Now What Have I Done..... '22 Stanley Steam Car

[nsbrassnut]

Hi Peter

 

Thanks for the picture.

 

It reminds me that I should have also included a picture of the clamps mounted on the wheel. My Stanley uses the Firestone lock ring wheel which is slightly different. The few clamps on the car that look similar to yours do appear to be the better fitting ones. The others don't appear to be fitting quite right. The point of the wedge is in between the rim and fellow, but the other end isn't touching anything.

 

Some pictures of the clamps on the wheel below.

 

 

[nsbrassnut]

Side note. I did run across an article in my Stanley reading so far where someone was restoring a SV later model with the modified engine. And one of the "defects" it had was that later SV model changed the rear axle final drive gears from straight cut that Stanley had used since the start, to bevel/helical cut gears (like many camshaft gears). I think the idea was to have a quieter rear axle as helical gears are quieter than straight cut. The problem with changing to the helical cut gears was that this now results in a significant side load on the gears pushing them to opposite sides against the sides of the case. If there are no thrust bearings, then there can be problems. For this application the designer should have used herringbone cut gears that have a double bevel/helix on the gear, half in each direction of the helix. Quiet and inherently balanced thrust. But an expensive gear to make.

 

The author of the article changed the drive gears back to the original Stanley design of straight cut gears during his restoration.

[nsbrassnut]

Here is another chassis inspection report. I pulled off the two front wheels to inspect and clean the front wheel bearings. Removing the hub caps showed that although the bearings were well greased, the grease didn’t look like what I’m used to seeing.  The back side of the wheels had grease coming out which suggested that something might be out of place with the grease seals. The grease itself was a very dark brown, thick semi-fluid material that I haven’t seen in wheel bearings before. It was very stringy when removed and varsol could hardly cut it.

 

This car is definitely different than anything else that I have worked on. The front wheel bearings appear to be unique and are different than anything else that I have run across so far. The inner grease seal retainer is fixed to the spindle instead of the wheel like most that I have seen. The felt seals were actually missing which explains the mess on the wheels. The design appears to need felt rings to be pressed into the groove on the plate on the spindle. Then a raised ridge on the inside of the wheel hub presses into the groove and runs against the felt to make the seal. Looks like I’ll be shopping for some felt to make some seal rings out of soon.

Edited April 4 by nsbrassnut (see edit history)

[nsbrassnut]

 

The wheel bearings have only a couple of letters and numbers and no makers mark that I can recognize. And both the inner and outer cones are “flanged” on the large side of the cone. The tapered roller bearings have flanges on one end of the rollers as well. I think the design was intended for the raise part of the roller to be able to roll in the groove in the cone, perhaps as a secondary way of keeping the rollers in alignment. I have never seen anything like this in a wheel bearing before, but have seen something like it in a specialty bearing book once. Fortunately, when cleaned the bearings, cones and cups all appear to be in good condition.

 

 

 

The king pins and spindles are in good condition. There is a slight bit of wear and movement in the spindle on one side, but not enough to get concerned about for now.

 

Next comes removing the tie rod for cleaning and inspection.

Edited April 4 by nsbrassnut (see edit history)

[Angelfish]

You'll be running Peking to Paris in no time. 

[nsbrassnut]

I spent some time on the Stanley this weekend.

 

The goal was to try to adjust some of the play out of the steering box. There is a bit more free play at the steering wheel than I would like. Currently the play is about 2" and I would like to get it under 1".

 

I thought I had some information on the steering box and how to adjust it, but it turned out my reference information doesn't cover the right year.  Some may have run across the website http://stanleymotorcarriage.com/735restoration/RestorationHome.htm where the owner of a 1918 Stanley 735B has told the story of his restoration. His car had a Warner steering box. I was also able to find some information for Warner in Dykes manuals for that period.

 

The access to the steering is not simple on this car.

 

The shiny box in the second picture is a try at an oil - water separator for the condensate from the condenser on the way back to the water tank that Keith added. The later condensing Stanleys can experience issues with steam oil in the condensate which can eventually get into the boiler and could lead to longer term damage.

 

After I removed the separator box and could get to the steering box I looked for clamping bolts and anything that might look like a form of adjustment. I think that the adjustment is to loosen everything up then turn the big nut on the steering column on the top of the box. This may turn an eccentric bushing to move the steering gears closer together to reduce the play.

 

Well that is the current thought. I was barely able to move the nut and steering tube a bit then decided to put it all back together and think about it a bit more.

 

Taking the steering off entirely is not in the plan for now, as it looks like the boiler has to come out along with one of the boiler support mounts in order to provide room for the box and column to come out the bottom of the car.

 

while I was in there I found writing on the side of the steering box. It looks like its a Ross Gear company steering box and not a Warner. And unfortunately, Ross is not covered in my Dykes book. So if anyone has any information on Ross steering boxes from this period it would be welcomed. I'm also going to post it under Technical and see if anyone there might have some information.

 

 

 

I

 

 

Edited April 14 by nsbrassnut (see edit history)

[nsbrassnut]

Hi All

 

I;m copying this over from the Technical section so that there will be a more complete copy of the story here.

 

Thank you for the comments and suggestions. I do agree that it would be better to remove it for a more detailed inspection and service. I did that with the tie rod and drag link. Off, apart, cleaned up, inspected then lubricated and re-installed. However, there is a problem with the steering box. Looking at the car it looks a lot like they installed the box on the bare frame, then built the rest around it. There is no path to take the steering box and column out without some potentially serious dismantling under the hood or perhaps even more. It has to go down through the firewall to come off. There is no removable panels in the body firewall or floor to allow it out that way.

 

Here are some pictures to try to show the problem.

 

Looking down on the steering box, it can't come up and out. The steam throttle is attached to the top of the box and above it is a water level gauge blowdown valve. Beside it with the fins is the boiler water level gauge.

 

From underneath. The steering box cannot come forward and down without removing the boiler burner assembly and fuel supply lines. And then removing steering column mounting brackets at the dash, it may be possible to tilt it and take it down under the boiler support cross member (which is bolted for removal if the boiler is out).

