Thunder and Lightning.

[miletus12]

Emily Goss Davenport

The invention of the world's first electric motor is credited soley to Thomas Davenport. Some sources include his wife's cousin and brother, but few include the critical role played by Thomas's wife Emily. Recent research as well as contemporary biographers of Thomas Davenport clearly indicated that Emily Goss Davenport was as much involved in this important invention as her more widely-known husband. Thomas Davenport, an impoverished, uneducated blacksmith, had become intrigued with Joseph Henry's electromagnet that had come to be used in the iron ore separation process. Davenport purchased one of Henry's magnets and together with Emily, his brother Oliver and cousin Orange Smalley began work on what is described in the patent specifications as "an application of magnetism and electro magnetism to propelling machinery." (Patent Number 132). Both Thomas' biographer Walter Davenport and brother emphasize Emily's role in the invention. She was well-educated, kept the notes as the invention went along and recommended, most critically, the use of mercury as a conductor when it came to the point where it looked as if the Davenports' efforts were about to fail. The Davenport electrical motor received its formal patent in 1837 and Thomas sold a model to the country's first school of engineering, Rensselaer Institute in New York. It would be almost fifty years later before Thomas Edison would start his manufacturing company to produce motors modeled after the Davenport electrical motor.


References:

Biography of Thomas Davenport by Walter Rice Davenport (Vermont Historical Society, 1929).

Mothers and Daughters of Invention by Autumn Stanley (Rutgers University Press, 1995) pp. 293-294

Patently Female by Ethlie Ann Vare and Greg Pracek (John Wiley, 2002) p. 28.

The Motor.

DESCRIPTION (BRIEF)

Model to accompany US patent number 132, "Electric Motor, issued to Thomas Davenport, 25 February 1837. This is the first US patent issued for an electric motor. No extant markings. The patent claims: "Applying magnetic and electromagnetic power as a moving principle for machinery in the manner above described, or in any other substantially the same in principle". Wooden base, 9 by 14 in., supported on four curved legs, carrying a circular frame, in which there are four rough electro-magnets, painted red, made to revolve within a ring of steel magnets. The steel magnets in the ring are crescent-shaped can be lifted out of the frame. Reference: W. James King, Development of Electrical Technology in the 19th Century (Smithsonian Institution, 1962), 264.

This model was made by Vermont blacksmith Thomas Davenport (1802-1851) as a replacement for his original patent model. The original was destroyed in the 1836 fire at the US Patent Office. Davenport may have incorporated improvements in this model that are not reflected in the patent drawings.

OBJECT NAME

Electric Motor

motorelectric motor

OBJECT TYPE

Patent Model

OTHER TERMS

Electric Motor; Electromagnetic Devices

DATE MADE

ca 1837

ASSOCIATED PERSON

Davenport

MAKER

DavenportDavenport, Thomas

MEASUREMENTS

overall: 15 in x 10 in x 15 in; 38.1 cm x 25.4 cm x 38.1 cm

ID NUMBER

EM.252644

CATALOG NUMBER

252644

ACCESSION NUMBER

49064

PATENT NUMBER

132

SEE MORE ITEMS IN

Work and Industry: Electricity

EXHIBITION

Lighting a Revolution

EXHIBITION LOCATION

National Museum of American History

DATA SOURCE

National Museum of American History

George Daniel Davenport, son of Thomas and Emily, was slain in the Battle of the Wilderness in 1864 in the American Civil War. He left no descendants.

The other brother, Reverend Reverend Willard Goss Davenport, had a daughter, Irene Davenport, born in 1855. This will be her "fictional" story. .  

[lordroel]

Mar 17, 2023 15:07:47 GMT miletus12 said:

Emily Goss Davenport

The invention of the world's first electric motor is credited soley to Thomas Davenport. Some sources include his wife's cousin and brother, but few include the critical role played by Thomas's wife Emily. Recent research as well as contemporary biographers of Thomas Davenport clearly indicated that Emily Goss Davenport was as much involved in this important invention as her more widely-known husband. Thomas Davenport, an impoverished, uneducated blacksmith, had become intrigued with Joseph Henry's electromagnet that had come to be used in the iron ore separation process. Davenport purchased one of Henry's magnets and together with Emily, his brother Oliver and cousin Orange Smalley began work on what is described in the patent specifications as "an application of magnetism and electro magnetism to propelling machinery." (Patent Number 132). Both Thomas' biographer Walter Davenport and brother emphasize Emily's role in the invention. She was well-educated, kept the notes as the invention went along and recommended, most critically, the use of mercury as a conductor when it came to the point where it looked as if the Davenports' efforts were about to fail. The Davenport electrical motor received its formal patent in 1837 and Thomas sold a model to the country's first school of engineering, Rensselaer Institute in New York. It would be almost fifty years later before Thomas Edison would start his manufacturing company to produce motors modeled after the Davenport electrical motor.


References:

Biography of Thomas Davenport by Walter Rice Davenport (Vermont Historical Society, 1929).

Mothers and Daughters of Invention by Autumn Stanley (Rutgers University Press, 1995) pp. 293-294

Patently Female by Ethlie Ann Vare and Greg Pracek (John Wiley, 2002) p. 28.

The Motor.

DESCRIPTION (BRIEF)

Model to accompany US patent number 132, "Electric Motor, issued to Thomas Davenport, 25 February 1837. This is the first US patent issued for an electric motor. No extant markings. The patent claims: "Applying magnetic and electromagnetic power as a moving principle for machinery in the manner above described, or in any other substantially the same in principle". Wooden base, 9 by 14 in., supported on four curved legs, carrying a circular frame, in which there are four rough electro-magnets, painted red, made to revolve within a ring of steel magnets. The steel magnets in the ring are crescent-shaped can be lifted out of the frame. Reference: W. James King, Development of Electrical Technology in the 19th Century (Smithsonian Institution, 1962), 264.

This model was made by Vermont blacksmith Thomas Davenport (1802-1851) as a replacement for his original patent model. The original was destroyed in the 1836 fire at the US Patent Office. Davenport may have incorporated improvements in this model that are not reflected in the patent drawings.

OBJECT NAME

Electric Motor

motorelectric motor

OBJECT TYPE

Patent Model

OTHER TERMS

Electric Motor; Electromagnetic Devices

DATE MADE

ca 1837

ASSOCIATED PERSON

Davenport

MAKER

DavenportDavenport, Thomas

MEASUREMENTS

overall: 15 in x 10 in x 15 in; 38.1 cm x 25.4 cm x 38.1 cm

ID NUMBER

EM.252644

CATALOG NUMBER

252644

ACCESSION NUMBER

49064

PATENT NUMBER

132

SEE MORE ITEMS IN

Work and Industry: Electricity

EXHIBITION

Lighting a Revolution

EXHIBITION LOCATION

National Museum of American History

DATA SOURCE

National Museum of American History

George Daniel Davenport, son of Thomas and Emily, was slain in the Battle of the Wilderness in 1864 in the American Civil War. He left no descendants.

The other brother, Reverend Reverend Willard Goss Davenport, had a daughter, Irene Davenport, born in 1855. This will be her "fictional" story. .  

Is this a discussion, the rules are clear that the author of a thread has to start a discussion instead of posting only links to something as i only see text and not what it is about.

[miletus12]

Mar 17, 2023 15:15:35 GMT lordroel said:

Mar 17, 2023 15:07:47 GMT miletus12 said:

Emily Goss Davenport



The Motor.

George Daniel Davenport, son of Thomas and Emily, was slain in the Battle of the Wilderness in 1864 in the American Civil War. He left no descendants.

The other brother, Reverend Reverend Willard Goss Davenport, had a daughter, Irene Davenport, born in 1855. This will be her "fictional" story. .  

Is this a discussion, the rules are clear that the author of a thread has to start a discussion instead of posting only links to something as i only see text and not what it is about.

The discussion is a "what if line of development of the electric locomotive", before Thomas Edison stole that patent and idea in the late 1880s.  

[lordroel]

Mar 17, 2023 15:38:09 GMT miletus12 said:

Mar 17, 2023 15:15:35 GMT lordroel said:

Is this a discussion, the rules are clear that the author of a thread has to start a discussion instead of posting only links to something as i only see text and not what it is about.

The discussion is a "what if line of development of the electric locomotive", before Thomas Edison stole that patent and idea in the late 1880s.  

I see only a link and text related to the link, no discussions to begin with as all threads do on the forum.

