Dreadnought Science: the Cultural Construction of Efficiency and Effectiveness
by Professor Crosbie Smith
presented to the Newcomen Society on 11th October 2006
Recent trends in the cultural history of technology challenge us to explore themes in maritime and naval history from the perspective of historical actors and their milieu rather than from modern – often ‘essentialist’ - vantage points. Rather than look at the cultural responses to the Dreadnought, however, this paper looks at some of the cultural processes at work in shaping the construction of the famous battleship project. In particular, the Author focuses on two of the human agents central to the project: Charles Algernon Parsons and Admiral Sir John (‘Jacky’) Fisher. Vastly different in temperament, both figures nonetheless shared a deep respect for the scientific style sometimes characterised by the term ‘science of energy’ and embodied in the work of William Thomson, Baron Kelvin of Largs. Known personally to both Parsons and Fisher from the 1880s, Kelvin had – together with a circle of ‘North British’ colleagues including his brother James Thomson, the Scottish engineer Macquorn Rankine and the Manchester experimentalist James Joule – formulated from the 1850s the new science of heat engines or ‘thermo-dynamics’. Thermodynamics in Britain was not an abstract mathematical theory but a science for educated engineers and scientists engaged in the business of designing and constructing the prime movers to drive the ships, locomotives, mills and – from the 1880s – the generators for the new electrical industry.
In the new science, concentrations of available energy – the potential energy stored in reservoirs of fuel such as water, coal or other material substances – had to be made to deliver in the form of useful work. The engines designed to achieve this goal were therefore ‘efficient’ to the degree to which they converted energy; conversely, they were ‘inefficient’ to the degree to which they ‘wasted’ or ‘dissipated’ the original supply of fuel. It was thus the aim of the engineer to direct such material resources for human ‘benefit’ (whether economic, social or military). Kelvin’s brother, for example, achieved very high ‘efficiencies’ with his patent water – or ‘vortex’ – turbines while Rankine pursued the ‘advantages’ of air over steam as the working substance in new designs of heat engine for marine purposes in the 1850s. But it was Charles Parsons who, focusing initially on steam turbine patents for electricity generation, eventually won over substantial sections of the maritime world to his radical break with conventional steam engines. Crucial to his campaign were claims that, compared in measurable terms to contemporary reciprocating engines, the steam turbine, operating with high boiler temperatures and pressures and delivering direct rotary motion, represented greater efficiency and less waste in the eyes of a new generation of scientific shipbuilders and marine engine builders.
The ‘science of energy’, however, had always been about much more than the physics of prime movers. As exemplified by William Stanley Jevons’s famous Coal Question, for example, ‘energy’ – and especially its economic supply – had long been connected with political economy. Kelvin himself had often written of the ‘mechanical effect’ (or useful work) delivered not just by machines but also by humans and animals. Directing both ‘machine power’ and ‘man-power’ for maximum effect was therefore all part of the same scientific and engineering culture. Admiral Fisher, I show, had long professed to be a Kelvin disciple and was thus quick to adorn his Committee on Designs (1904) with the revered elder statesman of British science. But above all, Fisher relentlessly exploited the language of ‘efficiency’ (versus ‘waste) in his celebrated campaign to reform the Royal Navy. Thus the Dreadnought would become the very embodiment of concentrated energy poised to deliver maximum effect both in terms of speed and fire-power.
Evening meetings at the Science Museum
Back to the top
James Muspratt and William Gossage: Protagonists in the Control of Chemical Pollution, 1822 – 1874.
by Mr Peter Reed
presented to the Newcomen Society on 8th November 2006
When James Muspratt went to Liverpool from Dublin in 1822 he was attracted by the prospect of supplying soda to the local soapboilers who were facing strong competition from their London counterparts. To produce cheap soda on a very large scale Muspratt adopted the Leblanc process that used salt as the starting material, but from an early stage his works were accused of creating a nuisance because of the pungent gas released from the tall chimneys that became a characteristic feature of these alkali works. Legal attempts were made to close his works (and others using the Leblanc process) and often heavy fines were imposed. It was only when wealthy landowners such as Lord Derby found their land and woodlands damaged that Parliamentary action was initiated to better control this pollution. In 1862 the Select Committee on Injury from Noxious Vapours was established under Derby’s direction. Among those giving evidence was William Gossage, an alkali manufacturer from Stoke Prior in Worcestershire, who provided information about an “acid tower” he had invented in 1836 that condensed almost 100 percent of the harmful gas and prevented it escaping from his works – the “acid tower” proved to be a derelict windmill. Surprisingly other soda manufacturer did not take up this invention until the 1850s by which time much damage had been done and many fines imposed. The Select Committee report led to the 1863 Alkali Works Act legislation – the first attempt to control chemical pollution. The development and use of the “acid tower” became an important feature of this legislation alongside the establishment of the Alkali Inspectorate whose function today forms part of the Health and Safety Executive.
This paper will explore the role of Muspratt and Gossage in the early history of pollution control, the nature, development and operation of the “acid tower”, and the establishment of the Alkali Inspectorate.
Evening meetings at the Science Museum
Back to the top
IK Brunel's first cast-iron bridges of 1835-38 and the Uxbridge Road fiasco (abstract)
by Dr Steven Brindle and Mr Malcolm Tucker
presented to the Newcomen Society on 13th December 2006
The subject was an updated account of the research that Dr`Steven Brindle is doing with Mr Malcolm Tucker on Brunel's engineering in cast iron.
Evening meetings at the Science Museum
Back to the top
The Roman Aqueduct at Aspendos (abstract)
by Dr Norman Smith, Member of the Society
presented to the Newcomen Society on 10th January 2007
Aspendos, on the coast of southern Turkey, is an important Roman site famous above all for its large and well-preserved theatre. There is also an aqueduct, or at least its ruins, less well-known but of considerable interest and puzzlement to historians of Roman engineering. The aqueduct's principal feature is a pressure siphon, 45m deep at its maximum, and interrupted twice in its 1670m length by two ramped towers which carried the water pipe(s) up to tanks at hydraulic gradient level, and then down again.
Despite these towers being well documented for over a century, the reasons for them continue to be discussed and numerous explanations, either separately or in combinations, have been proposed.
Diagrams and pictures are used in this talk to present a full consideration of the Aspendos aqueduct's design and construction, and an analysis of how it worked, or might have worked. Topics covered :
- Discussion of the nature of the evidence as to how it worked
- An outline of past explanations and suggestions covering structural, hydraulic and pneumatic arguments.
- A discussion of the current position and latest proposals, including the author’s:
- alleviating forces at bends
- venting air
- reducing water-hammer
- accommodating flow variations
The conclusion emphasises how great a problem is the lack of evidence, especially in hydraulic details.
Evening meetings at the Science Museum
Back to the top
A History of Crofton Pumping Station (abstract)
by Mr Ian Broom, Member of the Society
presented to the Newcomen Society on 14th February 2007
Topics covered:
- inception 1794
- an engine is acquired
- a diversion to the Royal Military Canal
- the site is chosen
- a second engine is ordered
- the search for more water
- 1843–1846 modernisation and failure
- 1852 the GWR era
- damage and repair
- final decline and shut-down in 1959
The history is based on the minute books of the Kennet and Avon Canal Co at the PRO, the Boulton and Watt Collection at Birmingham, the Rennie Papers – ICE and Edinburgh and the archives of the BWB at Gloucester.
The paper sheds some light on the process of ordering and the manufacture of an engine at Boulton and Watt.
Evening meetings at the Science Museum
Back to the top
A Light to Lighten our Darkness: the development of lighthouse optics from candles and simple reflectors to the sophisticated and brilliant glass refracting lenses of the 19th century (abstract)
by Miss Julia Elton, President
presented to the Newcomen Society on 14th March 2007
Although much work has been carried out on the construction of lighthouse towers, very little has been done on the remarkable history of the optics they were built to house, in particular Augustin Fresnel’s innovatory glass refracting lenses, which revolutionised the lighthouse service worldwide. The paper shows the increasing sophistication of such lenses through the international collaboration of engineers and manufacturers as they strove to prevent loss of light and to strengthen and direct the beam accurately to overcome loss of life at sea. It also shows how lamp design developed in response to the changes in optics, and the effect on both of the introduction of electricity in the middle of the 19th century.
Evening meetings at the Science Museum
Back to the top
The Mighty Maverick – the Gas Industry in South London (abstract)
by Mr Brian Sturt
presented to the Newcomen Society on 11th April 2007
The South Metropolitan Gas Company, the nation's second largest, was a maverick among gas concerns, and was renowned for placing its individualistic stamp all it undertook. From the beginning of the twentieth century the Company adopted a new approach to gas production and utilisation, by supplying gas of unvarying quality to consumers, using appliances which operated at full efficiency without requiring adjustment, manufactured to a set standard. Following a protracted fight in Parliament, alterations gained to statutory regulations allowed more efficient methods of manufacture and purification. Under the 'Metro' brand name, appliances suitably designed were made by, or produced for, the Company to specified standards.
Following the First World War the industry took increasing advantage of more efficient vertical retorts for gas production, with use of carburetted water gas to augment peak demands. However, the South Metropolitan continued to supply gas manufactured from horizontal retorts only. From 1920, to maximise efficiency, tight control was made on coal supplies regarding quality and standards of cleaning. Further, a system of meticulous works inspection was placed over each phase of gas manufacture, ensuring optimum production performance. With this level of control, bringing carbonisation in horizontal retorts to its zenith, the Company were able to claim production efficiencies equal to vertical retorts.
The East Greenwich works were reconstructed in the 1950s after a run-down of plant and standards during WW2, but this was the beginning of the end for town gas manufactured from coal. The unique system evolved by the South Metropolitan, once the talk of the industry, became only a memory.
Evening meetings at the Science Museum
Back to the top
Stabilising the Leaning Tower of Pisa – the role and importance of its history (abstract)
27th Dickinson Memorial Lecture
by Professor John Burland CBE, FRS, FREng,
Emeritus Professor of Soil Mechanics, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Imperial College, London
presented to the Newcomen Society on 9th May 2007
The stabilisation of the Tower of Pisa has proved to be an immensely difficult challenge to civil engineers. The Tower is founded on weak, highly compressible soils and was on the point of falling over. The masonry was highly stressed and at risk of collapse. The internationally accepted conventions for the conservation of valuable historic monuments ruled out any invasive or visible intervention in the Tower. Understanding the history of construction of the Tower and its movements over the years provided the key to explaining and modelling the behaviour of this enigmatic monument. Gradually a solution to stabilising the Tower evolved using an ingenious method of earth extraction from beneath the foundations which itself turned out to have interesting and important historical precedents. The lecture explores the historical aspects which proved to be so crucial in saving the Tower.
Evening meetings at the Science Museum
Back to the top
List of titles of all papers in Transactions
A to B | C to D |
E to I | J to O |
P to S | T to Z