 

 

 

 

And then on top of all that. There may not be enough room to remove the pitman arm from the steering box before it hits the splash apron. Hopefully, if the frame mounting bolts are loosened first it would come off and allow the box to move in enough to get it off.

 

 

So yes, the box needs to come off to be serviced. But it may have to wait until later when I have the burner off when it comes time to inspect it and pressure test the boiler. In the meantime it may just have to stay "as is" for now.

 

Some more info on Ross steering next.

[nsbrassnut]

Some additional information. I spent some time going through my reference library looking for information on Ross steering boxes.

 

I found some notes that described a bit of the Ross history and design. From the notes, its appears that Ross started supplying steering boxes in the early 1920's or so. And that the early designs used shims between the main case and a side plate to adjust the mesh with the worm. After a few years, they redesigned the case to include an external screw and lock nut which allowed for the adjustment of the mesh of the pin and the worm with the steering still mounted in place.

 

Unfortunately, it appears that I have one of the earlier designs.  Here are some pictures from the Gasoline Automobiles reference book, c1940 that provided the additional information.

 

 

[nsbrassnut]

Here are some pictures to show that I did have the tie rod and drag link off the Stanley for servicing and inspection. The parts cleaned up well and show only minimal wear. I did find though that there should be some leather "booties" on each end of the drag link to help keep the grease in and dirt out. I have some left over leather from another project that may help make some that will work.

 

Its nice to work on an un-restored car where the bolts are all rusted and stuck. So far, nearly everything has come apart with hand tools and gentle force.

 

Now for a bit of a comparison between a Stanley and Ford Model T from the same era. The Ford weighs about 1400 lbs dry, the Stanley about 3,800 dry. You may see in the pictures where some of that comes from.😉

 

Here is the Stanley tie rod beside a Ford T one.

 

 

 

And the Stanley drag link beside a Ford T one.

 

Edited April 17 by nsbrassnut (see edit history)

[A Woolf]

I have a 1917 with a Warner gearbox.  We have had the steering box out of our car without removing the burner.  It is a neat trick and basically it involves clearing plumbing out of the way.  Then removing the steering wheel, upper dash bracket and pitman arm and removing the mast (cover) over the steering shaft.  The front of the car must be elevated and them it will just move far enough inboard and aft to clear the frame and burner.  It is important to note that my car has a stock size boiler and burner.  I doubt it would work with a 26-inch boiler in the car.   And your car may be just different enough it will not work.

 

Also, I have regeared the steering on my car to make it easier to turn and more pleasant to drive.  Several other owners of condenser cars with the Warner steering boxes have also regeared the steering.   If your Ross steering gear is worn out a future option you could consider would be to retrofit a Warner steering box and regear it.  Warner boxes do turn up from time to time.   

Alan

[nsbrassnut]

Hi Alan

 

Thanks for the notes. I have heard of some owners re-gearing their steering. One version was to cut and weld the pitman arm. But I'm not comfortable with that approach for mine. But I would consider changing to a different shorter pitman arm if I were to run across one.

 

Mine does have the 26" boiler. It also has the later style "kidney" boiler water level gauge. I'm not sure if that was being used by '17 or not. Together they leave very little space around the steering box.

 

I keep looking at the car and I think that the steering could be removed. Its just how many other bits have to be removed from it to gain enough access. It looks like the box has to move sideways about 2.5 inches to clear the frame (once the arm is off). But there is only an inch between the box and the water level gauge.

 

I am planning to remove the burner assembly anyway to inspect the burner surface. I have some concerns about possible surface rust that may block some of the burner holes since the car has sat for several years. There is a layer of light flaky surface rust on the top boiler tubesheet and I expect to find more on the bottom. The burner holes are small and it wouldn't take much to plug some of them off. Fortunately it appears that the rust will brush off with only a little effort.

 

With the burner out and if the level gauge is removed and a hood shelf removed (to be able to flex the splash shield slightly to get the arm off) and of course removing the steering wheel and bracket it should be possible to jiggle and maneuver the box down out from under the car.

 

Presently the car is in what I consider my "clean garage" and I'm waiting until it gets moved into the workshop later this year before getting deeper into the dirty work like that.

[nsbrassnut]

Hi All

 

Just a short update this time.

 

After waiting about 3 months I went back and gave the leather another application of Leathertique. It didn't take much to make a "wet coat". The first time it soaked in really fast. This time less soaked in, but the appearance has improved. For the most part the leather appearance has gone from flat black to a mostly satin black. The front and rear cushions and front seat back have softened up noticeably. The back of the back seat does look and feel better, but is still somewhat stiff compared to the rest of the interior.

 

But overall, some improvement in both appearance and texture. A before and after comparison below.

 

 

[r1lark]

Leather is looking great! Amazing what some loving care can do for old leather.

[nsbrassnut]

Well, it bit the bullet and got new tires for the Stanley. As several others have comment in recent month the cost of tires for early cars has increased. And if you live up here in Canada with our beaver bucks, it can be really painful to bring in tires.

 

 

I did a fair bit of humming and hawing on just what tire to order and it took me a while to settle on one (as well as for the savings account to get read for them). Some have mentioned on the MTFCA website about the English Blockley tires that they have been bringing in for Fords. Blockley’s main specialty is vintage sports car tires. But someone talked them into making clinchers for Ts (both sizes now). And someone else talked them into making 34” X 4 1/2” straight side tires that fit a few vintage cars, one of which is my Stanley.

 

 

I did some comparison between their tire and the usual “brand x” competitor.

 

 

Blockley                     8 ply rating,                             load rating 1,700 lbs. @ 65 psig

Brand X (2 options)    4 ply nylon, 6 ply rating         load rating 1,250 lbs. @ 60 psig

 

 

Since the Stanley, fully loaded and with passengers can be pushing 5,000 lbs. the load rating starts to swing the choice. And the bonus, the landed cost here in Canada came out slightly less than for the US based brand x options.

 

 

For anyone interested here is the Blockley website. For some reason I have problems with emails with them, but once I called by phone everything went just fine. And the tires arrive 7 days after the order, and with more air miles in their account then I have!

 

 

https://www.blockleytyre.com/

 

While on the topic of tires.

 

 

Big cars need big tires. Not just now, but back then too. So, for some comparisons, tires for this car have never exactly been “low cost”.

