It is currently Sun Oct 22, 2017 12:47 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 79 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Ultimate High Tech Steam, what would you build?
PostPosted: Sun Jul 21, 2013 9:30 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 7:20 pm
Posts: 1910
Location: San Diego, Ca
I'd give David Wardale one of the numerous NKP Berks and let him have at it.

Wishful thinking.

_________________
http://www.kentuckysteam.org


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ultimate High Tech Steam, what would you build?
PostPosted: Sun Jul 21, 2013 10:15 pm 

Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2004 3:37 pm
Posts: 1052
Location: Pacific, MO
Jeff Lisowski wrote:
I'd give David Wardale one of the numerous NKP Berks and let him have at it.

Wishful thinking.


I consider that blasphemy.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ultimate High Tech Steam, what would you build?
PostPosted: Sun Jul 21, 2013 10:25 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 7:20 pm
Posts: 1910
Location: San Diego, Ca
Frisco1522 wrote:
Jeff Lisowski wrote:
I'd give David Wardale one of the numerous NKP Berks and let him have at it.

Wishful thinking.


I consider that blasphemy.


Maybe so, and I know Steve Wickersham was dead set against Wardale doing anything to 614, however, there are a couple Berks and Kanawhas that are worse off than being experimented on.

_________________
http://www.kentuckysteam.org


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ultimate High Tech Steam, what would you build?
PostPosted: Sun Jul 21, 2013 10:44 pm 

Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2004 11:54 pm
Posts: 1709
"I consider that blasphemy."

Don't you mean heresy?


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ultimate High Tech Steam, what would you build?
PostPosted: Sun Jul 21, 2013 11:52 pm 

Joined: Thu May 24, 2012 1:37 pm
Posts: 870
It was important not to horse the throttle on a T1, of course, but that isn't really what the problem was. Little things like low rail joints or frogs would momentarily decrease the FA on one 'engine' (take away traction from one tread and 25% of the adhesion goes...) and it would then slip to higher speed on the same amount of throttle setting -- there being a couple of things to observe: engineers would have real trouble recognizing there was actually a slip going on; use of a single throttle for both engines made recovery difficult; the precision of the Franklin valve gear meant no self-restoring action.

The story I heard about T1 starting (which I referred to earlier) was that the technique involved adjusting the fire and the injector at starting time to put the boiler pressure relatively low. This made the throttle setting far less critical, and with longer cutoff the engine was less prone to spin up should there be a slip. By the time the engine gathered speed, the draft would have picked up and the steam generation gone back up.

This, or any other gentle touch on the throttle, did not address the real problem with T1s, which was that they would break loose and slip at high speeds, where the throttle would be open and high mass flow present, but the noise on the engine would make it difficult to assess in time when a slip was propagating, or what engine it was affecting. Within human reaction time, the slipping engine could run up to very high rpm indeed, at which point even closing the throttle would not cause instant spindown to re-establishment of adhesion. The Franklin type A was notorious for being able to achieve really neat valve events at very, very high cyclic rpm. That is NOT a good thing in a propagating slip...

I have argued elsewhere that when NYC built the test Niagara S2a (5500) they intentionally restricted the steam circuit (to develop the equivalent IHP of the piston-valve version) with the experience of the T1s in mind. (It was difficult for Bob LeMassena to figure out in his '80s article in Trains why NYC appears to have done this). At one time I thought it was just to economize on fuel and water rate, with the engine already developing almost too much power for its intended work, but that did not explain the problem with tortuous passages. Ameliorating high-speed slipping does -- it is not a 'problem' but an attempt at a default solution. (Of course there are better solutions, but crews might not learn or use them...)

Don't give Wardale a NKP Berk, give him a Kanawha. There are too many of them suffering slow, rusty dissolution. I, personally, would like to get my hands on the one with the welded boiler... ;-}

_________________
R.M.Ellsworth


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ultimate High Tech Steam, what would you build?
PostPosted: Sun Jul 21, 2013 11:59 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 7:20 pm
Posts: 1910
Location: San Diego, Ca
Overmod wrote:
Don't give Wardale a NKP Berk, give him a Kanawha. There are too many of them suffering slow, rusty dissolution. I, personally, would like to get my hands on the one with the welded boiler... ;-}


Which one is that?

