|
Commentary
by Industry Veterans
Back
to Top
|
RAY
BERRY, PRESIDENT, GALLAHER & SPECK
Few people realize that Chicago was a pioneer in many phases of
the construction field. This was due in part to the disastrous effects
of the Great Fire of October 8, 1871, which destroyed 30% of the
total property value of that day. In all, about 18,000 buildings
were burned.
The loss of all these
buildings probably made Chicago's building program of the next two
decades the greatest in American history. The architects and owners
had learned their lessons and instituted new features and methods
that gave Chicago a position of leadership in the construction industry,
which it did not relinquish for many years. It was the birthplace
of modern skeleton construction, a term applying to buildings in
which external and internal loads are transmitted to the foundation
by a framework of metal or reinforced concrete, either separately
or in combination. The Tacoma Building, erected in 1890, was the
first riveted steel building, although I believe now the Home Insurance
Building, finished in 1885 with bolted construction, is acknowledged
to be the first skeleton skyscraper. Incidentally, the young firm
of George A. Fuller built the Tacoma on a negotiated basis, as there
was no way to accurately estimate what the cost would be with this
untried technology.
It was said that by 1895
there were more steel skeleton type buildings in Chicago than in
all the other cities in the country put together. The 21-story Masonic
Temple which was built in 1895 was the nation's tallest building
and was not equaled in height until 1905, when the Majestic went
up. It was not surpassed until 1909 when the 22-story Blackstone
and LaSalle hotels were erected. It was 1914 before the 60-story
Woolworth Building took the record to New York City where it stayed.
However, for 22 years, other cities had to look to Chicago for the
tallest buildings.
Although it was 1964
before Chicago had its first steam elevator in the Charles B. Farwell
store, several years after this type appeared in New York City,
the first practical elevator can be said to have been installed
in Chicago. In 1870, C.W. Baldwin invented and installed the first
hydraulic elevator in a store for Burley and Co. on Lake Street.
One of the first Otis patent steam passenger elevators was installed
in the Honore Building, but was burned out one year later. J.W.
Reedy put an elevator in the six-story Lord & Smith Building in
1872, and Davis steam-hoisting elevators were installed in the Henderson
Building in the same year. All this, of course, was before my time,
but I do recall that the 12-story Merchants Loan Building had the
Fraser elevators with their very elaborate roping arrangement. These
elevators ran until 1933 after 33 years of service. Another unusual
device was the Cruickshank Safety which operated against a column
of wire ropes instead of the guide rails for Marshall Field & Co.
for about 25 years, beginning abut 45 years ago.
The entire parking system
for the Pure Oil Building Garage was designed and built by the Wheeler
Elevator Co. The motors were supplied by the Imperial Electric Co.
and the controllers and accessories by the C.J. Anderson Co. The
fire doors and guides were furnished by St. Louis Fire Door Co.,
according to Wheeler specifications, but the operating mechanism
was designed and manufactured by Wheeler. After the garage project,
Gallaher and Speck bought Wheeler, and C.W. Wheeler became associated
with the new company as chief engineer. He was a very ingenious
man and designed many unusual applications outside the elevator
field, including exterior prison doors, doors weighing many tons
for arsenals, the Argonne National Laboratory and special bridge-lifting
equipment.
As I mentioned, Chicago
was a pioneer in many respects. Back in 1920 when the Chicago Tribune
offered US $100,000 in prizes for an architectural plan, Finland's
Saarinen submitted a new concept of tall office building design
that was to set a pattern for all future office buildings in its
completely functional and vertical design. It did away with cornices,
belt course and imitation of classic architecture. He had a great
influence on architecture, just as Chicago had a great influence
on all other cities of the nation.
|
Back
to Top
|
FRANK
BUCKRIDGE: THE PEELLE CO., RETIRED
I remember when I was young, a boy started out in a manufacturing
industry cleaning up the premises. I became a "shop cat," the low
man on the totem pole who did all the lugging and scrubbing. This
was with the Peerless Engineering Co. Around 1914, there wasn't
the kind of delivery service we find today and anything within ten
blocks was carried. If it was a five horsepower motor, you lugged
it alone; if it was 100 feet of conduit, another shop cat got on
the other end. Working for Elevator Supplies, Gurney and A.B. See,
I moved from shop cat to apprentice, second-class helper and finally,
mechanic. Of course, we had the union then, and it was tough to
graduate from one grade to another as the examinations were difficult,
and you had to have a recommendation from the mechanic you had worked
under as well as the employer. I believe you had to be an apprentice
two years and a helper one year.
The helper carried a
regular machine shop for the mechanic in a big leather bag with
a strap, and those tools went home every night; all 50 pounds of
them. There were no dainty tools as we have today; everything was
heavy, and the main asset of the helper was enough muscle to carry
that tremendous bag. He had to know how to do one other thing, when
he got on the job, secure a box for the mechanic to sit on. A good
helper made US $8.00 a week; an average mechanic made US $12.00
and a top mechanic made US $18.00.
I got into the door business
with the Quincy Elevator Gate Co. in the late 1920s. Of course,
wooden gates were popular then and it was before the counterbalanced
door gained wide acceptance. We made a vertical collapsing gate
that was operated by a penthouse machine. Later I managed the Door-Motive
Co. of Detroit until Peelle bought it out. Master door-operating
units in the penthouse were popular until the individual motor-driven
sheaves were invented.
As sales manager and
later vice-president for Peelle, I had contact with elevator companies
all over the country, and two of the most important things I saw
happen in our industry were the emphasis on maintenance and the
ability of the elevator companies to sell directly to the customer.
It's strange that in
the past few years there should be such a great stress on the part
of subcontractors to get out from under the general contractors.
The elevator companies, led by Otis, recognized the value of this
many years ago. Our industry was a pioneer in this concept. You
also hear an emphasis now on the evils of bid-peddling as if this
were something just invented. You couldn't even trust some of the
public stenographers in the old days; you'd borrow her typewriter,
instead, to fill in your bid. A sealed bid was no security at some
of those openings. It got so bad that the architect or owner would
pass down the aisle with a basket, and each bidder would throw in
his envelope a few seconds before opening time.
The salesmen of those
days had to be hard entertainers, and the strain broke some good
men. Now a salesman has to be a good technical man instead of being
able to hold his liquor. Speaking of technical men, the old time
mechanic was a far better mechanical man than his counterpart today.
He practically had to build an elevator in the field and many of
the men were fine machinists as well. Now the technicians are in
the factories, and the equipment comes out in more of a package.
Of course, the present-day elevator constructor is in another world
from the old-timer, electrically.
|
Back
to Top
|
W.B.
GERVAIS: HISTORY OF THE COUNTER-BALANCED DOOR
On February 24, 1874, a patent was issued under No. 147,853 to J.W.
Meaker for the Meaker or counter-balanced door for freight elevator
shafts. It is my understanding that a patent of a similar nature
was issued in England, but was used more for window purposes than
for elevator doors or safety devices of this description.
Mr. Peter B. White, an
engineer of the city of Chicago, realized the usefulness of this
patent or device more for safety purposes than for fire and enlisted
the cooperation of the W.H. Chenoweth Co. who were then the pioneer
ornamental and steel door manufacturers in Chicago. This company
introduced the Meaker door for the purpose of safety devices rather
than fire.
(I
herewith show a small illustration [Figure 1] of how this particular
door was made and call attention to the fact that doors erected
in one plane, a 7' opening required a 14'6" floor height.)
The W.H. Chenoweth Co.
continued to manufacture these doors solely until the patents expired.
I associated myself with the W.H. Chenoweth Co. in 1890. Then, on
the first of January, 1893, became one of the managers of the Variety
Manufacturing Co.
When the Chicago Auditorium
Building was built in 1888, a number of Meaker doors were erected
in this building. They were made of a 1 x 1 x 1/4" angle, of No.
24 gauge corrugated steel. Light Morton chain was used running over
No. 4 Moore sheaves. Up to this date, these doors are giving perfect
satisfaction. I could name dozens of buildings in which these doors
were erected and are still in working order in 1927.
In
the latter part of 1895, we were asked to erect doors in the Young
Women's Christian Association on Michigan Boulevard, then known
as Michigan Avenue. These floor heights were exceedingly low and
not enough space existed between the elevator shaft and the floor
to put in staggered guide doors.
As necessity is the mother
of invention, Mr. W.A. Cross, one of the engineers of the Variety
Manufacturing Co., designed a door which would take up much less
space in the shaft and required only 10'10" from floor to floor
for a 7' clear opening. (I show herewith a small cut [Figure 2]
illustrating how this was accomplished.)
Patents were issued for
this door which was known as the Cross Improved Elevator Door on
May 19, 1896, and of the thousands that were erected by the Variety
Manufacturing Co. in Chicago, the requests for repairs have been
practically nil.
In the days of the old
Meaker door there was no such thing as a testing laboratory for
the insurance companies, so that this particular door was never
put to a laboratory test.
On October 27, 1903,
a fire test was made at the Chicago Underwriters' Laboratories (then
in an alley on 21st Street) of the Cross Improved Elevator
Door, and needless to say, it was found wanting in a great many
respects, as the light construction had been inherited by us and
was still followed.
The requirements of the
National Board of Underwriters were becoming more and more exacting,
and the manufacturers had to keep pace with their demands, so gradually
the heavy constructions of doors came into use. The latest design
in heavy-duty construction was installed in several buildings of
the Sears Roebuck Co. This corrugated iron door is seen in Figure
3.
|
Back
to Top
|
L.S.
GRAVES: HORIZONTAL VS. VERTICAL CYLINDERS PISTON PACKING
It seems to be
a stock argument of those interested in vertical machines that the
horizontal cylinders will soon wear out, and it is difficult to
keep them packed. As we are constantly meeting this "talk," we will
state a few facts which we are sure our customers will corroborate.
We have never yet heard
of one requiring re-boring, and are sure we never shall, as they
will last a lifetime with ordinary good care. All the other parts
of the machine will wear out before the cylinder will need re-boring.
We always guarantee our piston packing to last one year without
replenishing. We have had many of them run two years and some three
years, constantly, without re-packing, depending upon the care they
receive.
The work of adjusting
the packing and replacing when worn out can be done from the open
end of the cylinder, by an ordinary mechanic, or janitor of the
building, and will not cost over 10% of the same service with any
vertical machine using rubber and leather packing. We will tell
you why: Our cylinder, being open on the end, admits of being lubricated
with a mixture of plumbago and lard oil, which reduces the friction
and wear of the parts to comparatively nothing. A glazing of the
plumbago is formed in the cylinder on which the soft packing travels
and seems never to wear or touch the iron; and with our new method
of oiling, it is very easily applied and keeps everything clean.
This oiling is impossible with vertical cylinders taking water at
the top. Again, our pistons travel very slow - an average of one-tenth
the speed of the car, or six feet for a car travel of sixty.
In most vertical machines,
the piston travels one-half the speed of the car, or five times
faster than ours. Parties using the vertical cylinder will invariably
use the horizontal pump, making over one hundred times more piston
strokes to pump the same water, which rather damages their argument.
We also know that nine-tenths of our finest steam engines are horizontals,
with the same objections against them.
|
Back
to Top
|
JOHN JALLINGS: THE
FIRST WATER HYDRAULIC ELEVATORS
The first hydraulic elevators were built so that the two sets of
sheaves were pulled apart in order to produce the movement which
caused the elevation of the car. This form of construction had its
disadvantages, the most conspicuous of which was the closeness of
the two groups of sheaves when the car was at its lowest point in
the hatchway.
The arrangement of the
sheaves and cables on any one of these elevators, whether it be
vertical or horizontal, is identical with the arrangement of the
sheaves and rope in a tackle used in hoisting heavy loads by hand,
except as to the point of application of the power and of the load.
When pulley blocks and a rope move a heavy load by hand the power
available is limited - in fact, the object of the machine is to
allow a small power of the tackle, which is so arranged that a mechanical
advantage is obtained. If four frictionless sheaves are used, a
man can lift a weight four times as great as the force he exerts.
However, the weight will be lifted through only one-fourth of the
distance through which the free end of the rope is moved. In practice
this is not strictly true, for friction has to be subtracted from
the theoretical weight which it is possible for the system to lift.
With the hydraulic elevator,
the conditions are reversed. In this case, there is an abundance
of power. By applying this power directly to the sheave and attaching
the load to be lifted to the free end of the tackle, the large amount
of power is so distributed as to lift a smaller load through a correspondingly
greater distance.
When water under pressure
is admitted to the cylinder, it forces the piston along its bore
and, through the medium of the piston rod to which it is attached
and the crosshead, it pulls the set of movable sheaves away from
the set of fixed sheaves. The hoisting cable is attached at one
end to the frame which holds the fixed sheaves and is wound around
one of the sheave in the crosshead. It is then passed underneath
to one of the fixed sheaves, then around, over, and back to the
second sheave in the crosshead with the process being continued
with all the sheaves. The cable is finally carried up to the hatchway
to the sheave at the top of the run, over it, and down to the car.
When the piston moves, the car moves a proportionately greater distance,
depending upon the number of sheaves that are used.
|
Back
to Top
|
C. MCCOMBE: AN ENGINE
TO KILL MEN
Before the perfection of winding gear capable of raising skips,
kibbles and cages from the depths of a deep mine, the miner was
forced to haul himself laboriously to the surface by means of a
series of fixed ladders. These were secured to the wall of the vertical
shaft or rose at a steep angle in lengths of about 25 feet (7.62
meters) between platform or "sollars" which spanned the shaft. The
platforms were pierced between ladders by an opening or manhole.
Exiting via these ladders was a cruel task for, as miners were thrust
deeper and deeper, they might well be faced with an hour-long climb
to the surface. A miner might, during this time, raise himself 1,500
feet (approximately 457 meters) with 20 pounds (9 kilograms) on
his back - this at the end of a long and tiring shift underground.
So bad were the conditions
that the exhaustion of miners working in the Cornish Consolidated
Mines prevented the older and more experienced men reaching the
deep levels. They were exclusively operated by the younger and inexperienced.
Small wonder that deep mines were unpopular and such ventures had
their labor problems, even in the early nineteenth century.
However, an ingenious
solution was at hand. Far off in the Hartz Mountains, Bergmaster
Dorrell of Clausthal was supervising the driving of great wrought-iron
nails into the pairs of wooden pump rods which plunged downward
to the bottom of one of the local mines. These substantial baulks
of timber reciprocated backward and forward within a foot or two
of each other. Using the Bergmaster's invention called for a cool
head. All the miner had to do was to spring on the topmost peg at
the summit of either rod's stroke. As the rod lunged downward, to
pause for a split second before the return stroke, the miner had
the chance of transferring his position to another peg which was
driven into the opposite timber pump-rod, then at the top of its
stroke. By repetition of this hair-raising procedure, the miner
could descend the mine at an unheard of rate. Depending on one's
point of view, the return journey was just as easy - or hazardous.
The
Bergmaster introduced his idea in 1833, the initial experiment enabling
miners to reach a depth of about 200 meters. The success of this
method of transporting miners to and from their work was reflected
in its subsequent adoption in many European countries. Bergmaster
Dorrell installed another system, again based on two reciprocating
pump rods driven by a waterwheel, in 1835, reaching a depth of about
420 meters.
Further development proceeded
apace. The primitive wrought-iron pegs were replaced by comparatively
roomy platforms with a grab bar fixed at chest height. Shafts were
also designed to incorporate this new system which quickly became
known in Britain as the "man-engine." The technique was not dependent
upon the use of two reciprocating rods; a single rod could be used
in conjunction with a single or double flight of sollars attached
to the wall of the shaft. This method, although slightly safer,
was only half as fast as the technique employing double rods.
Nevertheless, where capacious
sollars and two flights of side platforms were used, a shift of
descending miners had no difficulty in passing an ascending band
of workers en route for the surface. Although the single-rod version
of the man-engine eventually came into universal use in Britain,
further development work, carried out abroad, produced four-rod
versions. Other experiments using wire ropes were concerned with
lessening the weight of the great lengths of timber which together
made up the reciprocating rod.
The shafts which held
the man-engines were often far from vertical with several changes
of angle during their descent. In such cases it was necessary to
accommodate the change in angle by guiding the jointed reciprocating
rod over rollers.
It was in 1834 that the
Royal Cornwall Polytechnic Society offered a prize for the best
model of a machine for lifting miners to the surface from deep mines.
The premium was awarded to Michael Loam for a model of a man-engine
similar to the German pattern. Loam had been interested in man-engines
for some years, having previously read a paper to the Devon and
Cornwall Miners Association on the history and development of the
man-engine concept. The model submitted by Loam had an interesting
feature insomuch that he incorporated a triangular cam revolving
in a rectangular frame. When one of the three points of the cam
came into contact with the frame, it caused a momentary pause in
the movement of the reciprocating rod. This was intended to correspond
to the fleeting alignment of the pump-rod platforms with the sollars,
so that the miners could step on and off in safety. At other times
in the rotation of the cam, movement was accelerated.
Despite the interest
generated by Loam's model and the offer by the Polytechnic Society
of a subsidy for such a system installed in a Cornish mine, it was
not until 1842 that the mine adventurers at Tresvean decided to
take up the challenge. The Polytechnic had offered £300 for the
first 182 meters and £200 for the subsequent 182 meters dependent
upon a successful operating period of two months. By the beginning
of 1842, the experimental engine had reached 43.7 meters.
Its initial success persuaded
the adventurers to carry the work down to the 1,680 feet (510 meters)
level at an expense of £1,670. The trial section was based upon
two parallel rods actuated by a waterwheel. The stroke was 12 feet
(3.66 meters) at a rate of five strokes per minute, thus providing
a rise or descent of 60 feet (18.3 meters) per minute. The waterwheel
was presumably replaced by a steam engine, as a later source refers
to a double rotary 36-in (0.91-m) cylinder engine acting on two
small wheels which acted in turn on two larger wheels.
Not all the miners looked
at these developments with unalloyed enthusiasm. Many older men,
apprehensive about the agility and nerve required to use such a
fearsome contraption, would have nothing to do with the idea and
declared the mine owners were erecting an engine to kill men. Brushing
aside the objections, the mine authorities arranged for pupils from
the local school to travel down to the 18- m level, the return being
equally free from accident - a typical nineteenth century solution
to a ticklish development problem!
Despite the conservative
attitude of some miners, the success of the Tresavean engine was
praised by a local bard known as the Gwennap Poet who wrote: "The
engine by which he is raised from below, Now supersedes climbing,
health's deadliest foe - "This miners know well and their gratitude
show, Their core being O'er, from labor they cease, And delighted
avail, O Loam, of the ease, Thy genius procured them and joyful
ride, On the rod, while others descend by their side."
Three years later a second
man-engine was installed at the United Mines. This was to be the
last of the double rod versions. Henceforth all Cornish man-engines
were of the slower, marginally safer single-rod type. Sixteen engines
were built over the next 50 years or so in Cornwall while in Europe,
30 engines were in use by 1865.
The man-engine at Devon
Great Consuls occupied a shaft with a depth of 1,020 feet (311 meters)
with landings at intervals of 12 feet. These sollars were pierced
by openings through which the 8-in. square timber rod reciprocated.
The platforms on the rod were 18 by 15 inches (0.46 meters by 0.38
meters) and the openings in the sollars 27 by 24 inches (0.68 meters
by 0.61 meters).
A typical European man-engine
was that at the Maria Shaft at Przibram in Bohemia. The engine reached
a depth of 3,000 feet (912 meters), the rods being forged from the
best steel. The square section was one inch by one inch (2.54 cm
by 2.54 cm) at the bottom increasing to 3-1/2 inches by 3-1/2 inches
(9 cm by 9 cm) at the surface. The rod sections were connected at
intervals by means of dovetails. The sollars were fabricated from
sheet iron with a thickness of 1/7 inch (4 mm) and of an area sufficient
to accommodate two men. The total weigh of the reciprocating load
was 77 tons, a figure which increased to 95 tons when 260 men were
riding to the surface.
The engine is reported
as having a 22-inch diameter (0.56 meters) cylinder and a 3-ft 8-
in. (1.12-m) stroke. Safety of such structures was a problem, the
engines being far from accident free. Every 100 meters or so catch
pieces flanked the reciprocating rod. These were designed to prevent
the rod failing much more than the normal stroke in the event of
a failure. This system of a single rod provided the means of almost
closing the shaft with the equally spaced sollar platforms through
which the rod reciprocated. Sloping boards under each sollar guided
the miners' heads towards the rectangular hatch in each sollar.
The double rods, working in an almost open shaft, were more prone
to accidents. In 1880, 11 men died in the Abraham mine in Freiberg
due to a rotten pump rod. A tragedy involving another 11 miners
occurred in the Rosenhof shaft at Clausthal about the same time.
Figures are available
for the seven years, 1873 to 1879, for the annual death rates for
miners using man-engines in Cornwall. They were 0.14 per 1,000 persons
riding such systems, enough to send a present-day factory inspector
into a decline. Yet, it was claimed that the system was far safer
than ladders whose toll for the same period was quoted as 0.21 deaths
per 1,000 men. Simonin in a book entitled "British Mining," published
in 1884, makes no bones about the hazards involved in riding a busy
engine. "There must be no hesitation. If the place should happen
to be already occupied on the ladder, or on the stage fixed against
the shaft, by one miner who is going up as another is going down,
he should remain quiet in his place and wait for a second movement.
The slightest embarrassment may cause the most serious accident
and the brutal engine, by its sudden return, may kill the traveler
on the spot or break a limb."
The safety of such a
system was not improved by the habit of some miners who chose to
travel up and down the rods without lights despite the fact the
sollars were often slippery with mud and grease. In spite of the
risks inherent in the system there was the great advantage that
the miners could step on and off at any level they chose. Improvements
in other devices for raising men from the depths of mines were developed
in the latter part of the nineteenth century. They were like the
man-engines in earlier years, regarded with fear and suspicion by
the miners in the West Country. "A Cornishman does not like to hang
to a rope" was the reaction of many men to the newfangled winding
gear.
Nevertheless, change
was on the way; only the Cornish Levant Mine, clinging to its cliff-top
eyrie above the sea still retained its man-engine as late as the
first World War.
The end was brutal and
sudden. "Cornish Tin Mine Disaster," "Failure of a Man-engine" screamed
the headlines on a mid-October day in 1919. The engine built to
kill men had finally lived up to its name. At three in the afternoon,
the ponderous wooden beam had parted at the nose of the connecting
rod when the steam engine was nearly at the top of its stroke. At
that precise moment some 150 men were en route for the surface.
Failing free the beam crashed and re-bounded from the walls of the
shaft carrying with it the safety stops. Only at the 300-m level
did the safety devices hold.
Many men were dashed
from their stances and crushed against the sides of the shaft, smashing
away other sollars and platforms as they fell. Rescue parties were
quickly on the scene, but the task of extracting the dead and injured
was extremely difficult. By the following night, only nine bodies
had been recovered, another miner dying after reaching the surface,
leaving 21 men unaccounted for. The final death toll stood at 31.
At the inquest, it was
revealed that the wrought-iron strap connecting the man-engine rod
to the nose of the engine beam had fractured due to an undetected
flaw in the metal. The disaster spelt the end of this form of vertical
transport, already obsolete, having been long overtaken by other
forms of haulage and winding gear.
|
Back
to Top
|
GEORGE
REPPERT: CODE ENGINEER
I recall when I joined Otis' construction manager's office in 1909
there were no elevator codes. The manufacturers policed themselves
and did a good job of it. Of course, there were only a few companies.
Otis was the big one and A.B. See was active at that time. Haughton
was also in the picture. They were all very much aware of what the
others were doing, and there was a real effort to maintain high
standards according to sound engineering practices. The Otis chief
engineer, Dave Lindquist, and their chief mechanical engineer, Fred
Hyman, had a good deal to do with this and with promoting the first
codes. New York City had its first elevator "rules" in June, 1918,
and it was comprised of 15 pages. It wasn't the first American elevator
code, however. Boston was a pioneer in this respect, with a code
which became effective in 1914. I remember working on a revision
of it in 1919.
California adopted a
code in 1916, and Ohio placed its in effect in 1924. The Ohio code,
like that of New York City, was very brief and covered general requirements
only. The New York City document restricted speeds to 700 feet per
minute and this had to be revised to permit the installation of
1,000 feet per minute cars in the Empire State Building in 1931.
After 41 years, I left
Otis in 1950 and devoted all my time to code work. I suppose the
U.S. has taken the lead in this field, as we have had requests for
information from all over the world regarding our work; from Holland,
Germany, Sweden and other distant places. We have testified through
the years in many escalator accident cases; probably 40 or so since
1950. I don't think the accidents are caused by the speed of the
stairs but by where people step. You know, the old escalators installed
in the London "underground" back, I believe, in 1904, traveled at
a speed of 190 feet per minute, about twice as fast as the modern
average.
