GIFT OF 
 Arthur E. Moncaster 
 
RECE/VEB 
 
 TUBE 
 
The 
 
 MODERN BOILER 
 
 TUBE 
 
 A STORY OF ITS EVOLUTION AND 
 DEVELOPMENT A SOME EXPERT 
 OPINIONS ON ITS EFFICIENCY A ILLUS- 
 TRATED BY STANDARD MILL TESTS 
 
 NATIONAL TUBE COMPANY 
 
 GENERAL OFFICES: PITTSBURGH, PENN. 
 
 DISTRICT SALES OFFICES 
 
 ATLANTA NEW ORLEANS PITTSBURGH 
 
 CHICAGO NEW YORK ST. LOUIS 
 
 DENVER PHILADELPHIA SALT LAKE CITY 
 
 PACIFIC COAST REPRESENTATIVES 
 U. S. STEEL PRODUCTS COMPANY: SAN FRANCISCO SEATTLE PORTLAND LOS ANGELES 
 
 EXPORT REPRESENTATIVES 
 U. S. STEEL PRODUCTS COMPANY, NEW YORK CITY 
 
A chain is no stronger than 
 its weakest link a boiler 
 no stronger than its flues 
 
 
 Table of Contents 
 
 Introduction Historical Sketch . . . Page 3 
 
 Tests Applied to Boiler Tubes .... " 7 
 
 Standard Specifications " 9 
 
 Summary of Proceedings, I. M. Boiler 
 
 Makers' Association "13 
 
 Proceedings 1909 Convention . . . . " 14 
 
 Proceedings 1910 Convention .... "27 
 
 Proceedings 1911 Convention .... "31 
 
 /V33 
 
WE feel that it is unnecessary to offer any detailed explanation pv ,descHpt]6n,' 'f;,t;he 
 processes employed in the manufacture of steel boiler tubes, these having been' fully 
 covered in other publications issued by this Company ("Modern Welded Pipe" and "Shelby 
 Steel Tubes and Their Making"). This book was primarily designed to discuss the develop- 
 ment and characteristics of modern boiler tubes, rather than as a treatise on their manufacture. 
 
 The earliest records we have of the manufacture of wrought iron tubes dates back to 
 the patent of Henry Osborn, of Birmingham, 1812, and refers to the manufacture of gun 
 barrels by bending wrought iron plates over a circular and tapered mandrel and welding the 
 heated metal thereon under a tilt hammer. The cessation of the European wars left a large 
 amount of this material on the market which was used as gas pipe in 1815 during the early 
 days of gas lighting. 
 
 The extension of gas lighting called for cheaper pipe in longer lengths, resulting in the 
 first approach to modern butt welding, using a tilt hammer with semi-circular grooves in the 
 die, welding the heated and bent plate without a mandrel. (James Russell patent, 1824.) 
 In the following year the hammer was dispensed with by Cornelius Whitehouse, who welded 
 wrought iron strips by pressing the edges of the skelp together by drawing through dies 
 the basis of the butt-weld 
 process as we have it to-day. 
 
 The success of Geo. 
 Stephenson's first locomo- 
 tive in 1829 pointed out the 
 necessity for a stronger tube 
 and the problem of increas- 
 ing the strength of tubes 
 by lap welding received the 
 
 attention of inventors, but liiwg / 1111111 
 
 it was not until about 1845 ' 
 
 that the process of lap weld- 
 ing came into successful 
 operation; since then it has 
 been vastly improved in 
 detail. 
 
 726315 
 
THE MODERN BOILER TUBE 
 
 Seamless steel boiler tubes were first made in 1885 by piercing solid round billets, open- 
 ing a new and wider field for tubular goods. A few years later soft steel was successfully 
 substituted for charcoal iron in lap- weld tubes. 
 
 Since Steplienson's time the locomotive tube has been developed step by step with the 
 demands of locomotive service (the most severe which the tube-maker has to meet) ; indi- 
 rectly the manufacture of tubes for merchant and marine service has reaped the benefit of 
 the extensive experiments made to meet the exacting conditions imposed by modern 
 locomotive practice. 
 
 "\\ **The eV01fllofri".pf the boiler tube is comparable with the developments of other branches 
 of tne jron ^and steej m'dustry, where the use of steel has gradually superseded the use of iron, 
 ;fDtjrh*3ao*! ihaiJt"ims' proved better fitted to meet the demands of modern conditions. 
 
 The boiler tube of to-day, as manufactured by this Company, is the result of forty years 
 of constant experiment and experience, various methods and materials having been adopted 
 and discarded in turn as soon as their limitations were found. For many years we 
 made all boiler tubes of charcoal iron. As the use of soft steel became a success in the 
 manufacture of welded pipe it was tried in lap-welded boiler tubes and gave satisfactory 
 results. In the meantime seamless steel tubes began to find their place in the market and 
 charcoal iron tubes became almost entirely displaced by steel in the merchant tube business. 
 In view of this experience and the opinion of practical boiler men of the trade, it was 
 decided to devote our entire attention in the boiler-tube line to the manufacture of steel 
 tubes, both lap-welded and seamless. 
 
 No product of our mills must stand such demands in service as the locomotive boiler 
 tube of to-day. It is the weak member of the boiler, on the stability of which the record 
 of the locomotive depends. Recognizing the increasing demand on modern railroad locomo- 
 tives, we have endeavored by careful experimenting, assisted to a large extent by the liberal 
 policy of the railroads themselves, to better adapt the tube to this service. Tubes failed 
 mainly through (1) corrosion, (2) wearing out of the ends or breaking off the bead in the 
 flue-sheet, due to repeated working of the tube ends in the effort to keep them tight in the 
 flue-sheet. 
 
 During the past decade the manufacture of boiler tubes has undergone great improve- 
 ment so that to-day, with modern blast furnaces, steel works, rolling-mills and manufacturing 
 plants especially designed for this industry, the steel boiler tube is now much better than 
 that made ten years ago. We find it expedient to use the same grade of steel for both lap- 
 welded and seamless locomotive tubes, namely, the steel which has proved by experience to 
 be best adapted to severe conditions of service in the flue-sheet. 
 
 The first mentioned cause of failure, corrosion (usually due to bad water conditions), 
 was met by giving special attention to the uniformity in the manufacture of the steel and to 
 the working of the metal while hot. A new process of working the hot bloom was devised 
 which gave the surface portion of the metal a continuous, uniform, dense surface, and this 
 has been found to benefit the tube by making it less liable to local corrosion, or pitting. Soft 
 steel so treated was found to corrode more uniformly and to a lesser degree under natural 
 
THE MODERN BOILER TUBE 
 
 conditions* than charcoal iron. This fact has been abundantly demonstrated by tests made 
 at our own mills, and by leading railroads in all parts of the country during the last four 
 years, wherever these tubes have been put into service side by side with standard charcoal 
 iron. Material so treated has become known as "Spellerized steel." At the present time we 
 are treating all lap-welded boiler tubes by this process. 
 
 The question of corrosion having been practically disposed of by actual experience 
 investigation was continued into the wider field of flue-sheet troubles. Here also it was 
 found by laborious comparisons of engines operating with steel and those operating with 
 charcoal iron under the same conditions, that a decidedly better mileage was obtained with 
 the stronger metal. It was found, however, that steel for tubes must be carefully made for 
 this purpose of a special grade of open hearth quality, moderately low in phosphorus and 
 sulphur, and easily weldable, yet not so soft as to give way too easily under the roller or 
 prosser. Failures were naturally experienced at first, and doubtless more improvements will 
 follow, but one of the leading railroad lines shows by actual record of more than a hundred 
 locomotives that the durability of tubes in the flue-sheet has been increased at least 50 per 
 cent, on the average, by the use of steel. 
 
 The following extracts from reports of the Special Committee on Steel versus Iron Tubes 
 submitted to the Convention of the International Master Boiler Makers' Association, 1909-10-11, 
 may be of interest here as indicating the scope and results of some of these locomotive boiler 
 tube tests. By way of making clear what the system of inspection and testing amounts to 
 in the manufacture of steel boiler tubes, illustrations are shown of mill tests to which 
 these tubes are now regularly subjected. 
 
 * The practice, advocated by some, of testing different grades of iron and steel, by placing samples for an hour in strong acid, has not been 
 found to afford results comparable with natural corrosion, and it has been pointed out by the Committee on Corrosion of the American Society 
 for Testing Materials (see following extract) in their report for 1909, that when so used the acid test is misapplied and may be very misleading. 
 
 ABSTRACT FROM REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON THE CORROSION OF IRON AND STEEL, 
 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY FOR TESTING MATERIALS, 1910. 
 
 It has come to the attention of the Committee that the conditions for uniformity in carrying out an accelerated acid test to determine the 
 rate of solution as a possible measure of tendency to corrosion, which was contained in this Committee's report of 1907, has been misinter- 
 preted by some as a standard method proposed by the Committee. This is not the case. It was merely the intention of the Committee, 
 that those who cared to make such an acid test should use certain uniform conditions as to concentration of acid, size of specimen, time of 
 immersion, etc., in order that the results thus obtained should be comparable, with a view of determining whether the results of such a test 
 bore any relation whatever to corrosion as observed in service. The results so far obtained show that the test is not generally applicable, and 
 in some cases may be very misleading; 
 
 Respectfully submitted on behalf of the Committee, 
 W. H. WALKER, ALLERTON S. CUSHMAN, 
 
 Secretary Chairman 
 
 5 
 
THE MODERN BOILER TUBE 
 
 Concerning Spellerized Steel 
 Boiler Tubes 
 
 From time to time we have been asked various questions about 
 the SPELLERIZED STEEL BOILER TUBE, and for the benefit of those de- 
 siring information, we answer below three of the most common queries. 
 
 No. 1. What are the specific advantages of SPELLERIZED STEEL 
 BOILER TUBES? 
 
 No. 2. How does this steel tube compare with the charcoal -iron 
 tube in point of workability? 
 
 No. 3. In actual practice is it more difficult, as a matter of manu- 
 facture, to get uniform material in iron or in steel, speaking now with 
 reference to boiler tubes? 
 
 Spellerizing is a process of roll-knobbling steel, while hot. This 
 
 method of working the metal has the effect of making the surface 
 more uniformly dense, hence it is better adapted to resist corrosion, 
 especially in the form of pitting. Experiment and practice have demon- 
 strated that SPELLERIZED STEEL BOILER TUBES will, in actual 
 service, resist corrosion at least as well as, and under many conditions 
 better than, charcoal-iron tubes. 
 
 2 The SPELLERIZED STEEL BOILER TUBE is more ductile than the 
 charcoal-iron tube, and lends itself to manipulation, distortion and 
 "punishment" to a much greater extent, and at the same time has 
 greater toughness and strength. For instance, in experiments to deter- 
 mine the durability of the SPELLERIZED STEEL BOILER TUBE, in the 
 flue-sheet it was found that the SPELLERIZED STEEL BOILER TUBE, when 
 set in the flue-sheet in the ordinary way, would withstand at least fifty 
 per cent reduction in gauge under the roller without cracking. Char- 
 coal iron will rarely withstand twenty-five per cent reduction without 
 failure. 
 
 3 Methods of steel making are now so improved that it is possible 
 to get a more uniform product in steel than in iron, and the tend- 
 ency year by year is towards further improvement. The steel tube 
 of to-day is far better than the steel tube of ten years ago, and is better 
 than any iron tube we have ever made. Most metallurgical advances 
 in the last ten years have been along the line of improvements in steel, 
 whereas comparatively few, if any, have been made in the line of 
 iron improvement. 
 
THE 
 
 MODERN 
 
 BOILER 
 
 TUBE 
 
 Tests Applied to Boiler Tubes 
 
 In order to ascertain that the quality of material and manufacture are satisfactory, all 
 boiler tubes are subjected to severe tests. These tests, assisted by rigid inspection, insure 
 that steel boiler tubes as manufactured by this company, whether intended for locomotive, 
 stationary or marine boilers, will give satisfactory service. 
 
 A flattening test is made on both crop ends of each lap-welded tube. This test is used to 
 indicate the strength of weld and ductility of the metal and a guaranty of the uniformity of 
 the product. 
 
 Every boiler tube is subjected to an internal hydrostatic test pressure of 500 or 1,000 
 pounds pressure, according to the size and kind (all seamless boiler tubes are tested to 1,000 
 pounds pressure). 
 
 Details of tests which may be applied to boiler tubes are given in the specifications pages 9 
 and 11. 
 
 Standard Tests on Steel Boiler Tubes 
 
THE 
 
 BOILER 
 
 TUBE 
 
 Test of Lap -Welded Locomotive Flues 
 
 Every SPELLERIZED LAP-WELDED LOCOMOTIVE TUBE is given a special test, applied to 
 both crop ends. 
 
 This test, illustrated on this page, combines the vertical crushing, horizontal flattening 
 and flange tests on one piece. A special machine has been designed, which enables the test to 
 be made very quickly, and as crop ends are used the cost is reduced to a minimum. If the 
 test piece opens at the weld or elsewhere the tube from which it was cropped is rejected. If 
 the tube stands the above test on the ends the regular internal pressure test is then applied. 
 
 Special Test on Spellerized Lap -Welded Locomotive Tubes 
 
 First piece to the left shows a crop end of a Boiler tube (two crop ends are cut from every SPELLERIZED STEEL LOCOMOTIVE BOILER TUBE) 
 
 The second piece shows the crop end laterally crushed; and the third piece shows the crop end crushed -vertically with a 
 
 flange turned on the top. It should be borne in mind that every single SPELLERIZED BOILER TUBE for 
 
 locomotive service receives this test twice once on each crop end the combined test being 
 
 made in one operation while the piece is held in the testing machine. 
 
THE 
 
 BOILER 
 
 TUBE 
 
 National Tube Company 
 
 Specifications for Lap -Welded and Seamless Steel Boiler Tubes 
 for Merchant and Marine Service 
 
 Material 
 
 Material must be good quality soft steel rolled from solid ingots. Sufficient crop shall 
 be cut from the ends to insure sound material. 
 
 March 15, 1912 
 
 Dimensions, Weights and Test Pressures 
 
 Merchant and Marine Boiler Tube Specification No. 1 
 
 Outside Diameter, Inches 
 
 Thickness, 
 Inches 
 
 Thickness, 
 Birmingham 
 W T ire Gage 
 
 Weight 
 Per Foot, 
 Pounds 
 
 Test Pressure, 
 Pounds 
 
 Seamless 
 
 T Wol.rl.n.r] 
 
 Seamless 
 
 Lap-Welded 
 
 Hot Finish 
 
 J^tlJJ TT eitl^Vl 
 
 Cold Finish 
 
 
 1 
 
 .095 
 
 13 
 
 .918 
 
 1,000 
 
 
 
 \y 
 
 .095 
 
 13 
 
 1.171 1,000 
 
 
 
 \y 2 
 
 .095 13 
 
 1.425 1,000 
 
 
 
 1% \% -095 13 
 
 1.679 1,000 
 
 750 
 
 2 
 
 2 2 
 
 .095 13 
 
 1.932 1,000 
 
 750 
 
 <%\/. 
 
 2*4 2^ 
 
 .095 
 
 13 
 
 2.186 1,000 
 
 750 
 
 2 V2 
 
 2i/ 2^ 
 
 .109 
 
 12 
 
 2.783 1,000 
 
 750 
 
 %y 
 
 2% 2% 
 
 .109 
 
 12 
 
 3.074 1,000 
 
 750 
 
 3 
 
 3 3 
 
 .109 
 
 12 
 
 3.365 
 
 1,000 
 
 750 
 
 3M 
 
 3M 334 
 
 .120 11 
 
 4.011 1,000 
 
 750 
 
 3^2 
 
 Q 1 / O 1 / 
 
 o / o o / o 
 
 .120 11 
 
 4.331 
 
 1,000 
 
 750 
 
 3% 
 4 
 
 3% 3% 
 4 4 
 
 .120 11 
 .134 10 
 
 4.652 
 5.532 
 
 1,000 
 1,000 
 
 750 
 750 
 
 41^ 
 
 4 1 A 4 1 A 
 
 .134 
 
 10 
 
 6.248 1,000 
 
 500 
 
 5 
 
 . 5 5 
 
 .148 
 
 9 
 
 7.669 
 
 1,000 
 
 500 
 
 
 6 
 
 .165 
 
 8 
 
 10.282 
 
 
 500 
 
 
 7 
 
 .165 8 
 
 12.044 
 
 
 500 
 
 
 8 
 
 .165 8 
 
 13.807 
 
 
 500 
 
 
 9 
 
 .180 7 
 
 16.955 
 
 
 500 
 
 
 10 .203 6 
 
 21.240 
 
 
 500 
 
 
 11 .220 5 
 
 25.329 
 
 
 500 
 
 
 12 .229 
 
 4j/2 
 
 28.788 
 
 
 500 
 
 
 13 
 
 .238 
 
 4 
 
 32.439 
 
 
 500 
 
 The permissible variation in weight is 5 per cent, above or 5 per cent, below that given in table. 
 
 9 
 
THE MODERN BOILER TUBE 
 
 Inspection 
 
 (a) Tubes shall have a reasonably smooth surface, free from injurious pits, laminations, 
 cracks, blisters or imperfect welds; they shall also be free from kinks, bends and buckles, 
 signs of unequal contraction in cooling or injury during manufacture. 
 
 (6) The thickness of the wall shall not vary more than 10 per cent above or below the 
 gauge specified, except at the weld, where .015 inch extra thickness will be allowed. 
 
 (c) Tubes shall not vary more than one-half (j/0 of one per cent either way from being 
 round or true to the mean outside diameter, except in the smaller sizes, where a variation of 
 .015 of an inch will be accepted. 
 
 (d) Tubes shall not be shorter than the length ordered, nor more than .125 inch longer. 
 
 Physical Tests 
 
 FLATTENING TEST: A section three (3) inches long shall stand hammering flat, cold, 
 until the inside walls are within three times the thickness of the material without cracking 
 at the bend or elsewhere. In case of Lap- Welded tubes for Marine work, the bend at one side 
 shall be made in the weld. 
 
 FLANGING TEST: For Marine purposes on Lap- Welded tubes four (4) inches and smaller, 
 and on all sizes of seamless tubes, a flange three-eighths (^6) of an inch wide shall be turned 
 over at right angles to the body of the tube without showing crack or opening at the weld. 
 
 INTERNAL PRESSURE TEST: Each tube shall be subjected by the manufacturer to an 
 internal hydrostatic pressure for the respective size and gauge, as given in table of Dimensions, 
 Weights and Test Pressures. 
 
 General Requirements 
 
 In addition to the above tests, each tube when inserted in the boiler must stand expanding 
 and flanging where required without cracking or opening at the weld. Tubes which fail in 
 this way may be returned to the manufacturer. 
 
 A certificate of test shall be furnished the purchaser of each lot of tubes for Marine service, 
 describing the kind of material from which the tubes were made, and that the tubes have been 
 tested and have met all the requirements prescribed by the Board of Supervising Inspectors, 
 Department of Commerce and Labor, Steamboat Inspection Service. 
 
 All tests to be made at place of manufacture. 
 
 10 
 
THE MODERN BOILER TUBE 
 
 American Society for Testing Materials 
 
 Locomotive Materials 
 
 Specifications for Lap -Welded and Seamless Steel Boiler Tubes 
 and Safe Ends, 2^ Inches Diameter and Under 
 
 Manufacture 
 
 1. The steel shall be made by the open-hearth process. 
 
 Chemical Properties and Tests 
 
 2. The steel shall conform to the following requirements as to chemical composition: 
 
 Carbon not over 0.15 per cent 
 
 Manganese 0.30 0.50 per cent 
 
 Phosphorus not over 0.04 per cent 
 
 Sulphur not over 0.045 per cent 
 
 3. (a) Analyses of two tubes in each lot of 250 or less shall be made, and these analyses 
 shall conform to the requirements specified in Section 2. Drillings for analyses shall be taken 
 from several points around each tube. 
 
 (6) If the analysis of only one tube does not conform to the requirements specified, 
 analyses of two additional tubes from the same lot shall be made and each of these shall 
 conform to the requirements specified. 
 
 Physical Properties and Tests 
 
 4. A test specimen not less than 4 inches in length shall have a flange 3/8 inch wide 
 turned over at right angles to the body of the tube without showing cracks or flaws. 
 
 5. A test specimen 4 inches in length shall stand hammering flat until the inside walls 
 are in contact, without cracking at the edges or elsewhere. For lap-welded tubes, care shall 
 be taken that the weld is not located at the point of maximum bending. 
 
 6. A test specimen 2j/ inches in length shall stand crushing flat longitudinally without 
 showing cracks or flaws. 
 
 7. Tubes of Nos. 9, 10 and 11 B.\v.g. shall stand an internal hydraulic pressure of 1,000 
 pounds per square inch, and tubes of Nos. 12 and 13 B.w.g. an internal hydraulic pressure of 
 900 pounds per square inch. 
 
 8. (a) Test specimens shall consist of sections cut from a tube. They shall be smooth 
 on the ends and free from burrs. 
 
 (6) All specimens shall be tested cold. 
 
 9. One flange, one flattening, and one crush test shall be made from each of two tubes 
 in each lot of 250 or less. Each tube shall be subjected to the hydraulic test. 
 
 10. If the results of the physical tests of only one tube do not conform to the require- 
 ments specified in Sections 4, 5 or 6, retests of two additional tubes from the same lot shall 
 be made and each of these shall conform to the requirements specified. 
 
 11 
 
THE 
 
 MODERN 
 
 BOILER 
 
 TUBE 
 
 Standard Weights 
 r tubes of various out 
 
 Table of Standard Weights 
 
 11. The standard weights for tubes of various outside diameters and thicknesses are 
 as follows: 
 
 Thickness 
 
 Weights, Lbs. per Ft. of Length Outside Diam., In. 
 
 Nearest B. w.'g. 
 
 Inches 
 
 1% 
 
 2 
 
 214 
 
 VA 
 
 13 
 
 0.095 
 
 1.68 
 
 1.93 
 
 2.19 
 
 2.44 
 
 12 
 
 0.110 
 
 1.93 
 
 2.22 
 
 2.51 
 
 2.81 
 
 11 
 
 0.125 
 
 2.17 
 
 2.50 
 
 2.84 
 
 3.17 
 
 10 
 
 0.135 
 
 2.33 
 
 2.69 
 
 3.05 
 
 3.41 
 
 9 
 
 0.150 
 
 2.56 
 
 2.96 
 
 3.36 
 
 3.77 
 
 12. The weight of the tubes shall not vary more than 5 per cent from that specified in 
 Section 11. 
 
 Workmanship and Finish 
 
 13. (a) The finished tubes shall be circular within 0.02 inch and the mean outside 
 diameter shall not vary more than 0.015 inch from the size ordered. They shall not be 
 shorter than the length ordered, but may exceed it by 0.125 inch. 
 
 (b) For lap-welded tubes, the thickness at any point shall not vary more than 0.01 
 inch from that specified, except at the weld, where an additional thickness of 0.015 inch 
 shall be allowed. 
 
 For seamless tubes, the thickness at any point shall not vary more than 10 per cent 
 from that specified. 
 
 14. The finished tubes shall be free from injurious seams, flaws, or cracks, and shall 
 have a workmanlike finish. They shall be free from kinks, bends and buckles. 
 
 Marking 
 
 15. The name or brand of the manufacturer, and "Tested at 1,000 pounds" for Nos. 
 9, 10 and 11 B.w.g., or "Tested at 900 pounds" for Nos. 12 and 13 B.w.g., shall be legibly 
 stenciled in white on each tube. 
 
 Inspection and Rejection 
 
 16. The inspector representing the purchaser shall have free entry, at all times while 
 work on the contract of the purchaser is being performed, to all parts of the manufacturer's 
 works which concern the manufacture of the material ordered. The manufacturer shall 
 afford the inspector, free of cost, all reasonable facilities to satisfy him that the material is 
 being furnished in accordance with these specifications. All tests and inspections shall be 
 made at the place of manufacture prior to shipment, and shall be so conducted as not to 
 interfere unnecessarily with the operation of the works. 
 
 17. Tubes when inserted in the boiler shall stand expanding and beading without show- 
 ing cracks or flaws, or opening at the weld. Tubes which fail in this manner shall be rejected, 
 and the manufacturer shall be notified. 
 
THE 
 
 MODERN 
 
 BOILER 
 
 TUBE 
 
 'Steel vs. Iron Flues' 
 
 Summary of Data Presented at International Master Boiler 
 Makers' Association Conventions, 1909, 1910 and 1911 
 
 The proceedings of these three Conventions on the subject of boiler tubes are reproduced 
 in the following pages. For the convenience of those interested in the subject and too busy 
 to read all the details, the main conclusions have been condensed into a few paragraphs under 
 the following topics : 
 
 CORROSION AND PITTING: Twenty opinions on this subject^ are nearly equally divided, 
 the experience of six members indicating that the steel pits less than the iron, while as many 
 went on record with just the opposite opinion, and the remaining eight considered the 
 two materials to be equally affected. Several men of wide experience prefer iron for body 
 tubes, because of supposed superiority in resisting corrosion, yet recommend steel for safe 
 ending where the material is really subject to more severe conditions of service. 
 
 The view of eight of the members that iron and steel are about equally resistant to 
 corrosion, under the usual conditions of service, would appear to be a reasonable conclusion. 
 In 1901-2 the United States Navy Steam Engineering Department conducted extensive 
 tests which indicate that there is relatively little difference in the corrosion loss of tube mate- 
 rials : 
 
 Loss grams per Sq. In. in aerated 
 
 distilled water, comparing with 
 
 iron as 100 per cent. 
 
 93.7 per cent 
 
 94.5 per cent 
 
 101.3 per cent 
 
 100.0 per cent 
 
 1. Hot drawn seamless open-hearth steel 
 
 2. Lap- weld Bessemer steel .... 
 
 3. Cold drawn seamless open-hearth steel 
 
 4. Charcoal iron 
 
 MILEAGE AND EFFICIENCY: The greater part of the evidence presented refers to this 
 subject rather than to corrosion. The experience of one of the largest railway systems is 
 typical : a test including ten locomotives, five passenger and five freight, each equipped with 
 iron and steel tubes, shows the steel to have given an average additional mileage over the charcoal 
 iron of 40,400 in case of passenger engines and of 23,700 for freight engines (page 16) ; while 
 in another case it was found that twenty-eight freight locomotives averaged 25,000 miles 
 more with steel tubes than had been attained previously with iron tubes under the same 
 conditions (page 28). On another system iron flues in the passenger service afforded 55,000 
 to 65,000 miles between "shoppings," w r hile steel gave 110,000 to 148,000 miles. Seventeen 
 members favor the modern steel tube for efficiency, five are opposed to this and ten report 
 equally good results with the two materials, so that most of the evidence favors steel tubes. 
 
 CONCLUSION : The idea has been advanced that the pitting of iron and steel is preventable 
 to a great extent (page 26); and it is generally accepted, according to this discussion, that 
 steel tubes expand and bead into the flue sheet better and hold their position more perma- 
 nently than iron, are stronger, of smoother finish and truer to size and gauge than the older 
 material; also with ordinary care they are welded with as good results as iron; and finally, 
 that their service efficiency is higher, so that the statement of one of the members that "steel 
 flues are the coming thing" (page 32), seems to aptly express the trend of opinion at these 
 meetings. 
 
 13 
 
THE MODERN BOILER TUBE 
 
 Official Report 
 
 and Discussion of Report of the Special Committee on 
 
 Steel vs. Iron Flues 
 
 before the International Master Boiler Makers' Association in Convention at Louisville, April 27-30, 1909 
 
 (See pages 150 to 166 of Official Proceedings) 
 
 Fourth Day's Session 
 
 The Convention met pursuant to adjournment at 9:30 A. M. and was called to order by 
 the President. 
 
 The President: The first order of business this morning is the report from the Com- 
 mittee on Steel versus Iron Flues. 
 
 Report of Committee on Steel vs. Iron Flues 
 
 Mr. O'Connor: I wish to make a few explanations before this report is read. You will 
 note in the body of the report when read that my experience has been very limited with the 
 steel flues, consequently I can say at this time but little concerning these two metals. On 
 the Chicago & Northwestern lines west of the Missouri River we have had since May, 1909, 
 several locomotives equipped with the steel and iron flues, half and half in each locomotive. 
 Up to date we have not had occasion to remove any of them, either the iron or the steel, 
 from our boilers. From reports received from time to time we cannot complain of the service 
 given from either the iron or the steel flues, both giving, so far, good satisfaction. I have, 
 however, made personal inspection of the flues in the fire-box of a few of the engines, and by 
 close observation relative to the flue bead at fire-box end I found the steel-flue bead to have 
 a little advantage over the iron bead, as the steel bead remains closer and firmer to the flue- 
 sheet surface than the iron bead. That is all the material difference I could note between 
 the two metals. 
 
 By the time of our next Convention in 1910, I will, in all probability, have removed 
 some of these experimental flues from the engines so equipped, and then I can make a more 
 complete report, giving the accurate service and general condition of the two metals as found 
 in our section of the western country. We must not forget that water conditions are not the 
 same in all parts of the country, and in that respect we must depend on what will be brought 
 forth from a thorough test of actual service. 
 
 Therefore, I will say that in my short experience with these two metals I would consider 
 this report that will be read before you incomplete, and would suggest that this Association 
 continue this Committee over another year. I would also suggest that the incoming presi- 
 dent appoint two more members on this Committee, making the number five instead of three, 
 and that the two additional committeemen be among those that have had good experience 
 with both the steel and iron flues. 
 
 14 
 
THE MODERN BOILER TUBE 
 
 The President : Mr. Sarver was on that Committee, too. 
 
 Mr. Sarver: Let the Secretary read the report, please. 
 
 In submitting to you our report the undersigned Committee on the above subject would 
 respectfully present the following: 
 
 Our personal experience and our investigations have furnished us such a wide difference 
 of opinion, relative to the two metals mentioned in this subject, that it proved quite inter- 
 esting as well as a hard problem for the Committee to determine anything like a satisfactory 
 report; hence, it was decided so to present this paper to the Convention, giving our personal 
 experiences as well as those of other members, thereby affording an opportunity for general 
 discussion among all the members of the Convention with the object in view that by general dis- 
 cussion we, the Committee, would profit by the information obtained as well as other members. 
 
 We are also of the opinion that the introduction of the steel flue is not as widely known 
 as the iron flue, consequently the ultimate possibilities are yet to reach a good many of us 
 who, as yet, have not had sufficient experience to determine which of the two metals has 
 proven the most successful in a general way, in economy, as well as securing the best service. 
 
 The following report from Mr. B. F. Sarver of the Pennsylvania Lines, Fort Wayne, 
 Ind., will be of interest to the members relative to steel flues. Mr. Sarver has this to say: 
 
 Mr. Chairman: The locomotive at the present time is required to carry almost double 
 the steam that it was a few years ago, and as a matter of safety, those in charge of the motive 
 power department should advocate the use of the highest class of material obtainable, having 
 in view, at all times, economy and safety. 
 
 In regard to seamless cold-drawn flue tubes, I might say that the steel is made by the 
 open hearth process and must be of the finest quality that can be purchased, otherwise it 
 cannot be pierced. It is always uniform in quality, and as you do away with the welding of 
 the flues it makes a stronger tube than the ordinary iron tube. It expands and beads per- 
 fectly, and in service the tubes hold their position in the flue-sheet much better than the 
 softer product. The steel tubes are truer in size and gauge than the welded ones, and are free 
 from the objectionable scale caused by welding, and the surface defects can more readily 
 be found. 
 
 The surfaces of the steel flues are so densified that they are not so liable to be affected 
 by pitting and corrosion, caused by the foreign substances in the water. They are very 
 readily welded and can be installed in a boiler at a less expense than the iron tubes. 
 
 Although the steel makers do not guarantee their steel to run below .04 per cent in sul- 
 phur and .03 per cent in phosphorus, I give you below the maximum and minimum carbons 
 taken from sixteen heats, made by steel makers for steel tubing: 
 
 Carbon 10% Carbon 16% 
 
 Phosphorus 008% Phosphorus 01% 
 
 Manganese . . . . 39% Manganese . 49% 
 
 Sulphur. 03% Sulphur. 025% 
 
 And in neither test the sulphur showed above .03 per cent and the phosphorus above 
 .017 per cent. 
 
 15 
 
THE 
 
 MODERN 
 
 BOILER 
 
 TUBE 
 
 I might state that a great many of the large railroad systems of this country are using 
 almost exclusively the seamless cold-drawn tubes for safe ends. And as a great many of the 
 roads have large quantities cf charcoal iron tubes in service, in looking this matter up I find 
 they weld very readily into steel. 
 
 It is generally understood that the end of the tube, especially the fire-box end, has to 
 stand the most severe punishment, and if the railroads, generally speaking, have selected the 
 seamless tube for the purpose of safe ends, they must recognize in it a quality superior to 
 iron. I cannot see why, at a less expense than iron, it would not be the most economical 
 body tube for locomotives. 
 
 The physical quality of seamless cold-drawn steel tubes is as follows: 
 
 Tensile strength, pounds per square inch 50,000 to 60,000 
 
 Elastic limit, pounds per square inch 80,000 to 35,000 
 
 Elongation in eight inches 20% to 25% 
 
 I might further say that after extensive tests made by the Steam Engineering Depart- 
 ment of the United States Navy, they recommended some years ago seamless cold-drawn 
 steel tubing for the boilers of their battleships. This is also a fact with all the great navies 
 of the world ; their steam boilers are all fitted with seamless cold-drawn steel tubing. 
 
 I believe the time is not far distant when the superintendent of motive power as well as 
 the boiler-maker foreman will all specify seamless cold-drawn steel tubing for all purposes. 
 
 One of the lines with which I am connected used steel tubing for safe ends exclusively. 
 Since the adoption of steel at this particular place they have increased their flue mileage at 
 least 25 per cent. The maintaining and calking of flues in engine house has also been reduced 
 the same proportion, 25 per cent. I have experienced no difficulty whatever in welding the 
 steel safe ends to iron flues. 
 
 Below you will find a chart showing five passenger as well as five freight engines with 
 the mileage made with iron flues, as well as steel safe ends, we applied. 
 
 
 Mileage made, Iron Flues 
 
 Mileage made, Steel Flues 
 
 Steel over Iron 
 
 1 Passenger 
 
 60,299 
 
 108,478 
 
 48,179 
 
 1 
 
 96,273 
 
 103,330 
 
 7,059 
 
 1 
 
 41,684 
 
 115,723 
 
 74,039 
 
 1 
 
 50,128 
 
 87,524 
 
 37,396 
 
 1 
 
 84,561 
 
 120,088 
 
 .35,527 
 
 1 Freight 
 
 33,260 
 
 55,063 
 
 21,803 
 
 1 
 
 39,390 
 
 76,788 
 
 37,398 
 
 1 
 
 46,371 
 
 54,639 
 
 8,268 
 
 1 
 
 30,614 
 
 59,967 
 
 29,353 
 
 1 
 
 28,130 
 
 50,014 
 
 21,884 
 
 10 
 
THE MODERN BOILER TUBE 
 
 I will conclude by saying that my experience in this particular line, with what I have 
 been able to find in looking this matter up, and also with the increased flue mileage shown in 
 the above chart, I cannot help but say that we are coming to the use of steel flues very rapidly. 
 
 Mr. Clement Ryan, of the Union Pacific Railway, Omaha, Neb., also presents the fol- 
 lowing report: 
 
 Mr. Chairman: I hereby beg to submit the following on the above subject, and hope 
 that it will at least open up a line of discussion that will be of benefit to all concerned. 
 
 Regarding the use and value of steel in comparison with iron flues, beg to say that in my 
 opinion iron is the best for all purposes, especially as regards pitting. We have had a great 
 deal of experience on the Union Pacific with both iron and steel tubes, and find the steel so 
 badly pitted after a service of from eight to twelve months as to necessitate 75 per cent of 
 the flues to be scrapped, while iron flues running over the same district and under same water 
 conditions last for years. I would, therefore, respectfully recommend the use of iron flues 
 with steel safe ends, as the steel safe ends in fire-boxes stand the heat better than iron. It is 
 standard on the Union Pacific to use iron flues with steel safe ends for fire-box, and the results 
 have been good. 
 
 The welding of steel and iron flues requires a good deal of attention, as the heating of 
 these two metals is not the same, and we have had a good deal of trouble in the past welding 
 steel safe ends to iron flues. We would find after the weld was made that at a point about 
 one-half inch from the weld the steel would be cracked sometimes half way around the flue. 
 To overcome this difficulty will say, that after the steel piece has been fitted to the flue 
 and put in the fire, it should never be removed until it is ready to weld, because immediately 
 it comes in contact with the air and is then replaced in the fire, a certain per cent of the weld- 
 ing power is destroyed. Respectfully submitted, 
 
 M. O'CONNOR, Chairman, 
 B. F. SARVER, 
 CLEMENT RYAN. 
 
 The President: You have heard the report of the Committee and also the recommenda- 
 tion of the Chairman. What do you wish to do with the report? 
 
 Mr. Lucas: I move that the subject of this report be continued for another year. The 
 proposition is a new one, and a good one, and one we will always have before us. I believe 
 we ought to go into it thoroughly, and I suggest that the Committee be increased by the 
 addition of two members. 
 
 The motion was seconded. 
 
 The President: The motion before the house is that the report from the Committee on 
 Steel versus Iron Flues be accepted, with thanks to the Committee, and the Committee be 
 continued one year with the addition of two members, making it five. Do the members 
 wish me to appoint the other two? 
 
 Mr. Smythe: Two of the members of this Committee expressed themselves in the report 
 and they disagreed. Do I understand that we accept the report and agree that they are both 
 right? 
 
THE MODERN BOILER TUBE 
 
 The President: No, we cannot do that. We are accepting their report as presented. 
 They have given us the best information and conclusion they could. If the Committee is 
 continued they will still be gathering information. We are not satisfied with what we have 
 so far, but it is the best they could furnish us for the time and experience they have had. 
 So we continue the Committee with the addition of two more members to make still deeper 
 investigation and report at the next Convention. 
 
 Mr. Smythe: No doubt the charcoal-iron tube people are perfectly satisfied to give 
 the steel flue another year's trial and let it speak for itself; but I, for one, would dislike to 
 take any part in deciding which one is the best. I think we came here for other purposes 
 than to advertise any one make of an article or material ; so I don't think that the charcoal- 
 iron people are a bit worried about being given another year's trial. 
 
 Mr. Goodwin: I would think that the motion should read "received" instead of 
 "accepted," and that would clear it up. There is no final report, and the Committee is to be 
 continued so that the subject is still open. In reference to the appointment of the Com- 
 mittee, it would be well enough for the new President to appoint the two new members. I 
 believe our Chairman would be glad to have the new President receive all the honors that 
 belong to his office. 
 
 Mr. Sarver: I do not think it is the duty of any committee to recommend whether steel 
 or iron should be used. It is not the sense of my report at all. When you appoint a com- 
 mittee on a subject and ask that committee whether steel or iron is best, they must certainly 
 say one thing or the other. What is left for a committee to do if they do not do that? It is 
 nothing to me who furnishes the steel, whether it be Mr. Smythe or Mr. Goodwin. My 
 report does not specify that we shall use the steel those men make, or any other makes of 
 steel. The topic to my mind was this: Whether this Committee thought steel or iron flues 
 were best, and I gave you just exactly what my experience has been. From my experience, 
 from the figures, and from the mileage and the service that we have obtained from steel safe 
 ends, it would be impossible for me to come here and advocate iron; and if I am not allowed 
 to give in my report the conditions that exist, you might as well not have a committee. I 
 cannot come here and say iron flues are what I want when those of steel have run from 25 
 to 35 per cent more than iron in actual service. I only put in the paper what I know to be 
 actual facts. Another thing has come up since I wrote that report. We had an engine that 
 ran 40,000 miles with iron flues. We took it into the shop and applied steel safe ends. It 
 has run 72,000 miles and is running yet. So you see that I cannot come here and say that 
 iron flues are as good as steel. (Applause.) 
 
 Mr. Lucas: I believe what the gentleman has just said is just exactly what we want to 
 know. The Committee has certainly made a good report. They have given us all the infor- 
 mation they can. They have not specified anybody's make, but they should specify whether 
 it was steel or iron. I don't think the Committee has anything to feel sorry about in this 
 respect, at all. 
 
 Mr. Brown : It is my opinion that when these questions arise before the body for recom- 
 mendation, we ought not to lose sight of conservatism. In my yard conditions are not the 
 
 18 
 
THE MODERN BOILER TUBE 
 
 same as in your yard. There are members who can take either kind of flues and give good 
 reports as to their use in their jurisdiction. I don't see how this assembly can adopt or rec- 
 ommend what material we shall use. The railroad company which I represent covers a vast 
 area of country. We have good water and bad water districts. You have heard the good 
 results reported by Mr. Sarver of the service steel flues have rendered his company. I pre- 
 sume we have members here who could give us a report of the good service iron flues have 
 given. 
 
 Mr. Hemphill: I rise to a point of order. Is there a motion before the house? 
 
 The Chairman: I believe there is. I put the motion and then asked whether the Con- 
 vention was ready for the question. We are open for discussion as long as anybody wants 
 to talk. Mr. Brown, continue. 
 
 Mr. Brown: I don't believe that I am out of order. All questions are debatable before 
 being put to a vote. That is parliamentary rule. I want to cite you conditions on the Louis- 
 ville & Nashville Railroad. I don't see how we could conscientiously recommend the adop- 
 tion of any material. It is only recently that I had to throw out flues weighing 22 pounds to 
 the foot that were practically new. There ought to be a long life in store for those flues, 
 but the defect was on account of the action of the water upon them. It caused pitting. We 
 have iron tubes in those same districts and you would not know there was any trouble 
 with them. You can cite me as using both iron and steel. We are building twelve high- 
 pressure boilers and a test is being made with steel versus iron. A year from now I will 
 have information as to the results. I want to remind you that it would be impertinent for 
 this Convention to recommend any material that would not be good in certain localities. 
 
 The President: I believe there might, perhaps, be a tendency, and some members be 
 somewhat inclined to believe that your Chairman has been influenced in this matter. I am 
 not of that sort of makeup. I am, perhaps, rather sensitive. When I appointed this Com- 
 mittee, I did so fully and solely for the interest of this organization. When elected President 
 of this organization no subjects were put before me. I selected them. The members of this 
 Committee made just as able a report as they could. What are these meetings for if not for 
 information? I have spent hours and hours in the evening, after my work, and out on the 
 road, to select these committees. I have been turned down, time and time again, by 
 members who were asked to serve on committees, and had to take others. I was not 
 connected with the concern that I now represent when I appointed this Committee, 
 and had no thought of going with any company of its kind. Some of our members 
 talk as if I appointed this Committee just to bring out this subject, in order to make 
 recommendations for the adoption of certain material. That is not the principle of 
 this Association. We have no line of material to recommend. We are here to discuss whether 
 the material has given satisfaction or not, and if there is anything in the line of an evil, to 
 eliminate it and determine the remedy to be applied. It is our duty to look into it. When 
 this Committee was appointed I was general foreman boiler maker of the Missouri Pacific 
 Railway. I found in certain places in the country that steel would not give the same satis- 
 faction as iron; and that steel would give satisfaction in certain parts of the country where 
 iron would not. What I wanted to do was to bring out before this Association what steel 
 and iron had been doing. (Applause.) 
 
 19 
 
THE MODERN BOILER TUBE 
 
 Mr. Goodwin: I can fully realize the embarrassing position of our President, and I want 
 the floor just long enough to express my opinion about these facts. I don't believe we have 
 in this Association a more conscientious, or a man more devoted to the interests of this Asso- 
 ciation than our President, Mr. Conrath. (Applause.) I have known him for years and 
 years, and always found him to be straightforward. I know that Mr. Conrath had no idea 
 or intention of appointing any one on this Committee to give his opinion in reference to one 
 side of the question. I don't believe that the members of this Association think Mr. Conrath 
 would do such a thing. He is naturally a little sensitive, because to-day he is associated with 
 the National Tube people. I do hope and trust that Mr. Conrath will not think that there 
 is a member of this Convention who would consider for a moment that he had any selfish 
 personal interest to serve in making these appointments, or that he sought to give advantage 
 to one or the other side. His only object was to bring out the true facts and the true 
 conditions, and the honest opinions of the members of this Committee. I spoke a 
 moment ago of the appointment of the other Committee. I did that simply because I was 
 fully aware of the fact that, possibly, it might be embarrassing on the part of the President 
 to appoint the other two committeemen, as he might think there would be some criticism 
 or reflection with reference to it. I believe it would be more appropriate for the incoming 
 President to fill this Committee. I hope Mr. Conrath will not assume that there is a 
 member in this hall who feels that he would do anything wrong whatever in making appoint- 
 ments. (Applause.) 
 
 The President: That is just why I asked the question from the member who made the 
 motion, because it was putting me in an embarrassing position. I asked him whether he 
 wished me to appoint the Committee. I thank you. That is all right. 
 
 Mr. Troy: I believe we ought to have all the information we can get on this subject. 
 Many members have not said anything at all, and I am sure many are using both steel and 
 iron tubes. Is the subject open for debate now? 
 
 The President: The subject is still open for debate. 
 
 Mr. Troy: I have had a little experience with steel tubes, and I presume that in some 
 places they will run, but not in my district. I have not a written report, but I can give you 
 a verbal statement. I applied a set of steel tubes in an Atlantic engine carrying 200 pounds 
 steam pressure. After it had run 30,000 miles I removed the tubes, and I had to throw fifty 
 of the bottom tubes into the scrap, they were so badly pitted. 
 
 Mr. Gray : I do not know of a more live subject at the present time among railroad men 
 than steel versus iron tubes. It is a pretty serious proposition for a man to change from one 
 kind of tubes to the other, especially if he changes the body flues, because, if he gets started 
 on one kind of flues and finds they are not suitable for his district, he has to throw away 
 several thousand dollars' worth. I would like to hear from members in different water dis- 
 tricts as to what their experience has been. We have a number of steel body tubes and a 
 great many safe ends, and as far as the leaking and the life of the tube in the fire-box are 
 concerned, I have not been able to find practically any difference in my district. 
 
 Mr. Walker: W T as it not the motion that the report of the Committee be accepted and 
 the Committee be extended for one year, with two members added to it? 
 
 20 
 
THE MODERN BOILER TUBE 
 
 The President: That is right. 
 
 Mr. Walker: That motion ought to be put before the house and carried, and then a 
 motion that the subject be open for discussion would be in order. 
 
 The President : The motion before the house is that the report be received and the sub- 
 ject be open for discussion. The rest of the motion was explained before that the Com- 
 mittee be extended for one year with two additional members. 
 
 The question was put and the motion carried unanimously. . 
 
 Mr. Lucas: Seamless steel tubes are rather new to us all. I presume there are few mem- 
 bers who have not a set of steel flues in service undergoing test. Some are getting first-class 
 results where others are having trouble. We put in our first set of seamless tubes in January, 
 1905. We removed them after forty-five months' service, 168,000 miles. There was no 
 pitting. Every tube went back into the boiler. We have, about eight or ten sets in service 
 still doing business, and have not found any of them pitted. We have iron tubes that are 
 pitted badly on one of our divisions, scrapping 2,400 in six months, where we only scrapped 
 542 during the same period, on account of light weight. 
 
 Mr. Reddy: Is there anybody in the Convention who has had any experience with steel 
 tubes in connection with treated water? We have no steel tubes on our road, but have con- 
 templated putting in two sets for test purposes. We have treated water on our system. 
 
 Mr. Brown: I believe I am the member's honeysuckle. (Laughter.) We weld iron 
 ends on steel tubes and steel tubes on iron ends, and we have trouble in making these welds. 
 But going back to the water conditions on the Louisville & Nashville. It is, as Mr. Lucas 
 states. We all have a story to tell. I still say we ought to be conservative. Speaking of 
 mileage, I have iron tubes that have made 130,000 miles between changes of tubes. 
 
 Mr. Filcer: We find pitting on the tubes on several divisions of the C., C., C. & St. L., 
 both in steel and iron tubes. This is owing to the condition of the water. We have not dis- 
 covered any pitting on divisions where we have water-treating plants. W T e are getting better 
 results from steel tubes than we did from the iron tubes. 
 
 Mr. Sarver: Mr. President, in making up my part of this report, I never took into con- 
 sideration who was going to furnish these tubes. Nobody asked me that. I wrote my report 
 simply on the conditions that exist. I would like to hear from Mr. Letteri, who has had more 
 experience with steel safe ends on the Pennsylvania than anybody I know of. 
 
 The President: Mr. Sarver, we believe your report is very conscientious. It is a poor 
 man who would not express his opinion and his experience. 
 
 Mr. Letteri: I started in on the steel tubes, I think, in 1896. We made a three-year 
 test of them. Regarding pitting, my experience does not go so very far. We have very hard 
 lime water, and we all know that no pitting takes place in lime water. It only occurs in 
 places where they have real pure water. As far as service is concerned, just as Mr. Sarver 
 stated in his report, the end of the flue that is in the back sheet, when the flues are removed, 
 is heavier at the time of removal than the iron flue would be in three months' service, and 
 the flues at the present time are not removed on account of being worn out, but simply to 
 get the mud and scale out of the boiler. 
 
 21 
 
THE MODERN BOILER TUBE 
 
 Mr. Wanberg: I have had some experience in the last twenty or more years, and I find 
 that an engine in constant service is not as apt to pit the flues as one that is taken out of 
 service and left out from time to time. As between iron and steel, I could not say which 
 would pit the quicker. My attention was called to a condenser less than two years ago, 
 which I applied to a set of flues. We took out the flues and found that an iron flue put in less 
 than nine months before was badly pitted, and was scrapped. I knew the trouble was not 
 in the water altogether, because we had flues that had given us better service. I found the 
 dynamo set so close to this condenser that it made electrical connection between the two, 
 and that was the cause of the trouble. That was two years ago. I put in a set of the same 
 tubes made by the National Tube Company, and we have had no further trouble from them. 
 The previous trouble was due to the electric current, and not to the material of the tube. 
 My attention was also called to the west end of the H. & E., where we put in one set of flues. 
 In eight months' service the entire set was scrapped on account of pitting. We knew it was 
 not the water, because we had iron flues that ran longer on that same division. They had 
 run for years and not caused us any trouble from pitting. We investigated, and found that 
 a man was using blue vitriol in the water. It was not the flue, but the vitriol this man used. 
 The same thing may exist on your road. I do believe, however, that the pitting of flues is 
 due a great deal to taking an engine out of service and leaving it out from time to time. More 
 damage is done in one week out of service than a month in service. 
 
