Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote user="carnej1"][quote user="carnej1"][quote user="Bucyrus"] Could coal make a comeback without steam?Wasn't there quite a bit of interest in gas turbine locomotives during the transition from steam to diesel?  If I understand it correctly, they burn coal in a firebox, and send the resulting expanding gas of combustion directly into a turbine.  I always heard that the main problem encountered was fly ash eroding the turbine blades.  That seems like such a specific problem that I would think there would be some way to solve it.  I don't know how it all shakes out in terms of power engineering, but the concept of burning coal and turning it directly into mechanical energy without making steam, seems intriguing in its simplicity.Has anybody ever explored the possibility of directing a stream of pressurized combustion gas into a reciprocating engine rather than into a turbine?  This would be like an internal combustion engine, except the combustion would be external.[/quote] Caterpillar holds several patents on solid fuel gas producer systems suitable for mobile (specifically locomotive)applications. These are meant to supply producer gas to dual fuel or spark initiated gas(cng) engines.I believe Tom Blasingame(modern Steam designer) was involved in these designs, according to his online bio worked on similiar systems with MK rail(he also holds a patent on a slug/tender which would house such a device). I don't believe a prototype was ever constructed.  I also saw some documents online some years back that detailed an EMD engineering study for a gas turbine electric locomotive using a gasifier system (as opposed to burning pulverized caol in the turbine like the UP experiment). These dated from the late 80's/early 90's, the same time period when GE was trying to develop coal slurry fueled diesel engine. There were part of a research paper written by an enginnerring student who (IIRC) had intereed at EMD.[/quote]Links to patents: <a href="http://www.google.com/patents?id=sy8hAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4">http://www.google.com/patents?id=sy8hAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4</a> http://www.google.com/patents?id=PD4mAAAAEBAJ&dq=%22solid+fuel%22++%26+%22gasifier%22+%26+%22locomotive%22[/quote]carnej1,Thanks for posting those patents on coal gasification.  I want to learn more about that process.  But I want to clarify a point about the distinction between two different methods of combusting coal; the gas producer and the gas turbine.  I am not suggesting that one is better than the other for railroad application, but only want to clarify the difference between them because the labels make them sound the same.  Back on page 5, I posted some possible variations of a coal burning locomotive drive train including this variation:5)        Some version of a coal fired gas producer that would drive either a turbine or a reciprocating engine, which in turn would drive an alternator, which would produce electric current to drive conventional traction motors.I should not have used the term gas producer because that designates a specific type of combustor that is not a part of what I was suggesting by this alternative #5.  The gas producer or gasifier process produces fuel gas that can then be burned either directly in the firebox where the gasification process is taking place, or it can be piped to fuel an internal combustion engine such as a diesel.  What I intended in alternative #5 is a combustion chamber where coal is fully burned for power, rather than being cooked to drive off flammable gas that can be used for fuel to produce power in a second combustion process.   The process of alternative #5 does produce gas, but it is the expansive gas of full combustion that can be used to drive a turbine.  This gas is not a fuel gas, but rather, a hot, expanding gas that produces physical pressure like that of an explosion.  It could drive a turbine or a reciprocating engine just like pressurized steam does.I am not sure what the proper name for this system is, but it is the basis of what is referred to as a gas turbine engine.  I assume that this was the basis of the early U.P. gas turbine locomotive experiments.  But I am curious to know if it has ever been used to drive a reciprocating engine rather than a turbine.I know there have been experiments to burn coal in diesel engines with combustion occurring within the cylinders just like petroleum fuel is burned.  What happens if you burn coal outside of the engine in a larger combustion chamber and conduct the expanding gas into the engine through admission valves?  I am looking for information on this approach.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag