Trains.com

(More) Lumpy Questions

12305 views
46 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Cambridge, UK
  • 419 posts
Posted by owlsroost on Friday, July 10, 2009 6:42 AM

carnej1
I just got the new edition and was interested to note that many of the larger boats built recently have MTU 4000 series engines which are a higher speed (RPM wise) design.

The MTU 4000 series are also used in rail applications - here in the UK we have a whole fleet of passenger trains which have recently been re-engined with the V16 version (de-rated to 1500RPM & 2250HP to match the original engine power output). They also power the diesel version of the European Bombardier Traxx loco. The recent Brookville Equipment Corp locos for CDOT/Metro North use the V12 MTU 4000 too.

 The V20 version is rated at 4000HP for rail use.....4800HP for marine use Cool

 Tony

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Friday, July 10, 2009 10:10 AM

The MTU 4000 engine is also used by MPI for its locomotive designs:  http://www.motivepower-wabtec.com/locomotives/low-horsepower/mpex-low-emissions-locomotives.php 

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    November 2003
  • From: Rhode Island
  • 2,289 posts
Posted by carnej1 on Friday, July 10, 2009 11:22 AM

CSSHEGEWISCH

The MTU 4000 engine is also used by MPI for its locomotive designs:  http://www.motivepower-wabtec.com/locomotives/low-horsepower/mpex-low-emissions-locomotives.php 

Given that WABTEC/MPI previously also offered CAT engines in their medium HP locomotives I wonder If Progress Rail's (CAT subsidiary) entry into the locomotive market is the reason that MPI shows only Cummins and MTU/Detroit Diesel as options on the website?

 IINM, Brookville also offered CAT power but now seems to exclusively use MTU prime movers..

"I Often Dream of Trains"-From the Album of the Same Name by Robyn Hitchcock

  • Member since
    January 2009
  • From: Poulsbo, WA
  • 429 posts
Posted by creepycrank on Friday, July 10, 2009 3:18 PM
All the locomotives that use MTU or Cummins or CAT engines seem to be assigned to duties where they don't stray far from home.
Revision 1: Adds this new piece Revision 2: Improves it Revision 3: Makes it just right Revision 4: Removes it.
  • Member since
    November 2003
  • From: Rhode Island
  • 2,289 posts
Posted by carnej1 on Saturday, July 11, 2009 9:50 AM

creepycrank
All the locomotives that use MTU or Cummins or CAT engines seem to be assigned to duties where they don't stray far from home.

 

Both UP and NS are buying CAT repowered locomotives from Progress Rail (rebuilt from SD50s) intended for road service.....time will tell if they are successful..

"I Often Dream of Trains"-From the Album of the Same Name by Robyn Hitchcock

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Saturday, July 11, 2009 10:05 AM

creepycrank
All the locomotives that use MTU or Cummins or CAT engines seem to be assigned to duties where they don't stray far from home.

This may be due to the fact that MTU, Cummins and Caterpillar engines are not widely used in railroad service at this time and most shop forces are not familiar with them.

 

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    January 2009
  • From: Poulsbo, WA
  • 429 posts
Posted by creepycrank on Saturday, July 11, 2009 10:27 AM
CSSHEGEWISCH

creepycrank
All the locomotives that use MTU or Cummins or CAT engines seem to be assigned to duties where they don't stray far from home.

This may be due to the fact that MTU, Cummins and Caterpillar engines are not widely used in railroad service at this time and most shop forces are not familiar with them.

 

All these engines also have short lube oil change intervals so it would be interesting to see how cat deals with this. In the case of the UP locomotives they are probably intended to be used as switchers but the NS conversion has CAT's new C175 engine on test which is completely unknown except it resembles the MTU 4000 series in concept.
Revision 1: Adds this new piece Revision 2: Improves it Revision 3: Makes it just right Revision 4: Removes it.
  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: Where it's cold.
  • 555 posts
Posted by doghouse on Sunday, July 12, 2009 9:38 PM

owlsroost

The V20 version is rated at 4000HP for rail use.....4800HP for marine use Cool

Why would that be?

  • Member since
    October 2008
  • From: Calgary
  • 2,047 posts
Posted by cx500 on Monday, July 13, 2009 1:08 AM

doghouse

owlsroost

The V20 version is rated at 4000HP for rail use.....4800HP for marine use Cool

Why would that be?

 

In North America the horsepower rating for locomotives is that nominally available at the wheels.  The diesel prime mover is actually producing quite a bit more, but some horses are diverted to the various other appliances such as fans, compressors, water pumps, traction motor blowers and so forth.

So possibly the reason for the difference is that in marine applications the horsepower is measured at the end of the crankshaft before any parasitic losses occur (and some may in fact be handled by separate auxiliary engines).  A difference of 800HP seems high, though, and perhaps a higher RPM is being allowed for marine use.

I understand that in Europe locomotive horsepower is measured at the crankshaft, something to bear in mind when comparing locomotives.

John

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Cambridge, UK
  • 419 posts
Posted by owlsroost on Monday, July 13, 2009 2:36 AM

doghouse

owlsroost

The V20 version is rated at 4000HP for rail use.....4800HP for marine use Cool

Why would that be?

 

The marine use rating I quoted from the MTU website is for "e.g. fast ferries such as monohulls, hydrofoils, catamarans and surface effect ships" - for "Unrestricted continuous rating e.g. conventional ferries" the rating is similar to rail use.

The de-rating is because rail use is a more stressful application than marine or automotive use - in particular, in rail use engines can spend long periods running at full power, followed by long periods at low power or idle - this 'binary driving' increases the thermal stresses, so the engines are de-rated to provide the reliability levels/service intervals acceptable to rail operators.

Tony

  • Member since
    August 2001
  • From: US
  • 261 posts
Posted by JonathanS on Monday, July 13, 2009 8:48 AM

In marine service you have the whole ocean (or lake or river) to cool the engine.  In a locomotive you have a fairly small amount of water that you must cool with the air.  In Arizona in summer the air can be 115 which doesn't cool very well. A hotter engine compresses the air less efficiently and limits the amount of fuel which may be burned.

Also in nearly all marine service the air is at or nearly at sea level pressure.  This allow the engine to compress much more air than can a locomotive in Denver, to say nothing of at the Moffat Tunnel.  More compressed air in the cylinder permits more fuel to be burned which in turn provides more power.

  • Member since
    January 2009
  • From: Poulsbo, WA
  • 429 posts
Posted by creepycrank on Monday, July 13, 2009 9:38 AM
Welcome to the twilight zone of engine rating systems. First all engines are rated or corrected to standard conditions of combustion air and fuel temperature and atmosphere pressure and humidity, all of which can have surprising results even between winter/summer conditions. The Europeans have got to watch out for their marine rating as in this country they will run flat out. The voyage from New Orleans to Saint Louis takes about 23 days and a Moran tug( pair of 12-645-E5s rated at 2150 hp each) takes a loaded oil barge from New Orleans to Portland Maine, about 2000 miles virtually at jammed rack the whole way. Harbor tugs are like switcher at about 20% load factor and only run at full power intermittently of say 15 minutes and the rest at low power. Surprisingly mainline service for locomotives is only about 50% load factor due to the hurry up and wait nature of it. The high marine rating are for high speed vessels such as patrol vessels etc. that hardly ever run at high speed and to do so the lighter the engine-hull weight combination the better. So using a MTU engine for switcher seems to make sense as a low load it probably won't get all slobbered up and has extra power when you need it. Some marine operators are trying the high speed diesel on ATB's and I never met a captain that ever had enough power. The biggest advantage of these engines is that they have the lowest price per horsepower.
Revision 1: Adds this new piece Revision 2: Improves it Revision 3: Makes it just right Revision 4: Removes it.
  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Monday, July 13, 2009 2:08 PM

The differences in duty cycles also explains why an automobile-size gasoline engine has not yet been successfully modified for aviation service in light planes.  Aircraft engines tend to spend more time closer to full throttle while an automobile engine in everyday service spends more time at about 1/3 to 1/2 throttle than anywhere else (watch the tachometer on your dashboard) and has been built accordingly.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    January 2009
  • From: Poulsbo, WA
  • 429 posts
Posted by creepycrank on Monday, July 13, 2009 3:09 PM
The aircraft analogy works for me. You have take off power, cut back to climb power, then take more off for high cruise power. The high cruise power would correspond to continuous rating for diesel. I would expect that the 4800 hp for the MTU would be war emergency power. In CAT's marine website they have worked out a pretty good explanation of their rating system. EMD rates their marine engines slightly lower than the locomotive rating.
Revision 1: Adds this new piece Revision 2: Improves it Revision 3: Makes it just right Revision 4: Removes it.
  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Cambridge, UK
  • 419 posts
Posted by owlsroost on Tuesday, July 14, 2009 8:43 AM

creepycrank
The Europeans have got to watch out for their marine rating as in this country they will run flat out.

 

The marine "Unrestricted continuous ratings" for the MTU 4000 series are similar to the rail use ratings.

Keep in mind that these are high-power-to-weight ratio, high-speed (1800 rpm) engines - the downside usually comes in higher maintenance costs, which is why US freight locos use low-speed engines.

An Austrian subsidiary of GE is developing a new 3800 hp high-speed engine (derived from a natural gas-fuelled version) to power the new GE JS37Aci locos for the UK - the US GEVO engine is too big and heavy for this application. It's interesting that GE thought it worthwhile to fund the development of this (for a 30 loco order) rather than buying-in something like the MTU 4000 - they presumably think it has potential elsewhere.

 Tony

  • Member since
    September 2008
  • 1,112 posts
Posted by aegrotatio on Tuesday, July 28, 2009 12:22 PM

I love the engine talk!

Recently in New York City I observed a parallel hybrid bus and a serial hybrid bus.  The serial hybrid was marked "diesel-electric" and "electromotive."  The Chevrolet Volt is also electromotive.  Are there other non-locomotive applications of electromotive vehicles other than that huge dump truck mentioned earlier?

  • Member since
    November 2003
  • From: Rhode Island
  • 2,289 posts
Posted by carnej1 on Wednesday, July 29, 2009 11:31 AM

aegrotatio

I love the engine talk!

Recently in New York City I observed a parallel hybrid bus and a serial hybrid bus.  The serial hybrid was marked "diesel-electric" and "electromotive."  The Chevrolet Volt is also electromotive.  Are there other non-locomotive applications of electromotive vehicles other than that huge dump truck mentioned earlier?

 The technology is beginning to spread into other industries. For instance Caterpillar has just introduced a diesel-electric version of the D7 Bulldozer that uses regenerative braking. Le Tourneau inc. builds giant front end loaders for mining applications that are diesel electric although not "hybrids" (though they may well be working on that). There are also some hybrid heavy trucks on the market. Foss Maritime just built the world's first hybrid tug boat and is using at for ship assistance work at the Port of Los Angeles.. Of course in many of these applications diesel-electric powerplants are not a new development but the energy storage systems are..

"I Often Dream of Trains"-From the Album of the Same Name by Robyn Hitchcock

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