 Mr. McKeown: I would like to ask Mr. Sarver or Mr. Letteri whether they find any 
 difference with scaling in iron flues or steel flues do they find any difference in cleaning 
 with a flue cleaner? 
 
 Mr. Sarver: No, sir. 
 
 Mr. McKeown: Mr. Letteri, how about it; do you find any difference? 
 
 Mr. Letteri: Practically the same; I could not tell any difference in the cleaning. 
 
 Mr. Gushing: I have been handling steel flues since about 1900, and I have also had 
 iron flues mixed in with them. When I started on this subject of steel flues we were getting 
 22,000 and 23,000 miles out of a set of flues. We put a test set in and got 69,000 miles. I 
 removed the tubes, had them cleaned and examined, and found no signs of pitting. I also 
 had some iron flues, and found no signs of pitting in them. But in the last two years, flues 
 in service four or five or six years, show pitting on both the iron and steel. I don't attribute 
 it to the material, but to laying the engine up for a month or six weeks at a time, also to the 
 flues being taken out of the boiler and put outside and left in the weather. They rust, and 
 that starts the pitting. I don't think it is the fault of the steel or iron, but of the handling. 
 
 Mr. Linderman: I have been handling steel flues about six years. On our passenger 
 power with the iron flues, the best we could do was 55,000 to 65,000 miles. With steel we 
 raised our mileage from 110,000 to 148,000 miles. We have no pitting. With regard to Mr. 
 McKeown's question relative to the cleaning of tubes, we found that steel tubes cleaned 
 a little easier than the iron. 
 
 Mr. Johnston: Some time ago I was connected with a small road in the northwest, 
 now a part of the Northern Pacific, where the blacksmith foreman and boiler foreman were 
 requested to order or specify the material desired in their line; as boiler foreman, I tried 
 
THE MODERN BOILER TUBE 
 
 steel and iron flues; also welded steel safe ends on iron flues, and vice versa. We had no 
 trouble either on account of welding or the service received, the steel and iron flues giving 
 practically the same mileage from 40,000 to 50,000 miles; that is, from shopping to shop- 
 ping. We gave the purchasing department to understand, that whatever tubes they could 
 buy to the best advantage to the company we would use. I am now connected with the 
 Santa Fe, and in the past two years we have had considerable trouble from flues pitting, in 
 several instances getting only eight months' service, when it was found necessary to scrap 
 them. 
 
 Mr. President: Was that with iron or steel? 
 
 Mr. Johnston: Iron tubes; and I believe as Mr. Gushing does, that considerable of this 
 pitting is caused by having them out in the weather, causing them to rust considerably, to 
 which, in my opinion, the pitting, after setting, can be traced. 
 
 Mr. Smythe: I believe an explanation is due Mr. Sarver of my remarks about the Com- 
 mittee. I would suggest to the Chairman that he write to the members that are using iron 
 flues, and in his report also embody a report from the iron flues. I know there are large roads 
 that are taking out steel flues and adopting iron, for what purpose I do not know. I have 
 not the experience of you gentlemen, but I think that next year the Committee should have 
 a report from both sides. The two gentlemen who were on the Committee had experience 
 with steel flues, and there was nobody who knew anything about iron flues at all. Surely 
 it ought to be possible to say something good about iron flues, and we ought to hear from the 
 gentlemen who have the information. 
 
 The President: Excuse me, but iron tubes are mentioned. 
 
 Mr. Andrew Green: I think everybody in the hall has had experience with iron tubes, 
 and I think those who have not had any experience with steel tubes will get good results if 
 they try them. 
 
 Mr. James E. Cooke: The Bessemer Railroad, which I represent, is a comparatively 
 small road, yet we haul the largest tonnage of any road in the United States. We have 
 engines carrying 225 pounds, and during the past eight or ten years have used nothing but steel 
 tubes. We weld No. 10 steel ends onto iron and steel tubes, using oil or coke for fuel. We 
 have little trouble with the flues breaking after they are put into the boiler, but we do expe- 
 rience some trouble with flues pitting. We find that iron tubes pit as readily as steel in bad 
 water districts, therefore, cold-drawn steel tubes are the best in the market for our service. 
 
 Mr. Kelly: We have men here that use both kinds. I suggest that each one act as a 
 committee of one, so we will know what we are talking about next year, and be able to recom- 
 mend something to our officials. I suggest that we each make a test. I would also suggest 
 that the Chairman of the Committee write to the manufacturers. I believe next year, or two 
 years from now, we will know just exactly what we are talking about, and I recommend we 
 ascertain just where these pitted flues come from, and report the outcome of the test. 
 
 The President: It was my idea that we would discuss the matter here, the members to 
 then go home and go into the matter deeper and find out where they are. 
 
 Mr. Kelly: I would like to have them put in half and half in the same engine, the right 
 side iron and the left side steel. 
 
 23 
 
THE MODERN BOILER TUBE 
 
 Mr. Lowe: As a representative of the Canadian Pacific Railroad I will state that we 
 are operating in the neighborhood of 1,500 locomotives. The western lines, which I repre- 
 sent, have about 740. I believe I should have something to say in connection with our tubes 
 and the material used. We are using steel tubes except in those cases where we are having 
 experiments with other brands. In the good water district, as regards renewal, we are gov- 
 erned by the time adopted for internal inspection of the boiler. In the same districts with 
 the iron ends, we find no gain or loss in connection with either material. But when we come 
 into bad water districts, it is not a question of the vitality of the bead or security to the tube- 
 sheet, but of having to remove them for scale. We had been using the steel tube for many 
 years before I came to your Convention. I am not interested in one particular brand of 
 tubes over another. Every brand that is supplied us for experiment will get a fair trial. We 
 have practically found no gain or loss in bad water districts, and in good water territory any 
 flue stays in long enough to come within the time limit of internal inspection of the boiler. 
 
 Mr. Lucas: In making this test, when you get your people to buy a set of iron tubes, 
 I would like the members to keep a record of the work done on each set, and the number of 
 flues plugged when in the shop, and give us complete data of what has been done. It will 
 be well to state whether it was a good grade of iron tube against the steel tube, or a common 
 body grade of iron against the steel tube. Let us show up everything. 
 
 Mr. O'Neill: I have had a great deal of experience with steel tubes, and I find after 
 making several tests, that by putting in a half set of iron flues and a half set of steel, in cer- 
 tain districts where we applied these flues and the condition of the water was very bad, we 
 took flues out in about fourteen months. The steel flues were pitted so badly we could not 
 put them back; the iron flues were not pitted at all that we could notice. Before this I had 
 been ordering all steel flues. I am still ordering some for safety ends, and I find I get better 
 service from the steel ends than I do from the iron ends, but the steel seems to pit. It doesn't 
 seem to have any particular place, either at the bottom or top of the flue. After noticing it 
 very closely, and studying these little pits, I think there is some kind of sediment or sulphur, 
 making a soft place in the flue, that causes it; the action of our water has a tendency to cut 
 through. There will be a small pit, and the flue will be all right all around for twelve or four- 
 teen inches, and still this little pit eats right through it. In the iron flue we don't notice that 
 at all. However, I find that the steel end does better in the sheet than the iron end, 
 and for that reason we have adopted the iron body, welding the steel end on, and we get 
 very good results. 
 
 Mr. Rapp: In regard to this proposed test, to be absolutely fair with both materials, 
 I believe it would be better, instead of putting in one material on one side and the other 
 material on the other side, to put in alternate rows. I conducted a test several years ago 
 with Swedish iron and steel on two engines. One engine had both injectors on the right 
 side and the other engine had one injector on the left side and one on the right. I found in 
 the engine that had both injectors on the right side, the left side flues played out first ; and on 
 the engine that had the injectors on each side, the injector on the fireman's side was evidently 
 used most, and the right side played out soonest. I woidd recommend in this test to make 
 alternate rows of iron and steel. 
 
THE MODERN BOILER TUBE 
 
 The President: They might get mixed up and not be able to find out which was which. 
 
 Mr. Rapp: The only way would be to make a chart of the sheet, and represent one 
 material by an x. 
 
 Mr. Elkins: I tried that scheme a few years ago. I put in a set of flues, using iron and 
 steel in alternate rows, but did not get any satisfaction from the experiment, for when they 
 leaked we could not tell which had started the trouble, as all of the bottom ones would be 
 leaking; when we removed the flues after eleven months, the steel flues seemed to be pitted 
 a little more than the iron ones. However, we safe-ended the entire set. 
 
 Mr. Brown: The flues that we applied were never touched by the weather. Our flues 
 are kept under cover. In our mineral districts, where steel will not live and iron will, the 
 twelve boilers we are making I think will afford a fine test. There will be six Pacific types 
 and six heavy freight engines, both high pressure. The flues on one side will be iron and on 
 the other steel. For the benefit of this Committee I promise that I will give this my un- 
 divided attention for the next twelve months. If a report from me on this subject will 
 be acceptable I will be only too pleased to give it to them, at whatever time they wish. 
 
 Mr. Lucas: There is one point I want to bring before the Convention relative to weld- 
 ing steel safe ends onto iron tubes. I want to know what they are going to put them up 
 against. If you use a good iron tube against a steel tube it will be a more fair test than 
 if you use common ordinary body grade iron against the steel tube. 
 
 Mr. J. B. Smith: We have been using steel tubes for the last eight years. Previously 
 we had been using charcoal iron. We started in to buy safe ends the same as tubing and we 
 got two or three more months' service out of the iron. Last fall we had a great deal of trouble 
 in our vicinity with bad water and the tubes pitting, and our mechanical department investi- 
 gated to see what was the matter. I thought the steel flues were giving us the trouble, but 
 we made a chemical analysis and it turned out to be the iron. We are now making several 
 tests with Swedish iron flues versus steel, also sterilized iron flues and sterilized cold-drawn 
 seamless tubes. So I don't know what the result will be. I suppose by the time of the next 
 Convention I can make a report. We are making a test now, putting one-half iron on one 
 side and steel on the other, but every other flue is steel and iron, steel and iron, and so on. 
 
 Mr. Brown: The Master Mechanics' Convention some years ago adopted specifications 
 as to the best method, in their judgment, of making a test. This test we have accepted and 
 it has been our guide. The end we put on a flue has to pass the specification, whether it be 
 steel or iron ; if it is a safe end it passes the specification and if it is a body flue likewise. This 
 also specifies the gauge for the different parts, that is, the body and the safe end, and I think 
 it is a complete test. 
 
 Mr. Linderman: I have been handling steel flues for nearly six years. On our passenger 
 power, with iron flues, the best we could do was 55,000 to 65,000 miles from a set of flues. 
 After adopting a cold-drawn steel flue, we raised our mileage on the same class engines to 
 100,000, with some engines running as high as 148,000 miles on one set of flues. We have no 
 pitting. Referring to Mr. McKeown's question regarding the cleaning of tubes, we found 
 that steel tubes cleaned easier than the iron. 
 
THE MODERN BOILER TUBE 
 
 Mr. McCarrahan : East of Pittsburgh and Erie we have about 3,200 engines. Up to 
 the present time we have been using the best grade of charcoal iron. We have under con- 
 struction at the present time in the Juniata shops thirty-three consolidation engines, having 
 465 two-inch tubes, 15 feet by 2^ inches. One-half of these engines are to be equipped with 
 steel tubes and the other half with iron. One year from now I may be able to give you some 
 data as to how they compare. 
 
 Mr. Elkins: I move that the discussion be closed. 
 
 Mr. Brown: I second the motion. 
 
 The President: It has been moved and seconded that the discussion be closed. 
 
 Mr. German: I have listened to the discussion on the pitting of flues. I have not heard 
 any remedy advanced for the prevention of pitting. We use both steel and iron flues on the 
 Lake Shore system. We have points on our system where the flues pitted very badly, but we 
 have overcome that difficulty by the use of soda ash and the frequent washing out of boilers. 
 
 The President: I want each and every one to take an interest in this matter during the 
 year, and write to the Committee on this subject so as to give them a chance to make a good 
 report at our next annual Convention. 
 
 The question was put and the motion carried unanimously. 
 
THE MODERN BOILER TUBE 
 
 Official Report 
 
 and Discussion of Report of the Special Committee on 
 
 Steel vs. Iron Tubes 
 
 before the International Master Boiler Makers' Association in Convention at Niagara Falls, Ontario, May 24-27, 1910 
 
 (See pages 138 to 133 of Official Proceedings) 
 
 Report of Committee on Steel versus Iron Tubes 
 
 The President: The next topic for discussion will be the report of the Committee on 
 "Steel versus Iron Tubes." 
 
 M. O'Connor, chairman, read the report of the Committee. 
 Your Committee on above subject beg leave to report as follows : 
 
 During the past year since our last Convention at Louisville, Ky., your Committee 
 made every effort to ascertain the very best information from a great many localities using 
 both steel and iron, relative to obtaining the most accurate knowledge of this subject. 
 
 We are pleased to report that the returns came in very satisfactorily as far as prompt- 
 ness is concerned, but materially different in opinion; however, the greatest number reported 
 that as far as actual service is concerned, steel tubes give just as good service as iron tubes, 
 and vice versa. 
 
 Relative to welding, we have found to our satisfaction that where an oil furnace is used 
 there is no difficulty or secret in welding steel tubes. In an open coke or coal fire, some oppo- 
 sition is met, due to the impurities in the fuel. 
 
 Respectfully submitted, 
 
 M. O'CONNOR, Chairman. 
 
 D. G. FOLEY, 
 
 M. M. MCALLISTER, 
 
 C. L. HEMPEL, 
 
 B. F. SARVER, 
 
 Committee. 
 
 Mr. O'Connor: On this subject, "Steel versus Iron Tubes," I would respectfully report 
 that the paper I have on this particular subject is not a long one by any means, but simply a 
 short paragraph, just enough to bring the subject before the Convention in a general way. 
 My excuse for this short paper is that I was unable to get the reports from the other members 
 of the Committee within the time specified by our Secretary: to have them sent in ninety 
 days before opening of the Convention, therefore I deemed it advisable to say just enough 
 to introduce the subject for general discussion; however, Mr. President, I have some data 
 on this subject, and after I hear from other members on this important subject, I will be 
 pleased to give it, and my personal experience with the two metals. 
 
 27 
 
THE MODERN BOILER TUBE 
 
 Mr. B. F. Sarver: I have a little report which I would like to read. I made quite an 
 extensive report last year in favor of steel flues; I have a few figures here to verify my asser- 
 tions made at that time. I will read this report to the Convention. 
 
 I have not a great deal to say on this subject at this time. You will remember that I 
 submitted quite a lengthy report on this subject last year, and I am pretty well exhausted 
 with the exception of a few figures, which I would like to submit to substantiate the argument 
 I made last year in my report in favor of steel flues and safe ends. 
 
 Since I made my last report to you before the Master Boiler Makers' Association I have 
 gathered some data. I have one engine that has 2j/-inch by 21-foot tubes to submit to you 
 as evidence at this time. This engine when first turned out of shop was equipped with iron 
 tubes and safe ends, making a flue mileage of 47,230 miles. These flues were then removed 
 and the same flues were safe ended with steel safe-end material. After these flues had been 
 applied this engine made a flue mileage of 68,361 miles, thus making a gain of 21,131 miles 
 in favor of the steel safe ending. 
 
 We have experienced no trouble to speak of on account of flues leaking since this engine 
 wa; equipped with steel safe ends. We have also had a test made of twenty-eight freight 
 locomotives which were equipped with steel tubing, and these engines made an average 
 of 75,000 miles per engine. 
 
 Our previous flue mileage in this particular location, equipped with iron flues, would 
 not average over 50,000 miles per engine; this w^ould make a gain of 25,000 miles in favor 
 of the steel flues. We do not experience any trouble in welding the steel safe ending in the 
 iron flue. We have also had a great deal less of flue leakage with steel than we do with iron. 
 I do not know that I have anything more to say at this time. 
 
 President Brown: What do you propose doing with the subject? 
 Mr. Laughridge: I move it be received and discussed. Carried. 
 
 The President: We will take twenty-five minutes on this subject, if it is the pleasure 
 of the Convention. 
 
 Mr. Green: We use iron flues and steel safe ends mostly. 
 
 Mr. Bennett: That is our practice on the New York Central, and we get good results 
 
 Mr. O'Connor: Acting as your Committee Chairman during the year just passed on the 
 subject matter of "Steel versus Iron Tubes," I am now pleased to give some data, also per- 
 sonal experience with these two metals. On our lines west of the Missouri River where we 
 have some bad water conditions, we have had equipped during the past two years for experi- 
 mental purposes several engines with steel and iron flues, half and half in each engine, or, 
 if you please, steel on one side of flue-sheet and iron on the other. Five of these engines men- 
 tioned have, since May, 1908, passed through the shop, receiving light, heavy, or general 
 repairs, the first engine taken in shops, July, 1909, having following record: Equipped with 
 steel and iron tubes, half and half, May, 1908; removed July, 1909; total number of tubes 
 in engine, 245; condition of tubes when taken from boiler and carefully inspected: 20 steel 
 tubes badly pitted and scrapped, 6 iron tubes slightly pitted but not scrapped; all iron tubes 
 repierced and replaced in boiler; all steel tubes except the 20 scrapped, repierced and replaced 
 
 28 
 
THE MODERN BOILER TUBE 
 
 at same location in boiler. Iron tubes, while engine was in severe service during ninety days 
 previous to shopping, leaked quite frequently; steel tubes leaked occasionally; efficiency 
 of beads in fire-box in favor of steel. 
 
 Second engine equipped May, 1908, with both steel and iron tubes, located in boiler 
 same as first engine, removed from boiler October, 1909; total number of tubes in boiler 245; 
 condition of iron and steel tubes when inspected: 8 steel tubes badly pitted and scrapped, 
 no iron tubes found pitted, and all tubes, both iron and steel except the 8, were repierced 
 and replaced in same boiler, same location as removed from. 
 
 Third engine equipped May, 1908, steel and iron tubes; removed 49 tubes from bottom 
 of shell (24 steel and 25 iron tubes) while engine was in shop for light repairs. All tubes were 
 repierced and replaced in boiler; none scrapped. Engine still in service, giving good 
 satisfaction with her tubes. 
 
 Fourth engine, steel and iron tubes applied April, 1908; all removed December, 1909; 
 condition of tubes after inspection: 26 steel tubes slightly pitted, 20 iron slightly pitted; 
 neither steel or iron tubes in condition to be scrapped, and all were repaired with safe ends 
 and put in same location in boiler as when removed. Condition of tube beads in fire-box 
 end: material strength of steel good, material strength of iron soft and spongy. 
 
 Fifth engine, total number of tubes 289; steel and iron tubes applied May, 1908, and 
 all removed from boiler January, 1910. Engine in passenger service, and total mileage made 
 with these tubes without any renewals between May, 1908, and January, 1910, 103,663 miles. 
 Condition of tubes when removed from engine boiler and closely inspected: 14 steel tubes 
 badly pitted and scrapped, 49 iron tubes, badly pitted and scrapped; all other tubes taken 
 from this engine were repaired with safe ends and replaced in same location in boiler. While 
 engine was in service from May, 1908 to January, 1910, the tubes, both iron and steel, gave 
 us very little trouble on account of leaking. 
 
 Mr. Lucas: Were the iron tubes safe-ended? 
 
 Mr. O'Connor: No, sir, they were new flues; they had no safe ends on the flues. 
 
 Mr. Linderman: Did you follow up your engine-house work with the roller? 
 
 Mr. O'Connor: We use the roller but very little. We use the sectional expander 
 entirely. There is hardly a roller applied in the shop unless it is a loose flue or the first 
 resetting of flues. 
 
 Mr. Lucas : We are using both steel and iron tubes, mostly iron, due to the fact that the 
 steel tubes have been recently put on the market, and we are getting fairly good results with 
 all classes; we have had iron tubes pit and steel tubes pit. We are using mostly charcoal 
 iron tubes. We weld on a special charcoal tube for safe ending. We have a number of engines 
 running with steel safe ends, which give us good results. W 7 e made a report showing 517 
 engines, all running with flues twenty-five months and over. Our mileage has gone up to 
 280,000 in our big passenger engines. We average pretty close to 100,000 miles; and in our 
 good water we could do better. We have a number of sets of steel tubes that have not been 
 in long enough to report on them. On our own district we have 117 engines running with, 
 flues twenty-five months and over. 
 
 29 
 
THE MODERN BOILER TUBE 
 
 Mr. Linderman: The New York Central is using charcoal iron tubes on which we weld 
 steel safe ends. We do not experience any trouble in welding the steel to the iron, and are 
 getting the best of results. For some time we kept a very close record of the number of defec- 
 tive welds, and found that they averaged five per 1,000. 
 
 Mr. McKeown : I think I have probably the report of one engine that has been running, 
 giving the mileage of the steel and iron flues. This was gotten out since I forwarded the 
 report to Mr. O'Connor. One engine has run 49,000 miles, and the other four have been 
 running ten to eleven months. The first one has been running sixteen months, and we have 
 removed two iron flues on account of beads being partly broken off and worn out. According 
 to the report the steel flue has a little the best of the iron flue so far. In the meantime we 
 have removed five flues on account of being split inside of the sheet. In two of them we found 
 a couple of little pieces broken out, indicating that they were probably crystallized a little. 
 That engine is still running to-day, and will probably run two months longer. The iron 
 flues are apparently in very good shape. The report shows a little more work of the iron 
 flue than of the steel flue. If the subject is carried over to our next meeting, I will be able 
 to tell you more about it. I am sorry Mr. O'Connor has not our report in. 
 
 The secretary read Mr. McKeown's statement as follows: 
 
 Statement showing the number of Steel Tubes worked and the cost thereof 
 
 as compared with the Iron Tubes which were applied to 
 
 several engines for test purposes: 
 
 Engine 1698 Engine 1704 
 
 No. Flues Worked COST No. Flues Worked COST 
 
 4913 Steel $13.55 4770 Steel $13.39 
 
 5919 Iron 15.65 5712 Iron 15.31 
 
 Engine has made 34,480 miles from July, 1909, to Engine has made 29,294 miles from September, 
 
 May 1, 1910. . 1909, to May 1, 1910. 
 
 Engine 1702 Detroit Engine 1751 
 
 No. Flues Worked COST No. Flues Worked COST 
 
 6112 Steel $17.87 5618 Steel $15.94 
 
 7520 Iron 21.28 6773 Iron 19.89 
 
 Engine has made 31,629 miles from August, 1909, Engine has made 33,478 miles from August, 1909, 
 
 to May 1, 1910. to May 1, 1910. 
 
 Engine 2008 
 No. Flues Worked COST 
 
 5734 Steel ? . $22.89 
 
 8547 Iron 29.91 
 
 Engine has made 49,451 miles from March, 1909, to May 1, 1910. 
 
 Mr. L. M. Stewart: On the Atlantic Coast Line at the Waycross new shops, where I 
 am located, until six months ago we welded steel ends on charcoal iron bodies. In other 
 words, it made no difference what material the safe ends or flue bodies were made of, we 
 welded together and had good results. In the past six months we have adopted a standard 
 No. 10 gauge charcoal iron safe end and No. 11 gauge Spellerized flue bodies. We weld about 
 4,000 per month with Furgerson oil furnaces, and get good results. 
 
 On motion the discussion was closed. 
 
 30 
 
THE MODERN BOILER TUBE 
 
 Official Report 
 
 and Discussion of Report of the Special Committee on 
 
 Steel vs. Iron Flues 
 
 before the International Master Boiler Makers' Association in Convention at Omaha, Nebraska, May 23 to 26, 1911 
 
 (See pages 193 to 204 of Official Proceedings) 
 
 Steel versus Iron Flues 
 
 The President: We now come to the topic, "Steel versus Iron Flues. What Advantages 
 and What Success in Welding Them, and the Effect of Length of Tubes and Maintenance." 
 
 The President: Mr. Raps, have you the report of the Committee? 
 
 Mr. Raps: Mr. Linderman is chairman of this Committee but he is unable to be pres- 
 ent. I wrote a short report myself and sent it to Mr. Linderman, but I have no copy. I 
 was unable to prepare the report that I would like to have made, and I would suggest that 
 the Committee be given another year's time, as I know that Mr. Linderman is making some 
 very interesting experiments. I think the Committee can promise you a good report if you 
 so order. 
 
 Mr. President: I will ask Mr. Kelly to read the report of the Committee. 
 
 Albany, N. Y., May 20, 1911. 
 
 DEAR MR. LUCAS: It will be impossible for me to meet with you at Omaha. Owing to 
 labor troubles we are having it has been impossible for me to get out the report of the Com- 
 mittee of which I am Chairman. I have been working night and day for the last three months 
 and have not been to the office in ten weeks. 
 
 I am sorry to disappoint you in this matter and I assure you that my intentions were 
 of the best, but I have been going the limit since the trouble started. 
 
 I am enclosing what information I was able to get from the other members of the Com- 
 mittee, which may be of some use to the Convention. 
 
 Hoping you will have a pleasant and profitable Convention, I remain, 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 F. A. LINDERMAN. 
 Mr. F. A. Linderman, Chairman, West Albany, N. Y. 
 
 DEAR SIR: This subject is of vast importance. My first experience with steel flues was 
 in 1900. We received a set from the Shelby Steel Tube Company. We applied them to one 
 of our engines; they worked fine and gave good results. We also welded a set of safe ends to 
 iron flues without any trouble whatever. We have handled the Detroit steel flues, also with 
 good results. We have five engines running on test with one-half set of Spellerized flues and 
 one-half set of iron flues, which are giving good results. We have no trouble in welding safe 
 ends to flues, nor in welding steel safe ends to iron flues. 
 
 31 
 
THE MODERN BOILER TUBE 
 
 In regard to pitting, we haven't noticed any so far. I am of the opinion that steel flues 
 are the coming thing. I have a preliminary report of 171 Spellerized steel and 171 charcoal 
 iron flues as applied to this engine, No. 2008. Summarized the test from time flues were first 
 applied to this engine, 2-12-09, until the engine was again shopped and flues removed, 10-1-10. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 JOHN McKEOWN. 
 
 Preliminary report of 171 Spellerized steel and 171 charcoal iron flues, as applied to 
 engine No. 2008, summarizing the result of test from time flues were first applied to this 
 engine, 2-12-09, until the engine was again shopped and flues removed, 10-1-10 
 
 Requirements 
 
 Flues for use in locomotive boilers should be of such a character that safe ends can be 
 easily welded onto the body of the flue, without danger of injuring the material so as to make 
 it brittle. The material in flues should be of such a composition that they can be rolled or 
 prossered without danger of breaking the flue inside the flue-sheet, or without having the 
 beads break off. The flues should be of such material as to resist the pitting action of water, 
 and should also resist the formation of scale as much as possible. 
 
 Conclusions 
 
 The test as made shows the first cost of steel flues per foot is 28 per cent cheaper than 
 iron flues, that the cost of maintenance of the steel flues is 38 per cent cheaper than the iron 
 flues. 
 
 From the results it is noted that seven iron flues were removed, due to worn beads, as 
 compared with one steel flue removed for the same cause. It has been the impression that 
 the beads of the steel flues were not as serviceable as the beads on the iron flues on account 
 of the nature of the material. Previous tests have been made in which it is shown that beads 
 on the iron flues would last longer. Other tests of Spellerized steel and charcoal iron flues 
 are in progress, which will determine this point decisively. 
 
 Seven steel flues were removed due to bursting inside of flue-sheet when being worked. 
 This may be explained by the fact that considerably more care must be exercised in welding 
 the steel flues onto the safe ends to be sure that the metal in the steel flues is not burned, 
 making it brittle. They can be welded satisfactorily, but greater care must be exercised in 
 welding them at the proper heat. 
 
 The results of the present test show that the steel flues accumulated or held two times 
 as much scale as the iron flues. This accumulation of scale would make the steel flues less 
 efficient regarding the transmission of heat, and if this condition prevails in the case of other 
 steel flues on test it will be a heavy argument against their usage. 
 
 By referring to the attached table of results it is noted that the loss of weight due to 
 corrosion and cutting off the beads, when removing the flues, is 1.22 pounds per flue for the 
 iron flues and 1.79 per flue for the steel flues. The steel flues were somewhat heavier when 
 first applied, but from the test made it could not be ascertained just why the loss in weight 
 on the steel flues should be greater. 
 
THE 
 
 MODERN 
 
 BOILER 
 
 TUBE 
 
 Tests 
 
 Engine 2008, which left Galion shop February 12, 1909, was equipped on the right side 
 with 171 Spellerized steel flues, on the left side with 171 charcoal iron flues, for comparison. 
 These flues were removed about October 1, 1910, when engine was again shopped for T. B 
 M. F. repairs. The length of service was approximately nineteen and one-half months, with 
 a mileage of 64,460 miles. 
 
 Preliminary reports have been furnished each month showing the number of flues worked 
 and cost of working. The complete figures have been tabulated and are attached, and show 
 the number of flues worked and the cost per month since the flues were applied. 
 
 A blue-print is attached showing the flue arrangement, also showing location of certain 
 flues which failed in service. 
 
 A tabulated statement is attached which shows the results of the steel and iron flues. 
 This sheet shows figures obtained in regard to weights of flues when applied and weights of 
 flues after removal, before and after cleaning. 
 
 Sheet showing work necessary to keep flues in engine 2008 in repair; 171 Speller- 
 ized and 171 iron flues were applied to this engine, 2-12-09. 
 
 Month 
 
 IRON FLUES 
 
 STEEL FLUES 
 
 No. 
 Worked 
 
 Time 
 Required 
 
 Cost 
 Total 
 
 Cost 
 Per 100 
 
 No. 
 Worked 
 
 Time 
 Required 
 
 Cost 
 Total 
 
 Cost 
 Per 100 
 
 March 
 
 319 2-55 
 
 .85 
 
 .497 
 
 310 2-59 
 
 .83 
 
 .484 
 
 April 
 May 
 
 556 8-05 
 390 5-52 
 
 2.39 
 1.76 
 
 1.40 
 1.03 
 
 357 3-40 
 263 4-43 
 
 1.09 
 1.45 
 
 .638 
 .850 
 
 June 
 
 658 
 
 8-35 
 
 2.54 
 
 1.51 
 
 556 
 
 6-53 
 
 2.11 
 
 1.24 
 
 July 
 Aug. 
 Sept. 
 Oct. 
 
 643 
 655 
 523 
 704 
 
 9-31 
 6-07 
 5-21 
 
 7-42 
 
 2.13 1.85 
 2.01 1.18 
 1.64 .96 
 2.31 1.35 
 
 557 
 339 
 372 
 564 
 
 9-11 
 5-41 
 4-44 
 6-15 
 
 2.80 
 1.87 
 1.41 
 1.90 
 
 1.64 
 1.09 
 
 .825 
 1.11 
 
 Nov. 
 
 983 12-09 3.66 2.14 
 
 458 
 
 4-33 
 
 1.39 
 
 1.813 
 
 Dec. 
 
 988 
 
 9-38 
 
 2.89 1.69 
 
 1,061 9-46 
 
 2.97 
 
 1.74 
 
 Jan. 
 
 528 6-15 
 
 1.93 1.13 
 
 509 
 
 6-20 
 
 1.52 
 
 .89 
 
 Feb. 
 
 390 3-10 
 
 .93 
 
 .543 
 
 425 
 
 3-50 
 
 1.15 
 
 .67 
 
 March 
 April 
 May 
 June 
 
 1,112 
 1,086 
 1,290 
 1,383 
 
 9-30 
 12-52 
 12-20 
 14-46 
 
 2.89 1.69 
 3.87 2.26 
 3.73 2.18 
 4.48 2.62 
 
 1,043 
 781 
 760 
 766 
 
 10-17 
 7-08 
 5-30 
 6-18 
 
 3.12 
 2.15 
 1.67 
 1.93 
 
 1.82 
 1.23 
 .975 
 1.12 
 
 July 
 
 1,297 18-54 
 
 5.97 3.48 
 
 544 
 
 5-15 
 
 1.58 
 
 .925 
 
 Aug. 
 Sept. 
 
 1,090 
 982 
 
 14- 
 11-55 
 
 4.36 2.55 
 3.62 2.12 
 
 550 
 271 
 
 5-35 
 2-20 
 
 1.76 
 .70 
 
 1.03 
 .41 
 
 Total 
 
 15,472 
 
 179-35 
 
 53.96 
 
 32.18 
 
 10,486 
 
 111-58 
 
 1 
 
 33.40 
 
 19.80 
 
 33 
 
THE MODERN BOILER TUBE 
 
 Result of Test 
 
 Steel Flues Iron Flues 
 
 Number applied 171 171 
 
 Average weight per flue when applied, pounds 41.1 37 . 12 
 
 Average weight when removed, with scale, pounds 43 . 28 37 . 86 
 
 Average weight when removed, clean, pounds 39 . 31 35 . 9 
 
 Weight of scale held by each flue, pounds 3 . 97 1 . 96 
 
 Weight lost due to corrosion and cutting beads off when removing, per 
 
 flue, pounds 1 . 79 1 . 22 
 
 First cost of Flues per foot $ .09 $ .125 
 
 Total first cost 243 . 00 342 . 00 
 
 Total cost of maintenance 33 . 40 53 . 96 
 
 Cost per engine (with all flues iron or steel) 552.50 791 .92 
 
 Flues removed, due to bursting inside of flue-sheet while working .... 7 
 
 Flues removed, due to worn beads 1 7 
 
 Total mileage made by engine 64,460 64,460 
 
 Remarks: Engine failure, one, 7-29-10, due to flues leaking, causing one and one-half 
 hours' delay to west bound freight train. 
 
 Mr. Goodwin: I move that the report be received and opened for discussion. Carried. 
 
 Mr. Goodwin: I see here is a report which claims that on one side the accumulation of 
 scale was greater on the steel than on the iron tubes. I wish to ask which side the injector 
 is on that particular engine. 
 
 Mr. McKeown: On the left side. 
 
 Mr. Goodwin: And all the water that was applied to the boiler went in on the steel 
 side, then? 
 
 Mr. McKeown: Our engineers are responsible for the water going into the boiler; 
 therefore it is natural for them to use the right hand injector most, and that is why I think, 
 probably, there is a little more scale on the steel flues. 
 
 Mr. Goodwin : Do I understand that it is usual for the engineer to work the injector? 
 
 Mr. McKeown: Both work. I think they use a little of both. They work the injector 
 on the engineer's side the most. 
 
 Mr. Hodges: And invariably when it is possible the engineer wishes to have the fireman 
 work the water, and Mr. McKeown says that the injector on the right side was used the 
 most. From experience I have had and conversation with engineers, as a rule the fireman 
 works the water and the engineer keeps the injector open in case the left side fails. 
 
 Mr. McKeown: As a general thing the engineer is responsible and works the right hand 
 injector the most. If anything goes wrong with the right hand injector he has the other one 
 to fall back on. That is why I think probably there is a little more scale on the steel flues. 
 
 Mr. Goodwin: In applying those tubes, were they first weighed? Did you weigh the 
 new steel tubes and the new iron tubes when you took them out? How did you find out that 
 there was more scale on the steel than on the iron? 
 
 34 
 
THE MODERN BOILER TUBE 
 
 Mr. McKeown: According to the weight, that is the way it averages up. You could 
 not notice very much difference by looking at them with the naked eye. 
 
 Mr. Goodwin: When you applied them the second time do you remember whether the 
 steel weighed more than the iron? 
 
 Mr. McKeown : I believe the report shows that the steel tubes are heavier. 
 
 Mr. Raps: I think I owe the gentlemen of the Convention an explanation. I asked a 
 gentleman, whom I supposed knew, whether the Chairman on this subject had made a report, 
 and he said he had not. I naturally supposed there was nothing before the Convention 
 until it was brought out here this morning. That is how I came to make the remarks I did. 
 
 Mr. Kelly: Some three years ago we started dealing with iron and steel flues, and our 
 experience with iron flues is that we cannot get an iron flue that will stand expanding with- 
 out splitting. The material in the iron flue seems to be all right, but it is simply impossible 
 to maintain engines in service without splitting the flues in the prossering. Take, for in- 
 stance, engines coming right from the locomotive works, and the first time we expand them 
 they split in the lap weld. The steel flue, the seamless steel flue I prefer, will not do that, 
 and in our experience as to beads with all kinds of steel flues, the iron had a shade the best 
 of it, but I believe that in a steel flue without a seam they will work up easily without work- 
 ing the sheet too much. I don't believe in getting in there with a big sledge hammer. From 
 my experience I think that an iron flue with a steel safe end is the proper thing in bad water. 
 
 Mr. McKeown: I have heard of different men having trouble welding steel flues; that 
 they would split at the weld and fall off, would not weld, and all sorts of trouble. We have 
 handled quite a number of different makes of steel flues and have had no trouble whatever. 
 
 Mr. Lucas: We have made several tests of iron and steel tubes and have several tests 
 under way now. We find very little difference, and we have no trouble in welding either 
 way. We are getting good results out of both. 
 
 Mr. McKeown: We have an engine now running with one side steel lined and the other 
 side copper lined. It has been in service, I think, about three months and is doing pretty 
 well so far. 
 
 Mr. Kelly: Mr. McKeown, are those tubes seamless steel? 
 
 Mr. McKeown: Yes. 
 
 Mr. Kelly: What gauge? 
 
 Mr. McKeown: 125 Master Mechanics' gauge. 
 
 Mr. Kelly: You have no trouble with them at all? 
 
 Mr. McKeown: None. 
 
 Mr. J. H. Smythe: I did not intend to take part in the discussion, as the speaker thinks 
 that any one interested in the sale of an article should not be allowed the privilege of the 
 floor while you are talking about his article. In fact, I think your Constitution and By- 
 Laws state that very clearly, but my competitors, Mr. Goodwin and Mr. Conrath, seem to 
 have things cut and dried, and a great deal to say showing the advantage of their produc- 
 tion, but failing to show the disadvantages. 
 
 The speaker does not see how Mr. McKeown could make such a showing in favor of any 
 one kind of tubes, when applied as Mr. McKeown has in his engine, as you all know that a 
 
 35 
 
THE MODERN BOILER TUBE 
 
 round house boiler maker will do his work as quickly as he can in a hot locomotive, and make 
 out his report to suit himself. 
 
 I wish to offer an apology to this Association for violating your Constitution and By- 
 Laws by taking part in this discussion, as I believe the Parkesburg Iron Company's charcoal 
 iron boiler tube is able to stand on its own merits. I thank you. 
 
 Mr. McKeown: Now, then, Mr. Smythe, we have a blue-print of the shape of the flue- 
 sheet, and those flues are numbered one, two, three, etc., from the center line. The steel 
 flues are on the right side, and the iron flues are on the left side and they are all numbered 
 on the blue-print. Our boiler makers are thoroughly instructed when they go in to note what 
 flues they report, and note the time they do it and the hour. We watch them pretty closely. 
 We also have them note the time they work the left or the right side, and we have the blue- 
 print marked for that purpose. 
 
 Mr. A. Green: We have been using steel safe end flues for the last five years. Previously 
 we used iron flues. I find that steel gives the best service on our lines. I believe that every 
 foreman with the same experience with both steel and iron will say that steel gives the best 
 service where they use the expander to make repairs to flues in round house. The iron will 
 not stand it. I think the steel flue is here to stay, as it gives better service than the iron 
 flue especially in bad w r ater districts. 
 
 Mr. Wandberg: I consider that I handle and work about as many flues as any one man 
 present, and I have as much bad water, and therefore as many bad flues to work on as any 
 one. I don't agree with some of the remarks made, especially by Mr. Kelly, when he claimed 
 an iron flue wouldn't stand without splitting. I am under the impression that the flue Mr. 
 Kelly refers to is simply an iron body flue. We have steel safe ends on our flues with a space 
 deep enough, and we have no trouble with our flues splitting on either end; but I find, with 
 the present coal that we are using the Iowa coal that it has a large percentage of iron, 
 and unless we clean out the flues before the expander is put in we experience trouble inside 
 of the flue-sheet. We have had a number of flues burst in that way, but that is the only 
 trouble we have had. As far as the iron flue standing up and working, with the steel safe 
 ends, I tell you there is no difference; but the iron flue has a little the best of the steel when 
 it comes to pitting. 
 
 Mr. Conrath: Mr. Kelly, what has been your experience with Spellerized versus iron 
 tubes in comparative tests? 
 
 Mr. Kelly : The test was in favor of the iron, but it was so little you could hardly notice 
 it. I didn't inspect those flues alone. I had the superintendent of shops with me and we 
 both made our report. And we didn't look at one flue. We looked at each flue and every 
 part of it all the way through. 
 
 Mr. Conrath: How did the tubes test out in the bad water territory between Missouri 
 Valley and Sioux City? This was a comparative test with iron, to ascertain which would 
 resist corrosion to the greatest extent. I have a record which is taken from Mr. O'Connor's 
 report at the Niagara Falls Convention, and the numbers of these engines were 202, 1209, 
 and Wyoming No. 3. 
 
 Mr. Kelly: I can't recall the case you speak of. 
 
 36 
 
THE MODERN BOILER TUBE 
 
 Mr. Conrath: One was engine No. 202, the other No. 109, I believe on the Wyoming- 
 Northwestern. 
 
 The President: Ordinarily I am on the floor, and always wanting to say something, too; 
 but you have put me up here and don't give me a chance to say a word, and I am getting all 
 out of practice. You know the claims made for the Jacobs-Shupert Fire-box something 
 new and it sounded good. A few years ago we started out with the steel tube. It has been 
 developing and we have been getting results. We started experimenting with steel flues a 
 little over six years ago, and the first flues we put in at that time are still in service. So far 
 none are pitted. We have iron flues furnished us twelve or thirteen years ago, and a great 
 many of them are still in the service a great many of them have been scrapped and some 
 are pitted. During that time we have had steel tubes of all makes in the service, and we have 
 some in service twenty-nine months still in service and still doing business. The same 
 is true of iron flues. We have steel tubes in service forty-five months and still doing service; 
 we have iron tubes in service that length of time and still doing service; so I say there is 
 good in both. It will take years to show what the actual life of a steel tube is over and above 
 and against an iron flue. I claimed a few years ago that the life of an iron tube was about 
 twelve years. Under certain conditions we have iron tubes alongside of them and they pitted 
 through in about the same time; so again I say, we can get good results from both. 
 
 Mr. Laughridge: I have not been taking much part in these discussions, but I don't 
 want to get tongue-tied. I don't want to say too much on the flue business. We have been 
 using steel flues for seventeen years, and I think we are pioneers in the business. About six 
 years ago our superintendent of motive power thought we would try a couple of sets of iron 
 tubes, to see if we could keep the flues tight. At that time we were having trouble on account 
 of the dry season in keeping our flues tight. We applied those sets of iron tubes and they 
 lasted ninety days, where we were getting about eight months out of the others. The Penn- 
 sylvania Railway is in the same locality I think their record shows about the same per- 
 centage as ours, but the days and the service are in favor of the steel tube. As far as pitting 
 is concerned, I believe that is entirely a local condition. We don't have any pitting either 
 on iron or steel. We have such a heavy encrustation of lime that after one trip the tube is 
 covered like a coat of whitewash; so I think the question of pitting is entirely local. It may 
 be that some localities can use the steel and cannot use the iron, and vice versa. As I have 
 said, we are pioneers in the steel business and we are in it to stay. We have had seventeen 
 years' experience with it, and we are not going to change to the iron tube unless local 
 conditions change. 
 
 Mr. McKeown: I wish to ask all the gentlemen who spoke of the flues pitting, where 
 they split in the boiler, or on top or bottom or at the front flue-sheet? 
 
 Mr. Wandberg: We find that the bad flue is invariably where there is the heaviest 
 pitting, and at the bottom side of the flue also. Mr. Laughridge remarked that the pitting 
 is local; but he also stated, practically, that a scale was formed on the flue and that it gave 
 the flue no chance to pit. I don't agree with that. I find, while we may have a coat or two 
 of scale throughout the flues, before doing anything with that, if the scale is knocked off, 
 pitting is found under the scale and in the body of the material. 
 
 37 
 
THE MODERN BOILER TUBE 
 
 Mr. McKeown: I find in our divisions there is very little pitting. We have some, but 
 find it on the bottom side of the flues toward the front flue-sheet, but we do not find any on 
 top. In certain localities it occurs, but we find it on the bottom part of the flues at the front 
 end; we do not find it at the back end, nor on top. 
 
 Mr. Conrath: The pitting of tubes is not altogether due to impurities in the water, but 
 sometimes to poor circulation and low temperature. Where the degree of heat is below 160 
 degrees F., the gases that enter into the boiler with the feed water will attack the material, 
 as along about that temperature the gases are at their most destructive power, and I find 
 that in our modern long locomotive, the tubes pit to a greater extent in the front end. This 
 I believe to be due to the low temperature and poor circulation. 
 
 Mr. Chapman: I disagree with Mr. Conrath that it is in the circulation. The circula- 
 tion ought to certainly work on all boilers on railroads alike, when you are working your 
 engines and flues under similar conditions. On that part of the Union Pacific where I am, 
 the pitting does not occur in the front end at all. I can show you flues that pit only in the 
 first eighteen inches of the fire-box. I don't believe it is in the circulation at all. I believe in 
 water circulation, and I know that the circulation ought to be alike, and I believe you will 
 agree it is alike when the districts are the same. 
 
 The President: Most of this is due to local conditions and electrolysis. I think we will 
 have to close this subject, as the time allotted has long been exceeded. 
 
 Mr. Gray: On the Chicago & Alton we have used about all the different makes of iron 
 and steel. As far as mileage is concerned and the amount of care we have to give the flues 
 while in service, I have been unable to discover any difference between the iron and the steel 
 flue; but when it comes to welding there is a great deal of difference. We have had consid- 
 erable trouble with steel flues breaking off at the weld. This does not always occur in the 
 new weld, but frequently at the second. After this weld has been in the boiler for the second 
 time and made considerable mileage, it will suddenly break off and cause an engine failure, 
 which goes to prove that you are never sure of what kind of weld you have on a steel flue. 
 We have had many engine failures owing to the breakage I have mentioned. 
 
 Mr. Laughridge: I move that the subject be closed. 
 
 Mr. Kelly: I would like to have Mr. O'Connor answer that question about the test on 
 the lines west of here that I couldn't answer, with reference to pitting, in connection with 
 engine No. 202, as I did not see the flues when removed. 
 
 Mr. O'Connor: In reference to Mr. Kelly's suggestion requesting me to state to the mem- 
 bers my experience with steel and iron tubes and what success we have obtained: 
 
 I assure you, gentlemen, that I am only too glad to report to the body just what the test 
 of steel and iron tubes gave us on the C. & N. W. lines west of the Missouri River. 
 
 The manner of making the tests was carried out accurately, and the results reported to 
 my superior officers, according to their instructions to carefully inspect and report all defects 
 in either steel or iron tubes when they were removed from the locomotives having test tubes 
 applied. These locomotives under test were not all assigned to any one district of our division, 
 
THE MODERN BOILER TUBE 
 
 but to several districts along the division. The lines west of the Missouri River, comprising 
 the Nebraska and Wyoming Divisions of the C. & N. W. Ry., cover a large territory and 
 consist of about 1,700 miles of railway. So you can readily see that in such a large territory 
 it is possible to expect different water conditions, which naturally bring about the defects, 
 pitting, etc., in our boiler tubes. 
 
 Engine No. 202, referred to in this subject, in passenger service, running between Omaha 
 and Norfolk, Nebraska, eastern district, was equipped with the test tubes, half and half, 
 steel tubes right side, iron tubes left side. The mileage made from the time the engine was 
 equipped with these tubes until taken into the shops for general repairs to machinery and 
 resetting of all tubes, was 103,000 miles. In removing these tubes from the boiler care was 
 taken to keep them separate, and also when placing them in flue rattler to clean them. 
 
 After removing them from the cleaning rattler they were thoroughly inspected, with 
 the following results: 49 iron tubes badly pitted and scrapped; 14 steel tubes badly pitted 
 and scrapped. 
 
 All of the tubes mentioned in these tests were new tubes. No welded tubes were applied. 
 At the same time a similar test of steel and iron tubes was made on one of our locomotives 
 on the western district, in Wyoming, with results just the reverse more steel tubes pitted 
 than iron tubes. I could not say just at this time the number of defective tubes involved in 
 this test, but the total number of scrapped tubes was not as great as in the test made on the 
 eastern district with engine 202. 
 
 Attention was also given those engines having steel and iron tubes applied, relative to 
 service obtained at fire-box end, and after making personal inspection I found that the mate- 
 rial strength of the steel tube bead was better than the iron, the latter material being of a 
 more soft and spongy nature, while the steel bead remained almost in its natural condition; 
 hence the results were that we had fewer leaky tubes from the steel than from the iron tubes. 
 
 A Member: Do you use steel safe ends or iron ends? 
 
 Mr. O'Connor: We use both. On our heavy power we use steel safe ends; on our small 
 power we use iron ends. 
 
 Mr. Conrath: There were 14 steel against 46 iron. I think I have the record only 
 nine were thrown away. 
 
 A Member: Why do you use steel safe ends on your heavy power? 
 
 Mr. O'Connor: We get better service in the fire-box end. 
 
 The motion to close the discussion was put and carried. 
 
 It is generally understood that much depends on the boiler tube, especially in locomotive 
 service, this being relatively the weaker member, so that the usefulness of the engine is fre- 
 quently determined by the strength of the weakest tube. 
 
Rogers & Company 
 
 Chicago - New York 
 

LIBRARY USE 
 
 RETURN TO DESK FROM WHICH BORROWED 
 
 LOAN DEPT. 
 
 THIS BOOK IS DUE BEFORE CLOSING TIME 
 ON LAST DATE STAMPED BELOW 
 
 USB 
 
 LD 62A-50m-2,'64 
 (E3494slO)9412A 
 
 General Library 
 
 University of California 
 
 Berkeley