psi does not refer to that pump.

The magnet should tolerate the temperature if it is a solanum/cobalt rather than neodymium. I've played with these on a pump test rig I made and they do have the driving power. They are very brittle though as I let go of one and it shot across the bench to join its mate and smashed in two. They are claimed to keep their magnetism at over 500F.

I rather gave up on a magnetic drive for my proposed Lamont because I expected to have trouble with magnetic iron oxide ( the black rust that comes out when you blow down your boiler) building up on the magnet and jamming the pump. I suppose a magnetic trap could be put in the circuit to get over this but have gone back to seals for the moment.

Perhaps we need to ask the supplier for the details of his 500F/1000psi pump.

Oh George I see you beat me to it!

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/12/2011 03:01PM by Mike Clark.
Re: Lamont boiler
March 12, 2011 03:10PM
I do question the pump that Jeremy posted, it is hard to believe that those 4 little phillips head screws could hold the intake plate on @ 1000psi.

I agree there, but it is possible it can hold at that pressure, I would be concerned with any pump pressure over 250psi for that.

For my applications im using relatively low "system pressure" but are getting comparable heat transfer rates, George speaks of at the higher system pressures.

Since water "does not increase in viscosity" at higher pressures and temps, I fail to see the concern with the relevance of "pump head pressure" as in any application, true, if the pump is at the bottom of the system, it does have to contend with head pressure if its raising the water level to 7 feet, but this is not the case, if the circulation circuit is "level" so to speak, because the vertical level, is the same at intake and exhaust ports, for example the circuit im speaking of has a dead rise of less than a foot. However, this does not take into account, centrifugal forces in dynamic motion such that, an mobile application would see.

Re: Lamont boiler
March 12, 2011 03:34PM
It's not the real head in terms of height but the pressure head due to frictional resistance to flow in the Lamont circuit that the pump has to deal with.

Doble's calculations and suggested flow rates of 8ft per sec for water and 75ft per sec for steam could be achieved in his 850lb/hr generator without problems but it gets a bit more difficult for a smaller capacity generator (I'm after 250ls/hr) because the pipe bore needed to get the flow rate is small and the frictional resistance builds up. Like everything else in this game it comes down to hitting the best compromise. The interesting bit is to try to work it all out before bending pipes so as to avoid getting it all horribly wrong and having to start again.

Re: Lamont boiler
March 12, 2011 03:45PM
It's not the real head in terms of height but the pressure head due to frictional resistance to flow in the Lamont circuit that the pump has to deal with.

You make it seem as that the flow problem "must exist" it can be corrected, by optimizing, one can increase tube diameter etc, and the flow charictoristics optimized for a given set of conditions.

Im going to run over to my shop here in a minuite, I want to at least photograph the system im describing, to give a better idea of heating surface area, etc. The pictures would enhance specifics, I think that would be helpful to the discussion. give me an hour or so, I will take like 8 pictures of the hardware im talking about.

Re: Lamont boiler
March 12, 2011 03:51PM
Doble's rules of velocities were quite good but before all of the B&W theoretical and testing were done to come up with somewhat different velocities-also the velocities were dependent on the pressures and temperatures that effected the Reynolds number and the required turbulent flow.. My remarks of pressure head(downcome) pressure was in a discussion about natural circulation boilers, not the Lamont. If the Lamont vertical drum had 20" or 5" of water in it the circulating pump would be most happy, that is why controlling the water level is such a simple and easy thing to do. On the three Lamonts I have designed every turn of the lamont coil has computations on its average viscosity and its change in temperature due to the high level of heat added; it starts off with saturated water and ends up with 20-25% steam by weight or about 93% steam by volume. The viscosity helps determine the Reynolds number and then the so-called friction factor can be determined in order to calculate the pressure required for every coil with also computing the average specific volume of each coil.. Then one adds up all the delta pressure requlirements to add up with the total pump pressure required for the entire Lamont loop(plus losses for bends and non-straight losses. It is one big and time consuming task to determine what is going on with a fierce fire on both siddes of the tube but is worthwhile so that one knows what they are going to end up with before bending or winding tubes.
Re: Lamont boiler
March 12, 2011 05:35PM
George - I appreciate your very helpful and interesting reply. Actually with hindsight I think my comments on the "Doble" sums and the size of pipes and output needed are more relevant to the pancake economiser section of the generator than to the Lamont circuit.