[miletus12]

Okay... The year is 1876, 100 years since the founding of the American republic. The Davenport family has been connected with the electric motor for a considerable part of that history.

"The electric motor had been in existence, at least in rudimentary form, as early as the 1830's; in 1835 the Vermont blacksmith Thomas Davenport exhibited an electrically propelled toy train in Boston and Springfield.

It is a what-if situation to consider what would happen if that demonstrator had been scaled up before Siemens ever developed his carriages in Berlin in the 1880s.

The missing pieces to the first American electric trolley would be a dynamo (Charles Brush) and a suitable steam engine. The steam engine would be simple. The dynamo-motor would not be so simple, because of some problems with materials science.

Just from a real history perspective, the brushes and the commutator required a development of the appropriate wear-resistant, copper or carbon brushes and contacts and this was not achieved in the United States until 1885. Prior to then, it was the mercury dip contact bath or soft iron contactors and that did not work too well. Sparking, fires and burned insulation was the usual result.  

So we have to solve those problems before the Boston electric tram car can chug up Beacon Hill.

[575]

Looking forward to follow this.

[miletus12]

Letter:
47 1st Ave,
Boston, Mass
12 January 1876

Mister Charles Francis Brush, Esq.
1350 Euclid Avenue, Suite 1000,
Cleveland, Ohio

Dear Mister Charles Brush.

We have just received your model of the electric current generator you made for us this past week and put it through the tests we discussed in our past letter to you. We find it does not meet our current specifications and needs.

To wit:
-the “dynamo” is excessively heavy at nearly 1,500 pounds and underpowered at 25 horsepower of rated work. We were promised an overall weight of approximately 1,000 pounds and 40 horsepower to install in our 4,000 pound carriage. During our tests we found the work output measured as 0.006 hp/lb.

-as we have a requirement to move that 4,000 pound carriage up an incline of 10 degrees, the above result is not satisfactory. We require a device that can generate approximately 0.01 hp/lb as work. As we also use the customer’s insistent metric units of measurement, that tested work output was 10.27 W/kg. The required minimum output of 16.44 W/kg was not attained and the carriage stalled at 1/3 of its planned 4 mile or 6.44 kilometers up the incline run. Henceforth to avoid confusion as to the stated requirements, we will use the customer's requested units of measurement to that requirement.

After consultation with my colleagues, Mister B. Fiske of New York and Mister J. Howell of Virginia, we collectively have reached the following conclusions and make these recommendations to assist you in your next attempt to meet the requirements:

1. The mounting is excessively large and made of a conductive metal that produces the danger or a ground-short at the armature contacts. While iron is cheap and the wood insulator blocks serve to make the dynamo function at the base mount; we did notice that it caught fire around the silk insulation wrap when it shorted out. Perhaps aluminum or steel would be a better housing and perhaps India rubber would make better shock mounts as well as wrap insulator?
2. We agree that the soft iron brushes and contactor plates vibrated excessively during armature rotation and that the sparking which resulted probably caused the fire.
3. We recommend that lightening the armature and stator hoop with a different stiffer and lighter metal might be advantageous, and perhaps using copper wire wrap in the stator “might” save a few additional hundred pounds.
4. We recommend that if you cannot find a suitable copper/nickel alloy metal to make the brushes and commutator contacts from a supplier in the United States, then perhaps, Sheffield, in England can supply the needed materials?

We await your next application and expect that you will have a sample dynamo for us to test in March of this year.

Sincerely:
Irene Goss Davenport; DME
BNY

[lordroel]

Mar 17, 2023 16:45:29 GMT miletus12 said:

Okay... The year is 1876, 100 years since the founding of the American republic. The Davenport family has been connected with the electric motor for a considerable part of that history.

"The electric motor had been in existence, at least in rudimentary form, as early as the 1830's; in 1835 the Vermont blacksmith Thomas Davenport exhibited an electrically propelled toy train in Boston and Springfield.

It is a what-if situation to consider what would happen if that demonstrator had been scaled up before Siemens ever developed his carriages in Berlin in the 1880s.

The missing pieces to the first American electric trolley would be a dynamo (Charles Brush) and a suitabble steam engine. The steam engine would be simple. The dynamo-motor would not be so simple, because of some problems with materials science.

Just from a real history perspective, the brushes and the commutator required a development of the appropriate wear-resistant, copper or carbon brushes and contacts and this was not achieved in the United States until 1885. Prior to then, it was the mercury dip contact bath or soft iron contactors and that did not work too well. Sparking, fires and burned insulation was the usual result.  

So we have to solve those problems before the Boston electric tram car can chug up Beacon Hill.

Better.

So this is a TL.

[miletus12]

Diary entry: C. Brush dated 22 January 1876.

The windmill powered dynamo I sent to “that woman” as the electric motivator for her tram car; she rejected. Ordinarily I would write her off as just another disappointed customer; but she had the effrontery to send me a complete package of complaints and suggestions, attached to her rejection letter, and then demanded that I fulfill the contract with another example of a dynamo modified to her specifications.

Naturally, I replied to her letter, with one of my own, that if she knew how I should build the dynamo better than I did, then maybe she should build it herself.

That, in hindsight, was a mistake; for today I received as a visitor, a Mister Robert Fraye, solicitor, currently in the employ of Mister William Henry Vanderbilt. Yes, THAT Vanderbilt. Mister Fraye was most courteous and properly formal when he handed me the legal injunction that forbade me from engaging in any other business or manufacture until I had fulfilled my contract with “that woman”.

I have examined my options and I have concluded several things:
a. I must discharge my lawyer and replace him.
b. I must contact Antonio Pacinotti, my colleague, for further insight on how to wrap the stator as “that woman” suggested. He has been somewhat successful in his work and with luck, I should obtain his results without patent issues between us.
c. I must investigate a local source of copper conductive materials suitable for contactors, obtain the services of a gunmaker to forge the steel hoops and armature horns here in Cleveland. Perhaps the Eagle Ironworks of Cincinnati, Ohio?
d. I must find out more about “that woman” for she apparently has powerful friends.

To add salt to the wounds, Mister Fraye has been kind enough to offer me the options of accomplishing a through c, at my own expense, or face bankruptcy and criminal charges of fraud.

However, if I deliver a suitable dynamo in the time specified, Mister Vanderbilt will defray my costs and ensure I will profit from the results of success. What I do not understand; is why is he interested? But as I am caught between the lawyers and the poor house I really have no choice in the issue.

If I am to have a suitable dynamo ready by March of this year, I had best get cracking!

[miletus12]

Vanderbilt.



IGD.

Mar 19, 2023 14:36:49 GMT miletus12 said:

Diary entry: C. Brush dated 22 January 1876.

Diary entry: C. Brush dated 1 February 1876.

I am doomed..

[miletus12]

Miles Greenwood

Industrial innovator Miles Greenwood was born on March 19, 1807, in Jersey City, New Jersey. In 1817, he moved with his father to Ohio, settling near Cincinnati. In 1832, Greenwood established the Eagle Ironworks on the banks of the Miami and Erie Canal near Cincinnati. The foundry quickly became the largest in the Midwest.

Greenwood spent the remainder of his life involved in the iron business. He also was very civic minded and served on the Cincinnati City Council. During the American Civil War, Greenwood only allowed the Eagle Ironworks to produce items for the Northern war effort. At the war's outbreak, Eagle Ironworks manufactured one dozen iron anchors for pontoon bridges at the request of General John C. Fremont. Greenwood's firm manufactured the anchors in just twenty-four hours. Over the course of the war, Greenwood developed machinery that could manufacture three thousand smoothbore muskets per day. He also built turrets for ironclad ships when no other iron foundry would attempt the work. Greenwood's contributions to the Northern war effort greatly assisted the Union. The Eagle Ironworks' contributions also prompted Southern sympathizers to set fire to the foundry on three different occasions. Combined damages amounted to 100,000 dollars, but Greenwood never ceased production.

One of Greenwood's more important innovations was helping to develop and manufacture the first practical steam fire engine in history. On March 2, 1852, three Cincinnati residents, Abel Shawk, Alexander Bonner Latta, and Greenwood, began construction of the fire engine. Shawk was a locksmith, and Latta was a locomotive builder. The Eagle Ironworks manufactured the engine. Earlier inventors had manufactured steam-powered fire engines, but the Cincinnati version proved to be much more practical. The steam engine could begin pumping water out of a water source in ten minutes. Earlier engines took much longer. A principal reason for Greenwood's involvement with this product was a fire that destroyed the Eagle Ironworks in 1852. Greenwood hoped that this new fire engine would better protect his business.

