Outside of all the discussion here, has anyone actually heard anything from the UP steam crew about how they will repair this locomotive or about future operating practices?

I am a professional railroader by trade and know that when we get new bosses, there is a bit of teething and a learning curve to catch them up to speed. Mr.Rimmasch (sp) seems to have the most conversant understanding of what is going on and the personalities involved from the discussion I've read. With that being said:

Does the damage shown make 844's boiler beyond economical repair?

Do you see the current management and operations team learning from this issue and executing the proper changes to keep it from occurring to the other steamers in their stable?

Thanks in advance for the replies.

Joe

One railroad's policy on boiler blow downs. CN installed these signs in the cabs of many of its engines.

Those are awesome.

My question has to do with water treatment. Does anyone here have any familiarity with the Porta treatment? http://www.portatreatment.com/

It's purported benefits seem to be outstanding in terms of efficiency, and scheduled maintenance. It seems to be based on a regular cycle of hot washouts, a consistent blowdown procedure, and good boiler management.

If anyone knows more could you please elaborate.

Thanks,
Steve Piwowarski

the loss of mainline steam rather killed these regular water treatment processes, the steam lines made sure their water going in was treated right. You didnt have these major issues.

Scale buildup is simply scale buildup, not really damage, everytime you run the engine you have the regular wear and tear that goes along. It effects heat transfer, if it gets into piping restricts water flow, regular use at levers, turn valves will thrash the buildup off on them.

The 844 kept running, but it wasn't pulling heavy duty freight, just happy fans. But on regular runs I bet you would start noticing why you can't get steam as well for that next hill.

Could it be that the extensive use of "helpers" the last couple of years be indicative of the deteriorating boiler conditions? If so, it could mean they were well aware of the situation.

Wasatch has an extensive library of Mr. Porta's personal writings and hand written papers (copies not originals). We also have a few videos of him discussing some of his work. As many of you may know, Mr. Porta attended a few runs with the the 614T in the 1980's as well. Suffice to say, my observation has been that generally people will pull this line out their hat "We use the Porta system of water treatment." My response "Oh, really, explain to me the finer details of the program and how you have applied it to your locomotive?" Truth be known, not many have ever A.) Attempted to do it and B.) Have read enough about it to properly apply it. It seems to me that somebody has mentioned that in the case of UP they were using the Porta System. Well, not the Porta system I am familiar with! It is easy to hide behind something that is easily masked as "black magic."

The best way to understand Mr. Porta's work is to apply his principles and reasoning behind what he did. 1% here, 2% there, 1% over here......add it all up, you can come up with a total improved efficiency of more than 10-15%. Porta was a master at taking what he had (very little) and making it work beyond his expectation. Too often, we seek detailed explanations of his work when the reality is, his work was very simple to understand yet, challenging for most to apply. Above this response is a great discourse on the importance of reading and the requirement to test and apply what you have read. It is noted further that skimming a paper or memo and then regurgitating it as miles worth of BS does not count as properly understanding or applying a particular principle. Mr. N.Day has in his signature has something to the effect [paraphrased] Less words, more hardware. Mr. Day has mastered the principle of less talk....more work. Others (not mentioning names) have mastered the art of "more talk (BS) less work and polished chrome=importance, power and dominion." How do you effectively talk your way out of poor performance? How do you effectively explain proper locomotive handling at the great cost to your own company as a result of your own mistakes and then, pawning it off on past peoples mistakes?

Point is, there are many, many good and effective ways to treat, handle and attend to your boiler. No matter how much you talk about it, none of them have been properly applied in any form in this case.

Respectfully,

JohnE.

I have news for you. That is also the way the Yanks have done it for around 130 years. It's nothing new at all, except nowadays we have flexible, lighted borescopes that let us look into and even film the places no smith with mirrors could have ever seen.

The difference here is that nothing of the sort was done with this locomotive boiler after 2010. There is a You-Tube video out there someplace wherein the guy who dreamed this up brags about his new and better methods. Actually, he pretty much describes how it was done decades ago, but seems to ignore the reality that back then there were entire gangs devoted to doing boiler washes at virtually every roundhouse.
AND, they had the benefit of a huge steam boiler facility on the property so they had plenty of high pressure steam and hot water and even chemicals to do thorough boiler washes.

What is being done is a quick drain and refill. Only the bottom mud ring plugs are pulled and the mudring is rinsed out with cold water. The top plugs, middle plugs, belly plugs and front plugs are not even disturbed. When the water coming out of the plugs looks clear, the mudring plugs are put back in, the boiler is filled, and the fire relit.

As anyone with an ounce of experience can tell, this is NOT the way to wash out a boiler. Most of what was in it is still in it. 31 service days later, it now has twice as
much foreign material in it. 31 service days after that, which is the 92-day inspection, it has three times as much. If you don't bother to remove the dome lid or some of the top plugs and actually look inside, you will think the thing is OK. After all, the water coming out the mudring is clear, right? What more could you ask for? And it didn't take nearly as long as the previous people took to do it right.

The boiler shell probably isn't hurt. The flues and tube sheets will take most of the punishment, as is evident in the photos on TO.

But, somebody at UP needs to wake up and get rid the notion that everybody previous had no idea what they were doing. They weren't perfect bay any means, but this kind of mess never happened then, either.

One thing I have observed in looking at photos/videos of 844 in operation in the last few years is the lack of the trademark scale stains from the blowdown separator mounted on top of the boiler just ahead of the cab. These can be seen on any in-service photos of 800/3900/4000 Class locomotives. The separator receives the output of the locomotive driver air-operated blowdowns as well as the manually controlled ones. While the water is piped down, the separator is open on top to release steam, which is very wet and burdened with scale and precipitates on the boiler jacket. The previous manager had us add one blowdown so (as I remember) there were four (of one kind or another) just on the mudring, as well as at least one on the shell. It is possible additional piping has been added or other modifications, as I have not even seen the locomotive since it has been under the care of the current manager.

Having been an operating guest of the previous manager, I saw the water treatment regime then in use. It was both thorough, effective, and simple to administer. Ed Smith would take his samples in the morning, look at a laminated chart on the lid of the water treatment bunkers we mounted on top of the auxiliary tenders, and treat accordingly. A similar event took place every time water was taken. This basic practice was well established way before my time, but they had to work out of the boxcar or boiler-dorm hauling jugs up the ladders more frequently. Being that Ed (Smith) was not fond of changing tubes, staybolts, and certainly not plate, he kept a keen watch on water treatment. The then OGEMP foreman (who also assisted in boiler work) was also equally well versed and effective. While kind, funny, and generally skilled, neither of these men were or aspired to be knowledgeable or even interested in the theory of water treatment - yet their desire to reduce their boilermaker workload propelled them to sufficiency.

Having spent some years of my life in that boiler I am disappointed by what I see, however, I am not in a position to judge the current situation. It was amazing to hear that new firebox cool down in the shop and the soft, but sharp tink-tinking the flexible staybolt heads made as they articulated in their sockets - not having any scale to impede their function. Perhaps there is something to learn from the practicality aspect of the flat-face German-style flexible staybolt head with wave washer.

The training issue is certainly interesting. Having come from an automotive background in an independent shop, we always were aware of ASE (Automotive Service Excellence) certification and would occasionally hire a certified technician. Note that ASE certification is not required to work on a vehicle in DOT service. My experience is that the badge was not a substitute for brains, common sense, and a desire to learn through reading and mentoring - and certainly did not make a mechanic. It did seem to assure at least mediocrity, which is sometimes better than what you might otherwise get.

Porta's improvements are pretty understandable in concept, however, there is a great deal of detail and methodical calculation required to apply correctly as well as a lot of learning that sometimes must take place to apply it outside of his experiences. Also, no chain is stronger than its weakest link. - LDP.

[quote="John E. Rimmasch"]Being that the discussion has remained civil and we are A service day is defined as fire in the firebox or pressure in the boiler above atmospheric. Every 31 "Service days" the boiler is to be washed and inspected. In Appendix C of the section noted above, you will find the 31/92 day inspection forms and the annual inspection form. It is interesting to note that in the form(s) the question is asked:

Incorrect and i quote from 230.8 "Service day. Any calendar day that the boiler has steam pressure above atmospheric pressure with fire in the firebox. In the case of a fireless steam locomotive, any calendar day that the boiler has steam pressure above atmospheric pressure."

This thread and its comments about water treatment and getting water quality reports from domestic water utilities made me recall a post I made on this forum a few years ago. When it found it, I realized that I had made it back in 2002!

water treatment


A water supplier may have several wells and some are used seasonally and some as above by time-of-day. And the water may have different characteristics. A published water quality report is most likely an average Check each source as it is used and treat it accordingly.

That is why the prudent crew tests the water minutes before putting the hose in the tender. Relying on reports that are days, months or even years old is just asking for trouble.

double-heading is more for fan fun, usually the engine(s) has plenty of power, even if scaled up like this (for fan trips), for trips with diesel coupled in, its a safety-just in case, the diesel's motors are cut out and the steamer is doing all the tugging, even on the diesel.

765 has been doing very well running by itself. The Jawn Henry had an onboard treatment tank (in the water tender, coal carried on the engine), something to think about.

It may be time for the excursions to think harder on water treatment.

regardless, 844 can come back as a fully restored and "clean" engine.

This is literally a "tempest in a teapot". The fact that the boiler of 844 is scaled up is part of the reason we have a 1472 service day rule and annual inspections. We can speculate all we want that "something was not done correctly" but the result is what it is. However, I would also comment that the condition of the tubes and flues is probably within the "normal" experience of the railroaders "back in the day". In the days of steam, locomotives stayed within the confines of one or two divisions whose water characteristics were well known and water treatment, while applied routinely may or may not have been completely effective. We have no records of the boiler conditions found when tube replacement finally took place because no one was interested in that. The job was to clean and refurbish the boiler. Today, 844 roams all over the UP making water treatment much more problematic. Yes, an effective water treatment program and a thorough washout procedure would help, but the UP is doing what it needs to do to keep the 844 rolling. We can only hope that the UP steam managers learn something about the need for water management and an effective blowdown schedule.

Not even close to normal for "back in the day" or otherwise. Third world countries with no water treatment ability can do better in a longer period of time.....or shorter depending on how you want to look at it!

There is simply no excuse. Period. There is no way to pawn this off on the past crew and simply no way to defend yourself in the case that you were doing proper washes and inspections. Can't have your cake and eat it too.

Kindly,

JohnE.