Talk:Timeline of steam power
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list |
||
 |
This article lacks sufficient references and/or adequate inline citations. | ||
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. (assessment comments) | ||
| High | This article has been rated as high-importance within the Trains WikiProject. | ||
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject UK Railways.
|
||
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Transport in Scotland.
|
||
 |
This article is within the scope of the Timelines task force. |
John Smeaton published information about designing steam engines in 1774. This is not quite true. He did indeed experiment then, but never published it. The information was summarised by John Farey jr in the article Steam Engines in Rees's Cyclopaedia,(pub 1816) and he used it in his Treatise on the Steam Engine of 1827. Whilst some of Smeaton's papers survived the fire in Farey's office in 1844 these have not so far been traced. See my paper 'John Farey and the Smeaton Manuscripts', in History of Technology vol 10. I have amended the Smeaton reference accordingly Apwoolrich 07:02, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
No mention of Stirling engines?
When did superheating become practical? Paulc206 09:50, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Steam is still used in many (as far as I know, all) nuclear-powered ships, where the reactor is used to heat water which then powers the ship and its eletrical systems using steam-driven turbines. Most people associated steam with the distant past but as late as the 1980s (and, as far as I know, still today) Navy midshipment still study "elements of steam propulsion." Paulc206 09:50, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Savery influence on Newcomen?
I have a bit of a problem with the description of Newcomen's engine as an "unmodified Savery-like engine to pump a piston instead of water"(?!). I just do not see the link and think it more likely that Newcomen would have heard of Papin's experiment described in Acta Eruditorum published in Leipzig in 1690 in which he describes the action of condensed steam creating a vacuum in a cylinder causing atmospheric pressure to push down a piston. Moreover Savery's engine alternately used vacuum then pressure, whereas Newcomen only used the vacuum for the power stroke - or rather, atmospheric pressure, which is why his engines were called "atmospheric". The priciples involved had been well known since Heron of Alexandria, or so it seems to me. The confusion probably comes from the common name of "fire engine" for which Savery obtained a royal patent and which meant that Newcomen had to do a deal with him. --John of Paris 19:04, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Anti-vandalism
I just reverted the article to remove some vandalism near the begining of the article. 206.188.67.28 (talk ยท contribs) (OCT 25, 2007)
- Thank you. Well-spotted. EdJogg 08:31, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Unreferenced
How about a few references now?--John of Paris (talk) 17:25, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Steam engine before Savery
I don't want to edit the article myself, but I suggest someone who knows the details may want to add the fact that de Herrera, a Spanish inventor and architect, devised a steam engine much like Newcomen's almost a century before Savery's engine. It was used successfully to drain water from the Crown's silver mines in the Guadalcanal region of Spain. I've never seen an English language history of the steam engine mention his name, but I believe several Spanish language histories do cover the topic.Cd195 (talk) 04:19, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
- If you or any fluent Spanish speaker can trace the exact source, then obviously it will be of interest. The thing about Newcomen's engine of course is that it did not appear out of the blue but was the case of a practical man pulling together the results of a number of previous studies, notably Papin's. Personally speaking, I tend to trust this sort of story rather than look for an "inventor" because you can see the "working" - but let's see...--John of Paris (talk) 15:50, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
