The keys to any such "political situation":

1) Only talk about the things that put you in a good light.
2) Avoid at all costs talking about things that don't fit your chosen narrative/agenda.
3) When asked a question, answer instead the question you wanted to be asked, while deftly avoiding the substance of the actual query.

In this manner, anyone can be both completely "honest" and simultaneously completely deceptive.

We see this carried out among both our political class and our news media on a daily basis, as well as in corporate America.

Oh, yeah, I forgot one other thing:

4) when someone writes something that differs from the agenda you are promoting, threaten to personally sue the "publishers."

I am interested in the hydro technique described here. As I understand it, you don’t use a mechanical pressure pump to raise the water pressure for the test. Instead, you fill the boiler completely full of cold water. This would be completely full with no air space. Then you heat that water, but not to the boiling temperature.

The point is simply to heat the cold water enough to make the cold water mass expand slightly. Since there is no air in the boiler, the slight expansion of the cold water acts purely as a hydraulic force because water is non-compressible.

So, in effect, this is using thermal expansion of water for raising hydraulic test pressure instead of using a high pressure mechanical pump. The only element actually pressure deflecting in this test is spring action of the pressure gauge.

I can understand how this procedure could be entirely safe without the need for water glasses. If the vessel failed, it would just crack and leak water rather than explode.

In 42 years, I have only ever seen one instance where a locomotive boiler was tight enough to raise pressure simply by heating the water. In most cases there is enough of a leak somewhere in the system to bleed off any pressure rise due to expansion. As the saying goes, "You hydro a boiler to see where it leaks, not if it leaks". If you can pull it off, good for you, but it would be prudent to have a hydro pump hooked up just the same.

A couple of other points: A wood fire sure would make a dirty mess inside the firebox to inspect, not to mention hot grates for the inspector to kneel on. We usually use a kerosene fueled torpedo heater, aimed through the fire door.

The maximum temperature allowed for a hydro is 120 degrees, the idea being that if there is a failure and a big leak, you don't want the water so hot that people could be scalded. The minimum temperature is 70 degrees. A cold, cold hydro could cause an otherwise avoidable failure due to the steel being more brittle.

During the hydrostatic test of record, the boiler pressure is raised to 125% of its Maximum Allowable Working Pressure (i.e. for a 200 psi boiler, the test is done at 250 psi). This requires the use of a pump of some type to force water into the boiler.

Same as Kelly, when we did hydros we also used a very large propane fired torpedo heater to heat the boiler and water. Placed at the firebox door, with the stack capped, and allowed to run overnight it would heat the water to above 90 deg. F (well over 70 deg. F at the mud ring).

For a pump we used our hot water pressure washer. The hose from the washer was attached to a manifold which contained a small pressure gauge and a ball valve to bypass water to a hose running out the shop door. The manifold was attached to the boiler blowdown pipe. The washer was allowed to run at just above an idle. With the bypass valve initially closed (and the blowdown valve open), the pressure washer would begin forcing hot water intot the boiler. As soon as the small pressure gauge showed a change, the operator would slowly open the bypass valve to control the rate of change, thus raising the boiler pressure very slowly. When the test pressure was achieved, the operator could hold it there by adjusting the bypass valve. The FRA inspector would then do his business and after giving the OK, the pressure washer would be shut off and the pressure allowed to slowly drop to zero (or sometimes the inspector would have us drop the pressure to a certain level and hold it there for awhile before going to zero).

There are of course various ways to do the same thing, but we made do with what we had on hand.

Brian

Forgive me but in the back of my mind a 300 psi gauge should be used for anticipated pressures of 150 psi range. They are pushing the gauge pretty hard and to a extreme where repeatability of a reading becomes an issue.

Robby Peartree

I'm going to assume that a small fire was used rather than a heater to bring the water up to temperature. Then the actual hydro was likely performed in the normal manner. The excitement of "first fire on the grates" can be a misleading. If I'm not mistaken C&O 2716 had a fire on the grates in the past year as well as part of a boiler treatment. It sounds exciting but shouldn't be confused with a fire up. I'm sure the staff at N.N. are competent enough to raise alarms if a contractor was doing something obviously wrong. This discussion on K&T 14 has been wonderful but I'd hate to see other organizations be dragged through the mud by being guilty by association.

Or to be a bit more specific, to raise the temperature of the cold boiler, to eliminate some of the thermal stresses in the structure if test-stressed at 'ambient' temperature.

Just for clarification: for a hydro you're meaning degrees, not psi. Saturation temperature at the pressures you indicate would be between about 338 and 350 degrees F, with a considerable critical explosion hazard should there be any major issue demonstrated in the boiler structure. With your experience I know this was a typo.

EDIT (this was typed before several of the immediately preceding responses could be read) -- yes, an external pump is used to bring up the hydrostatic pressure. This would NOT be done thermally, although you may be reasoning analogous to how pressurization in a nuclear PWR is done with heating elements. A relatively simple hydraulic hand pump does this nicely: it may take a relatively large number of strokes as the boiler may swell a surprising amount relative to the pump chamber volume, but the mechanical advantage is the same as for any other hydraulic pump. Then if leaks start to form, the volume through them is little more than that delivered by the last stroke or strokes of the pump... something that would be less true of a power-operated high-pressure pump like that on a pressure washer.

In my opinion, water temperature should be as high as does not constitute a burn hazard for those potentially exposed to burns or other injury from leaks. Ideally it should be as close to atmospheric-pressure boiling temperature as possible as that reproduces service conditions the most closely before the latent heat of vaporization content gets to be high enough to produce 'rocket effects' at leaks. But that wouldn't be for a 'first' hydro where there may be surprisingly large defects developing.

I thoroughly agree with the idea of raising temperature through some combination of circulating the boiler water through an external heater or using some relatively high-volume air heater at a fixed temperature rise. More than just a small fire raises the possibility of excessive spot heating at some points in the boiler structure. (You would of course cut off the circulation through the external heater before pressurizing for the test!) I have thought for many years that part of the 'best' way to "boot a locomotive" involves progressive heating via external circulation of the water rather than 'direct steam' charging of a cold boiler with overcritical water (as in some late practice) -- let alone buiilding so large a fire as to raise pressure in no more than a couple of hours...

Though I am not being asked to respond and though the bulk of you have already decided how you feel about me, you can all take this message for what it is worth. I understand that what I say here will ultimately be used against me and my customers (sad). I do however hope that some of you....not all of you....will see that RYPN has simply turned into a "hate" forum. I really liked what Mr. Mitchell IV wrote above. These situations are no longer about the truth. The issues on this forum are now utterly about the destruction of people (companies) and or railroads or organizations that do not fit the "agenda" of the overwhelming (hate) populous of this page. This is primarily why I do not hang out here anymore. The hatred of me personally (by so many people who have never met me or my customers) is so deep that it is hard to engage in even a civil conversation. Be that as it may; I respect Kelly A. and feel that I have a least a small window through which to make a few comments. To all of my haters....I get it, you will copy and paste my comments and flame me with them. I already know that.... have at it.

The Hydro of the 81 with the fire in it was NOT the first, nor will it be the last hydro that it has before being placed in service. Far too many of you have the idea that we (any contractor, me or otherwise) will do work on a boiler and then, when finished, fill it up with water and "squeeze" it and then make a final ruling. Oppppp....it had a leak. FAIL!!!!!!!!!! Folks, it does not work this way. Kelly is overwhelmingly correct here. We hydro test to see where the boiler leaks....NOT IF THE BOILER LEAKS. Vessels of all kinds leak. Period. This idea that a Hydro is spotless dry experience is false.

Yes, the boiler of the 81 was so tight (thanks to the no less than 4 previous test hydros that we did) that indeed, we were able to test to full pressure with nothing more than heat. Yes. It had a few weeping issues (KCC work from 50 years ago), but no rivers, no streams, no major leaks.

