RUBBER TIRES FOR TRACTION ENGINES.
When it was first discovered that a smooth-faced driving wheel, running on a smooth-faced rail, would "bite," the era of iron railways and locomotive engines may be said to have fairly commenced. The correction of a single radical error was, in this case, the dawn of a new system of travel, so extensive in its growth and marvelous in its results, that even the wildest dreamer could not, at that time, have imagined the consequences of so simple a discovery.
A popular and somewhat similar error regarding the bite of wheels on rough and uneven surfaces, has also prevailed. We say popular error, because engineers have not shared it, and it has obtained, to any notable extent, only among those unfamiliar with mechanical science. The error in question is, that hard-surfaced wheels will not bite on a moderately rough surface, sufficiently to give an efficient tractile power. It seems strange that this error should have diffused itself very extensively, when it is remembered that a certain degree of roughness is essential to frictional resistance. The smoothness of the ordinary railway track is roughness compared to that of an oiled or unctuous metallic surface; and it has been amply demonstrated that the resistance of friction, of two bearing surfaces depends, not upon their extent, but upon the pressure with which they are forced together. A traction wheel, of given weight, resting upon two square inches of hard earth or rock, would develop the same tractile power as though it had a bearing surface of two square feet of similar material.
On very rough and stony ways, however, another element practically of no importance on moderately rough ways, like a macadam surface or a concrete road, where the prominences are nearly of uniform hight, and so near together as to admit between their summits only very small arcs of the circumference of the wheel; comes into action. This element is the constantly recurring lifting of the superincumbent weight of the machine. Even this would not result in loss of power, could the power developed in falling be wholly applied to useful work in the direction of the advance of the engine. The fact is, however, that it is not so applied, and in any method of propulsion at present known to engineering science, cannot be so applied. Above a certain point where friction enough is developed to prevent slip, the more uneven the road surface is, the greater the power demanded for the propulsion of the locomotive. And this will hold good for both hard and soft-tired wheels.
What then is the advantage, if any, of rubber-tired wheels? The advantages claimed may be enumerated as follows: increased tractile power, with a given weight, secured without damage to roadways; ease of carriage to the supported machinery, whereby it—the machinery—is saved from stress and wear; and economy of the power, expended in moving the extra weight required by rigid-tired wheels, to secure the required frictional resistance. The last-mentioned claim depends upon the first, and must stand or fall with it. The saving of roadway, ease of carriage, and its favorable result upon the machinery, are generally conceded.
A denial of the first claim has been made, by those interested in the manufacture of rigid-tired traction engines and others, in so far as the rubber tires are employed on comparatively smooth surfaces; although the increased tractile power on quite rough pavements and roads is acknowledged.
This denial is based upon results of experiments performed on the streets of Rochester, England, between the 9th October and the 2nd November, 1870, by a committee of the Royal Engineers (British Army), with a view to determine accurately the point in question.
Care was taken to make the circumstances, under which the trials took place, exactly alike for both the rubber and the iron tires. The experiments were performed with an Aveling and Porter six-horse power road engine, built in the Royal Engineers' establishment. The weight of the engine, without rubber tires, was 11,225 pounds; with rubber tires, it weighed 12,025 pounds. Without rubber tires it drew 2.813 times its own weight up a gradient of 1 in [missing]; with rubber tires, it drew up the same incline 2.763 times the weight of engine, with the weight of rubber tires added; showing that, although it drew a little over 2,200 pounds more than it could do without the rubber tires, the increase of traction was only that which might be expected from the additional weight.
It is claimed, moreover, that the additional traction power and superior ease of carriage on rough roads, secured with rubber tires, is dearly bought at the very great increase in cost, of an engine fitted with them, over one not so fitted.