Noughty Surus Engine

[Jo]

This morning was another "Naughty Surus" day: Just when I thought I had sucessfully stopped Surus buying castings the happy trumpetting sound from the dining room was a clear indication that he had another delivery of a set of castings and was laying them out on the dining table to admire them


As many of you will know he already has an extensive collection of castings for model engines and an increasing number of completed engines. Up until now few could be considered to be Elephant Sized, until this one  To get some idea of the size of this a couple of pics of him with some of his Stuart Engines: His No 10, No 1, No 5 and his latest set of castings.


He knows nothing of the history of this engine so what it is is just speculation but clearly this is an orphan and the castings have been maturing for a very long time. The Standards look similar to the Stuart No 1 but there is a pair of them like the original No 5 but this one is bigger  If it was numbered like a Stuart Engines this could be a No 0 engine.

Until I find out more details about what it is it is going to be known as the Surus size 0 Vertical Steam Engine or the Noughty Surus Engine

Jo

[Bluechip]

Hmmmmmm ..

Looks like the outer coating has fallen off.  Quick tickle in the blast cabinet or an illusion?

I would have thought they'd be rough machined by by now 

Dave

[Roger B]

Another interesting project  Is that a built up and pinned crankshaft?

Dave, maybe they were cleaned up with Snickers ice cream 

[Jasonb]

That's a big un.

What's the bore, stroke and flywheel diameter?

[Jo]

I have just started the clean up, the bore looks good  There is some deep water pitting in a couple of places in the castings but nothing which can't be fixed 

The crankshaft is built up and pinned Roger.

What's the bore, stroke and flywheel diameter?

Bore & Stroke = 76.2mm
Flywheel = 266mm diameter, 35mm thick.

If I make a box bed with 5mm clearance under the Flywheel the finished engine will be 600mm tall 

Jo

[crueby]

Oh. My. That is a big elephant. I mean engine!

[Admiral_dk]

Congrats on a new addition to the hoarding collection       

There must be something wrong with my eyes as I have no objection about a 3" stroke, .... but the bore looks like about a third off that in the picture 

Per

[Jo]

One needs a little something to keep you busy during Covid-19 lock down 

There must be something wrong with my eyes as I have no objection about a 3" stroke, .... but the bore looks like about a third off that in the picture 

The delivery service took this picture of the cover before it was delivered but as you can see they used one of those weird imperial measurement devices which are so difficult to read   

Jo

[Admiral_dk]

Okay - but going back to the original picture - it still looks like the stroke on the crank in the foreground is much bigger than the bore in the cylinder in the back .... is it "just" the angles / distance from the lens of the camera, that cheats me 

Well it will not be the first - nor the last time I get it wrong .... Oh well in this case it doesn't matter much - as long as the parts you got can be used together.

[crueby]

Okay - but going back to the original picture - it still looks like the stroke on the crank in the foreground is much bigger than the bore in the cylinder in the back .... is it "just" the angles / distance from the lens of the camera, that cheats me 

Well it will not be the first - nor the last time I get it wrong .... Oh well in this case it doesn't matter much - as long as the parts you got can be used together.

I took a look at that photo just now - I think the shadows are fooling you. Look at the aspect ratio on the steam chest laying in front of it, and the outline just visible in the photo. Bore is a little under the cylinder length, when you add in piston thickness it is the same. 

[john mills]

That looks like a nice size engine when will you start on it.


John

[Bluechip]

The delivery service took this picture of the cover before it was delivered but as you can see they used one of those weird imperial measurement devices which are so difficult to read  

Jo

Two reasons:

[1]  I'm weird.

[2]  The camera anti-shake is buggered. The first shots I took with the metric side of the rule were unreadable. 

Dave

[Jo]

That looks like a nice size engine when will you start on it.

Thanks John,

The first problem will be to decide what to do with it. I could draw it up as an oversized Stuart 5 with reversing gear but it came with only one Eccentric which implies no reversing gear 

In the mean time I have a few other engines to finish off    I will need the space to work on this one, the short term requirement was to make the castings fondleable without getting rust all over us.

Short term I have a lot of gardening to do 

Jo

[Jo]

The delivery service took this picture of the cover before it was delivered but as you can see they used one of those weird imperial measurement devices which are so difficult to read  

Jo

Two reasons:

[1]  I'm weird.

[2]  The camera anti-shake is buggered. The first shots I took with the metric side of the rule were unreadable. 

Dave

Excuses, excuses    Metric is just so much easier to work in.

Jo

[Bluechip]

   Aw strewth ......

