Were baffles ever used in locomotive boilers to prevent sloshing or provide additional support for longer tubes?

I'm baffled by the idea, actually.....

Circulation good. Blocking circulation bad.

"Ever" covers a lot of ground and I'm not going to say "never" but.......I haven't run across it even in my most obscure research. Boilers grew for a while without combustion chambers, then we got combustion chambers, which prevented flues from becoming extremely long, and of course you can spec whatever gage tube you need for structural purposes.

I have seen sort of baffly spiral inserts inside fire tubes to slow the passage of gas (I know what you're thinking, stop it) for greater heat transfer but the tradeoff there is in free drafting.

Tenders, sure......we need to keep their contents more stable by impeding the speed of movement of thousands of gallons of unpressurized water crashing around, but I think if it had ever been tried in boilers it would have been discarded after the first few washouts proved unsuccessful. I'd be very interested in any information to the contrary.

dave

I know 765's boiler does not, I've been in it. I think the tender has some plate areas that have obvious large holes, not enough to heavily restrict water movement, but may help slow down sloshing. As you use water have you filled a glass half full of water then drive a car with it having it site on some level surface? now you get the idea to slow down slosh.

The boiler is usually filled between the glass on the level indicator, if water were half full in the boiler you would be in trouble. Most of the time the boiler is nearly full of water.
You may be more concerned about water level and grades going downhill may slosh water to the front of the boiler lowering it around the firebox top, thats a nono. So going downhill you may want to give the boiler a fill. Perhaps boiler designers have calculated that and theirs some leniency room to allow for grades and sloshing.

speaking of sloshing the Illinois Central years ago expanded the electric IC line south in Chicago, I remember riding it, before hitting the new line the track was lumpy like any other used track, once we hit the new line, it was dead smooth. A freshly poured coffee cup would not even ripple, it was -that- smooth.

I seem to recall that Chapelon experimented with a baffle in the barrel arranged to have the frontmost third or so of the flues act as a feedwater heater. It has been at least a decade since I read the nontechnical description in the H.C.B. Rogers book about Chapelon, so I may have a detail or two wrong...unlike a modern shell-and-tube heat exchanger, I believe there was just the one baffle to increase the dwell time of incoming water and possibly settle out sediments before spilling over into the rest of the boiler. Again, I don't remember the specifics of the setup being given nor do I recall how successful it was deemed...

Interestingly enough, I learned today that NS's East End Shops is experimenting with baffles in diesel locomotive radiator headers to increase cooling capacity.

.

The New Hope and Ivyland #40 had a baffle in it until the 2010 operating season. The baffle was positioned laterally basically even with the rear fluesheet. The bottom of the baffle was about 2" above the the crown and consisted of plate 10" tall, this extended to just above the regular operating level. It was attached via 4 3/4" bolts to pieces of rolled angle which are still riveted to the boiler shell.
There is no reason to have such a baffle in a boiler especially when taking into account it prevents the hottest water in the boiler from being able to circulate off of the crown and out into the tube bundle. As Kelly said, circulation/sloshing is key and for that reason I took it out.
The results of removing it in terms of improved behavioral characteristics should not be terribly surprising. The boiler "warmed up" more quickly at the beginning of each day, the recovery time following running an injector seemed to decrease and (surprisingly) the locomotive was drastically less prone to carryover. This is something which prior had been a plaguing issue.
The question I am left with is that of was it installed at the factory or was it installed by the Lancaster and Chester (or the subsequent owner)? I am leaning towards the thought of it being an after market modification because of the fact that of the 6 rivets utilized to attach the rolled angle pieces to the shell there are 3 different styles of rivet heads. This seems a little sloppy, even for baldwin.

Cheers, Jason

.

I was thinking the same thing. I was in there when we replaced the flues in '05 and don't remember seeing that. I wasn't really looking for it though.

Limejuice and Kelly,

I had never noticed the baffle in the two times that I was in 40's boiler prior to its removal. It wasn't until Jason pointed out the odd symmetrical row of 3 rivets and asked me what they were holding inside that I even noticed the oddly placed rivets. Thus, I can see how it would easily be missed or not noticed. Perhaps I am wrong but I can't see why it would have been riveted instead of welded if it was installed after 1991.


Casey Q.

.

Kelly,

It would have absolutely been in the way of running weld on the water side. Perhaps it had been removed prior to you guys commencing the project. Do you have any photos from the project that may show the brackets riveted to the shell? Additionally, the exterior rivets of the brackets exhibit mild corrosion consistent with the balance of the shell indicating they are in fact old..... to whatever extent.

Cheers, Jason

N&W 1218, did not have any baffles or supports for the 24 foot long tubes/flues.

I do not recall any boiler dwgs of the Y class showing supports or baffles for the tubes/flues.

Robert Yuill

I spent a few minutes this weekend looking for a book or a photo rather that I have of a tube sheet support section, mid boiler. I can not say that it was on a locomotive, but I believe it was in a heating boiler. The tubes were 30 plus feet long. To support what Kelly has said, the baffle had oblong holes in it to ensure that tubes were placed in the correct holes (round tube holes), but that the water could still move fairly freely around the sheet. The sheet was designed to hold tubes straight, not impinge on water flow.

Further, I really want to say that Santa Fe tried a support sheet in one or two of there first generation compounds. If you look in the 1904 Cyclopedia, there is a photo of a large ATSF articulated with an articulated boiler section or course. I don't know much about the design or why, but for some reason I recall reading that one option in this design was a larger boiler, longer tubes with tube support sheets and no combustion chamber. Some of the first compound articulates had a more conventional boiler with little or no combustion chamber to speak of. As the design progressed, so did the boilers. I don't know that we have really good history on the first experiments with BIG compounds and articulated test beds. I could very well be wrong, I have just not seen them.

Headed to TRAIN/ARM, sorry I can't spend more time looking for that boiler photo.

Kindly,

JohnE.