Talk:Newcomen atmospheric engine
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Newcomen atmospheric engine article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 Archives (Index) |
|
This page is archived by ClueBot III.
|
Papin
editI perceive a conflict between the discussion of Papin in this article and the article on him and other sources I've seen:
The section of this article on [[Newcomen atmospheric engine# Denis Papin's experimental steam cylinder and piston|Denis Papin's experimental steam cylinder and piston]] ends with, "Although the engine certainly worked as far as it went, it was devised merely to demonstrate the principle and having got this far, Papin never developed it further, although in his paper he did write about the potential of boats driven by "firetubes". Instead he allowed himself to be distracted into developing a variant of the Savery engine."
I don't see a source for this statement, and it seems inconsistent with the discussion on the Wikipedia article on Denis Papin. That article says that "in about 1687, he left [France] to take up an academic post in Germany. ... Several of his papers were put before the Royal Society between 1707 and 1712 [including] a description of his 1690 atmospheric steam engine, similar to that built and [subsequently[ put into use by Thomas Newcomen in 1712."
I believe the Wikipedia article on Papin seems to be more consistent with other things I've read, and I'm therefore modifying this article to reduce this apparent inconsistency. DavidMCEddy (talk) 01:50, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
10 gallons (54.6litres)
editIn the pump section, which I was wondering what it looked like, actually would appreciate for more information and images. But I think the 10 gallons to liters number is incorrect, which should be 37.85 liters instead of 54.6. 92.118.204.186 (talk) 21:48, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Neither is correct as the measurement is in imperial gallons, not US gallons. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 22:18, 1 March 2024 (UTC)