Lamont boiler

Hey Andy,

They were testing three different styles of superheater configurations in the MIT paper, none of which had anything even close to a balanced radiant and convective heat transfer. No system is capable or will ever be capable of giving perfect steam temperatures under all operable conditions, especially when one considers real world starting conditions, such as everything being stone cold. Once everything is hot then they can be very stable.

Hey Bart,

Good find, for a five times circulation that should be good enough for a 300 lbs per hr boiler. Roughly one gallon per minute of pumped water should be enough for 100 lbs per hour evaporation at a five to one ratio. That is figuring the water being cold going through the pump, one would need to correct for the difference between the waters volume at the saturated temperature of the boilers nominal pressure and that of 60 deg F.

Caleb Ramsby

Well......

I'm not sure I buy Peter's idea that multiple parallel flow witl lead to a high recirc rate, BUT................

(Note that I am just tossing this out for discussions sake, not actually recommending any of this as it would probably take a fair amount of development and I really don't want to get involved in hostile meaningless arguments....).

If you go with the same cross sectional area, but use tubes of 1/2 the diameter, you need 4 times as many tubes---with twice the cumulative surface area. The heat flux at the same firing rate is now 1/2 as great, meaning you could fire this once-through boiler twice as hard as a single-path once-through boiler before encountering DNB. Obviously there are limits to how small you can go before the natural resistance inherent in the tubes catches up with you, so you can't push the whole thing too far.

You could still shade the concept a bit and work the angles. If we maintain 150 psi feedwater backpressure, we can drive a fairly standard eductor at about a 1:1 pumping ratio...meaning we move about a pound for every pound we push in. OK, this is less than the 5 to 1 or higher that we have been talking about, but a 2:1 circulation ratio at half the heat flux seems to be getting us near the doorway.

Andy is right, the velocity does scour the tube walls, but that sure isn't the whole story. The conductivity and cooling effect of the water in the tube is also important. Heat flows nicely through water and it can absorb quite a bit, the mere presence of excess water moderates the onset of DNB. And I really don't think anyone has spent a lot of time looking at synergistic interactions. If you can reduce heat flux with parallel flow tubes, use feed to run an ejector to get recirculation going, design in some natural circulation to move even a bit more water...you might have a good start. Then comes inertia, it isn't necessary to force all that water around the loop each time, merely enough that it actually go around. I'm reminded of a bicycle wheel, one good flick and it revolves forever. Naturally you can't get that kind of low friction from flowing water, but careful attention to joints, kinks and so on can minimize flow path friction significantly; if the resistance is minimal you might just have a chance of letting the cumlative velocity build up as you start firing. I would suspect that a very tight control over the feed rate would be necessary, you would want to be feeding almost constantly to prevent long gaps in the eductor pumping action. This woud call for very tight control of the water in the boiler. If you can manage to scrounge up any further thermal pumping action such as a with a Fluidyne or whatever, the whole thing might even be practical. Who knows?

<Of course, I can still hear some old timers out there muttering that if we just build a rotary boiler we can achieve high natural circulation rates in a compact package simply by boosting the gee forces....>

Ken

Hi Ken,

Instead of writing, posting, and debating a long detailed "white paper", which I don't have time for, I will say that in 2006 I generated and analyzed MANY versions of a multi-path low-head natural-circulating boiler before gradually zeroing in on my current design, which looks promising enough to test. "how about this, nope, path too long, OK this, nope tubes too small, OK this, nope too many tubes, or maybe this... nope, bends too tight" and so on. I did indeed end up with about 2/3 of the evaporator heat flux of George's Lamont evaporator. This design is extremely well-calculated... uh, _heavily_ calculated anyway... we'll see how "well" after tests... at any rate it is no mere easily-dismissed half-baked off-the-cuff speculation. One curious feature of the design is that if the tubes "geyser", that would actually improve phase separation, and the extra kinetic energy of the "geysered" liquid would boost the recirculation rate/velocity. This might end up circulating better than the B&W-book-derived static pressure-head calculations indicate! Anyway, the math tells me it's worth building/testing a tiny, simple, low-cost, easy-build experimental version...

For some fun "post then run for cover" brainstorming, how about rotating paddles inside hard-fired straight vertical tubes surrounding the fire? That would keep the water moving quickly along the tube walls and scrubbing off the steam, without actually having to move the water mass from one place in the tube stack to another... also gives in-tube centrifugal phase separation... rotsa ruck working out a drive system for the paddles of course... OK my turn now to dive into the internetabulous/webtacular bomb shelter... fweeeyooo... INCOMING!...

Peter

Well, let's see.... 200 lbs steam/hr.... 2 gpm circulation... since we want something around 5 ft/sec flow to insure we're nicely turbulent, that means 1/2" stainless tubing, .049" wall. 100 ft worth of annealed welded 316 tubing will give us 13 sq ft heating surface. (Wow - normally, I'd want 40 square feet for 200 lbs/hr with a typical water tube design....) this would be about 15.4 lbs/sq. ft instead of 5. Pressure drop in the tubing for 2 gpm flow, assuming smooth inner walls, is about 17 psi. If we round that up to 25 psi to allow for a pressure drop where we enter the drum (to help prevent flashing into steam in the coil), the pump nomograph tells us we're going to use about .1 hp to drive the pump - or about 100W of electrical power to power the motor, which needs to turn at 1300 rpm or so. Of course, I could also just make a simple slow reciprocating piston pump to handle 2 to 3 gpm - the noise would be minimal if I made the pump run at 60 rpm or so. Hmmm. Also nice and repairable somewhere along the Inside Passage, where I hope to take this boat some day.

Ordered a copy of "Steam Generators" by Dagobert W. Rudorff from amazon.co.uk tonight - should make for good reading.

- Bart

----
Bart Smaalders [smaalders.net]

Hi Bart,

5 feet per second is pretty close to the circulation velocity I am looking at, at full steam output (rarely used on the road) in my natural-circulation boiler design. 60 rpm -- slooooow and quiet -- reciprocating pump for forced circulation, is also about the same number which I am looking at for my force-circulated "backup" boiler design -- IE, the design to use if my natural-circulation boiler idea does not pass its tests. This backup boiler design, an evolution of my "M2005", "Lamont"/force-circulated boiler design, currently runs neck-and-neck with my "M2006" rapid-natural-circulation design.

Reciprocating-pump forced-circulation boilers are sometimes called "Grzyb boilers" in private steam chat. Named after Tony Grzyb's reciprocating-pump-circulated boiler, which actually runs a road vehicle (motorcycle) -- and really well.

The "Grzyb boiler" version of my M2005 force-circulated boiler, which I am currently re-evaluating, is now hypothetically circulated by a very slow steam-powered "pumping engine" (AKA "donkey pump" ) located entirely within the boiler drum. Thus the 3"x4" DA, ~5psi, reciprocating water pump cylinder has a cost/weight and reciprocating mass comparable to a bicycle-tire hand air pump.

Personally, I am not interested in boilers with noisy, high-rpm mechanical components such as air blowers and centrifugal pumps. My personal goal is to build condensing steam cars, which IMO can and should operate silently, and without perceptible vibration.

[addendum/edit:]

Well, "should" run silently and without vibration... no. That's just my own goal for my steam car. Everyone has their own preferences. Some noise and vibration are often very acceptable, even preferable, to various folks. Nothing wrong with that at all. I drive an old Volkswagen Beetle, and I love it! To get noisier and shakier than that, I'd have to trade her in for a Harley, or maybe a Ural or Trabant...

Peter



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/24/2012 10:45PM by Peter Brow.

Bart,
One of the best books on advanced steam boiler design for its time in existence--I have had my copy for 20 years and has been great reading. Showed it to Tom Kimmel a few years ago and he went on a web search to find a rare copy and got one. Must reading for anyone anyone studying the past history of the great steam boiler engineers of their time Please let me know what it is presently selling for, they are rare and can be quite expensive. Enjoy reading and learning from the greats when steam was king.
Best, George

Bart,
You must have gotten the last copy, Amazon UK says they are out of the book Steam Generators. Now I need to go searching for one.

I really goofed and George straightened me out. The water does indeed boil in the Lamont coil and the water and steam are separated in the top of the drum.
Sorry about that.
Jim

Sorry 'bout snagging the last copy; I saw that there and waited a day, and picked it up.

No worries Jim - I came to the same conclusion driving to work today. I thought about the enthalpy of steams vs water, and how one could prevent boiling in the coils... net result, one cannot do this. Obviously, if we have a circulation mass rate of 5x steam production, 20% of the change in enthalpy per lb of steam produced must occur in each circuit in the boiler. Ok, assume for simplicities sake that our economizer is introducing water at 406.1 F(saturation temp at 250 psi)

Now, for saturated steam at 250psi, enthalpy of evaporation = 820.682 Btu/lb, so our mixture leaving the coils (also at 250 psi for fun) will be 20 percent of that + enthalpy of water at 250psi, or 545.8. Reverse looking up this, we see unsurprisingly that this means we have steam at roughly 20% quality. Now, suppose we add a 10 psi pressure drop at the end of the coil - does that help? Nope, we end up w/ virtually the same quality - 20%.

So how fast is the mixture moving in the coil when it dumps into the drum? Well, at 20% quality, our mixture of vapor and liquid is .351 ft^3/lb... our mass flow rate is 1000lbs/hr = .2777 lbs/sec... with a tube of .402" inside diameter, our velocity is
110 ft/sec, or about 75 mph. Sounds like a pretty vigorous scrubbing action to me. Using a pipe loss calculator, we
see that the pressure drop is 1.67 psi/ft of tubing (guesstimating a bit) to get this mixture through at that speed. This seems way too high... so let's see about using larger tubing to reduce the problems with excessive pressure drop while still retaining turbulent flow. Various fluids engineering texts suggest that a Reynolds number of over 4000 will insure turbulent flow... so that's a minimum. If we wound our coils with schedule 40 1/2" A106 steel pipe, we would see an ID of 0.622....
w/ 2 gpm, that's 2.11 ft/sec. Reynolds number is 10,200 - plenty turbulent. Now, our exit velocity is 2.11 * ratio of densities of water and exit mixture, or about 40 ft/sec - a lot more reasonable. 3/4" pipe would also work, with a Reynolds number of 7670 and exit velocity of 22.5 ft/sec. In terms of mass fraction, we're still 80% water - but in term of volume, we're 5% of the density of water at this temp.

What this means is that if you have a pressure washer coil of 12 to 20 sq. ft., that's a quick way of building oneself a Lamont boiler - just as we saw in Sacramento earlier this month.

- Bart

----
Bart Smaalders [smaalders.net]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/25/2012 01:01AM by barts.

Quote
George-n
One of the best books on advanced steam boiler design for its time in existence--I have had my copy for 20 years and has been great reading. Showed it to Tom Kimmel a few years ago and he went on a web search to find a rare copy and got one. Must reading for anyone anyone studying the past history of the great steam boiler engineers of their time Please let me know what it is presently selling for, they are rare and can be quite expensive. Enjoy reading and learning from the greats when steam was king.

The book was a bit over $80 delivered airmail. Looking forward to reading it... I was going over the copy of the Stumpf book on my last business trip; nice plane ride material with a steam table app on the smart phone ..

- Bart

----
Bart Smaalders [smaalders.net]

Bart,
Will intensify the search for the book in hopes of finding a copy. Actually a friend and I are reorganizing my library from stacks A-B-C- etc. onto shelves with each devoted to
specific subject matter. Even discovered all the LSP volumes from start to finish in their binders that I forgot I had. Still at it and who knows, that book too could be here too.
Even found the first steam vehicle book ever published, in 1837. Steam on Common Roads by Fletcher, a mint first edition.

Quite right, how could the Lamont coil operate and not produce steam, what a dumb statement I made. Velocity increases the heat transfer rate and also, as said, scrubs off the bubbles, probably prevents film formation too. All separation takes place in the drum. Sounds like the faster the better within reason, so the 8X evaporation rate could be a benefit over the 5X. The first and second Stumpf books are real gold mines.
Depending on what goes on at Cyclone, after we finish restoring Doble E-19, a return to the earlier design effort may be in the cards.
Jim

Barts,
As rare as the book is it was a good find at that price. Study it well and often.
As far as the Lamont circulation ratio the higher the better theoretically except this takes more power for the circulating pump, I would think that doubling the circulation ratio(and about doubling the pressure required) would require 4X pump horsepower. On Rods boat Lamont that put out abut 400#/hr steam the final pump design was circulation about 6,000#/hr-a ratio of 15:1. It took only 8 amperes@ 12.6 volts or 100 watts. That is why we could back the voltage down to 8VDC @5 amperes(40 watts) and still have an abundance of circulation. In a car one may want to double overdraw the boiler output for a minute or so for bursts of power(the water storage in the Lamont drum provides this) so chosing a higher ratio is a good idea There are many out there trying to get a grip on the whole Lamont circuit process after years of discussion. Just keep the Reynolds number coming out of the pump way above the laminar flow area of 6,000-8000) I used 50,000 Reynolds number at full output to insure the tube temperature could not rise above the saturation temperature by 100 degrees. The pump on Rods 5-6GPH firing rate boiler would easily suffice for the 12GPH Stanley Lamont(1070#steam/hr) designed for Jim Cranks desire for a 75mp condensing Stanley. In that boiler the Lamont circuit had 72 feet of tubing evaporating 1000#/hr with a heat absortion of almost 700,000BTU per hour With an exposed outer tube atea of 11 sq.ft it amounted tto 64,000BTU/sq.ft and was capable of much more with absolute full output safety.. Remember the 5:1 minimum circulation ratio is for full boiler output; when traveling down the road with half boiler output the actual circulation ratio would be double. Study Chapter 8 in the old B&W boiler design book until you dream the equations in your sleep-then a person can get a grasp on how to calculate what is going to happen.
Reminds me that a year ago or so had a most enjoyable conversation with Dr. Art Gardiner and we talked at length about the Lamont and things boiler. Most enjoyable and wonderful long conversation with another advanced engineer who learned the old way when colleges had test steam engines in their laboratories and we had the advantage of learning from actual testing way back then sliderules and all.
There are so many talented machinests and builders with money out there, I believe Dr. Arts quote was "hobbyists and builders build it first and then try to find out if it works by testing; the engineer knows how it will work and perform before building ever starts".
Good fortune on the book, took Kimmel many months to find one a few years ago.
Best to all, George

Hey George,

Am I wrong in believing that it is the tube temperature rise that is the most important goal in regards to boiler heat transfer?

You stated that your design goal was to keep the tube within 100 deg F of the saturation of the water/steam, what would be your recomendation for max tube temp rise for a natural circulation boiler? I have been calculating the boilers that far in depth, but havn't really seen in my books a recomendation as to max tube temp rise, especially for a very short tube where warpage isn't a significant concern.

Caleb Ramsby

Caleb,
It is very important if one wants to use the cheapest boiler tubing(like SA-106) in the hottest heat transfer sections but is not the only factor at all. It is the chief factor when using such inexpensive tubing instead of inconel or hastalloy, ask Jim about the Lear boiler in the racecar!
I am in a very tired place right now and will give an answere some thought, perhaps in a day or two. Sometimes the answeres do not come quickly and require thought other than "off the top of ones head". Just consider the larger the temperature differential between the gas bulk temperature and the receiving tube OD temperature in radiation determines the amount of heat transfer available, the tube OD temperature establishes the maximum safe temperature that the tubing can be used with safety, thus keepng it as close to the saturated steam temperature going thru it is a factor in all of this.
Later, George

Bart-George,

Found the book, buried in with the Hispano-Suiza and Rolls-Royce books. Didn't even know i had it.
Now to really study it; but first glance says it is one gold mine of information.
George, Now i see why you like only one tube and not many in parallel.

Jim

Jim,
God bless you, I know you are one of the few that understands the complexity of boiler heat transfer, glad you found the book besides having a copy of it ! An amazing collection of work in one small 170 page book by of all names Dagobert Rudorff in 1938 when steam was absolute king.
Where have all these most inventive steam minds gone. They knew so much more about stea without computers than we do with them..
As I mentioned previously to Calibe it is the turbulence maintained/Reynolds Number/Velocity of flow that if possible makes a single path possible in a small Lamont with minimal circulating pressure.
Nice message to receive before going to bed.
George

Hey George,

I should have been a little less vague in my question, but in trying to figure out a better way to ask it I believe that I found the answer that I was looking for.

I am already figuring the as fired tube temperature back into the equation so that isn't an issue, nor really is the strength tube temperature. SA 106 at 700 F allowable stress psi 14,400, at 800 F it is 10,800 and at 900 F it is 6,500. It isn't really the tube that I was concerned with.

What I was trying to determine was if there was a point reached when the difference between the temperature of the tube and the water/steam became great enough that there could be a flash point production of a steam bubble which would interupt the circulation in a natural circulating boiler.

Thinking about it a bit more, it is of course the vapor barrier heat transfer coefficient which is indicitive of this aspect of boiling, so it is then a matter of the water/steam side being able to handle the heat coming through the tube.

To get more directly to my point, what I am trying to determine is how fast the circulation rate will respond to a change in burner output. As you noted when starting a natural circulation boiler there is no fluid flow and if pushed too hard there will be spot production of a slug of steam which will allow the tube in that area to elevate in temperature greatly, thusly forming an impulse type of bubble formation, with it pushing the steam out of both ends of the tube. So I suppose what I need to do now if figure out how rapidly the burner can be ramped up without causing this to happen.

Even if circulation is already secured I have a feeling that if the burner is capable of producing massive amounts of heat transfer then it would be able to over power the natural circulation if it were ramped up too fast without giving the circulation circuit time to accelerate. In other words, the burner could outrun the circulation and if it did then it would stop it and the tube may burn out.

Ummm, so I think that I really have answered my own question. T

hanks for the thoughts George, get some rest!

Caleb Ramsby

George,
Now that i read it for the first time from cover to cover and certainly will two or three times more, this is one astounding little book of information. Not waving of hands, voodoo, reading of owl entrails, tea leaves, playing with recreational chemicals or just ignorant guessing and posturing, this is solid hands on first class information. And such a little book too. Pays to organize one's library once in while.
My guess is that when the Diesel got really good enough, the schools started to concentrate on them and dropped steam as the preferred power source. The new kid on the block.
We only got one or two days, the rest was the Diesel and especially gas turbines. Same time railroads were dropping steam for many reasons and airlines went whole hog for gas turbines.
Jim

I was thinking and maybe others that a restriction at the end of the evaporator tubes would might hold off some or all evaporation until it is released into the seperating LaMont stand pipe. But at pressure above someware around 450 PSIA the enthalpy of the saturated vapor is decreassing with pressure. Flow resistance cause a reverse pressure gradiant to the direction flow so would cause earler vaporation do to the higher pressure. That might have a flating effect on the vapor content as pressure drops in the direction of flow. It shouldn't have a signifiance unless the pressure differance is fairly high. But it is kind of interesting.

Andy

Atached plot of saturated Vapor Enthalpy

Folks

Just a general thankyou for recomending the Steam Generators book, I was unsure about purchasing this little volume but agree it is a gem. Found on ebay and delivered for $75.00. Cover a little tired but inside is good.
The book is available on google books but afraid this is not availble to we Scots due to British copyright laws.

A search on Internet Archive came up with an interesting 346 page book / thesis from 1952
A COMPARISON OF FORCED AND NATURAL CIRCULATION STEAM GENERATORS
By Walter Leslie Marshall, Lieutenant Commander, ''United States Navy
[www.archive.org]

Brian

Brian,
Thanks for the link on the 1952 book you found, will have to put some time into it in pdf file.
Much aappreciated, George

Awesome Brian thanks!

In doing a bit of reasearch about natural circulation flow conditions and flow types of mixed vapor/liquid I stumbled across a really excellent databook on the formulas for figuring out such conditions, as provided free by Wolverine Tube, INC.

[www.wlv.com]

Brian, hopefully England doesn't have anything against Wolverines!

They have two databooks, both in PDF form, the second one, which is actually databook 3, also has in it videos of bubble type flow conditions, as well as a very excellent spreadsheet which figures what flow conditions from your inputs, superb spreadsheet, increadibly usefull!

I ran across these a number of years ago, and I thought that they were downloadable as a single unit, maybe one must register, as it is now one can download the databooks by navigating through the chapters inside the pdf while on the web then using the save function to save that chapter to your computer. Actually this has its advantages, when reading it you only have to load a single chapter at a time, lot less load time if there is something specific you are looking at.

Caleb Ramsby

For the few of us that now have a copy of STEAM GENERATORS by Rudorff after studying the Benson and large Lamont chapters there are a few other chapters that are most intriiguing. Warren Doble went to Germany in the early 30's and Abner once and a while. So is it not surprising that their work there appears to have had an effect on the giant Sulzer boiler/power company as they developed(as in the Sulzer chapter) giant parallel flow forced (monotube) boilers that look like giant Doble boilers that could put out over 40,000#steam per hour. The pictoral of the "Sulzer Differential Temperature Regulation and Summation Valve" is priceless as to how far advanced that mechanical computer control system was over the Doble..
Another great chapter is the STEAMOTIVE, a alternative forced flow with recirculation to fit in a small locomotive, rectangulat in size. One can see the separating drum up above with all the tangential inputs from the parallel tubes. Wether it was a Lamont or a combination of Lamont and spillover cycle is not clear in my memory. So much good technical stuff in that book as well.
Make progress, George

My recollection is that the SteaMotive boiler was mostly a spillover design....most of the steam went once-through and the spillover portion was recycled. But seems like different references each tell a bit different story, my theory being that the boiler was in development and the reports varied according to the current configuration.

Ken,
Your comments are so true, there were a few attempts and modifications to it that could make it a quasi this-or-that boiler. That they talked about the water from the drum being recircultated but also the excess feedwater ratio being held fairly constant could make it one or the other.
A Lamont may be designed for a 5:1 circulation ratio at 100% boiler output but with 25% boiler output it wuld have basically a 20:1 circulation ratio with a fixedcirclulation pump output.
I wonder if the Steamotive was ever installed in a small deisel shaped locomotive and used is something I know nothing about. Just was another great effort to keep steam competitive with the onflux of deisels. I do get a kick out of the very fast steaming vertical Lamont peak load boilers that could produce almost 50#steam/sq.ft. per hour that I believe the Germans and Japanese used in their battleships for steam backup and reserve that made them faster than the best of the British ships. Now lets see, if a 23" Stanley boiler of 100 sq.ft gas flue area could do this it could produce almost 5,000#/hr and not its 320-400#/hr. Such a difference between a slow firetube boiler and a really well designed peak load Lamont boiiler should be observed.
George

George,
I was thinking last night about this and trying to remember what Besler said about why he used the spillover in all his commercial steam generators.
It wasn't for any superior reduction in heating surface area or size and weight, they were all built like brick outhouses, it was to protect the unit from his customers. As they had a warranty, the spillover made sure the dirt and sediments got flushed out of the coil stack on a regular basis. He said he never could be sure they would follow instructions and blow down the steam generators on a regular schedule. The blowdown did this for sure. I seem to think it was part of the automatic firing up cycle.
I have an owners manual somewhere, ought to look this up.
Again, the Lamont is king and that precious little book tells why. Or is it La Mont as I see here and there?
Jim

Hello Jim

On the patents his name is pinted La Mont and period newspaper reports show either LaMont or La Mont. Of French origin and not a member of the Clan Lamont. Interesting report of his death in 1942 at [fultonhistory.com]

Walter L. Marshall's thesis I linked to above is drawn heavily from the Steam Generator book but he includes a lot of data and tables which are interesting, at least to me.

Caleb
Thanks for the link, no problem to download. There are ways to access google books from UK but I'd probably be arrested and extradited to the USA, no joking!

Brian

Brian,
Unfortunately the link did not come up. I once had a copy of the newspaper obituary(can't find now) in where in great respect a fellow naval officer said he died from "a broken heart", suicide was not mentioned. That his own Navy would not use his high performance boilers and that the Germans and Japanese did during WW II could cause a broken heart for such disappointment. If you can find another link would appreciate it greatly. I believe ten or more years ago there was still a LaMont company in Britain that mainly were in the business to improve existing standard boilers with an added LaMont circuit in the hottest gas sections. I have another book/article showing original large LaMont boiler sections with pictures of the tubing sections, wonder in my mind how these things disappear!
Best, George

There are only a few bits of the Steam Generator book online at Google... evidently copyright is still an issue w/ that volume, but perhaps in 2013 or 2014.... Personally, speaking as an author, I'd like to see books that go out of commercial availability be made available via Google after some period of time, but that's pretty off-topic for here.

- Bart

----
Bart Smaalders [smaalders.net]

Hello George

I have checked and the link and it is still good. It is a large pdf file 1MB but if you right hand click and 'save traget as' it might work for you better.

Bart
Good to know that I'm not missing out this time. UK law is 70 years after the author dies, so I would guess 10 to 20 years time.

Brian

Musing things over, it's almost as if the Lamont boiler wants a turbopump w/ a electric motor to start things off... once the exit velocity from the coil becomes many times the entrance velocity (which is what happens when the quality of the steam goes from 0 to 10 or 20 percent), the coil could run itself w/o external power since we could tap a bit of the kinetic energy of the existing steam/water mix.

I don't know how to build such an animal, but it has its attractions...

- Bart

----
Bart Smaalders [smaalders.net]

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