It is currently Wed Oct 07, 2026 2:15 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: PRR S2
PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 11:43 pm 

Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2004 9:35 am
Posts: 8139
Location: Wilton, NY
Builders photo of this unusual and short lived locomotive, which worked better for Lionel than the PRR:

http://abpr2.railfan.net/abprphoto.cgi? ... 6200_C.jpg


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: PRR S2
PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 5:30 am 

Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2004 5:58 pm
Posts: 1084
looks powerful. thanks for sharing


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: PRR S2
PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 10:30 am 

Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 3:07 pm
Posts: 17
I have always wondered as to why this engine didn't work out. What caused not to be successful?


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: PRR S2
PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 10:55 am 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2004 1:45 am
Posts: 1138
Location: Beaumont, Texas
rob216 wrote:
I have always wondered as to why this engine didn't work out. What caused not to be successful?


Most steam turbine locomotives consumed large amounts of steam at slow speeds. They also required a seperate turbine for backing up, and gearing. This made them way more complicated than it was worth in terms of higher pressure or fuel saving.

The only ones that were moderately successfull were a group of condensing engines built in Sweden. One was even tried in Britian.

_________________
-James Hefner
Hebrews 10:20a

Surviving World Steam Project - New Address!

International Stationary Steam Engine Society


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: PRR S2
PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 2:12 pm 

Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2004 8:31 am
Posts: 1341
Location: South Carolina
James is correct about the major problems with the S2.

Basically a steam turbine can be designed for optimum performance at only one rotational speed. The steam blows into the turbine through multiple nozzles and strikes a series of alternating stationary and moving blades. The shapes and angles of these blades are carefully calculated in order for the maximum energy to be extracted from the steam. If the moving blades are moving too fast or too slow, much of the efficiency is lost. The S2 was very efficient when cruising along at typical passenger train speeds, but at low speeds and especially when starting, it was a different story.

I've read that in the case of the S2, there was almost no resistance to steam flow when the engine was starting. As a result, the boiler pressure would rapidly fall, stressing the boiler and causing a high number of staybolt failures. As you can imagine, efficiency was pretty miserable during these conditions too.

The most successful Swedish engines actually weren't condensing. See this page (these engines are located on the lower half of the page) for more info:

http://www.dself.dsl.pipex.com/MUSEUM/L ... edturb.htm

My guess is that the Swedish turbine engines were designed for relatively slow speed operation and their turbines were geared appropriately, so that they spent most of their time operating in their most efficient speed range. Two of these engines have been preserved.

_________________
Hugh Odom
The Ultimate Steam Page
http://www.trainweb.org/tusp


Offline
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


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

Jump to: