Material ingenuity: Jaohn Smeaton's practical methods as an instrument maker, experimental philosopher, and engineer

John Smeaton (1724-1792) was an English instrument maker, experimental philosopher and engineer. My aim in this dissertation is to examine the practical methods Smeaton used in his scientific and technological research. Whereas much of the secondary literature on Smeaton focuses on his career as a prolific engineer, I draw attention to Smeaton’s early instrument making and electrical experiments, which, I argue, constituted a crucial first step in his development into a major engineer of the first Industrial Revolution. In the central chapters of this dissertation, I discuss Smeaton’s role in the vis viva controversy, the Royal Society network he appealed to during the building of the Eddystone Lighthouse, and the methods that he used in his research into waterwheel functioning and lime mortars. To provide some historical and methodological context, I look at the methods and influences of Smeaton’s predecessor John Theophilus Desaguliers (1683-1744), who tried to apply Newton’s mechanics to practical machines. Finally, I explore Smeaton’s legacy as an instrument maker, focusing on the evolution of air pump research in the second half of the eighteenth century, followingSmeaton’s significantly improved pump design of 1752.

The overarching theme of this dissertation is the notion of ‘material ingenuity’ – Smeaton’s ability to manipulate, modify and control material objects, across a wide variety of disciplines. This is brought out most clearly in his development of a common method for carrying out both scientific experiments (primarily in electrical research) and technological trials (windmills, waterwheels and lime mortars). I show that Smeaton used parameter variation to test hypotheses, generate practical rules, and optimise the machine or process under consideration. Contributing to recent research in the history and philosophy of science, I argue that Smeaton bridged the gap between science and technology not because he applied scientific knowledge to practical problems, and not only because his social network included both practitioners and theoreticians, but primarily because he developed a single experimental method that could be used in both scientific and technological research.