3985 Report?

Wolf · **Posted:** Wed Aug 20, 2008 12:35 pm

For the gentleman seeking actual data on a Lempor exhaust system and as the "Red Devil" book can be hard to find these days, try following this link:

http://www.martynbane.co.uk/modernsteam ... llr19.html

It contains a brief story of one locomotive's recent modification and includes a graphic comparison the performance of its Lempor with several other locomotives.

Enjoy!

Schuylkill Valley · **Posted:** Fri Aug 22, 2008 3:14 pm

Check out this , I saw it on a website.
Len.

" September 18 - October 6 - North Platte NE: UP 4-6-6-4 #3985 on display at North Platte Railfest 2008. Departs Cheyenne 8am September 18 to North Platte. 3985 will continue from North Platte to St. Paul.
For details - Union Pacific Steam
September 22 - UP 4-6-6-4 #3985 North Platte dep 8am to Fremont.

http://www.diary.svsfilm.com/

Robby Peartree · **Joined:** Wed Aug 25, 2004 11:16 am **Posts:** 767

Hi All,

Anyone notice the open smoke box shot of UP 3985 on the UP steam site?

Robby Peartree

RR_GraphixGuy · **Posted:** Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:13 am

Robby Peartree wrote:

Hi All,

Anyone notice the open smoke box shot of UP 3985 on the UP steam site?

Robby Peartree

Robby,

Since I didn't see it right off the bat on their main page, would you be kind enough to give me (and maybe the rest of us) a link to where you are looking? Which page/section is it under?

Thanks,

Planeman · **Joined:** Thu Mar 10, 2011 11:48 pm **Posts:** 14

Does it show the lempor exhaust installation?

Frisco1522 · **Posted:** Wed Mar 16, 2011 7:05 pm

It may still be in the scrap pile behind the shop.

Robby Peartree · **Joined:** Wed Aug 25, 2004 11:16 am **Posts:** 767

http://www.uprr.com/newsinfo/media_kit/ ... lery.shtml

Hi Mike Lewis

Hopefully this will help you out.

Robby Peartree

Bobharbison · **Joined:** Fri Dec 03, 2004 9:42 pm **Posts:** 3011

Quote:

Union Pacific can not ban me from speaking of the work that we (WRC) do (does). That would be a violation of my personal Constitutional Rights.

Sure they can. (I'm not saying that they did, only that they can...)

It's called a non-disclosure agreement, or a confidentiality agreement. They're common as can be in the software / computer / technology / web industry. They're also fairly common in fields like real estate when deals are in the works.

Violate your constitutional rights? Nope, not at all! Freedom of speech does not apply to an agreement that you've entered into voluntarily in exchange for seeking employment. Just ask many of the employees from Apple, Google, Microsoft, etc etc.

Now, as I said, I am not implying that they have done any such thing. I'm only stating that it would be totally legal and within normal practice to do do.

Lincoln Penn · **Joined:** Wed Feb 02, 2011 9:40 pm **Posts:** 841

It is lying on the ground behind the shop building, in plain sight. The standard exhaust system was reinstalled after a year of experiementing and tweaking the Lempor, which produced results far inferior to the UP/ALCo design. The Lempor was removed last spring.

It might work well under certain circumstances on smaller locomotives, but despite the best efforts of all concerned, it didn't work on this big engine.

whodom · **Posted:** Wed Mar 16, 2011 10:12 pm

Lincoln Penn wrote:

It is lying on the ground behind the shop building, in plain sight. The standard exhaust system was reinstalled after a year of experiementing and tweaking the Lempor, which produced results far inferior to the UP/ALCo design. The Lempor was removed last spring.

It might work well under certain circumstances on smaller locomotives, but despite the best efforts of all concerned, it didn't work on this big engine.

I'd say odds are pretty good this Lempor didn't perform up to expectations because it had to be designed to retain the existing exhaust stack openings. By comparison, back in the 1980's David Wardale worked out a Lempor design for C&O 614 when they were considering modifying it as part of the American Coal Enterprises project. The 614, a much smaller engine than 3985, would have required a triple stack Lempor arrangement to get the optimum proportions. My guess is an optimum Lempor for 3985 would require at least 4 stacks.

Another factor is that the UP's standard exhaust system is probably pretty darn good compared to most U.S. locomotives. It already has twin stacks and multiple exhaust nozzles per stack, both of which improve the performance compared to a single stack/single exhaust nozzle as used on most engines. Even if the Lempor had been a "clean sheet" design, it probably wouldn't have shown as big of an advantage as it has on many of the locomotives where its been successfully applied.

The fact that this Lempor didn't work out on 3985 is not proof that Lempors don't work on big locomotives.

Planeman · **Joined:** Thu Mar 10, 2011 11:48 pm **Posts:** 14

I assume that the design was fully analyzed before the installation was made. Where the limitations known at the time and a decision was made to proceed with a non-optimal configuration anyway?

It is a shame that the design team is restrictedby a non-disclosure agreement from discussing the findings. I am sure there are some valuable lessons for all.

R. Hahn · **Joined:** Sun Aug 22, 2004 5:01 pm **Posts:** 199

Planeman wrote:

I assume that the design was fully analyzed before the installation was made. Where the limitations known at the time and a decision was made to proceed with a non-optimal configuration anyway?

From the little bit of knowledge I have of Lempors, I would say the "proceed with non-optimal configuration" is how most are designed. The height of the mixing chamber needs to be quite large compared to nozzle diameter and I would bet very few lines have the clearance for the optimum.

I would also say that the 3985 would be very far from optimal and like Hugh said, would require more more stacks to a least come close.

Too bad it didn't work out.

Roger