The Flow Of Gases In Furnaces

HOT-BLAST STOVES

101

resulting in a less uniform heating than is secured in the ordinary
design of the Cowper stove. M

In the model (Fig. 61) of the Cowper stove the cross-section
was intentionally made with checker openings of several sizes,
in order to show, in a graphic manner, that such complications
of the checkerwork are useless.

The hot-blast stove patented by J. Z. Stephenson and J. Evans
(Fig. 64) has never come into any ex-
tended use. In order to insure a uni-
form distribution of the hot gases
through the checkerwork the inventors
resorted to a series of complicated walls
and dampers in the chamber below the
checkers.

The discussion carried on in the
technical journals, between Luhrmann
and these inventors, is mentioned merely
for its historic interest. Luhrmann con-
tended that the largest portion of the
waste gases passed through the section
above A and the smallest portion
through the section above C. The in-
ventors claimed the contrary. This
discussion made it very clearly apparent
that the ideas of contemporary constructors, in regard to the cir-
culation of the gases, were confused to a most remarkable extent.
The quarrel was finally settled to the satisfaction of both parties.

In the Cowper stove the work of the checkerwork is inherently"
uniform, and all walls and dampers below the checkers, for the
purpose of distributing the gases, are superfluous. (2>

(1) This design will give less frictional resistance in the large openings than
in the small; accordingly, the waste gases from the large passes will be hotter
than the gases from the smaller passes.

<2) In the Revue de M6tallurgie, for February, 1913, p. 362, can be found the
designs of a Cowper stove built for the furnace at Caen, France, and provided
with five chimney valves connecting the chamber below the checkerwork
with a bustle pipe outside the stove. The idea was, of course, that this would
conduce to the uniform distribution of the gases heating the checkerwork.

This idea, in many ways, resembles that of Stephenson and Evans, men-
tioned above. The multiplication of the chimney valves is useless. It would
be sufficient to replace them by a single valve whose dimensions may be
computed by Yesmann's formula.

FIG. 64.