The record-union., 1896-04-14
REPORT OF EXPERTS.
The Boiler Offered by the RiSdon Iron
Works Preferred.
They Think, However, That the Boiler
Capacity Should be Divided Into
Three Independent Parts.

AT the meeting of the Board of Trus-
tees last night the committee of experts
to whom had been submitted the plans
and specifications and the various bids
| for furnishing boilers for the Water
Works, submitted the following report
action on which was deferred one week,
until the Water Committee could exam
| inc it:
10 the Honorable the Board Of TruS-
tees of Sacramento City-Gentlemen:
In compliance with the request of your
Water Committee, we have carefully ex-
amined and considered each of the sew
eral bids, plans and specifications pre-
sented of boilers for the Sacramento
Water Works, with the view of selecting
and recommending such as are best
suited to meet conditions and require
ments.
The requirements are efficiency, dura-
bility, convenience and economy-the
latter, in it's fullest sense, embracing
and combining the whole, and implies
the best interests of the city. After
very careful investigation of all points
| for and against each as best we could
we have agreed upon proposition No /
presented by Mr.. Leland, representing
the Risdon Iron Works of San Francisco
as being the most acceptable, all things
considered.
| We have selected the water tube type,
as representing the best modern prac-
| tice, and judge of it by knowledge of the
| principles involved and numerous au-
thentfc records of tests showing the eco
| nomical evaporative or steam making
| qualities of this class of boilers, of
which there are various constructions.
| OF those presented of this type, the
one recommended is the lowest and best
bid. 1t does not necessarily follow that
the least first cost is always economy
although it has bearing, other things
being nearly equal. Apparent inequali-
| ties are often simply difference of
opinion on certain points, without sub
stantial reasons to support it, and some
good or bad point in one may be bal
anced or offset by good and bad points
| in the other.
! We believe the boiler presented to be
a good, economical, practical, every
day working proposition, and that it
| will prove satisfactory in use. We
| might explain more fully in detail the
points we have considered, but do not
| think it necessary or advisable at this
time, as concise brevity is usually the
| most satisfactory; nor do we deem it
requisite to comment on other bids, as
we are not called upon to criticise, but
| to recommend We would feel better
| satisfied, however, if the same boiler
| capacity was divided into three instead
| of two parts, or, even one more of same
size, considering the quality of fuel used
would perhaps be good economy. 1t
can probably be satisfactorily arranged
| with the contracting parties if the sub
| stitution is considered desirable
We would add few suggestions as to
contract and specifications: In any
bid accepted it should be understood
that each boiler must be so arranged
pendently as to steam and water con-
nections, having all necessary stop
cocks and fittings; also, all necessary
f1ues and connections to chimney, in
cluding hampers; kind of CRATES to suit
fuel used, and necessary wrenches and
fire-room tools, all subject to the general
approval Of engineer in charge.
We also present diagram showing
| our views as to the best arrangement of
boilers in fire-room, looking to con-
venience in changing from old to new,
also to any possible future addition. Re-
| spectfully submitted,
G. A. STODDARD,
J. M. DUNCAN,
]. W. BOYD,
Examining Committee