| Railway Preservation News https://www.rypn.org/forums/ |
|
| Pennsylvania to Outlaw old Boilers? https://www.rypn.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=2854 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | HRMO'Biph [ Tue Mar 19, 2002 12:46 am ] |
| Post subject: | Pennsylvania to Outlaw old Boilers? |
Just heard from some of my traction engine contacts that the State of Pennsylvania is looking to outlaw old rivited boilers in the wake of the Madina tragedy. Understand there are to be some hearings to also look into exercising jurisdiction over boilers under federal inspection as well. Anybody up there know anything more? Oberservation: after it was all said and done, the Madina explosion had nothing to do with the fact it was an old rivited boiler, but everything to do with the fact it was an abused, misrepaired one, and wasn't in any real condition to run, especially with low water. lorija799@aol.com |
|
| Author: | Mik [ Tue Mar 19, 2002 2:16 am ] |
| Post subject: | No one knows |
They held a meeting, on Medina and inspections. It got bogged down with questions, they lost control and ran out of time. Nothing of any real use was discussed there. On the agenda was the proposed formation of an advisory board to recommend changes (if any) to the existing law, but they never got anywhere near that far down the list. There was a press interview of Mr Payton awhile back (August?) in which he stated the current law was adequate, then a memo in December saying that they had decided to add an ultrasonic inspection of the crown sheet (okay, except no word on how often, or how much $$$, just that you needed an arbitrary minimum thickness of 5/16", or submit it to a certified shop to have more in-depth measurements and calculations done to get some sort of variance...just lovely considering some were 5/16" when built) And yes, there is now a rumor that the state may decline to inspect any hobby boilers "until further notice". What that means is anyone's guess , EXCEPT a lot of small communities stand to lose a sizable chunk of tourist $$$ if the threshing shows are cancelled or steamless. The overriding rumor is (and has been since he got involved in the investigation), that our beloved Mr.Payton has had an axe or two to grind with hobby boilers for years, and the Medina fiasco may be just the excuse he needed to try what he would not have otherwise been able to do. BUT since the mandatory retirement age was raised we still will probably have about 6 more years of his inspired guidance.... So please excuse me if I use a pseudonym |
|
| Author: | Pete [ Tue Mar 19, 2002 5:41 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Pennsylvania to Outlaw old Boilers? |
> Understand there > are to be some hearings to also look into > exercising jurisdiction over boilers under > federal inspection as well. The FRA has pre-empted all railroad boilers into their purview, so state pressure vessle codes and their attendant bureaucracies no longer have jurisdiction *period*. I can't imagine that the FRA intends or wants to regulate live steamers. They aren't "railroads" as defined by the FRA, but I haven't heard anything one way or the other. |
|
| Author: | HRMO'Biph [ Tue Mar 19, 2002 10:45 am ] |
| Post subject: | New rules may allow additional oversite |
no one was talking about the FRA inspecting non RR stuff, but if one looks at the new rules, there is the possibilaty that the FRA would allow additional state oversite. There is NOTHING in the new rules to preclude that, as there were in the old ones. I know that at least one state(on the east coast) whose Dept. of Transport shows up in addition to the FRA inspector. That state requires that engineers be qualified thru them and the FRA. It has been rumored for years that many of the FRA responsibilaties may be shifted to the states. In the current climate of government and liabilaty idiocy, there are no longer any guarantees about regulations and their permanance. lorija799@aol.com |
|
| Author: | G. W. Laepple [ Tue Mar 19, 2002 7:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: New rules may allow additional oversite |
In the Keystone State, employees of the Public Utilities Commission are certified by the FRA as track, equipment and signal inspectors and they do just that. When I was working in the industry, on several occasions I had a visit from an FRA regional guy one week and a visit from the PUC guy the next week. There are not enough FRA men around to keep an eye on all the railroads, so in Pennsylvania, the state guys do quite a lot of it. I don't recall if any of the equipment inspectors are qualified on steam, however. K4s1361@hotmail.com |
|
| Author: | M Austin [ Wed Mar 20, 2002 12:06 am ] |
| Post subject: | Nothing arbitrary about 5/16" |
Minimum thickness of plates used for stayed surface is 5/16" regardless of pressure or staybolt pitch per ASME Boiler Code. |
|
| Author: | Mik [ Wed Mar 20, 2002 12:44 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Nothing arbitrary about 5/16" |
> Minimum thickness of plates used for stayed > surface is 5/16" regardless of pressure > or staybolt pitch per ASME Boiler Code. Yes, that is for new construction, so what is the corrosion allowance? Zero? I repeat, that is simply not practical. |
|
| Author: | M Austin [ Wed Mar 20, 2002 3:06 am ] |
| Post subject: | Corrosion allowance = zero |
If proper water chemistry is maintained, corrosion will not occur. |
|
| Author: | Rick [ Wed Mar 20, 2002 9:33 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Corrosion allowance = zero |
> If proper water chemistry is maintained, > corrosion will not occur. That is a bif IF. However out in the real world, proper water chemistry cannot always be maintained, so some corrosion will occur. Why not just add another sixteenth or eighth of an inch to compensate for it? The Tod Engine todengine@woh.rr.com |
|
| Author: | ge13031 [ Wed Mar 20, 2002 9:54 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Boiler life |
Doesn't this all have to do with expected life of the boiler? The 5/16" having been used will give you a rough idea of the boiler life ... if you want to extend the life of the boiler you increase the thickness. You also have to figure in the ups and downs of "museum" operation which probably cause more corrosion than daily operation. I have read several notes from "old timers" listing the problems created by indiscriminate operation. lamontdc@adelphia.net |
|
| Author: | Mik [ Wed Mar 20, 2002 11:49 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Boiler life |
First of all, there is/was/should have been a certain amount of corrosion allowance built into that 5/16" number. (A Zero allowance is highly improbable, we are discussing a society of mechanical engineers, not theoretical physicists) Now, someone knew what the allowance % was when they used that number in writing the regulation. (other parts mention 3 full turns for threaded connections which with the ever popular 12 pitch equals 1/4".....logic says that was probably the number they started with before adding 1/16 for a corrosion allowance. BUT I also suppose logic could gone right out the window once this recommendation became adopted as "code".) Back to the original issue, I have talked to some friends in the Department of Labor and Industry. The facts (according to my sources) are: Yes, there is a temporary moratoriam on hobby boiler inspections, BUT only until after a department meeting to be held in the first weeks in April. Second, sweeping changes in the antique boiler law (read: outlawing rivetted construction) as mentioned above would require that the state government enact legislation, which is not (to anyone's knowlege) pending, or even in commitee. However, all that does NOT preclude the possiblility/probability that there will be new and more stringent methods of inspection added without change to the existing law (I can only assume this comes under "inspector's discretion" for requiring further tests). I repeat, the insiders feel (at this point) that there will probably not be new law (not in the immediate future anyway), just more "red tape and hoops" squeezed in under the old one. |
|
| Author: | BobK [ Wed Mar 20, 2002 8:00 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Boiler life |
First the 5/16 is a rule by ASME. The contractor who builds the boiler can elect to use a plate 1/16 over but may not use a plate under 5/16.Also the ASME rule as stated was partly correct in that the minimum thickness for stayed surface plates is 5/16"....however,that is for the flat plates, as that value only applies to stayed surfaces that are not curved or spherical. robert@trainorders.com |
|
| Author: | Pete [ Thu Mar 21, 2002 3:52 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: New rules may allow additional oversite |
About 8 years ago, somehow state inspectors (PUC etc) were empowered to enforce FRA stuff. I believe this was some piece of Federal legislation. This means that the FRA regs apply and state regs don't. So any State inspectors must apply the FRA regs rather than their own state's. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|