# 30
LNG - hhmmmh, alright , very clean combustion !
waste oil / used motor oil ? - oohm !
( it contains all kinds of toxic ingredients making it a health hazard to burn )
Regards
Juniatha
#31
Sorry about the geared steam diversion...I had wrongfully assumed that since it was classic logging steam a larger version would be acceptable. But thank you for your detailed reply, one of those if only it had been tried ideas...
I think that for oil burning steam locomotives, waste restaurant cooking oil will likely see more and more use, as it is quite cheap and usually carbon neutral. But there are issues with greater corrosion. It will be interesting to see if greater adoption takes place, as steam locomotive fuel consumption of gallons per mile gets pricy quickly...
NW
#32
Regarding # 27: If I understand correctly, you were using three mechanical speeds, rather than the diesel-hydraulic method of filling and draining torque converters. What were you using as a clutch, and what arrangements were you using for torsional shock in the driveline?
I had thought that oil firing on the A would permit some overloading of the boiler (albeit with much poorer net efficiency) to give acceleration to higher speed. But the principal difference was in the arrangement of main and side rods on the A vs. the F7 (or, come to think of it, the T1). A possible advantage here is that the main and side rod can be 'fork and blade' (with common sleeve on the pin) giving even closer and more direct transmission; it might be interesting to see how a late-Thirties implementation of lightweight rods would differ from the version installed on the As as built... but I don't think there is much question that the running gear would support very high rotational speed with lower augment than an arrangement where the main rods have to bear entirely outboard of the side rods.
I think I noted VERY carefully that I would never dare ask the people at VN to touch the 05, let alone start tinkering with it! I would deserve the bolt if I did...
With respect to #28: LNG has problems both with physical density and with heat content. For example, you will need very careful arrangements to preheat the fuel, and to keep water out of any part of the cryo arrangement especially when refueling. I believe that much of the 'practical' research into NG locomotives has concentrated on CNG for some of these reasons, although some of the hydrogen-fuel projects have gone a long way toward providing (and perhaps even to an extent costing-down) reasonably good refueling methods for cryogenics.
Perhaps interestingly, there are now a couple of multiple-reflective-shield insulation systems that make LNG storage much less difficult. But it is still NOT a particularly good fuel for firing legacy steam locomotives, in my opinion.
Waste oil is reasonable for use on cash-strapped tourist lines and the like, where the volume of combustion gas actually released does not pose a major health hazard. Some of the problems with 'pollutant' materials, like detergent constituents or additives in the original oil or contaminant materials, can be addressed by treatment at the time the waste oil is centrifugally filtered. I admit that I have a problem with the idea of burning 'run-of-sump' waste lube oil without centrifuging and treating it first.
I expect waste oil to have the same general drawback as WVO in that when demand increases, the price of the fuel (even unfiltered) goes up, and availability goes down (there are similar conditions for less-refined 'biodiesel' products suitable for external-combustion burning, and I expect them to be observed with respect to stocks for torrefied fuels when those become common).
# 33
Well OK, waste oil was just a shot in the dark. You can get away with it because steam locomotives are exempt from environmental smoke laws. They can put on the biggest "Burning of Rome" smoke effects, as the late lamented Lucius Beebe used to call them and there isn't a thing the most "gungi" EPA agent can do about it. Hee, hee, hee!
The waste vegetable oil? You know maybe if places like McDonalds, Wendy's, Burger King and other places realized just how hungry people would get after a run-by of a steam locomotive that smells like hot French fries they'd give the waste oil away just for marketing purposes!
Now tell me there's some folks out there who can go past a MickeyD's without just TASTING those fries in their minds!
#34
Firelock, an article in Trains a couple years ago indicated that the restaurant oil powered locomotives smelled just like petroleum powered steamers.
Going back to other locomotives, I would like to see a GN 2-8-8-0, or 2-6-8-0, as they were such interesting locomotives.
I would also like to see the Madame Queen restored.
# 35
Hi everyone,
( reply to # 34 ) The Madame Queen - ok , she was the first of the big Santa Fé engines , however the later ones were even better ...
I for one would like to see resurrected a Q2 as the best of the Duplexi and final word in PRR fast freight , of course the unreal S1 6-4-4-6 - rather than a T1 - however with certain wanting features vastly improved , the S2 with improved drive unit to improve riding and performance , lower instant steaming load when starting , and if have one more wish free : last not least a Niagara with vastly improved cylinder tribology , exhaust and draughting . It's pretty much East Coast oriented if you like - I leave it to other contributors to balance it out ... *g*
More than anything historic however I'd like to see a *well designed* *good looking* new type like one of my ...
but that's another story
# 36
Hi Juniatha!
Calling Pennsy's S-1 unreal is putting it mildly! That thing looked like something out of science fiction! It was cool though, too bad it wasn't preserved.
The S-1 WAS a good running engine, though, I've never read anything anywhere that said it wasn't. The problem was its size, just a little too big. Too big for any of the PRR's turntables and marginal on the "wyes". It frequently de-railed on wyes to the fury of the yard crews. "If this @#$%&!!! de-rails one more time!!!!!" "ARGHHHH!!!"
Too bad, the S-1 was a flyer on the Crestline racetrack.
Wayne
# 37
Hi Wayne
About Long Tall Sally-One :
Here’s Raymond the Lionlike as he admires his 'Streamline-1' ArtDeco Monster :
http://www.raymondloewy.org/gallery/vid_loc_high.html
Here’s a site with a collection of S1 photos and a so-so- text ( don’t take it too seriously ) I think she looks best on that full moon calendar painting :
http://www.dieselpunks.org/profiles/blogs/sunday-streamline-14-the-big
What I have always wondered about Loewy's styling is : why did Loewy make this tender engine to look like a tank engine with side tanks ? just look at these huge plain plates that cover up high wheels like an ungainly medium legth skirt : no style , no shape nor meaning , the sheets are but giant metal curtains . When in the end Crestline shop (?) had cut it all away the engine looked so much better around the dual drive sets – although the front remained a pretty messy mixture of droopy bulbous curves and short straight lines that go nowheres .
To me , this engine's contouring tells of the limits of an industrial designer’s scope to really get ‚the feeling‘ for what a steam locomotive was and what to do with given proportions and shapes of technical elements .
Good riding / derailing :
From her sheer length of engine wheel base over bogie / Delta truck she should have been a fair enough high speed straight-on runner – on the other hand , length is not all there is to high speed running and triple axle bogies are not ideal for it – at least not without some special arrangements for the middle axle . So I wouldn’t dare to say neither way …
Since she had been one of a few American loco classes having higher than 80 in drive wheels and having had power abounding she still remains my favorite for steam speed record .. if ! .. PRR would have had her in mint condition , had the straightest , level part of their Crestline – Chicago mainline refurbished to 120 plus mph mint condition and then had released her for an all power high speed run until acceleration would level out . What speed then ? .. no , you won’t read no figures from me !
The problem of derailing afaik was virulent only on the quickly laid loop at Crestline ( and probably other end of line , too ) plus a few known bad spots of sagged rail or kink in tight curve in station trackwork . To be fair , these troubles should rather be attributed to clearly inadequate quality of trackwork rather than to the engine . No question , for each and every type of locomotive adequate trackwork is indispensable , this is , has been and always will be sine qua non and applied to a plain 4-4-0 as it did to this 6-4-4-6 engine .
It would have been a great show had they stowed her away in some shed on the vast area of Altoona Works and only re-discovered her recently . However , for sure they would restore her with all those curtain plate side valances , complete with those ‚cheap thrill speed stripes‘ ( sorry Raymond ) et all . Horrible – no , I think then she’s better gone for good !
Maybe she roams the Eternal Mainlines West of steam – she was a poor wayfaring stranger while travelling through this world of woe , there is no sickness , no toil or danger in that bright land to which she’s gone .. :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XV4XrbiS9R0
Whatever , anyways , that would be over the rainbow :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RDmXsGeiF8
Why Eva Cassidy ? Well just listen I guess she ‚speaks‘ for herself - and btw she also performed the above song , if you prefer :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_sDyE98AGzw&list=PLC89F05DF3FC1AE69
‚The best die young‘
RIP
# 38
Yes, it's a shame about the poor old S-1, a short life because someone didn't do all the math to figure out how they were going to turn the poor girl around.
Still, it's hard to believe the stodgy, conservative old Pennsy put out something like that. Maybe the Worlds Fair of 1939 had something to do with it, you know with all the futuristic stuff going on there. Mom went to the '39 Fair, well it was easy, she's a New York City girl, and she's still waiting for her personal robot! Mom says the '39 Fair was a LOT better than the one in 1964.
Ah 1939, the year movie buffs cal the "Watershed Year." More classic films were released in 1939 than any year before or since, too many to go into. Sorry, starting to drift!
It's still a pity the S-1 wasn't saved. C'est la vie.
PS: I STILL love the way it looks! Art Deco on steroids!
# 39
Well OK now, I've suggested waste motor oil as an alternative locomotive fuel. Too nasty some say. I thought waste vegetable oil would be a good alternative since it would leave a "French Fry" scent down the main line. No good another poster said, it still smells like any other petroleum product.
Right. Then let me suggest a resurrection of a fine old American cottage industry, centered in the Appalachian Mountain regions. That's right brothers and sisters, I'm talkin' MOONSHINE! Ever had any? Potent stuff! Trust the Firelock on this one.
As the old song goes...
"Willie the Gambler drove a '59 Rambler, each winter it'd freeze up blue!
But all last winter he went roarin' through the timber just by mixin' in some Mountain Dew!"
Hey. we want energy independence, right? Fracking's supposed to be bad, right? We've got to use something!
Juniatha made a suggestion some months ago about using "Bommerlunder" but I'm sure the Germans need all they can make over there. They've got their own steamers to worry about.
I heard they used "Bommerlunder" to fuel the Me-163 but that's another story.
*# 40*
Moonshine, or at least something close to it, is already being used as a motor fuel. It's called ethanol.
# 41
Think small. A 2-4-2, 2-4-2T, or 0-4-4T Forney.
How about a totally radical concept?
Build a chassis with a 0-4-0 or 2-4-2T wheel arrangement. Take a 21st century industrial gas fired boiler and place it on top. Surround the boiler with an historically accurate steam dummy wooden body. When the boiler needs maintenance, pull it off and put another one on the chassis.
If fuel is a problem, use a fireless system with a storage tank instead of a boiler. You can use an electric heater, plug the locomotive in at night, and have a supply of steam ready in the morning.
Then there are compressed air locomotives....
Kevin
# 42
Hello,
Firelock76 Yes, it's a shame about the poor old S-1, a short life because someone didn't do all the math to figure out how they were going to turn the poor girl around. Still, it's hard to believe the stodgy, conservative old Pennsy put out something like that. Maybe the Worlds Fair of 1939 had something to do with it
Still, it's hard to believe the stodgy, conservative old Pennsy put out something like that. Maybe the Worlds Fair of 1939 had something to do with it
Firelock,
I think the 1939 fair is the exact reason she was built that long. She was the longest rigid frame locomotive ever built, and so the world record may have been more a factor in her design than practicalities like turning her...
# 43
CSSHEGEWISCH Moonshine, or at least something close to it, is already being used as a motor fuel. It's called ethanol.
C'mon man, don't over analyze this, I'm just trying to make a joke here! BTW, moonshine's got a lot more ZAP to it than plain old ethanol. Wow! Had some stuff from Georgia one time courtesy of a fellow Marine.
#44
Firelock, alcohol is used as a fuel in model steam locomotives (most about G scale), so there is a precedent...but think of the cost of gallons per mile...
To balance out Juniatha's eastern steam power a few posts back, I propose a NP Z-6. And a rebuild of the NP 2626. What a good looking locomotive!
# 46
Lois -- if you fire with Pocahontas coal, the result is almost ALL carbon emissions. "Carbon emissions" doesn't mean sooting or smoke, it means 'containing the element carbon' -- which is the major constituent of any steam coal. More specifically, the emissions are carbon dioxide (complete carbon combustion) and carbon monoxide (incomplete carbon combustion, as from reducing atmosphere/insufficient O2 in the combustion plume, or early quench).
Interestingly, steam locomotive soot and unburnt fines represent less of a 'global warming' hazard than does gaseous CO2, and less of a health hazard than nanoparticulates in diesel exhaust...
# 47
Yep, coal has lots of carbon, and if it doesn't look like coal when you're finished with it, and you've moved a train some in the process, you have freed up tons of carbon and placed it back in nature other than as coal. Some is worse than others, but you still need to meet the calorific requirement to move train X between points A and B. That may be with 20 tons or 25 tons, but the result either way will be lots of carbon footprint. Or, emissions.
#48
Yes, coal produces carbon emissions, but some is better than others. Appalachian coal is better than the lignite that UP fired their locomotives with (some say it was mostly mud!).
For carbon neutral steam, used restaurant oil is likely the best fuel.
#49
As the salty old roundhouse foreman said when dieselization began:
"Where you gonna get the cinders for yer yard track ballast if you stop usin' coal?"
***# 50***
# 46 Overmod on Wed, Aug 7 2013 5:12 PM
>> "Carbon emissions" doesn't mean sooting or smoke, it means 'containing the element carbon' <<
Well , ok – but what he *meant* was solid carbon – i.e. unburnt particles or partly burnt particles ,soot escaping the chimney and producing a cloud of smoke *as black as coal* - or .. carbon as you remarked quite rightly .
Btw : what do*you*mean by >> steam coal << ? Could it be coal mining by using steam pressure for fracking ? ( no , sure not , it’s carbonized steam using too much superheating and palm oil for cylinder lubrubbing – no , ‘coursenotsorry )
>> Interestingly, steam locomotive soot and unburnt fines represent less of a 'global warming' hazard than does gaseous CO2, and less of a health hazard than nanoparticulates in diesel exhaust... <<
That’s an important point , I fully agree with that !
#48 NorthWest on Thu, Aug 8 2013 1:01 AM
>> For carbon neutral steam ..<<
Can’t ‘believe’ in ‘carbon neutral’ combustion of carbons – *any* ( !! ) plants used for this latest fraud only grow where *other* plants had grown before which now are taken away for these ‘carbon neutral carbon production plants’ – and that’s not even accounting for carbon burnt in heat generation for processing these plants into useable oils !
= J =
# 51
Juniatha Btw : what do*you*mean by >> steam coal << ? Could it be coal mining by using steam pressure for fracking ? ( no , sure not , it’s carbonized steam using too much superheating and palm oil for cylinder lubrubbing – no , ‘coursenotsorry )
"Steam coal" is a slang or informal term for coal that is well-suited to combustion in a boiler, such as a steam locomotive boiler, for raising steam. An important quality is not too much ash and that the ash that is there melts at a high temperature to prevent formation of clinker. Clinker that clogs the entry of combustion air into the firebed is the bane of locomotive firemen (yes, men) of all lands and cultures. Low volatiles may help in reducing the amount of visible smoke when burnt in a locomotive boiler.
"Metalurgical coal" is probably a more technical term for coal, when made into coke, is of a satisfactory high-carbon composition and makes a fluffy coke for use in a blast furnace to make iron from iron ore. It probably needs to be low ash and the ash having a chemical composition that doesn't confound the blast furnace chemistry.
But you knew all that, you are testing us?
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
52 class
>> But you knew all that, you are testing us? <<
Paul ,
I'm afraid you're so right - 'twas but a joke , though with a background I have to say , if you know which thread and issue I mean ( it's gone for good now ) ... 'twas but a friendly turn of a card ( alas , parsing the project ..)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4K6j0m2mxE
..night falls over the dark roundhouses with their high windows amber glow and their sinister black steely steeds of uncanny voices .. I think it’s steam within a dream
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1zVojw3IkU
But what does the raven appear for ? Indeed,strange days have found us
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NleFEDHmdhs
E=MD² ? Teodora singing ... ( not Russian , it's Bulgarian , I guess - they use kyrillic letters , too ; although she is Roumanian )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DsuhiQbP5A
#53
Firelock76 #49 As the salty old roundhouse foreman said when dieselization began: "Where you gonna get the cinders for yer yard track ballast if you stop usin' coal?"
# 54
# 53 NorthWest Fri, Aug 9 2013 6:48 PM:
>> .. but it is better than the bunker C some steamers burn. And it is cheap and in abundant supply! <<
Yep , NorthWest - and ,sorry , that's how it smells , too !
Once you have gotten a breeze of heavy bunker C oil , I think you dig pan waste - it has an air of abundance of energy and in combination with the deep base , subwoofing of the burners is *sooo* fitting for big steam - it's the completion of the warm embracing that's so thrilling about feeling a live big steam locomotives right before you !
Leave the forests alone , let the jungles live , use wind and solar energy for what have you and let us have a glimpse of steam at it's best - the dark honey is well spent on the rare bliss of it ...
#55
JuniathaLeave the forests alone , let the jungles live , use wind and solar energy for what have you and let us have a glimpse of steam at it's best - the dark honey is well spent on the rare bliss of it ...
Agreed!
#56
I just wish people would quit pickin' on coal, the original biomass fuel, as a fuel for steam locomotives. Look, you burn the coal, boil the water, make steam, run the train. What could be more simple and "organic" than that? Who knows what kind of demons and devils are at work under the hood of a diesel? Besides, who doesn't like the smell of coal smoke? Kind of like the smell of burning leaves in autumn that everyone misses so much.
Just so everyone knows, I DO believe in global warming and climate change, there's plenty of historic and geologic evidence to show it's happened plenty of times on the past, along with global cooling. What I DON'T believe is that mankind has anything to to with what's an apparantly normal cycle for this planet. Man? Who's a pimple on the butt of the world? Please.
So shoot me.
# 57
answering on # 56 :I will not shoot you , Firelock , sure not , I think we all want to have you around some more - but !the consumption of oxygen by mankind due to technological heat processes as against times before technology was being developed - and that is what the bio system was balanced for ! - has been increased by some 100 times per person - plus the number of humans has multiplied by - well - just incredible and totally out of proportion . There are cities in the Third World with more inhabitants than there were .. umph , I change my example from what was on my mind .. in all of Europe just about a century or two ago .
This sort of thing cannot go on without severe consequences and in these times with peak oil past we begin to feel it - only its starting very gently , very slowly , and with all those fluctuations that had been there is still scope for denying the truth , but don't deceive yourself , we will live to see it swell to awesome and awful size and then there is no more denying .
The Titanic didn't sink in a few minutes - yet was doomed the very moment the hulk had been ripped open . Still , there was time for those who wanted to pretend everything would turn out well to keep dining , talking , promenading , taking a shower , dressing for the evening , going to bed , playing cards or what have you . All those finally woke up to the unthinkable when they saw the water trickle over the floor and never leaving no more but gaining and gaining until the last one understood it would just be the third class sinking but *all* the ship without exception .
With Kassandra's compliments
#58
Ah dear lady, we're going to have to agree to disagree on the global warming thing. All I can say is the last few vocanic eruptions pumped a lot more crud into the atmosphere than man's done lately and we're still here. As I've said before I'm an amateur historian and I think I've got history on my side. Uh history, you ARE on my side, aren't you? You around? Where'd you go? Oh, back on the bookshelf with 499 of your sisters you silly little muse!
Oh, I HAVE been shot at before, but that's another story.
With Clio's complements, Wayne
# 59
Well , Firelock , in the presence of N&W 611 in steam and ready to go we will agree that a little coal fire on a steam locomotive's grate won't do no harm - and if it does we're prepared to go doomsdaying and pay the price - *after the ride* , for sure .
" Now why should we have to go doomsdaying , too , with you steam buffs - all because you couldn't leave those old sooty monsters alone ! "
cry the diesel fans . And it's true , it's a shame , isn't it ...
(Who's up for # 60 ? )
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.