Steam in the 21st Century

[NevadaNorthernFan901]

Steam by far is the most amazing piece of equipment we made and thats what cool about it, is the fact that the way it runs cool vs diesels lack the fun and amazement steam does. Nevada I will gladly run you route with honor if you make one! I think the next wave of steam will prove diesels other wise long live steamers of america. There was some people that made things and they were the only ones that believed it could happened and they proved the world wrong they were right. So I say don't let others put down work when do you really know for 100% sure it can't be done.

Hello Beattie, I adgree with you on that, steam power is the most amazing piece of equipment that will ever run on the face of the earth. It was put to death to soon, so railroads could increase their profits, besides most railroads in the US are subsidized by the government. And the stocks in the companies are too high priced for what they actually make. There is so much that can still be done with the steam locomotives today that would make it more efficent and profitable to run. But someway it would have to get around the tree huggers and earth lovers as they tried to ban mining in the 80's with the slogan "Ban Mining, Save our trees and water" and the mining companies responded with "Ban Mining, Let the Bastards Freeze to Death in the Dark". So there will have to be some damage to the earth to sustain the human race. We have gone this far without any problems.

Steam died do to yearly operating cost and that has not changed or is likely to change. A steam engine is just less efficient than an internal combustion one, that's physics and can not be fixed. A steam turbine is mush better but only if it is big to big for a loco. And I love steam, I have a real live steam loco but they are never coming back.

They make turbines nowdays to fit in any peice of equipment and is not so large, that they can be placed into a steam locomotive. Today's world nothing is impossible to do or make.

 