Yes, we had a hydro pump attached as well, but did not use it. I tripped over it in the video if you watch closely enough. As Kelly, and I think Ron Travis suggested....even I did not have 100% faith that we could do it with heat alone. Very rare on a locomotive boiler. We also had three vent valves located at various locations on the boiler and the team knew where they were. If something went wrong, a handful of us knew where to let the boiler go by opening a valve. No, we did not have a water glass installed. By the way, a water glass on a hydro is not a codified rule.

If you watch any of the 20 or more videos of the event, NO, we did not use "air" to hydro the boiler. It is water only and in this case, water and heat. But you can blame me for the mistake of the "publishers" of the videos. I get it.

Yes, Wasatch RR has and follows a very strict written procedure for Hydro testing. Our hydro test procedure which was certified by ASME, AAR and API is very detailed. No, I will not share it with any of you because everything I share is used against me (including this post at some point). By the way, there is no code violation nor FRA violation to the use of heat as a means to hydro a boiler or vessel. In fact, at our shop when we build new, a pump is only used if we must to use it. Otherwise, we normally use propane heaters and burners.

The temperature of the 81 reached about 175 degrees. Right.....higher than that of a required FRA hydro. THIS WAS NOT THE FRA HYDRO NOR WAS IT THE FINAL HYDRO. Yes, we did an interior inspection after but only after the boiler was cool enough to enter. This is another issue our young industry faces. There is a notion among my haters that when you do a hydro, it MUST BE THE FRA HYDRO AND IF THE FRA WAS NOT THERE, IT MUST BE WRONG. The truth is, I can hydro a boiler 8000 times or one time in front of the FRA. This hydro, hot hydro if you will, was to allow us to see "where the boiler leaks" so the leaks could be addressed for a FINAL FRA WHEN THE TIME IS RIGHT FOR THE FINAL FRA HYDRO.

Typo. Did any of see BNSFRYFANS post above where he/she included in the post a typo related to the date? The typo shows the year 2020 as 2920. Simple typo. But, as the haters run the page, nobody caught it. What every did catch is that the sticker on the gauge on the 81 had a typo. The shop person at NNRY (not Wasatch, even though you can blame me for it) accidentally wrote 11/20 on the gauge. We should crucify this person for the typo, but we need to openly forgive BNSFRYFAN for his/her typo. The typo on the gauge did not nullify the test, nor the gauge. We all (the railroad and my team) caught the mistake and noted it. It will be corrected for the FRA hydro.

Yes, thanks to many complaints by the hater team here at RYPN, after the videos and the pictures came out, FRA showed up in full force. Yes, mostly because of me. Yes, at the direct request of the hate group of RYPN. Yes, FRA asked a lot of questions. Yes, we answered all of them. If you feel so entitled (which so many of you do) you can contact the region or the NNRY for information about that.

Take this for what it is worth as I am public enemy number one. I am sharing a lesson from all of this to all of you who may actually care about your own organization. Take it or leave it. If I were the owner of a tourist railroad, in a society run like RYPN and social media and the press work right now, here is what I would do:

1. I would never allow a single person to take pictures nor post pictures of anything, anywhere.

2. I would tell of my young volunteers and my old fart haters that if they post anything about the operation....they are fired.

3. I would then make an example of the first volunteer or fan that violated the rule.

4. I would make sure that the only press that goes out about my railroad would be positive.

Now that so many of you are laughing at me. Too many railroads and organizations have done this already. And, it works. Want me to name them for you? Unfortunately for me and Wasatch, we did not get that luxury, so we get to be the proverbial punching bag in the industry. God bless America and God bless the right of free and open speech (for those who run the agenda while stripped from those who are hated).

Go ahead, let the games begin....punch away.