Now do it with MY camera ....

It's an ancient 20 year old Hitachi.

The battery is shot, holds a charge for 30 mins on a good day. ( Providing you don't use it to take many piccys )

The anti-shake  ... well, ain't no longer there.

You can always buy me a new one if it causes you that much grief.   

Anyway, back to self-isolation. Just wondering if painting myself with Anti-Corona Dope might help ??????????? 

Dave

[john mills]

The metric ruler is readable but that imperial side is difficult to make any sense .i am happy to work in imperial inches or metric or mixture of both.I have spent the last 50years in industry working in both.
   John

[Flyboy Jim]

The metric ruler is readable but that imperial side is difficult to make any sense .i am happy to work in imperial inches or metric or mixture of both.I have spent the last 50years in industry working in both.
   John

John.......that is a "special" ruler made like that for "metricists" to use in pictures to reinforce their disdain for the Imperial System. 

Jim

[Jo]

John.......that is a "special" ruler made like that for "metricists" to use in pictures to reinforce their disdain for the Imperial System. 

No that is this one, which shows you need four scales (the 64th bit is out of the photograph further along  ) to do what metric does with only one, notice which one is at the top for drawing straight lines with 

Jo

[Jasonb]

I have a few engineers steel rules with half mm increments not those silly plastic things with 1/10th centimetre markings .

Back to the engine if it were intended to be a workshop engine then there would be little need for it to have reverse, large flywheel supports that thought as if meant for say a boat it would more than likely have had a solid flywheel rather than that large diameter spoked one.

You could make it up as something like an organ engine, again no need for reverse and about the right sort of size for a small one, my 2/3rd scale Tidman one is 540mm tall.

[Jo]

It is proving very useful for measuring these Victorian castings.

I am tending towards a non reversing engine as I have done lots of reversers 

Jo

[john mills]

No5 stuarts are fine looking engines and mine runs well on steam that set of castings will make a good engine too.
It is a lot more powerful than the 5s.I have a similar size engine 3" bore but 2 1/2stroke double size of KN harris
launch engine in his book  .they are good size engines.

[Jo]

I had forgotten about that engine, thanks John 

Having captured the general shape of the castings to an accuracy of whole millimetres  Puttting them together started to show some potential pitfalls which might account for this engine being Orphaned.

So time for a bit of pre-drawing casting fondling to see what we have got: If I put some screws to secure the standard to the bottom cylinder cover it is clear that the two standards are too narrow for the Base. (the Two sides of the standards have not been machined and have a draft angle on them which means it is difficult to square things up using them.

The one thing that should be square is the inside edge of the guide so by putting some parallels in there at 45mm spacing things at the top can be checked. The two standards are still a little short of the sides of the bottom cover so it would seem appropriate to increase the distance between the standards may be to 50.8mm   

And so the pre-drawing fondling begins, lots of variables to check once the constraints are known then the actual drawing can commence.

Jo

[john mills]

looks like some dinner adjust meant to be worked out ,could some of those machined faceless need remachining
makes a job like this interesting.Will be watching to see what you do.
the engine i built the drawings were drawn by someone how did not seam to know what they were drawing
they were doubled up from a smaller size.blatent mistakes were also doubled in size then vital basic details
were missed or changed so it could not have been put together.

   John

[Flyboy Jim]

Please excuse my ignorance, but is this an engine that would of been used in real life for something or is it just a really big model?  Also, any guesses how old these castings might be? 

Jim

[Jasonb]

I think I would be inclinded to try and keep the standards as you have them in the last photo as it would be easy to add some metal to the inside of the sole plate provided you have sufficient room for the crank and big end to rotate.

Something does not look right on your drawing, the standards stick out beyond the cylinder but are overhanging the inside of the standard, photos suggest it should be one or the other.

[Jo]

Please excuse my ignorance, but is this an engine that would of been used in real life for something or is it just a really big model?  Also, any guesses how old these castings might be? 

We are guessing they are a set of Victorian Workshop Steam engine castings and they would date from somewhere between the 1890's to pre WWI so at least 100 years old.

Something does not look right on your drawing, the standards stick out beyond the cylinder but are overhanging the inside of the standard, photos suggest it should be one or the other.

Yes I know It was a quick throw together to see if there was anything I should be looking further into... Like the feet on the standard being a bit narrow for the base  I am currently planning on bunging up the existing threaded holes so that the parts can fit together better.

But this is all after the gardening 

Jo

[crueby]

That engine would be big enough to power the wheelbarrow for your garden....