[aardvark1]

~~~~snip~~~~

They make turbines nowdays to fit in any peice of equipment and is not so large, that they can be placed into a steam locomotive. Today's world nothing is impossible to do or make.

Hi NNF901,

While I appreciate and respect your position on steam loco's, you MAY be caught in an endless debate of pros's and con's about the subject.

May I respectfully suggest that you contact the major railroads in the USA directly and ask them what their position would be on bringing steam loco's back to use in the USA.

Please post their responses when you receive them.

Kind regards,

 

[NevadaNorthernFan901]

It comes to that, So I guess that I will do that.

 

[jmeinig]

It was put to death to soon,

Soon? I don't think that more than 150 years is soon. Now if diesel were to be put to death, that would be closer to soon. If I may also make a request, could you post the response that the big company makes on the forums?

 

[NevadaNorthernFan901]

I sure will I am collecting numbers on which companies to call. If the companies let me I will post their answers on the forums.

 

[whitepass]

They make turbines nowdays to fit in any peice of equipment

Gas turbines not steam.

All you need to do is make a lot of money, buy a railroad and have steam locos made for it, time frame of around 20 years.

 

[NevadaNorthernFan901]

Gas turbines not steam.

All you need to do is make a lot of money, buy a railroad and have steam locos made for it, time frame of around 20 years.

Gas and Steam turbines are pretty much the same except that in a gas turbine, the fuel sourcen is injected in with an ignition system installed to light it, and a steam turbine is the same with out those two parts. Pipe steam in one end and out the other and the turbine will spin just as it would as a gas turbine.
I also do plan on making a lot of money and buying a railroad or building one from scratch and redeveloping steam technology to use on the railroad.

 

[aardvark1]

Gas and Steam turbines are pretty much the same except that in a gas turbine, the fuel sourcen is injected in with an ignition system installed to light it, and a steam turbine is the same with out those two parts. Pipe steam in one end and out the other and the turbine will spin just as it would as a gas turbine.
I also do plan on making a lot of money and buying a railroad or building one from scratch and redeveloping steam technology to use on the railroad.

I am sure that you know this, but I respectfully submit this wiki as it details some differences between gas and steam turbines for locomotives.

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

It seems that the article points out that several attempts have not been successful.

Kind regards,

 

[NevadaNorthernFan901]

"The Pennsylvania Railroad used the largest direct-drive steam turbine locomotive in the world. Built by Baldwin Locomotive Works, the S2 Turbine, c/n 70900, was delivered to Pennsylvania Railroad in September 1944. It was originally designed as a 4-8-4, but due to shortages of lightweight materials during World War II, the S2 became the only locomotive ever built with a 6-8-6 wheel arrangement. PRR #6200, the S2 turbine, had a maximum power output of 6,900 HP (5.1 MW) and was capable of speeds over 100 mph (160 km/h). With the tender, the unit was approximately 123 feet (37 m) long. The steam turbine was a modified marine unit. While the gearing system was simpler than a generator, it had a fatal flaw: the turbine was inefficient at slow speeds. Below about 40 mph (64 km/h) the turbine used enormous amounts of steam and fuel. At high speeds, however, the S2 could propel heavy trains almost effortlessly and efficiently. The smooth turbine drive put far less stress on the track than a normal piston-driven locomotive. However, poor efficiency at slow speeds doomed this turbine, and with diesel-electrics being introduced, no more S2s were built. The locomotive was retired in 1949 and scrapped in May, 1952."

Yes, I see that, according to this on the turbine subject, once the locomotive got up to speed the S2 could propel heavy trains effortlessly and effciently. The designer would have to overcome the inefficient start up, but my Idea would be to use a electric generater that is hooked up to the turbine to power traction motors either on the loco itself or on the tender to get the locomotive up to speed over 40 mph, then switch over to the steam turbine direct drive without the use of the electric motors. Also this turbine in horsepower is equilvent to the moderday desil-eletric locomotive, and maybe has more horsepower that most of the diesel locomotives in use today.

 

[whitepass]

No go, N&W, C&O, and UP all tried steam turbine/electric all failed badly. You can not switch from generator to direct drive. Steam turbines work by letting steam expand so size matters a lot more volume=more power. In 1945 $4.5 million was spent on a research program that also failed.

 

[Beattie]

Thinking I wonder if you could run steamers by solar? Think about heats up water, unless I am missing something we should look into this.

 

[whitepass]

Solar - hard to do that at night or in the rain or snow.

 

[Beattie]

Solar - hard to do that at night or in the rain or snow.

do you think we could store the energy it has and store it for use at night or weather problems? I mean I seen it on cars homes and they all state it can work during night with stored power. As to were to put the storage tanks easy put them in the tender were all the coal used to be at. I think should least build a prototype to see if it worth it or not.

 

[NevadaNorthernFan901]

Or that we use salt, heat it up in the fire box and run water tubes through it, Salt can retain heat longer than any other material that is melted. They are using it in solar powered generation stations all over the world.

Beattie, I like the Idea, but I even think it would be impossable to do, unless you combine it with the salt idea they are using in solar power plants and some how get it to work in a smaller area on a locomotive, as solar power plants take up huge areas to melt the salt in the tower to create steam. I think my idea would work best of anything there is.

 

[aardvark1]

Or that we use salt, heat it up in the fire box and run water tubes through it, Salt can retain heat longer than any other material that is melted. They are using it in solar powered generation stations all over the world.

Powerplants do not use... just salt. They use the following:

Molten salt technology.....

The molten salt is a mixture of 60 percent sodium nitrate and 40 percent potassium nitrate, commonly called saltpeter. It is non-flammable and nontoxic, and has already been used in the chemical and metals industries as a heat-transport fluid, so experience with such systems exists in non-solar applications.
The salt melts at 221 °C (430 °F). It is kept liquid at 288 °C (550 °F) in an insulated "cold" storage tank. The liquid salt is pumped through panels in a solar collector where the focused sun heats it to 566 °C (1,051 °F). It is then sent to a hot storage tank. This is so well insulated that the thermal energy can be usefully stored for up to a week.

When electricity is needed, the hot salt is pumped to a conventional steam-generator to produce superheated steam for a turbine/generator as used in any conventional coal, oil or nuclear power plant. A 100-megawatt turbine would need tanks of about 30 feet (9.1 m) tall and 80 feet (24 m) in diameter to drive it for four hours by this design.

Regards,

 

[NevadaNorthernFan901]

I was close, I am just throwing ideas out.
But it could still be applied to steam locomotives to improve the efficiency, rather than just burning straight coal in a firebox. But now use the coal to heat up the saltpeter to molten stage and pipe the molten saltpeter through the boiler and water will turn to steam faster, thus reducing the time to "Steam Up" the locomotive, than the old ways of heating water by having the gases going through pipes to the smoke stack and the heat from the flames heat the rear of the boiler, but now use a seperate flue to vent the gases to the stack.

 

[whitepass]

A railroad loco has to fit in a box 10'x14'x120' or you have to re-lay all the track, bridges, and tunnels. There is also a wight limit that varies by road.

 

[NevadaNorthernFan901]

I know that but how would adding the molten salt process to a steam locomotive make it any bigger? It would be still the same size as before. Most steam locomotives in the US never went any larger than 120 feet.

 

[sniper297]

All wet

Wading thru all this I got soaking wet, seeing very little about the primary problem with steam. What is steam? Steam is water heated up above the boiling temperature. If water came from mother nature clean and pure that would work very nicely, but it doesn't. Water is full of minerals, some places it has iron particles, calcium, lime, assorted other rocks and garbage. That was the biggest expense with the old time steam engines on railroads and ships, cleaning out the boiler tubes and replacing all the associated plumbing. Start pumping water thru the feedwater heater, mineral deposits start building up, water gets to the boiler and starts boiling, the tubes start clogging up with deposits. Fresh out of the shops it has max efficiency for an hour or two, the efficiency immediately starts dropping off because the deposits on the inside surface of the tubes don't conduct the heat to the water as efficiently. The longer you run the worse it gets and the more fuel is needed to create the same energy.

Modern steam ships use distilled water, which they get by evaporating salt water and condensing it again, running through filters to get any remaining sediment, then recycling the water and reusing it so they don't have to keep making fresh water. That helps considerably because the boiler tubes don't need to be cleaned as often - but it comes at a price, now you have to clean the gunk out of the filters and distilling evaporators.

What you really need to make steam efficient is a substitute for water, preferably something that boils at a lower temperature, which also has no impurities or corrosive effect on metal plumbing.

 

[NevadaNorthernFan901]

See, now this is the kind of talk we should do, throw ideas out and talk about them that would help improve the steam locomotive. Not argue over garbage of this and that like before. You could put a filtration system at the water tanks along the railroad tracks, and using solar power to run the pumps and filtration systems to get the minerals and garbage out of the water. But as sniper said, someone would have to clean the filters every now and then. That should help with the boiler from getting dirty.