Steam & Excursion > Why Vanderbilt tenders?

Does anyone know the advantages and/or disadvantages of using a Vanderbilt tender? Why is called "Vanderbilt"? Thanks in advance!

In 1901, Cornelius Vanderbilt III, whose great-grandfather founded the New York Central Railroad, invented a cylindrical tender which was soon adopted by a number of American railroads with oil-burning and coal-burning locomotives.
Compared to rectangular tenders, cylindrical Vanderbilt tenders were stronger, lighter, and held more fuel in relation to surface area.

Railroads in the U.S. and Canada who were noted for using Vanderbilt tenders include:
Baltimore & Ohio
Canadian National
Grand Trunk Western
Great Northern
Southern Pacific
Union Pacific

CPRR Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> In 1901, Cornelius Vanderbilt III, whose
> great-grandfather founded the New York Central
> Railroad, invented a cylindrical tender which was
> soon adopted by a number of American railroads
> with oil-burning and coal-burning locomotives.
> Compared to rectangular tenders, cylindrical
> Vanderbilt tenders were stronger, lighter, and
> held more fuel in relation to surface area.
>
> Railroads in the U.S. and Canada who were noted
> for using Vanderbilt tenders include:
> Baltimore & Ohio
> Canadian National
> Grand Trunk Western
> Great Northern
> Southern Pacific
> Union Pacific

Would someone please elaborate on how the cylindrical design could carry more fuel than a rectangular one? It seems a rectangular shape would hold more volume to me.

Notice he said fuel, not water. The fuel compartment on a regular tender is surrounded by water, whereas the fuel compartment on a Vanderbilt tender is all fuel (especially so on an oil burner).

>Would someone please elaborate on how the cylindrical design could carry more fuel than a rectangular one?

The cylinder part carries the water; fuel oil is in the trapezoidal part at the front.

Railwaybaron, for additional information see this earlier discussion.

http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?10,1877030,1877172#msg-1877172

Cheers,
Jack



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/03/13 08:43 by africansteam.

Round tanks are easier to fabricate than square ones and do not need added reinforcement to keep the sides from bowing out from the weight of the water. Sacrificing some volume for less weigh, less parts, and more strength.

Think of how boilers are built. The barrel of the boiler needs no reinforcement to prevent bowing. Flat tube sheets (like a flat side sheet of a square tender tank) require stays and braces to prevent bowing and distortion from pressure. Round is stronger than flat.

Does anyone know why man hole covers in the street are round instead of square?

ddg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Does anyone know why man hole covers in the street
> are round instead of square?

Yes.

Er, I meant to say: because the manholes are round too?

In all seriousness: so that the cover does not fall into the hole. This question was also posed to me during a job interview a few years back--in German. At the time, I was not familiar with the German word for "manhole cover" (it's not the first word they teach you when learning a foreign language). The gentleman interviewing me asked me why "Gullideckel" are always round. I politely replied that I would be more than happy to answer the question, if only he would do me the kindness of telling me what the word "Gullideckel" meant. He laughed, stood up, and pointed out the window: "the round thing in the street". I gave him the right answer and I got the job (though probably not solely based on that fact).



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/02/13 18:08 by pennengineer.

It is an intrinsically stronger shape. Look at the shape of tank cars and consider that on many the tank must take the full pulling and buffing forces of the train (no frame). But, no, per foot a Vanderbilt tank carries less water than a rectangular tank. Otherwise they would have been more popular.

pennengineer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ddg Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Does anyone know why man hole covers in the
> street
> > are round instead of square?
>
> Yes.
>
> Er, I meant to say: because the manholes are round
> too?
>
> In all seriousness: so that the cover does not
> fall into the hole. This question was also posed
> to me during a job interview a few years back--in
> German. At the time, I was not familiar with the
> German word for "manhole cover" (it's not the
> first word they teach you when learning a foreign
> language). The gentleman interviewing me asked me
> why "Gullideckel" are always round. I politely
> replied that I would be more than happy to answer
> the question, if only he would do me the kindness
> of telling me what the word "Gullideckel" meant.
> He laughed, stood up, and pointed out the window:
> "the round thing in the street". I gave him the
> right answer and I got the job (though probably
> not solely based on that fact).

On the good old ESPEE here in Portland back in the 60's a conductor on the Clackamas Switcher (Jimmie DesChamp if anyone remembers) at least once referred to a carload of sanitary napkins (KOTEX at the time I believe) as "MANHOLE COVERS"...no sh..!

Dick Samuels



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/02/13 20:36 by EMDSW-1.

That is the sure call.


Nudge

Mr. Samuels, that's the funniest post I've seen here in a long time...

Cheers, Dave

Hillcrest Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mr. Samuels, that's the funniest post I've seen
> here in a long time...
>
> Cheers, Dave


Glad you enjoyed it...still chuckle every time I think of "stogie Jim" or "Peaches" as he was often called...but that's another story!

Dick Samuels

EMDSW-1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> On the good old ESPEE here in Portland back in the
> 60's a conductor on the Clackamas Switcher (Jimmie
> DesChamp if anyone remembers) at least once
> referred to a carload of sanitary napkins (KOTEX
> at the time I believe) as "MANHOLE COVERS"...no
> sh..!
>
> Dick Samuels

Damn, and I thought this was a family website....LOL

As long as were on the subject of consumer goods manufactured by paper products companies, I'm reminded of an SP job in the Oxnard area that switched (among other things) a plant that made "bathroom tissue". The DS called the crew on the radio and it went something like this, "2nd Oxnard job, what is your location?" "We're just getting ready to go up and squeeze the Charmin."

I always figured the Vandy tenders were used where the RR had long enough turntables to fit their extended lengths, as compared to the typical "square" tender tanks.

Minor refinement re: Street Manhole covers....

The embedded mounting ring for the flat cover has an interior annular ring of smaller diameter that the cover, proper.
It forms a circular inner shelf, recessed by the thickness of the actual cover.

This small ring is what prevents the original size cover form falling through it's own hole.

If there was not the "shelf-ring", then, YES, the cover would easily slip into the piping below.

Just to clear that up.
Wes Camp.

A book I have called "The Iron Horse" by Henry B. Comstock is a good history of American locomotives and steam going back since before there were railroads. I recommend it to those who are interested in learning more about steam locomotives but don't know where to start. But I've always had to chuckle about his comment about Vanderbilt tenders: That they "derived their name from that of the rail magnate on whose network of roads they were first used extensively." Hahahahaha. Remember all those Vanderbilts on the NYC? Neither do I. (I also didn't appreciate that the illustrations seem to be pencil tracings of actual photographs which are used without credit. Yet I still recommend the book.)

CPRR Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> In 1901, Cornelius Vanderbilt III, whose
> great-grandfather founded the New York Central
> Railroad, invented a cylindrical tender which was
> soon adopted by a number of American railroads
> with oil-burning and coal-burning locomotives.
> Compared to rectangular tenders, cylindrical
> Vanderbilt tenders were stronger, lighter, and
> held more fuel in relation to surface area.
>
> Railroads in the U.S. and Canada who were noted
> for using Vanderbilt tenders include:
> Baltimore & Ohio
> Canadian National
> Grand Trunk Western
> Great Northern
> Southern Pacific
> Union Pacific

I think one could add the Erie, KCS, and SAL to that list. AA

Stanford White
Carmel Valley, CA