I was wondering if any museums has thought about using a fireless steam locomotive? They would still need a steam source,but I would think a stantionary boiler would be cheaper and easyer to maintain. Could a steam/water tank be mounted on a normal steam locomotive's frame,wheels and cylinders?
I don't know if any museums use fireless steam locomotives.
As for conversion to fireless?
Well, I know of examples where coal burners have been converted to run on biodiesel (Ex: Disneyland Railroad in Anaheim, CA.) and natural gas (Ex: Knott's Berry Farm in Buena Park, CA.).
Fireless locomotive's were typically used around industrial sites where there was a more than generous supply of plant steam available. I think you'd need a whompin' big stationary boiler to charge up a fireless.
Altering a conventional steam locomotive to fireless operation doesn't sound that practical. It'd also ruin the historic fabric (for lack of a better term) of the converted locomotive.
However, sometimes the opposite it done. Years back there was a 15" gauge railroad in Washington state that was pulled by a compressed air locomotive converted to live steam. That short tourist road died with the owner unfortunately, but the locomotive is still in existance as a museum exhibit.
The idea would be to use a locomotive that already was missing the boiler or other major parts that would not permit it to be put on display. in other words was headed to be scrapped.
That sounds plausible. I'd wonder if it would also be possible to run such a locomotive on compressed air, assuming it was small enough. Any steam engine is also capable on running with compressed air in lieu of steam.
I know it's phoney and kinda hokey, but it has occurred to me that a diesel or gas engine driving an air compressor could be hidden in the tender to supply air to the boiler. Sometimes my mind worries me.
There was one compressed air locomotive in use in New Orleans back in the 1920's. The water board used it to switch chlorine cars at their plant. It was compound and ran at 1000psi. I have pictures of it somewhere.
_____________
"A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner
Colorado is full of fireless cookers and had quite a history with them (mostly from the sugar factories all over the state.) Two are being restored in the Ft. Morgan area, but that story has some uncertainties tied to it.
http://www.steamlocomotive.info/F92001.cfm
For a good look at fireless steam locomotives check this out...
www.northeast.railfan.net/steam21.html
A great assortment of fireless locomotives,also called "fireless cookers," with photos.
A fireless steam engine working at an industry could quickly run to the steam source for a refill when it is running low. A museum engne out on the road that ran low is in trouble.
This is really interesting to me. My hometown is Brush, just down the road from Ft Morgan.
The Dinkie that now sits in front of the office of the sugar plant used to sit on the end of the spur track overlooking Main Street.
MidlandMike A fireless steam engine working at an industry could quickly run to the steam source for a refill when it is running low. A museum engne out on the road that ran low is in trouble.
Rather depends on how far out the road runs.
The Nevada State Railroad Museum (Carson City, NV) runs in a circle around its shop/covered display building. Not very far - the circle is under a mile of total distance.
Also, an engineer with any smarts will watch his temperature and pressure gauges and make sure he keeps plenty in reserve. Running low with a fireless cooker isn't an abrupt change from normal power to no power. It's a gradual decay of performance.
Chuck.
Paul of Covington I know it's phoney and kinda hokey, but it has occurred to me that a diesel or gas engine driving an air compressor could be hidden in the tender to supply air to the boiler. Sometimes my mind worries me.
Nothing all that 'phony' about it. The issues lie in two other places.
First, presumably you're not talking about enough pressure to supply the cylinders directly (as in the early diesel locomotives with pneumatic transmissions). Therefore you're filling the boiler with compressed air, perhaps without aftercooling ... but even so, I wouldn't expect the compressed air to stay particularly hot. When it expands through the cylinders, you will get freezing of water vapor, a progressive decrease in the expansive power due to the chilling of the cylinder block and piston assembly, and distinct problems with lubrication. These were known and common problems with compressed-air locomotives that were required to work for any sustained time at high duty cycle.
The important point about a fireless cooker is that it does not use 'compressed steam' to work. What's inside the reservoir is supercritical WATER, at a density many hundreds of times that of steam at equivalent pressure. This progressively flashes to steam right down to the point that the water mass reaches a temperature where the evolved pressure and developed mass flow is insufficient to move the locomotive -- that is far longer than a compressed-air reservoir even at very high initial pressure, and the rate at which the pressure falls as the engine works is also lower than that seen with compressed gas.
The late European designs for fireless locomotives could use very high initial storage pressure (as I recall over 1200 psi) which was done to increase the heat capacity of the charged water. This might not be desirable for a museum operation for 'other reasons' but the necessary heating might be accomplished through a combination of electrical resistance elements, 'solar heated' material, and a relatively small coil monotube boiler (which could be easily truck-mounted in case of 'emergency'). The usual charging was done not with hot water (as in one of the 'direct steam' systems used in large conventional engine terminals) but by bubbling steam through perforated pipes near the bottom of the reservoir volume, with some and perhaps most of the charge water already present. I don't recall how quickly this worked for the European systems, but it is reasonably rapid (compared to gas-to-water heating systems like the old dieselman's joke about fire-soot-a pipe-scale-water) - think condensation in a very large open FWH with no high-end restriction on temp)
[quote user="mudchicken"]
Great story and history. I remember well Cleveland electric illuminating little dink.
Firelock76That sounds plausible. I'd wonder if it would also be possible to run such a locomotive on compressed air, assuming it was small enough. Any steam engine is also capable on running with compressed air in lieu of steam.
Lake Shore Railway Museum in the borough of North East, PA (outside of Erie) has been known to run their Heisler fireless locomotive on compressed air.
See: https://youtu.be/voBKRe6V3tA
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.
Somehwere about thee or four yeas back, a compnay called TerraJoule was proposing a new twist on the fireless cooker. Their idea was to use solar collectors to heat/boil water and store the mix in a pressure vessel. The steam would be utilized in a multiple expansion steam engine, where the higher pressure cylinders would be bypassed when the steam pressure dropped below a certain point, and more stages would be bypassed as the pressure dropped.
One key takeaway from their presentation was the LPG tanks would be ideal for storing the hot steam water mix.
Multiple industries in Germany apparently still use them, and the NewsWire had an article a while back about a power plant that was returning one to service.
http://trn.trains.com/news/news-wire/2014/12/german-fireless-locomotive-to-return-to-work-after-20-years-in-a-museum
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
Yeah been their. Nice place with a great station. Was their again this summer when the 765 rolled east.
"TRAINS" ran an article about 5-6 years ago during the height of the oil spike that proposed that US manufacturers who used processes that generate large amounts of steam purchase new fireless locomotives for plant switching. The German manufacturer DM was mentioned as an OEM provider..
http://www.dampflokwerk.de/en/produkte.htm
"I Often Dream of Trains"-From the Album of the Same Name by Robyn Hitchcock
tomikawaTT Running low with a fireless cooker isn't an abrupt change from normal power to no power. It's a gradual decay of performance. Chuck.
Running low with a fireless cooker isn't an abrupt change from normal power to no power. It's a gradual decay of performance.
Not necesarily. Most fireless steamers used a reducing valve that would keep the steam supplied to the cylinders at a constant, ussually lower presure.
This means that the preformance of the locomotive would remain constant, until the presure dropped below what the reducing valve supplied to the cylinders. When this happened the locomotive's preformance would sharply drop off or stop altogether.
Although I do agree with you; an engineer with any sense in his head keeps as close an eye on his pressure as he does on the tracks ahead. It would certainly be embarasing for an engineer to answer as to why he let his pressure drop so low without returning to be recharged.
For the interested, there is a story in the link below about the first fireless steam locomotive in America (the "Rubicon") and her sisters. All three survive today.
http://ctr.trains.com/way-it-was/railfan-stories/2013/05/canned-steam-at-the-cash
I think the tiny NCR locos in the link above would be perfect for any museum that is small or has crowded trackage, both of which would prohibit larger conventional steamers. They are very simplistic, and could be run on air, I think.
Running on compressed air is not a viable alternative for a fireless cooker. Keep in mind that the superheated water in the pressure vessel will gradually turn to steam as the pressure decreases. Compressed air does not have this "recharging" factor.
CSSHEGEWISCH Running on compressed air is not a viable alternative for a fireless cooker. Keep in mind that the superheated water in the pressure vessel will gradually turn to steam as the pressure decreases. Compressed air does not have this "recharging" factor
Running on compressed air is not a viable alternative for a fireless cooker. Keep in mind that the superheated water in the pressure vessel will gradually turn to steam as the pressure decreases. Compressed air does not have this "recharging" factor
But it could be done. The compressed air would not last nearly as long as superheated water and steam, as you say. But the loco could be run on air for short periods of time, as is shown by the video in an above post, where an 0-6-0F is shown running on air.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=voBKRe6V3tA&feature=youtu.be
Firelock76 Fireless locomotive's were typically used around industrial sites where there was a more than generous supply of plant steam available. I think you'd need a whompin' big stationary boiler to charge up a fireless. Altering a conventional steam locomotive to fireless operation doesn't sound that practical. It'd also ruin the historic fabric (for lack of a better term) of the converted locomotive. However, sometimes the opposite it done. Years back there was a 15" gauge railroad in Washington state that was pulled by a compressed air locomotive converted to live steam. That short tourist road died with the owner unfortunately, but the locomotive is still in existance as a museum exhibit.
Hey, remember that converted locomotive I mentioned above? Well, it looks like it's back!
According to my latest issue of "Railfan and Railroad" Anacortes No. 1 was fired up and operated at the Anacortes Museum back in November. Now the museum's looking to build a short 18" gauge line (I got the gauge wrong) for limited public operation.
Cool huh?
www.anacortesmuseum.com. Check it out, AND the video of the locomotive's builder, the late Tommy Thompson. You'll be sorry it you don't, what a neat little train!
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.