You've probably seen
some of the old stairs in Macy's (there are over 70 units there,
the largest installation in the world) that have wooden balustrades
and cleats on the steps. There is 3/4" clearance between cleats,
but they had fewer accidents than on the modern units where the
clearance was brought down to 1/8". This is because Macy's catered
to a high-class clientele who didn't bring their children to shop,
or at least watched them when they did. In some of the kinds of
stores using escalators today, the whole family tags along and the
first thing the mother says is, "Run along and play on the escalator."
She doesn't know where the children are until an hour later, someone
finds one and gives her the news that junior is missing part of
his sneaker or the seat of his pants from sitting on the treads.
The aforementioned Empire
State Building was called the "Eighth Wonder of the World," and
it was said to have contained more office space than all the buildings
in St. Louis or Baltimore at the time. Four old elevators were salvaged
from the old building on the site and used to haul the 3,000-4,000
workmen to the upper floors. To save time, rolling kitchens took
food up to the men. Although this is not ancient history, it was
probably the most dramatic installation in New York City's history.
|
Back
to Top
|
NATHAN
SCHLESINGER: PRESIDENT, UTILITY ELEVATOR SERVICE, INC.
One thing about the hand rope job Archimedes invented, when you
pulled the rope, it started and when you pulled the rope again,
it stopped (sometimes). You didn't need a road map to know where
you were going. The hand ropes weren't as antiseptic as the present
day automatics that come wrapped in plastics; you got your hands
dirty on them, but they did fit your pocketbook.
New York City in the
1920s was a busy place. Many skyscrapers were going up including
the Empire State Building. These were jobs for Otis, A.B. See and
Gurney. Our company got no closer to a gearless machine than Coolidge
did to a smile. New York City in the 1920s and 1930s was a city
of thousands of basement drum machines, of hand ropes, shipper wheels,
knives and clips, monstrous motors and mechanical brakes. Fifty-mile
hikes? You didn't need a physical fitness program in those days
when you could juggle a Westinghouse C motor, a mammoth that gave
out a big 7-1/2 horsepower at 900 rpms; or in the DC areas with
Federals and Nationals - large oblong masses of iron, each heavy
enough to be ballast for the "Levithan."
In 1922, the Edison Co.
decided to change the city from 2 phase to 3 phase and from DC to
AC. All of a sudden there was a big changeover activity. We bought
switches from Payne, mounted them on 1" black slate and wired them
up. My father liked the Ryan brake, and we ordered them from Cincinnati.
We used the Westinghouse CS motor, large by today's standards, but
half the size of what we were replacing. I recall the machine limits
and hatch limits came from Payne too; they had fine equipment.
Utilizing used material
didn't have the stigma attached to it in the old days that it has
now. It always involved the fun of a search. Centre Street, in lower
Manhattan, was the street of second-hand motor shops at that time.
Police headquarters was there and still is. Flanagan's was on Centre
Street, a restaurant that served the best roast beef and beer in
New York City. We toured the motor shops and probably ended up with
something like a G.E. type K.E. for about US $25. Then we'd go up
to East 5th Street and the Bowery, which was in its prime as a "bum-haven,"
and they'd roll out in the middle of the street. We'd pick up a
good board for US $5. If you stayed long enough on 5th street, you'd
meet someone from almost every elevator company in town.
New or used, the jobs
were tested and as soon as they were, we'd run down to the Building
Department for the Certificate of Completion and before the ink
was dry on the chief inspector's signature, we were in the owner's
office for our check. In the 1930s, in particular, you didn't matter-of-factly
draw a payroll by writing a check; there was always the little matter
of getting the money in the bank. Despite this, "Those were the
good old days."
I'd rather have my father's
picture published than mine, for he was the "old-timer." Joe Schlesinger
worked for Bill Wheeler's grandfather and gave me a wire shackle
for a teething ring. He was a dedicated elevator man and a great
person. He was an artisan in the tradition of men who know only
perfection, and he spent a good deal of his life developing devices
to make elevators safer.
|
Back
to Top
|
HERBERT
PAUL GLASER
For some time, while
working for Utility Elevator Company, I had it in the back of my
mind to go into business for myself in the New York City area. Two
fellow employees were interested in becoming partners ÐHarold Leon
and Jack Abramowitz. Each put up $300 and I bought a lathe for $550
and the rest of the money for a drill press and a couple of motors
for sanding. In 1926 we set up shop under the name G.A.L. Electro
Mechanical service (G.A.L. being the initials of the partners).
We started out making motor repairs and some elevator work, including
recabling. Leon worked in the shop and took telephone calls, Abramowitz
did motor repairs and I designed items and tried to sell them. An
elevator interlock was one design I tried to peddle. It kept the
elevator from running when the doors were open or unlocked. Another
Ð a gate switch Ð was made at the rate of two dozen a week, Within
six months we had a mimeographed catalogue with 10 items. Within
two years we moved from the basement of a building on Amsterdam
Avenue to larger space at 208 Centre Street, just off of Canal.
Early in 1929 Jack left the company. He couldnÕt live on what we
were making. I took home about $5 a week and we had several thousand
dollars in receivables. Then on October 29 the stock market crashed.
Customers couldnÕt pay us. They were broke and we were broke. We
lived from hand to mouth but in 1931 we began to recoup. World War
II was a difficult time for Germans living in the U.S. I was not
eligible for the draft. We became part of the war effort, as did
almost every machine shop and industry. At first we had second-rate
contracts no one else wanted but later, because of our good work,
we received larger and more complex contracts. We learned how to
work with government specifications and ventured into new operations
using new tools and material that served us well when the war ended.
We were part of the "production miracle" Ð in 1942 the U.S. government
was pumping $300million a day into the economy and the jobless rate
had gone from 8 million in 1940 to almost zero in 1945. During the
war years the Gross National Product soared from 91 billion to $215
billion. Although the large corporations benefited the most some
small companies were revived in those years/ G.A.L. was one of them!
|
Back
to Top
|
J.P.
