VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1234567[8]910 ]
Subject: Modern Steam Locomotives


Author:
Greg B
[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
Date Posted: 16:57:13 07/20/12 Fri

In chapter 18 of Hannegan's Cove, the idea of a modern steam locomotive is mentioned in passing. The idea struck me as very interesting for two reasons: 1. modern diesel locomotives use the diesel engine to generate electric power, which drives electric motors; 2. the late-generation steamships, especially naval vessels, used steam turbines to generate electricity which drove electric motors (basically one step from current nuclear subs and carriers).

So it seems that steam-turbine electric locomotives are technically feasible and might have clear environmental advantages. Maybe if they burn hydrogen to produce the steam?

Did anybody else think along these lines?

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:
[> Subject: Re: Modern Steam Locomotives


Author:
Dmitri
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 17:36:48 07/20/12 Fri

What I thought of it was the loss of efficiencies in converting one power source to another (and another, and another) before actually driving the wheels (or propeller). What is the efficiency losses involved in a diesel engine running a generator running an electric motor? There must be a valid reason for it or it wouldn't be done. Hydrogen is "clean" but generating/obtaining, transporting, and storage of hydrogen is dangerous and not cheap. Not that gasoline isn't also (other than to produce).

Dmitri

>In chapter 18 of Hannegan's Cove, the idea of a modern
>steam locomotive is mentioned in passing. The idea
>struck me as very interesting for two reasons: 1.
>modern diesel locomotives use the diesel engine to
>generate electric power, which drives electric motors;
>2. the late-generation steamships, especially naval
>vessels, used steam turbines to generate electricity
>which drove electric motors (basically one step from
>current nuclear subs and carriers).
>
>So it seems that steam-turbine electric locomotives
>are technically feasible and might have clear
>environmental advantages. Maybe if they burn hydrogen
>to produce the steam?
>
>Did anybody else think along these lines?
[> [> Subject: Re: Modern Steam Locomotives


Author:
Deadly Ernest
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 18:24:12 07/20/12 Fri

Diesel-electric motors are used on a lot of trains and other situations for the ability to more finely control the application of power to the motor and the ability to more easily spread the power delivery out via electric cable to the electric motors on the drive wheels instead of mechanical transfer.

I don't know about now, but as late as the 1970s they were still building ships with high pressure superheated steam turbines that used a mechanical transfer of the energy direct to the drive shafts. The steam turned the turbines which turned gears which turned the drive shafts. After the steam ran through the drive turbines it was directed into turbines to generate electricity to drive the on-board electrical systems like radar, radio, lights, tv, etc.


>What I thought of it was the loss of efficiencies in
>converting one power source to another (and another,
>and another) before actually driving the wheels (or
>propeller). What is the efficiency losses involved in
>a diesel engine running a generator running an
>electric motor? There must be a valid reason for it
>or it wouldn't be done. Hydrogen is "clean" but
>generating/obtaining, transporting, and storage of
>hydrogen is dangerous and not cheap. Not that
>gasoline isn't also (other than to produce).
>
>Dmitri
>
>>In chapter 18 of Hannegan's Cove, the idea of a modern
>>steam locomotive is mentioned in passing. The idea
>>struck me as very interesting for two reasons: 1.
>>modern diesel locomotives use the diesel engine to
>>generate electric power, which drives electric motors;
>>2. the late-generation steamships, especially naval
>>vessels, used steam turbines to generate electricity
>>which drove electric motors (basically one step from
>>current nuclear subs and carriers).
>>
>>So it seems that steam-turbine electric locomotives
>>are technically feasible and might have clear
>>environmental advantages. Maybe if they burn hydrogen
>>to produce the steam?
>>
>>Did anybody else think along these lines?
[> [> Subject: Re: Modern Steam Locomotives


Author:
Marv
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 21:44:20 07/22/12 Sun

>What I thought of it was the loss of efficiencies in
>converting one power source to another (and another,
>and another) before actually driving the wheels (or
>propeller). What is the efficiency losses involved in
>a diesel engine running a generator running an
>electric motor? There must be a valid reason for it
>or it wouldn't be done. Hydrogen is "clean" but
>generating/obtaining, transporting, and storage of
>hydrogen is dangerous and not cheap. Not that
>gasoline isn't also (other than to produce).
>
>Dmitri
>
>>In chapter 18 of Hannegan's Cove, the idea of a modern
>>steam locomotive is mentioned in passing. The idea
>>struck me as very interesting for two reasons: 1.
>>modern diesel locomotives use the diesel engine to
>>generate electric power, which drives electric motors;
>>2. the late-generation steamships, especially naval
>>vessels, used steam turbines to generate electricity
>>which drove electric motors (basically one step from
>>current nuclear subs and carriers).
>>
>>So it seems that steam-turbine electric locomotives
>>are technically feasible and might have clear
>>environmental advantages. Maybe if they burn hydrogen
>>to produce the steam?
>>
>>Did anybody else think along these lines?

Probably not cost effective. The Navy has been replacing steam turbines with gas turbines. During
Desert Shield is was cheaper to send a gas turbine Destroyer from Norfolk to the Persian Gulf,than to send a steam turbine Destroyer from the Mediterranean.

U.S. Nay tugboat YTM 409 had a four cylinder diesel engine driving a generator to power a 900 hp electric main engine. The electric engine was not a powerful as the diesel main engine on a YTB.
[> Subject: Re: Modern Steam Locomotives


Author:
K Pelle
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 19:38:12 07/20/12 Fri

The problem with steam locomotives is based primarily on waste heat and secondly on water usage. On a ship you can use the temperature of the surrounding water to cool the used steam and recycle it as water which can then be recirculated and reused to create more steam. On a locomotive, there is no way to dispose of the heat used in boiling the water to turn it into steam, so the water is used once, then exhausted into the atmosphere. Various systems have been tried, but little success has been achieved in surmounting that one problem.
[> [> Subject: Re: Modern Steam Locomotives


Author:
bigolal
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 20:53:22 07/20/12 Fri

>The problem with steam locomotives is based primarily
>on waste heat and secondly on water usage. On a ship
>you can use the temperature of the surrounding water
>to cool the used steam and recycle it as water which
>can then be recirculated and reused to create more
>steam. On a locomotive, there is no way to dispose of
>the heat used in boiling the water to turn it into
>steam, so the water is used once, then exhausted into
>the atmosphere. Various systems have been tried, but
>little success has been achieved in surmounting that
>one problem.

Well, perhaps I'm mistaken, but, if memory serves the Doble Model E (Steamcar) could go something like 1500 miles before needing additional water. In addition, its performance (speed, fuel economy, etc) was comparable to or exceeded internal combustion cars of the day (1920s). By the way, it was a low pollution vehicle, as well.
[> [> [> Subject: Re: Modern Steam Locomotives


Author:
K Pelle
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 01:50:10 07/21/12 Sat

>Well, perhaps I'm mistaken, but, if memory serves the
>Doble Model E (Steamcar) could go something like 1500
>miles before needing additional water. In addition,
>its performance (speed, fuel economy, etc) was
>comparable to or exceeded internal combustion cars of
>the day (1920s). By the way, it was a low pollution
>vehicle, as well.

You're not mistaken, the last model of the Doble was a masterpiece of engineering for its day. It only carried a reserve of about 25 gallons of water and used a monotube (flash) boiler heat by atomized kerosene (Known today as Jet Fuel) which was ignited by a spark plug. Preheat of the water was accomplished by wrapping the preheating pipes around the exterior of the actual boiler, which not only heated the feed water, but reduced the heat loss of the boiler shell. The fire was induced to burn at high temperatures by forced air (an electric fan) which produced extremely efficient combustion and very low pollution. The steam was fed into two opposed compound engines and coupled directly to the drive axle, so although the cylinders were quite small, they fed almost all their power to the rear wheels. (I don't recall the displacement of the high and low pressure cylinders - if I ever knew it.) Exhaust steam was condensed and reused, which extended the distance the car could run before refilling the water tank.

I understand that a later attempt to convert the Doble system for use in larger vehicles was a failure, probably because of the economies of scale - some things just don't work well when scaled past optimum values.

I'm a steam 'nut,' but I've only seen one Doble in my life and that was about 50 years ago, so there can't be many around. Recently though a collector friend of mine obtained an engine and rear axle unit from a 1922 model D(?) Doble. He hopes one day to have it running in a small car, but then - he always was a dreamer.

kp
[> Subject: Re: Modern Steam Locomotives


Author:
Lew
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 21:29:42 07/20/12 Fri

Both the Chesapeake and Ohio and the Norfolk Western fieled steam-turbine-electrics; the C&O had three Baldwin/Westinghouse units built to pull the "Chessie" streamliner train AN THE n&w BUILT 1 UNIT NICK-NAMED THE "jAWN hENRY".

See http://www.wilkinsontrains.com/traindisp.cfm?train_id=195 for info one the "Chessie" train and http://trn.trains.com/en/sitecore/content/Home/Railroad%20Reference/Railroad%20History/2006/06/The%20Jawn%20Henry.aspx for the "Jawn Henry. Also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jawn_Henry_(turbine)#Norfolk_.26_Western_Railway for general steam turbine info on Wilipedia.

Lew


>In chapter 18 of Hannegan's Cove, the idea of a modern
>steam locomotive is mentioned in passing. The idea
>struck me as very interesting for two reasons: 1.
>modern diesel locomotives use the diesel engine to
>generate electric power, which drives electric motors;
>2. the late-generation steamships, especially naval
>vessels, used steam turbines to generate electricity
>which drove electric motors (basically one step from
>current nuclear subs and carriers).
>
>So it seems that steam-turbine electric locomotives
>are technically feasible and might have clear
>environmental advantages. Maybe if they burn hydrogen
>to produce the steam?
>
>Did anybody else think along these lines?
[> Subject: Re: Modern Steam Locomotives


Author:
Leo
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 02:38:20 07/21/12 Sat

May I draw your attention to this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LMS_Turbomotive

A British Steam Locomotive built in 1935



>In chapter 18 of Hannegan's Cove, the idea of a modern
>steam locomotive is mentioned in passing. The idea
>struck me as very interesting for two reasons: 1.
>modern diesel locomotives use the diesel engine to
>generate electric power, which drives electric motors;
>2. the late-generation steamships, especially naval
>vessels, used steam turbines to generate electricity
>which drove electric motors (basically one step from
>current nuclear subs and carriers).
>
>So it seems that steam-turbine electric locomotives
>are technically feasible and might have clear
>environmental advantages. Maybe if they burn hydrogen
>to produce the steam?
>
>Did anybody else think along these lines?
[> [> Subject: Re: Modern Steam Locomotives


Author:
K Pelle
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 03:56:46 07/21/12 Sat

>May I draw your attention to this?
>
> >href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LMS_Turbomotive">htt
>p://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LMS_Turbomotive

>
>A British Steam Locomotive built in 1935
>
Thank you. I'd heard of that engine, but I have no knowledge of British Railway systems. I see from your reference that she carried 4000 Imperial gallons of water and I was wondering if anyone would know how far she was able to go between watering stops?

More than anything else water demand is the primary bugaboo for non-condensing steam engines. Of course maintenance is second in line to that because steam engines are not self lubricating like diesel engines are. (Actually external combustion just isn't as efficient as internal combustion, darn it, because I'd love to see steam engines running in mainline service once more!)

kp
[> [> [> Subject: Re: Modern Steam Locomotives


Author:
Andy
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 23:44:17 07/21/12 Sat

>>May I draw your attention to this?
>>
>> >>href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LMS_Turbomotive">ht
>t
>>p://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LMS_Turbomotive

>>
>>A British Steam Locomotive built in 1935
>>
>Thank you. I'd heard of that engine, but I have no
>knowledge of British Railway systems. I see from your
>reference that she carried 4000 Imperial gallons of
>water and I was wondering if anyone would know how far
>she was able to go between watering stops?
>
>More than anything else water demand is the primary
>bugaboo for non-condensing steam engines. Of course
>maintenance is second in line to that because steam
>engines are not self lubricating like diesel engines
>are. (Actually external combustion just isn't as
>efficient as internal combustion, darn it, because I'd
>love to see steam engines running in mainline service
>once more!)
>
>kp
AFAIK the west coast main line (ex LMS Railway), which these engines operated on, had water troughs at suitable locations to replenish the water. This article shows the one at Brock, nr Garstang, between Preston and Lancaster.

http://www.garstangcourier.co.uk/lifestyle/the-thirsty-days-of-steam-trains-1-4404744
[> [> [> Subject: Re: Modern Steam Locomotives


Author:
Mike
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 17:17:50 09/13/12 Thu

As well as the Turbomotive (35-52), there was the Hush-Hush (allegedly so named to keep the project quiet, rather than for her sound) - see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LNER_Class_W1 and http://www.lner.info/locos/W/w1.shtml

I think she looked far better in her original guise (29-36), rather than the W1 rebuild (36-59) :(

Sadly, she was never really given the chance to prove herself :( The boiler was replaced far too early - interestingly, it was used for pressure-testing and space heating for a further 26 years or so, so it couldn't have been as bad as claimed !
[> Subject: Re: Modern Steam Locomotives


Author:
J Skelton
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 11:10:05 07/21/12 Sat

Doing some web searches on modern steam, I found this link: http://5at.co.uk

The project was suspended earlier this year because the next step will require large amounts of cash. The man behind the design of the proposed locomotive worked in South Africa and later in China on modernising steam traction; he failed in both places because management had already made the decision to abandon steam.

The website provides a lot of techmical detail including anticipated performance and range.
[> Subject: Re: Modern Steam Locomotives


Author:
mikey
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 04:47:32 07/22/12 Sun

>In chapter 18 of Hannegan's Cove, the idea of a modern
>steam locomotive is mentioned in passing. The idea
>struck me as very interesting for two reasons: 1.
>modern diesel locomotives use the diesel engine to
>generate electric power, which drives electric motors;
>2. the late-generation steamships, especially naval
>vessels, used steam turbines to generate electricity
>which drove electric motors (basically one step from
>current nuclear subs and carriers).
>
>So it seems that steam-turbine electric locomotives
>are technically feasible and might have clear
>environmental advantages. Maybe if they burn hydrogen
>to produce the steam?
>
>Did anybody else think along these lines?
[> Subject: Re: Modern Steam Locomotives


Author:
Ronald McKenzie
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 05:08:15 08/26/12 Sun

>In chapter 18 of Hannegan's Cove, the idea of a modern
>steam locomotive is mentioned in passing. The idea
>struck me as very interesting for two reasons: 1.
>modern diesel locomotives use the diesel engine to
>generate electric power, which drives electric motors;
>2. the late-generation steamships, especially naval
>vessels, used steam turbines to generate electricity
>which drove electric motors (basically one step from
>current nuclear subs and carriers).
>
>So it seems that steam-turbine electric locomotives
>are technically feasible and might have clear
>environmental advantages. Maybe if they burn hydrogen
>to produce the steam?
>
>Did anybody else think along these lines?

Steam engines of their day could go a long distance on the coal they carried, but only a short distance between taking up water to have for steam. Unlike on a ship or sub, the train has no way to cool the steam back to water, so only gets to use the water once.
[> [> Subject: Re: Modern Steam Locomotives


Author:
Rob
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 09:05:11 08/26/12 Sun

>>In chapter 18 of Hannegan's Cove, the idea of a modern
>>steam locomotive is mentioned in passing. The idea
>>struck me as very interesting for two reasons: 1.
>>modern diesel locomotives use the diesel engine to
>>generate electric power, which drives electric motors;
>>2. the late-generation steamships, especially naval
>>vessels, used steam turbines to generate electricity
>>which drove electric motors (basically one step from
>>current nuclear subs and carriers).
>>
>>So it seems that steam-turbine electric locomotives
>>are technically feasible and might have clear
>>environmental advantages. Maybe if they burn hydrogen
>>to produce the steam?
>>
>>Did anybody else think along these lines?
>
>Steam engines of their day could go a long distance on
>the coal they carried, but only a short distance
>between taking up water to have for steam. Unlike on a
>ship or sub, the train has no way to cool the steam
>back to water, so only gets to use the water once.

That fact would probably make things difficult for a modern transcontinental steam engine to be profitable, but it could be a viable idea for switcher engines. In some cases those could also be used for short trips.

Another possibility would be possibly disguising the workings of a modern steam locomotive in the body of an antique - using that as the motor power for nostalgic/historical train rides.
[> [> Subject: Re: Modern Steam Locomotives


Author:
Lew
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 12:51:20 08/26/12 Sun

>
>Steam engines of their day could go a long distance on
>the coal they carried, but only a short distance
>between taking up water to have for steam. Unlike on a
>ship or sub, the train has no way to cool the steam
>back to water, so only gets to use the water once.

There were some steam loco's with condenser stems to se the water over. I remember reading in "TRAINS" Magazine about such engines being used in South Africa, but don't remember details. I will search over the next few days and try to get more info. I believe one of the main problems was the loss of forced draught from the steam exhausting up the stack.

Lew
[> [> [> Subject: Re: Modern Steam Locomotives


Author:
Lew
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 17:06:03 08/26/12 Sun

>>
>>Steam engines of their day could go a long distance on
>>the coal they carried, but only a short distance
>>between taking up water to have for steam. Unlike on a
>>ship or sub, the train has no way to cool the steam
>>back to water, so only gets to use the water once.
>
>There were some steam loco's with condenser stems to
>se the water over. I remember reading in "TRAINS"
>Magazine about such engines being used in South
>Africa, but don't remember details. I will search
>over the next few days and try to get more info. I
>believe one of the main problems was the loss of
>forced draught from the steam exhausting up the stack.
>
>
>Lew


Here are a couple items I found. The Yahoo search has many good hits.


Lew
[> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Modern Steam Locomotives


Author:
Lew
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 17:07:48 08/26/12 Sun

>>>
>>>Steam engines of their day could go a long distance
>on
>>>the coal they carried, but only a short distance
>>>between taking up water to have for steam. Unlike on
>a
>>>ship or sub, the train has no way to cool the steam
>>>back to water, so only gets to use the water once.
>>
>>There were some steam loco's with condenser stems to
>>se the water over. I remember reading in "TRAINS"
>>Magazine about such engines being used in South
>>Africa, but don't remember details. I will search
>>over the next few days and try to get more info. I
>>believe one of the main problems was the loss of
>>forced draught from the steam exhausting up the stack.
>>
>>
>>Lew
>
>
>Here are a couple items I found. The Yahoo search has
>many good hits.
>
>
>Lew


Hear are the hits I got OOPS!

Yahoo Search:

http://search.yahoo.com/search?ei=utf-8&fr=slv8-hptb5&p=condensing%20steam%20locomotives&type=


Wikipedia article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condensing_steam_locomotive

Lew
[> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Modern Steam Locomotives


Author:
K Pelle aka dotB
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 19:09:14 08/26/12 Sun

Unfortunately condensing locomotives usually managed to do any cooling of the exhaust steam by running the condenser pipes through the water tanks. That would soon heat the water in the tanks to near boiling point, at which time the injectors on the engine would not function so they had to use steam powered pumps in order to refill the boilers. Not only that, but there are many other problems which crept into the situation, so often they lost any benefit in travel between watering points. All in all condensing locomotives were seldom a viable solution to the problem - instead most railroads tried to use the largest possible water tank they could and suffered with the inconvenience of frequent water stops.
[> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Modern Steam Locomotives


Author:
Lew
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 19:49:48 08/26/12 Sun

>Unfortunately condensing locomotives usually managed
>to do any cooling of the exhaust steam by running the
>condenser pipes through the water tanks. That would
>soon heat the water in the tanks to near boiling
>point, at which time the injectors on the engine would
>not function so they had to use steam powered pumps in
>order to refill the boilers. Not only that, but there
>are many other problems which crept into the
>situation, so often they lost any benefit in travel
>between watering points. All in all condensing
>locomotives were seldom a viable solution to the
>problem - instead most railroads tried to use the
>largest possible water tank they could and suffered
>with the inconvenience of frequent water stops.

Or else pull extra water tanks (N&W called them 'Thermos Bottles')to extend the range between water stops.

Lew
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Modern Steam Locomotives


Author:
K Pelle aka dotB
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 21:17:07 08/26/12 Sun

>>Unfortunately most railroads tried to use the
>>largest possible water tank they could and suffered
>>with the inconvenience of frequent water stops.
>
>Or else pull extra water tanks (N&W called them
>'Thermos Bottles')to extend the range between water
>stops.
>
>Lew

And the operating department got belly ached at because that extra tank of water was 'dead' weight, bringing no revenue to the railroad - just one more loss of profit that the financial department hated.

kp


[ Contact Forum Admin ]


Forum timezone: GMT-5
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.