Got this in an email today, worth sharing. It is the official announcement from The Steam Railroading Institute:

"As many of you now know, at approximately 2:30 AM on July 24th, #1225 suffered a boiler tube failure. On later inspection, four other tubes were cracked in the release of steam that occurred. This was NOT, I repeat NOT a catastrophic situation, and was not an uncommon occurrence in the days of steam. We are very proud of Zach Hall, our volunteer, who did EXACTLY what needed to be done in the situation, dropping the fire, getting the injector going, and reacting in a cool, calm manner. To say his quick action was a textbook response of what anyone working on steam should do under these circumstances was an understatement. Everyone at SRI (and the #1225) owes a big debt of gratitude to Zach.

Greg and our crew are working with our friends (many of whom attended Trainfestival) to help us get the damaged tubes removed, replaced, and have the locomotive hydro-ed and back under steam as quickly as possible for our busy fall season, which includes are trips to Hamburg, and Cadillac.

As is often the case in these situations, there is a tendency by the general public to not understand what has happened, and for visitors and those lacking knowledge about steam to overreact when such an event occurs, and rumors often do spread that are unfounded. We at SRI are very appreciative that at least in this case, there seem to be a general understanding of the fact that the situation was well handled, and at no time was the public in jeopardy. That said, we would ask that if you do hear said comments, to help us set the record straight --- and invite those who care to ride with us this fall and winter to experience the glory of large, operating steam in the 21st Century. "

I think I've heard other steam people say it. I've seen it as well. Boiler tubes these days don't seem to be as good as one from a generation ago.

It seems a bit unusual for tubes to crack with minimal service. We have found the new flue material to be less corrosion resistant than the old. I would be interested to know the grade of steel. SA-178 grade A is preferred, but grade C is often offered. Grade C has a higher carbon content and will work harden and crack more easily than grade A according to a B&W engineer I corresponded with years ago. SA-192 is seamless, and should not be too susceptible to cracking.

Do the tubes say "Made in China for export"? ;)

Seriously, this thread really made me pause to think. A flue failure absolutely is part of the glory of steam railroading. That's how it was. Imagine if we could somehow use modern or future technology to absolutely eliminate failures like this -- should we?

Take a trolley museum. Pole dewirement problems sometimes break poles or wire, stranding streetcars with revenue passengers on them. The new trolley buses have automatic pole-droppers. Should a trolley museum use them to eliminate that downtime? Suppose it's the future, and there's a museum of jet travel. Everyone must enter through a faithful operating replica of the TSA "queue up and take off your shoes" security. Should they rip it out just because visitors hate it? Heck, should an operating railway museum build a train simulator, that sits on gimbals to simulate motion, and has projectors out every side... thus assuring the animatronic nightmare always runs on time?

I would say no. I would say part of authenticity is having the risk of authentic problems.

That's all fine and good, until you're the one that has to front the money to fix all those "authentic" problems. From a REALISTIC perspective, if a future technology were to be developed that eliminated certain costly problems with steam locomotives, then I'm sure any organization that runs one would want them implemented. The more money you can save, the better you can ensure that the locomotive will keep running for years to come with no threat of eventual retirement due to lack of funds.

Sure, the railroad industry already has shown the way. Just replace all those leaky steamers with shiny new diesels, and no more flues to worry about.

Why does someone always want to improve upon the technology we are trying to preserve?

Thanks for the response. If you do have any factual information that can be shared on steel, grade, etc. that you think might be contributory it would certainly help. There's a number of projects every year wrestling with tube specifications.

That's a tough nut to call for 'accuracy'. I'm reminded of the "Lyon" project, where I think the reproduction design was authentic, including the supposedly weak spot in the frame where the original cracked.

I'm also reminded of a message I often pass along in serving the public with dirty windows, rusty cars, junkyard collections, and restrooms that leave the wrong memories - "your mission as a 501c3 is not to educate the public on why people quit riding trains!"

This thread, beyond the wonderful accurate official information about 1225 brings up lots of museum issues, particularly for those who operate.

Its easy to say we can make our rolling stock better... but where is the line between appropriate for a preserved (museum) object, and a piece of equipment... once you start making changes and improvements it's hard to say when to stop...

Better metallurgy, be it flues, or cast steel in place of chilled iron wheels is probably a good idea. In some cases it's a necessity... I don't know that anyone is casting chilled iron anymore... The steel used for flues may no longer be in production.

While I appreciate the discussion of flue failure on steam locomotives in the "age of steam" I would still do all in my power to make sure any engine in my care would not have such a failure (not that it might not... I was in the cab of a shay that did many years ago)

Once you start to make improvements you soon start making compromises... For example, roller bearings are better, but solid bearings are more accurate... The change is visible to the informed observer.

A trolley retriever is probably better for the overhead, but in most cases it looks different.

Objects preserved in a museum (operating or not) for their historic and educational value need to be repaired in kind... This is what sets museums apart. Tourist railroads, operating as an attraction, may have more freedom to improve their rolling stock as needed.

Randy (rapidly donning his silver fire suit)

So are Boiler Explosions.

But a flue failure does not a boiler explosion make...

I suppose my flippant remark bears expanding upon. No one is saying to use inferior material for the sake of causing incidents. However, I also don't see doing a major redesign based one or two isolated occurrences. It seems to me the biggest problem is likely not that the steel has changed (but it may have, see Linn's remark) but that the service requirements have changed. Back in the day... flues stayed hot for thirty days at a time. In the entire time between ICC mandated inspections, they only likely saw sixty thermal cycles, and thermal cycling of the boiler, with its attendant stress of all the parts of the boiler expanding/shrinking at different rates, is very likely what is causing the cracks.

So. I'm curious, seeing as I don't specify boiler material, either for a living or as a hobby. What is the dominant market for boiler tubes today? Is there much market for replacement flues for 250 – 300 PSI power boilers, or is the major market now low pressure heating boilers? Are there different grades of tube available? I would suspect there is a whole 'nother class of tube available for high pressure power plant use, but also expect that a) the proper sizes are not available, and b) that spec. grade is considerably more expensive. What about certification? Is the boiler tube market seeing a flood of off spec. foreign steel tube masquerading as certified stock like the structural bolt market has been dealing with?

Could the problem be addressed simply with tighter specification?

I have spent a considerable part of my life in tourist railroading and steam preservation (locomotives & agricultural steam). I'm now employed as a state boiler inspector. I see high and low pressure boilers (and their tubes) almost daily....ranging from less than 15psi up to 600psi steam, and am currently involved at a new power plant that will operate at MAWP = 4000psi superheated. In all of this, including welded piping inspections, it seems that material is getting worse and worse. I've had to review repairs to cracked tubes, cracked tube sheets, cracked furnace tubes, etc. Many of the welders that I review are veteran welders and are quite good. They are now complaining of poor quality material that won't weld as well as the "old stuff". Manufacturer's data sheets from foreign countries (especially pipe from Russia, China, Malaysia, Italy, Indonesia, etc.) are usually unreadable, and the stenciling on the material is a joke. As an inspector, I can only review the documentation and take it for face value unless I have reason to question something. Even today I was witnessing a steam piping hydro test, and got wet from a pinhole leak in the pipe, not the weld, but the (new) pipe itself.

To answer Dennis' question, yes tube/flue material is still very much in demand for all pressure and temperature ranges. And yes, the foreign stuff is questionable....

Just my two cents,

Mark

Mark,
As a former tool maker and tin knocker I know a little about metal but I certainly don't have the knowledge of metal that you would but I have to agree with what you say about foreign metal and foreign products in general. It's JUNK. Look at car parts.. most of the stuff you buy at an Auto Store is cheap stuff made in China. I have a 6 year old van with 70,000 miles and I'm on my 4th set of brake rotors because the metal is JUNK... My comment here is not to knock the 1225 team at all, it's just to vent my anger about the JUNK products we are getting in this country anymore.
Jay

Future technology? Like, say, diesels, perhaps?

Many operators are already making wise alterations to their steam locomotives - from synthetic oils to electronic monitoring systems, to bigger changes that aren't entirely wholesale.

At what point do you start disrupting the actual historic nature/fabric and start creating a different machine or defeating the purpose? Nobody gets involved in steam preservation because it's easy, but there's nothing wrong with trying to push it in that direction. Authentic problems and their solutions and preventions are part of the story.

Many modifications made can be justified with historical speculation: if steam progressed, it's possible that builders or railroads would have spent time tinkering and improving, but essentials like water, fire, and pressure will remain. These elements are entropic by nature and while their negative effects can be minimized, won't they always remain? Spokes will break, rods will bang, threads will wear, cracks will weep -- some things you shouldn't need to improve, because they do their function (tell-tale holes in staybolts, because even if you can get a stronger stay, you still need to know when if/it breaks because they do.) A machine that by its very fabric beats itself to death can only be corralled so much before it needs to be overhauled anyway -- which is exactly why the 1225 is due for its 15 year/1472 soon.

KL

As was stated... sa-178-a is the best tube material is the best. When trying to source it I have had to just say point blank to suppliers"I don't care what you think will work for me, give me a price on what I asked for". Likewise, I have had the Folks at Ajax Rolled Ring (think that's the name) argue that type DHT tires are just fine and that others use them. Well, DHT tires are very hard compared to C and even harder than plain D... They are illegal for interchange (DHT tires may not be used in tread braking applications per interchange laws) and the harder the tire the less adhesion. If you are running essentially captive service, low speed and with a set load not working the engine to near it's limit then one doesn't need C tires...D would be ok and it has been proven that DHT are allright. Still, doesn't make them legal for interchange and there are a few locomotives out there running with them that occasionally leave home rails.

Back to boilers, new steel is MUCH harder than the original stuff. Great for tensile strength but it tends to make it a bit more prone to cracking in certain areas (rear tube sheets, tubes, etc). Also, it is a true statement that it does not weld as easily as the original stuff...my opinion.

Mark, you spoke of a plant boiler going in that is to operate at 4,000psi. What is the temperature of that steam and what material is being used to contain it? Some alloy type steel?

Cheers

I'm still learning about the actual boiler itself. At this point, most of my duties have been piping.....main steam, reheat steam, feedwater, auxiliary steam, etc. etc. Most of the high pressure piping is a Chrome alloy SA-335 grade P91.

If I remember correctly, the main steam exiting the boiler is roughly 3900-4050psi @1100 degrees Fahrenheit. Safety valves are set @ 4150 I think.

All I can say is it's some wicked stuff that this hillbilly inspector is amazed by.....

Mark