22HP Minneapolis Return Flue Restoration

Here are some pictures of the canopy frame from last weekend.

This is Mitchell Dillon and Jeff Knutson.
PB290194.jpg


Another view of the frame.
PB290200.jpg


And onother.
PB290196.jpg
 
Jeff, Tom, Mike & the rest of the fine restoration crew:

What happened to the canopy?

Thanks again for letting me take the 22 for a spin! :congrats: Fantastic job! The trip was well worth the miles.

Beth
 
Beth,
As with all restoration projects the schedule has gotten a little stretched out.

Maybe if Jeff had a set deadline, (like NTA), the canopy would move up on the priority list!!!!

It was nice to finally meet you and I'm glad you and your group had a good time at the show. Next year come out a little earlier and we will show you some of the other projects waiting to be completed.

Tom
 
Made me curious too. My guess was something along the lines of "lover of steam". GOOGLE tells me it means "queen of steam". Cool. :cool:
 
Tom,

....you could make NTA the deadline for the new canopy....June 24-27..it would be one heck of a good time...East Mississippi meets West Mississippi...:thumb:

I'd really like to see it and as many other Minneapolis items come....that pesky trucking thing gets in the way though...how many shows can you hit coming this direction and back which will kick in for trucking?

I'm trying to sneak the scale prony our direction too...;)

Dan & Becky,

"Reine de Vapeur" was a running joke with Susan Stant...she is the "princess of steam" while I was "queen."

Beth
 
The more I learn about these engines, the more questions I have. As many know, National Threshers is featuring Minneapolis this year and hopefully the 22 can make it. The only return flue engines that have been around here are the Kitten and the Huber-until my spin on this engine last September.

In doing research for the feature, I came to learn that Minnie made the most return flue engines of any brand, but few remain under steam. We have multiple "normal" Minnies around here.

Question: I've been told that the return flues were prone to exploding:hide:, so how does the design of this new boiler over come the original flaws? The boiler pictures are fascinating and I'm sure the story is in them.

Got the canopy done yet Tom? :D

Thanks!!!

Beth
 
Beth,
I knew that Minneapolis made more return flue engines then direct flue engines, but I was not aware that they made the most return flue engines. I would have thought that Huber made the most return flue engines as that is all that they built.

An interesting fact is that the first few years that MTM was in business, they did not manufacture steam engines, but they sold engines. In 1887 they sold 20 Huber steam engines, in 1888 they sold 30 Huber engines and in 1889 they sold 40 Huber steam engines and 20 North Star engines manufactured by Upton of Port Huron, Michigan. On July 1, 1889 MTM finished there first experimental steam engine.

In 1890 a new $30,000 plant was added for the manufacturing of the MTM return flue steam engine and 125 men were added to the workforce and 26 RF engines were made. Until 1892 the boilers were made by E. P. Allis of Milwaukee and Freeman and Sons of Racine, Wisconsin. They also bought the rights to the Woolf reverse and abandoned the more complex link that they had used during the first two years of production. Thanks goes to Gerry Parker for these interesting facts.

As to your question about return flue boiler being prone to exploding I will give you my opinion. I was not around when these boiler explosions occurred so these are simply my observations and opinions. In the early years of the “farm engine”, most of the engines were built with return flue boilers, so any boiler explosion was more likely to be from a return flue boiler. The return flue, or Scotch marine boiler design, is still used today so I do not believe that there is any design flaw in this style of boiler. I would speculate that the number one cause of boiler explosions back in the day was the same as it is today – operator error. You can take a brand new boiler built today and if you run it low on water you run the risk of a boiler explosion. How much training did these boiler operators get in the real early years of the “farm engine”? My second concern is scale buildup in the boiler. Both of the return flue boiler that Jeff bought at the Rynda sale were full of scale under the fire tube. I have seen other return flue boilers with the same condition. Did these boilers get the washouts they needed? I see boilers even today that don’t get proper washouts. They also were stuck using whatever water was available and they didn’t have the water treatment we have today. So it is my opinion that most, if not all of these boiler explosions were caused by low water (operator error) of scale buildup (improper maintenance).

The big complaint on return flue boilers is the external pressure on the large fire tube. The fire tube is surrounded by water so the hottest the fire tube should ever get is saturation temperature of the steam, or about 325-350 degrees in the pressure range that these boilers are operated at. However, if the water level is low, or if the fire tube is scaled over on the water side, the fire tube could be overheated and loose it's strength. The steel will start to loose appreciable strength when it gets over about 500 degrees.

As far as the new boiler goes, it was built to all of the current codes and the steel is 27% stronger then what we assume the original boiler was built with. The new boiler also has welded seams which are 100% efficient instead of the 60-70% efficient seams on the original boilers. As an example, the shell on the new boiler is actually good for 359.7 PSI. I have no concerns about the safety of the new boiler.

It is interesting that many people have a bias against the return flue boiler, but the first thing to let loose in a low water condition in a return flue boiler should be the top row of tubes at the front of the boiler which should not cause a catastrophic failure. In a direct flue boiler the first thing to be exposed is the crown sheet which can, and has, caused catastrophic failures. Bottom line is, keep water in the boiler and keep the boiler clean.

We have been a little distracted in the shop with the installation of a new crankshaft in one of Jeff’s other engines. This is almost completed so we should be able to get back to the canopy very soon. Once we know the plans for the summer, we might get more motivated to get the canopy done.

Tom
 
ICLIDA;7481 said:
Beth,
I knew that Minneapolis made more return flue engines then direct flue engines, but I was not aware that they made the most return flue engines. I would have thought that Huber made the most return flue engines as that is all that they built.

Tom

Thanks Tom,

Obviously I misunderstood the numbers. I thought it was a bit odd that MTM would have built more than Huber.:thumb: Thank you for the correction.

I agree on the lack of education for the first batches of engines & poor water quality as well as washouts. They probably learned through literal trial & error. They didn't have the resources we have today or perhaps the ability to read the information.

I appreciate all of the facts and figures that you all have been kind enough to share.

Best Regards!
Beth
 
Beautiful machine. Got to see it run Fathers day weekend. Thanks for the pictures.
 
22 RF Minnie at NTA

I just received this photo from NTA photographer Michael North. This picture will appear on the 2011 exhibitor plaque as the engine won the Best Restored Engine. We really appreciate them bringing it all of the way to Ohio!

Beth
 
Lagging Mounting

Hi Jeff, Tom, and Mike; Do you have any pictures of how you attached the wood strip boiler lagging to the expanded metal under the jacket? :Shrugs: If it was in the thread I missed it. Was it a twisted baling wire type of attachment, or did you come up with something more sophisticated like welding nuts to the expanded metal and bolting the strips on? :scratching: Thanks, 3/4 A
 
3/4,
We nailed through 1/2" wide banding strips starting at the top and working our way down.
Tom
PB110060.jpg
 
Hi Tom; Thank you for the reply. That makes a lot of sense, especially for opening it up for later UT's :duh: . Still trying to finalize how I want to modify the 3/4 A to make future trips under the jacket easier as well as keeping my inspectors happy. I am not ready to lose the jacket entirely as many have suggested. Have a good show, :thumb: 3/4 A
 
Back
Top