You must have done some heroic sums on your Lamont designs - the pump flow rate is the most easily adjusted bit of the system even after it is built but the hard part is to work out the effect of length, bore, area, flow, heat input etc to get the right mix of steam and water at the output end. It's hard to see, where you are dealing with a Lamont circuit which includes coils round the combustion chamber, helical coils round the rest of the interior and pancake coils as well, how you can decide how much heat is picked up in each part. Experience tells I suppose - much of Doble's sums seem to be experience based rather than from first principles.

Clearly alteration of the pump flow rate in the Lamont circuit must change the heat transfer taking place during a single pass through the coil, which might change the steam to water mix coming out, but does this change the overall heat transfer rate of the system - perhaps not? Presumably water picks up more heat per unit length of pipe than steam does so there will be an optimum pump rate for a Lamont circuit to keep the “steam transition” region in the best place along the pipe. Is that something that should be built in? Or is it just circulating so quickly that this does not matter.

It's pretty complicated and now its bedtime!

Re: Lamont boiler
March 12, 2011 05:36PM
Hi Guys,

I got the pictures, but forgot to photo the resevoir, darn it smiling smiley Feel free to ask any questions, and let me know if you guys want to see this burner make some steam (its open to atmosphere, no pressure) on video.


Re: Lamont boiler
March 12, 2011 05:37PM
4 more-


Re: Lamont boiler
March 12, 2011 07:33PM

I'd love to see a video.

Everyone else:

It seems everyone has their own projects on the go, but one consensus is that the Lamont is the boiler they want on their steamers. I'm very excited to see if anyone here turns up a pump that will suit the specifications demanded by all us users. (eg: realistic cost, durability, GPM, temperature tolerance, etc)

I'd assume the qualities of the pump would be the same across the board. Maybe if someone could list them here it would be easier for everyone to search.

Re: Lamont boiler
March 12, 2011 09:41PM
Oops, pump no good after all? Ok, "WOW retracted". Well, maybe a "car-Lamont-suitable" off the shelf circulating pump will turn up. If not, there are other options.

Re: Lamont boiler
March 12, 2011 11:50PM
No not everyone is looking at a LaMount for automotive use. I am still thinking about monotube with smart microprocessor control and variable firing. Or the oncethrough standpipe boiler I saw in Light Steam Power. It's control is as simple as the Lamont with out the circulation pump. Still i have conserns about the standpipe in an automobile. Just as a quick test I used a 2 foot clear plastic 1.5" ID half filed with water. Acceleration in a stoke s-10 pickup drove the water almost over the top. I am sure baffels can keep the sloshing to a minum. But I can't see it ever being able to hold a consistant water level. Probly need a good distance between High water and low water points Mabe with the new accelerameter chips the control con be smarter. The game controler and smart phone market have these accelerameter chips cost low,

Re: Lamont boiler
March 13, 2011 04:07AM
Hey Van,

I also don't have an interest in a "LaMont" type of boiler either. What I am working on is a water tube type with much shorter water flow paths and a lot less resistance to the flow of fluids through them, also admiting the feed water(pumped with plungers ) through an orifice to induce a head in the circulating water. This however requires that there always be water being pumped when there is fire. That is an adaption of the Maxim design.

As you are probably begining to understand there is not and never will be a consensus amoungst the steam car people as to what engine, boiler or even throttle for that matter to use!

The best you will ever get here is the majority opinion of ONLY the people who speak their mind, those who remain silent remain unheard.

Caleb Ramsby
Re: Lamont boiler
March 13, 2011 04:41AM
Hi Caleb,

And there is a big private "grapevine" among those who rarely or never post here... including "top men"... lots more being said behind closed doors...

Andy and Caleb,

OK, special rapid-natural-circulation boiler, no pump, no eductors, no drum, all small tube, for me. Another non-Lamont "nonconformist" shockingly exposed... there's more of us...

unless a really good OTS Lamont pump shows up... then maybe... Would it kill them to beef up the pump volute housing and magnetic-coupling can on that March pump?... a few bucks worth of extra metal and bolts...

