Chapter 6

The action of the meter was thus: When a current passes through the coil, R, it heats the liquid at the place, thus causing a circulation, the warm liquid ascending while the cold liquid descends as shown by the arrows. This circulation causes the undershot wheel to revolve, and its revolutions are registered by the clockwork. The stronger the current, the more the heat, and thus the more rapid the circulation. The warm liquid once in the tank, which is of a reasonable size, will impart its heat to all the diffusers. The surface of the glass tube, etc., is very small in comparison to the surface of the tank. It will be seen that the function of this apparatus is independent of the outward temperature, for the motion of the liquid is due only to that heat which is generated by the current. When the current does not pass, it is evident that the liquid, at whatever temperature it may be, does not circulate, as all parts are of the same temperature; but the moment the current passes, a difference is produced, which causes a circulation in proportion to the current. We may mention that we tried various liquids, and give preference to pure olive oil. It will also be seen that this meter is good for alternating currents. In conclusion, we may remark that the tests we made gave satisfaction, and we wanted to publish them, but that Mr. Jehl was called away to fit up the Edison exhibit in the Vienna exhibition for the Societe Electrique Edison of Paris. After the exhibition we began our work upon our disk machine, and had almost forgotten our meter. The whole apparatus is mounted on a base, K.

JEHL AND RUPP. Brünn, Sept. 26, 1887.

* * * * *

STORAGE BATTERIES FOR ELECTRIC LOCOMOTION.[1]

[Footnote 1: From a paper read before the National Electric Light Association, New York, August, 1887.]

By A. RECKENZAUN.

The idea of employing secondary batteries for propelling vehicles is almost contemporaneous with the discovery of this method of storing energy. To Mr. Plante, more than to any other investigator, much of our knowledge in this branch of electrical science is due. He was the first to take advantage of the action of secondary currents in voltaic batteries. Plante is a scientist of the first grade, and he is a wonderfully exact experimenter. He examined the whole question of polarization of electrodes, using all kinds of metal as electrodes and many different liquids as electrolytes, and during his endless researches he found that the greatest useful effect was produced when dilute sulphuric acid was electrolyzed between electrodes of metallic lead.

A set of Plante's original cells was exhibited for the first time in March, 1860, before the Paris Academy of Sciences. Scientists admired and praised it, but the general public knew nothing of this great discovery thus brought to notice. Indeed, at that period little commercial value could be attached to such apparatus, since the accumulator had to be charged by means of primary batteries, and it was then well known that electrical energy, when produced by chemical means in voltaic cells, was far too expensive for any purpose outside the physical laboratory or the telegraph office.

It was twenty years after this exhibition at the Academy of Sciences in Paris that public attention was drawn to the importance of storage batteries, and that Mr. Faure conceived the idea of constructing plates consisting of lead and oxides of lead. At that time the advantages accruing through a system of electrical storage could be fully appreciated, since electrical energy was already being produced by mechanical means through the medium of dynamo-electric machines.

It was the dynamo machine which created the demand for the storage battery, and the latter was introduced anew to the public at large and to the capitalist with great pomp and enthusiasm. One of Faure's accumulators was sent to Sir William Thomson, and this eminent scientist in the course of experiments ascertained that a single cell, weighing 165 lb., can store two million foot-pounds of energy, or one horse power for one hour, and that the loss of energy in charging did not exceed 15 per cent. These results appeared highly encouraging. There we had a method of storing that could give out the greater part of the energy put in. The immense development which the electric transmission of energy was even at that early day expected to undergo pointed to the fact that a convenient method of receiving large quantities of transmitted energy, and of holding it in readiness until wanted, must be of the highest importance. Numerous applications of the Faure battery were at once suggested, and the public jumped to the conclusion that a thing for which so many uses could be instantly found must necessarily be a profitable investment, and plenty of money was provided forthwith, not with the idea of commencing careful experiments and developing the then crude invention, which would have been the correct thing, but for manufacturing tons of accumulators in their first and immature form.

I need not describe the disappointments which followed the first unfulfilled hopes, nor repeat the criticism that was heaped upon the heads of the early promoters. Those early hopes were untimely and unreasonable. A thousand difficulties had to be overcome--scientific difficulties and manufacturing difficulties. This invention, like most others, had to go through steady historical developments and evolution, and follow the recognized laws of nature, which are against abnormal and instantaneous maturity. The period of maturity has also been retarded by injudicious treatment, but the ultimate success was inevitable. Great advances have been made within the last few years, and I propose now to offer a few facts and figures relating to the present state of the subject with reference to the application of storage batteries to locomotive purposes. It is not within the province of this paper to discuss all the different inventions of secondary batteries nor to offer any suggestions with regard to priority, therefore I will confine myself to general statements. I am aware of the good work that was done in the United States by Kirchhoff twenty-six years ago, and of the more recent work of Mr. Brush, of Cleveland, Mr. Julien and others, but I am more particularly acquainted with the recent achievements of the Electrical Accumulator Company, who own the rights of the Electrical Power Storage Company, of London. I have used the batteries of the latter company for propelling electric boats and electric street cars. The first of the boats was the Electricity, which was launched in September, 1882, and which attained a speed of seven miles an hour for six consecutive hours. Since then a dozen electric boats of various sizes have been fitted up and worked successfully by means of storage batteries and motors of my design. The most important of these were the launch Volta and another similar craft, which is used by the Italian government for torpedo work in the harbor of Spezia. On the measured mile trial trips the Italian launch gave an average speed of 8.43 miles an hour with and against the tide. The hull of this vessel was built by Messrs. Yarrow & Co., and the motors were manufactured by Messrs. Stephens, Smith & Co., of London. The Volta, which was entirely fitted by the latter firm, is 37 feet long and 7 feet beam. She draws 2'6" of water when carrying 40 persons, for whom there is ample sitting accommodation. There are 64 cells in this boat. These are placed as ballast under the floor, and actuate a pair of motors and a screw coupled direct to the armature shaft running at 700 revolutions a minute. We crossed the English Channel with this boat in September of last year, leaving Dover at 10:40 in the morning, arriving at Calais at 2:30 P.M.; stayed about an hour in the French harbor for luncheon and floated into Dover docks the same evening, at 6:30, with full speed. The actual distance traversed without entirely discharging the cells was 54 miles. The current remained constant at 28 amperes until 5 P.M., and it only dropped to 25 amperes at the completion of the double voyage between England and France. Several electric launches are now being constructed in London, and one in New York by the Electrical Accumulator Company.

M. Trouve exhibited a small boat and a tricycle, both worked by Plante accumulators, at Paris, in 1881.

The first locomotive actuated by storage batteries was used at a bleaching works in France in 1882. During the same year I designed an electric street car for the storage company, and this was tried on the lines of the West Metropolitan Tramways in March, 1883. It had accommodation for 46 passengers. This car had many defects, and I reconstructed it entirely, and ran it afterward in its improved form on the South London Tramways, and also on a private track at Millwall, where it is now in good condition, and I have a similar car in Berlin. M. Phillippart exhibited a car in Paris and M. Julien made successful experiments in Brussels, Antwerp, and Hamburg. Mr. Elieson is running storage battery locomotives in London. Mr. Julien has also been experimenting with a car in New York, and I believe one is in course of construction for a line in the city of Boston. Messrs. W. Wharton, Jr. & Co. have a storage battery car running at Philadelphia on Spruce and Pine streets, and this energetic firm is now fitting up another car with two trucks, each carrying an independent motor, similar to my European cars.

I have mentioned all these facts in order to show that there is a considerable amount of activity displayed in the matter of storage batteries for street cars, and that continued and substantial progress is being made in each successive case. The prejudices against the application of secondary batteries are being rapidly dispelled, and there are indications everywhere that this method of propulsion will soon take a recognized place among the great transit facilities in the United States. I feel convinced that this country will also in this respect be far ahead of Europe before another year has passed over our heads.

There are several popular and I may say serious objections to the employment of storage batteries for propelling street cars. These objections I will now enumerate, and endeavor to show how far they are true, and in what measure they interfere with the economical side of the question.

First objection: The loss of energy, which amounts in practice to 20 and sometimes 30 per cent. Now, every method of storing or transmitting energy involves some waste, but in saying this we need not condemn the system, for after all the term efficiency is only a relative one. For instance, a 10 horse power steam engine consumes three times as much fuel per horse power hour as a 1,000 horse power engine does, yet this small engine must be, and is regarded as, one of the most economical labor-saving appliances known to us. Considered as a heat engine, the efficiency of the most economical steam motor is but ten per cent.--90 per cent of the available units of heat contained in coal being lost during its transformation into mechanical energy. Thus, if we find that the storage battery does not return more than 70 per cent, of the work expended in charging it, we ought not to condemn it on that account until we have ascertained whether this low efficiency renders the system unfit for any or all commercial purposes. It is needless to go into figures in order to show that, when compared with animal power, this objection drops into insignificance.

The second, more formidable, objection relates to the weight of storage batteries--and this involves two disadvantages, viz., waste of power in propelling the accumulator along with the car, and increased pressure upon the street rails, which are only fitted to carry a maximum of 5 tons distributed over 4 points, so that each wheel of an ordinary car produces a pressure of 1¼ tons upon a point of the rail immediately under it.

The last mentioned objection is easily overcome by distributing the weight of the car with its electrical apparatus over 8 wheels or 2 small trucks, whereby the pressure per unit of section on the rails is reduced to a minimum. With regard to the weight of the storage batteries, relatively to the amount of energy the same are capable of holding and transmitting, I beg to offer a few practical figures. Theoretically, the energy manifested in the separation of one pound of lead from its oxide is equivalent to 360,000 foot pounds, but these chemical equivalents, though interesting in themselves, gives us no tangible idea of the actual capacity of a battery.

Repeated experiments have shown me that the capacity of a secondary battery cell varies with the rate at which it is charged and discharged. For instance, a cell such as we use on street cars gave a useful capacity of 137.3 ampere hours when discharged at the average rate of 45.76 amperes, and this same cell yielded 156.38 ampere hours when worked at the rate of 22.34 amperes. At the commencement of the discharge the E.M.F of the battery was 2.1 volts, and this was allowed to drop to 1.87 volts when the experiment was concluded. The entire active material contained in the plates of one cell weighed 11.5 lb., therefore the energy given off per pound of active substance at the above high rate of discharge was 62.225 foot pounds, and when discharging at the lower rate of 22.34 amperes the available useful energy was 72.313 foot pounds, or nearly 2.2 electrical horse power per pound of active matter. But this active substance has to be supported, and the strength or weight of the support has to be made sufficiently great to give the plate a definite strength and durability. The support of the plates inclusive of the terminals above referred to weighs more than the active material, which consists of peroxide of lead and spongy lead; so that the plates of one cell weigh actually 26.5 pounds. Add to this the weight of the receptacle and acid, and you get a total of about 41 pounds per cell when in working order. Seventy of these cells will propel an ordinary street car for four hours and a half, while consuming the stored energy at the rate of 30 amperes, or over 5.6 electrical horse power. The whole set of seventy cells weighs 2,870 lb., which is barely one-fifth of the entire weight of the car when it carries forty adult passengers. Therefore the energy wasted in propelling the accumulator along with a ear does not amount to more than 20 per cent. of the total power, and this we can easily afford to lose so long as animal power is our only competitor. From numerous and exhaustive tests with accumulators on cars in this country and abroad, I have come to the conclusion that the motive power for hauling a full-sized street car for fifteen hours a day does not exceed $1.75, and this includes fuel, water, oil, attendance, and repairs to engine, boiler, and dynamo. We have thus an immense margin left between the cost of electric traction and horse traction, and the last objection, that relating to the depreciation of the battery plates, can be most liberally met, and yet leave ample profits over the old method of propulsion by means of animals.

The advantages of storage battery street cars for city traffic are self-evident, so that I need not trouble you with further details in this respect, but I would beg those who take an interest in the progress of the electric locomotive to give this subject all the consideration it deserves, and I would assure them that the system which I have advocated in this brief but very incomplete sketch is worthy of an extended trial, and ready for the purposes set forth. There is no reason why those connected with electric lighting interests in the various cities and towns should not give the matter their special attention, as they are the best informed on electrical engineering and already have a local control of the supply of current needed for charging.

In the car which we use in Philadelphia there are actually 80 cells, because there are considerable gradients to go over. Each cell weighs 40 pounds and the average horse power of each battery is six. Sometimes we only use two horse power and sometimes, going up grades of 5 per cent., we use as much as 12 horse power, but the average rate is 6 electrical horse power. With reference to the weight of passengers on the cars, we have never carried more than 50 passengers on that car, because it is impossible to put more than 50 men into it. There are seats for 24, and the rest have to stand on the platforms or in the aisle.

The changing of the batteries takes three minutes with proper appliances. One set of cells is drawn out by means of a small winch and a freshly charged set is put in. It takes the same time to charge the battery as it does to discharge it in the working of the cars, so one reserve set would be sufficient to keep the car continually moving.

