Post by classicsteve on May 13, 2009 20:42:53 GMT
Tel (and others),
After getting hold of a wood and brass half-beam engine (see separate thread) I have been looking up these half-beam engines. There are a couple of things I don't understand.
First is that the beam is a dead weight, I would have expected some sort of counterbalance on the flywheel. I suppose it is handy to always know where it will stop, but I thought they would balance it out a bit more. It may not be critical on a model, but on a full sized engine that is a heavy beam, surely it would surge on the down-stroke.
The other is that a lot of the Easton and Amos engines have the valve chest offset towards the top end of the cylinder. Why did they do that ? Easton and Amos engines dominate the pictures I can find of half-beam engines.
The problem seems to be that these engines came and went in the 1803 to 1860 slot, so maybe the literature is scarce, but some of the gurus out there must have old books and piccies.
Steve
After getting hold of a wood and brass half-beam engine (see separate thread) I have been looking up these half-beam engines. There are a couple of things I don't understand.
First is that the beam is a dead weight, I would have expected some sort of counterbalance on the flywheel. I suppose it is handy to always know where it will stop, but I thought they would balance it out a bit more. It may not be critical on a model, but on a full sized engine that is a heavy beam, surely it would surge on the down-stroke.
The other is that a lot of the Easton and Amos engines have the valve chest offset towards the top end of the cylinder. Why did they do that ? Easton and Amos engines dominate the pictures I can find of half-beam engines.
The problem seems to be that these engines came and went in the 1803 to 1860 slot, so maybe the literature is scarce, but some of the gurus out there must have old books and piccies.
Steve
