It is currently Sun Feb 25, 2018 3:51 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 109 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: PRR T1 Build Update
PostPosted: Sun Feb 04, 2018 1:43 pm 

Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2005 1:05 am
Posts: 407
Baldwin's magic mass production number was 10.

Attachment:
magic10.jpg
magic10.jpg [ 175.55 KiB | Viewed 1420 times ]


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: PRR T1 Build Update
PostPosted: Sun Feb 04, 2018 5:56 pm 

Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2015 5:55 pm
Posts: 432
M Austin wrote:
Baldwin's magic mass production number was 10.



That's interesting. What do you suppose they would have done with a frame for a single model like this one, or had they stopped agreeing to one-offs by that point?


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: PRR T1 Build Update
PostPosted: Sun Feb 04, 2018 7:26 pm 

Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 12:44 pm
Posts: 39
Location: Cheyenne, WY
Actually, the Baldwin Magazine, Vol. 2, Number 2 (Second Quarter, 1945), page 7, notes that BLW considered using a welded frame but elected to go with the cast frame.
Dave

_________________
Dave Griner


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: PRR T1 Build Update
PostPosted: Sun Feb 04, 2018 7:29 pm 

Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 7:52 am
Posts: 1282
Location: Strasburg, PA
filmteknik wrote:
The biggest concern has always been the frame. Have they determined if the capability to cast such a large, complex shape still exists anywhere in the world?

That ability has gone away simply because it is obsolete and not needed any more. If you need a large complex shape today, you weld it together. PRR was experimenting with fabricated cylinder blocks in the 1930's. There was no shortage of large steel foundries back then, so why would they have bothered? Because they recognized that fabricated construction promised many advantages over castings. Advantages that are routinely exploited today.

Rest assured that if Rudolph Diesel had choked on a sausage as a young man, and the big three were still building steam locomotives today, you can be sure that their frames would be built up by welding together steel shapes.

_________________
"It was not easy to convince Allnutt. All his shop training had given him a profound prejudice against inexact work, experimental work, hit-or-miss work."
C. S. Forester

Strasburg Rail Road Mechanical Department


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: PRR T1 Build Update
PostPosted: Sun Feb 04, 2018 8:00 pm 

Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 4:29 pm
Posts: 1109
Location: Youngstown, OH
For an example of what is possible with steel weldments, just Google image search "heavy weldments".

HK Porter was a pioneer in welded steam locomotive frames. J&L 58's frame is a heavy weldment.

_________________
Rick Rowlands
Steel Industry Preservationist, Narrow Gauge Railroader and ALCOhaulic


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: PRR T1 Build Update
PostPosted: Sun Feb 04, 2018 10:13 pm 

Joined: Thu May 24, 2012 1:37 pm
Posts: 958
Quote:
"M Austin wrote:
Baldwin's magic mass production number was 10."


But this is for boilers, which have no relation to modern frames whatsoever. Furthermore, they apply to the sets of tools used to form the boiler plate for riveted construction, something that wouldn't apply anywhere to 5051.

As a potentially interesting aside, a similar set of progressive dies is used in forming the eyes of Timken light-alloy rods. Precise drawings and information for these exists in the N&W archives, and this qualifies as an 'intermediate stage' between the absence of the tooling and, as Baldwin noted, the existence of the tooling from a previous order.

Baldwin obtained cast beds from its subsidiary in Granite City, and I do not know by how much (if at all) the cost of one of the 25 T1s they produced was reduced by having all the cores and patterns made up to make the beds. None of that is even remotely relevant to the situation involved with making a new cast-bed equivalent. And certainly Baldwin provided plenty of bids for locomotives (or via GSC even for individual cast beds for other people's projects) in small quantities.

_________________
R.M.Ellsworth


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: PRR T1 Build Update
PostPosted: Mon Feb 05, 2018 12:20 am 

Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 7:52 am
Posts: 1282
Location: Strasburg, PA
The only time that I know of where a minimum order came from Baldwin was (going from memory only) I recall reading that the White Pass approached them for a couple (?) of new 2-8-2's in 1952. Baldwin had been out of the steam locomotive business since 1949, and replied that a minimum order of ten locomotives was needed to justify reopening steam locomotive production. White Pass declined and bought the GE shovel nose diesels instead.

_________________
"It was not easy to convince Allnutt. All his shop training had given him a profound prejudice against inexact work, experimental work, hit-or-miss work."
C. S. Forester

Strasburg Rail Road Mechanical Department


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: PRR T1 Build Update
PostPosted: Mon Feb 05, 2018 10:17 am 

Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2004 11:16 am
Posts: 582
david griner wrote:
Actually, the Baldwin Magazine, Vol. 2, Number 2 (Second Quarter, 1945), page 7, notes that BLW considered using a welded frame but elected to go with the cast frame.
Dave



Yes and some people at the Nevada Northern considered welding on flat spots on a tire until the issues of doing that were understood. Just because something was considered and mentioned in an article does not make it feasible.

Robby Peartree


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: PRR T1 Build Update
PostPosted: Mon Feb 05, 2018 11:27 am 

Joined: Thu May 24, 2012 1:37 pm
Posts: 958
Quote:
"Just because something was considered and mentioned in an article does not make it feasible."


Suggest you carefully read the patent PRR filed regarding the transformation of the T1 to the "T1a", with specific reference to attaching the new valve chests, and then come back here and try to make the implicit claim they 'didn't know enough about welding then' again.

