Engineering, Building, and Architecture

• 

  American Steam Gauge Steam Engine Indicator

  Description

  The American Steam Gauge Co. of Boston, Massachusetts, manufactured this steam engine indicator, serial number 572. It consists of a brass piston with one groove; a brass cylinder; an internal, single wound spring, which can be changed; a large drum with a coil spring and single record. The stylus is missing. Accompanying the indicator is a box with two small wrenches; a packet of record paper with the title on top of the Taylor Engine Company Time Card; and actual engine records on five sheets.

  An engine indicator is an instrument for graphically recording the pressure versus piston displacement through an engine stroke cycle. Engineers use the resulting diagram to check the design and performance of the engine.

  A mechanical indicator consists of a piston, spring, stylus, and recording system. The gas pressure of the cylinder deflects the piston and pushes against the spring, creating a linear relationship between the gas pressure and the deflection of the piston against the spring. The deflection is recorded by the stylus on a rotating drum that is connected to the piston. Most indicators incorporate a mechanical linkage to amplify the movement of the piston to increase the scale of the record.

  When the ratio of the frequency of the pressure variation to the natural frequency of the system is small, then the dynamic deflection is equal to the static deflection. To design a system with a high natural frequency, the mass of the piston, spring, stylus, and mechanical linkage must be small, but the stiffness of the spring must be high. The indicator is subjected to high temperatures and pressures and rapid oscillations, imposing a limitation on the reduction in mass. Too stiff a spring will result in a small displacement of the indicator piston and a record too small to measure with accuracy. Multiplication of the displacement will introduce mechanical ad dynamic errors.

  The parameters of the problem for designing an accurate and trouble free recorder are such that there is no easy or simple solution. Studying the variety of indicators in the collection shows how different inventors made different compromises in their designs.

  Location

  Currently not on view

  ID Number

  1981.0217.08

  accession number

  1981.0217

  catalog number

  1981.0217.08

  Data Source

  National Museum of American History

• 

  Steam Engine Indicator

  Description

  This steam engine indicator consists of a steel piston with three grooves, which can be changed; a vented steel cylinder; an external, double wound spring, which can be changed; and a brass stylus. The drum assembly is missing. Accompanying the indicator is a box with two extra pistons and liners, seven extra springs, and one turn cock.

  An engine indicator is an instrument for graphically recording the pressure versus piston displacement through an engine stroke cycle. Engineers use the resulting diagram to check the design and performance of the engine.

  A mechanical indicator consists of a piston, spring, stylus, and recording system. The gas pressure of the cylinder deflects the piston and pushes against the spring, creating a linear relationship between the gas pressure and the deflection of the piston against the spring. The deflection is recorded by the stylus on a rotating drum that is connected to the piston. Most indicators incorporate a mechanical linkage to amplify the movement of the piston to increase the scale of the record.

  When the ratio of the frequency of the pressure variation to the natural frequency of the system is small, then the dynamic deflection is equal to the static deflection. To design a system with a high natural frequency, the mass of the piston, spring, stylus, and mechanical linkage must be small, but the stiffness of the spring must be high. The indicator is subjected to high temperatures and pressures and rapid oscillations, imposing a limitation on the reduction in mass. Too stiff a spring will result in a small displacement of the indicator piston and a record too small to measure with accuracy. Multiplication of the displacement will introduce mechanical ad dynamic errors.

  The parameters of the problem for designing an accurate and trouble free recorder are such that there is no easy or simple solution. Studying the variety of indicators in the collection shows how different inventors made different compromises in their designs.

  Location

  Currently not on view

  ID Number

  1981.0217.12

  accession number

  1981.0217

  catalog number

  1981.0217.12

  Data Source

  National Museum of American History

• 

  Dreyer, Rosenkranz & Droop Steam Engine Indicator

  Description

  Dreyer, Rosenkranz, & Droop manufactured this steam engine indicator, serial number 10633. It cannot be disassembled for inspection. The stylus is missing.

  An engine indicator is an instrument for graphically recording the pressure versus piston displacement through an engine stroke cycle. Engineers use the resulting diagram to check the design and performance of the engine.

  A mechanical indicator consists of a piston, spring, stylus, and recording system. The gas pressure of the cylinder deflects the piston and pushes against the spring, creating a linear relationship between the gas pressure and the deflection of the piston against the spring. The deflection is recorded by the stylus on a rotating drum that is connected to the piston. Most indicators incorporate a mechanical linkage to amplify the movement of the piston to increase the scale of the record.

  When the ratio of the frequency of the pressure variation to the natural frequency of the system is small, then the dynamic deflection is equal to the static deflection. To design a system with a high natural frequency, the mass of the piston, spring, stylus, and mechanical linkage must be small, but the stiffness of the spring must be high. The indicator is subjected to high temperatures and pressures and rapid oscillations, imposing a limitation on the reduction in mass. Too stiff a spring will result in a small displacement of the indicator piston and a record too small to measure with accuracy. Multiplication of the displacement will introduce mechanical ad dynamic errors.

  The parameters of the problem for designing an accurate and trouble free recorder are such that there is no easy or simple solution. Studying the variety of indicators in the collection shows how different inventors made different compromises in their designs.

  Location

  Currently not on view

  ID Number

  1981.0217.15

  accession number

  1981.0217

  catalog number

  1981.0217.15

  Data Source

  National Museum of American History

• 

  Crosby Steam Engine Indicator

  Description

  Crosby Steam Gauge & Valve Co. of Boston, Massachusetts, manufactured this steam engine indicator, serial number 6163D. It consists of a steel piston with one groove; a vented brass cylinder; an external, double wound spring; a large drum with a spiral spring and a single record; and a pencil lead stylus. Accompanying the indicator is a box with a wrench, a number of pulleys for reduction gear, and a bracket with pivot on end.

  An engine indicator is an instrument for graphically recording the pressure versus piston displacement through an engine stroke cycle. Engineers use the resulting diagram to check the design and performance of the engine.

  A mechanical indicator consists of a piston, spring, stylus, and recording system. The gas pressure of the cylinder deflects the piston and pushes against the spring, creating a linear relationship between the gas pressure and the deflection of the piston against the spring. The deflection is recorded by the stylus on a rotating drum that is connected to the piston. Most indicators incorporate a mechanical linkage to amplify the movement of the piston to increase the scale of the record.

  When the ratio of the frequency of the pressure variation to the natural frequency of the system is small, then the dynamic deflection is equal to the static deflection. To design a system with a high natural frequency, the mass of the piston, spring, stylus, and mechanical linkage must be small, but the stiffness of the spring must be high. The indicator is subjected to high temperatures and pressures and rapid oscillations, imposing a limitation on the reduction in mass. Too stiff a spring will result in a small displacement of the indicator piston and a record too small to measure with accuracy. Multiplication of the displacement will introduce mechanical ad dynamic errors.

  The parameters of the problem for designing an accurate and trouble free recorder are such that there is no easy or simple solution. Studying the variety of indicators in the collection shows how different inventors made different compromises in their designs.

  Location

  Currently not on view

  ID Number

  1981.0217.17

  accession number

  1981.0217

  catalog number

  1981.0217.17

  Data Source

  National Museum of American History

• 

  Shimadzu Photo Recorder

  Description

  Shimadzu manufactured this gas engine indicator. It is a photographic recorder with a four sided mirror for shutter and a drive with pulley and belt to an external motor. A sensing element is enclosed, but no description is available. Accompanying the indicator is a box with a wrench, two film holders and two cans of Kodak exposed film, extra film holder and mirror assembly. Additionally, there are two tool steel parts with short, knife edges, which are probably parts of the sensing element.

  An engine indicator is an instrument for graphically recording the pressure versus piston displacement through an engine stroke cycle. Engineers use the resulting diagram to check the design and performance of the engine.

  A mechanical indicator consists of a piston, spring, stylus, and recording system. The gas pressure of the cylinder deflects the piston and pushes against the spring, creating a linear relationship between the gas pressure and the deflection of the piston against the spring. The deflection is recorded by the stylus on a rotating drum that is connected to the piston. Most indicators incorporate a mechanical linkage to amplify the movement of the piston to increase the scale of the record.

  When the ratio of the frequency of the pressure variation to the natural frequency of the system is small, then the dynamic deflection is equal to the static deflection. To design a system with a high natural frequency, the mass of the piston, spring, stylus, and mechanical linkage must be small, but the stiffness of the spring must be high. The indicator is subjected to high temperatures and pressures and rapid oscillations, imposing a limitation on the reduction in mass. Too stiff a spring will result in a small displacement of the indicator piston and a record too small to measure with accuracy. Multiplication of the displacement will introduce mechanical ad dynamic errors.

  The parameters of the problem for designing an accurate and trouble free recorder are such that there is no easy or simple solution. Studying the variety of indicators in the collection shows how different inventors made different compromises in their designs.

  Location

  Currently not on view

  ID Number

  1981.0217.18

  accession number

  1981.0217

  catalog number

  1981.0217.18

  Data Source

  National Museum of American History

• 

  Lehmann & Michels Gas Engine Indicator

  Description

  Lehmann & Michels manufactured this gas engine indicator, serial number D. R. P. 416623. It is based on patent number 1532692, which was granted to Josef Geiger of Augsburg, Germany, on April 7, 1925.

  The L & M catalog describes this instrument as a Pi-Meter and instrument to measure the mean pressure. There is no record, pointer, or dial. Most likely, it contains a heavy fly wheel that is damped, an impulse of gas pressure each cycle does work on fly wheel, and the work determines the velocity which is transcribed into a mean pressure for each stroke of the piston.

  An engine indicator is an instrument for graphically recording the pressure versus piston displacement through an engine stroke cycle. Engineers use the resulting diagram to check the design and performance of the engine.

  A mechanical indicator consists of a piston, spring, stylus, and recording system. The gas pressure of the cylinder deflects the piston and pushes against the spring, creating a linear relationship between the gas pressure and the deflection of the piston against the spring. The deflection is recorded by the stylus on a rotating drum that is connected to the piston. Most indicators incorporate a mechanical linkage to amplify the movement of the piston to increase the scale of the record.

  When the ratio of the frequency of the pressure variation to the natural frequency of the system is small, then the dynamic deflection is equal to the static deflection. To design a system with a high natural frequency, the mass of the piston, spring, stylus, and mechanical linkage must be small, but the stiffness of the spring must be high. The indicator is subjected to high temperatures and pressures and rapid oscillations, imposing a limitation on the reduction in mass. Too stiff a spring will result in a small displacement of the indicator piston and a record too small to measure with accuracy. Multiplication of the displacement will introduce mechanical ad dynamic errors.

  The parameters of the problem for designing an accurate and trouble free recorder are such that there is no easy or simple solution. Studying the variety of indicators in the collection shows how different inventors made different compromises in their designs.

  Location

  Currently not on view

  ID Number

  1981.0217.19

  accession number

  1981.0217

  catalog number

  1981.0217.19

  Data Source

  National Museum of American History

• 

  Souvenir of the Opening of the East River Bridge, May 24, 1883

  Description

  By the late 19th century, the United States had established itself as a world leader in the area of civil engineering. Perhaps no project better symbolized America's technical prowess than the awe-inspiring Brooklyn Bridge, which connected the nation's largest and third largest cities—New York and Brooklyn, respectively—in 1883 across the turbulent tidal strait known as the East River. The main 1,600-foot (490-meter) span of this towering suspension bridge exceeded the world's longest span by fifty percent.

  The bridge's opening prompted a huge celebration. This white metal medallion was struck to commemorate that occasion. Its obverse proudly proclaims the motto, "Two Cities As One," while the legend on its reverse reads: "Souvenir of the Opening of the East River Bridge, May 24th 1883."

  Location

  Currently not on view

  Date made

  1883

  associated date

  1883-05-24

  ID Number

  1981.0079.01

  accession number

  1981.0079

  catalog number

  1981.0079.01

  Data Source

  National Museum of American History

• 

  Hopkinson Steam Engine Indicator

  Description

  An engine indicator is an instrument for graphically recording the pressure versus piston displacement through an engine stroke cycle. Engineers use the resulting diagram to check the design and performance of the engine. The J. Hopkinson & Company of Huddersfield, England manufactured this steam engine indicator ca 1855. Made of brass, it consists of an internal cylinder and piston which is surrounded by a concentric brass drum holding the recording paper. The piston causes the stylus to rise and fall with pressure changes thereby directly recording the indicator’s pressure-volume diagram output on the paper. Around the drum’s base is wound a cord that is attached to the connecting rod of the piston on the steam engine being measured. This causes the drum to rotate as the engine’s piston moves. An internal coil spring causes the cord to retract and the drum to counter rotate back to its original position as the connecting rod returns.

  The introduction of the steam indicator in the late 1790s and early 1800s by James Watt and others had a great impact on the understanding of how the steam behaved inside the engine's cylinder and thereby enabled much more exacting and sophisticated designs. The devices also changed how the economics and efficiency of steam engines were portrayed and marketed. They helped the prospective owner of a machine better understand how much his fuel costs would be for a given amount of work performed. Measurement of fuel consumed and work delivered by the engine was begun by Watt, who in part justified the selling price of his engines on the amount of fuel cost the purchaser might save compared to an alternate engine. In the early days of steam power, the method to compare engine performance was based on a concept termed the engine’s “duty”. It originally was calculated as the number of pounds of water raised one foot high per one bushel of coal consumed. The duty method was open to criticism due to its inability to take into consideration finer points of efficiency in real world applications of engines . Accurate determination of fuel used in relation to work performed has been fundamental to the design and improvement of all steam-driven prime movers ever since Watt’s time. And, the steam indicators’ key contribution was the accurate measurements of performance while the engine was actually doing the work it was designed to do.

  Location

  Currently not on view

  date made

  ca 1855

  ID Number

  1979.0344.01

  accession number

  1979.0344

  catalog number

  1979.0344.01

  Data Source

  National Museum of American History

• 

  Ship Model, Steam Schooner Royal

  Description

  This model represents a vessel powered by both steam and sail power. An auxiliary schooner, the Royal was one of several built after 1890 for use in the Alaska salmon fishery. Tenders like the Royal transported workers and supplies, and carried fish packed at remote canneries. The model shows a deckhouse with a pilothouse forward, a fish hatch, and a slide companionway to the forecastle.

  The Royal was built in 1891 by Matthew Turner at Benicia, California. Turner, born in Ohio in 1825, grew up on the shores of Lake Erie, where he learned about fishing and the ship-building trades. In 1850 he joined the throngs of fortune-seekers heading to the California gold rush. After some success in the gold fields, he returned east but was soon back on the West Coast, where he organized a trading company that shipped lumber and other cargoes. He also began building ships, and in 1882 he moved his operations to Benicia, on Suisun Bay, northeast of San Francisco. A prolific builder, Turner launched some 228 sailing vessels in his career. The site of Turner’s Benicia shipyard was registered as a California Historical Landmark in 1987.

  date made

  1891

  maker

  Turner, Matthew

  ID Number

  TR.076238

  catalog number

  076238

  accession number

  28022

  Data Source

  National Museum of American History

• 

  Ship Model, Catcher-Processor Alaska Ocean

  Description

  This scale model of the fishing vessel Alaska Ocean was custom-built for the Smithsonian by Erik A. R. Ronnberg Jr., at his shop in Rockport, Massachusetts. The starboard hull is cut away to reveal the factory where workers process tons of fish into blocks of frozen fillets, minced fish, and surimi (used in making imitation crab meat and other food products). The cutaway also shows the laboratory where fish products are tested, the freezer hold, a stateroom, and the galley. On the weather (top) deck, the model features all of the deck machinery, the trawling equipment, and the vessel’s rigging. A net full of fish is shown being emptied into one of the bins on the factory floor below.

  Ronnberg spent about 27 months building the model, and estimates he spent 5,500 hours getting every detail right. While he built the wooden hull according to design drawings provided by naval architect Guido Perla of Seattle, he had to make his own drawings and patterns to craft the machinery and equipment, most of which are cast in metal. Ronnberg used cheesecloth and tulle to make the net and spent untold hours fashioning the chafing gear out of acrylic yarn, which he knotted in bunches before separating the strands by hand.

  He studied photographs and films of the actual vessel at sea, and made detailed figures of people dressed in appropriate working gear in the factory, on the deck, in the fish hold, in the galley, and on the bridge. The model is populated with 125 figures, 1,200 individual fish, and several masses of fish in the cod end of the net. Everything on the model is painted by hand. The scale is 3/16^th inch = 1 foot.

  The Alaska Ocean itself is a 376-foot-long vessel in the Seattle-based catcher-processor fleet. Workers catch, process, package, and freeze groundfish—mostly pollock and Pacific whiting—in the Bering Sea and in the waters off the coast of the Pacific Northwest. The vessel can harvest about 325 metric tons of fish per day and can freeze over 250,000 pounds of fish product daily.

  The idea to build the Alaska Ocean began in the late 1980s. Jeff Hendricks, a fisherman from Anacortes, Washington, who owned and operated a fleet of boats in partnership with a Japanese company, decided to “Americanize” his operations. This was in advance of the American Fisheries Act of 1998, which sought to increase American ownership in the fleet by requiring that vessels be American-built, owned, and operated. Although Hendricks sought bids from several American shipyards for his new venture, there were none at the time that could handle the scope of the vessel he envisioned. Eventually, he worked with a shipbuilder in Norway to expand and rebuild an American oil supply vessel. The Alaska Ocean arrived in Anacortes in the summer of 1990 and began fishing that fall with a largely local crew. It remains in the fleet and, as of 2008, is owned and operated by Glacier Fish Company.

  Because catcher-processors are so efficient, their operations are highly regulated to prevent overfishing. A harvest quota is determined by the National Marine Fisheries Service and members of the Pollock Conservation Cooperative, a group of catcher-processors including the Alaska Ocean, divide up the quota amongst themselves. This self-regulating measure ends what is often called the "race for fish," and results in more careful, less wasteful fishing.

  Independent scientific observers also travel aboard every vessel in the fleet, monitoring the trawling and empyting operations. They record all by-catch, the term for fish caught in the net other than the target species. There are hard limits on allowable by-catch for certain species, and because the data are computed, reported, and shared for the fleet as a whole, individual vessels are motivated to monitor the by-catch and make adjustments.

  date made

  2009

  ID Number

  2009.0080.01

  accession number

  2009.0080

  catalog number

  2009.0080.01

  Data Source

  National Museum of American History

• 

  R2-D2, from Return of the Jedi

  Description

  In the fictional universe of George Lucas' Star Wars films, robots called droids (short for android) come in many shapes and serve many purposes. Two droids-R2-D2 and C-3PO-have won enormous popularity for their supporting roles in all six of the series. In the collections of the museum are costumes of R2-D2 and C-3PO from "Return of the Jedi," released in 1983 and the third film in the Star Wars series.

  Designed from artwork by Ralph McQuarrie in 1975, R2-D2 looks more like a small blue-and-white garbage can than a human being. In the films, R2-D2 is the type of droid built to interface with computers and service starships-a kind of super technician suited for tasks well beyond human capability. By turns comic and courageous, this helpmate communicates with expressive squeals and head spins, lumbers on stubby legs, and repeatedly saves the lives of human masters .

  Several R2-D2 units, specialized according to function and edited into a final composite, were used for making a single movie scene. Some units were controlled remotely. Others, like this one, were costume shells, in which actor Kenny Baker sat and manipulated the droid movements.

  R2-D2's sidekick and character foil, also based on art by Ralph McQuarrie, is C-3PO. Termed a protocol droid in the films, C-3PO can speak six million languages and serves the diverse cultures of Lucas' imaginary galaxy as a robotic diplomat and translator. Where R2 is terse, 3PO is talkative. Where R2 is brave, 3PO is often tentative and sometimes downright cowardly. Where R2 looks like a machine, 3PO-in spite of the distinctive gold "skin" -more closely resembles a human in movements, vision, and intelligence

  In each of the Star Wars films, actor Anthony Daniels wore the C-3PO costumes. Like the R2-D2 units, more than one C-3PO costume was used for each movie.

  The Star Wars films are much more than pop entertainment. Since the first of the series was released in 1977, they have been so immensely popular that they have become cultural reference points for successive American generations. And like other popular works of science fiction, they play a powerful role in shaping our vision of the future.

  Likewise, the droids are more than movie stars in these influential films. They are also indicators of the place of robots in the American experience. Conceived at a time when more robots inhabited the imaginative worlds of science fiction than the real world, R2-D2 and C-3PO represent the enduring dream of having robots as personal servants, to do things we will not or cannot do for ourselves. Today, real robots are more numerous. They mostly work on industrial production lines, but researchers are working to extend the use of robots for tasks not humanly possible. It is likely we will see more of them in the future--as aids for medicine and surgery, for military and security, and even for exploring, if not a galaxy far away, at least the far reaches of our own solar system.

  Location

  Currently not on view

  ID Number

  1984.0302.01

  catalog number

  1984.0302.01

  accession number

  1984.0302

  Data Source

  National Museum of American History

• 

  C-3PO, from Return of the Jedi

  Description

  In the fictional universe of George Lucas' Star Wars films, robots called droids (short for android) come in many shapes and serve many purposes. Two droids--R2-D2 and C-3PO--have won enormous popularity for their supporting roles in all six of the series. In the collections of the museum are costumes of R2-D2 and C-3PO from "Return of the Jedi," released in 1983 and the third film in the Star Wars series.

  Designed from artwork by Ralph McQuarrie in 1975, R2-D2 looks more like a small blue-and-white garbage can than a human being. In the films, R2-D2 is the type of droid built to interface with computers and service starships--a kind of super technician suited for tasks well beyond human capability. By turns comic and courageous, this helpmate communicates with expressive squeals and head spins, lumbers on stubby legs, and repeatedly saves the lives of human masters.

  Several R2-D2 units, specialized according to function and edited into a final composite, were used for making a single movie scene. Some units were controlled remotely. Others, like this one, were costume shells, in which actor Kenny Baker sat and manipulated the droid movements.

  R2-D2's sidekick and character foil, based on art by Ralph McQuarrie, is C-3PO. Termed a protocol droid in the films, C-3PO serves the diverse cultures of Lucas' imaginary galaxy as a robotic diplomat and translator, speaking six million languages. Where R2 is terse, 3PO is talkative. Where R2 is brave, 3PO is often tentative and sometimes downright cowardly. Where R2 looks like a machine, 3PO--in spite of the distinctive gold "skin"--more closely resembles a human in movements, vision, and intelligence.