COPELAND: The Strutt's North Mill Hoist
The Strutt's
North Mill hoist was of a later type in 1945, but very much like
a packing case with T&G wooden boards. My reflection is that it
had a steel folding door. The lift man was a Fred Barrett of Bargate,
small in stature, very slow in nature and with regimental ways for
working the lift - an ex-army man.
However, the West Reeling
Mill, not the clock tower end, had a very old belt-driven hoist
that had originally been driven off a line shaft that had been powered
by a huge steam engine. This lift was Horce Glue from Farmer Green,
and his wife used to be the cook for Chevin Cafe.
The hoist, its size
being about 6 ft-0 in. x 4 ft-6 in. at the load, passed for 1/2
ton (capacity) - again, a T&G wood cage on angle/channel iron frame.
The drive was by electricity using flat leather belts three inches
wide; the motor used a Vee belt reduction to the first drive shaft
with two pullies 12" diameter by 7" face. Must have been two for
two belts three inches wide to move over into drive. These belts
drove onto a worm reduction shaft of the hoist wheel. This shaft
carried fast and loose pullies for the crossed-up belt, giving a
larger area round the pulley and an open drive down belt running
in re- verse direction to the up belt - maybe four to five feet
apart from the drive shaft. Belt striking forks (change over belt
guides), moved the required up or down belt into drive mode, keeping
the other belt on the free pulley. The driven pullies may have been
a third larger in diameter to improve friction loss and area pulling
power increased. The reduction worm crown wheel enclosed in oil
bath, possibly Radicon or Crofts type, connected the output drive,
the hoist head wheel and the lift cage by wire ropes, also the balance
weight in the mill shaft. No speed governor, to my recollection,
was fitted to this hoist in the event of a runaway or belt brake
or slack belt not pulling the load. The other belt driving up or
down hadto be eased over to stop me movement of the hoist Clue told
me to always stand with my legs bent. I looked at him, noticing
mat he was bow legged This put me off using the hoist for rides,
taking to the stairs.
The
operator, on closing the outer door and inner gate, would start
the lift by pulling a hemp rope. These two ropes went the full height
of the mill round a wheel in the lift well and the other end to
operate the belt-moving gear in the motor room. Pulling the up rope
would move the drive belt onto the fixed dnve pulley. Note the two
holes in the floor and the top of the hoist cage (accompanying graphic
No. 1). The rope only moved when the man pulled it He never let
his hands go free from the rope (which ran free until he gripped
or pulled me opposite to travel direction) Moving off with a screech
way up over head from the belt moving over to the drive pulley required
a bit of skill on his part, I think. On arrival at the required
floor level, he pulled the down-side rope, the belt forks putting
the up-belt on the loose, free-running pulley. If one overshot the
landing, he would ease the down side over just a touch - another
screech and off you go. This hoist had call bells on each floor,
but I have no knowledge of a bridge wheel on the drive in my recollection
or floor level stops. This may have been when me old North Mill
lift converted to electncity.
The floor level door
must have had a lock worked from me lift itself at each level. I
question whether the inner gate had an interlock on closing to stop
one pulling the control rope and monng the belt over to ~the drive.
The cage was given a light globe when the drive was changed from
steam to electricity. Young Jack Wolley inspected the works as a
Saturday monning job. This hoist was taken out of service after
the war, 1947-1948, and a new Evans lift was fitted in the clock
tower end of the West Mill I do not remember any working lift or
works in this shaft. We moved any heavy machine parts up the mill
in this shaft by hanging up to three sets of hand chain blocks,
working each in time (turn) to the required room floor.
J. F. Copeland now
helps out at the Bude Haven School workshops. He attends one-half
day to help the technicians.
The accompanying Figure
2 shows the extensive array of line shafts throughout the five floors
of North Mill of Strutt's Mill, all machines on the line being driven
by the huge water wheel located under the mill. As may be seen,
the lift at the very end of the top floor was also powered in this
fashion.

The water wheel produced
a horizontal rotation to an axle which engaged a vertical axle at
the basement. The vertical axle was fitted with gears at the ceiling
of each floor level. These engaged a horizontal axle at each floor
which ran across the ceiling and provided power to the spinning
wheels, looms and mill equipment. On the far end of the fifth floor,
the horizontal axle was provided with pulleys arranged as shown
in Figure 1 to drive the lift machine. The mill contains 15 arches
in length. The floors are continued beyond the end wall by two additional
arches, giving a small room on each floor which is occupied by the
Counting House, the staircase, the stove which warms the mill in
winter and also a crane (lift) for drawing the goods up to the machines
on various floors. The Belper North Mill is one of the U.K.'s most
important industrial buildings. Built in 1803-1804 on the site of
an earlier cotton mill destroyed by fire, it represented, on completion,
the pinnacle of engineering technology. The brick arch floors are
supported on an iron frame and contribute to making the mill fire-proof.
A warm air heating system was built in, as was a hoist between floors.
The water wheel was very wide for the period, powering an extensive
range of machines through a complex arrangement of belts and shafts.
Sunday school was provided in the roof space.
|
Back
to Top
|
Umberto
Sermedese -- THE FOUNDATION OF ROMAN/ITALIAN FREE THINKING
It is important to remember
that the inquiring mind was largely born in Italy. The earlier Greeks
were adverse to experimentation, believing that they could determine
the truth only with the power of the mind. This is why Galileo Galilei,
the founder of the experimental method, is considered to be at a
watershed in history. Galileo said, "No", to a dogmatic philosophy
that had endured for 2000 years and ushered in an Age of Experimentation
and Science, speaking out against the traditional church, teachers
and institutions of the time. After Galileo was pressured to leave
the University of Pisa for expounding his ideas he moved to the
University of Papua and protection by the Venetian Republic's Doges,
aristocrats who fostered freethinking.
Latin, the language
of the Romans, also played a part in the furtherance of experimentation.
It was the language of the aristocracy, scholars and the elite;
ideas could be expressed more clearly in Latin than in Greek. It
was very important to translate and clarify contracts, pacts and
other agreements and the first university degree given was in law
Ð at the University of Bologna Ð the oldest in the world. A jurist
had to know the exact meaning of each word and phrase. One could
only be a Doctor in the Law after spending seven years in civilian
law, six years for canonic law and five year for the liberal arts.
