1 Steam Cars : Phorum
General Steam Car topics
Burner exhaust flue
Posted by: Mike Clark (IP Logged)
Date: February 04, 2005 09:27PM
<HTML>I am wondering about the full length exhaust flue on the noncondensing Stanley - do we need it and why did Stanley fit it? SSSSteamer's post describing a flue fire in the thread on jet sizes set me off on this train of thought.
Coffin nosed cars all have the long flue but condenser cars just have a downpipe which finishes in front of the firewall. I thought all noncondensing cars had a long flue but pictures in the Stanley Steamer book show many cars of 1906 to 1908 which don’t have the long flue, particularly the Model H. They just have the downpipe.
Since the flue can fill with condensed fuel, fuel vapour and oil from the steam exhaust which then burn or go bang would we be better off without it? I’ve had flue explosions which have inflated the long flue and lifted the smoke hood - without the flue perhaps explosions would be less likely to lift the smoke hood - certainly there would be no-where for fuel to condense and catch fire. It would be much easier to get a good run for the steam exhaust pipe if it didn’t have to go into the flue.
Would fumes or fire risk would be more of a problem for a coffin nosed car without a long flue than for a condenser car which has air flowing through the radiator and hood?
Mike</HTML>
Coffin nosed cars all have the long flue but condenser cars just have a downpipe which finishes in front of the firewall. I thought all noncondensing cars had a long flue but pictures in the Stanley Steamer book show many cars of 1906 to 1908 which don’t have the long flue, particularly the Model H. They just have the downpipe.
Since the flue can fill with condensed fuel, fuel vapour and oil from the steam exhaust which then burn or go bang would we be better off without it? I’ve had flue explosions which have inflated the long flue and lifted the smoke hood - without the flue perhaps explosions would be less likely to lift the smoke hood - certainly there would be no-where for fuel to condense and catch fire. It would be much easier to get a good run for the steam exhaust pipe if it didn’t have to go into the flue.
Would fumes or fire risk would be more of a problem for a coffin nosed car without a long flue than for a condenser car which has air flowing through the radiator and hood?
Mike</HTML>
Re: Burner exhaust flue
Posted by: Rolly (IP Logged)
Date: February 04, 2005 10:07PM
<HTML>Mike
It bothered me a lot when I was having burner problems and on occasion had a good fire coming out of the exhaust. But on the condensing cars the water tank is right there at the end of the flue pipe and extends back for about four feet. I never had any thing catch fire under the car. Just my fear. With my new Derr boiler my flue gasses are down to around 300° F. Of course the condenser cars are much lower to the ground as well and it would cut the ground clearance to extend it back under the water tank.
Rolly</HTML>
It bothered me a lot when I was having burner problems and on occasion had a good fire coming out of the exhaust. But on the condensing cars the water tank is right there at the end of the flue pipe and extends back for about four feet. I never had any thing catch fire under the car. Just my fear. With my new Derr boiler my flue gasses are down to around 300° F. Of course the condenser cars are much lower to the ground as well and it would cut the ground clearance to extend it back under the water tank.
Rolly</HTML>
Re: Burner exhaust flue
Posted by: SSsssteamer (IP Logged)
Date: February 06, 2005 02:18AM
<HTML>On the 1911 Model 85 7 passenger 30 hp cars that have been built, on most of them, the flue gasses dump right behind the boiler like they do on the condensing cars. They still carry their dummy exhaust flues to hide the feed water heater and to make the cars look like they should. I don't see any reason why not to build the model 85s any other way. On a totaly correct and original car, I would build it no other way than what Stanley did. Keep them looking original.</HTML>
Re: Burner exhaust flue
Posted by: Ben in Maine (IP Logged)
Date: February 06, 2005 11:40AM
<HTML>Hi,,,Of course the reason for having the exhaust exit with the flue gas, was to add heat to the vapor [steam] to thin out the huge cloud of '' steam'' at the back of the car. People objected to the cloud ,, and Locomobiles deliverd in England had a condenser to help w/ this problem,,no it just dumped the water. There has been at least one accident due to a following car not realizing there was a auto inside the fog bank..The feature of combining the flue gas and exhaust is a patented feature,,but for the moment I cant recall who claims it,,back around '98-'00 I think. A few people carry a clip on Hi intensity bicycle[I think] lamp to clip on ,for the road , and not be on the car for display. Cheers Ben</HTML>
Re: Burner exhaust flue
Posted by: Kobus van Jaarsveld (IP Logged)
Date: February 16, 2005 02:01PM
<HTML>On my coffin-nosed Stanley the exhaust steam from the engine is released inside the flue about halfway down it's length through a ±1½" Dia pipe roughly 15"long. The leading end is closed off and the open end points backwards.
