The whole power given by the fall of the Merrimack at Lowell, of 33 feet, is estimated at about 10,000 norse-power, the entire amount of which is already leased to the corporations. In addition to this, there are in the mills 31 steamengines, furnishing 5000 horse-power additional; and besides these sources there are the three falls of Concord River, the power of which we have no means of estimating. *Fourneyron Wheel. [Extract from a Treatise on the power of water, by Joseph Glynn.] M. Fourneyron, who began his experiments in 1823, erected his first turbine in 1827, at Pont sur l'Ognon, in France. The result far exceeded his expectations, 1827 but he had much prejudice to contend with, and it was not until 1834 that he con structed another, in Franche Comté at the iron-works of M. Caron, to blow a furnace. It was of 7 or 8 horse-power, and worked at times with a fall of only 9 inches. Its performance was so satisfactory that the same proprietor had afterwards another of 50 horse-power erected, to replace 2 water-wheels, which together, were equal to 30 horse power. The fall of water was 4 feet 3 inches, and the useful effect, varied with the head and the immersion of the turbine, 65 to 80 per cent. Several others were now erected: 2 for falls of 7 feet; 1 at Inval, near Gisors, for a fall of 6 feet 6 inches, the power being nearly 40-horse, on the river Epté, expending 35 cubic feet of water per second, the useful effect being 71 per cent. of the force employed. One with a fail of 63 feet gave 75 per cent.; and when it had the full head or column for which it was constructed-namely, 79 feet-its useful effect is said to have reached 87 per cent. of the power expended. Another, with 126 feet, gave 81 per cent.; and 1 with 144 feet fall, gave 80 per cent. At the instance of M. Arago, a commission of inquiry was instituted by the Government of France, for examining the turbine of Inval, near Paris, the total fall of water being 6 feet 6 inches, as has been before mentioned. By putting a dam in the river, below the turbine, so as to raise the tail water, and diminish the head to 3 feet 9 inches, the effect was still equal to 70 per cent.; with the head diminished to 2 feet, the effect was 64 per cent.; and when the head was reduced to 10 inches, it gave 58 per cent. of the power expended, notwithstanding the great immersion of the machine. In the year 1837, M. Fourneyron erected a turbine at St. Blasier (St. Blaise,) in the Black Forest of Baden, for a fall or column of water of 72 feet (22 mètres). The wheel is made of cast-iron, with wrought-iron buckets; it is about 20 inches in diameter, and weighs about 105 pounds; it is said to be equal to 56 horsepower, and to give an useful effect equal to 70 or 75 per cent. of the water power employed. It drives a spinning-mill belonging to M. d'Eichtal. A second turbine, at the same establishment, is wo: ked by a column of water of 108 mètres, or 354 feet high, which is brought into the machine by cast-iron pipes of 18 inches diameter of the local measure, or about 161⁄2 inches English. The diameter of the water-wheel is 144, or about 13 inches English, and it is said to experd a cubic foot of water per second; probably the expenditure may be somewhat more than this. The width of the water-wheel across the pier is .225, or less than a quarter of in inch. It makes from 2200 to 2300 revolutions per minute; and on the end of *The Fourneyron wheel receives the water from the inside, discharging it outwards. The gate, a thin hoop somewhat deeper than the wheel, is placed between the chutes and wheel, and is opened by being raised With such an arrangement, economical part gate results are impossible; and M. Fourneyron and many others have made the wheel with divisions in the buckets as shown in the MacAdam plan. The "quarter turn" of the Holyoke Machine Co. is the invention of Mr. Boyden. MacAdam places the wheel at the small end of a vertical cone-shaped tube. Valentine and others have placed it in scroll and various kinds of curbs. It has been constructed so as to receive the water from below by many parties. It has been made with register gate inside of chutes, between chutes and wheel, and in one case in my experience, with two register gates, one inside of chutes, the other outside of wheel. It has been made with short straight chutes, also long curved ones. It has been suspended by the upper end of its shaft in various ways, instead of resting upon a step. It has been made of iron in the coarsest and cheapest style, and of bronze at an enormous cost. It has proved as variable in useful effect as any of the other kinds of turbines. the spindle or upright shaft of the turbine is a bevelled pinion, of 19 teeth, working into two wheels, on the right and left, each of which has 300 teeth. These give motion to the machinery of the factory, and drive 8,000 water spindles, roving frames, carding engines, cleansers and other accessories. The useful effect is reported to be from 80 to 85 per cent. of the theoretical water-power. The water as filtered at the reservoir before it enters the conduit pipes; and it is important to notice this, since the apertures of discharge in the wheel are so small as to be easily obstructed or choked. The water enters the buckets in the direction of the tangent to the last element of the_guide-curves, which is a tangent to the first element of the curved buckets. The water ought to press