Jump to content

Identify the Fan No. 28


Steve Rockwell

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Evan Atkinson said:

That blurb specifically states Marietta Mfg Co. and though it mentions a reorganization, wasn’t The Pennsylvania Electric Co. already a completely separate Cassel business? Methinks if you go to the trouble of changing 75% of the design of your motor and moving manufacture from one legal business to another, one is doing that for a compelling reason. I can think of no more compelling reason than protecting your bottom line, which is what I think H. Burd, clever dog that he was, was trying to do!

Cassel is the first name in the incorporation of the Pennsylvania Electric Co. in 98 and was the principle stockholder. He was also the president and receiver of the Marietta Mfg. Co. stated in a 03 biography. Crescent fan manufacture facilities changed in same town, why the change, that is not stipulated. 

Who said the Crescent Pennsylvania Electric CF motor was redesigned when introduced in 02?  No new DC motor patents claimed in 02 by Kulp or another assigned to the Pennsylvania Electric Co. I am aware of. Maybe they just continued with Brinser's patent and paid Diehl the Royalties. 

1904 Pennsylvania.jpg

Edited by Russ Huber
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/16/2024 at 8:06 PM, Russ Huber said:

 

Who said the Crescent Pennsylvania Electric CF motor was redesigned when introduced in 02?  ....

You did. At least, you suggested it and far earlier than I did.

image.thumb.png.2b465b0252da5b8be6249bc4b65b8917.png

image.thumb.png.7435fbfaf177a462c7bcb989ad44d9c1.png

But if Pennsylvania Electric never went on the record and actually said it was re-designed, the proof they actually did is the Crescent here. Photo below. I haven't taken it apart for servicing yet, but note the square field casting.

image.thumb.png.bdee52bdba01fa4aef07994e90fa36eb.png

It has to be a c.1902+ Pennsylvania Electric model. Crescent motors made under the Brinser patent, which your historical timeline established came first would be anything made by either Crescent Electric Co. (Kulp) or Marietta Mfg. Co (Cassel) -1900. My motor is the same as these Crescent fans, pictured.

image.thumb.png.84ff1340dabaccae49456a8721c7026a.png

This 1904 model happens to be more ornate, a sideband that is "crowned", but it's the same fan.

image.png.dc798ca5713afaac97d3b60ef693e62c.png

Same as these too.

image.png.d547d55a6fc70a7786d2bc6472bb36a5.png

This one as well!

And my motor is different enough from the Brinser patent that legally, Diehl would have trouble duplicating their winning judgement again. Especially if...IF...this motor Pennsylvania Electric used for the basis of their redesign originated from Sprague, a very financially successful, well-known and comparably-sized manufacturer as Diehl that had already commercially produced and sold the Lundell Empire fan using it with no legal action from Diehl against them.

I suspect paying Sprague (or their foundry vendor) a fee to use the Empire field casting may have been less financially onerous than paying Diehl royalties. If the yarn I'm spinning is even remotely true, this twist would have generated a real "stick-it-to-'em" satisfaction that H. Burd undoubtedly, relished.

My theory at least!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Evan Atkinson said:

You did. At least, you suggested it and far earlier than I did.

image.thumb.png.2b465b0252da5b8be6249bc4b65b8917.png

image.thumb.png.7435fbfaf177a462c7bcb989ad44d9c1.png

But if Pennsylvania Electric never went on the record and actually said it was re-designed, the proof they actually did is the Crescent here. Photo below. I haven't taken it apart for servicing yet, but note the square field casting.

 

It has to be a c.1902+ Pennsylvania Electric model. Crescent motors made under the Brinser patent, which your historical timeline established came first would be anything made by either Crescent Electric Co. (Kulp) or Marietta Mfg. Co (Cassel) -1900. My motor is the same as these Crescent fans, pictured.

 

This 1904 model happens to be more ornate, a sideband that is "crowned", but it's the same fan.

 

Same as these too.

 

This one as well!

And my motor is different enough from the Brinser patent that legally, Diehl would have trouble duplicating their winning judgement again. Especially if...IF...this motor Pennsylvania Electric used for the basis of their redesign originated from Sprague, a very financially successful, well-known and comparably-sized manufacturer as Diehl that had already commercially produced and sold the Lundell Empire fan using it with no legal action from Diehl against them.

I suspect paying Sprague (or their foundry vendor) a fee to use the Empire field casting may have been less financially onerous than paying Diehl royalties. If the yarn I'm spinning is even remotely true, this twist would have generated a real "stick-it-to-'em" satisfaction that H. Burd undoubtedly, relished.

My theory at least!

 

 

There are a lot of stabs in the dark I made years ago. The above made in 2012 is just one. You can't grow and improve without hitting a few road bumps. 🙂

What I am implying to date above is what in electrical trade supports changes done to the 02 Crescent CF motor as a result of the infringement case? The only thing we have so far is theory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correct, theory is all we have. Observable facts, logical deductions, but all theory until some old documents show up, verifying our conjectures. Trade journals haven't mentioned it that I can find. Considering Gramme ring armature ceiling fans were made well into the early teens and that's all Crescent had produced to this point, there'd have to be a compelling reason to get them to switch. Sticking with my theory for now 😎

Link to comment
Share on other sites

     This is Identify the Fan No. 37, out of sequence, dated 1 Mar 1900...

 

image.jpeg.fab5bf62fc96236efb6cfced6e2bf6b9.jpeg

 

                              image.png.4af814985dde4669683431475ec08ee1.png

 

                                                           image.thumb.jpeg.686b040ab1206eadcf2302e5f705ccc8.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Evan Atkinson said:

Correct, theory is all we have. Observable facts, logical deductions, but all theory until some old documents show up, verifying our conjectures. Trade journals haven't mentioned it that I can find. Considering Gramme ring armature ceiling fans were made well into the early teens and that's all Crescent had produced to this point, there'd have to be a compelling reason to get them to switch. Sticking with my theory for now 😎

Still going to stick with your theory? 🙂

 

 

1901

 

CrescentLegal2.v1.jpg

CrescentLegal3.v1.jpg

content.jpg

content (2).v1 (37).jpg

Edited by Russ Huber
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Steve Rockwell said:

     This is Identify the Fan No. 37, out of sequence, dated 1 Mar 1900...

 

image.jpeg.fab5bf62fc96236efb6cfced6e2bf6b9.jpeg

 

                              image.png.4af814985dde4669683431475ec08ee1.png

 

                                                           image.thumb.jpeg.686b040ab1206eadcf2302e5f705ccc8.jpeg

Man, oh MAN STEVE! You are just amazing with what you find. This gives me so much hope that you may one day find images of my beloved Backus electric ceiling fans. Backus Water Motor Co. was so early to the ceiling fan game (1892-1893) that perhaps their models made it into the photo archives shown with all their parts together and apart. Fingers crossed, big time. Incredible! 

These images of the Crescent are fantastic. I wonder: do they have more pictures of it, disassembled? I cannot tell for sure from this angle if the field casting is square or round, but it looks somewhat squared off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/19/2024 at 9:07 AM, Russ Huber said:

Still going to stick with your theory? 🙂

1901

content (2).v1 (37).jpg

It was a good theory while it lasted. Their field is square, but it seems that's where the similarities end....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...