Reusing Dynamic Braking Power on Dieasals instaed of Dispersing it as heat

[Anonymous]

suppose the diesels' dynamic brakes charged up a large bank of batteries housed in a trailing slug instead of disapating the power as heat . That slug could then be used as an additional booster to maintain the train's speed up the next grade without the expenditure of additional fuel. This is the principal of the hybrid drive that is increasingly being used in automobiles

[edblysard]

The amount of energy recovered wouldnt be enough to pull the slug up the grade, much less enough to move a locomotive and a train...besides, you have to waste fuel dragging the batterys around, so there would be no real gain

Ed

[Anonymous]

How much extra fuel would be used towing around the battery car when it's either being charged up or used up?

[Overmod]

Oh, no, close your eyes...!

dunkirk, it's extremely poor form to snip something from someone else's reply and post it as a new topic without their permission. Especially when it was intended as an illustration of a general principle... a different principle, I might add, than providing booster power to railroad applications.

Note that the current and future generations of hybrid locomotives would do this directly, since their battery banks can be made quite sufficient to provide traction power to any sane number of slug or MATE traction motors for the time such power is required, and regenerative charging would be an inherent function of any hybrid road unit.

Perhaps needless to say, you would NOT design or engineer a whole separate battery (at traction voltages and capable of sourcing and sinking traction current) just to absorb dynamic power for booster use. Remember there's a bunch of other equipment, aside from the battery, that would be required -- and batteries have to be charged at an optimal rate, preferably not in series, which might easily make charging them from dynamic current an expen$ive sort of exercise if you didn't already have a use for much of the power-distributing switchwork, or have some means (please note how carefully I avoid defining what that would be) to cut over any 'excess' power to the db grids in order to avoid overcharging the cells or exceeding their optimal charge rate...

[dharmon]

I believe that the Railpower Group, the maker of the Green Goat switchers is supposedly working on a hybrid commuter locomotive. I would presume that since they are working the power cell technology issue they might be exploring this avenue also given the accelerate/brake action required in commuter ops.

Plus it gives another avenue to practice cutting/pasting/plagurizing......

[BaltACD]

The practicalities of doing this on Diesel-electric locomotives is beyond economic reality.

That being said, it was done with straight electric locomotives that were used in freight service on the Northeast Corridor in the before AMTRAK days. I believe MILW and GN also used the principals on the electrifications in the Pacific Northwest.

The current generated by dynamic brake operation was put back into the catenary electric system for use by other trains drawing power from the system.

[ajmiller]

Hey, no need to waste all that perfectly good heat. Could use it to make hot water so that tired hoboes could take warm showers, do their laundry, or boil some hotdogs. The possibilities are endless!

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by ajmiller

Hey, no need to waste all that perfectly good heat. Could use it to make hot water so that tired hoboes could take warm showers, do their laundry, or boil some hotdogs. The possibilities are endless!

A bucket of water on the engine block does the same thing for much less waste

If you want to think about heat being wasted, think about the Sun that gives us heat and light on earth. And it will still burn long after we all are dead.

[csxengineer98]

will you just please shut up.... your posting of lame ideas on ways to get power and filing the forum with worthless crap is getting old.... what is this..like topic number 4 on electicity... enough is enough.... eveything you have said so far is off the wall.... and costs more money then it is worth in the long run.... go back to you tree hugging and notions that GM is a crack dealer....
give it a rest!!!
csx engineer

[ajmiller]

QUOTE: Originally posted by HighIron2003ar

QUOTE: Originally posted by ajmiller

Hey, no need to waste all that perfectly good heat. Could use it to make hot water so that tired hoboes could take warm showers, do their laundry, or boil some hotdogs. The possibilities are endless!

A bucket of water on the engine block does the same thing for much less waste

Ok, we'll do it your way....but only if each hobo can have his own bucket.

QUOTE:
If you want to think about heat being wasted, think about the Sun that gives us heat and light on earth. And it will still burn long after we all are dead.

I know! And what is the Bush administration doing about all this solar waste? Absolutely nothing! Why, if we don't act soon, the sun will burn out in 5 billion years and then what will people do?

