 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Australian Car Forums / General Car Topics (Australian group) / March 2008Early vehicles with no water-pump:'thermosyphon'
Up until around 1950, it was not uncommon to see cars using the "thermo-siphon" principle to circulate hot water from the engine up into the radiator top-tank,..then as it cooled, it would drop down thru the radiator simultaneously displacing cooler water back thru the bottom hose into the engine again. Was this system as efficient as pump-assisted cooling? Dont know, but in some old footage WWII stuff, you can see TS being used on trucks as well as Jeeps. One might guess, that the hotter the coolant is, the faster it will circulate. Jason >Up until around 1950, it was not uncommon to see cars using the >"thermo-siphon" principle to circulate hot water from the engine up into the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >Jeeps. One might guess, that the hotter the coolant is, the faster it will >circulate. I wouldn't have said the 50's - I don't recall any post-war thermosiphon vehicles, but it was a while back ;-) The system was only suited to lower-powered vehicles typical of the pre-war era. The thermomotive force was delta(density) which approximates delta(temp). Hotter coolant didn't make it more efficient, but the effectiveness depended on the amount of temp drop through the "radiator" (which of course isn't a radiator at all - it is a conductive heat exchanger). The temp drop, in turn, was dependent on - apart from the radiator design - the adequacy of airflow and the consequent heat transfer to the air mass. > >Up until around 1950, it was not uncommon to see cars using the > >"thermo-siphon" principle to circulate hot water from the engine up into the [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > dependent on - apart from the radiator design - the adequacy of airflow and the > consequent heat transfer to the air mass. It would have been good if the TS approach worked well,..as a failed w/pump is hard to predict,..not so much in the N-S engine trans as you could at least test for bearing-slop and pre-empt trouble,..but on E-W where the pump is innaccessble on many cars. But as you have said anyway,..suitable for low-power engines only. Jason > Was this system as efficient as pump-assisted cooling? Not even remotely close. Model T Fords ran a thermosyphon cooling system, and it apparently didn't take very long for one of the most popular "after-market" add-ons to be a belt driven water pump as the things had major cooling issues. Every model Ford after the Model T ran a water pump, and the original side valve V8's ran one for each bank. > Dont know, but in some old footage WWII stuff, you can see TS being used > on trucks as well as > Jeeps. One might guess, that the hotter the coolant is, the faster it will > circulate. Most of the WWII stuff that I'm familiar with ran a conventional water pump. Jeeps certainly did, although a condenser option was used on jeeps that saw service with the British SAS in the African desert. This condenser was basically a metal 3 gallon can bolted to the outside of the grille and worked like an overflow bottle as found on most current model cars, designed to collect water as it came out from under the radiator cap when the thing got hot, and put it back in when it cooled down. Side valve engines tended to run pretty hot with the exhaust gas passing through the block rather than the head, and radiators of the era weren't terribly efficient. In fact, most of them were hopeless compared to even the most basic types found in the cheapest cars of today. -- Regards, Noddy. >> Was this system as efficient as pump-assisted cooling? > [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > terribly efficient. In fact, most of them were hopeless compared to even > the most basic types found in the cheapest cars of today. Kubota diesel tractor here is thermo-syphon - and way past a 50's vintage. Seems the thermo system was is use quite recently:-) It's effective enough in the application since it's fan assisted and speaking of low power, it sure as hell is. Motor is a roaring 850cc triple - and the device has a hydrostatic trans so it spends all of it's time at higher RPM, the load being varied more so than the RPM. I would have thought a pump driven system would be better in that application and sure enough, the latest models in that class do have a water pump. I also figure that the radiator on the tractor is a hell of a lot bigger in proportion to it's power rating compared to say, a modern car. The Trojan 2 stroke commercials had thermo-syphon - and a story I read mentioned that the water boiled a hell of a lot of the time - ensuring steam was the coolant for much of the head of the things. Seemed to work ok there.  SignatureToby > > Was this system as efficient as pump-assisted cooling? > [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > Regards, > Noddy. The immediate post-war (WW2) Ford "Prefect" 10 HP side valve imported from UK was thermo-syphon. The Ford Australia version of the same vehicle had a water pump added between the lower radiator hose and the engine block, mounted on the front engine mounting bar. These vehicles continued to be sold up to 1951 IIRC. The water pump was not particularly reliable, having a 1/2 inch diam shaft rinning in a bronze bish. SignatureRegards, Chas. (To email me replace 'xxx' with tango papa golf) >> > Was this system as efficient as pump-assisted cooling? >> [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > particularly reliable, having a 1/2 inch diam shaft rinning in a bronze > bish. I bet it was more reliable than that 'other' water pump whose name begins with "j" used for bloody years in the marine environment. SignatureToby >> Was this system as efficient as pump-assisted cooling? > [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > Regards, > Noddy. Ford Model T had a water pump in early production, but reliability problems with the pump and some redesign allowed it to go to thermosyphon in about 1910. Thermosyphon cooling can, if properly designed, be just as effective as pump assisted cooling, and has the advantage of automatic temperature regulation without a thermostat. It has the drawback that it needs a considerable difference in height between the top of the head and the top of the radiator, plus large diameter and straight top and bottom connections between the engine and radiator. These present constraints that put it in the too hard basket as styling began to take over car design from the 1930s, and the development of (fairly) reliable water pumps and thermostats in the 1920s left it by the 1930s as a relic found only in developments of existing designs. There were a few probably still being sold into the 1950s, but they would have been rare, although in the 1950s most of the cars on the road were still from the 1920s (few were sold in the thirties and post-war production was only just getting under way). JD > >> Was this system as efficient as pump-assisted cooling? > > [quoted text clipped - 46 lines] > cars on the road were still from the 1920s (few were sold in the thirties > and post-war production was only just getting under way). That steep angle on the upper hose is the visual give-away. As kids, dad had a Standard 8 from the late '40s. It was TS. The tax induced long-stroke went a little too far with our clunker (literally). It broke a piston on a "sunday drive" once. Got train home :-( Jason > That steep angle on the upper hose is the visual give-away. As kids, dad > had > a Standard 8 from the late '40s. It was TS. The tax induced long-stroke > went > a little too far with our clunker (literally). It broke a piston on a > "sunday drive" once. Got train home :-( Not far from where my in-laws live in Geraldine (in New Zealand's South Island) they have a retired friend who runs a farm, and on that farm they have an old shearer's shed with the overhead belt system powered by a model T engine. In fact, it looks to be the front section of a model T truck that's been cut off at the firewall complete with frame rails and turned into a stationary power plant, and judging by the radiator it's from the late 'teens. It's still completely original and has it's 2 speed planetary gearbox attached which is hooked up to the drive, and the throttle and spark controls have been fixed to a headboard at the back of the engine with a small petrol tank. It has no starter and gets fired by hand crank (which actually makes it great for what it does as it needs no electrical power to fire it up), and it gets used on occasion. I had a go at cranking it last time I was over there and that was *real* interesting :) The bloke who owns the place has a somewhat novel addition use for the thing, and that is heating his lunch. He apparently likes eating canned sausages & vegetables for lunch, and when he's off to the shed for the day he takes a couple of cans and places them in behind the radiator on a couple of little shelves he's stuck in there. The engine gets fired up for the day's work and by lunch time the cans are piping hot. -- Regards, Noddy. >The bloke who owns the place has a somewhat novel addition use for the >thing, and that is heating his lunch. He apparently likes eating canned >sausages & vegetables for lunch, and when he's off to the shed for the day >he takes a couple