Hi,
Well, my vaporizer issues still seem to be present. I have a 1918 735 with a 21" empire burner with a drilled grate.

I had been trying to burn #2 diesel, without much success, so, after making up about 5 different vaporizers I decided to just go back to #1 diesel which the local distributor claims is about as close as I can get to 1918 kerosene.

I fabricated a new vaporizer with 1/4" black sch 80 (could not find sch 40) seamless pipe, welded onto a 10" long 1 1/2" diameter grooved hot dog for a total length of 6' 2". Not running a cable.

Fired it up and it was burning fabulously, could cruise along at 35 mph with 450 lbs of steam on the level, even cycled off a few times.

After about 30 miles the vaporizer started to get restricted and performance suffered. I pulled into the shop, hooked up a steam enema and blew out a bunch of carbon. Then hooked the fuel line back up and drove another 5 miles before it nearly completely clogged up. I made it back to the garage with 100 lbs of pressure. Hooked up the enema again poked at the hot dog end and got it cleared out enough to put things back together, raise 500 lbs, take it all apart again and completely blow it out with high pressure steam.

It all seems to be clear now. It appears that the clog occurred in the hot dog at the end of the vaporizer loop. Is my pilot too hot or is there something else going on? I had very good vaporization with no smoke. I could fire up without using the pilot fuel, just but turning on and off the main fuel until things warmed up enough for good vaporization.

When it was working well it was as good as it ever has been driving the car. I think I could live with a bit of clogging if it would only do so after a couple of hundred miles, 30 just doesn't cut it.
Any ideas out there, Thanks, Eric

Dear Eric, You are closing in on your fuel troubles, one step at a time. The next step is to shorten up the main fuel vaporizer pipe to match your Empire burner heat and fuel type that you are using. I would start by whacking off 4" of vaporizer pipe each time it repeatedly plugs up until you have found the ideal vaporizer length that will give you good service. Make sure that everything has the correct clearance and location. Adjusting the length of your vaporizer by trial and error is the only way you are going to find the correct vaporizer length. None of our Stanleys have had plugged vaporizer tubes in years. I pull their cables about once every 800 miles of service and check them for carbon. No plugging problems yet. My vaporizer pipe is short enough that after the car has been sitting for about an hour or more, I have to use the firing up valve when it is time to leave or the burners will flood from too much kerosene going through a cooled main fuel vaporizer. I don't find that a problem to me at all. Proper fuel vaporization with enough heat is when the fuel just becomes invisible as it leaves the branch forks.

1/4" nominal pipe size is .540" OD. .302" ID for Sched 80, .364" ID for Sched 40. Are these common sizes for vaporizer tubes in Stanley burners? What size/type cable is generally used? What size did the Stanley factory originally use? Has anybody tried thermocouples or thermometers at or near the jets?

Peter

[note: corrected OD figure above, 6-5-09]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/05/2009 08:24PM by Peter Brow.

I fabricated a new vaporizer with 1/4" black sch 80 (could not find sch 40) seamless pipe, welded onto a 10" long 1 1/2" diameter grooved hot dog for a total length of 6' 2". Not running a cable.
Eric


You should use a cable. I use a 19 strand stainless ¼”cable, this keeps less fuel in the vaporizer tube requiring the fuel to move faster through the tube hopefully not letting it get as hot. Item 3458T91 McMaster-Carr $1.40 ft .You may want to use 3/16 with Sch 80 pipe Item 3458T28 $1.06 ft.
I get it locally from a sling supplier.

Rolly

Hi,,,Don;t forget a SMALL amount of water/ steam entering the vaporizer wil l cause carbon,,,can anyone recall the thread we had that on ??? Put a " T " and a petcock,,so any blowby of the enema valve will go out the petcock ,,Also be sure to put a checkvalve so that you will not over pressure the pilot or ballest tanks to boiler pressure,,,Good luck,,,Ben

The cable in the vaporizer tube has two functions: to keep the fuel swirling and not let it run along the hot bottom side of the tube and to regulate the amount of fuel in the tube so the fuel will vaporize as closely to the jets as possible. I am not sure about condensing cars but the Stanley non-condensers did not use a cable. They used individual wires in the vaporizer tube for the purposes outlined above. That makes it easier to have the proper amount of raw fuel in the tube for vaporization by adding or removing wires. I can attest this method works very well. I use 18 gauge annealed wire in the vaporizer tube in my car.

Stanley non-condensers did not use a cable. They used individual wires in the vaporizer tube for the purposes outlined above.
Ken

Ken what documentation do you have to suggest Stanley did not use wire cable on the non-condensing cars. There drawings are clearly marked wire cable.

I have built vaporizing burners using individual wires and yes they work very well. I used SS welding wire.

I am attaching a photo of the Stanley drawing. As well as the Empire burner Eric is using.

Rolly

Rolly:

I have a couple of original vaporizers to look at. I can count and measure the wires in them. I know Stanley called them cables but the factory made them up. One vaporizer has straight wires and the other one looks like they put the bundle in a lathe and turned the head a round or so while holding the other end of the bundle.

I run my 1911 with a Stanley burner with this setup on gasoline and it runs very well. I use 18 gauge annealed wire with 14 wires in the pilot vaporizer and 11 in each of the main fuel vaporizers. I have had very little carbon trouble since I started using wires.

Hi Ken,,,Do you still use the " Over the boiler " heating coils with this set-up,,,Some words of advice or observation would be appreciated,,,as not so many fire on gasolene these days,,,Cheers Ben

Ken I need to build a burner for an 18” 1906 boiler design. I have a new burner pan un-drilled with no air tubes and a cast-iron slotted original grate. All dimensions of anything you have would be appreciated.
My e-mail address is not hidden. Click on my name if you want to e-mail me.

Ben was the coil on the top of the boiler, and do you need it. I don’t think Bo is using it.
See attached.

Rolly



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/04/2009 08:05PM by Rolly.

I believe the top coil was so that anytime steam was up,,the gasolene would be a ready vapor,,at boiler saturated temp,,that being OVER boiling point of gas,,,Seems like a good idea to me,,,But what I see now'days are most all [including the 100% original cars,,haha ],,have later burner features,,and a gas pilot and k-1 mainfire,,An original burner can be an ugly animal I fear,,as well as the rest of it,,,The water indicator w/ string and pulley,,,,,the copper shell boiler,,NOT STEEL,,oh fun,,,Back to the question,,,I would guess the top coil would make things work better,,,I assume ??? that the steam autto was between the top coil and the [across the burner] vaporizer,,Hmmm,,,Is annyone running the superheater as it was on early cars,,[Driven into the tubes,],,,the one that if ya crack a tube,,,,boiler water/steam goes to the engine DIRECT bypassing the throttle,,Hey guys,,,,don't get too pickey,,Enjoy the ride while we all can,,There is only a limited amount of time for us to share all this info,,Cheers Ben

Hi Ben,

Correct, the 1906 Stanley instruction manual shows the steam automatic (main burner automatic fuel control valve) plumbed between the top coil and the main vaporizer. Some early steam cars had all of the fuel vaporizing tubing upline from the steam automatic. Sometimes the steam automatic valve was right in the burner jet, looking like a diesel injector pintle valve. These features disappeared after a few years, possibly (?) because of carbon in the control valve. I have the 1911 Stanley manual too, but can't find it at the moment. Entropy and chaos seem to have the upper hand around my office and shop lately. Seems to be the good (creative & productive) kind of chaos, fortunately. Good point on limited time for info-sharing; also, I am finding, there is only so much time for designing and building. Some time back you said something about the early Stanley burners being better than the later ones? I once took some courses from a college professor who was fond of a Victorian expression: "would you care to dilate upon that topic?"

Hi Ken,

Thanks for the fascinating info on the loose wires in early Stanley vaporizers. Have you measured the inner and/or outer diameters of your vaporizers? I think pilot and main vaporizers at that time used the same tube or pipe. A couple folks have told me that modern 1/4" sched 40/80 pipe is not original, only used in replacement vaporizers in recent decades for availability reasons, and that the Stanleys originally used 5/16" OD thin-wall seamless steel tubing for their vaporizers. I like to double-check things like that with as many people as possible when the issue comes up.

I am building a vaporizing burner (pilot nearly complete) and am looking for info on the best-running features. Some have advised me to use cables, others to not use cables.

Hi Pat,

I enjoyed reading about your great results with burner vaporizers. Years ago all I heard was that vaporizing burners are nothing but trouble, completely useless, can't get to the store and back without plugging, etc.. This didn't square with what I read in the older literature, about people driving thousands of miles in factory-tune Stanleys with no burner trouble. Amazing machines, these Stanleys.

Peter

I want to stress that when I am talk about Stanley vaporizers, I am talking about the single fuel system vaporizer with three 1/8” tubes welded together that came as original on my 1911 20 HP car. I am not that knowledgeable about later (1914 or later) cars nor too much earlier than that, for that matter.

Ben, I am not using a fuel heating coil above the boiler as the instruction manual shows. And I am using the three-tube indicator to monitor the water level in the boiler as came original on my car. Although my car is a 1911 model, it has a lot of 1912 model features that came on it when new.

Thanks for all the advice!
I got home again last night so today I dropped the burner and reamed out the vaporizer, still had some carbon in it. It had sagged some so was touching the burner plate in one area so I straightened things out and added two new supports, so hopefully it will not sag again. I could not get any stainless cable here except for 3/32" so, made up three lengths of that size cable and put them in, they extent the entire length of the vaporizer. I will try firing up on Friday and see what happens, I am keeping my fingers crossed and hoping this works, if not I will start shortening the vaporizer in 4" sections till all is good. Thanks again and I will keep you posted on the progress. Hope to have it ready by the tour next month!
Eric

Well, today was the day for the test and all did not go well. It fired up well, got steam up in about 15 minutes which is darn good for me. Then drove around town some, lots of stop and go, had to park for an hour or so with the pilot on, etc.. Anyway after about 8 miles it started to clog-up and spit out little bits of carbon to plug up the jet. By the time I got back home, after 10 miles things were pretty well plugged up and the cables are pretty well stuck, I will drop the burner and take out the vaporizer again and try to get the cables loose, then chop off 4" and try again. Eric

Hi,,,I didn't understand if the steam enema is part of the car or if you added the fittings as a temporery,,do it now only,,,,IF there is ANY chance the steam valve leaks the tiny bit,,,it WILL cause the fuel to crack,,Compressed air or oxy can be used to burn out the carbon,,,If using oxy,,,,,read the posts on that first,,before you melt the pipe or set the garage a'fire,,Ben

I don't have a steam enema hooked up all the time, I just disconnect the siphon line and run a pipe to the fuel line and take out the clean-out plug by the jet. I did manage to melt one of my earlier vaporizers!
Thanks, Eric

Eric,

I've just re-read your first post on this thread and think you should be reducing the hot dog which is where you say the coking up is found. I reckon 6 foot is a suitable length for the vaporiser but you are getting too much heat into it through the hot dog which is probably too long and because of the grooves is picking up far too much heat. I would get rid of the grooved hot dog. On my car (which runs on 50/50 petrol/diesel) the hot dog is plain, about 6 inches long and maybe 1.25" diameter. The whole vaporiser is 6ft with a cable inside. It almost never carbons up and when I pull the wire out which is very rarely, there is almost no carbon on it and I hardly ever have blocked jets. I don't have a steam enema and have never had to do anything to clean the vaporiser out in 8 years and more than 6000 miles use. So they can work well.

Mike



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/14/2009 11:35PM by mike clark.

Hi Mike,
You might be onto something. I just looked at the vaporizer on another Empire burner, it is 3/8" tube 84" long with a 7 1/2" long 1" diameter un-grooved hot dog. It appears to be length and shape illustrated in the Empire burner patent illustration that Rolly attached to an earlier post. I have borrowed this vaporizer and will give it a try in my burner and see how it works, it does not use a cable, the inner bore is about .277". There was a bit of soft carbon build-up at the last 1 or 2" of the hot dog that cleaned out easily. I noticed on the Empire burner patent that they refer to the hot dog as the vapor chamber and imply that it has a larger bore than the inside diameter of the vaporizer tube.
Eric

Eric
My hotdog on my 1920 burner was bored for a 3/8 pipe thread, about three inches deep and packed with stainless steel wool. This wool could be pulled out and cleaned when the branch forks were removed.

Hear is a photo of an empire burner showing the hotdog and vaporizer tube. I don’t like the way the tube is bent going into the hotdog.

I think you should still have a cable, ¼ inch SS. You could have it in two days if you call
McMaster-Carr Item 3458T91 $1.40 foot. 562-692-5911

Rolly

Rolly

There's a good reason for using a cable in the vaporiser which is to increase the speed of flow so as to reduce the build up of a hot gas insulation layer on the inner wall of the vaporiser tube. It also helps to avoid leaving a stream of unvaporised liquid down the middle.

I am sure the fuel vaporiser is the same as a monotube steam generator where the aim of the designer is to make the liquid flow fast enough in the evaporation zone that it wipes off any bubbles (of gas in the vaporiser, steam in the monotube) from the inside of the tube. This prevents bubbles from forming an insulating coating. This coating would reduce the transmission of heat to the bulk of the flowing liquid, reduce the cooling effect on the wall of the tube so it eventually burns out and importantly in the vaporiser also let the gas in these bubbles overheat so it cracks and deposits carbon.

It's also a good thing to reduce the amount of fuel in the vaporiser which lurks there after you have stopped and then wizzles out and goes bang in the burner.

Mike

I took a closer look at the 3/8" tube vaporizer and it turns out that both the tube and the vaporizer are Stainless Steel. There was just a little soft carbon in the last inch or two of the tube.
I will order some of that 1/4" cable from McMaster Carr when I get a chance. I dropped the burner and took out the 1/4" sch 80 pipe vaporizer and the cables are pretty well stuck so it might take a bit of doing to get it cleaned out and modified, thought I would cut down the hot dog to 7 or 8" as a start.

Eric you have been running this car for several years now. What did you do different to the burner vaporizer setup that you now are having problems?

I have never used sch 80 pipe for a vaporized. I buy 20 foot lengths ¼ inch 316L sch 40, last price was $9.50 per foot. I get three vaporizer pipes from each 20 foot piece.
¼ sch 80 only has an inside D of 0.302 you may only want to use 3/16 D cable.

Rolly

Hi Rolly,
Looking back on things I seem to have started having clogging issues shortly after I got the pilot to work well. That and increasing the fuel pressure from 100 psi to 140 psi. Those were the only two major changes other than re insulating the burner and fabricating a separate distance piece to hold the superheater (I kept the burner plate to boiler distance the same).
Previously the pilot had a larger jet that delivered too rich a fuel mixture with a yellow sooty flame.
I put in a smaller jet and now the pilot burns with a strong blue flame.
The empire burner has an isinglass window where you can view the pilot in action, it burns really well "cold" on 4 lbs of pressure but I have to boost it to 10 lbs when things heat up after a couple of miles of driving. Also when the main fire kicks in the pilot blows out (too much pressure in the burner?) unless I have my steam stack draft valve opened up.
Thanks, Eric

Sounds like you answered your own question.
You’re over cooking your hotdog. You need to cut your pilot back some. If you can’t cut back on the burn rate or pressure you could plug some of the holes with furnace cement. Never done that and not sure I like it but worth a try to see if that is your problem.
I had some pilot blowouts and used a nichrome wire coil under my hotdog, this stayed bright red and would relight the pilot. Worked good.

Rolly

Hi,,,Random thoughts,,,If when the main fire comes on,,think of how the vapor gets directed UNDER the grate,,you want the vapor to go back,,make a U turn and START to come up around the pilot,,,,IF the vapor comes up at the rear first,,then fills the chamber first,,there will be a whoom,,[or ?] and this is what blows the pilot out,,,Rolly's wire is good and should make improvement or cure,,,But look for the vapor trail,,just to see whats going on,,The baffles under the grate are the key,,I looked at one of my empire burners and the hot dog is smaller dia,,and longer than Stanley,,,AND it has a heat shield spot welded to the underside of the hotdog,,,U shape,,,I hope this helps some,,,and does not add confusion,,,Did the ancient Greeks have a God of burner grates,,,if so ,,we need replicas for condenser cap,,, :=} Cheers Ben

Hi Ben The only photo I have of your burner is with the remote extended pilot.
I also have another photo of the two different types of pilots.
See attached.

