Steam & Excursion > Is this an A.J. Stevens boiler?

I haven't seen discussion anywhere about the collection of old boilers sitting next to the CSRM Sacramento shops, formerly rip-rap along used along the former river front.

One boiler caught my eye (the one at left, below), due to the indented lower portion of the firebox rear wall below the door. I've been told that something like this was a feature of some A.J. Stevens designed locos. Is this a Stevens boiler? Has any detailed discussion of these boilers appeared anywhere?

EO

---

Where are those exactly? Can they be seen on Google Maps or such?

They are on the site of the old SP Sacramento Locomotive Works just north of the Amtrak station.

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.587354,-121.5024016,99m/data=!3m1!1e3

The one next to your subject: what's with the shape of the mud ring for THAT boiler.?
Must be that it was specifically built as an oil burner?

Notice the stepped-down position at the dirt level.

Wes C.

wcamp1472 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The one next to your subject: what's with the
> shape of the mud ring for THAT boiler.?
> Must be that it was specifically built as an oil
> burner?
>
> Notice the stepped-down position at the dirt
> level.
>
> Wes C.

Preface: I'm in WAY over my head here.

These boilers all appear to have lap waist seams (yes?), which if true presumably would date them them to pre-1890, at least. My postulated Stevens boiler has a much deeper firebox than the others - was this designed to burn wood?; the others, coal?

EO

If they havent been gutted, the best one should be used for a longitudenal section to show museum visitors What is inside a steam locomotive boiler.

Cheers,
Jack

hogheaded Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> wcamp1472 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The one next to your subject: what's with the
> > shape of the mud ring for THAT boiler.?
> > Must be that it was specifically built as an
> oil
> > burner?
> >
> > Notice the stepped-down position at the dirt
> > level.
> >
> > Wes C.
>
> Preface: I'm in WAY over my head here.
>
> These boilers all appear to have lap waist seams
> (yes?), which if true presumably would date them
> them to pre-1890, at least. My postulated Stevens
> boiler has a much deeper firebox than the others -
> was this designed to burn wood?; the others,
> coal?
>
> EO

Can't really see the waist seams in this photo. The
firebox roof sheets are obviously lap seams.

If you are talking about the circumferential seams
where the boiler courses are joined together, that is
a completely different animal from longitudinal lap
seams that have inherent weaknesses due to the design.

When soil remediation began, they found several ancient boilers buried out in front of the shops. All appear to originally have had wood burning fireboxes. I can only guess as to why they were buried. The best guess I heard was support in the surrounding swamp land.

Al told me there were more but those ones were the ones he was able to save. I do recall they are originals from AJ Stevens, fascinating stuff!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/16/17 21:32 by CaliforniaMachinist.

EO
If I remember correctly, during the tour of the shops during the SP convention, these boilers were part of the hazz mat clean up and we're found buried next to the shop.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/16/17 21:39 by dmaffei.

Realist Wrote:
> Can't really see the waist seams in this photo.
> The
> firebox roof sheets are obviously lap seams.
>
> If you are talking about the circumferential
> seams
> where the boiler courses are joined together, that
> is
> a completely different animal from longitudinal
> lap
> seams that have inherent weaknesses due to the
> design.

Here's a photo showing the waist seams of the loco behind the one in the above picture's foreground. The lap waist seam is clearly visible. A visual depiction of what happens when one fails can be found in an old thread where you guys educated me on same: https://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?10,3819129,page=1


dmaffei Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> EO
> If I remember correctly, during the tour of the
> shops during the SP convention, these boilers were
> part of the hazz mat clean up and we're found
> buried next to the shop.

Right next to the shops? in former Lake Sutter? In that case they could not have been dumped there any later than about 1906-07, when the last of the lake was filled in (according to Peticotich's "Sacramento Shops"). This fits my (ignorant) preconceptions, as SP then seems to have been busily replacing lap (waist) seam boilers on many of its older engines.

I didn't think to include the image at bottom, showing an early example of Stevens' "signature" early firebox (with that "indent" at the rear. This is part of an early 1870's drawing (at CSRM) of the replacement boiler for the J. G. Kellogg, a 4-4-0 that he and his brother assembled at Alameda Point (the fist Transcontinental RR terminal) in 1866, when he was Master Mechanic of the San Francisco & Alameda Railroad. I've never heard an explanation about what Stevens was hoping to accomplish with this design. Maybe one of you can figure it out.

EO

EO

---

---

Never heard them called "waist seams" before. The waist sheet
is at the front of the firebox.

The proper terminology is "longitudinal seams," and yes, those
are lap seams.

Realist Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Never heard them called "waist seams" before. The
> waist sheet
> is at the front of the firebox.
>
> The proper terminology is "longitudinal seams,"
> and yes, those
> are lap seams.


As I said, I'm in over my head, here. I stand corrected. Thanks!

EO

The only reason I can see for the s-shaped F + B sheets is to get longer tubes/flues and more boiler volume, since the rear axle would shorten the boiler otherwise.

Kimball Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The only reason I can see for the s-shaped F + B
> sheets is to get longer tubes/flues and more
> boiler volume, since the rear axle would shorten
> the boiler otherwise.


I was trying, unsuccessfully, to come up with a reason for that, too. IIRC, these were mostly 4-8-0 (and a single 4-10-0) so your theory makes sense.

-LD