of cans and places them in behind the radiator on a couple >of little shelves he's stuck in there. The engine gets fired up for the >day's work and by lunch time the cans are piping hot. That's pretty much how I get a lot of my hot dinners in the scrub. I've even baked bread. After driving 12 to 18 hours, hot tucker is a great boost. SignatureCheers Paul Saccani Perth, Western Australia. > That's pretty much how I get a lot of my hot dinners in the scrub. > I've even baked bread. > > After driving 12 to 18 hours, hot tucker is a great boost. I would imagine :) -- Regards, Noddy. > Ford Model T had a water pump in early production, but reliability > problems > with the pump and some redesign allowed it to go to thermosyphon in about > 1910. The first 2500 model T's built in 1908 had water pumps, and at the rate they were being manufactured even at that early stage meant that they'd switched to thermosiphon within a month of the car first being built. For the rest of it's life (1908-1927) it ran a thermosiphon cooling system, and a pretty inefficient one at that. Apparently the only reason the water pump was dropped was because old Henry was such a cantankerous miserable old c.nt who believed in simplicity for the sake of it, and eliminating it meant he could cut the cost of building the car by a buck or so. -- Regards, Noddy. > Up until around 1950, it was not uncommon to see cars using the > "thermo-siphon" principle to circulate hot water from the engine up into the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Jeeps. One might guess, that the hotter the coolant is, the faster it will > circulate. I have worked of a sh.t-load of WW2 vehicles as an army vehicle mechanic - all had water pumps.... try WW1? I think you might need to make that 1950 a couple decades earlier....... SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >> Up until around 1950, it was not uncommon to see cars using the >> "thermo-siphon" principle to circulate hot water from the engine up into the [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >I think you might need to make that 1950 a couple decades earlier....... Thermo-syphon is still common, but not as a sole means. You'll still see this phrase in manuals for british vehicles into the seventies "pump-assisted thermo-syphon". One of the teaching LAMES at Midland TAFE reckons that it is not a problem to set up an auto-engine conversion in a lightie that will work OK via thermo-syphon if the pump fails. Personally, I'm *very* dubious about this, but some cooling would have to be better than no cooling. SignatureCheers Paul Saccani Perth, Western Australia. >>> Up until around 1950, it was not uncommon to see cars using the >>> "thermo-siphon" principle to circulate hot water from the engine up into [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > "pump-assisted thermo-syphon". One of the teaching LAMES at Midland > TAFE Which one? > One of the teaching LAMES at Midland >> TAFE > >Which one? I'll put a name to the face next time I'm there. SignatureCheers Paul Saccani Perth, Western Australia. >> One of the teaching LAMES at Midland >>> TAFE >> >>Which one? > > I'll put a name to the face next time I'm there. Can't be any worse then some of the complete fuckwits at MITA ;-) >>> Up until around 1950, it was not uncommon to see cars using the >>> "thermo-siphon" principle to circulate hot water from the engine up into the [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > Personally, I'm *very* dubious about this, but some cooling would have > to be better than no cooling. When pumps were first insalled to *AUTOMOBILES* - they were considered an adjunct (a subordinate relationship) to the thermo-syphon system - I do not believe that the principle has ever been changed. Sydney Technical College (now changed to TAFE) taught that phrasiology when I did my automotive apprenticeship. I may be a matter of symantics tho - a bit like an aircraft battery being thought to be the primary power supply when, in fact, the primary provider is the alternator with the backup being the battery. As I said before, I will happlily accept advice of a car that did not heve a water-pump after 1950 BUT I have never personally seen any - or possibly even after 1940 and there would not have been *too many* after 1930 - certainly on the US models. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >>>> Up until around 1950, it was not uncommon to see cars using the >>>> "thermo-siphon" principle to circulate hot water from the engine up [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > possibly even after 1940 and there would not have been *too many* after > 1930 - certainly on the US models. After 1950? Gogomobile VW Porsche there are others sh.t ya gotta be careful round here - PS, PS is there somewhere. SignatureToby >>>>> Up until around 1950, it was not uncommon to see cars using the >>>>> "thermo-siphon" principle to circulate hot water from the engine up [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > > sh.t ya gotta be careful round here - Yeah - My big mistake was that I forgot about Toby - :) > PS, PS is there somewhere. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >> As I said before, I will happlily accept advice of a car that did not >> heve a water-pump after 1950 BUT I have never personally seen any - or [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > VW > Porsche Dammit; beat me by 4+ hours!! SignatureKnob >>> As I said before, I will happlily accept advice of a car that did not >>> heve a water-pump after 1950 BUT I have never personally seen any - or [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >> > Dammit; beat me by 4+ hours!! You could have mentioned the Hondas, Citroens and Toyotas to save face:-) I reckon despite all the crappola about pollution regs, there are still some air-cooled 4-wheeled chariots in production, somewhere or other. Then we'd both be in the sh.t for having the temerity to try to change the subject. Me doubly so because I hacked it a bit by mentioning tractors. Feral, to his credit, hasn't yet started on about old-fart stationary engines. Yet. Further, I reckon with computerised engine management, ceramic technologies, integral engine heads and trick machining we should all be driving air-cooled machines. You've gotta know that I'M UTTERLY AND COMPLETELY FED UP WITH MONGREL LIQUID COOLING SYSTEMS AND THEIR ATTENDANT EXPENSE, MAINTENANCE AND RELIABILITY PROBLEMS. And - the c.nts are still building cars that will absolutely shred their engines with slow coolant loss with no warning other than a temp gauge needle sneaking up the scale ever so slowly. Yep - even if it is close to the speedo, it's easy to miss it out of a scan you set up. Idiot lights worked. Aeroplanes even have them all over the inside of the pointy end of the things. Idiot lights could be wired to drive an alarm of some consequence - hell you could even buy senders that switched on early enough to prevent major damage........ I feel better now. SignatureToby >And - the c.nts are still building cars that will absolutely shred their >engines with slow coolant loss with no warning other than a temp gauge >needle sneaking up the scale ever so slowly. Yep - even if it is close to >the speedo, it's easy to miss it out of a scan you set up. Some of them read low temperatures after even a small coolant loss, all the way up to having no coolant at all! 'cause the sender is the first thing to go dry, and steam doesn't transfer heat as well as liquid, so the sender gets air cooled.... SignatureCheers Paul Saccani Perth, Western Australia. >When pumps were first insalled to *AUTOMOBILES* - they were considered >an adjunct (a subordinate relationship) to the thermo-syphon system - I >do not believe that the principle has ever been changed. Sydney >Technical College (now changed to TAFE) taught that phrasiology when I >did my automotive apprenticeship. I haven't had a look at what we are teaching today on cooling systems in the new syllabus. That's inspiring me to have a look and find out. >I may be a matter of symantics tho - a bit like an aircraft battery >being thought to be the primary power supply when, in fact, the primary >provider is the alternator with the backup being the battery. I would have thought that the battery was the primary power supply. The alternator acts to supplement the battery. Having driven a few thousand km without a battery (after exciting the alternator and coil at each hand cranked start) I'd say they don't too well with changing loads. You won't find many alternators that will work without a battery to excite them at start up either. >As I said before, I will happlily accept advice of a car that did not >heve a water-pump after 1950 BUT I have never personally seen any - or >possibly even after 1940 and there would not have been *too many* after >1930 - certainly on the US models. I can't recall seeing any liquid cooled cars without a pump either. SignatureCheers Paul Saccani Perth, Western Australia. >> Up until around 1950, it was not uncommon to see cars using the >> "thermo-siphon" principle to circulate hot water from the engine up [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > I think you might need to make that 1950 a couple decades earlier....... Lots of cars including fords until around 1950 did not run pumps , I owned several mostly 8 and 10 hp 4 pot s/v motors . > Up until around 1950, it was not uncommon to see cars using the > "thermo-siphon" principle to circulate hot water from the engine up...... I agree; it was not uncommon to see those vehicles. In 1950 most of the cars of the road were prewar and many of those were pre 1930 when thermosyphon was used. Maybe some can quote a post 1930 *CAR* that didn't use a water pump. Is there was one, I was not aware of it. Even the old "A" model ('27 to '32 ????) had it's fair share of grunt - it'd do 75 MPH - now stopping it is entirely another story. ???? = Just off the top of my head - when did the "B" model come to Australia? SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >> Up until around 1950, it was not uncommon to see cars using the >> "thermo-siphon" principle to circulate hot water from the engine up...... [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >thermosyphon was used. Maybe some can quote a post 1930 *CAR* that >didn't use a water pump. Is there was one, I was not aware of it. 1948 Austin 8 (forerunner of the A40) definitely didn't. They may have been around in '38, but certainly no earlier. IIRC the 'Big Seven', which was the forerunner of the 8, was first introduced in '38. >Even the old "A" model ('27 to '32 ????) had it's fair share of grunt - >it'd do 75 MPH - now stopping it is entirely another story. Model A ran from '28 -'31. >???? = Just off the top of my head - when did the "B" model come to >Australia? Model B (which is the correct designation) was '32 only. The 4-cylinder was continued in '33 but was called the Series 40 4-cylinder. SignatureJohn H >>> Up until around 1950, it was not uncommon to see cars using the >>> "thermo-siphon" principle to circulate hot water from the engine up...... [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Seven', which was the forerunner of the 8, was first introduced in > '38. I thought the A40 was 1948? http://www.autogallery.org.ru/m/aus8.htm >> Even the old "A" model ('27 to '32 ????) had it's fair share of grunt - >> it'd do 75 MPH - now stopping it is entirely another story. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > 4-cylinder was continued in '33 but was called the Series 40 > 4-cylinder. Yeah, thanks for the affirmation, I can certainly wear that. A mate of mine had a very old Austin 7 (Meteor) - with a two main bearing crank! They had the 2 seater Chummy (Coupe), 4 seat Tourer and sedan and the 2 seat (bullet) Meteor if my memory serves. Until around 1950, the older US cars seemed (to me) to be more abundant (they lasted longer post-war) so more of my first-hand experience was with them SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >>>> Up until around 1950, it was not uncommon to see cars using the >>>> "thermo-siphon" principle to circulate hot water from the engine up...... [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >http://www.autogallery.org.ru/m/aus8.htm Makes sense, Austin 8 ran from 1939 - 47... and still used thermosyphon. :) >A mate of mine had a very old Austin 7 (Meteor) - with a two main >bearing crank! They had the 2 seater Chummy (Coupe), 4 seat Tourer and >sedan and the 2 seat (bullet) Meteor if my memory serves. Chummy was the tourer... 2 door 4 seater (I once owned one). The Meteor was an Australian bodied roadster... AFAIK they didn't exist anywhere else, but I don't know who built the bodies. There was also a sedan (Ruby). They ran two bearing cranks up to '37. The early ones, which had a lighter crankshaft, were a very successful competition engine, and many were still racing well into the 60's. They also had an aluminium crankcase. Arthur Waite won the very first Australian Grand Prix in an Austin Seven (1928). Ray Uffindell actually drove his from Adelaide to Bathurst to compete and still finished fairly well up in the 1938 race. SignatureJohn H > Even the old "A" model ('27 to '32 ????) had it's fair share of grunt - > it'd do 75 MPH - now stopping it is entirely another story. The Model A had a water pump. The last Ford to use Thermosyphon was the model T, and it's engine was first released in 1908. > ???? = Just off the top of my head - when did the "B" model come to > Australia? 1932. The model A finished it's run in 1931. -- Regards, Noddy. >> Up until around 1950, it was not uncommon to see cars using the >> "thermo-siphon" principle to circulate hot water from the engine up...... [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > ???? = Just off the top of my head - when did the "B" model come to > Australia? as mentioned some of the smaller fords ran no pump , some of the austins did until 53 or 52 and the B model was circa 31/32 |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.