 

 

From my library, 34 X 4 1/3, $36 to $56 each in 1922. A set of four with tubes could be over $200 CDN. When Ford Ts were going for under $500, and a new Stanley was running about $5,000 CDN landed here.

 

 

 

And from the Stanley’s library, 1948, $52.35CDN each plus tax. Keith only paid $600 for the Stanley and he had to get a new set of tires for it which cost mover than 30% of what he paid for it.

 

Here I am in 2024, and the cost of a set of tires and tubes today relative to my cost for the Stanley is almost as high.

While some things change, some things just sort of stay the same.😉

 

Edited May 2 by nsbrassnut (see edit history)

[nsbrassnut]

Just a short update. A tool arrived recently that every steam workshop likely needs to have lying around.

 

 

Pressure testing of the various tanks and the boiler of the Stanley are high on the “to do” list before going too far into the steam systems. I knew that I was going to be looking for a hydrotest pump and pressure gauges, but wasn’t sure where to start looking for the them. Then on a recent Saturday night cruising YouTube I ended up watching an interesting video where someone used a manual hydrotest pressure pump to actually push out the dents in their motorcycle exhaust system. It was interesting to watch and the process worked well for him. For me the interesting part was seeing that he had acquired a pre-made pressure test system that had all the basics already put together.

 

 

So off to Amazon to check out options and I found out that there is a multitude of pre-assembled manual hydrotest pump sets out there designed for plumbing/heating/HVAC work that I didn’t know about. After some humming and hawing I settled on a mid cost range one that looked like a good match for my needs. It’s rated to 750 psig test pressure which will cover the range of test pressures that I’m considering for the Stanley. This is a bit less than a new boiler would be tested at, but is enough to be able to test at 10% over the safety valve working pressure of 550 psig.

 

The pump came with a test hose with a refrigeration system connector when I would prefer to use regular NPT and compression fittings for test connections. So off to Princess Auto (our version of Harbour Freight) for a regular hydraulic pressure hose and fittings. Now to start checking the leftovers box to see if I have enough small pipe fittings to make up some test connections. Then it will be time find a small tank or two to carefully practice on.

 

Slowly getting closer to actually putting a wrench on the Stanley’s steam systems.

Edited May 10 by nsbrassnut (see edit history)

[wayne sheldon]

Sounds like fun!

[nsbrassnut]

Work on rebuilding the body on my ’13 Ford has been getting in the way of working on the Stanley. But I do need to get the Ford to a certain point of progress that it can be moved out of the workshop to storage barn so that the Stanley can come in the shop for the more serious work later this year.

 

I did reach a good point on the Ford recently to take a day to work out how to do some hydro testing for the various Stanley pressure tanks. After two trips to the hardware store for various small pipe fittings and bits I had enough to carry out a test test.

 

The previous owner of my Stanley had read about concerns for old brass materials being susceptible to stress cracking with age. Many of us have seen that with thin spun or pressed brass cracking with age on brass lamps. So, he removed the original thick walled brass small twin fuel pressure tanks and made up some replacements out of stainless steel pipe fittings. Fortunately, he saved the original tanks. When I looked them over the originals looked to be in good condition with no visible signs of corrosion or cracking outside or inside. One of the first things I ordered for the Stanley was a pair of replacement fuel pressure tanks from Vintage Steam Products. This left me with a spare pair of original tanks that were a good place to practice pressure testing. Looking at the tanks I believed that they were likely just fine.

 

The test pump came with a pre-installed gauge, but I also purchased one at Princess Auto to use as a cross check. I don’t trust the low cost off the shelf gauges to be too accurate so I wanted to use two and compare their readings. If the two were within 10% I would consider them reasonable for general use.

 

Connecting up the fittings and test pump weren’t hard. I included a vent fitting at the top of the tank to allow air out when filling the tank with water with the pump. Then shutting the vent pump would raise pressure more easily. I did learn a few thinks carrying out the first test. The pressure pump test gauge included a second red needle to mark the peak test pressure. I figured that it would move up when pressure was raised, similar to other gauges that move the secondary needle up to show the peak reached. The first pump stroke on pressure didn’t appear to move the test gauge at all and I started to think it was defective. Then I looked up at the second gauge on the tank and it read over 200 psig. My target pressure was 200 which was recommended in some SACA articles on servicing Stanleys, which is well over the operating pressure of 120 to 140 psig. Well, I almost over did the test. Manually moving the secondary needle on the pump gauge to a target pressure allowed the pressure reading needle to move right up. Turns out that the red second needle is a bit stiff and should be used to set the target pressure, not the peak pressure. The test pump came with very limited instructions and didn’t include this detail.

 

Releasing the pressure and resetting the pump test gauge target needle I started over. With all the air out, the test pump would raise the pressure to over 200 psig in less than one pump stroke. It doesn’t take effort much to pressurize water. Then I looked at the two gauges to see what they read. The one on the pump read 200 and the second one on the tank just over 240 psig. That’s about 20% difference, way more than I consider acceptable for this project.

 

On the other hand, when I started over and set the pressure at 200 on the higher reading gauge, locked the bleed valve and left it to sit the tank held pressure just fine with no leaks after an hour. The second tank tested just as well. So, both original tanks passed the pressure test. It also told me that I need to order a pressure gauge with a certification test sheet so that I have one that I can trust to show the test pressure more accurately than the cheap off the shelf ones. I have found a source in Canada. They sell the off the shelf gauge for $10, and the same gauge with a certification data sheet is $110. The price for getting the right materials.

Here is a picture of hydro test set up for one of the pressure tanks so that you can see what it looks like.

[DonMicheletti]

In doing a hydro test, it is good practice to calibrate the test gauge before doing a hydro.

If you live near a railroad museum that has a steam locomotive, they should have gauge calibration tools (dead weight tester). Perhaps they could help to do gauge calibrations.

With a steam locomotive that degree of innacuracy is unacceptable.

[nsbrassnut]

Hi Don

 

Agreed, for a good "formal" test a calibrated gauge is a necessity. This first test was a learning trial for me and a test comparison of "off the shelf" gauges. I somewhat expected the gauges to not compare well. And in the future I want to carefully test the Stanley gauges as well to feel that they are reading correctly so a more accurate gauge is needed.

 

Unfortunately, no operating steam museums near me. And since I retired, I can't carry a gauge into the power plant and ask one of the instrument technicians to do me a favour any more. 😉

 

I have ordered a test gauge with a calibration certificate. The certification may come in handy in the future if someone wants to confirm that the test gauge that I'm using is good. And I will feel much better with a gauge with a known accuracy. The cost is about the same asking a commercial shop here to carry out a documented calibration.

 

Once the new gauge arrives I'll repeat the tests for the original tanks and also start preparing for testing of the other tanks on the car as well.

[DonMicheletti]

Good solution

[nsbrassnut]

Follow up note on test pressure gauges. Good practice for picking a size/range for a pressure gauge is to pick one that where the target operating or test pressure is in the range of 50 to 75% +- of the gauge scale.

 

On the Stanley there is a wide range of system operating pressures. The fuel systems operate between 30-+ (pilot) and 130 +- (main fuel) psig, while the steam systems are operating in the 400 to 600 psig range. Then add 10 to 25% extra for hydrotesting pressure "used" tanks. When new, most of these tanks are tested at 2 X operating.

 

To follow the guidelines for sizing the pressure gauges I ordered two, on 0-300 psig and one 0-1000 psig. I got a bit of a break on the order. The calibrated gauges were 10% off and at the higher price qualified for free shipping.  So, in the end the cost wasn't quite as bad as I first thought.

[nsbrassnut]

Hi All

 

Its been a while since an update. Not too much to report on the Stanley front. The '13 Ford that I'm re-wooding is taking longer than expected to get to a point it can be moved out of the workshop to make room for the Stanley. And then the usual summer fun and chores to get done while the weather is good. Kind of typical for old car projects.

 

The certified pressure gauges arrived within a few days and are on the shelf for future use. I did take a couple rainy days and started to open and explore the spare Stanley boiler water level gauge. I have been fortunate that a few good spared did come with it to learn on. It has been another learning experience. More on that topic later when I get further along.

 

I did get some good news recently though. The previous owner's son found the spare wheel rim for the Stanley hiding in one of the barns on the farm. I was able to pick up up this week. Its a 25" Firestone three piece lock ring rim. Not the easiest thing to find some days. It is a very helpful item to have. I starting to think it might have been lost through the years as even Keith wasn't sure any more and it doesn't appear in any of the many older pictures of the car.

 

Drive Safe

 

 

 

 

[wayne sheldon]

Glad you got that rim! That size and style could be very difficult to get. 

 

Just some things to think about and consider while doing your pressure testing.

The reason behind putting water in the tank for pressure testing isn't that it is easier to pump up to the testing range pressure. Although that is a side effect of the real reason.

IF (big IF again) a tank were to explode while being tested? It is the pressure, how many hundreds of pounds per square inch, that will cause the rupture. Damage, on the other hand, is a matter of the expansion ratio of the material inside and under that pressure. Air can be compressed a tremendous amount, hundreds to one in extreme pressures. Water (most liquids to some extent?), on the other hand, does not want to compress hardly at all. Forget hundreds to one, not even two to one under extreme pressures.

IF a tank ruptured and exploded? The difference in explosive force from say a five gallon container between 100 percent air versus less than five percent air with over 95 percent water, is about the difference between a stick of dynamite versus a small firecracker that you could actually hold in your open hand and only get a second degree burn.

 

If the conditions were right (not too many cubic feet inside, tightly closed doors and small windows?), A twenty gallon tank with only air inside at high pressure could literally blow the roof off your garage! Mostly water inside? Things might get wet, and your test stand might be broken. But I still wouldn't recommend standing too close.

 

Illustrating the point.

[nsbrassnut]

Hi Wayne

 

I'm in agreement with your comments.

 

Rest assured that I have been down that path before. Hydro-testing of tanks and piping was a regular event when I worked in our local steam electric power plants. Pressurized air (or gas) is only used under some very specific conditions due to the potential explosive energy contained in a pressurized gas. A few of us were nervous engineers on our construction site the first time that we pressure tested a buried natural gas line with high pressure air instead of water. It was one of those rare exceptions where air was used as water could not be drained out or drying of the line ensured.

 

That was the reason I purchased a hand powered hydro test pump and calibrated test gauges. Using a hand pump also gives me some "feel" when pressurizing tanks for testing that doesn't come with motorized pumps.

 

The only place air may be used for testing would be in some of the plumbing connections where the volume is small and where water might be hard to get out afterwards.

 

A few years ago I scrapped one of my workshop portable air compressors when it developed a rust pin hole in the bottom of the tank. When I realized the hiss was not from a leaking hose fitting and found the leak from the tank it was immediately junked. And I took a punch and smashed the pinhole into a real hole so that no one else would could patch it.

[wayne sheldon]

It is all interesting stuff! I figured you probably had considerable knowledge yourself. Part of my intention in posting was to make other people reading your thread to give some thought to the reasons behind some of the things we do.

 

In the whatever it is worth department, and forgive a hopefully short thread drift? My great great grandfather was one of the survivors of the steam riverboat Sultana's explosion after the ending of the Civil War. If he had died, I wouldn't be here now. One of the causes of the explosion was a patched fracture in one of the boilers.

The actual death count was never known, as the boat had been overloaded, and they quit taking count or names. 1800 people were known killed, and the actual count is believed to have been a few hundred more. But that was a somewhat larger boiler.

 

So much history to learn about!

[nsbrassnut]

The Stanley came with a selection of spares and various worn out parts that could be used for future patterns. One of the nicer items was a complete spare boiler water level gauge that is correct for this car. This gives me a chance to open up, inspect, test, etc. the spare gauge to learn about how they work before I touch the one on the car.

 

 

First, here is the one in the car.

 

The level gauge is an interesting design of a specialized float gauge with a “non-contact” reading on the gauge face. Something to consider. The service conditions for this gauge are boiler water/steam that can be up to 600 psig and 500 Deg F. Typical hollow floats would not stand up under these conditions. They came up with an interesting approach to the problem. Instead of a single float on an arm, Stanley used two solid metal “floats” on a balance arm. The balance arm is drilled to mount a second shaft off center by the half round weight. Each solid weight is a different material, with a different length from the point of balance/rotation. The half round weight feels like lead. The round ball weight appears to be solid aluminum. The round one is definitely lighter than the half round one. When in air (or steam) the round end will drop down. When water enters the gauge, the round weight will displace some water and since it has a lighter specific gravity (I think I got that right) than the half round end, it will start to “float” in the water compared to the half round lead weight. This provides some “lift” to that end of the balance arm which then will rotate the shaft that goes up the finned extension from the body.

 

The finned extension is the end that comes up and just through the firewall so that the driver can see the gauge face. The upper end of this shaft is then attached to a magnet which also turns with the shaft. Then there is a heavy screwed on brass cap that provides a pressure seal beneath the actual indicating gauge. Then on the top of this nut there is a faceplate with the gauge numbers and a pin for the indicating arm to rest on. The arm is steel and then like a compass, the need will align with the magnet that is under the brass cap. Once assembled, there is no way that steam pressure can “blow out” the indicating gauge that is facing the driver. And with solid “floats”, the pressure cannot collapse the float inside the gauge.

 

The same principle is used for the level gauges for the pilot fuel and the main fuel in the tanks mounted at the rear of the car. I have since found out that this basic design was likely common back then before electric gauges started to be used.

 

And I thought that magnetic non-contacting indicating gauges were the neatest thing with I first ran across them at work about 25 years ago. And now I find out that the technology is over 100 years old.

 

Here are a couple pictures of the spare boiler water level gauge partially dismantled before is started to do some work on it.

 

And here is the spare one.

Edited July 25 by nsbrassnut (see edit history)

[r1lark]

Very neat, thank you for the pictures and great description. It has always amazed me how the engineers 100 - 200 years ago came up with (sometimes complicated) mechanical solutions for a specific need. 

 

I like to look at old steam engines from the late 1800s/early 1900s, and also hit and miss engines, just to examine the various linkages. 

[nsbrassnut]

The spare gauge needed a new aluminum screw on bezel that holds the glass on over the indicating needle. This should be a fairly straight forward small project, right.

 

 

It’s been a while since I did anything like this and I was a bit out of practice. So, in the spirit of another members notes on how a 5 minute job takes all day, here is what it takes to produce one new gauge bezel when you are out of practice.

 

 

Inspect old damaged bezel ring and come up with plan A to make a new one.

Plan A, make a steel threaded plug gauge to use to check the thread fit of the new aluminum bezel internal thread.

Search around shop and finally locate some aluminum round stock and steel round stock.

Chuck and center the steel round stock and turn to size.

Measure threads and change manual threading gears on lathe (it’s an old lathe).

Turn threads on plug gauge until both the old damaged bezel and the good one from the car fit.

 

Mount parting tool into tool post.

Change back to regular lathe gears.

Part off new bezel.

Change to 3 jaw chuck.

Mount gauge cap in chuck.

Put on new bezel.

Clean up inside diameter face of bezel.

Using fine wet/dry sandpaper and polish shine up the new bezel.

 

Change to threading gears.

Regrind tool a second tool bit for threading and mount in tool holder.

Start cutting inside threads.

Check inside threads with steel threading gauge plug.

Only goes in about one thread.

Make another threading cut.

Only goes in about one thread.

Repeat 3-4 times, threading plug only goes in one thread.

Examine more closely.

Notice that the “short cut” left the center of the new aluminum bezel “sticking up”.

Steel thread gauge plug has flat face.

Realize thread plug gauge is hitting on the raised center of the new aluminum part.

Call myself a “d--- a—" again.

 

 

 

Mount aluminum round stock.

Change lathe gears back to regular ones.

Turn section to target OD size.

Get out knurling tool and mount in tool holder

Aim to knurl only the top section of the new bezel.

Knurled the wrong end.

Call myself “d--- a—“.

Knurl both ends to at least look reasonable.

Try “short cut” of only turning out the outer inside edge of the new bezel.

 

Look at the original cap that the bezel goes on again more closely.

Realize that it fits in my hand and can be used as the thread fit gauge directly.

Try it in the new bezel on the lathe.

Discover that the new bezel threads have been turned oversize and its too loose.

Call myself “d--- a—” again.

Set up parting off tool in tool holder and cut off the now “practice” bezel.

 

Change back to regular lathe gears.

Face off aluminum plug.

Develop plan B to do a better job the second time.

Turn to size.

Knurl the right end of the bezel.

This time drill and bore out the center.

Using boring bar slowly open up the inside to the proper size.

Change back to threading gears on lathe.

Go to sharpen the threading bit and mount it in the boring bar.

Discover that the that I ground the bevel on the tool bit the wrong way when making the threads on the first try.

Call myself “d--- a—” again.

Regrind the tool bit and set up in the boring bar.

Slowly turn the inside threads.

Check fit using the original gauge cap.

Slowly creep up on the right size threads, one pass at a time.

Finally achieve a good fit.

 

Test assemble gauge head with new bezel.

 

Eventually, I did manage to produce a decent usable new bezel for the boiler level gauge.

 

There is a reason that I tend to by extra material for practiceing when picking up supplies for my old car projects.

Edited July 26 by nsbrassnut (see edit history)

[Rod P]

Like you said, "a bit out of practice," but you got there in the end, and job done. 

 

I am yet to fire up an older 'modern' lathe I inherited, so your learning curve isn't wasted on me. 

 

Enjoying learning about The steam car experience. 

 

Thanks. Rod.

[prewarnut]

It looks great! Any pic of your knurling procedure or left-over stock you can show with?

[nsbrassnut]

Here are some basic on the way I did the knurling on the gauge bezel. There are a few ways to do it, but this is the one that I used.

 

 

For most applications there are specific tools for doing the knurling. The tool that I used is a basic hobbyist grade one. The tool holds two hardened steel wheels. Each wheel is seriated at an angle, with opposite angles on the two wheels. The two wheels are also mounted in a collar in the tool that can rotate a bit so that the two wheels can press evenly on the surface to be knurled.

 

 

The tool is then mounted in the tool post and squared with the piece in the chuck that you want to knurl. Then line up the knurling wheels with the spot you want the knurl and lock the carriage. Then using a low rpm, slowly wind the cross feed and push the knurling tool wheels against the piece to be knurled. After a few revolutions the knurling pattern should appear on the piece being turned.

 

 

If you want a wider knurl than the tool wheels can provide, then you need to know the right pitch to set the carriage gears to the right setting to be able to make the knurl in one pass using the carriage gear drive. You need a good lathe and tools for that to work well.

 

 

My lathe isn’t very powerful so when knurling the pattern isn’t very deep or sharp. Knurling puts a good size side load on the part in the chuck and carriage, it helps to have a lathe with some power behind it when doing this.

 

 

Here are a couple pictures of the knurling tool.

And a couple of the tool mounted in the lathe and against the left over aluminum slug from the bezel.

 

 

 

 

Hopefully this will provide a basic idea of how the process works. I expect that if you check on YouTube you can find several videos that may show the process as well.

Edited July 27 by nsbrassnut (see edit history)

[r1lark]

I'm glad to see I'm not the only person left using a lantern style toolpost! 

[dibarlaw]

Paul:

To make up these aluminum oil caps for 1911-1915 Buicks. Using my 1950s 10" South Bend lathe I had 6 different lantern style tool changes as well as 4 tools set up in a turret block.

I was able to do all the operations except the straight Knurl for the one style of cap. The knurling tool holder I had was too large for my small lathe so I had to use my 1910 13" WF&J Barnes that I still run off of line shaft.

 

[nsbrassnut]

Larry, that's nice work. Can I have your workshop? 😉

 

Here are a few more observations that I ended up with when working on the level gauge.

 

 

The spare balance arm held a puzzle. It wasn’t clear how it was attached to the bar that goes up to the magnet under the needle. The hole where that rod goes it didn’t show any signs of threads or for a set screw. There was a set screw on the rod that holds the round aluminum ball and signs of threads on it that looked like it threaded into the fitting in the lead weight. Eventually I got the nerve to try turning out the set screw, which of coarse twisted right off. But with some care and vise grips I was able to carefully turn out the rod threaded rod. Then with after spending a fair bit of time measuring the threads and hunting up a #6 fine thread nut to double check the threads and confirm that the size was #6 fine thread. Armed with that I mounted filled the broken screw smooth and mounted it in the drill vise. And with some luck I was able to eventually drill out the broken set screw and recover the threads in the fitting.

 

 

The main part of the story was to eventually figure out how they lever arm mounted on the gauge rod. The method they used was to slide the fitting with the 1/2 circle lead weight onto the gauge rod. Then thread in the lever rod into the fitting. This lever rod is then tightened to act as a set screw to hold the fitting on the gauge rod. Then the one set screw locks the lever rod in place. The round aluminum weight is held on the lever rod by nuts and lock washers on each side.

 

The next finding was a surprise. Comparing the two aluminum balls, the one on the spare lever looked a bit more corroded than the one on the gauge. But the level rod on the spare had less corrosion than the one on the gauge. When measured, the ball on the spare lever was slightly smaller in diameter, about .060 to 0.100” smaller. Then I thought I should check the balance of the two. The surprise was that only the level arm on the gauge hangs correctly in air. The correct way is ball down. The spare when on a rod sat ball high, which would not work in service.

 

 

 

 

Some more thought. If you get into material science, aluminum and steel in water is a galvanic cell where aluminum is the sacrificial anode that will corrode first. Sacrificial aluminum anodes are used on some ships as a form of corrosion protection for the steel hull.

 

Comparing the ball on the gauge and the one on the spare, it almost looks like the ball from the spare has been swapped for the one on the gauge. I wonder? So, for now, the spare lever arm will stay a spare and there will be a watch for an aluminum ball of the right size in the future. Or one can be made, but not right now.

 

Stanley documentation appears to be very limited, and some of what I have been reading has actually conflicted information between two articles written at different times. It’s a slow process of doing some reading, looking for some drawings, doing some testing and lots of thinking and re-thinking when working on this Stanley.

Edited July 29 by nsbrassnut (see edit history)

[nsbrassnut]

The next phase of working on the boiler level gauge was to look into replacement gaskets between the main gauge body and the indicator finned “tower”, and the one under the gauge cap to the tower. These two gaskets are exposed to the boiler operating pressure and temperature. The working pressures that I decided to use for gasket material selection were 600 psig and 500 Deg. F.

 

 

The gasket needs to be made to the right size to fit into a recessed ring cavity in the body of the gauge and inside the threaded cap. The gaskets then “squish” a bit when the parts are bolted up to provide the tight seal under pressure and temperature. Here is the body of the gauge as I was digging out the well compressed remains of the original gasket.

 

 

 

Once again it took more than one try to get the right material. There was what appears to be an original new gasket in the spares box. The original gaskets for this service would be graphite/asbestos. Something that you don’t want to use anymore.

 

I did some online searches to look at Garlock gasket options. The first material that I picked out was a fiber based gasket material that looked like it should work I went over to the local industrial park and checked with a gasket material supplier. They guys at the desk were friendly and let me buy some off cut material at a reasonable price. They did however note that my choice was not what they would recommend for this service. They recommended a modern graphite/fiber/metal foil composite gasket material. The cost of that material is a fair bit more.

 

 

I did end up with some of each gasket material and then picked up a gasket cutting tool to try to cut some gaskets. The yellow fiber material would cut well using a cutting tool. But the graphite/foil material would tear up. So back to the supplier again. They have a custom CNC gasket cutting rig for commercial work. But then there is a set up charge plus the material and cut charge. These gaskets need to be well cut to fit in grooves in the mating parts so I did break down and have them do the set up and gasket cutting. I decided to have a few sets made to provide enough to do both gauges and some for the spares box. But unlike making a few gaskets for a normal car, these little gaskets ended up costing upwards of $20 CDN each!

 

The gasket material that we used was Durlon, a Canadian made equivalent to Garlock in the use. Here are some pictures to compare the gasket materials. This the one on the right is the graphite/foil material, but a hand cut version that failed my fit test. The new CNC cut ones fit much better.