John E. Rimmasch (JohnE.)

jrimmasch@wrrc.us

307-778-7458

307-286-2833 cel/text/talk

P.S. Score card; So far well over 30 people on this board have written me, called me, supported me, boosted me and encouraged me to avoid and ignore the haters of RYPN. So far, ZERO of my hater group (which is about 80% of you here) have accepted my invitation to call, chat, have lunch (I pay) or talk. I take that as a score of 30 to 0. Haters, you need to catch up here. My supporters are winning and I am thankful for all of them!

P.P.S Yep my spelling and grammar have mistakes.....hang me for that too!

Robbie, I think you're confusing gauges for steam with gauges for hydraulic pressure.

For a steam gauge, you want a fair degree of 'headroom' to be sure you can 'gauge' pressure overruns, keep stresses in the Bourdon tube or whatever away from what corresponds to 'full deflection', etc.

But this is a static hydraulic measurement, which will never exceed the anticipated range of pressure in practice. It only happens to be on a 'steam' boiler. So long as any point to be reached is within the calibrated range of the gauge, and that presumably includes the highest indicated index on the gauge's scale, this would be an accurate hydraulic measurement.

One problem in using a higher-reading gauge is that the resolution will probably be less. For a hydro that's not really a critical thing in most potential cases. You're testing to a range above regulated pressure, not 'to destruction' (or, a bit more accurately, not to find the precise pressure where a given part of the boiler started to leak).

I think transparency in any railroad/business/organization is important. While these are all ideas to politically maintain a forced positive image, they're unrealistic and go against the First Amendment that you just supported in another thread. Photos leak, eventually truths get out. The worst truths are the ones that have been seemingly swept under the rug. Like it or not, Wasatch is enduring it's own fallout from a different sort of #MeToo movement.

Per Part 230, section 230.36:


Regards,
Bob Milhaupt

My lawyer neighbor called what Wasatch is doing the "Streisand Effect." JohnE's attempts to deflect, lay blame on others, and scream are likely drawing more attention than had they simply said that they messed up and accept responsibility.

JohnE likes to blow his horn that knows all the codes and regulations. Doesn't that make the pictured work all the more abominable?

...and you'd time the existence of your railroad with an egg timer, especially that last one.
In any group, there'll be people who aren't very good, and some who either have an axe to grind, whether it's correct or not.
The problem with the above "floggings will continue until morale improves" mindset is that it's a recipe for disaster. Don't you freaking DARE question the man, but what happens when "the man" is the one goofing up? I've talked with people who were at Gettysburg in the early 90s and two have told me that there were those who tried to get the word out on how dangerous their operation was, and tried to get through to those in charge, and were all sent packing. And we know what happened soon after.
I've heard the same about a couple of antique airplane operators as well, including one which killed several people last year. I've heard if you questioned the man, there was the door. And people paid for that with their lives, dying very badly in the process.
Look I don't know you from Adam and if you go back, you'll see I haven't jumped on the hater bandwagon as I don't have a clue how accurate any of this stuff really is.
We all goof up every no and then and these days, it's all online.
Heck, I did something really dumb (nothing that would have caused anyone or anything to get hurt or damaged, though) a few years ago and it got online. I didn't get angry at those who posted it, as I had to man up and accept what I did wrong.
It made me a better (and more cautious) person in the long run, I think.
I'm taking all this with a grain of salt. All of it.
But like I told that idiot pilot who told me to remove a posting about his very poor landing, "If you don't like your mistakes being in the open, maybe you should just focus on stuff that won't get into the public?"

My lawyer neighbor also tells me that 1 3 and 3 likely would violate the FRA's "whistleblower" protections which allow a railroad's employees to take pictures and post them to the FRA of unsafe practices.

This tells me a lot.

See BSFRYFAN...we have something in common.....now you want the list of RR's and museums that enforce these policies with their people. Wanna know something...a few of them are people you defend....!

This is widely done and enforced in many, many organizations.

My name and phone numbers have not changed. The score has.

The current score now is:

32 positive contacts and out reaches efforts to me directly vs -0- from the Hate Squad.

In fact, so you all know, in one case I got a text message with no name and information and I did not ask who it was nor did I ask for information. I was just welcoming of the text message!