steadily against the curved buckets, entering them without shock or impulse, and quitting them without velocity, in order to obtain the greatest useful effect; o.herwise a portion of the water's power must be wasted or expended, without producing useful effect on the wheel. It is difficult to imagine that a machine so small as this can give motion to the works of a cotton mill on so large a scale. Professor Ruhlmann says, that when he saw it actually doing so, he could not for some time credit the evidence of his senses; and, although he went purposely to examine it, his astonishment prevented him from comprehending, in the first instance, that the fact was really as it appeared. The Jonval Turbine [From J. E. Stevenson's Circular.] By referring to our certificate on another page, it will be seen that it is impossible to construct a turbine greatly to exceed in useful effect a "Jonval," when properly constructed and well finished; and by reference to the table of experiments here inserted, it will be noticed that the efficiency of the Jonval turbine depends not upon the name "Jonval," neither upon the simple fact that one wheel is placed above another-as from 6 Jonvals tested, but ON gave 90.77 per cent., that being the one made by us; whereas one other give only 50.34 per cent., the lowest of all tested. And why this difference? Simply because one builder knew what he was doing, and the other did not. There are many parties, purporting to manufacture the Jonval turbine, who state in their circulars that "at a trial of turbine wheels, at Fairmount Water Works, at Philadelphia, in 1859 and 1860, the Jonval wheel gave the highest percentage of all tested;" and they would have the public believe that with their rough, unfinished castings, guide and bucket curves, of whatever form they may happen to be, they give this wonderful result, when none of them possess more than one feature of the Jonval turbine; and these experiments show that a "Jonval," made by a man of experience, and tested under the most favorable circumstances, gave the poorest result of all, simply because he failed in the application of the principles embodied in its construction. The following is a table of the experiments at the Fairmount Water Works, at Philadelphia, in 1859 and 1860, as taken from the report of the Chief Engineer. The table explains itself. At a trial of water wheels, at Fairmount Works, by order of the Select and Common Council of the City of Philadelphia, a Jonval turbine, made by J. E. Stevenson,' of Paterson, New Jersey, was tested March 9th, 1860, and produced a co-efficient of useful effect of .8777 per cent. under the following circumstance: 925 pounds were raised 25 feet by 70.25 cubic feet of water under a head and fall of 6 feet. To this must be added the friction of the transmitting machinery, estimated at 3 per cent., making a total useful effect of .9077 of the power employed. O. H. P. PARKER, (SEAL OF CITY.) Chairman of the Water Com. HENRY P. M. BIRKINBINE, Chief Engineer. In attestation of the above signatures of O. H. P. Parker and Henry P. M. Birkinbine, I set my hand and affix the seal of the City of Philadelphia, this, 3rd day of April, 1860. ALEXANDER HENRY, Mayor of Philadelphia. Turbine builders may object to my classification of the various wheels repre sented upon the opposite page; but because M. Jonval defined certain lines for a turbine, he no more proved that those lines covered the principle than he would have proved that the only place to walk upon a street is exactly three feet from its centre on a line parallel therewith, had he defined such a line. The wheel itself was common and known as the Tub wheel. Two wheels made upon the Wry-Fly specification, placed one above the other, would have covered the plan of M. Jonval; placing a fixed wheel above the wheel proper would have little originality unless done before any other builder had made an application of chutes to turbines. The experiments of D. P. Blackstone, show plainly that the vertical part of the buckets of the Vandewater-Burnham wheel, represented with the others, is of little practical utility; indeed, the vertical part of such buckets have often been proved to be decidedly injurious. Wheels constructed in that way, however, render it more convenient to apply the water economically at part gate. Many plans for gates have been tried with the Jonval, but none that has not in some way proved objectionable. Many have been made without any gate, simply letting the water on from the head gate of flume. Geyelin of Philadelphia has a telescopic tube below the wheel, the bottom thereof being lowered to the apron beneath, in order to stop the water. Wicket gates have also been tried in a tube below the wheel, but both plans cause an extravagant use of water, unless the wheel runs at whole gate. "Outside register gates" are the most common; these also render it impossible to economize water at part gate. The inside register, like that of Gates Curtis is far better in that way, but like the other register gates it works hard. Down. ward discharge wheels were objected to because they were supposed to press heavily upon the step; such an idea could only have gained a place through very superficial reasoning, for if 75 or 80 per cent. of the weight of the water forced the wheel ahead, the balance of the weight could only press down upon the step, whether downward, central or outward discharge, |