After the three men demonstrated their finished engine to the Cincinnati City Council, the city agreed to buy an engine. The fire engine was presented to the Cincinnati Fire Department on January 1, 1853, and made Cincinnati the first city in the world to use steam fire engines. This first engine was named "Uncle Joe Ross" after a city council member. In 1854, Cincinnati residents raised enough funds to allow the fire department to purchase a second steam fire engine. This engine was known as "Citizen's Gift."

The steam fire engine changed firefighting in Cincinnati. Pleased with the engine, local government leaders decided to form a professional fire department rather than relying on volunteers. On April 1, 1853, Cincinnati created the first professional and fully-paid fire department in the United States. Greenwood, co-inventor of the steam fire engine, served as the department's first chief.

The company struggled financially after the Civil War. Shortly after the conflict, the Eagle Ironworks ceased operations, although several firms continue to use the name today. Greenwood died on November 6, 1885, in Cincinnati.

I think Chuck thinks Stinky is optimistic at 500 pounds and 100 horsepower. Maybe twice the weight and half the horsepower? That four pole dynamo is not as easy to make as a steam powered fire engine!

[miletus12]

Letter:
47 1st Ave,
Boston, Mass
1 April 1876

Mister Charles Francis Brush, Esq.
1350 Euclid Avenue, Suite 1000,
Cleveland, Ohio

Dear Mister Charles Brush.

I set pen to hand this Saturday to “compliment” you on your second attempt to make for us a dynamo suitable for our needs. Your choice of vendor, the Eagle Iron Works of Cincinnati, Ohio was most interesting, as my associate, John Adams Howell, remembers that concern as the one that created the gun-house for the USS Klamath, a Cascoe Class monitor built in that city, that never saw service in the War of the Rebellion, as she was overweight and top-heavy and unsafe to steam in even the calmest of currents. Do you see where this letter trends, Mister Brush?

We received that dynamo, on the 25th of last March month, and we promptly tested it to see if it met specifications.

At 1200 pounds (544 kg.), the result for the dynamo was 0.038 hp/lb (0.062 kW/kg) for the dynamo alone.

When mounted in the carriage, with the aggregate weight now 4,200 lbs (1905 kg) the result was 0.018 hp/lb (0.029 kW/kg). This exceeds the required minimum output of 0.011 hp/lb (0.018 kW/kg).

The good news is that the carriage made it up the 4 mile incline. It did not stall out, nor did it catch fire. The bad news is that the brush contacts, made of brass that was mounted on carbon silicate bedding, melted and welded themselves to the copper commutator contacts.

We trust that your third attempt will be more successful? We suggest the following modifications:

1. The solid cast armature could be lightened by stacking disks of thin steel plate with light spacers of non-conductive material and sliding that wheel assembly onto the axle as is done with a wagon with a squared hub join. Each plate in that stack, both steel and the spacer, could have holes drilled in the wrap arms / spindles so that further weight reduction is achieved. The whole intent, here, is to reduce the current single cast armature by 300 pounds (136 kg).
2. We think that the shoes for the stator, wire wrapped and mounted by rivets on the bell / yoke, is a fantastic idea to lighten the hoop. The ease of repair, would be further improved by screw mounting the shoes to the bell to ease their replacement. Again, plate stacking the shoes and drilling in holes to lighten each plate is recommended.
3. Furthermore, the bell, itself, could be drilled with holes for air cooling the armature and that bell thickness of 2 inches, (5 cm) could be halved, with little loss in sturdiness throughout the whole assembly. These steps, 2. and 3., could save an additional 300 lbs (136 kg.).
4. Mister B. Fiske recommends a set of non-conductive mica sleeves and steel ball bearings sealed in heavy oil for the armature spin mounts.
5. For the contactors and brushes for the commutator, I have taken that problem out of your hands, as you have proven incompetent in that matter. I have verified that a carbon laminate paper with copper salts embedded into it will suffice for needs. I have supplied an appendix with descriptions as to how you are to make the commutator and the contact brushes. The process is mine and is patented. You will pay me royalties as described, also included in the appendix.

