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?
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
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
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.
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.
doghouseowlsroost The V20 version is rated at 4000HP for rail use.....4800HP for marine use Why would that be?
owlsroost The V20 version is rated at 4000HP for rail use.....4800HP for marine use
The V20 version is rated at 4000HP for rail use.....4800HP for marine use
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.
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
CSSHEGEWISCHcreepycrankAll 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.
creepycrankAll 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.
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..
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
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
IINM, Brookville also offered CAT power but now seems to exclusively use MTU prime movers..
carnej1I 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.
edbenton The HTC truck had all 3 axles where the TM's were facingthe same way getting rid of axle twisting underload and preventing some wheelslipping. The old flexicoils were arranged were the inner motor was facing the oppistie way and man those were slicker than a bannana peel over egg whites on wet rail if you get my drift. The TMS would be flexing one way or another and slipping like NO TOMMOROW.
The HTC truck had all 3 axles where the TM's were facingthe same way getting rid of axle twisting underload and preventing some wheelslipping. The old flexicoils were arranged were the inner motor was facing the oppistie way and man those were slicker than a bannana peel over egg whites on wet rail if you get my drift. The TMS would be flexing one way or another and slipping like NO TOMMOROW.
That was not my experience. We always figured an SD40 had identical tractive effort to an SD40-2 in helper service or drag freight service, and we mixed them up indiscriminately in consists and in the same service. I never noticed the SD40 being slippery compared to an SD40-2.
RWM
bubbajustin Murphy Siding SD40-2's had longer frames, and perhaps the famous porches(?), than SD40's Why?Thanks Because EMD wanted to have a locomotive with a longer frame. Also didn't want to squeeze that other axel under the shorter frame
Murphy Siding SD40-2's had longer frames, and perhaps the famous porches(?), than SD40's Why?Thanks
SD40-2's had longer frames, and perhaps the famous porches(?), than SD40's Why?Thanks
Because EMD wanted to have a locomotive with a longer frame. Also didn't want to squeeze that other axel under the shorter frame
New to train watching and modeling (HO Scale). Working on a first layout and taking pictures in the tri-state area (OHio, West Virginia, Pennsylvania).
Follow up to your Caterpillar comment on the 797 Class Truck, Norscot offers a 1/50 Diecast of this very large truck. Little pricey but very, very nice! Here is the website, and particulars on the Model. Click the small pic on left to get a really good look at the detail.
More later, love being here.
The SD40-2 shared the same frame as the SD45-2 and SD40T-2 whereas the SD40 shared the same frame as the SD45
ML
The road to to success is always under construction. _____________________________________________________________________________ When the going gets tough, the tough use duct tape.
creepycrankBaltACD When I was a kid and my family went to New Orleans for vacation one year, we took the Mississippi River boat tour around the harbor area of the city. Nowhere near any railroad facility I hear a 'train' pulling hard.....a minute or two later a Tow boat passes our vessel shoving a number of barges....it was powered by EMD 567 engines. The prime movers sound the same, no matter the application. They could have very well have once been in locomotives as EMD's biggest marine engine competitor was remanufactured engines salvaged from wrecked locomotives. We traced an engine on a American Dredging cutter head dredge to a Conrail locomotive.
BaltACD When I was a kid and my family went to New Orleans for vacation one year, we took the Mississippi River boat tour around the harbor area of the city. Nowhere near any railroad facility I hear a 'train' pulling hard.....a minute or two later a Tow boat passes our vessel shoving a number of barges....it was powered by EMD 567 engines. The prime movers sound the same, no matter the application.
When I was a kid and my family went to New Orleans for vacation one year, we took the Mississippi River boat tour around the harbor area of the city. Nowhere near any railroad facility I hear a 'train' pulling hard.....a minute or two later a Tow boat passes our vessel shoving a number of barges....it was powered by EMD 567 engines. The prime movers sound the same, no matter the application.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
HI
BEING A MARINE ENGINEER GOT MY START ON A 567A X LST ENGINE. THATS HOW I GOT INTO BEING A RAIL FAN . 567 ALL THE WAY TO 710s NOW THANKS TO THE GOVT. THEY WANT TO KILL A GOOD THING.FOLLOWING THE NEW GEVO ENGINE SOUNDS GOOD HAVENT HEARD WHAT THEIR TROUBLES ARE THOUGH.GE IS TRYING TO BREAK INTO THE MARINE MARKET
HERBYD
Although I'm sure the engine rebulders were getting 567's and 645's from wrecks the vast majority came from retired and scrapped units. To this day EMd sells lots of remaufactured 645s for marine applications..
BaltACDWhen I was a kid and my family went to New Orleans for vacation one year, we took the Mississippi River boat tour around the harbor area of the city. Nowhere near any railroad facility I hear a 'train' pulling hard.....a minute or two later a Tow boat passes our vessel shoving a number of barges....it was powered by EMD 567 engines. The prime movers sound the same, no matter the application.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.