Oil Burning in Steam Wagons.
Page 1
Page 2
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
WITH the -continuance of the shortage of coal (Which, at the , moment of writing, shows little Sign of lessening) users of steam boilers are generally seeking for substitute fuels, and are closely examining, the claims of oil burners and their. attendant feed systems. The problem lti the case of stationary plant is not difficult of solution, because weight and bulk are not ,matters of importance, and the question of inconstancy of oil level does not arise. Suitable oil burners for vehicles, light and compact, are not available on the market, but, as it happens, their construction is quite simple and Well within the capacity of the workshop belonging to a steam-wagon fleet, and in this issue we have gone very closely into the details of a device which should give complete satisfaction. It is suitable for both horizontal and vertical boilers, and, whilst it will certainly prove effective, it will not be expensive to make, and therefore may be regarded as an economical expedient. which, when coal again becomes available, can be removed from the firebox and scrapped, or put aside for any other emergency. .
The history of the particular burner is not uninteresting. It was invented by an employee of one of our leading steam-wagon manufacturers, and was patented in the joint names of the cornpany and the inventor. A considerable amount of experimental work was carried out with the burner, and it, was found to operate with refined and crude oils quite successfully. When in operation a good head of steam was obtained, and there were no signs of smoke, smuts or—oily deposits, because the burner acted automatically and somewhat in the manner of the petrol carburetter of an internal-combustion engine, With the assistance of a steam jet to spray or to gasify the oil. One large burner or two smaller ones in theashpan can be employed, and the paver for himself recently drove a new wagon a hundred miles' journey to London, two of the smaller burners being fitted, and delivered the vehicle to the customer after a run which was remarkable for -the ease of control experienced and for the abundance of steam available throughout. However, the inventor is of the opinion that one large burner in the hands of a less experienced driver would be better than two small ones.
Particularly since the war, the price of fuel oil has risen to such an extent that the company who were joint owners of the patents decided not to continue the payment of patent fees, and the inventor, feeling equally discouraged, allowed the patent to lapse about a year ago.
Enterprise in Six-wheeler Design Necessary.
IN drawing attention, as we have done persistently, and hitherto alone, to the benefits that must accrue to the roads, as well as to hauling and carrying interests, from the adoption of six (even, where it be proved practicable, of more than that number) wheelstinsteadl of four on heavy motor vehicles, we have ,badlin 'view the need for . encouraging, first, the British designer and manufacturer to cope with the technical side of the problem of spreading the load over a larger area of contact with the road ; and, secondly, the Minister of Transport in the adoption of regulations that should serve to advance the design of vehicles which shall conserve our roads whilst conveying heavier loads than are permissible under the Motor Car Act of 1903 and its .Regulations. The limit of 12 tons total axle weight puts a definite check upon the development of. the rigidframed six-wheeler because the *comparatively high tare weight of such a vehicle leaves (but small margin for the pay load.
However, there is this measure of satisfaction . that, to the best of our belief, the Minister is willing to consider arguments that can be advanced in favour of increasing the permissible axle weights, and virtually waits for manufacturers of vehicles to show that they can, and do, produce vehicles which impose upon the road a pressure not exceeding, let us say, eight tons per axle and which spread that load over a reasonable area.
A duty now lies upon manufacturers to produce designs which shall meet the requirements, I and we...regard the matter as of considerable urgency lest foreign manufacturers get ahead and gain an entree into important markets, for it is fully realized that the make of vehicle first adopted in a prospective fleet is the one which will, in the great majority of cases, receive future orders, for the reason that, all other things being equal, the matter of maintenance and the problem of spare parts are simplified if but one type is employed in a fleet. British manufacturers, therefore, cannot afford to allow this question to be neglected for a moment
Putting the Case Before the Chancellor.
wE are considerably nearer to a return to motor-vehicle taxation by way of a petrol duty than many people would think. From a source invariably well informed in such matters, we understand that January 1st, 1928, should see the reversion to a system which must be more fair in its incidence, although it is not anticipated that the total contributions to the Exchequer and• the Roalyund will be less (proportionately to the number of vehicles) than. is'now the case. Quite apart from the fact that-the amount of duty paid' in respect of any vehicle would, in the case of a petrol tax, be proportionate to road user, there would be many advantages to users—in • particular, freedom from the present hampering restrictions brought about by the need for taking out quarterly licences. Many a vehicle is idle during certain months of the year, not because business is not offered, but'because it does not pay to license the vehicle. The delivery of new vehicles, again, is frequently held up until quarter day, because it is not profitable to license them for a period before quarter day.
We observe from a circular issued by the Royal Automobile Club and the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders that not only are those two bodies, acting jointly, offering to the Government "the fullest assistance in their power ". In respect of the intention of the Chancellor• of the Exchequer to explore the practicability of substituting a duty on motor spirit' for the present duty on heavy vehicles, but that they propose to offer suggestions of detail with reference to the revised schedule of duties applicable to commercial goods and public-service vehicles. Why, may we ask? Surely if it be thought desirable (as it certainly is) to place views upon this matter before the Chancellor, the suggestions shOuld come from the Commercial Motor Users Association, as representing the users, acting in co-operation with the manufacturers represented by the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders. Those two bodies are better acquainted with the needs of the case, and can present morT powerful arguments than any other combination, one of which is not concerned with the operation of commercial motors.