Rolly

Hi Rolly,,,The 23" burner that I looked at is under the Henee 14" inch lathe,,behind the big red touring car,,[French],,your photo is the 26" burner that went with the 1920 - 735 Stanley,,Ben

I think I found it Ben
You know Ben its not easy getting the satellite to look through a skylight and under a lathe.

Rolly



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/16/2009 11:21PM by Rolly.

yep,,,top left corner is the taper attachment,,,maybee index cards w/ # on em,,next time,,Good goin Rolly,,glad you could get the angle,, cheers,,Ben

Hi Mike & Everyone,

Interesting notes on the cable, in fact everyone's posts in this thread have been extremely interesting. The disadvantage of a cable in the vaporizer is that it seems like it should take longer to warm up from cold, and also too thick of a cable (or wire bundle) would impede the fuel vapor flow. I think it depends on the fuel pressure and firing rate. Lower pressure would require a larger flowpath inside the vaporizer, that is, a thinner cable, or none, for the same inner diameter of tube & flow rate. Likewise, a higher flow/firing rate, all other things being equal, would need a larger flow path. Too large a flowpath, of course, could lead to the problems you mentioned.

I am looking at a 2-mixing-tube burner, with one vaporizer per jet/mixtube, no hot dog or branches. Similar to the early Stanley burners. I think that 3/8" OD x .319" ID steel tubes, approximately 5 feet long each, no cables, should give enough heating area and flow path for 8 gallons per hour maximum total firing rate, 4 gph per vaporizer/jet, with 80 psi maximum fuel pressure and straight gasoline fuel. Gasoline is convenient, though recently its local price has gone from same/cheaper than diesel, to substantially more than diesel, which has me reconsidering diesel fuel, or a diesel/gasoline mix. Last I heard, David Nergaard was running his Stanley burner on straight diesel.

The lower pressure has fuel system advantages, and matches the Ottaway burner parameters, which I have designed the grate and mixing tube flowpaths to match.

The vaporizer I am currently looking at is the above tubing arranged in a sort of "S"-shaped, "double-hairpin" layout, basically 3 straight horizontal runs down the center of the burner, stacked vertically and linked by 2 tight U-bends, and about 1/4 of the tubing directly over the pilot. There would be 2 of these S-tubes, next to each other. If nothing else, it looks extremely easy to build.

Only building and experiments will tell for sure if this is any good, of course, but I figured it wouldn't hurt to post this for comment. Any ideas, folks?

The remaining design work (small details in the pumps & controls) does not look like it will affect the burner, but I am finishing it before burner building anyway. I have lost count of how many times one design change, dictated by available parts, materials, fabrication factors, etc, led to changes in seemingly unrelated areas of the powerplant. Glad I didn't build those "unrelated" parts before finishing the other design work, as I would have had to rebuild them, in some cases several times.

Ben: very interesting note on baffles and mix distribution through the grate at main burner lighting, and pilot blowouts. My burner design has horizontal mixing tubes below a very shallow pan, with tubes feeding fuel/air mix to the center of the pan. Pans, plural, actually. It is designed as 2 separate burners, side by side, to form a circular grate, 2 semi-circles with pilot between them. The mix flows radially outward in the pan, from the mixing tube ends, which turn 90 degrees vertically to join the pan. Small baffles at the entry to the pan direct the mix horizontally. When the steam automatic opens, fuel/air mix should flow up through slots next to pilot almost instantly; the far end of pilot is only a couple inches from the mixing tube ends/baffles.

One advantage of this design is that larger or smaller mixing tubes are easily installed, as needed, because of the mixing tubes' external location. No need to build a deeper pan for larger mixing tubes if those become necessary. Another advantage is that the shallow pan, with only a small volume under the grate, should give less cataclysmic backfires.