Edited July 30 by nsbrassnut (see edit history)

[r1lark]

Well, $20 CDN is probably not too bad in my mind, when I compare with the cost of small gaskets for my Studebakers. Besides, you really can't put a price on safety and peace-of-mind.

Edited July 30 by r1lark (see edit history)

[nsbrassnut]

Yes, safety is an important item. But I should add a bit more perspective.

 

The "buy in" was $100 for the CNC programming for two different size rings before any were cut. Two ring gaskets needed per gauge. To get down to a price near $20 each required buying 6 pairs, 12 gaskets in total. I should have enough gaskets to last for a few gauge overhauls.

 

The next step was a functional test with water in the gauge to see how it responds. Using temporary gaskets I assembled the gauge and connected some pipe fittings and clear tubing so that I could add water. The water should come out the side connection when the gauge reads "-". The other scale markings are +- 1 and 2 inches from "normal".

 

The gauge worked well. But I also discovered that someone must have worked on the lever on this one before. If you look close the gauge needle is reading "backwards". The gauge is reading right, but its the round end of the needle pointing at the level and the needle is pointing to the opposite side. The magnet and the lever arm are 180 degrees out of sync. This will need to be corrected in the future if the gauge is to be used. Here is a picture of the gauge with some water in it and the gauge reading 2" "high".  And in case anyone asks, yes I did try spinning the needle to see if it would align the other way, but like a compass needle, it will only line up with the magnet one way.

 

 

 

 

[nsbrassnut]

Many of the early cars with long wheelbases and big wheels have large turning circles. My ’14 Hudson is 120” wheel base and 34” wheels and has a big turning circle and can be challenging going around tight turns. The Stanley has a wheel base of 130” and 34” diameter wheels. And the front frame has to be wide enough to hold a 23” diameter boiler. This Stanley has a BIG turning circle and I expect will be harder to turn than my Hudson.

 

 

Anything that reduces its ability to turn is something to consider. I do have some advantages to what the previous owner had when he got it back in 1948. There appears to be very little original Stanley documentation other than some factory bulletins and the basic owner’s manuals. If you needed work in most cases I suspect it was recommended to go to a dealer.

 

 

Keith kept his 50 years of SACA magazines and had collected some original and reprint Stanley owner’s manuals. To that I have added a set of reprinted Stanley bulletins and information from the Stanley museum. I have been spending time reading the back issues and the few manuals and often just time staring and looking over the car. And today you can go on the Internet and Forums and find a lot of good information there also.

 

 

I keep the car on axle stands to save the high pressure old tires an make it a bit easier to slide under. One day I noticed that the wheels appeared to not turn as far for left turn as for right. That only took a few months turning the steering back and forth and staring at it to figure that out by the way. The front spindles were coming against the stops and the left front tire was starting to touch the drag link when turned fully left. So the wheels were turning as far as they could go.

 

 

Then one day after re-reading one of the reprint manuals, that is actually for the 740 series, and looking at the chassis lubrication diagram I noticed that the drag link in the diagram looked different than the one on the car. The original 735 manual that came with the car didn’t have this diagram. The diagram showed a “crooked” drag link with a horizontal kink in it that would allow some room for the left wheel in a turn.

 

Looking again at the Stanley, the drag link on the car was mounted “straight” in a horizonal plane. The drag link did have a “kink”, but it was located in the vertical position. At first glance this would make sense as the kink would help the front of the drag link rise over the steering arm on the spindle.

 

Out came the measuring tape. And sure enough the difference in the amount that the wheels turned left and right was measurable,  nearly 2” when measured at the very front of the tire to the front spring at the extreme left and right turn position. I would expect most designers to aim for nearly identical turning of the front wheels left and right.

 

 

Another look at the drag link. If it was flipped end for end, it would also rotate 90 degrees when re-connected. So, I tried it. And sure enough, it would make a noticeable improvement in the ability to turn left. The drag link looks odd, but it does work that way everything joins up without any binding. The first try turning the wheels left the spindle stop hit the axle, but where the tire used to rub the drag ling there was now almost 2” clearance.

 

The spindle stop was a threaded bolt that could be removed, cleaned and adjusted to let the spindle turn more. When the stop was adjusted to let the tire nearly touch the drag link again the distance between the frame and front of the tire at maximum left and right turn was nearly the same.

 

The ability to turn left is still slightly less than turning right as the drag link still has to fit between the tire and the spring when turning left vs right. It may not sound like much, but when the turning circle is a big as the one for the Queen Mary, every bit helps. I suspect that the car has been like this for decades and perhaps even before Keith got it. If someone not familiar with the car had worked on it they could easily think that the factory position is wrong and reposition the drag link without realizing that they were actually making the car harder to steer.

Edited August 1 by nsbrassnut (see edit history)

[nsbrassnut]

Well, after letting the Stanley sit on the jack stands and a fair bit of reading its time to start thinking about some inspection of the engine. First some information on steam engine lubrication that I have been learning about from various sources.

 

 

Selecting oil for use in steam engines is different than selecting oil for ICE engines. There are two main classes of steam cylinder oil, compounded and non-compounded. Compounded oil has animal fats like tallow blended in at about 5% by weight. Tallow and hot steam actually mix a bit and produce a greasy compound that helps the oil cling to the metal parts. However, compounded steam oil doesn’t separate from water very well for this reason. The second type is a straight mineral oil that can withstand the high temperature of super-heated steam, yet still provide good lubrication in the engine cylinders.

 

 

The next problem is balancing the amount of oil to be added to the steam to provide just enough oil for engine lubrication, but not so much that the oil in the exhaust gets into the boiler where it can cause long term damage by producing sludge that can foul the boiler. The earlier non-condensing Stanley’s don’t have this problem. All the steam and condensate is exhausted out onto the ground along with the oil. This makes it easier to set the oil feed a bit generous to protect the engine and allows the use of the compounded steam oil. Condensing Stanley’s instead need to balance the amount of steam oil used and how to separate it from the condensed steam to reduce the chance of boiler fouling.