Re: Lamont boiler
March 13, 2011 09:44AM
THEM is not gonna build your pump,,,,Buy the damm thing and cast a new end for it,,At 50 bucks/hr,,the pump aint worth much,,Did I leave my coffee over there,,I'm late already,,,Ben
Re: Lamont boiler
March 13, 2011 12:54PM
I've been inspired to write a haiku.


bane of steam technology.

pump search continues.

Re: Lamont boiler
March 13, 2011 01:04PM
any body tell me the purpose of nozzles in evaporater section of Lamont boiler......
Re: Lamont boiler
March 13, 2011 01:37PM

When initally selected this pump, it was for 0psi internal pressure, and 250*f, thats what the spec sheet says. I have a contact at March pumps.

Here's the link to the actual spec sheet from March-


I have successfully run this pump to 450*f, but I have modifiyed the magnetic coupling, it has air directed over the magnet in the coupling.

I didnt really question things that much, because this was done earlier, and I had gotten up and running years ago with this thing.

The first link(reseller) "incorrectly rates the following spec's for the pump" 1000psi ;internal pressure ;500*f circulating temp.

The actual specs from the OEM (March Pump) are max 150psi :internal pressure ;250*f circulating temp.

What Ben said is applicable, you could re-cast the pump housing in stainless steel, perhaps add a coupla bolts, then cool the magnetic drive coupling with air, and the unit could be made to reach the 1000psi spec for :internal pressure, since there is no seal needed for the pump shaft connection, and friction problems associated with that type of mechanical drive for the impeller (steel not a magnet). Your not going to find something like this to buy turn-key, most likely you will have to make it with a special casting.

Re: Lamont boiler
March 13, 2011 04:10PM
Meant to get back to you. With a 4-5X circulation ratio the heat transfer is fairly constant and although the water/steam laminar film coefficient may change a llittle bit it doesn't matter much. The coil(s that receive the most heat are the lower spiral coil facing the firebox plus can receive allot of convective heat transfer as well. The goal was to not have more than 100F temperature rise across this laminar film inside the tube so that regular steel tubing coulc be used. When I designed a 12GPH firing rate Lamont for Jim Crank years ago for a 740 Stanley it took 80-100 hours of an immense number of calculations to design it. It is not an easy matter engineering wise to really design such a boiler. Think of all those old B&W engineers working alll this out with slide rules on immense boilers!!
That pump March design and price seemed to be too good to be true and with those 4 little phillips head screws holding the end entrance plate on was. Rod Teel up in NH could probably machine another one out of stainless like his but the cost could be $1000 or more depending upon required pressure head and operating pressure. I had mentioned on this thread a while back that back then(11 years ago) only two pump manufactures offered to design and make one as nothing was available at that time and the two prices were $20k and $25K!!!! They both weighed with motor more thn the Lamont boiler which was I believe 220#.
Its tough work, George
Re: Lamont boiler
March 23, 2011 12:50AM
I like the drum outside the fire because it can't be considered a "fired" drum and the connections in my design are also outside the fire box. The drum in my design is made from steel pipe with an od just under 6 inches so it is not considered a drum by size either.

As George has shown the horsepower to circulate the water in the tubes is minimal and the volume of the steam/water mix leaving the tubes is great. To me this means that the steam/water mix leaving the tubes has enough power to pump the circulation water for the boiler. If you pumped water at 10 gpm into a tube and 90% of it turned to steam, the velocity exiting the tube would vary with the pressure, but it would increase greatly.

I have pondered over this for a while and startup presented me with the most concern. I don't know, but George believes that the pump must be started when the boiler is first fired. I have information from several tests on LaMont installations where the circulation was stopped during runs, but not much on cold firing with delayed pumping.

If the initial mix entering the drum from the coils could start the pump, what would keep the mix from blowing out both ends of the boiler tube instead of flowing in the direction required during startup ?

Then I added one way valves that have virtually no restriction in one direction but significant restriction the other way. These are made of 2 steel parts welded together and welded to the drum for tubing connections. There are no moving parts, no springs, no service required. When I say virtually no restriction, I mean in the valve it's self, there are restrictors purpously built into each one (see below).

Well I eliminated the pump motor and shaft seal, but do I want to build this design and find out it won't start pumping properly ? Not really, so I have pondered on this for some time.


What if I used the feed water to turn the pump also ? A great idea I thought unless the water level in the drum was too high for feed water when the boiler was started. Well then just do what they did on the French Boiler, after shutdown, drain the drum back to the feed tank with a thermal valve. The thermal valve would prevent excessive pressure or steam from dumping into the feed water tank because the system would have to cool for the valve to open. As a safety feature, the pressure in the drum could also prevent the valve from opening untill it reached a safe level and could be overcome by the valve spring. Just think how much power is in your feed water as it pumps at 500 psi into a cold 100 psi drum.

Every LaMont boiler I have design information on uses restrictors on the inlets to the boiler tubes which allows a design that is slightly off to be fine tuned. George can do the math to fine tune a LaMont boiler so restrictors are not generally needed and the flow is balanced. The restrictors are used to balance the flow in multipule boiler tubes when the coils can't be made to the desired length or shape. If the flow paths are identical, identical restrictors would be used, but in a modern power plants water walls, the length of passage, direction of flow, flow restrictions, and relative position to the flames, change the restrictors used. The most modern book I have on the subject approaches the design from the physical layout first. When that is known, the restriction of the circuit is determined to develop flow information and required restrictors. I have seen a design where the shortest tube on a header was 36 feet long, right next to it was a 157 foot tube.

I am not saying to make a poor design and try to adjust for it, but what other boiler gives you the chance to fine tune it.

Always good to hear from you George !

Peter Heid
Re: Lamont boiler
March 23, 2011 08:58AM
I've kept this one on tap for a while, it isn't exactly a valve, but does promote one way circulation...


Re: Lamont boiler
March 23, 2011 09:50AM
Just a quick thought, but would it be possible to pump steam from the seperating cylinder into the super heater? The goal being to allow the system to remain at low pressure, and the high pressure to be generated exclusively in the super heater. Then a pump with such high quality seals would not be needed.

A major drawback being you'd need one more pump, and one that pumps steam at that.

Re: Lamont boiler
March 24, 2011 12:04PM

Very Good Research, a fluidic diode is exactly what I had in mind. There are many ways to make one and some would be fairly easy to fabricate. I have a very good book on fluidic controls and logic devices that my valve idea is from. It is "Design of Pneumatic and Fluidic Control Systems", ISBN 0961385103, 1984. Tesla had a few designs also, like patent 1329559. Se also pat no 2727535.