This then acts as a venturi when the car is running and helps to ventilate the burner. I believe this to be original and I always thought it to be a rather nice idea.</HTML>
This then acts as a venturi when the car is running and helps to ventilate the burner. I believe this to be original and I always thought it to be a rather nice idea.</HTML>
Re: Burner exhaust flue
Posted by: Mike Clark (IP Logged)
Date: February 17, 2005 10:56PM
<HTML>Kobus,
I've tried using a shorter steam exhaust and one which goes right to the back of the gas flue - can't say I noticed any effect one way or the other on the burner although logic says there would be - maybe I haven't run with it short enough.
Don't you find the whole flue gets horribly oily and then drips onto your garage floor? At least with a long pipe it's the highway which gets oily! I suppose the steam in the flue would extinguish fires.
Mike</HTML>
I've tried using a shorter steam exhaust and one which goes right to the back of the gas flue - can't say I noticed any effect one way or the other on the burner although logic says there would be - maybe I haven't run with it short enough.
Don't you find the whole flue gets horribly oily and then drips onto your garage floor? At least with a long pipe it's the highway which gets oily! I suppose the steam in the flue would extinguish fires.
Mike</HTML>
Re: Burner exhaust flue
Posted by: Kobus van Jaarsveld (IP Logged)
Date: February 18, 2005 12:43PM
<HTML>Mike,
I have not changed anything from the layout as found on the car before restoration, thinking that I would preserve originality.
Yes, it does drip oil on to the floor, that's part of it's pedigree. It also sprays some oil on to the adjacent rear spring.
If I have a reservation about the layout, then it would be that I suspect that on max boiler pressure with the main fire out and only the pilot burning, a sudden opening of the steam valve can cause an instant draft through the burner and suck the pilot flame out........
Cheers, Kobus</HTML>
I have not changed anything from the layout as found on the car before restoration, thinking that I would preserve originality.
Yes, it does drip oil on to the floor, that's part of it's pedigree. It also sprays some oil on to the adjacent rear spring.
If I have a reservation about the layout, then it would be that I suspect that on max boiler pressure with the main fire out and only the pilot burning, a sudden opening of the steam valve can cause an instant draft through the burner and suck the pilot flame out........
Cheers, Kobus</HTML>
Re: Burner exhaust flue
Posted by: Dick Vennerbeck (IP Logged)
Date: February 22, 2005 02:55PM
<HTML>The sign of a properly lubricated Stanley is the square outline of oil that appears under the exhaust after sitting for a while. I have always regarded that oil as a welcome sight and not a mess to clean up. (Although it is probably not environmentally correct!)</HTML>
Re: Burner exhaust flue
Posted by: Ben in Maine (IP Logged)
Date: February 22, 2005 05:37PM
<HTML>Hi,,Put a small hook on the front side of square flue,,,hang a small pail before backing into garage,,Cheers Ben</HTML>
Re: Burner exhaust flue
Posted by: SSsssteamer (IP Logged)
Date: February 23, 2005 05:49AM
<HTML>In our museum, we have cookie sheet sized drip trays on the floor for the exhaust stacks to drip into. I am afraid that since I am such a busy person, I would blindly drive off to town with the bucket still hanging from my exhaust. When you back back into the stall and you back over a lipped tray, they make quite a clatter. That helps keep you alert after a full day of touring. :-) We have been out steaming quite a bit lately here in Western Washington. Lots of sunshine and no rain. We sent it all to California, and so far, Death Valley has received more rain this year than we have. Great weather for steaming.</HTML>
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.