All: What is the function of a hot dog? In Stanley burners, these appeared at the same time that the main burner was modified to burn kerosene.

Peter

Hear are a couple of photos of a small vaporizing burner. You couldn’t get much of a cable two far in this vaporized tube and by the fittings on each end of the tube it would not appear that one was used. I’m not sure what it went on, most likely a small carriage early 1901 – 02.
I’m not sure how the pilot is set up in this burner; I think I took the photo because of the nice bending and different arrangement of the vaporizing tube.
Does anyone know more about this arrangement.

Rolly

Burner with a much modified vaporizer path,,as built by Judson Thompson in Waltham,,,Cheers,,,Ben

Well,
Looks like I will try a smaller hot dog. The one on my "original" vaporizer slid, as a tight fit, over the vaporizer tube. This eliminated two welds and probably also decreased heat transmission to the fuel, I might try this again. My pilot might be running hotter than it was before but I do not have any issue with raising boiler pressure at rest with just the pilot on, in fact the pressure decreases at about 200 lbs an hour.

A question on cables, do folks run cables that run the full length of the vaporizer including the hot dog, or only the length of the tube itself leaving the the hot dog without cable?
Thanks, Eric

Eric I have seen them run in from either end. Starting at the branch forks or from the fuel supply, mostly from the fuel end.
I always ran the cable in from the fuel end and never more then 350 degrees. If you go any more you will never pull the cable out. Or it becomes very difficult.
I weld the cable to a 3/8 threaded end and install a stop and make up a caped nipple. I remove the caped nipple and screw on a female I bolt to pull the cable out.
See photo & drawing.

Rolly

Hi All,
Well I put the remade vaporizer back in today. It is now the same 1/4" sch 80 seamless pipe, about 5' 5" long with a 1" diameter, 7 1/2" long hot dog that slides over the pipe. I steamed up and went for a short run today, I will have to run it more tomorrow. The first impressions are fairly promising though. It took longer to get it all warmed up and vaporizing than it ever has, it was a little wet until I started to get steam out the drip valve. It seems to burn fairly well as long as I don't completely open up the fuel valve, If I do that things get a bit smokey and wet again even when it is hot. So, what if I switch to a smaller jet size? I will try and run things as they are a bit longer to get it all good and hot to see how the performance is, as of now it looks like I might not be getting quite enough heat.
Eric

At the 2009 SACA/NW Steam Clinic and Tour, the main fuel vaporizer plugged up again on the way up to the Kilckitat River Road. this time Eric did a bench test of his burner before putting it back into his Stanley. The Empire pilot was violent in it's heat on the main fuel hot dog. The flame was unstable too. Eric found a part for the pilot light that he had been leaving off. It was an external tube that channeled the incoming air to the Empire pilot. After putting that back on, the pilot light settled down. Then after a thorough pilot light cleaning, the pilot light performed excellent on only about 2 or 3 pounds of air pressure. His 1918 Stanley performed excellent on the last three days of the tour in The Dalles.

Hi All,
Just thought I would update things. The tour did go pretty well and once things were sorted out the car went well. I dropped the burner again yesterday just to look things over and the burner plate and all looked really good, no soot, etc. for the first time in what seems forever! I think part of my problems probably stemmed from using too big a jet (a size 52). Things had been burning rich the first day of the tour. I had always assumed that the smoke from the burner was due to incomplete vaporization but it seemed to be that I was just putting more fuel into the burner than it could handle. When I got the car the fuel pressure was set at 100 lbs and I boosted it up to 140 lbs which probably made the mixture too rich. When I swapped out vaporizers I also swapped out the jet holder which had a # 56 jet. This seemed to do the trick allowing me to drive with the fuel valve full on without over fueling the burner.
I did have some carbon build-up in the vaporizer at the junction between the vaporizer and the jet holding assembly where I had a bit of a small leak, this joint is somewhat tricky to seal and will take a bit more work to get all squared away. Will get it all back together and try it again. This swapped out vaporizer is 3/8" stainless tube with a 1" diameter 7 1/2" long stainless hot dog. During the tour I put out the pilot at long stops so I did not cook the hot dog area too much.