[M636C]

A realistic alternative to batteries in a locomotive might be a flywheel connected to a motor and generator. This could absorb the energy faster than batteries and feed it back to motors when needed. It would still be costly and heavy. A flywheel driven switcher was built for use around a power station in England in the 1950s. It plugged into mains power when idling and could switch a rake of coal wagons and return simply on the energy in the flywheel. It was better than steam but not as useful as diesel power.

Peter

[Overmod]

Peter et al.

Regarding flywheel generation: Hard to find it any more in this age of railroad-research budget cuts, but...

http://www.utexas.edu/research/cem/technoloty_prospectus.html

Yes, the misspelling is necessary <:o)

You might also note that an adjunct version of the technology is being developed as 'flywheel batteries' for space applications.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Overmod

Peter et al.

Regarding flywheel generation: Hard to find it any more in this age of railroad-research budget cuts, but...

http://www.utexas.edu/research/cem/technoloty_prospectus.html

Yes, the misspelling is necessary <:o)

You might also note that an adjunct version of the technology is being developed as 'flywheel batteries' for space applications.

Not only did the UT folks misspell "technoloty", in the illustration they show the rail wheel being flu***o the flatheaded railhead!

[Anonymous]

Remind me not to read techincal papers so early in the morning.

[chad thomas]

Railway age had a article on Flywheel energy storeage in locomotives sometime around 1992. The application they were focusing on was commuter trains with a lot of stop & go. The flywheel would be too big to fit on the locomotive platform, so it would require another unit to put the flywheel on.

[Anonymous]

Well if we all used solar and wind there would no more coal trains now would there mr railfan?

[Anonymous]

Do they use Flywheels in Power plants?

[carnej1]

Actually Railpower's website mentions a "Hybrid Roadswitcher" as one product they are trying to develop from the Green Goat. There aren't any details but it seems to be related to their "Hybrid Branchline" locomotive project.....

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Dunkirkeriestation

Do they use Flywheels in Power plants?

I think Hydroelectric Dams have those on top of the Turbines, they are called "Generators"[:D]

[Anonymous]

Well - I once had the idea to produce hydrogen and oxygen from water by the means of electrolisis (sp?, proper term?) with power fed through traction motors.

Then the hydrogen could be injected to the engine as a booster...

[Hugh Jampton]

QUOTE: Originally posted by uzurpator

Then the hydrogen could be injected to the engine as a booster...

STAND WELL BACK!!!

[kevarc]

QUOTE: Originally posted by uzurpator

Well - I once had the idea to produce hydrogen and oxygen from water by the means of electrolisis (sp?, proper term?) with power fed through traction motors.

Then the hydrogen could be injected to the engine as a booster...

ANyone who want to do this has to be clinically insane. hydrogen is extremely dangerous. And jsut the thought of this may cause nightmares. And then you have the oxygen to deal with. Another dangerous gas.

[ajmiller]

QUOTE: Originally posted by kevarc

QUOTE: Originally posted by uzurpator

Well - I once had the idea to produce hydrogen and oxygen from water by the means of electrolisis (sp?, proper term?) with power fed through traction motors.

Then the hydrogen could be injected to the engine as a booster...

ANyone who want to do this has to be clinically insane. hydrogen is extremely dangerous. And jsut the thought of this may cause nightmares. And then you have the oxygen to deal with. Another dangerous gas.

You could inject the oxygen into the crew compartment as a booster for the engineer.[;)]

[csxengineer98]

QUOTE: Originally posted by ajmiller

QUOTE: Originally posted by kevarc

QUOTE: Originally posted by uzurpator

Well - I once had the idea to produce hydrogen and oxygen from water by the means of electrolisis (sp?, proper term?) with power fed through traction motors.

Then the hydrogen could be injected to the engine as a booster...

ANyone who want to do this has to be clinically insane. hydrogen is extremely dangerous. And jsut the thought of this may cause nightmares. And then you have the oxygen to deal with. Another dangerous gas.

You could inject the oxygen into the crew compartment as a booster for the engineer.[;)

takes alot of electicity to seperat water atoms...and the net yeild you would get back in the way of oxygen and hydrogen would be nomanl at best....
csx engineer

[Anonymous]

Well - my calculations showed about 5-10% reclamation considering 25% of energy being sent to on the resistor grids. There actually are working "hydrogen" engines, and I'm not talking about fuel cells - just plain old heat based motors. Explosion from hydrogen is similar in effect to explosion from burned diesel fuel. Besides - the oxygen alone would be enough to use it - simply to ditch turbo and use pure oxygen injected to the cylinder.

kevarc - anything is daangerous if not used properely. So is diesel engine.

csxengineer98 - it is about 76% efficient - or you need 1,3 Joules to get 1 Joule worth of hydrogen.

