The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1894-02-05

would N individual rather kAvs on his
hands under similar eoudisions-a pump
Ing engine that showed he vss IS 90 In
cash oat Of pocket, or one that shoxed
debit Of bat half that sum1 In either cass
he would Likely los half the purchase
price. Nor recently ous Of the most csie5ra-
ted engineers Ia the East has made careful
report - 70 which il the most economical
70 run-a hizh-dusy engine giving 3 duty
Of loo. COO 90 foot pounds for each thou
sand pounds of water evsporated in the
boilers. OK direct acting engine giving .
duty Of abons COCO. 900 foot pounds
Tor the same quantity Of water evsporased;
In this calculation Of course the items Of
fuei consumption. interest and deprecsa-
ton are the main ones. He, however. also
took into account extra labor Of handling
fuel. the extra cost Of the water consumed
in the boilers all doxn to the most minute
detail. Now, generally speaking. the
high-dusy engine costs about twice Is
much ~ the direct-actinE. and taking all
the items above mentioned into account
he came to the conclusion that with inter.
est At per cent and with coal At $3.50
ton the two engines were about equal;
IL coal were cheaper than that price the
direct-ac.ing engine vas the most desira-
Die. but il IL we're higher then the high
duty engine was the best for economical
resulta In applying these figures to our
own case is Is bus right 10 bear in mind
that the coal he used will go half - far
again - ours. 50 that for fnei that he
bought for $3.50 We would have TO Ray
1915. On the other hand our rate ofinter-
est is per cent, and cost of repairs is
higher here than East. From these figures
IL would seem that 10 is quite an open
question whether the lower priced pump
would not be better for US even II it were
going to be used continuously. The yearly
expense might be little greater, but the
final amount of money out Of pocket when
We came to changs our system would moro
than make up for il. and they show most
plainly that for occasional use the lower
priced engine 10 far the. cheaper. The
pump alluded to in this letter as direct
acting Is far superior TO the old pumps
used by the city before the new "Hoiiy"
was purchased. and the various makers
will guarantee q duty OF 6o.0o0 600 (sixty
miilion) foot pounds for IL, and duty OF
leo. 0o00 o0 Zone hundred miliion) foot
pounds for the high-duty sngines. Some
makers guarantee q little better than these
figures, but they as given are usual.
For the information of those who do not
know what these figures mean the follow
ing explanation may be interesting. A
duty Of ioo. 900 90 foot pounds means that
1000 pounds of water evaporated in the
boilers will raise 100, 0oo, 600 pounds. of
water one foot high through the pump,
and, Of course, 100. Coz. 900 pounds raised
one foot high is the same as 1000. 600
pounds raised 100 feet. or any other SINH
lar combination can be made. Now sup
posing pound of our coal will evaporate
five pounds of water (which is about
right. then 300 pounds of coal would
evaporate in the boilers 1000 pounds of
water. or would raise 1000 900 pounds of
water through tho pump 100 feet high,
and 1t Is easy to sec that here there is
saving of fuel compared to q pump that
will only raise 1000. GOO pounds of water
sixty feet high with consumption Of an
equal amount of fuel. CHARLES Power.