The loss of energy from standing about is probably nothing. If a battery were to stand charged for three months in a dry case, the loss of energy might be in three months 10 per cent. I purposely had a set of cells standing for two years charged and never used them. After two years there was still a small amount of energy left. So as regards the loss of energy in a battery standing idle, it is practically nothing, because no one would think of charging a battery and letting it stand for three months or a year.

I have had them stand three or four months and I could hardly appreciate the loss going on, provided always that the cells are standing on a dry floor. If the exterior of the box be moist, or if it stands on a moist floor, there will naturally be a surface leakage going on: but where there is no surface leakage the mere local action between the oxides and metallic lead will not discharge the battery for a very considerable time.

I have made experiments in London with a loaded car pulled by two horses. I put a dynamometer between the attachment of the horse and the car, so as to ascertain exactly the amount of pull, measured in pounds multiplied by the distance traversed in a minute. You will be surprised to know that two horses, when doing their easiest work, drawing a loaded car on a perfectly level road, exert from two to three horse power. I have mentioned a car in Philadelphia where we use between two and twelve horse power. A horse is capable of exerting eight horse power for a few minutes, and when a car is being driven up grades, such as I see in Boston, for instance, pulling a load of passengers up these grades, the horses must be exerting from 12 to 16 horse power, mechanical horse power. That is the reason that street car horses cannot run more than three or four hours out of the twenty-four. If they were to run longer, they would be dead in a few weeks. If they run two hours a day, they will last three or four years.

The life of the cells must be expressed upon the principle of ampere hours or the amount of energy given off by them. Street car service requires that the cells work their hardest for fifteen or sixteen hours a day. The life of the cells has to be divided; first, into the life of the box which contains the plates. This box, if appropriately constructed of the best materials, will last many years, because there is no actual wear on it. The life of the negative plates will be very considerable, because no chemical action is going on in the negative plate. The negative plate consists almost entirely of spongy lead, and the hydrogen is mechanically occluded in that spongy lead. Therefore the depreciation of the battery is almost entirely due to the oxidation of the positive plates. If we were to make a lead battery of plates ¼ inch thick, it would last many years; but for street car work that would be far too heavy. Therefore we make the positive plates a little more than one-eighth of an inch thick. I find that the plates get sufficiently brittle to almost fall to pieces after the car has run fifteen hours a day for six months. The plates then have to be renewed. But this renewal does not mean the throwing away of the plates. The weight is the same as before, because no consumption of material takes place. We take out peroxide of lead instead of red lead. That peroxide, if converted, produces 70 per cent. of metallic lead, so that there is a loss of 30 per cent. in value. Then comes the question of the manufacture of these positive plates, which, I believe, at the present day are rather expensive. But I believe the time will come when battery plates will be manufactured like shoe nails, and the process of renewing the positive plates will be a very cheap one.

I ascertained in Europe that the motive power costs 2 cents per car mile; that is, the steam power and attendance for charging the batteries. We have to allow twice as much for the depreciation of a battery at the present high rate at which we have to pay for the battery--$12 for each cell. But I believe that as soon as the storage battery industry is sufficiently extended, the total cost for propelling these cars will not be more than six cents a mile, or about one half the cost of the cheapest horse traction.

I have made some very careful observations on the cable tramway in Philadelphia, which is quite an extensive system. I have never been able to ascertain the exact amount of waste in pulling the cable itself; but I have it on the authority of certain technical papers that there is a waste of about eighty per cent. I do not intend to depreciate cable or any other tramways, but there is a difficulty about introducing cable tramways. It is necessary to dig up the streets and interfere with the roadways. I have been told that the cable arrangements in Philadelphia cost $100,000 a mile, and that the cable road in San Francisco cost more than that. One of the directors of the cable company in Philadelphia told me that if he had seen the battery system before the introduction of the cable, he would probably have made up his mind in favor of the former. The wear and tear in the case of the storage system is also considerable. There is a waste of energy in the dynamo; secondly, in the accumulator charged by that dynamo; thirdly, in the motor which is driven by the accumulator; and fourthly, in the gearing that reduces the speed of the motor to the speed required by the car axles. It would be difficult to make a motor run at the rate of eighty revolutions per minute, which is the number of revolutions of the street car axle when running at the rate of ten miles an hour. Take all these wastes, and you find in practice that you do not utilize more than 40 per cent. of the energy given by the steam engine. But this is quite sufficient to make this system much cheaper than horse traction.