By following these suggestions, we are confident that a dynamo meeting our requirements is not only possible, but well-achievable.

Mister Vanderbilt sends you his regards. He suggests that the end of April will be most acceptable as a due date for the next model submitted to arrive here for testing.

He does not think that your request for reimbursement of $25,000.00 is justified until the dynamo has passed all testing. Anyway; good luck with your next attempt. Please pass on to Mister Miles Greenwood that he is about to be purchased out. We like his company.

Sincerely:
Irene Goss Davenport; DME
BNY

[miletus12]

Mar 20, 2023 18:00:25 GMT miletus12 said:

Diary entry: C. Brush dated 1 February 1876.

Diary entry: C. Brush dated 5 April 1876.

Received two messages about the dynamo. The letter from "that woman" confirmed what I suspected about the dynamo Stinky sent her. I wished he had held up a day, so I could have looked at it. It was overweight by the amount that I feared it would be. I know Stinky thought that he was helping me out by shipping it off as soon as he made it, but that good deed has backfired at us both.

From what else that Miles told me about the contraption, when I visited him this past Monday, and what "that woman" wrote about it in her letter, I began to smell a rotten fish in Boston. I sent Antonio Pacinotti a telegram about it and today I have his reply.

I see a trip to Boston in my immediate future.

[miletus12]

Letter:
47 1st Ave,
Boston, Mass
1 April 1876

Mister Bradley Fiske, MEE
63 Flushing Ave,
Brooklyn, New York

Dear Brad;

I wish to compliment your workshop on the duplication of the steam engine. I thought both the plans and the actual engine had been lost. As you know, Mister J. Ericsson has been a bit difficult as to supplying drawings for it, to us, ever since Thomas Rowland's workshop burned down in that insurance arson last year and his, Ericsson's, papers were lost to the fire. I guess his memory is not what it was.

That you could find and duplicate the achievement based on the recovery of the USS Patapsco wreck is quite remarkable. I would be remiss to note that at 100,000 pounds, the engine will not fit the tram carriage at all, but as you know the revised plan is to convey power to the tramcar by overhead suspended wires and pulley runners to that tramcar for the immediate future, The sheer weight of the steam engine is not at issue for us as this is a proof of concept. We can work on that problem to get it down to the required size once we have proofed all components. The present issue is getting that engine from New York to Boston to operate as the primary rotator for the dynamo, which means I am thinking of using a boat as the powerhouse and supply and as the means to move the engine from where you are to where I am.

Let me know what you think of the idea? We can pass it on to our other friend, Vanderbilt, and maybe he can arrange to have it built.

Your partner in all things connivery:
Irene Goss Davenport; DME
BNY

[575]

Mar 24, 2023 14:47:40 GMT miletus12 said:

Letter:
47 1st Ave,
Boston, Mass
1 April 1876

Mister Bradley Fiske, MEE
63 Flushing Ave,
Brooklyn, New York

Dear Brad;

I wish to compliment your workshop on the duplication of the steam engine. I thought both the plans and the actual engine had been lost. As you know, Mister J. Ericsson has been a bit difficult as to supplying drawings for it, to us, ever since Thomas Rowland's workshop burned down in that insurance arson last year and his, Ericsson's, papers were lost to the fire. I guess his memory is not what it was.

That you could find and duplicate the achievement based on the recovery of the USS Patapsco wreck is quite remarkable. I wopuld be remiss to note that at 100,000 pounds, the engine will not fit the tram carriage at all, but as you know the revised plan is to convey power to the tramcar by overhead suspended wires and pulley runners to that tramcar for the immediate future, The sheer weight of the steam engine is not at issue for us as this is a proof of concept. We can work on that problem to get it down to the required size once we have proofed all components. The present issue is getting that engine from New York to Boston to operate as the primary rotator for the dynamo, which means I am thinking of using a boat as the powerhouse and supply and as the means to move the engine from where you are to where I am.

Let me know what you think of the idea? We can pass it on to our other friend, Vanderbilt, and maybe he can arrange to have it built.

Your partner in all things connivery:
Irene Goss Davenport; DME
BNY

So a tramway to be powered with electricity delivered by a steamengine aboard a boat. Interesting approach but very practical and free the operation of a fixed place for the power production. Future new plant to be placed where practical and land cheap.

Tramway running on rails?