Jump to content
dafi

Chain pumps on first and second rates

Recommended Posts

Druxey,

 

This would mean than that the chains along with their cups, would have been exposed?  Or do you think they just didn't include the tubes, etc. for simplicity's sake?   I'm thinking that this type of stuff was the "common knowledge" that was never written down.

dafi likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think one reason for the bad documentation is that that system was only needed about two dozen times in about 100 years - that is about the number of three deckers in the Royal Navy from 1750 on ...

 

But one could also see a development in the display.

 

It started perhaps as a mere longer chain to the upper deck to allow more people as seen in ZAZ0339 Royal Princess.

 

It became more and more encapsulated for security sake but especially to become less messy as water could drop back to the cistern without landing on the decks.

 

Next steps could have been the second extension.

 

And perhaps the lower cistern to be watertight and a cistern atop for reasons that we do not guess yet?

 

XXXDAn 

Edited by dafi
mtaylor likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Queen model implies one long, continuous chain to the middle deck, not a tandem bike-like affair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Queen model certainly implies a connection between the middle deck and the lower deck;  I cannot see anything that would enable us to be more specific than that,  though. 

 

If there is one long chain,  I find it difficult to visualise any reliable way in which the turning effort of the men on the lower deck would be applied to a chain that merely passed by in a vertical line,  and did not pass around any wheel.  The links and washers of the chain pumps were not of a shape which would be easy to grip when just moving in a straight line past the perimeter of a revolving object.

 

This of course is not to say that it was not done,  just that it is impossible,  without further evidence,  to be certain either way.

 

Mark P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Were I designing the instillation of the chain pumps, 'not really pumps at all, just water lifting devices using dippers to carry the water'. I would place a pump head or multiple pump heads on each deck that I wanted bilge water to discharge, each separate pump independently running to the bilge with no breaks or openings. On a man of war, seldom would there be a shortage of men to power the pumps and provide enough men for rotation on those pumps. Want water on one deck with a pump head, man that pump, have a lot of water to move, then man all the pump heads regardless of deck and open the scuppers. Not having any knowledge of how it was set up, the object still would be to lift water from one place to another using simple and easily repairable methods. Wonder if any method so far noted are 100% accurate.

jud

Edited by jud
druxey likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mark: thank you for your latest comments.

 

I don't think the 'tall' pumps were intended to be worked by crews on both levels. The arrangement was merely to place the team on one set of pumps on the lower deck, the other on the middle deck. As the shafts of the brake pumps were almost in alignment, both sets could not be worked simultaneously at the same level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Druxey;

 

I have been pondering all the points discussed,  and reading up on chain pumps as much as I could.  Unfortunately none of my reference works give any details,  actual or surmised,  about chain pumps on three-deckers.  I can only believe in 'tall' chain pumps if the motive force is not applied at all on the lower deck,  but solely on the upper.  For this to be so,  there would be no need to fit cranks on the lower deck for the 'tall' pump,  as turning them would do nothing.  Therefore any cranks on the lower deck must have been solely to work the pumps on the lower deck;  and the cranks shown on the model of 'Princess Royal's' lower deck,  passing into the cistern of those pumps which have trunking rising to the middle deck,  were simply passing through the cistern so that men could stand fore and aft and work the pumps on the lower deck. 

 

One proof of this would be that when the pumps were all raised to the middle deck,  there would be no cranks at all on the lower deck.

 

I think that the position of the cranks was far enough apart that both could be worked together if the men stood outside them,  not inside;  but I believe it was probably not common for both to be worked at the same time,  as,  if the ship was heeling over more than a little,  only the lee-side pumps would have been very effective,  as the water in the well would be mostly on the lee side;  although the connection between the cisterns,  or a single wide cistern as often fitted,  would mean that in extreme conditions,  both pumps could be worked,  and discharge from only one side of the vessel;  a very necessary requirement when the ship was heeled over so far that the weather-side pump dale was running uphill. 

 

A point of interest,  but which does not advance the final resolution at all,  is that during the trials of the Coles-Bentinck chain pump in the 1770s,  one of the reasons given by the investigating committee to recommend the adoption of the new pump was that it was easier to work and left the men less fatigued;  so perhaps in the last decades of the 18th century,  there was not a need to be able to add extra hands on a second deck to help work the pumps.

 

A note for modellers intending to show full details below the orlop is that the lower part of the return tube on the new pumps was actually left open on one side for a good part of its height,  to facilitate repair and renewal of the chain links and washers.  Although this part will,  of course,  still be largely hidden within the ship's well.

 

Actually,  a final thought has just struck me,  which is that in the event of one pump (say the aft one) being worked from the lower deck,  and one pump on the middle deck (say the fore one) a line of men could stretch out fore and aft of the cisterns on both decks,  each line working one of the two pumps;  whereas if the two pumps being worked were on the same deck and the same crank,  only half the quantity of men could be employed to work them.  Therefore raising one pump to the middle deck does allow for a greatly increased number of men to be working them;  which may have been the way you had always visualised it.

 

There is then no requirement for a secondary chain;  but why would all the pumps later be raised to the middle deck?

 

Mark P

Edited by Mark P
druxey and dafi like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

Pups on ships I have seen

Pumps on Victory gun deck (fot. 1-5)

Fot. 1 Elm tree pump

Fot. 2 Chain pump and crank

Fot. 3 Chain pump discharge

Fot.4 Two chain and one elm tree pumps

Fot. 5 Pump pipes in ship hold

Fot. 6-9 Pumps on Danish freegate  Jylland

Fot. 10 VOC Batavia elm tree pumps and Admiral

Tadeusz

 

post-8878-0-05734200-1418077899_thumb.jpg

post-8878-0-38028700-1418077909_thumb.jpg

post-8878-0-68239400-1418077919_thumb.jpg

post-8878-0-77301200-1418077974_thumb.jpg

post-8878-0-76563800-1418077984_thumb.jpg

post-8878-0-86693300-1418078572_thumb.jpg

post-8878-0-47676500-1418078629_thumb.jpg

post-8878-0-93128000-1418078637_thumb.jpg

post-8878-0-72545600-1418078646_thumb.jpg

post-8878-0-47731300-1418078938_thumb.jpg

Mark P, robin b and dafi like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the photos, Tadeusz. However, Victory has been re-furbished many, many times over the years and very little "original manufacturers' equipment" remains in her. Jylland is of a later time period and country and Batavia is also a modern re-creation. Your Admiral is lovely, though!

 

Mark: I agree with your latest assessment. However, I don't have either a theory or an answer to your final question at the moment.

dafi and Mark P like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

Information about the pumps used on British warships in
during the XVII-XIX century with detailed drawings can be found in the excellent books :

The Arming and Fitting of Englisg Ships of War 1600-1815 by Brian Lavery

and

Englih Man of War 1650-1850 by Petr Goodwin

 

Tadeusz

 

 

 

post-8878-0-21599300-1418151815_thumb.jpg

post-8878-0-34966300-1418151870_thumb.jpg

post-8878-0-26601300-1418151883_thumb.jpg

post-8878-0-31337400-1418151905_thumb.jpg

post-8878-0-55418700-1418151915_thumb.jpg

post-8878-0-52276500-1418151928_thumb.jpg

post-8878-0-60743200-1418151940.jpg

post-8878-0-55208500-1418151964_thumb.jpg

post-8878-0-71810500-1418151975_thumb.jpg

post-8878-0-48402100-1418151987_thumb.jpg

post-8878-0-42461900-1418151999_thumb.jpg

post-8878-0-71616900-1418152010_thumb.jpg

post-8878-0-50310300-1418152024_thumb.jpg

post-8878-0-98511100-1418152036_thumb.jpg

WackoWolf, dafi and mtaylor like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here some contemporary drawings of the "short" pumps

 

(Still have to look for the source)the-improved-chain-pump-1440.jpg

 

 

Parts of Victorys pump (date unknown) REL0450

http://collections.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/63556.html

large.jpg

 

Indus 1839 ZAZ6853

http://collections.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/86644.html

large.jpg

Thetis 1817 REL0407

http://collections.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/63513.html

large.jpg

Edited by dafi
mtaylor, Dubz, druxey and 4 others like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Tadeusz, 

 

Thanks for posting the pictures.  I too have both these books,  and have read the pump sections again,  and attentively,  in recent days.  Although full of information concerning pumps,  unfortunately they do not have any specific information about their use in 3-deckers.

 

Hi Dafi;

 

The sketch of 'Indus',  although dated 1837,  shows something similar to the inboard profile draughts that were discussed a few posts back.  The red dotted lines show the pumps 'as usually fitted'  which seems to imply that in Indus' case they were not covered over,  but left open for some reason;  which,  judging by the context,  seems to be to save space.  If so,  this must have been important for some reason,  for the amount of space actually gained is not large in the overall volume of the ship.

 

By the way,  the beautifully engraved picture of the chain pump,  with all its parts,  was printed by the Navy Board,  for distribution to ships' carpenters,  to help them with maintaining and repairing the new pumps.  There is certainly a copy in the NMM archives.

 

Mark P

Edited by Mark P
mtaylor, druxey, Canute and 1 other like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to proove how blind we sometimes are: I do believe, most of us saw this drawing of an early 19th century first rate in Arming and Fitting page 174 plenty of times ...

 

post-182-0-74093600-1422104661_thumb.jpg

 

I stumbled over it because of Robin´s question about the panelling of the great cabins. And I discovered something on the right edge of it ...

 

post-182-0-58361000-1422104393_thumb.jpg

 

... the extended pump, showing dales and handles on both levels. Best picture so far.

 

So the question is, does anybody have more information about this picture including the bow section?

 

Cheers and thanx, Daniel

Edited by dafi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see that this hasn't been responded to for about 5 months, but after reading this through, If I was on a ship which was collecting water, building up into the hold, and was working the pumps, I would have to wonder how long can she float.  Then I would be thinking, what if the water got above this pump crank level, does this mean there would be no hope to try to prolong her staying up long enough to get her to some land.  It would make good sense to be able to plug off the dale on that level, and retreat to the level above.  If there were more hands that could work the pumps from above, then we might have a better chance of staying off the water a bit longer until we could get farther.  So having the cranks working on both levels would be good.  HOWEVER, in order for the hull not to refill through the return line to the bilge, the return chain would have to bypass the lower station so any water at that level could not flow back down.  My idea would be that there would need to be a second sprocket follower to keep the chain held into the seat of the lower sprocket so the crank sprocket could keep the chain rising.  That way, it could be worked by both upper as well as lower drive cranks as long as possible, and once that deck became flooded, the work would have to be done from above with more frequent reliefs from the crew to give us more time to get near land.  I have noticed on the pictures that there was a groove to hold a plug over the outlet or hold a discharge pipe.  That would make it so the lower pump could be closed up but remain effective from the upper crank station.  That means that if you find any evidence of a separated return pipe at the lower level, then we might still have an answer.    Any other thoughts?

robin b, WackoWolf and mtaylor like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Walter for your input.

 

If the handles of the crank shaft in the lower gun deck have to be given up, I do strongly believe, that the ship is really lost beyond hope :-)

 

As you state the strongest guess for the upper handle is to have more men handling it. Other reasons are still not yet to be seen, as there seems to be enough fresh water pumps for washing and fire fighting.

 

Just rediscovered this topic as in another place there was another discussion about it and this seemed a good idea to check if any new resources popped up to this topic :-)

 

Cheers, Daniel

trippwj, Canute, donrobinson and 1 other like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect that the limbers were cleared by working the pumps from the lower deck. One would not want to to use more energy in raising the water much higher than water level. The upper set would only be used to raise water from the lower cistern to the upper deck for washing the deck down, etc.

mtaylor and WackoWolf like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Druxey, but this is what I still doubt.

 

The chain pumps are for the bilge water, and this - in my humble opinion - is not really suitable for cleaning. On top the chain pumps do not give water with pressure, essential for fire fighting with a hose.

 

Both Fresh water and water with pressure can be given by the elm tree pumps, getting their Water from the outside of the hull.

 

So still it remains a mystery to me, why the Princess Royal and many later drawings show cisterns in the middle deck, while early plans show just a part that could be interpreted as a cogwheel with handle.

 

XXXDAn

rybakov, mtaylor, Dubz and 1 other like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dafi: on reflection, you are correct: bilgewater would not be suitable. However, now I recall seeing a cross-sectional drawings of a ship showing inlets and pipes below the waterline for drawing in fresh seawater. These had brake pumps with outlets for each deck, not chain pumps.

mtaylor likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are plenty of these systems for fresh water shown in modern compilations and contemporary sources as seen in                                           #40                          and in NMM.

 

Some come through the bottom, some come through the sides, some straight into the pump, some filling up a cistern and being pumped from there.

 

And if one looks at all the links here in NMM about the heads and other fecal facilities, one understands, that the fresh water is taken from some way underneath the surface ...

 

In my understanding, the chain pumps were only to evacuate the bilge from normal drainage, condensation and normal leaks and of course emergencies.

 

But back to my mystery of the middle deck chain pumps: The "normal" chain pump for two deckers and lesser ships is quite well documented, as there were hundreds of them being in use. First and second rates were only about 30 in the whole time from 1760 to the end of the era. So that could explain the lack of hints about these "phenomena".

Edited by dafi
mtaylor likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×