Trains.com

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Question about steam locomotives

1699 views
15 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    November 2005
  • From: Utica, OH
  • 4,000 posts
Question about steam locomotives
Posted by jecorbett on Thursday, February 25, 2016 9:57 AM

On the section of my railroad which I am building now I have a short stretch of street running that will be see mostly steam locomotives. My question is whether steam locomotives discharged lubricants that would darken the pavement between the rails. Same question for the pavement just outside of the rails. I am about to put down the pavement strips and would like to weather them realistically.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 10,582 posts
Posted by mlehman on Thursday, February 25, 2016 10:06 AM

Oh, definitely. Steamers had to be "oiled around" regularly. Ever remember a pic or movie clip when the engineer is walking around the loco with the oilcan? All the excess drips or is flung off. Steamers often had central lube systems that shot more oil to critical parts every so often. So you'd have dripping from underneath between the rails, plus outside the rails from the rods and valve gear.

Early diesels and friction bearing rolling stock also tended to be drippy, but to lesser degrees and in somewhat different patterns. Roller bearings have lessened this, but a diesel loco still tends to oooze here and there rolling down the tracks.

Mike Lehman

Urbana, IL

  • Member since
    May 2007
  • From: North Myrtle Beach, SC
  • 995 posts
Posted by Beach Bill on Thursday, February 25, 2016 10:07 AM

Think about all those photos we have seen with the engineer standing beside the steam locomotive with a "big ole" oil can.  Lubrication was added to multiple points on the running gear outside of the wheels by hand and/or by automatic systems.  Additionally, any steam leaks around the cylinders would result in greasy water dripping down.    I suspect that street running would involve slow speed and might well be close to the engine servicing area or station where the locomotive would have received oil on all of those bearings of the drive rods.  While I don't have any photos, I would certainly suspect that oil & grease stains would develop outside of the rails in such an area.

And although they were somewhat rare in the U.S., some steam locomotives did have 3 cylinders, with the center cylinder connected inside of the frame which would have resulted in increased chance of oil drippings down the center-line where those big locomotives were used. 

Bill

With reasonable men, I will reason; with humane men I will plead; but to tyrants I will give no quarter, nor waste arguments where they will certainly be lost. William Lloyd Garrison
  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: Southeast Texas
  • 5,449 posts
Posted by mobilman44 on Thursday, February 25, 2016 10:12 AM

Autos tend to throw off fluids from the center of the units where motor/trans/diff are located.  Steam Locos tend to throw off "stuff" on the outside of the rails where a lot of lubing took place.  That's not to say there wasn't much on the inside of the rails, for there was. 

Steam railroading, especially with coal fired locos, was a very dirty situation at best.  Oilers were cleaner, but the dirt and oils still managed to collect everywhere.

 

ENJOY  !

 

Mobilman44

 

Living in southeast Texas, formerly modeling the "postwar" Santa Fe and Illinois Central 

  • Member since
    November 2005
  • From: Utica, OH
  • 4,000 posts
Posted by jecorbett on Thursday, February 25, 2016 10:16 AM

Thanks for confirming what I thought was true. I knew steamers had a lot of moving parts that required frequently lubricating. I thought that there would probably be some dripping of that lubricant but I didn't want to just assume that to be the case. It would seem from what the two of you have said the pavement between the rails should be heavily weathered and a little less so just outside the rails.

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, February 25, 2016 10:16 AM

At our live steam railroad where the rails run on pavement, the concrete always darkens and gets oily-looking right outside the rails and in the center between the rails.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: 4610 Metre's North of the Fortyninth on the left coast of Canada
  • 9,352 posts
Posted by BATMAN on Thursday, February 25, 2016 10:19 AM

I watched a video last week where the old guy was saying that for one particular engine, most of the time spent in the roundhouse was trying to stop the oil leaks that were happening on one type of loco. He said they leaked as much as they burned and that brought an early end to them.

Brent

"All of the world's problems are the result of the difference between how we think and how the world works."

  • Member since
    October 2001
  • From: OH
  • 17,574 posts
Posted by BRAKIE on Thursday, February 25, 2016 10:26 AM

Allow me to repeat what one of my Grandpas said about a steam engine.

A steam engine needs a lot of tending to during a run and if that simple fact is overlooked you risk your life as well as your follow workers lives. Neglect a steam engine and she can kill you.

Larry

Conductor.

Summerset Ry.


"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt  Safety First!"

  • Member since
    May 2004
  • 7,500 posts
Posted by 7j43k on Thursday, February 25, 2016 11:14 AM

Beach Bill

And although they were somewhat rare in the U.S., some steam locomotives did have 3 cylinders, with the center cylinder connected inside of the frame...

 

 

 

In the U.S., there were even more of the balanced compound, with 4 cylinders, with two cylinders on the inside.  For example,  GN and SP&S each had 10 4-4-2's.  And Santa Fe had 434, mostly 4-4-2's and 4-6-2's.  All (I believe) were simpled (down to the regular 2 cylinders) fairly quickly.  So I think the 3-cylinder locos (UP and SP and IHB) could be regarded as more successful. 

 

 

Ed

  • Member since
    February 2005
  • From: Vancouver Island, BC
  • 23,330 posts
Posted by selector on Thursday, February 25, 2016 11:53 AM

Coal-fired steam locomotives drop hot cinders through the grating, and some ash.  This will land almost entirely between the rails.

Outboard of the frame, which is surprisingly narrow, the bearings throw off dirty lubes.  All pivot points on the rods do the same, as do the rods on their cranks.

All modern steamers had mechanical lubricators and/or hydrostatic lubricators. With lube constantly being forced into the bearings on the bolster of the engine truck, on crossheads, and into both the spindle vales atop the piston cylinders as well as into the cylinders themselves, it should come as no surprise that tracks are dirty, tarry, and in wet weather, slippery and dangerous places to be.

Cylinders cool when no steam is being admitted to them.  This happens when the engine is stopped.  Before long, their liners cool enough that what little steam does get to the cylinders begins to condense and puddle at the bottoms of the cylinders.  This must be eliminated prior to admitting steam and forcing the pistons to move inside the cylinders.  Cylinder cocks, two on each cylinder, are opened as about the first thing the hogger does when he gets the okay to move by the conductor.  He does this to prevent a hydraulic ram being made of the cylinders.  Since the hydrostatic lubricator is providing steam oil all the time, when the cylinder cocks drip or emit oily steam, some of it ends up outside the rails on the tie ends.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: Omaha, NE
  • 10,621 posts
Posted by dehusman on Thursday, February 25, 2016 12:58 PM

Thanks for confirming what I thought was true. I knew steamers had a lot of moving parts that required frequently lubricating. I thought that there would probably be some dripping of that lubricant but I didn't want to just assume that to be the case. It would seem from what the two of you have said the pavement between the rails should be heavily weathered and a little less so just outside the rails.

If you read the posts carefuly and look at a steam engine, with a couple exceptions (3 cylinder engines, Stehpenson valve gear, Heislers and Climaxes) all of the lubricated parts are near or outside the rails, NOT down the center of the track.  Plus, in the steam era all the car had plain bearings which dropped oil outside the rails.

Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com

  • Member since
    August 2011
  • From: A Comfy Cave, New Zealand
  • 6,247 posts
Posted by "JaBear" on Thursday, February 25, 2016 2:09 PM
I’d suggest that the weathering needs to be far more subtle than the picture that’s being painted by the previous worthy respondents.
Just Google “steam locomotives in streets” and look at the images.
 
My 2 Cents Cheers, the Bear. 

"One difference between pessimists and optimists is that while pessimists are more often right, optimists have far more fun."

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, February 25, 2016 2:29 PM

Remember also that it rains in the real world.  Much of the grime would be washed away.  Also if your modeling an area that gets heavy snow in the winter, the road gets scaped by the plow and the snow run off does a pretty good job of clearing off the streets.  The vehicular street sweeper was invented in the late 1890s, but the early ones may or may not have had an effect on your pavement between the tracks.

  • Member since
    November 2005
  • From: Utica, OH
  • 4,000 posts
Posted by jecorbett on Thursday, February 25, 2016 3:04 PM

I’d suggest that the weathering needs to be far more subtle than the picture that’s being painted by the previous worthy respondents.
Just Google “steam locomotives in streets” and look at the images.
 
My 2 Cents Cheers, the Bear. 
 

I didn't get a lot of hits of period steam locomotives running in streets but the few I did find seem to support your suggestion for subtlety. I would have thought the pavement would be more weathered. I've had oil drip on my garage floor which suggested to me the staining would  be more pronounced than it seems to be. As another poster suggested, rain and snow would wash away quite a bit of the leaked lubricants. My tracks will run on a concrete strip down the middle of an otherwise asphalt road. I'm wondering if the concrete would be more prone to stain than the asphalt.  

  • Member since
    August 2003
  • From: Collinwood, Ohio, USA
  • 16,367 posts
Posted by gmpullman on Thursday, February 25, 2016 3:32 PM

jecorbett
 I would have thought the pavement would be more weathered.

I'd have to say that the weather (especially rain) and the road traffic would have obliterated much of the deposits. By sheer volume, the vehicle traffic probably contributes about as much oily deposits as the passing trains did.

I find it interesting that the slight dips in the pavement, especially on the Interstates, causes the oil, clinging to the engine, to shake off the vehicles just past the dips in the road. Especially noticeable on concrete pavement.

You really won't find many ashes or cinders dropped unless there are holes rusted in the ashpan. They were generally pretty good at holding the cinders until the gates were opened to dump the ashes.

As pointed out, much of the lubricants spilled to the outside of the gauge, especially oil slung off the wheel faces that leaked out of journal boxes.

In the diesel era there was some oil that inevitably leaked from the gearcases just to the inside of the gauge.

 

And this shot, also in Elizabeth, Pa. on September 20, 1975.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/trainplanepro/11204100984

 

Regards, Ed

  • Member since
    August 2011
  • From: A Comfy Cave, New Zealand
  • 6,247 posts
Posted by "JaBear" on Thursday, February 25, 2016 5:48 PM
My apologies if I’ve not picked up on the year(s) that you’re modelling, but I think that what we (I’m 57) tend to forget that cities in general were grimier back in the day. Of course how much air pollution depended on the geographical location, the industries, and what was commonly used for domestic cooking and heating.
The Brits got a huge wakeup call from the Great London Smog of 1952, which resulted in the Clean Air Act of 1956. With a quick search I gather that the US lagged behind in similar legislation, The Air Pollution Act of 1955 only appears to be concerned with researching and laying out a legislative frame work for air pollution control and it took until the mid 60s before the legislation gained any teeth. 

jecorbett
. I'm wondering if the concrete would be more prone to stain than the asphalt.  

Sadly yes, concrete is more porous than asphalt, and unfortunately a little spilt oil goes a long way. (Even though I use drip trays).Sigh
I had a quick look on Shorpy, and while they’re far too early, I find these interesting. In the second we see who the real culprits were, and though an optimist, I reckon the chap, in white with the broom, is on a hiding to nothing.

Cheers, the Bear.Smile

"One difference between pessimists and optimists is that while pessimists are more often right, optimists have far more fun."

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Users Online

There are no community member online

Search the Community

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Model Railroader Newsletter See all
Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!