76% efficiency hydrogen/oxygen production -> 35% efficency in burning -> 85% efficency in motors motors. Total: 22% efficency.

So each 400 gals of fuel, of which 25% ends of the resistor grids, would mean 22 gallons saved. Or about 5,5% increase in fuel efficency. With 40% reclamation it is 10% increase in fuel efficency.

Overall - I deemed it "not worth the trouble"

[chad thomas]

Most of this discussion is absurd in my opinion.
All of these devices and ideas would require lots of expensive equiptment that would cost tons of money to maintain and would need lots of real estate inside the locomotive that's just not available to begin with. And for what to recover a few percentage points of overall efficiency. Come on guys, think about it. And just because something can be used on the scale of a 2500-3500 lb. car does not mean it can be applied to a locomotive working with 20,000,000 lb trains.

[CSXrules4eva]

Ok I have to say something here.
uzurpator I agree with you on this statement "anything is daangerous if not used properely. So is diesel engine." My ex Asst Principal always told me this saying anythin could be used as a weapon. A pencial, a plastic bag, areosal cans, any types of chemicals, even your hands can be used as weapons.

chad I also agree with ya here "just because something can be used on the scale of a 2500-3500 lb. car does not mean it can be applied to a locomotive working with 20,000,000 lb trains." many people (who don't know that much about trains) always ask me this question well if a car or a truck has it why doesn't a train?/

But asides from this experamenting with good old O2 and H seems very interesting to me. I don't see why experamentation with alternarte fuels in terms of railway applications should be a bad thing, give it a chance and see what happens. It seems to me like RailPower has had sucess so far with their late model Green Goat.

[broncoman]

QUOTE: Originally posted by M636C

A realistic alternative to batteries in a locomotive might be a flywheel connected to a motor and generator. This could absorb the energy faster than batteries and feed it back to motors when needed. It would still be costly and heavy. A flywheel driven switcher was built for use around a power station in England in the 1950s. It plugged into mains power when idling and could switch a rake of coal wagons and return simply on the energy in the flywheel. It was better than steam but not as useful as diesel power.

Peter

They actually have a standyby power system that uses this theory. It is pretty popular in Silcon Valley. They use power to keep the flywheel turning (requires very little to keep it spinning) then if they lose power the flywheel starts to spin down, but gives them enough time to shut down computers before the flywheel stops spinning.
Tried to find a link to a page but couldn't.

[chad thomas]

That could be very usefull for keeping power up while the backup generators fire up too.

[Overmod]

One of the more promising manufacturers of flywheel UPS is Active Power.

At the risk of seeing information from this particular link appearing 'mysteriously' in its own new thread, go here (and use the links on the left to read more about flywheel stuff):

http://www.activepower.com/index.asp?pg=technology_tacas_basics

Note the references here to what chad was talking about regarding startup and ride-through -- the heated-air solution uses flywheel power rather than batteries for this.

Of course, for a more vivid example, you'd have to go to the energy-storage system we used to use at PPL. This used a rotor about 20' across and quite a few feet long, spun up to fairly high speed, in order to generate the high electrical energy needed for plasma-containment experiments. What was striking about this was that, when someone fired a shot, you'd actually see the wheel slow down!

CSX, anything involving water dissociation is by definition an 'energy carrier' solution much like using hydrogen fuel in the first place (it takes more overall energy to make the hydrogen available as an engine fuel than you get back by using it). The principal problem I have with the idea is that there's almost certainly too much involved with the physical separation of the dissociated hydrogen and oxygen to make it safely workable on a locomotive. Much better to keep the energy in the form of electron flows -- in supercapacitors/battery-banks, or in electromechanical storage, for example -- if it's going to be used as an electron flow in traction motors. If you were using hydraulic drive, it would probably be best to use the energy in Karman-type accumulators, although you have to use some care in designing the systems that achieve the necessary high psi from the "traction" motors while avoiding even short-duration locked-wheel slips...