Peter Heid
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login

All files from this thread

File Name File Size   Posted by Date  
Double coil boiler.jpg 23.6 KB open | download Rolly 01/18/2011 Read message
Sawmill boiler & engine.jpg 29.9 KB open | download Rolly 01/18/2011 Read message
Early White Boiler-2a.jpg 136.8 KB open | download Rolly 01/19/2011 Read message
Forced Circulation systems.JPG 140.9 KB open | download Rolly 01/21/2011 Read message
pdf-preview.png 55.7 KB open | download Rolly 01/21/2011 Read message
P fired.pdf 493.8 KB open | download frustrated 01/21/2011 Read message
Big coil Lamont.jpg 191.1 KB open | download Mike Clark 01/22/2011 Read message
StumpfV4.jpg 68.9 KB open | download Brian McMorran 02/04/2011 Read message
DCP_0032aa.jpg 21.8 KB open | download Rolly 03/06/2011 Read message
Craig Standbridge.jpg 81 KB open | download Rolly 03/08/2011 Read message
P1010005.JPG 85.6 KB open | download Rolly 03/08/2011 Read message
lamont rough 1.jpg 78 KB open | download vandallas 03/08/2011 Read message
Stanley economizer.jpg 113.5 KB open | download Rolly 03/09/2011 Read message
Marine economizer.jpg 51.2 KB open | download Rolly 03/09/2011 Read message
Tryall.jpg 30.5 KB open | download Rolly 03/09/2011 Read message
Derr economizer.jpg 97.1 KB open | download Rolly 03/09/2011 Read message
Die-2.JPG 94.9 KB open | download Rolly 03/10/2011 Read message
Die-1.JPG 102.4 KB open | download Rolly 03/10/2011 Read message
031211a.jpg 47.6 KB open | download Jeremy Holmes 03/12/2011 Read message
031211b.jpg 32.1 KB open | download Jeremy Holmes 03/12/2011 Read message
031211c.jpg 46.8 KB open | download Jeremy Holmes 03/12/2011 Read message
031211d.jpg 33.1 KB open | download Jeremy Holmes 03/12/2011 Read message
031211e.jpg 56.6 KB open | download Jeremy Holmes 03/12/2011 Read message
031211f.jpg 52.8 KB open | download Jeremy Holmes 03/12/2011 Read message
031211g.jpg 44.5 KB open | download Jeremy Holmes 03/12/2011 Read message
031211h.jpg 38.2 KB open | download Jeremy Holmes 03/12/2011 Read message
031211i.jpg 43.8 KB open | download Jeremy Holmes 03/12/2011 Read message
Clayton pump.jpg 214.3 KB open | download Brian McMorran 07/06/2011 Read message
Clayton Pump 2.png 187.6 KB open | download Brian McMorran 07/06/2011 Read message
Untitled-1.jpg 68.1 KB open | download Rolly 07/07/2011 Read message
Untitled-1.jpg 165.6 KB open | download Rolly 07/09/2011 Read message
with valve.JPG 136.7 KB open | download Rolly 07/15/2011 Read message
machined casting-a..jpg 165.3 KB open | download Rolly 07/21/2011 Read message
castings.jpg 235.6 KB open | download Rolly 07/21/2011 Read message
P5050001.JPG 1.06 MB open | download Rolly 07/21/2011 Read message
P7230092.JPG 132.4 KB open | download Rolly 07/23/2011 Read message
P7230093.JPG 173.8 KB open | download Rolly 07/23/2011 Read message
P7230094.JPG 144.3 KB open | download Rolly 07/23/2011 Read message
P1000066.JPG 4.18 MB open | download Mike Clark 07/23/2011 Read message
THE WHITE FLOWMOTOR CONTROL SYS-16.doc 66 KB open | download Jim Crank 11/25/2011 Read message
LaMont boiler small.png 192.2 KB open | download frustrated 12/02/2011 Read message
Doble firing up small.png 162.2 KB open | download frustrated 12/02/2011 Read message
SatVaporEnthalpy.JPG 44.8 KB open | download steamerandy 01/25/2012 Read message
Orifice S Generator.jpg 254.8 KB open | download Jan S 02/11/2012 Read message
Lamont - French patent US1703228.pdf 628.2 KB open | download lohring 06/01/2015 Read message
image.jpg 106.7 KB open | download Brian McMorran 06/01/2015 Read message
CA French -b.jpg 109.2 KB open | download Rolly 06/02/2015 Read message
C.A.French.jpg 704.2 KB open | download Rolly 06/02/2015 Read message
Locomotor.jpg 468 KB open | download Brian McMorran 06/02/2015 Read message
D2730-1300(1).jpg 56.6 KB open | download lohring 06/05/2015 Read message
P2120055.JPG 116.7 KB open | download Rolly 06/05/2015 Read message
LSTM-002.PDF 120.6 KB open | download lohring 06/05/2015 Read message
Herreshoff-superheater.jpg 226.2 KB open | download Rolly 06/06/2015 Read message
Herreshoff engine 9 X 16 X 18_2.jpg 719.5 KB open | download Rolly 06/06/2015 Read message
Herreshoff 3-Drum.jpg 160.4 KB open | download Rolly 06/07/2015 Read message
US1545668-2.jpg 782.9 KB open | download Rolly 06/09/2015 Read message
US1545668A.jpg 869.2 KB open | download Rolly 06/09/2015 Read message
US1884979-0.jpg 812.1 KB open | download Rolly 06/09/2015 Read message
US2693-Lesh.jpg 751.3 KB open | download Rolly 06/09/2015 Read message
US10041- Shank.jpg 873.6 KB open | download Rolly 06/09/2015 Read message
IMG_2715.JPG 809.2 KB open | download IronChief 06/10/2015 Read message
IMG_2716.JPG 630.9 KB open | download IronChief 06/10/2015 Read message
IMG_2717.JPG 707.2 KB open | download IronChief 06/10/2015 Read message
IMG_2718.JPG 677.5 KB open | download IronChief 06/10/2015 Read message
IMG_2719.JPG 708.7 KB open | download IronChief 06/10/2015 Read message