Steamboats and other rivercraft - general discussion

[chborgm]

check this

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=lake+chiemsee+boats++in+50%27s&biw=1522&bih=846&tbm=isch&imgil=qHEAVse4ewIVnM%253A%253BGW0G__iH59YBwM%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fwww.chiemgau-bavaria.com%25252Fen%25252Fa-boat-trip&source=iu&pf=m&fir=qHEAVse4ewIVnM%253A%252CGW0G__iH59YBwM%252C_&usg=__rwSRSey-czOI0R427BYFQWxVx9o%3D&ved=0ahUKEwjkqsWq-tTNAhWJ9R4KHWlHB3cQyjcIKQ&ei=AMt3V-SqIonre-mOnbgH#imgrc=dqVFAo7gH1OjFM%3A

[Roger Pellett]

Several days ago there was a discussion on a build log regarding research for the steamer Chaperone and I questioned the absence of characteristic Ohio River yawl boats on a couple of well detailed models. It turned out that photographic evidence proved me wrong, but my question generated interest and a suggestion was made to move the discussion to this site, so here goes.

 

To me, most interesting thing about American Western Rivers steamboats was the way that innovators built these vessels to adapt to the then hostile environment that existed before the rivers were "tamed" with the current system of locks and dams. Conditions varied from very high water and swift currents to very shallow water. It was supposedly said that these boats could float on a heavy dew. In these low water conditions these boats using a system of heavy spars, tackles and their steam capstans could actually be lifted over sandbars.

 

Overcoming these navigational hazards also required a sturdy work boat to haul heavy hawsers ashore. Secured to large trees, these lines could warp the boats ahead. For this purpose, a specialized distinctive workboat called an Ohio River Yawl Boat was developed. Howard Chapelle described these boats in his American Small Sailing Craft. These boats were wide flat bottomed skiffs with considerable keel rocker and flaring top sides. This allowed the boat to carry heavy loads in very shallow water with ample stability.

 

Modellers wishing to include one of these boats on a steamboat model will find much information on the Internet. Googling Ohio River Yawl Boat will yield a number of interesting sites. First, there is a discussion on wooden boat.com, subheading Ohio/Mississippi River Skiff Yawl about these boats. Google books also has published Chapelle's small craft book. Both of these sources include Chapelle's drawings of representative craft. There is also an interesting article about Marietta, Ohio boatbuilder adapting this indigenous design to produce a inexpensive boat for high school age rowers.

 

Roger Pellett

Edited July 9, 2016 by Roger Pellett

[Cathead]

Roger, do you know if similar designs evolved along the Missouri, where conditions were quite different, and even harsher, than on the Ohio? Given that most Missouri River boats were built along the upper Ohio, it's certainly logical that the design you describe was supplied to boats destined for the Missouri, but I could also see a new subdesign developing in that basin to meet unique local conditions. I've never thought much about this aspect of Western River steamboats before, and appreciate you bringing it up.

[kurtvd19]

Yeah, Cathead, I agree - very interesting and I am going to do some checking on the sources Roger has cited.  I figured a boat was a boat - but being wider than average sure makes sense for the use.  The Chapelle book though is the one I do not have!

Kurt

[chborgm]

I have to ask this question. We talk about "Western Riverboats", yet you mention the Ohio River. What and where is the divider??

[Cathead]

In this context, "western" means the river basins west of the Appalachian Mountains. When steamboat technology was developing in the early 19th century, this area (including the Ohio basin) was still the frontier, and nearly isolated from the developed part of the country along the Atlantic seaboard. Much of the design and technology that went into steamboat construction on the upper Ohio River, where almost all the boats used along the Mississippi, Missouri, and Ohio rivers (and their tributaries) were built, was fairly indigenous and not imported from elsewhere. This is especially true since conditions on these rivers were very different from most rivers draining east into the Atlantic. So we talk about "western river boats" to mean the unique set of designs and construction methods that arose in that region, distinguishing these craft from the very different boats built for eastern rivers like the Hudson. Even as late as the Civil War, this region was still considered the "West"; it wasn't until the development of railroads that the Mississippi basin really became integrated into the rest of the country.

 

It gets a bit messier once you go west of the Rockies, to boats operating on the Columbia and other Pacific rivers. But as far as I know, these mostly derived their designs from the original "western" boats and so still qualify as such.

[chborgm]

I understand and it makes good sense to me. I was confused since I am from Pittsburgh and we consider things west of Cairo the west.

Thanks

[_SalD_]

I am fairly new to model ship building and have completed two wind powered sailing ships and would like to try a steam powered vessel for my next build.  From my local ship building club I acquired a set of plans for the Hudson River sidewheeler ‘Armenia’ by F. Van Loon Ryder, dated 1954, 1:96 scale.  What drew my attention to her was the interesting mechanism amidships that I’ve come to learn is called a ‘Walking Beam Engine’.  As of now I’ve just started to do a little research on her and in the process have acquired the three books pictured below.

 

Most of the information I’ve found by searching the web and in these books relate more towards the western (stern wheeler) style steamboat than the Hudson River (side wheeler) type steamboat.  I was wondering if anyone could recommend a book or website that might give me more information on the construction of the side wheelers, specifically the hull construction.

 

Thanks

 

 

 

[Cathead]

Sal,

 

That's a neat prototype, to be sure. Just to clarify, the placement of the paddle wheels isn't diagnostic of the boat's design or location. Western river boats used both stern and side wheel designs, as each has its benefits and drawbacks.

 

Stern wheels were generally better for shallow or snag-filled water, as the hull protected the wheel, whereas side wheels were quite susceptible to damage being exposed on the sides. In addition, stern wheels could be used to help a boat cross shallow bars or back off muddy shorelines; setting the wheel in reverse forced lots of water under the hull, "floating" it off an obstacle.

 

On the other hand, side wheels were more maneuverable, as they could be independently stopped or run in opposite directions, spinning the boat in place (at least on later designs with separate engines for each wheel). They also distributed the weight of machinery closer to the center of the vessel, reducing the "hogging" so common on stern wheel designs.

 

For rivers like the Hudson, which were deep and tame compared to the western rivers, side wheelers made a lot more sense, so that's what you mostly see. This is also true of the lower Mississippi, below the confluence of the Missouri and Ohio rivers into the main stem. But you saw a lot more stern wheelers as you went upstream to the upper Ohio and Missouri rivers in particular, and their smaller tributaries.

 

This is also the case because the western rivers, especially the Missouri, tended to have a lot of debris in them because their basins' geology wasn't as dominated by bedrock. Banks were always eroding away in huge chunks, dropping wads of trees into the river, and changing the rivers' courses regularly. By contrast, most eastern rivers like the Hudson are bedrock-dominated; they don't change course much at all and they don't erode their banks in the same way, so they tended to be "cleaner" of debris with more stable channels, negating the main benefits of stern wheel designs. So you tended to see side wheelers in the east, and a mix of the two in the West depending on where the boat's main work was intended to be (and various other factors, it's not quite this cut and dry).

 

This is a broad overview, there are many per-river details that I could write a small book on. But hopefully that clarifies part of the question. Personally I don't have any resources to suggest about walking-beam engines, but hopefully someone else does. I've seen examples on craft from various parts of the world, so hope that someone else here can help you out. I hope you can find resources specific to eastern boats, as the designs and construction will be pretty different from the western boats, due to differences in materials, industrial capacity, design philosophy, and river conditions between the two regions. But the placement of the wheels, on its own, isn't a factor.

[Roger Pellett]

The Winter 2007 (volume 47, no 4) edition of the Nautical Research Journal includes an article titled Research Advice, American Beam Engines by Alan D. Frazier. In addition to discussing these engines, the article includes a list of sources for further research. Go to the NRJ website to see if a copy of the article is available as a digital download. If not call the office and see if they still have this edition of the journal to sell

 

Roger Pellett

[kurtvd19]

Sal:

The article Roger mentioned is not yet available in the store but I am checking to see if it has been converted to go up onto the site or not.  If it has been converted I can arrange to get it o you for the same fee as listed on the web site store.  we have a lot more articles than are listed ready to go but we are contemplating a site revision and don't want to make double work for the web masters.  Those additional articles will be available once we sort out if we are going to change.  Otherwise I can print the pages in question off the CD's we sell, with all of the Journals archived, and can arrange to mail it to you.

I will post here when I find out one way or the other about the availability / method.

 

Kurt

[jbelwood]

Hi Sal, John Elwood here,

 

I presume you've been aboard the SS Ticonderoga at the Shelburne Museum

in Burlington, VT. If not, here's a little video of her including the walking beam.

 

 

John

[_SalD_]

Cathead, thanks for the information, I've just started to read up on these ships and have a lot to learn.

 

Roger, thank you for the reference.

 

Kurt, I appreciate your help and just let me know what the fee is. 

 

John, funny you should ask, the wife and I were up there last weekend.  Took lots of pictures. 

 

[Cathead]

Discussing the size of paddleboxes on sidewheelers?

 

Recently in a build log, the question came up of why the paddleboxes on some sidewheelers are so much bigger than the wheels themselves. It's a very interesting question, which started to generate theories, so I thought I'd bring the topic over here so avoid cluttering the original log. Two suggestions mooted so far were:

 

My (limited) understanding is that, as the paddlewheel turns, it creates some pressure in the paddlebox. The large space provided inside the box would ameliorate this effect, as did the later fancy perforated boxes seen on side paddle steamers. Can someone confirm or correct me? - druxey

 

Here's an idea on the paddlebox: is the extra space to allow for the possibility of debris caught in the wheel? Most western rivers had a lot of woody debris (branches, logs, etc) and I could see a moderate-sized branch getting caught up between two buckets and being lifted up into the paddlebox, where it could do some damage to either the surrounding shell or the wheel itself once it gets wedged in there. Maybe the extra radius reduces the likelihood of this? - cathead

 

 

Anyone else have ideas or insight?

[chborgm]

Since Google knows everything I looked there and found some interesting pictures which will help our theory.

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=paddlewheel+box+design&biw=1097&bih=614&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiImMHw-53OAhXTuB4KHYv5CDQQsAQIGw

[chborgm]

also look here

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=sidewheel+steamboat+plans&biw=1097&bih=614&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwio3JGh_Z3OAhVEFR4KHfwBAO8QsAQIIg

[druxey]

Unfortunately the images, as interesting as they are, do not solve the issue.

[chborgm]

I think the picture may give insight to the reason. the sternwheeler show how the water is picked up and thrown around

All of the sidewheelers shown had either vented sides or enlarged boxes. As the wheel turned the rear paddles tended to lift the water and pushed it into the boxes. The faster the wheel the higher the water would go until it rolled off the paddel. It then had to have some place to go. A vented box would let it roll off the sides. The taller box would take care of the splash that would occure. If the wheel picked up logs they would have got jamed on the way up and probably broke the paddle.

If you note on Glenn’s Heroine The box is much wider than the wheel.

[mtaylor]

I think the picture may give insight to the reason. the sternwheeler show how the water is picked up and thrown around

All of the sidewheelers shown had either vented sides or enlarged boxes. As the wheel turned the rear paddles tended to lift the water and pushed it into the boxes. The faster the wheel the higher the water would go until it rolled off the paddel. It then had to have some place to go. A vented box would let it roll off the sides. The taller box would take care of the splash that would occure. If the wheel picked up logs they would have got jamed on the way up and probably broke the paddle.

If you note on Glenn’s Heroine The box is much wider than the wheel.

 

At first glance at the pictures... some paddle boxes seem bigger than others. Following a few links and re-googling got me to a Wiki page which mentions the turbulence inside the box.  This turbulence issue is due to the fixed blades.  Once they went to the pivoting blades, the turbulence was much reduced and the efficiency of the paddles improved.    So,  I think you might be onto this with water being tossed up into the box.*

 

*Caution... this might be the reason or might not be for the boxes being designed the way they were.  

Edited July 31, 2016 by mtaylor

[Cathead]

Mark, it's my understanding that few western riverboats used variable-angle buckets on the wheel. Conditions were just too rough for them to work properly.

 

Also, did these wheels turn fast enough to really splash water that high? These were geared for power, not rapid rotation, and I wouldn't think they'd spray water except near the surface. By the time the wheel had rotated toward the upper portion of the paddle box, the water was almost certainly mostly drained off the bucket. I could see allowing for extra space at deck level where the wheel first hits and emerges from water, but I'm trying to envision the need tens of feet up at the top of the arc, where this discussion is focused.

[Pete38]

Just a guess from me, but what about room to service the wheel without removing the paddle box. Room to repair or replace a broken paddle or room to remove any debri that may be caught in the paddle.

[mtaylor]

Cathead,

 

What you say makes sense...  The paddlewheelers I used to see in St.Louis did turn pretty quick, especially heading upriver but those were all sternwheelers.  

 

 

Videos of the Delta Queen and the old Mississippi Queen show some spray coming off the wheels and seems to be dependant on speed.

 

We need a time machine and a designer from those years.....  

[Cathead]

Pete,

 

The core question here started with the rounded arch atop the paddlebox. I fully agree that a wider-than-minimum box makes sense at the level of the main deck, for everything from repair to debris to splash, but none of that explains the very wide arch at the next level up. Likely no one's crawling into that upper arch to do anything, why would they when you can just rotate the wheel 1/4 turn and work on it at the main deck level? But instead they still built the arch at the boiler deck level much larger than the wheel, which took more timber and added more weight, a significant choice given that these boats were very sensitive to both total weight and top-heaviness.

 

Mark, I don't know for sure either. That's what makes it fun and maddening!

[druxey]

Anyone care to comment on the air pressure idea?

[RiverRat]

Perhaps it was simply esthetics. See how BIG my wheel is! Mine's bigger than yours!!!

 

"Big wheel keep on toinin'..................."

[mtaylor]

Anyone care to comment on the air pressure idea?

 

Druxey, are you suggesting that air gets trapped in the paddle box?  There is apparently turbulance from the paddles splashing on front and the then tossing some in the air at the rear.  Basically, re-reading what Wiki talked about, there's quite a bit that was reduced by the variable pitch blades entering and exiting the water rather cleanly in addition to being more efficient.   

 

I suspect that Cathead is correct about the variable pitch not being used much on the Western Rivers.  A sandbar or snag would wreck havoc on a paddle.

 

Hmm.. food for thought and more research now that my Curiosity Button has been pushed.

Edited August 1, 2016 by mtaylor

[druxey]

Mark: We are discussing fixed buckets or blades here, rather than the feathering type. And yes, the trapping of air in the sponson is what I was speculating on.

[_SalD_]

This is just speculation on my part and not from any research but looking at it from a purely structural engineering point of view (since I am one) it appears that the arch is providing additional support for the exterior side of the lower deck beam.  Referring to Glenn’s Heroine build log, this lower exterior beam is spanning the length of the wheel well and is supporting half the weight of the paddle wheel.  By building the arch above this beam and connecting the arch and lower beam together with the vertical wall timbers it would provide a great amount of stiffness to the exterior side of the ship.  The geometry (height) of the arch would then be a function of its span and design properties of the material used to build it, i.e. the higher the arch the smaller the stresses.  Debris, water turbulence and aesthetics were probably also considered.

[captainbob]

How about aesthetics, or doesn't that count?  When I was designing I always tried to make it look good. IMO a small bump of a curve on the upper deck would look odd.

 

Bob

[chborgm]

I agree with your structural answer. It is obvious that with out the box there would not be any rigid support. I think all the rest are additional benifits.