  In each of the Star Wars films, actor Anthony Daniels wore the C-3PO costumes. Like the R2-D2 units, more than one C-3PO costume was used for each movie.

  The Star Wars, films are much more than pop entertainment. Since the first of the series was released in 1977, they have been so immensely popular that they have become cultural reference points for successive American generations. And like other popular works of science fiction, they play a powerful role in shaping our vision of the future. Likewise, the droids are more than movie stars in these influential films. They are also indicators of the place of robots in the American experience. Conceived at a time when robots inhabited the imaginative worlds of science fiction rather than the real world, R2-D2 and C-3PO represent the enduring dream of having robots as personal servants, to do things we will not or cannot do for ourselves. Today, real robots are more numerous. They mostly work on industrial production lines, but researchers are working to extend the use of robots for tasks not humanly possible. It is likely we will see more of them in the future--as aids for medicine and surgery, for military and security, and even for exploring, if not a galaxy far away, at least the far reaches of our own solar system.

  ID Number

  1984.0302.02

  accession number

  1984.0302

  catalog number

  1984.0302.02

  Data Source

  National Museum of American History

• 

  Factory Gates

  Description

  This pair of iron gates from the 1870s hung in the Dobson textile mill in Philadelphia, Penn., until 1991.

  In the late 18th century most workers were farmers or artisans, accustomed to overseeing their own work and schedules, and setting the pace of their work by the seasons and centuries-old traditions. With the rise of the factory system of production in the 19th century, managers sought to mold workers into disciplined and coordinated armies of employees. They tried to regulate each laborer's schedule, pace, and work habits. They prohibited amusements, reading, games, and consumption of alcohol—diversions that had been permitted in the flexible work schedule of artisans' shops.

  Fences around factories protected property and symbolically established who was in control. A fence forced workers to file through a gate past a timekeeper's office. Americans who worked in textile mills were among the first to experience the new relationship between managers and workers. Not everyone adapted to the new rules. Some workers found ways to continue to control their own work, formed unions to enforce their own work rules, or quit.

  user

  Dobson Mill

  owner of the mill

  Dobson, John

  ID Number

  1991.0731.01

  accession number

  1991.0731

  catalog number

  1991.0731.01

  Data Source

  National Museum of American History

• 

  Joseph Francis Life-Car

  Description

  As maritime traffic expanded in the early 19th century, especially with the rise in passenger travel, water safety became a top priority for American shipping inventors. This life-car, patented by Joseph Francis in 1845, was one of the most successful life-preserving devices developed at the time. Buoyant and pod-shaped, the metal life-car was used to rescue shipwreck victims when the vessel was foundering near land. While standing on the beach, a person from a lifesaving station used a cannon-like gun to shoot sturdy lines out to the ship, which would then be tied to the ship’s mast. The life-car was attached to, and pulled, along these lines. Up to four people were bolted into the airtight compartment. They laid flat as they were hauled through the rough waters to the safety of the shore.

  This life-car was first used on January 12, 1850, to rescue the stranded British bark Ayrshire. The ship, most likely filled with Irish immigrants fleeing the potato famine, ran aground on a sand bar off the New Jersey shore at Squan Beach, now known as Manasquan. A blinding snow storm made the ocean too dangerous to launch a surfboat, the usual method of rescue, so local lifesavers decided to launch the newly installed, experimental life-car. Although never tested in an actual emergency, the Francis life-car performed as envisioned.

  Out of 166 passengers and 36 crew members on the Ayrshire, only one was lost, perhaps needlessly, in the short journey from ship to shore. A male passenger insisted on riding on top of the life-car while his family inside was hauled to safety. He could not hold on and was washed away by the surf. Over the next three years, this device rescued at least 1,400 people on the New Jersey shore alone, as well as countless amounts of valuable cargo. The original, groundbreaking life-car used in the Ayrshire wreck was donated to the Smithsonian Institution by Joseph Francis in 1885.

  date made

  late 1840s

  patented

  1845

  Life-Car first used to rescue Ayrshire

  1850-01-12

  Life-Car donated to the Smithsonian Institution

  1885

  patentee

  Francis, Joseph

  ID Number

  TR.160322

  catalog number

  160322

  accession number

  16136

  Data Source

  National Museum of American History

• 

  Ship Model, Columbia River Salmon Boat

  Description

  This model represents the type of small boat used for gill-netting salmon on the lower Columbia River around 1876. Known as sailing gillnetters, these vessels were well suited to the tasks of fishermen working drift nets, which were walls of netting set across the path of salmon swimming upstream. The round-bottom hull is sharp on both ends, a feature that allowed the boat to ride more easily while the net was adrift. Its sprit rig was used for sailing to and from the fishing grounds and was easily stowed while fishing. The boats ranged between 23 and 28 feet in length. This model represents a vessel of 25 feet 6 inches in length, 6 feet 3 inches abeam, and 2 feet 3 inches in depth.

  The sailing gillnetter type was introduced to the Columbia River region between 1869 and 1872 and quickly replaced the smaller skiffs then in use. The early gillnetters were shipped north from boat builders in San Francisco, but by 1875 the type was being built locally. While a few fishermen purchased their own boats, the vast majority were owned by salmon canneries, which rented the vessels to local fishermen. When this model was made in 1876, there were about 500 sailing gillnetters on the river. By 1905 there were some 2,700.

  This model was donated by Livingston Stone, an early advocate of fish hatcheries, who served as Deputy Commissioner of Fisheries for the Pacific coast from 1872 to 1898, and senior fish culturist of the U.S. Fish Commission from 1898 to 1903.

  Date made

  before 1876

  ID Number

  TR.22216

  accession number

  5201

  catalog number

  22216

  Data Source

  National Museum of American History

• 

  Merritt Propelling Apparatus, Patent Model

  Description

  This brass, steel, and wood patent model accompanied the patent application for Daniel S. Merritt's crank paddle, which claimed advancement over the common steamboat paddle wheel. The application received patent number 89,231 on April 20, 1869. Merritt, a resident of Mount Morris, Michigan, also held a patent for increasing the motion of an engine (no. 81,393; August 25, 1868).

  The principle of this invention is similar to that of other steamboat paddles patented in the nineteenth century. Sets of paddles are fastened to a common frame or bar. Using cranks, the paddles are plunged into the water, swept backward, and then lifted clear for another pass, in a manner similar to the action of oars. There is little in Merritt's design to set it apart from the others, except that the depth of his paddles in the water is adjustable, to suit variations in draft of the vessel. Merritt claimed that "no swell is caused by these paddles, rendering them particularly applicable to the propulsion of vessels upon canals," where swells tended to erode the canal banks.

  Location

  Currently not on view

  Date made

  1869

  patent date

  1869-04-20

  inventor

  Merritt, Daniel S.

  ID Number

  TR.308547

  catalog number

  308547

  accession number

  89797

  patent number

  89,231

  Data Source

  National Museum of American History

• 

  Half Model, Fishing Schooner Helen B. Thomas

  Description

  Unlike most of the half-hull models in the Smithsonian’s National Watercraft Collection, this one was not intended for use in shipbuilding. Instead, this half model of the fishing schooner Helen B. Thomas was made to show a radical design innovation to potential vessel owners. Its maker, Thomas F. McManus, a naval architect in Boston, adapted an idea from sailing yachts to the fishing schooners of New England. He eliminated the bowsprit, the spar projecting forward from the schooner’s bow, in an attempt to make the vessel safer for the fishermen working in treacherous conditions far offshore. In McManus’s new design, fishermen would not have to clamber out on the bowsprit to tend the jib (the vessel’s forward-most sail), a dangerous task especially in bad weather that, in McManus’s view, resulted too often in injury or death.

  McManus made this half-hull model and displayed it in his Boston office, hoping to attract a client. After nearly a year, Capt. William Thomas of Portland, Maine, decided to try the design and contracted with the Oxner & Story yard in Essex, Mass., to build the schooner. The Helen B. Thomas was launched in 1902 and measured 106’-7” overall, with a beam (width) of 21’-6” and 13’ deep. The vessel became a successful fishing schooner. While no other schooners were built to this exact design, many were built without the bowsprit, a schooner design that became known as the “knockabout.”

  date made

  1901

  Associated Date

  early 20th century

  ship built from model design

  1902

  Captain who contracted the design

  Thomas, William

  contractors who built the ship

  Oxner & Story

  maker

  McManus, Thomas F.

  ID Number

  TR.310888

  catalog number

  310888

  accession number

  131237

  Data Source

  National Museum of American History

• 

  Model, Liberty Ship

  Description

  This model represents one of the 2,710 Liberty ships built during World War II. The designation EC2-S-C1 was the standard designation of the dry cargo Liberty ships that were used by the United States Merchant Marine to transport nearly anything needed by the Allies. Whether in Europe, Africa, or the Pacific, most of the essential supplies arrived on ships, including tanks, ammunition, fuel, food, toilet paper, cigarettes, and even the troops themselves. Manning these vessels was a dangerous task, as the merchant vessels faced tremendous losses from submarines, mines, destroyers, aircraft, kamikaze fighters, and the unpredictable elements of the various destinations. One in 26 merchant mariners died during the war, a higher fatality rate than that of any branch of the armed forces.

  Even before the United States was officially involved in World War II, shipyards on the Atlantic, Pacific, and Gulf coasts were building Liberty ships. Drawing from lessons learned at Hog Island in the First World War, Liberty ships were standardized and designed to be built quickly and efficiently. Using new welding technology, workers pieced together prefabricated sections in assembly-line fashion. This largely replaced the labor-intensive method of riveting, while lowering the cost and speeding up production. While it took about 230 days to build one Liberty ship in the first year, the average construction time eventually dropped to 42 days, with three new ships being launched each day in 1943.

  President Franklin Delano Roosevelt attended the launching of the first Liberty ship on September 27, 1941, at the Bethlehem-Fairfield Shipyard in Baltimore, Maryland. The ship was the SS Patrick Henry, named after the Revolutionary War hero whose famous “Give me Liberty or give me Death!” speech inspired the ships’ nickname. At the launching of the first “ugly duckling,” the President’s name for the stout and functional Liberty ships, he praised the shipyard workers: “With every new ship, they are striking a telling blow at the menace to our nation and the liberty of the free peoples of the world.” President Roosevelt proclaimed that these ships would help to bring a new kind of liberty to people around the world.

  date made

  early 1940s

  launching of first Liberty Ship, SS Patrick Henry

  1941-09-27

  attended first launching

  Roosevelt, Franklin Delano

  ID Number

  TR.313022

  accession number

  170015

  catalog number

  313022

  Data Source

  National Museum of American History

• 

  Ship Model, Victory Ship Type VC2-S-AP

  Description

  By 1943, the outlook for an Allied victory in World War II was steadily improving. The reign of the U-boats that had plagued Allied convoys in the Battle of the Atlantic was coming to an end. And the Axis powers were finally losing the tonnage war, which aimed to sink Allied merchant ships faster than replacements could be built. While the mass-produced Liberty ships were faithfully carrying cargo and troops to war zones, these ships were relatively slow. In response, the War Shipping Administration commissioned a new class of emergency vessels called Victory ships. This model represents one of the 534 Victory ships that were built alongside the Liberty ships in seven shipyards around the country.

  Speed was the key difference between the Victory and Liberty ships. When Liberty ships were designed, all of the new steam turbine engines were reserved for naval vessels, leaving the Liberty ships with reciprocating steam engines. While these engines were reliable, the ships could only reach 11 knots, leaving them vulnerable to attack. As the war progressed, more turbine engines became available and were installed in the Victory ships, giving them a speed of over 16 knots.

  Another improvement of the Victory design was a stronger and larger hull. This meant that more cargo could be transported at once, and improved the odds of the vessels continuing to serve in the merchant fleet during times of peace. After World War II, 170 Victory ships were sold as commercial freighters. About 20 were loaned back to the military and used in the Korean and Vietnam Wars. Several Victory ships have been preserved as museum ships and are currently located in California and Florida.

  date made

  early 1940s

  commissioned Victory ships like the ones this model represents

  War Shipping Administration

  ID Number

  TR.313023

  catalog number

  TR*313023

  accession number

  170015

  Data Source

  National Museum of American History

• 

  Ship Model, Tanker Type T2-SE-A1

  Description

  Although dry cargo freighters like the Liberty and Victory ships are probably the best-known emergency vessels of World War II, oil tankers were also mass produced in American shipyards and played an important role in the Allied victory. This model represents the most common type of tanker, T2-SE-A1, a commercial design that before the war started was already being constructed by the Sun Shipbuilding Company for Standard Oil. After the attack on Pearl Harbor, the United States Maritime Commission recognized that wet cargo like oil and machine lubricants would be just as necessary as guns and ammunition. The commission ordered this design to be built, in addition to the dry cargo designs.

  Like the Victory ship, the T2 tanker was outfitted with a steam turbine engine that gave the vessel a speed of over 14 knots. Tankers were also built at some of the same shipyards as the other merchant vessels, and experienced a similar construction time average of about 70 days. But unlike the Victory or Liberty ships, no T2 tankers have survived to become museum ships, and only one remains afloat in the National Defense Reserve Fleet, mothballed in Beaumont, Texas.

  date made

  early 1940s

  built tankers typical to this model

  Sun Shipbuilding and Dry Dock Company

  purchased tankers typical to this model

  Standard Oil

  ID Number

  TR.313036

  catalog number

  313036

  accession number

  173712

  Data Source

  National Museum of American History

Pages