 

 

The Stanley factory addressed the problem by changing the boiler design from using copper flue tubes to steel tubes that were welded on the bottom to the tube sheet. Metal tubes were a bit more tolerant of oil in the water, but were also more prone to rusting out and failing than copper tubes. They also added additional boiler blowdown taps to try to help with blowing out the oil that would tend to collect on the top of the water surface in the boiler. Stanley changed the oil feed to a mechanical oiler with the 740 series which allowed for a finer control of the steam oil feed than the original direct drive piston oil pump design.

 

 

Today many recommend going back to using copper tubed boilers on the condensing Stanleys, and then add an oil – water separator to remove the oil from the condensate before the water is recycled. This helps to extend the boiler life while also reducing problems associated with corrosion of steel boiler tubes.

 

 

The previous owner elected to install a new copper tubed boiler. He changed the oil feed pump to one from a Model 740 which can meter the oil feed to a more precise level than the Model 735 pump. He also built and added an oil separator just before the condenser based on designs suggested in SACA articles.

 

 

When I opened the oil separator and found that very little oil had made it to the separator. I was also warned that there was a leak on the oil feed line to the steam line connection and not all the oil was getting into the steam. While reading through the Stanley bulletins I ran across a note that they made a change in the oil feed connection about 1921 with the addition of an “atomizer” and slight change in the connection position on the steam line. Later while going through the parts box that came with the car, I found an odd fitting that was the right size to fit in the oil to steam line connection. The fitting had a pair of “prongs” on one end that would extend down into the steam line. This would help the get the oil into the middle of the steam line where it would better mix with the steam. I believe that this is the atomizer and that it may have been left off due to corrosion and the concern that it wouldn’t seal. When I checked the connection on the car it had only a replacement pipe nipple connection. That style connection would only get the oil to the side of the steam line and you would have to hope that it would mix by the time it got to the engine. Here is a picture of the two side by side. The Stanley bulletins also state that there is a “front” to the atomizer that should be installed to face forward in the steam line. Unfortunately, any marking on the fitting has been lost to rust over the years so I am not sure which way around it should be installed.

 

All this information started to leave me with concerns about whether the engine had had the right amount of oil added when it was last run in 2013. The state of the engine in the Stanley has been a bit of a concern since bringing it home. Keith told me the story of when he went to bring the car home in 1948, they accidently broke a part in the rear axle drive to the pumps when they first moved the car and found that some parts may have stuck when sitting in storage. When we went to move the car out of its former garage spot, I did turn the right rear wheel by hand to check that the pump drive was working and not stuck. In the rush that day, I didn’t look close at the other wheel to see what it was doing.

 

When we first pulled it out using my friend’s truck, I did feel something jerk and “un-stick” just before it started to move. It was similar to the feeling when a sticking clutch lets go on a regular car. It was not a good feeling, but once it was rolling there was no turning back. The car towed easily and there were no squeaks or other issues while later when loading it into the trailer or pushing it into my garage. Once in my garage it went back up on stands and has stayed there since November.

 

Recently I decided to inspect the engine and rear axle more closely. Both rear wheels turned easily when I was inspecting the brakes. When I turned one wheel, the other rotated in the opposite direction which is normal when the main input drive is not turning. At the time I just considered it due to drag in the steam engine and kept on going. More recently I started to investigate this more closely.

 

First test was putting a block under one wheel when turning the other to see if the engine would turn over. That test failed; the engine didn’t move. I’m not that strong myself so I got a neighbor to come over. With one person trying to turn each wheel, all we did was wear ourselves out. The engine wouldn’t budge.

 

The next test was to remove the steam inlet connection and hook up a compressed air supply to see if that would provide a bit more “oomph” to move the engine. Unfortunately, 100 psig of air wouldn’t move the engine either. And on top of that, I could hear hissing and found that air was leaking out the engine exhaust and you could feel it when the radiator cap was removed.

 

Well, this isn’t good. Time to stop and think about the next step. It rolled into the garage so it shouldn’t be badly stuck. But it’s still not a good sign of what the inside of the engine could be like. The plan for the next step is to remove the bottom engine cover and insulation and remove the steam chest cover and look inside and see what the steam chest and valves look like.

Edited August 4 by nsbrassnut (see edit history)

[nsbrassnut]

I had some time recently and worked on opening up the steam chest for inspection. Here is a picture of the bottom of the cylinders before removing the insulation cover and insulation. The fitting is where the warm up drain is, the input shaft of the valve was already removed to get it out of the way when I took this picture.

 

I also disconnected the steam inlet on top and removed it and sprayed in some penetrating oil as a precaution to hopefully help with removing the fittings on the bottom. The steam chest cover is known for its removal lugs to break off. Keith had picked up a new replacement, the original in the parts box had both lugs snapped off. I wonder what it took to get it off the first time?

 

 

He also made a custom wrench adapter to remove the cover. This came in handy when I wanted to remove it. A strong arm wrench wasn’t enough to budge the cover so I borrowed my neighbor’s impact wrench. I’m not fond of using power tools on old cars, they can easily be too powerful and cause damage. So, I started at the low power setting and took my time. Eventually worked up to the mid power setting and the cover started to move. Some back and forth and more penetrating oil and it came off with no issues.  Here is a picture of the custom tool and how it fits on the cover.

 

And here is what the inside of the steam chest looks like. Those orange spots are small dry rust spots. Overall, I think that the inside isn’t as oily as I would like to have found it. I did find that one of the “D” valves wasn’t touching the valve face on the block That was why the air was leaking through. The valves are installed with a small amount of free play and can “float” on the valve actuating rod. The valves are held against the block face by steam pressure to make the seal when running.  I did figure out later that with some oil added to the valve faces they would then “stick” to the block and should make a better seal for air more air testing.

 

The next step was to remove the lock nuts on the D valves and slide them on the valve rod and spray some penetrating oil into the cylinders. There isn’t a direct path in, but with the tube on the spray can some of it should get into the cylinders. Now to let them sit for a while and hope that some of that oil may find its way to the rings and pistons. I didn’t want to put in too much oil so that they pistons wouldn’t hydro lock. Looking how the D valves float, any excess oil should be able to come back out, provided the steam chest is not under high pressure when the piston finally moves.

Edited August 5 by nsbrassnut (see edit history)