Imagine emperors, kings and high church officials summoning Doctors
of the Law for advice! Later the University of Bologna issued doctorates
in Medicine, then in Philosophy. Its Law School was founded in 425
and the university, itself in 1088. The famed University of Prague,
in the "Golden City" of Charles the Great, was founded more than
250 years later. The creation of the Vatican Library in the mid-1400
was also a great assistance to Italian scholars and researchers.
As to Italian researchers
and inventors we must recognize Luigi Galvanic, the discoverer of
animal electricity, and Alexander Volta who discovered that electricity
will be developed by two different metal discs Ð zinc and copper
Ð in a solution of water and acid. Antonio Pacinotti in1860 invented
the generator and Antonio Ferraris developed the rotating field
AC motor, later mass-produced by Siemens, Edison and others. These
were men of science, not industrialists and they sought few patents.
There is no doubt but
that the Industrial Revolution in England moved the development
of the elevator ahead in geometric proportions but the inquiring
minds of the great English inventors had a flowering centuries earlier
on the Italian Peninsula.
Written in 1979 by
Umberto Sermedese, managing director of NORMA Company in Bologna,
Italy
|
Back
to Top
|
JORIS
SCHROEDER: Birth of the Gearless
The first idea for a
gearless traction machine was patented by A.L. Dewelius on December
21, 1897. This scheme foresaw the trend at the end of the 20th Century
by major manufacturers to use smaller but more numerous cables allowing
a smaller drive sheave. With the light counterweight this equipment
seemed more of a dumbwaiter or small goods lifts than a passenger
elevator.

On
the other hand the gearless elevator patented by C. W. and W.D.
Baldwin on September 4, 1900 was carefully thought out with an electric
reversing switch in the car and a governor geared to the drive shaft
at the lower level. This type of endless loop mechanism pre-dated
that used in the "Tower of Terror" at FloridaÕs Disney World by
almost 100 year! The hoist cables endless loop in both schemes are
kept well tensioned by two tension screws in the pit and in both
an additional loop around a tension sheave assures minimum, or no,
slippage. The gearless equipment in the Disney attraction allows
the car to supposedly "free fall" for a maximum thrill but it is
always under full control during the drop, thanks to the tight grip
of the cables upon the sheaves. The Baldwin scheme introduced a
small diameter drive sheave along with multiple cables as well and
considering the small drive sheave diameter the cables must have
been of a small diameter.
|
Back
to Top
|
GEORGE
JOHNSON
Although the firm of
George Johnson was founded in 1850 to do jobbing contracting it
was not until 1864 that it began producing lifts. It is thought
that Mr. Johnson developed the first builderÕs hoist. It was the
subject of hostility by the bricklayers who thought the device would
bring unemployment. Indeed, Mr. Johnson was subjected to several
demonstrations when visiting job sites. The lathe and ripsaw in
the shop were operated by foot treadle but a steam engine eased
the manual operation of tools in 1870. Thirty-odd years latter a
new gas engine was installed and when electricity came in the machines
were driven by still another form of power. In the 1920Õs the firm
rented lorries but 1950 saw the acquisition of a new t2o-ton Austin
Lorry.
His nephew, Mr. A.J.
Littlechild in 1866, joined Mr. Johnson. The twelve-year-old boy
was met at the train station and brought immediately to the firm
to begin work. In time he took over management due to the ill health
of Mr. Johnson. Mr. Frederick H. Brown, son-in-law of Mr. Little
child, joined the firm in 1910 when the writer entered employment
as a clerk. The war years threw a great strain on he partners as
they strove to keep the business together. After the war they were
joined by A. Donald Littlechild who had been in His MajestyÕs Forces
for four years. The three men formed a limited company and the pent-up
requirement for lifts caused the company to work at full capacity
with deliveries running from one to two years. Many of our orders
came fro the three of the main banks of England. Trolleys were developed
to be used in conjunction with the lifts in the banks.
In April 1941 the roof
and front of the building was almost totally destroyed by a parachute
bomb in the heaviest raid of the war. Only twenty of the company
men were available to effect repairs, clearing away debris, repairing
3,000 square feet of roofing and a portion of the building front
Ð a tremendous round-the-clock effort that allowed the firm to be
back in business within 24 hours.
It must be said that
the founder was a man of considerable inventiveness. A model of
one of his developments is on display at the National maritime museum
in Greenwich. The scheme, accepted by the Royal navy in 1866 had
to do with a type of steel casement upon which the gun would rotate.
After firing the gun would turn and a part of the turret wall would
close the porthole. This gave protection to the gunners when in
a close firing situation with another ship. He was a skilled carpenter
as well as an engineer and able to make an excellent model for inspection.
Written by Will Brown
of the Company in 1945
|
Back
to Top
|
THE
ROEBLINGS
It was during his years
at the University and the Polytechnic Institute in Berlin that the
young man first became interested in the study of suspension bridges
tutored by the celebrated Professors J. F. Dietleyn and J. A. Eytelwein.
After receiving qualification
as an engineer John A. Roebling and his younger brother, Karl, organized
in 1831 a small group of the younger people and undertook to lead
their emigration to the United States to the final adoption of a
site near Pittsburgh for their proposed community. The town was
at first called Germania, but later became known as Saxonburg.
In
1837 he obtained employment as an engineer with the State of Pennsylvania,
and it was while working in this capacity that he first came in
contact with the Pennsylvania Canal construction project and was
presented with the situation which led to his fabricating America's
first wire rope. At various points along the route of the canal
it was necessary to transport the barges across the mountains by
means of portage railways. Large hempen hawsers were used to tow
the boats up the sides of the hills. These hawsers were nine inches
in diameter, and, obviously, cumbersome to handle, as well as expensive
because of the frequency with which they had to be replaced.
At about this same time,
there fell into Roebling's hands an obscure German engineering paper
which described the experiments in Germany had been conducting in
the matter of the fabrication of a rope out of wire and he began
to experiment at his farm in Saxonburg in 1840. He approached the
State Board of Public Works with the plan to substitute his wire
rope for the hempen hawsers on the canal. There the reception accorded
him was cool.
But the rope worked.
It lived up to every promise he had made for it; it was flexible;
it was strong; it weighed no more than the huge hemp cables; its
diameter of 1 1/4 inches made it considerably more convenient to
work with; and it long outlasted the hemp.
Three years later, in
1847, he built the wire rope suspension bridge across the Monongahela
at Pittsburgh, and then, in 1850, he was engaged upon a project
that was to startle the world. A suspension bridge across the gorge
of the Niagara River, at Niagara.