Now, based on my somewhat cursory understanding of Baldwin diesel history, I'd tend to doubt Baldwin advising a fabricated instead of GSC-cast frame for this locomotive, in the absence of more specific evidence that it was more than a wild-hair idea. I can see some 'justice' for the idea based on the frame distortion forces being much less, nominally, in the duplex configuration than for the equivalent-capacity 4-8-4. But it flies in the face of the by-then-established value of the precise assured alignment that the cast beds would provide. (And it essentially short-routes a Baldwin subsidiary.)

What possible relevance this could have to 21st-century practice with effective controlled-atmosphere, directed preheating, and laser keyhole welding is, at best, head-in-the-sand obscure to me.

_________________
R.M.Ellsworth


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: PRR T1 Build Update
PostPosted: Mon Feb 05, 2018 12:37 pm 

Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2017 4:38 pm
Posts: 12
Robby Peartree wrote:
david griner wrote:
Actually, the Baldwin Magazine, Vol. 2, Number 2 (Second Quarter, 1945), page 7, notes that BLW considered using a welded frame but elected to go with the cast frame.
Dave



Yes and some people at the Nevada Northern considered welding on flat spots on a tire until the issues of doing that were understood. Just because something was considered and mentioned in an article does not make it feasible.

Robby Peartree


The Navy welded armor plate on new/damaged battleships. Certainly more than feasible.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: PRR T1 Build Update
PostPosted: Mon Feb 05, 2018 4:15 pm 

Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2007 8:03 pm
Posts: 908
Location: Brampton, Ontario
I've seen some massive weld repairs on the frames of several of the CNR engines that I've crawled around, from 2-6-0's all the way up to Northerns.


Attachments:
IMG_6287.jpg
IMG_6287.jpg [ 315.79 KiB | Viewed 625 times ]

_________________
CNR 6167 in Guelph, ON or "How NOT To Restore A Steam Locomotive"
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: PRR T1 Build Update
PostPosted: Mon Feb 05, 2018 10:54 pm 

Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2004 11:16 am
Posts: 582
Dear Overmod.

Place yourself where Baldwin was when the T-1 were developed. It is during WWII, development of new techniques is limited due to the war effort. The only thing everyone has in large quantities is demand for war effort products. Are you going to spend the time on developing weldaments or are going to use a casting operation that has already proven efficient and the industry is perfectly capable of producing a good product without much development. What would you have chosen? Now, your company’s magazine needs to show that you are forward thinking and working to reduce costs, would you put in the magazine that you considered something “innovative” no matter how long you considered the process. Absolutely you would put it in there. The N&W developed the movie “Modern Coal Burning Steam locomotive” to help explain their continued use of steam over the new diesel.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gH_o5xZ8wRU

Dear DWH,

They also built a lot of liberty ships by an all welding technique. Some did well some did not.
https://metallurgyandmaterials.wordpres ... -failures/

Dear Joe6167

I have seen some impressive welding where Baldwin was doing thermite welding on new locomotives on the El Paso & Northeastern 2-6-2. While welding frames is nothing new, the use of welding was closely monitored by the railroad community. Remember at this time a fully welded boiler would then be heat treated to reduce internal stress. Seeing that they used casting over welding may speak to many issues.

The era this work was done in is very different than today and that may very well have driven the decision process in ways we may never know.

Robby Peartree


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: PRR T1 Build Update
PostPosted: Tue Feb 06, 2018 12:19 am 

Joined: Thu Dec 12, 2013 1:26 pm
Posts: 60
The liberty ships show that when you try to do something new, there is a learning curve. An early British jet airliner had somewhat similar design flaw of square corner windows, and at least one of them crashed. At least we can learn from the failures of the past. Someday there maybe a need to build a one off steamer for a tourist line. Welding maybe cheaper than casting. PRR fabricated some drivers by welding. It would be nice to know how long they lasted in service.
Tom Hamilton


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: PRR T1 Build Update
PostPosted: Tue Feb 06, 2018 2:02 am 

Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2004 10:52 pm
Posts: 914
Hi,

IIRC, theT1 Trust already made sure they had a place to cast the frames before embarking on this quest.

I think I'll not worry about the casting of frames at this time.

Doug vV


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: PRR T1 Build Update
PostPosted: Tue Feb 06, 2018 7:08 am 

Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2006 10:42 am
Posts: 213
Location: Lancaster, PA
Hello,

In the late 1980's in my 1st job out of school, the company where I was employed routinely poured stainless steel castings in the 2000-3000 lb range. They constantly struggled with porosity and had to air arc the the defective areas, grind and fill with weld metal. A well seasoned engineer who had been with the company for years incessantly complained about the quality of these castings. So much so he used to declare the blow holes required to clean out the porosity were so large you could "throw a cat through them"! He was a strong advocate of fabrication. The company eventually tried a few large fabrications but did not make a wholesale switch. They may have had design concerns and were not comfortable with the concept completely.

In my first summer there I had an internship to develop a database on many of the castings to determine the numbers of gates and risers needed for mold set-up. In that early exposure it seemed was casting was a difficult art to master well. Today there maybe computer programs to assess flow, shrinkage and section sizes. Back then it seemed like accumulated experience was a very strong factor. Lots of risers can feed metal into the the casting but then you must remove them after shake out. If you have been around an air arc it's a violent dangerous process, you had better be wearing all leather so the molten beads of metal roll off you after they have been blasted out of the casting!

Fabrication is great alternative as long as stress relieving is part of the process.

Looking forward to seeing the Trust start the frame construction.

Sincerely,

Randy


Offline
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 109 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


 Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 70000, Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 29 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: