Talk:Fire-tube boiler

message: The image :Image:S1 boiler.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --22:23, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with Image:S1 boiler.jpg

message: There seems to be little agreement over the correct punctuation. From a quick Google for "fire-tube" (in quotes -- hoping to force inclusion of the hyphen, but failing!) the use of either a hyphen or a space appears to be pretty random. Professional sites (such as Babcock) seem to favour the hyphenated form, others seem less worried. A separate search for "firetube" generated just under half as many g-hits ('only' 31000 !). (The presence of all three forms in this article rather skews the results as the many WP-mirrors respond...)
My personal thought is that the hyphenated form is correct, since it forces 'fire' and 'tube' to be treated as a single noun; whereas 'firetube' just doesn't look right (and 'watertube' looks worse!).
So, what is the correct terminology to use throughout this article, and hence the correct article title to use?
EdJogg (talk) 17:40, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Having seen no prevalent usage, my intuitive preference is the same as yours, hyphenated.  TREKphiler hit me ♠  00:47, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "fire-tube", "fire tube" or "firetube" 

message: There are a few sentences in the 'Variations' section that I cannot resolve.
*"Not all shell boilers raise steam; some are designed specifically for heating pressurised water." -- why is this specifically in the 'Water-tubes' section? This is not explained. (Would seem to be a general point about all fire-tube boilers.)
*"In homage to the Lancashire design, modern shell boilers can come with a twin furnace design." ('Reverse flame' section) The phrase "in homage to" is troublesome. Was the design 'based on', 'inspired by', or what? ('homage' is probably a bit NPOV). The second half of the sentence doesn't seem to relate to the remainder of the paragraph.
*'Reverse flame' section -- needs a diagram for this. Not being a boiler expert, I cannot work out how this one works (which is not a problem I have with the other descriptions).
*"...the burner fires into a blind furnace..." ('Reverse flame' section) This needs more explanation: we have not encountered "burners" before (they have previously been called fires or furnaces, and existed on grates) nor the term 'blind furnace'.
Essentially these paragraphs need expanding (and references provided, of course) with any non-obvious terms explained for the benefit of the layman.
EdJogg (talk) 10:14, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Problem text under 'Variations'

message: The reference to 'burners' made me realise that NOWHERE do we mention what type of fuel the various designs of boiler are intended to use -- which must be a significant design consideration. The term "grate" implies a solid fuel (as does "ashpan"), whereas "burner" implies non-solid. What about chain grates, automatic stokers, oil burners vs gas burners, coal vs pulverised coal, wood/bagasse/biomass/etc, etc ? I would suggest that a separate section covers these in detail, with each boiler type mentioning what they were designed for. This will cause a bit of a structural problem, since fuel will need to be described first, then fire considerations, and then the different boiler designs. This has the unfortunate effect of giving more emphasis to the burning than the boiler, but unless we have a sub-article about the topic (or a dedicated section somewhere else?) I can't see a way round it.
EdJogg (talk) 10:14, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fuel type not covered

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Fire-tube boiler. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110715214237/http://www.gbt-inc.com/sps-single-pass-steam-boilers.html to http://www.gbt-inc.com/sps-single-pass-steam-boilers.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090211165829/http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/5558046/description.html to http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/5558046/description.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:55, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified