I've read that the steam locos would need to replenish their water supply more often than their fuel. I know it depends on a lot of factors, but what would be a reasonable distance for a mid size steamer such as a Consolidation or a Mikado to go between water stops when pulling a typical freight train, assuming no water pans. Just looking for a ballpark figure.
It depends on two things;
1. How big the steamer is (it's designation, etc)
2. How far is it going (is it pulling a cross-country train, or doing a short local run?)
I've heard or read 100 miles between water stops. But, as you correctly stated, it would depend on several factors - e.g. tender & boiler size, pulling tonnage, and speed.
Along the Waterlevel Route (NYC) some tenders were outfitted with water scoops so that locomotives like Hudsons, Mohawks, and Niagaras could "top off" using track pans while maintaining their running speed. Course, it only worked where tracks were level; hence the name.
Tom
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
I read someplace that a steam engine would average approx 150 gallons per mile. This all depended on terrain, train weight and speed. That's one reason tenders kept growing bigger and other means of extending runs were developed like track pans and aux tenders.
oldline1
Here's an interesting duscussion on the subject:
https://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?10,2722254
Ed
Prototype railroads usually tried to size tenders (and on-board water tanks for those locomotives without tenders) to suit their local conditions. Hence, the Santa Fe pulled humongous tenders riding on sixteen wheels half way across Arizona between water treatment plants, while a logger in the soggy northwest might need to siphon water out of a snow-melt stream every ten miles or so.
Rough, very approximate number for estimating how big a cistern would be needed. An efficiently fired and operated locomotive would consume something over one gallon per hour per drawbar horsepower.
When climbing the grade eastbound out of Ogden, UT, Big Boy would pretty well drain a 25,000 gallon cistern in 3 1/2 hours, and burn up 25 tons of coal in seven hours. NYC Niagaras, which could develop comparable horsepower, ran halfway from Harmon to Chicago on less than 40 tons of (better quality) coal, refilling their 18,000 gallon cisterns at track speed several times enroute. Big Boy and the Niagara had tenders of similar design and weight, but local conditions caused a BIG difference in fuel capacity (25 tons of coal vs 40) and water capacity (25,000 gallons filled standing vs 18,000 gallons filled from track pans at speeds up to 85mph.)
Toward the end of steam, N&W added auxiliary water cars to their line-haul locomotives, then closed 31 water stations (on grades or in high-tax political venues.) Losing the ability to pull a couple of hopper cars per train cost less than the price of keeping those water holes flowing.
My prototype had a not terribly dissimilar situation. The 0-8-0T assigned to one branch line didn't have enough water capacity to make a full round trip with its maximum-size train. So the Master Mechanic provided it with a four-wheel water canteen about the size of an apartment house dumpster. That was cheaper than putting in a watering facility that would only be used once or twice a day.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
NYBW-JohnJust looking for a ballpark figure.
In recalling many of the accounts I've heard and read about steam operations it seemed to me that quite a few of the "jobs" —weather they were turns, locals or switching work—the locomotive would need to be replenished with water right about the same time the crew "went to beans". So roughly about four-hours for water and eight for coal.
Sometimes, the engine was cut-off and the fireman would have to stay with the engine and get water while the rest of the crew could have their lunch in a near-by diner or under a shade tree.
As anyone familiar with steam will tell you, there were MANY variables. Bad water, high in minerals, would make for poor steaming as would leaky flues or staybolts. Some locomotives were simply poor steamers and the firemen didn't like getting stuck with one. The habits and methods of the engineer could make a big difference in water and fuel consumption, too.
Regards, Ed
Hello all,
ATSFGuyIt depends on two things; 1. How big the steamer is (it's designation, etc) 2. How far is it going (is it pulling a cross-country train, or doing a short local run?)
There is a third factor- -Altitude!
At elevations above 10,000-feet (3,048m) the boiling point of water is approximately 193ºƒ (89ºC) compared to 212ºƒ (100ºC) at sea level.
Here in Colorado the narrow gage steamers needed to replenish their water every 6-miles at elevations above 9,000-feet (2,743m).
That is why the towns on the High Lines were spaced in increments of 6-miles, with water tanks interspersed at 6-miles.
Hope this helps.
"Uhh...I didn’t know it was 'impossible' I just made it work...sorry"
Actually, inside the boiler of a steam locomotive altitude is a non-issue. It only comes into play when the kettle is open to the atmosphere. Boiler steam generation and superheating takes place in a closed system at pressures measured in multiples of atmospheres and at temperatures well above 212 degrees F.
The range of six miles was probably the result of small cisterns and nasty grades, not altitude. Those early narrow-gauge locomotives didn't have either tractive effort or horsepower available to drag a big tank of non-revenue water at the expense of revenue-producing freight.
Note that the 2-8-2s currently operating on the Silverton and the C&TS cover rather more than six miles between standpipes.
Chuck (Modeling the narrow gauge railroads of Central Japan in September, 1964)
tomikawaTTBoiler steam generation and superheating takes place in a closed system at pressures measured in multiples of atmospheres and at temperatures well above 212 degrees F.
I find this interesting from the point of view of my distant memory of physics. Remember in high school there was a beaker of water inside a bell jar. A vacuum pump pumped air out of the jar and the water boiled at room temperature.
There is no pressure in a loco boiler at the start up. It comes from the transformation of water into steam. If steam forms at a lower temperature, it is more efficient to intiate the process from a fuel wood-coal viewpoint. But as you build pressure in the boiler you will need more heat. Does a gallon of water produce the same amount of steam [under pressure] at sea level as it does at 10,000'?
I bailed out of an engineering program in 1970 so I never took thermodynamics. The Ideal Gas Law is stirring in my brain. PV=nRT It would seem that at a given temperature and pressure, the steam output would be constant However it is not that simple. R is temperature dependant itself. OK now I have a headache.
Henry
COB Potomac & Northern
Shenandoah Valley
How does a loco refill at track speed?
Gary
gdelmoro How does a loco refill at track speed?
Railroads who used this method had track pans at strategic locations. These were long reservoirs of water between the tracks. Most were at least 1000 feet long but I believe more typically that would be over 2000 feet long. The tender would have a scoop that would lower into the track pan which would collect water and deposit it in the tender while the train kept moving. I read recently that the ideal speed for scooping water was 35-45 mph. Any slower and little water would be gathered. Any fast and the water would slosh off to the sides rather than up through the scoop.
tomikawaTT Actually, inside the boiler of a steam locomotive altitude is a non-issue. It only comes into play when the kettle is open to the atmosphere. Boiler steam generation and superheating takes place in a closed system at pressures measured in multiples of atmospheres and at temperatures well above 212 degrees F. The range of six miles was probably the result of small cisterns and nasty grades, not altitude. Those early narrow-gage locomotives didn't have either tractive effort or horsepower available to drag a big tank of non-revenue water at the expense of revenue-producing freight. Note that the 2-8-2s currently operating on the Silverton and the C&TS cover rather more than six miles between standpipes. Chuck (Modeling the narrow gauge railroads of Central Japan in September, 1964)
The range of six miles was probably the result of small cisterns and nasty grades, not altitude. Those early narrow-gage locomotives didn't have either tractive effort or horsepower available to drag a big tank of non-revenue water at the expense of revenue-producing freight.
I rode the Durango and Silverton a few years ago and we made one water stop en route to Silverton. I'm guessing the locos took a drink in Silverton as well although I didn't stay to watch.
The whole purpose of a pressure vessel is to raise the vapour pressure of the water in it so that the water accepts more heat and can't sublimate as it would at mean sea level. If you tried to collect the energy in steam just above an open boiling vessel at sea level, and then tried to continue the process as the vessel is raised to 12,000', you'd find the enthalpy in the water/steam much less as its vapour pressure drops with altitude. It would take much less energy to get it to boil off at the surface...the open surface. So, you'd have to get much less 'work' out of the system....natch. You can't get out of it what you don't got in the first place!
So, you seal the system...largely, and build pressure. Yes, for the first hour or so of heating, you'd get more pressure building in the closed vessel due to the altitude, but as the closed boiler began to build pressure, less of the water would be able to turn to steam. More steam would condense in the boiler until, as the proper boiler pressure specified for that steam was met, you'd have the same energy in the boiler at X psi as you would at sea level. That last statement is important....read it again. In a closed system, at any given psi, the energy resident in the medium held by the boiler is the same regardless of the altitude or the mean pressure outside the vessel itself.
As indicated by others, the work requirement and the capacity of reservoires, including the boiler itself, determines how often the reservoires must be topped up or refilled. For a small boiler, less water. For a large firebox and large boiler (H-8, Yellowstone, Challenger, Big Boy, Y series, Big Six/Santa Fe,...), but not using a centipede or similar/typically assigned tender, and they're all trailing 8000 tons on slight grades, maybe refill every 50 miles....or a top-up at least. For tenders designed to hold more fuel than water, track pans every 20 miles...ish...? Dunno 'bout that last guess. Maybe a PRR/NYC expert can help us out.
I have two questions;
1. How many miles can a "Modernized" ATSF 2-10-2 "Oilburner" run without refueling?
2. How far can a 4-4-0 American or a 2-6-0 Mogul run without refueling?
selector Dunno 'bout that last guess. Maybe a PRR/NYC expert can help us out.
Far from anything "near" an expert... but I have always been interested in operations of the NYC. This article has some interesting facts along with very informative charts showing locations of pans, and plugs and coaling facilities with the distance between them noted:
https://nycshs.files.wordpress.com/2015/11/trackplans2.pdf
Another article details some of the developments of the scoops and pans. NYC expended great effort to develop High Speed scooping. 6,000 gallons in 17 seconds! That would fill your swimming pool in a hurry
Note the photo of the tender with "split-sides" toward the last page which led to the development of vent pipes:
https://nycshs.files.wordpress.com/2015/11/waterscoops.pdf
In my days of railfanning in the Painesville, Ohio area in the late 1970s and early '80s, I could still see the chamfered ties on the main line where the pans were and the concrete foundations of the pump house were still visible, too.
Always fascinating to see evidence of the once mighty steam locomotive!
ATSFGuy I have two questions; 1. How many miles can a "Modernized" ATSF 2-10-2 "Oilburner" run without refueling?
A "crew district" most likely, which would be anywhere from 75 miles to 150 miles at the minimum. Depends on the load, grade, speed and size of the tender.
Anywhere from 50 miles to 100 miles at the minimum. Depends on the load, grade, speed and size of the tender.
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
From Railway Track and Maintenance by Tratman 4th edition 1926
"..there are about 15,000 water stations averaging 20 mi. apart..."
I tried to sell my two cents worth, but no one would give me a plug nickel for it.
I don't have a leg to stand on.
DSchmitt"..there are about 15,000 water stations averaging 20 mi. apart..."
Just be clear, that doesn't mean trains stopped every 20 miles for water, that just means the railroad had someplace a train could get water.
NYBW-John gdelmoro How does a loco refill at track speed? Railroads who used this method had track pans at strategic locations. These were long reservoirs of water between the tracks. Most were at least 1000 feet long but I believe more typically that would be over 2000 feet long. The tender would have a scoop that would lower into the track pan which would collect water and deposit it in the tender while the train kept moving. I read recently that the ideal speed for scooping water was 35-45 mph. Any slower and little water would be gathered. Any fast and the water would slosh off to the sides rather than up through the scoop.
NYC's scoop design allowed scooping water up to 80mph. April 1945 issue of trains if you can find it.
Discussed here:
http://jimquest.com/writ/trains/pans/Track_Pans.pdf
dehusman DSchmitt "..there are about 15,000 water stations averaging 20 mi. apart..." Just be clear, that doesn't mean trains stopped every 20 miles for water, that just means the railroad had someplace a train could get water.
DSchmitt "..there are about 15,000 water stations averaging 20 mi. apart..."
Very true. It would make little sense for an operation to limit itself by placing water stops of any kind further apart than necessary, or than needed. There should be redundancy if only for the sake of the safety of the boiler's integrity and that of the crew. A railway couldn't predict or plan for floods, forest fires, earthquakes, and accidents, but it could plan for low levels of water in the cisterns of tenders along its route. Erecting a water tower or track pan every 50 miles instead of every 20 seems to be very limiting as only the stingiest of boilers and smallest of trailing tonnages would safely get between them almost all the time.
I figure steam locomotives would be slightly MORE efficient at higher altitudes, because there would be less back pressure on the exhaust.
I suppose you might need a somewhat larger grate area, since there'd be less oxygen available (see: trying to breath at high altitudes).
Perhaps there should have been a narrow gage 2-8-4??????
7j43k I figure steam locomotives would be slightly MORE efficient at higher altitudes, because there would be less back pressure on the exhaust. I suppose you might need a somewhat larger grate area, since there'd be less oxygen available (see: trying to breath at high altitudes). Perhaps there should have been a narrow gage 2-8-4?????? Ed
Or maybe a mudhen (outside frame) 36 inch gauge 2-6-6-6 - with something less than 67 inch drivers.
The question was asked, how far could a small locomotive go before refueling. I have seen a photo of a PRR H10 2-8-0 trailing a 'coast to coast' 16 wheel tender half again bigger than the locomotive pulling it. Likewise, ATSF had similar tenders for their oil burners.
In more than one case, tender capacity was set by turntable length. Check the long overhang at the rear of a Niagara's pedestal tender, needed to allow NYC to turn their 4-8-4s on 100 foot turntables.
The earlier days of railroading were full of tales about engineers having to drop their trains in some convenient siding while they cut and ran for water. Part of Casey Jones' reputation was the allegation that when he ran for water he took the train with him.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - with standpipes at every station)