KING'S WHARF PLANT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIX, Issue 21167, 27 April 1932, Page 13

KING'S WHARF PLANT.

TROUBLE WITH BOILERS. OFFER OF COMPENSATION. FURTHER PROPOSAL REJECTED. An offer of compensation for the delay caused to the Auckland Electric-Power Board by the defective furnaces under the new boilers at the King's Wharf power station was received by the board Yesterday from Babcock and Wilcox, Limited, which designed the boilers. The company also made a proposal to instal a different type of furnace with watercooled walls at a reduced cost. The board's general manager, Mr. R. H. Bartley, said that the company had agreed to pay the full amount of compensation for delay in shipping materials and in bringing the boilers into action, the sum agreed upon being £6OO. However, it did not agree to pay certain items estimated by him at £2OO and by the contractors at £I2OO. The trouble with the furnaces had been caused by the use of Waikato coal containing a proportion of iron and lime, which fused in the ash and caused the walls to waste away. The company said that norm?! annual maintenance would not be greater than £BOO, and the maintenance cost using this coal would be £2OOO. The board's figures showed a maintenance cost of over £4OOO, which, after deducting £BOO, left a difference of £3200 and not £I2OO. The company was prepared to instal Bailey furnaces with water-cooled firebox walls for £10,500, the normal cost being £13,400. This charge would include labour ajid supervision. What the board was asked to do under this offer was to hand each bo.iler over to the company and receive it back with a new furnace. The effect of the new fireboxes would be to increase steam output 25 per cent., but this increase was of no value to the board, as it was too small to save the use of one new boiler and was not needed with both boilers in,use. " I am doubtful if this expenditure would be the correct thing under the present circumstances," concluded the manager. " I cannot form an opinion until we know what happens at Arapuni. If we were sure of water-power I would not recommend the expenditure. We could use oil fuel or fire the boilers with overseas or Southern coal when they were required." In reply to Mr. J. Rowe, Mr. Bartley said that if the Arapuni supply failed he would recommend making the change and adding another boiler. " How long could we reasonably hold the matter abeyance ?" asked Mr. M. J. Bennett.

Mr. Bartley: As long as we can get Babcock and Wilcox to agree. Air. J. Park stated that samples of Waikato coal had been forwarded and the company had known what it had to deal with. The company was responsible for the design of the furnaces, in which it knew the coal was to be used. He considered that the board should not enter into negotiations to spend money when it should have received a satisfactory design at the outset. " The company has admitted that it knew what coal was to be used, but it never had the ash analysed," said Mr. Bartley. Mr. S. I. Crookes contended that ordinary engineering care had not been exercised, and the board should enforce its contract. . On the motion of the chairman, Mr. W. J Holdsworth, it was decided to inform Babcock and Wilcox that the proposal could not be accepted and to call on them to make such alterations to the boilers as would bring them within tho terms of the contract.