Ash Ejectors


B-rad

Member
Jul 1, 2015
609
214
108
39
Tacoma, WA
sees ash.png sees ash2.png

Found this article written in July 1912, thought I would share it, as its the most detailed description of See's ash ejectors, I've found thus far.
 

B-rad

Member
Jul 1, 2015
609
214
108
39
Tacoma, WA
No. Thanks! I saw the pictures before, but never the description. It answers a bit of a question I had.

The American Engineering and Railroad Journal Vol. LXVII, 1893 (Page 602), states at the time of its publication, that 'See's Hydro-Pneumatic Ash Ejector', had, '...recently been designed and put on the market by Mr. Horace See....'. As the pictures show the patent is 1901, leaving me to scratch my head as to why it wasn't patent for so long. But in the description you have led me to, it clearly states, "In Patent No. 483,770, granted to me October 4, 1892.."

Thanks again!
 

Cam Houseman

Member
Jul 14, 2020
2,214
531
188
16
Maryland, USA
Hi y'all,
where was Titanic's Ash Injector located? I think it's on the Stern, but where?
Here's a picture from "Titanic: Treasure of the Deep" (1992)
1614605314492.png


I appreciate the help :)
 
Mar 1, 2021
17
14
3
18
Kaysville, Utah. U.S
I found this in a post about the disposal of waste. Hope this helps you!

@Cal Haines

The ash hoists were used when the ship was in port and the ash ejectors were used at sea. The hoists were basically a block and tackle powered by a steam cylinder that would lift bags of ash from the boiler room up to E-deck, where they could be disposed of through doors in the ship's side to the pier or a barge. I assume that they lowered the ash buckets down to a man waiting below, but I don't know for sure. The reason that the "ash place" was on E-deck is the need for the door and the fact that it had to be above the bulkhead deck. In all cases, the ash hoists were located next to and above an ash ejector.

The ash ejectors used a jet of pressurized water to carry ash from a hopper in the boiler room up a tube with a curved top and shoot it away from the side of the ship. The fact that they sprayed a slurry of ash and water is doubtless why they were not used in port.

About every four hours a fireman would clean each of the three furnaces under his care, raking the ash and clinkers onto the stokehold plates. The duty of moving the ash from there to the ash ejector or hoist was that of the trimmers. The ash was probably loaded into a wheelbarrow and trucked to the ejector/hoist. I some cases this meant wheeling it through the passage between the boilers. The trimmer might have to break up the clinkers to get them to fit into the ejector.

You will note that in most cases the ejectors were in the aft end of the large boiler rooms. This makes sense, as the pumps that ran the ejectors were also on the aft side of the boiler rooms. The exception is boiler room #4, which had it, ejectors, forward (the pump is still aft)--I can't tell you why the difference.

The single-ended boilers in boiler room #1 were intended for use in port, so they weren't too concerned with access to the ash ejectors. In port, the ash from #1 was wheeled to the ash hoist in #2 or perhaps #3 (if they were disposing of ash from the port side). Apparently, they didn't generate so much ash that the distance was a big problem. If boiler room #1 was used at sea they had ready access to the two ejectors in #2, via the watertight door in the bulkhead.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Nov 14, 2005
2,309
1,204
308
There's some good info in the thread below. When doing your searches you might want to use the word ejectors instead of injectors. Also Mr. Halpern's article has good info on the ejector system. Cheers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

Cam Houseman

Member
Jul 14, 2020
2,214
531
188
16
Maryland, USA
There's some good info in the thread below. When doing your searches you might want to use the word ejectors instead of injectors. Also Mr. Halpern's article has good info on the ejector system. Cheers.
Thanks a Ton Steven! Yeah Sam is awesome
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Nov 14, 2005
2,309
1,204
308
I found this in a post about the disposal of waste. Hope this helps you!

@Cal Haines

The ash hoists were used when the ship was in port and the ash ejectors were used at sea. The hoists were basically a block and tackle powered by a steam cylinder that would lift bags of ash from the boiler room up to E-deck, where they could be disposed of through doors in the ship's side to the pier or a barge. I assume that they lowered the ash buckets down to a man waiting below, but I don't know for sure. The reason that the "ash place" was on E-deck is the need for the door and the fact that it had to be above the bulkhead deck. In all cases, the ash hoists were located next to and above an ash ejector.

The ash ejectors used a jet of pressurized water to carry ash from a hopper in the boiler room up a tube with a curved top and shoot it away from the side of the ship. The fact that they sprayed a slurry of ash and water is doubtless why they were not used in port.

About every four hours a fireman would clean each of the three furnaces under his care, raking the ash and clinkers onto the stokehold plates. The duty of moving the ash from there to the ash ejector or hoist was that of the trimmers. The ash was probably loaded into a wheelbarrow and trucked to the ejector/hoist. I some cases this meant wheeling it through the passage between the boilers. The trimmer might have to break up the clinkers to get them to fit into the ejector.

You will note that in most cases the ejectors were in the aft end of the large boiler rooms. This makes sense, as the pumps that ran the ejectors were also on the aft side of the boiler rooms. The exception is boiler room #4, which had it, ejectors, forward (the pump is still aft)--I can't tell you why the difference.

The single-ended boilers in boiler room #1 were intended for use in port, so they weren't too concerned with access to the ash ejectors. In port, the ash from #1 was wheeled to the ash hoist in #2 or perhaps #3 (if they were disposing of ash from the port side). Apparently, they didn't generate so much ash that the distance was a big problem. If boiler room #1 was used at sea they had ready access to the two ejectors in #2, via the watertight door in the bulkhead.
Don't know why your post didn't show up before. Probably the new browser I'm using with cookies turned off. Anyway good post. Thanks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Dec 27, 2017
76
53
48
Isle of Man
Cam, the picture you posted is a water inlet, probably for the condensers. The ash ejector outlets were round holes in the ships side above the water line.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Keith H

Member
Oct 13, 2017
121
75
73
There were rooms allocated for removal of ash when at port , ash was hoisted up in bags for disposal at port .
ash place.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

Mark Baber

Moderator
Member
Jul 4, 2000
6,367
390
433
Don't know why your post didn't show up before. Probably the new browser I'm using with cookies turned off.
Your browser is fine, at least on this score. Since Keith is a new member, the message required moderator approval before it appeared.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Mike Spooner

Member
Sep 21, 2017
1,070
216
138
Details drawing into the working of the 10 ash ejectors can be found in RMS TITANIC Owners Workshop Manual or TITANIC The Ship Magnificent books. I do have a photo of the item on my iPad but has gone the blink for now to enclose. Will enclosed when fixed. It does raise an interesting question as ash ejectors where used on RMS Aquitania very similar size ship to Titanic. Yet could be used to remove water as well with the bilge pumps to. As for Aquitania could shift 4,500 tons of water per hour as for Titanic 170 tons per hour with bilge pumps only. I may be bit unfair with Titanic as lessons learnt from her loss, could of well had a change plan! Or was just the plain fact the Aquitania was built to Admiralty standards?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users