_________________
http://www.kentuckysteam.org


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ultimate High Tech Steam, what would you build?
PostPosted: Mon Jul 22, 2013 12:53 am 

Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 3:41 am
Posts: 3012
Location: Inwood, W.Va.
The C&O K-4 with the welded boiler is No. 2789, the last one built new for C&O (Alco, 1947), the last survivor of the last five, which had those welded boilers, and currently stored and under slow restoration at the Hoosier Valley Railroad Museum in North Judson, Indiana.

http://www.hoosiervalley.org/roster/locomotives/

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/locoPi ... x?id=82713

http://www.steamlocomotive.com/berkshire/?page=co

http://www.steamlocomotive.com/berkshire/kanawha.shtml

The boiler almost looks like it has its lagging in place, due to the lack of rivets and welt plates typical of riveted construction.

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... id=2721249

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... id=1613492


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ultimate High Tech Steam, what would you build?
PostPosted: Mon Jul 22, 2013 5:29 am 

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 6:12 am
Posts: 179
Location: North Wales and Australia.
Assuming the blank page,
A 2-8-2 5 foot drivers, 3 cylinder compound, twin valves, oposite balanced valve gear and inner valves driven from out side with computer cutoff balanced reverising. Bakers valve gear to complete roller and needle bearings. Spinal type frames with balanced suspension and side control and wheel set stearing. Boiler with super heating and re heater of high gas flow area.cylinder steam balancing chambers, SADS or ADS advanced draughting lempor Kordinas, feed water heater. 40 ft square grate. Either liquid or solid bio fuel combustion. Computerised monertering system, full electrical systems including servicing lighting and cameras for line of sight driving. Improved steam cycle and flow piping, inclosed front end piping. Full insulation. High wheel profile, wheel washers, multiple sanding heads, railwashers. Advanced piston and valve rings, lubrication and waer face cooling. modified piston valve form. Modern and duel braking systems.

An estimated HP of 4000 or similar to the average diesel output. Top speed at around 100mph. May be there is a lot of minor detail that could be added but its the next ideas beyond Wardale and Porta. I am sure you understand just how radical a rethink some of the above is of a stephensoian loco this would be. I know that you could go water tubed boiler and turbine and so on but that's beyond what I understand.

_________________
Less words, more hardware. Only what others say can not be done is worth doing.


Last edited by Nigel Anthony Hewer Day on Mon Jul 22, 2013 6:34 am, edited 1 time in total.

Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ultimate High Tech Steam, what would you build?
PostPosted: Mon Jul 22, 2013 6:07 am 

Joined: Thu May 24, 2012 1:37 pm
Posts: 870
Let me briefly toss in a couple of notes, in case of unfamiliarity:

"computer balanced reversing" is an optimized modern version of what Valve Pilot does.

Baker gear can be completely pin-jointed (no critical sliding link contact as in Walschaerts) so it can be wear-free, and perhaps significantly entirely enclosed-lubricated.

"High wheel profile" is Porta's high-adhesion wheel profile (HAWP)

I presume the item after "lubrication" means 'wear-face cooling', by which I further presume he means cooled valve liners to allow very high admission-steam superheat. The 'advanced piston and valve rings' probably comprise multiple thin rings of proper metallurgy; along with this goes lightening and perhaps articulation of the valve.

In my opinion, you should not think of this as a traditional "Mikado" -- but rather as a Berkshire-scale locomotive where the thermodynamic efficiency is high enough to permit a 'firebox end' that can be carried on a two-wheel Delta truck. There is much more detail to the 'side control' than the brief mention indicates; presume that reciprocating overbalance is strictly minimized if not eliminated.

I regret that I have no idea what SADS or ADS is meant to stand for.

And please, no arguments about superheater configuration! <ducks for cover> ;=}

_________________
R.M.Ellsworth


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ultimate High Tech Steam, what would you build?
PostPosted: Mon Jul 22, 2013 6:12 am 

Joined: Thu May 24, 2012 1:37 pm
Posts: 870
BTW, since the significant thread on NYC Niagara servicing procedure has been bumped, let me propose that we expand this discussion to include 'ultimate high tech service and maintenance facilities and procedures' (that are practical and cost-effective in a real railroad context).

_________________
R.M.Ellsworth


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ultimate High Tech Steam, what would you build?
PostPosted: Mon Jul 22, 2013 1:57 pm 

Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2013 9:41 am
Posts: 72
Here's is what I would build.

http://www.northeast.railfan.net/images/erie5014a.jpg
and GN's Mclass

http://www.northeast.railfan.net/images/gn1981.jpg

http://www.northeast.railfan.net/images/gn2001.jpg

http://www.northeast.railfan.net/images/gn2022.jpg

Not to forget that A.T.&S.F. had 2-10-10-2's
Mr. Starr


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ultimate High Tech Steam, what would you build?
PostPosted: Mon Jul 22, 2013 2:24 pm 

Joined: Thu May 24, 2012 1:37 pm
Posts: 870
Oddly enough, there have been studies of using LNG or CNG on reciprocating locomotives, usually as part of a dual- or multi-fuel system. In my youth, I designed a system I called 'flash boosting' which implemented auxiliary burners ahead of Besler tubes to provide additional 'smokeless' combustion energy, and to gain some of the advantages of separately-fired superheaters for (relatively) short-term power excursions, such as starting or reaching the ruling point on a grade.

You would not want to use a purely gaseous fuel on a moving locomotive unless you had REALLY good flameholding methods, and REALLY good methods of avoiding kernels or whole zones where a critical mixture becomes established. (You do NOT want to find out why explosion doors won't work in that scenario!!!)

The relatively low heat content 'per liter' of the carbureted fuel, and the larger packaging (and pressure/cryo) requirements for the tankage, are not particularly favorable for external combustion. Since these fuels burn well in Brayton-cycle turbines, it makes better sense to use a bottoming Rankine cycle -- with some additional burner capacity downstream of the turbine to keep thermal cycling in the steam generator (called a HRSG, for 'heat recovery steam generator', it's so last century to call it a 'boiler'). The question then becomes 'how can the bottoming-generated power best be used'. And then, shortly after, 'is it cost-effective to provide the equipment for bottoming, based on that use'.

It might be remembered that heat recovery from piston engines has not exactly been a source of power 'too cheap to meter'; in fact, the Kitson-Still, which was supposed to generate some substantial percentage of its power steam from exhaust heat recovery, turned out to actually make so little steam from its "HRSG" as to make the provision of that component of the engine pointless.

I believe Matt Austin has distinctive competence in this area, and if he cares to comment on it we should listen to him.

_________________
R.M.Ellsworth


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ultimate High Tech Steam, what would you build?
PostPosted: Tue Jul 23, 2013 11:15 am 

Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2011 9:58 am
Posts: 55
Location: South Jersey
This would be my choice. Photo by my Mum.

Image

_________________
Old member,new screen name due to some glitch in the works
Steam professional since 1975
Former block operator-PRSL


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ultimate High Tech Steam, what would you build?
PostPosted: Tue Jul 23, 2013 11:35 am 

Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2007 7:31 pm
Posts: 138
Location: Elizabethtown,PA
This is where we need a ' Like ' button.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ultimate High Tech Steam, what would you build?
PostPosted: Tue Jul 23, 2013 3:56 pm 

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 6:12 am
Posts: 179
Location: North Wales and Australia.
Where Overmod talks about servicing it would be in this day a situation where other than fuel and water servicing would be every few thousand miles. The result is servicing is minimal and practical for an excursion engine even just line side. For a commercial operation the use of a diesel setup is entirely practical if liquid fuels are used.

Combustion. I know above in my proposal I just mention Bio fuels but any build now must consider fuel eficiency and environmental issues. Straight coal burning is out of the question. Like wise the use of compounding when it gives higher eficiency would be right.

Fundamentally and general comments here show a better understanding of the Stephensoian locomotive rather than the power station on wheels. The cost of building the latter would be massive so any reality would say the Stephensonian is more realistic.


The hart of what I proposed is based on a Chapelon 4-10-2 of around 1950's which was half built. You add in some Porta things along with Wardale's 26 and 5AT work, and then add in all my more recent work. The locomotive would be a very general purpose machine with high route availability and overall efficiency.

_________________
Less words, more hardware. Only what others say can not be done is worth doing.


Last edited by Nigel Anthony Hewer Day on Tue Jul 23, 2013 4:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Offline
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 79 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


 Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], dinwitty, Google [Bot] and 35 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: