Trains.com

Diesles with excessive smoke

8530 views
42 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    March 2004
  • From: Indianapolis, Indiana
  • 2,434 posts
Posted by gabe on Wednesday, September 1, 2004 9:08 AM
Was the "professional" advice really that different from the "amatuer" advice? Other than the fact that the "professional" would have charged for it and he is easier to sue? I feel as though I just went to the doctor and told "yep, you have a cold," that will be $480.
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, September 1, 2004 11:32 AM
Gabe;

I think the point Randy was trying to be made is that a) at least half of the people posting weren't/aren't amatuers, and b) they were termed amatuers by a person who didn't know the answer himself but had to go ask someone else. And that person said the same things that had already been posted several times! But that is all too typical forum behavior.

"Read everything before you post anything!"
  • Member since
    March 2004
  • From: Indianapolis, Indiana
  • 2,434 posts
Posted by gabe on Wednesday, September 1, 2004 12:39 PM
Umm . . . dgwicks,

That was kind of my point! Hense (1) the strategically placed quotation makrs in my naration, (2) my notation that "the professional's" advice was not any different from the other advice given, and (3) my sarcastic allusion to his claim that he a professional who did not offer advice different from people who did feel the need to call other people amatures while being generous enough to answer my question.

Randy,

if I mis-worded my response to indicate anything other than the fact that I know you know what you are talking about and don't take serious anyone calling you (or others) amatuers, I apologize. I assure you, my notation was intended to convey my opinion that it was very fooli***o refer to you as an amateur.

Gabe
  • Member since
    June 2004
  • From: roundhouse
  • 2,747 posts
Posted by Randy Stahl on Wednesday, September 1, 2004 12:58 PM
I don't mind being called an amatuer... I've been called worse.. at least I make a pretty good living at it. LOL !!!!
Randy
  • Member since
    January 2003
  • From: Kenosha, WI
  • 6,567 posts
Posted by zardoz on Wednesday, September 1, 2004 1:34 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by Randy Stahl

Since when.. Please qualify the statement, white smoke is associated with lube oil .
ALL of the locomotives I had the pleasure of troubleshooting the lube oil will cover you in a slimy mess if you are standing anywhere near the engine. The sides of the carbody will be covered in oil.
Randy


I hated when that happened! Plus it is rather dangerous as the walkway, grabirons, and steps also get a slick coating.
  • Member since
    June 2004
  • From: roundhouse
  • 2,747 posts
Posted by Randy Stahl on Wednesday, September 1, 2004 1:43 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz

QUOTE: Originally posted by Randy Stahl

Since when.. Please qualify the statement, white smoke is associated with lube oil .
ALL of the locomotives I had the pleasure of troubleshooting the lube oil will cover you in a slimy mess if you are standing anywhere near the engine. The sides of the carbody will be covered in oil.
Randy


I hated when that happened! Plus it is rather dangerous as the walkway, grabirons, and steps also get a slick coating.
Yea.. but you got to admit it's pretty cool when a RR officials car gets the lube oil treatment
Randy
  • Member since
    January 2003
  • From: Kenosha, WI
  • 6,567 posts
Posted by zardoz on Wednesday, September 1, 2004 1:49 PM
When I was on the Cheap & Nothing Works (C&NW) I used to dread being the first engineer to operate a "rebuild". Invariably there would be problems, such as clogged air filters (painted over), paint spray in the electrical cabinet (and on the relays & contactors), and others I cannot remember right now. What was just as bad was the sickly puke green color the interior of the cabs (and control stand, brake valves, seats, windows) would be painted.

Strangely, though, whoever did the Crandal rebuilds of the UP E8&9 A&B's for the commuter service did a good job, considering the amount of work that was needed. Except the cabs were the noisiest I had ever been in!
  • Member since
    January 2004
  • 6 posts
Posted by csxchris on Wednesday, September 1, 2004 2:02 PM
It's been my experience that the smokiest of the locomotives comes from a variety of issues NOT common to automobiles or even tractor trailers. The class one I work for prefers the intake filters changed every six months. Problem is, the work packet the computer spits out frequently omits the work item requiring to change the filters every six months. The mechanics certainly aren't ambitious enough to check. So for the most part a large percentage of this carriers locomotives rolling around have air intake filters that are just about plugged solid. I have noticed during numerous load tests where dirty air filters will rob between 100 - 500 horsepower. On GE's where the turbo freewheels all the time this is a big deal. The GE guy said that one test is to place a sheet of cardboard right over the intake grills see how much it smokes then! The GE will over fuel to compensate when the problem is a lack of ability to suck fresh air in. In result black smoke and if we're lucky lots of flames. All locomotives when cold as mentioned above will blow white smoke when started - particularly Alco's. I have witnessed some GP38-2's blow white smoke even when warm but usually it's a bad injector - identified usually by cutting out the injectors one at a time by disconnecting the rack. I have also witnessed GE's with bad turbos that won't spin enough or at all make ALOT of smoke and ALOT of racket. EMD's with bad turbos or bad overrunning clutches will do it too.
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, September 1, 2004 7:34 PM
What I know about diesels I've pretty much picked up in these forums (thanks for the education, guys!!) but I would tend to think if > anything < was spewing oil it would be a pretty good candidate for a rebuild. Unless I missed something...
  • Member since
    October 2003
  • 31 posts
Posted by tnchpsk8 on Friday, September 3, 2004 6:43 PM
In 30 years of trucking it was always : black smoke= too much fuel, blue smoke = engine oil in combustion chamber, white smoke = water vapor in combustion chamber. Seemed to be true for Cummins and 2stroke Detroits.
  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Friday, September 3, 2004 11:55 PM
Yeah, but don't forget white smoke can also be incomplete combustion -- as when glow plugs aren't working, or when a DI engine is stone cold. Some of the FL9s as maintained by PC in the early '70s would produce the most amazing clouds of white smoke "accelerating" out of Harmon.

Watch the speed with which the white smoke dissipates, and the way the smoke moves. It's different for water vapor than for unburned fuel. Remember that almost all locomotives don't use Prestone or other antifreeze -- the coolant is water. The amount that can leak into a locomotive-size compression-ignition engine without either quenching combustion or causing, ahem, worse problems like hydraulic lock shouldn't be that likely to give massive amounts of visible water vapor out the exhaust...

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, September 4, 2004 12:53 AM
In my own experience, an internal coolant leak is more likely to show as contamination of lube oil than abnormal exhaust smoke. The amounts of coolant (small) and the amount of heat in the cylinder and exhaust garuntees a clear vapor, unless the amount of coolant is very high. I have never seen this in a diesel engine though, vs. a gasoline engine, I imagine the pressures in a diesel engine being much higher cause the opposite - combustion gasses pressurizing the coolant system, and in fact this is what I have seen in diesel engines.

I once worked on an ancient 6-71, that every time you revved the engine, the radiator would blow. When the engine was stopped, the air box drains gushed coolant until the system ran out of water. I was amazed the engine never siezed from hydraulic lock with the amount of water coming out of the cylinders, but shure enough, it would run. I pulled the air box covers and saw all the water was coming from one cylinder. So, I pulled the head. The exhaust ports were dry and had no rust, also the valves showed no signs of contact with water, and there were no obvious cracks. This engine is a 71, so it has dry liners. No sign of leakage around the fire ring, and no rust or scale on the piston crown. I was stumped, so I took it to a machine shop to have it pressure tested - this was a job I did for some freinds on an old drill rig out in the middle of nowhere with minimum tools. The machine shop notified me that the injector tube had lost its seal, I later learned from a sage, that this is a common problem in old detroits.

At any rate, this case illustrates typical symptoms of a large coolant leak in a diesel engine. A coolant leak in a four stroke engine may show in the exhaust smoke because of intermittent cylinder pressure, unlike in a two stroke engine, but if the leak is in the cylinder head, again the coolant system will be pressurized. I have seen internal coolant leaks in other engines with wet liners, in those cases, the engine "pyucked" a lot and had contaminated oil.

As far as locomotives, I am only familiar with EMD, which has coolant jackets integral to the cylinder liner, although it appears there is a wet seal around the base? It seems in EMD's the likelyhood is much greater to see contaminated oil than an abnormal exhaust. I know of one engine that inhaled to much coolant from the airbox and chunked a cylinder. What was left of the con rod blew the side of the block out, rendering the engine useless.
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, September 4, 2004 1:03 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by csxchris

It's been my experience that the smokiest of the locomotives comes from a variety of issues NOT common to automobiles or even tractor trailers. The class one I work for prefers the intake filters changed every six months. Problem is, the work packet the computer spits out frequently omits the work item requiring to change the filters every six months. The mechanics certainly aren't ambitious enough to check. So for the most part a large percentage of this carriers locomotives rolling around have air intake filters that are just about plugged solid. I have noticed during numerous load tests where dirty air filters will rob between 100 - 500 horsepower. On GE's where the turbo freewheels all the time this is a big deal. The GE guy said that one test is to place a sheet of cardboard right over the intake grills see how much it smokes then! The GE will over fuel to compensate when the problem is a lack of ability to suck fresh air in. In result black smoke and if we're lucky lots of flames. All locomotives when cold as mentioned above will blow white smoke when started - particularly Alco's. I have witnessed some GP38-2's blow white smoke even when warm but usually it's a bad injector - identified usually by cutting out the injectors one at a time by disconnecting the rack. I have also witnessed GE's with bad turbos that won't spin enough or at all make ALOT of smoke and ALOT of racket. EMD's with bad turbos or bad overrunning clutches will do it too.



I just thought I aught to point out csxchris has the winning explanation, a clogged air filter will cause lots of black smoke and a loss of power.

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy