# A Visit to Ford's First ("1893 Kitchen Sink Engine")



## kquiggle (May 30, 2019)

I'm planning to visit the Ford Museum next week and I plan to take a look at the exhibit of Ford's "Kitchen Sink Engine:"

https://www.thehenryford.org/collections-and-research/digital-collections/artifact/361250

Many members of this website are probably aware that a number of people have built reproductions of the engine; others (like me) may be thinking about doing the same. I've looked at one reproduction at NAMES, and seen others online (as well as looking at the above link).

Prior to my visit, I'm wondering if anyone would like to offer advice as to what to look for to make the visit more productive in terms of learning details about the engine.  If you were going to take a close look at this engine, what details would you look for?


----------



## ShopShoe (May 31, 2019)

I would say that for any engine, not just that one, look at the small details and try to figure out how they might have been made with the tools Henry had. If photos are allowed, great; but you might want to write down some impressions. I generally find that there are lots of whole-engine views available, but the details will be hangups if you try to build something.

Second thing is to try to figure out the materials used: I saw the engine when I was a kid and I seem to remember that there was a sign that referred to a "lathe wheel" used as flywheel. The ignition spark came from an attachment to a hanging light fixture, which leads me to speculate that the kitchen light was probably DC and I wonder what voltage was actually available.

I have seen some of the builds you have mentioned on this forum (unfortunately, not in person) and I remembeer that some of the plumbing parts used were made differently back then and the ones you can buy now are different, so that is definitely worth noticing.

I guess it depends how accurate you want to be in modeling it: Do you want it to look just like the original or do you want a representation of it, perhaps in a smaller size.

FWIW,

--ShopShoe


----------



## Gordon (May 31, 2019)

I would say to look at the carburetor. I have looked at this design and have thought about building it and even have most of the parts but I have not gotten around to it. The carburetor looks pretty marginal with a drip oiler to dispense fuel. As much problem as we have now with better tools and more knowledge I find it amazing that he could get it to run at all.


----------



## kquiggle (May 31, 2019)

ShopShoe - thanks for the comments. I definitely plan to look for tool marks, manufacturer names on castings, etc. My goal is to make something as close to the original as possible, so I'll also be looking to see what the various parts are made from (brass, cast iron, etc.).

The pictures I have seen show the ignition spark connected to a hanging light fixture, which would have been 100V DC at the time. There is also some suggestion that a spark coil was also used, but I have not found what I would call a definitive reference on this. Present day reproductions use spark plugs, but the original engine did not - it used a more basic spark igniter (referred to in the drawing as an "ignition plug"; this was a flat spring which made contact with a contacter on the piston. The make/break contact as the piston moved created an ignition spark. I think this may have been possible with just 100V DC, but a spark coil would have helped. 

Present day reproductions have used plumbing parts. I have a theory that Ford used steam fittings, and that the engine body was made from a high pressure steam valve. This is pure speculation on my part, but the engine body does look very similar to steam valves I have found in old catalogs. Also, Ford was a "steam engineer" at the time, so he would have had ready access to steam fittings (or know were to get them).

Another theory I have is that Ford used steam piston packing for the cylinder instead of piston rings. There are features on the "original" drawing that suggest this, but the drawing is not all that clear. In addition, the drawing was made many years after the engine was built and is not the drawing Ford used to make the engine (I doubt he ever made such a a drawing before he built the engine).

Anyway, I have had a lot of fun researching the engine and the state of the art in combustion engines at the time. It's very interesting to follow the history of the development of such things as spark plugs, carburetors, etc.


----------



## wespete66 (Jun 7, 2019)

I agree with the above comments. Also I've read that the engine that is on display is actually a replica, and as such its accuracy is in question. I asked the museum once about the possibility of seeing the actual engine (in the archive rooms) and was told something to the effect that I wouldn't want to see it as it was quite crude in comparison..  I have found one photo supposedly of the actual engine.
I would love to see any photos you might get of it!

Edit: kquiggle, I just noticed your signature line.  Your website is one I have browsed a number of times, especially as I was trying to learn about this Ford engine. (I have not built one, but am gathering parts) Thank you for your efforts, past & present!


----------



## kquiggle (Jun 7, 2019)

I'll reveal a little secret here, now that I have completed my visit: I went to see the engine on a "special access" basis, meaning that I paid a fee to be allowed to closely inspect the engine (under supervision). I was able to get nearly hands-on access to the engine and inspect almost every detail very closely (could not see inside the cylinder, of course). I'm currently preparing a detailed write-up of my findings, which I will make available online as soon as it is ready.

I understand why there is some confusion as to whether the engine on display is original or a replica. The answer is both, and neither. The confusion arises because the museum has both a replica and the original. The original is in the museum section; the replica (which was donated to the museum) is kept in the "village" part of the museum and is housed in a replica Ford workshop (unfortunately closed for renovation when I visited). Apparently they actually fire up the replica engine for demonstrations.  I also say "neither" because I have reason to believe that some parts (or maybe only one part) of the original are not actually original, although I believe most of it is. I'll get into more detail on this in my write-up.

The engine has approximately 27 major parts and I inspected all of them in detail, so the write-up is going to take a week or two to complete. Stay tuned.


----------



## ShopShoe (Jun 8, 2019)

One question I have had is whether the engine was displayed in the Ford Rotunda and was it damaged when the Rotunda burned. When I saw the engine during a family vacation as a child, I seem to remember that it might have been in the Rotunda. According to the following article, The Ford Archives were there, but were saved.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Rotunda

--ShopShoe


----------



## Andy Munns (Jun 8, 2019)

Around this time ignition could be flame or make+break. System in the plans looks like precursor to make+break but without the iron core induction coil that "makes the electricity behave like treacle". Likely there was enough inductance upstream of the supply to cause the spark to follow the moving contact after the circuit is made, and then broken. Later M+B systems with in-line coil did this with only 4 phone batteries. Spark timing would have been just after TDC, however it is normal to retard he spark on M+B systems to TDC for start and also to retard the spark to idle the engine. These are early days before discovery of protons, neutrons or electrons - engineers did not really know what electricity actually was. Also interesting to see an earth return system, which predates 2 wire systems. Suspect the cam was a  wipe switch that only allowed current to flow when spark was needed - The moving contact in the combustion space looks to have done the timing.


----------



## a41capt (Jun 8, 2019)

From all the “original” drawings I’ve seen of Henry's first engine, it appears to have utilized a make and break ignition system. Has any one of you attempted to build one with this type of igniter rather than a spark plug, which Henry probably didn’t have access to in 1893?

Now THAT would be a challenge!

John W


----------



## a41capt (Jun 8, 2019)

Additionally, from the painting done taken from Henry's recollection of the event, there appears to be a wire leading from an over the sink hanging light fixture, and another leading to the faucet for ground.

Can this igniter type circuit be run from an AC source without some type of exciter coil? Seems like a mighty wimpy spark, unless Henry's gasoline had an extraordinarily high vapor pressure and low ignition temperature.

I sure would like to see the ACTUAL first engine's “innards”.

John W


----------



## kquiggle (Jun 8, 2019)

Shopshoe - here is the very little I know about the history of the engine:

1893 – engine completed by Henry Ford
1930s – engine donated to Henry Ford Museum
1930s and later – engine loaned out to various World’s Fairs and expositions
2019 – engine on display at Henry Ford Museum
In inspecting the engine, I did not see any evidence that it had ever been in a fire, although it appears to have been treated roughly at various times in its life.

John W - The Ford Museum has a diagram which purports to show how the ignition worked:

https://www.thehenryford.org/collections-and-research/digital-collections/artifact/361250​
One rendering of the engine appears to show a spark coil. I haven't found a definitive reference one way or the other (unless you count the above link). The electric light voltage at the time would have been 110 V DC; I think this would have been sufficient to create the necessary spark.  Also, I have not seen any information as to what Ford used for "gasoline" but from my research it was likely much more volatile than modern gas and would have been much easier to ignite.

Leon Ridenour (who sells plans for a spark plug version of the engine) has told me that he built a contact igniter version (using a coil, I think) but that it was very difficult to get and keep running, which is why he switched to a spark plug.

As for the innards of the engine, I would dearly love to see them. In fact, I would like to see the entire engine dismantled, measured, photographed, and given a museum quality restoration.


----------



## Andy Munns (Jun 8, 2019)

Assuming 110 volt AC? Could supply be Edison 110 volt DC system? Could supply also be 32 volt DC farm set supply? Also vintage knife switches for DC need 'flickers', which are spring operated rapid opening switch extensions designed to reduce harm of a 'sticky' spark following and burning the switch blades. Old AC knife switches do not have 'flickers' and the difference between AC and DC knife switches is easily seen. Engineers of the day would have known of the problem with DC contacts experiencing a spark following the moving contact. Modern engineers might not know this plus the Kettering system used a condenser (capacitor) to absorb this 'sticky' spark.


----------



## Andy Munns (Jun 8, 2019)

See https://www.old-engine.com/magign.htm plus follow links. My old Union Gas Engine in a boat dated from 1897 and had one of these coils (Cotton covered Copper around iron wire bundle in varnished wooden box filled with wax). These are only a series coil and ran on 4 x 1.5 volt phone batteries (each about size of a Coke can). Spark was only 6 volt / low tension. We once left the coil out to see what happened and engine ran but with weak spark. You could take out an inspection plug to observe the spark - Much fatter than what you see with a modern spark plug. Make and Break system only good for low revs - Union did 440 rpm flat out. Frisco engines similar. Plenty of running examples on YouTube. These M+B igniters were made mainly with steel working parts and had Mica insulation. You knew when to replace the Mica when there was glitter in the sunlight around a working igniter.


----------



## a41capt (Jun 8, 2019)

kquiggle said:


> Shopshoe - here is the very little I know about the history of the engine:
> 
> 1893 – engine completed by Henry Ford
> 1930s – engine donated to Henry Ford Museum
> ...



I had seen that drawing before, and it almost created more questions than answers! I think principle among them is what materials, how was it timed, and as stated, AC or DC?

I think I’ll have to be satisfied with the idea of a potential build with the spark plug system and a buzz coil, or reasonable facsimile thereof!

I’m with you though.  Tear it down, measure and photograph it, then an interior restoration and run it!  That’s what Henry built it for!!!


----------



## kquiggle (Jun 9, 2019)

At the time the engine was built, Henry Ford was the chief engineer for the Edison Illuminating Company in Detroit. At that time, they supplied 110 V *direct* current (DC from steam driven dynamos) for electric lighting. The electric lighting was primarily street lighting initially; very few homes had electric lighting. However, displays and paintings of the engine show it directly connected (no coil) to a light bulb outlet over the kitchen sink, presumably because Ford did not have electric lighting in his workshop (that would probably have been an un-affordable extravagance!). There was of course no such thing as a plug in type outlet at the time.

As a side note, there was a big technical battle going on at the time over the whether AC or DC was a better choice (war of the currents). Edison was fanatically in favor of DC (probably because his patents were based on it).

P.S. to Andy - thanks for that link on igniters; very interesting.


----------



## kquiggle (Jun 15, 2019)

I have made some progress in writing up my visit to see Ford's First Engine; here is a link to a work in progress:

https://sites.google.com/site/lagad...lathes-mills-etc/review---ford-s-first-engine

I invite questions, suggestions, theories, and wild speculation as I go along. I will post updates here as I make additions to the above web page.  I also apologize for not having completed this web page yet, but unfortunately we have finally gotten some good weather here in Michigan and I have been diverted by long postponed outdoor projects. 

As of this posting, I have so far addressed 4 of the 27 components. Also included are the spreadsheet schedule I prepared prior to inspection, my checklist of items I took to the inspection, and my inspection notes.


----------



## kquiggle (Jun 17, 2019)

Quick update - I have now completed posting up to component #14 (the Cylinder):

https://sites.google.com/site/lagad...lathes-mills-etc/review---ford-s-first-engine

If anyone has question, comments, or suggestions on the photos, please post them here. I am especially interested to hear from anyone who knows something about blacksmithing techniques.


----------



## kquiggle (Jun 22, 2019)

Done! I have completed my web page on this topic. I have also posted a link at the bottom of the web page to all of the 161 photos I took.

https://sites.google.com/site/lagad.../review---ford-s-first-engine?pageReverted=12

I will probably be making additions to the web page, and additional annotations to the photo album, but I will probably not make note of those changes on this forum topic. I do intend to further research the history around this engine, and update my web page with my findings and speculation.


----------



## RonGinger (Jun 22, 2019)

You must be a tech writer- your documentation is amazing. I also browsed through some of your other projects, all amazingly documented. Thanks for sharing all this.


----------



## kquiggle (Jun 23, 2019)

Ron - thanks for the compliment.  I'm just having fun with this as an amateur historian and an amateur machinist. I'm hoping people with more knowledge than me will chip in and critique my speculations.


----------



## a41capt (Jun 23, 2019)

An excellent write up indeed!  However, and this is just my opinion based upon my observations regarding your photos, I believe Mr. Ford modified his original ignition system to make it a more consistent and reliable concept engine at a later date y adding a spark plug. The protuberance on the combustion chamber that you mention appears to be nothing more that a plugged hole, probably the original location for the make and break ignition. Its position would be more conducive to ignition in an after top dead center make and break.

Additionally, the pice you refer to as a gas igniter is indeed a spark plug of the 1915ish (?) vintage and appears (if my theorizing is correct) to have been added later to support that more reliable ignition and running with a buzz coil or something similar.







Additionally, the contact ground wire hitting the cam at just after tdc is a unique way to ensure that the ignition system is energized on a 4 to 1 ratio.  Simplicity at its finest!

Another interesting point regarding the combustion chamber is the apparent offset of the intake versus exhaust ports. Once again, as Henry was a steam plant engineer, he understood the importance of valve timing in the cutoff principle, and with the intake port all but closed off by the forward movement of the piston in the exhaust stroke, there would be absolutely no exhaust pressure against the intake system, thereby ensuring that the waiting fuel charge would not be blown back out of the mixing chamber by the leakage of high temp gases at the swing valve.

Having never been in close proximity to the original engine, but after studying your exhaustive photographic records, that is just my two cents worth, and since I will probably never get the access you have had, I can draw no further conclusions than what I’ve included.

Thank you again for this excellent treatise on this valuable bit of engineering. I am considering a build of a replica myself, and I’ll most certainly use your very extensive volume of work as a backbone to my build!

John W


----------



## kquiggle (Jun 23, 2019)

John W - great observations and comments!

Also - thanks for the picture; I was looking through old publications trying to find a picture of a spark plug but did not have any luck. Can you tell me where that picture came from?

The official drawing of the engine shows the contact igniter in the current position of the plug, but here are a couple of reasons why you might be right:

The drawing was created many years after the engine was built and contains at least one clear error (an incorrect length measurement). There may be other errors or inaccuracies.

We have no way of knowing whether all of the parts now on the engine are original, or whether some work was done to make it "presentable" for showing at state fairs and such.
Also, I got the impression while reviewing my photos that Ford may have made a few changes to the engine as he went along, to improve or fine tune the design. Your idea that he took the trouble to replace the original contact igniter with a spark plug is an intriguing one. I was under the impression (with absolutely no evidence to back it up!) that once Ford got the engine working, he more or less put it on the shelf and moved on to other things. On the other hand, if he wanted to use it to demonstrate his knowledge and abilities to other people, he may well have had good reason to make improvements. Or maybe he just wanted to learn more about ignition systems . . .

An alternative theory is that he took an off the shelf spark plug and modified it into a contact igniter. 

On a related note, I found a reference on contact igniters which talks about the use of a "self-induction coil." This is basically just a wire coil on an iron rod, which would have been much easier to make than a buzz coil.

Also, take a look at this drawing (https://www.thehenryford.org/collections-and-research/digital-collections/artifact/361250) which shows the igniter farther back on the cylinder as you suggest, and no coil in the circuit.

It's fun to speculate on these issues, but I think it is also useful as well as your comment made me take a fresh look at the ignition drawing and notice a detail I had not paid attention to before. 

I'll be updating my web page with the results of my research, and I will add to it if I come up with further information. Thanks again for taking the time to comment.


----------



## a41capt (Jun 23, 2019)

kquiggle said:


> John W - great observations and comments!
> 
> Also - thanks for the picture; I was looking through old publications trying to find a picture of a spark plug but did not have any luck. Can you tell me where that picture came from?
> 
> ...



Interesting stuff for sure, and as you stated, the engine may have been improved and/or changed experimentally, or like the rest of us nuts, just for the simple enjoyment of watching one of our creations run!

I found the old ad on this website:

https://oldautonews.com/first-spark-plugs/

I very much enjoyed your work on this, and my conjecture is merely speculative, as Henry is no longer around to quiz on the subject, and it looks like he wrote very little about the construction of the original at the time of building. This leaves LOTS of holes for us reverse engineers to fill in.

Once again, thanks for all the hard work, and I look forward to any further additions in the future!

John W


----------



## a41capt (Jun 23, 2019)

One more thought and then I’ll leave you alone with your own thoughts.  What if the combustion chamber were not made from an angle valve, but instead from a cast iron pressure relief valve? It would explain the adjustable nut and stem on top, and if tightened to the max, would provide enough resistance against this low compression engine, while reducing the combustion chamber size, or at the very least, allowing for an adjustment to the compression ratio.

I found a picture of a similar looking antique pressure relief valve, and it looks remarkably similar. Unfortunately, I am unable to link to the picture or paste it here.

John W


----------



## kquiggle (Jun 23, 2019)

JS sent me an email with some interesting comments, which he has given me permission to share here:

Great write up on your visit and the engine. In looking at your photos in more detail, there is a gap between the ground spring and the cam. The Ford archives ignition sequence drawing  shows the following:

Piston electrode contacts ignition plug, spring not contacting cam
Piston electrode contact overtravels ignition plug opening circuit, spring contacts cam.
Piston electrode contacts ignition plug and spring in contact with cam. This produces a momentary short circuit.
Piston electrode breaks contact with ignition plug drawing a spark.
(Not shown on drawing) Spring breaks contact with cam giving a double break to the circuit ensuring spark goes out.
This is consistent with my knowledge of DC applications. I’m a retired electrical engineer who worked for Westinghouse and have experience with industrial DC systems. It can be difficult to break a DC arc. It is common to use two breaks in order to do so. It is much easier to interrupt an AC arc since it does so 120 times a second without any external help.

This system is very crude and timing is critical. The Ford archives drawing shows a cutaway of the piston in the cylinder. The cutaway shows a 90-degree bent electrode that will contact the ignition plug. The piston electrode, ignition plug electrode, or both would need to be flexible. Otherwise, the adjustment of the wiping action would be extremely critical. It takes 30,000 volts to jump 1 cm at normal atmospheric temperature and pressure. A 110VDC potential needs a gap of less than .037 mm to arc under the same conditions. I doubt much of a change at the compression ratio this device has. I admire anyone who can get this original ignition system to work reliably. A spark plug and induction coil would be incredibly easier.​The drawing he was referring to is here:

https://www.thehenryford.org/collections-and-research/digital-collections/artifact/361250​I was grateful to JS for reminding me of that drawing, as he noted a detail I had completely missed: the circuit is broken twice, once at the cam and once at the plug. This completely explains why the ground is not just connected to the frame. However, if you look at the spring contact closely, you can see that one leg is above the cam, and the other leg is contacting the base of the frame. The second leg would have completed the circuit continuously; perhaps there was insulation under this originally, which has since been lost.


----------



## minh-thanh (Jun 24, 2019)

kquiggle !
Thank you !, lots of  information (I only read a few, and I will read on, although I often use google translate )


----------



## a41capt (Jul 16, 2019)

kquiggle said:


> John W - great observations and comments!
> 
> Also - thanks for the picture; I was looking through old publications trying to find a picture of a spark plug but did not have any luck. Can you tell me where that picture came from?
> 
> ...



Well, thanks to your historical research, I’ve decided to build a copy of Henry's engine. I’ve purchased the plans set and parts from Mr. Ridenour and gathered the rest of the materials for the build. I have decided to deviate from Mr. Ridenour's plans in order to be more historically accurate thanks to your research and excellent photos.

Of course, finding parts from 1893 are pretty much out of the question, which is too bad because I believe I’ve determined how he may have fabricated his make and break ignition, but if I can get my proof of concept engine running, I will dive into attempting the pressure relief valve system he employed for his combustion chamber at a later date.

Thanks again for all the leg work on this. As I’m in Arizona, the Henry Ford Museum isn’t just around the corner, and even if it was, getting access to the engine at the level you received might be damn near impossible! I have visited the museum several times in the past while visiting my in-laws in Northeast Ohio, but as they are now deceased, I can think of better vacation locations!

I probably won’t document my build, but I promise to share links to pictures and video of the running engine when completed.

John W


----------



## kquiggle (Jul 18, 2019)

John - 

Good luck on your build, I look forward to hearing more about it. 

Getting the plans from Leon Ridenour is a good start; I think he did a great job of adapting the original design to "modern" parts (which if you think about it is very much in the spirit of the original engine). I have had the pleasure of speaking with Mr. Ridenour over the phone, and he was also kind enough to send me some email comments recently (some of which I will share on my web site, with his permission).

I spent a few hours looking through old (circa 1900) catalogs online to see if I could find listings for the original parts, but without success. On the other hand,some parts like the globe valve are still available and made pretty much in the same way as the Ford parts. I really need to make a trip to the Detroit Public Library, which has a tremendous collection of early automotive documents.


----------



## a41capt (Jul 18, 2019)

kquiggle said:


> John -
> 
> Good luck on your build, I look forward to hearing more about it.
> 
> ...


From watching his dvd and seeing the personalized notes he’s included in his plans, I get the impression that he’s a damn nice guy that has a genuine desire to help with any problems that arise!  I don’t want to publish my build simply because I’d have to make parts of his plans available, and that’d be a real slap in the face to a guy selling his knowledge and skills at a most reasonable price.  My first iteration will follow his plans almost to the T (pun intended) so I can get a handle on the basics before moving forward.

Since that angle pressure relief valve appears to be in very short supply (composed of unobtanium I believe!), I am considering turning one from common materials and building internals to closely mimic what I believe Henry utilized in his make and break system.  We shall see how well my guesstimation works out...

Anyway, I’ve finally gathered all the necessary materials with the exception of a large handwheel, and have completed the “carburetor” and intake system. Slow going as my workshop isn’t cooled and the summer heat here has been hovering right at 107 degrees Fahrenheit. On to the combustion chamber and cylinder!


----------



## kquiggle (Nov 5, 2019)

I thought people interested in this post would also be interested in what I think is a very interesting discovery thanks to the sharp eyes of my acquaintance "WH." There is a photo in the book _Ford Methods and Ford Shops_ which includes the Ford's first engine in the picture (taken 1914 at the Ford Highland Park plant?).

See comment 4 in this link for my thoughts on the picture, and a bit more background. 

For more on the book (and a link to a free download) see this link. 

Here's the photo for those who just want a quick look.


----------



## a41capt (Nov 5, 2019)

Nice catch! Easy to see how the rebuilt model may have some non-original parts when it looks like it might’ve been disassembled while in storage.


----------



## a41capt (Nov 5, 2019)

Here’s where I am in completing my Ridenour build. It’s been slow going doing the work on a mini mill, but slow and steady wins the race!

I put my finger in the picture as scale reference next to the piston.


----------



## a41capt (Nov 5, 2019)

Oops, picture didn’t post. I’ll try again.


----------



## davidyat (Sep 22, 2020)

*Does Ford's Kitchen Sink Engine have plans out there to follow and build one. I see a lot of people making one. Do we have to look at pictures and figure it out on our own? Or does someone have a blueprint sheet of how to build one? Are there plans for purchase somewhere?
Grasshopper*


----------



## scottyp (Sep 22, 2020)

I have not ordered them (yet) but I believe this is one good option:









						Henry Ford's First Engine
					

Henry Ford's First Engine Henry Ford's first internal combustion engine (1893) - the "kitchen sink engine" Plans and Build Package by Leon Ridenour




					sites.google.com


----------

