On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 20:56:17 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 19:39:41 +0700, wrote:

So essentially the engine had a constant loss lubrication system which
was not unusual in that era. I have seen other horizontal semi diesel
engines of the same eras that had oil cups or drip oilers on both main
and connecting rods.

I was looking at a couple of multi cylinder marine steam engines last
week which dated from the late 1800s/early 1900s. They had oil cups
on the main bearings. Couldn't figure out how the rod bearings were
lubed if at all. Good thing they were slow turning.

I crewed as a fireman/watertender on a couple of Great Lake tankers
with steam engines, both built in the teens I believe.
The Rocket (Cleveland Tankers) and the Illinois (Standard Oil).
Unfortunately I can't remember the lube systems, as I didn't pay much
attention. My impression is the rod bearings were splash lubed, but I
could be wrong.
Occasionally I'd spend some time in the engineroom chatting with the
oilers, and here's what I remember:
The engines were beautiful machines, with the steam heads high in the
space, the crank down below, and the men and auxiliaries mid-level.
Safety rails surrounded the engine pit, and you could chat without
yelling as the large rods pumped up and down nearly next to your ears.
The steam head valves and exhausting steam made the bulk of the noise.
The deck of a similar sized tanker powered by diesels was more
bothered by noise than the engineroom of a steam reciprocator.
The rods were articulated, the knee moving up and down on a slide,
which was lubed by the oiler with a common squirt oilcan.
Every moving part was clean, shiny, and slick.
I was shown by one oiler I was friendly with a lube retention hole on
one of the rod knee slides, and told a story, confirmed by others who
were there.
The slides were maybe 6" wide, and the lube holes maybe 1/2", spaced a
couple feet apart.
An oiler had lost a little finger in this particular lube hole, sliced
clean off after the first knuckle.
Everybody wondered at his bad luck, since it was almost
impossible to get a finger cut off there even with lackadaisical
attention to safety.
He was paid $3,000 for the loss of the finger.
Less than 2 years later the same finger of his other hand was
cut off in the same hole.
He was again paid $3,000, but was blackballed.
There was no doubt he had done self-amputations for the cash.
I don't know if this guy wanted the cash to buy an ETEC or a Parker,
but every time I look at the driver of one, the thought enters my
mind.

--Vic