When it was finished,
and when Roebling dared to move a fully-loaded freight train across
it, the accomplishment was heralded by the press of the day as one
of the wonders of the world and the engineer was rocketed to fame.
The successes attained
by Roebling with his new wire rope, both as a haulage medium on
the Pennsylvania Canal and as a suspension medium on bridges, made
certain its wide acceptance as an industrial tool. Much of Roebling's
time and energy were consumed in compiling data on the strengths
of wire rope and in experimenting with new types of ropes to meet
the demands of the many who sought to buy.
In 1848, John A. Roebling
purchased a three acre tract of land in Trenton, N. J., there to
set up a wire rope factory being that it was near the Cooper Iron
Works, his source of supply of wire.
During
the years that the Colonel was engaged in the building of the Brooklyn
Bridge, the John A. Roebling's Sons Company was assuming greater
and greater proportions as an industry, under the guidance of the
Colonel's two younger brothers, Ferdinand and Charles Gustavus.
Ferdinand and Charles
formed an ideal combination; Ferdinand's interests centered upon
the sales and financial aspects of the business. Charles, on the
other hand, had an unusual genius for the development of products,
of machinery, for the erection of plant buildings, and for the establishment
of plant organization.
Shortly
after Morse invented the telegraph in 1844, telegraph wire was in
great demand meeting the needs of this field and of the lightning
rod field brought the Roeblings into their first contact with the
manufacture of electrical wires as such.
The principal insulation
for the copper wire was a single or double cotton braid; consequently
a minimum of simple machinery was required. It was not long, however,
before the Roebling Company found it necessary to set up separate
facilities for the production of electrical wires and cables. As
the uses of electricity became more varied, so did the product which
carried it. Insulations included: first cotton; then paper; then
rubber; then silk and enamel and varnished cambric and all the many
others.
In the 1860's the Otis
Brothers were experimenting in a field which since has become one
of the largest consumers of wire rope. Until then, elevators had
been used sparingly, and then mostly for industrial purposes because
of their lack of safety mechanisms. The Otis Brothers, however,
brought out safety devices which have been largely responsible for
the expansion of the elevator industry. And the advent of wire rope,
which John A. Roebling designed to suit their needs, contributed
integrally to this development.
|
Back
to Top
|
The ASME/ANSI A17.1
Safety Code Beginnings by William C. Crager
The first edition of
this Code was published in January 1921. It was prepared by an American
Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Committee on Pro: tection
of Industrial Workers with the assistance of representatives of
a number of interests including manufacturers, insurance carriers,
regulatory bodies, and technical societies.
The application of this
Code in the formulation of various state and municipal codes emphasized
the need for its further development and extension. Accordingly,
ASME requested the American Engineering Standards Committee (AESC)
to authorize the organization of a Sectional Committee to undertake
this revision. They acted favorably on this request, and in January
1922, assigned sponsorship for the project jointly to the American
Institute of Architects, the National Bureau of Standards, and ASME,
all three of whom had taken an active part in the preparation of
the first edition of the Code.
The organization meeting
of the Sectional Committee A17 was held in November 1922. A number
of meetings of the Committee were held during the next two years
and in July 1925, a revision of the 1921 Code was completed, approved
by the AESC, and published as an American Standard.
Subsequent to the publication
of the 1925 revision of the Code, the necessity for development
research on the design and construction of car safeties and oil
buffers and for the development of test specifications for various
parts of elevator equipment was realized.
As a result, a Subcommittee
on Research, Recommendations, and Interpretations was appointed
in 1926. This subcommittee held regular meetings thereafter until
interrupted by the war in 1940, and carried on an extensive test
program at the National Bureau of Standards in connection with oil
buffers and car safeties. Subsequent to the war, the name of this
subcommittee was changed to ''Executive Committee for the Elevator
Safety Code."
The information gained
as a result of these tests and the experience derived from the adoption
and enforcement of the 1925 Code by various states and municipal
enforcing bodies, together with the developments which had occurred
in the design of the equipment as a result of installations made
in very tall buildings, prompted the Sectional Committee to prepare
and issue the third edition of the Code in 1931. The third edition
was approved by the Sectional Committee in February 1931, and subsequently
by the sponsors and by the American Standards Association (formerly
the AESC) in July 1931.
Further experience derived
from the adoption and enforcement of the 1931 edition, and developments
in the design of elevator equipment, led the Sectional Committee,
in line with its policy of revising the Code periodically, to prepare
the fourth edition in 1937, which was approved by the sponsors and
by the American Standards Association (ASA) in July 1937.
A fifth edition of the
Code was well under way in 1940 when it was necessary to suspend
the work due to the Second World War. However, a number of the revisions
already agreed upon by the Sectional Committee and approved by the
sponsors and by the ASA in April 1942, were issued as a supplement
to the 1937 edition. They were subsequently incorporated in a reprint
of the 1937 edition in 1945. In response to public demand, requirements
for private residence elevators were also issued in a separate supplement,
ASA A17.1.5-1953, and incorporated into the Code as Part V in the
1955 edition.
The Sectional Committee
reinitiated consideration of the fifth edition of the Code in 1946.
Due to the considerable period which had elapsed since the fourth
revision in 1937, and to the very extensive developments in the
elevator art, the committee decided that the Code should be completely
rewritten and brought up to date.
Special subcommittees
were appointed to prepare the revisions of the various requirements.
The membership of each subcommittee consisted of persons especially
familiar with the requirements to be covered by that subcommittee.
Fifteen subcommittees were set up with a total membership of over
150 persons. The membership of these subcommittees was not confined
to members of the Sectional Committee. It also included other persons
having expert knowledge of the subjects under consideration by the
subcommittees. These subcommittees and their personnel were listed
in the 1955 edition of the Code.
The drafts prepared by
these subcommittees were widely circulated to interested groups
for comment. After review of the comments and correlation of the
drafts, the fifth edition of the Code was approved by the Sectional
Committee, subsequently by the sponsors, and by the ASA in June
1955.
William C. Crager
served on various A17.1 code committees for 35 years. His career
was dedicated to elevator safety as an engineer, consultant and
author for over six decades. At the time of his death in 1987 he
had been chairman of the A17.1 Committee for 15 years.
|
|
|