Diesel Rail Traction before 1950 - Discuss

[Nearholmer]

Deliberately includes "pre-history" to permit, indeed, encourage, pre-Diesel internal-combustion discussion too.

 

Kevin

[jjb1970]

For those interested in the history of diesel engines the MAN museum in Augsburg is worth visiting. This is a corporate museum maintained by MAN, admission is free by appointment however you cannot just turn up (or at least you couldn’t on the occasion I visited). They have the original diesel there and still run it up for visitors along with various stuff like a U-Boat engine, E-Boat engine, buses, trucks, gear boxes etc. The automatic gear box of a Leopard II tank is very impressive. The E-Boat engine is the diesel that indirectly contributed to the Deltic engine as during the war German E-Boats (their equivalent of the MTB, more accurately called an S Boot) were powered by diesel engines whereas Allied equivalents relied on petrol engines and thus had fuel tanks full of petrol in lightweight boats subject to enemy fire. The MAN double acting in-line engines were not the favoured type and replaced by superior Daimler Benz vee form engines before the war, so whereas the Allies didn’t have an appropriate diesel Germany had two designs to choose from in the 1930’s. I wouldn’t trek to Augsburg just to visit the museum but if you are passing through it is well worth a visit. MAN hosted a CIMAC working group meeting there and it was probably the best venue of all the groups meetings.

[Nearholmer]

Good tip, JJB.

 

This is another absolutely excellent company museum: http://www.deutz.com/unternehmen/technikum.de.html

 

It seems to have regular opening hours now, but when my brother and I visited, it was only open on a "by arrangement" basis.

 

Key item of interest for railway enthusiasts is the 1897 narrow gauge rail tractor (drawing below), which is pretty much complete and in original condition, apart from the bonnet cover being absent. This loco led to a series-build of c4000 (yes, three zeros) up to and including the military ones of WW1. The equivalent UK loco was the Hornsby-Akroyd-Stuart of 1896, which, unfortunately, led to a series of about 4 (no zeroes)!

 

The Mercedes Benz museum also has the 1880s Daimler rail vehicles, but they are so suspiciously perfect that I wonder whether they have been re-manufactured.

 

Kevin

Edited January 26, 2016 by Nearholmer

[Zomboid]

Internal combustion on narrow gauge in the UK goes back a long way, it's far from my area of expertise but I remember reading about simplex tractors and peculiarly modified model t fords on the ravenglass & eskdale as part of its 15" resurgence (the 3' version being a pure steam outfit).

Possibly due to a glut of equipment becoming available after WW1.

[Nearholmer]

Zomboid

 

The pre-WW1 position on i.c. rail vehicles in Britain was, very roughly:

 

- a few small locomotives had been built in GB, about half having been exported;

 

- there were also a few German-built locos in GB;

 

- a good number of small motor-trollies had been built, and a good number exported;

 

- a good number of light railcars and tramcars had been built, probably as many going for export as staying in the UK;

 

- a few quite good, more robust, railcars had been built, notably the NER Autocar and things influenced by it, which were built by US firms with factories in GB, and there were a couple of really promising designs on trial;

 

- a main-line diesel electric loco for export was under construction (but it got cancelled, due to the war!)

 

K

[Fat Controller]

How about this baby..?

http://www.derbysulzers.com/sncf262BD1.html

[Titan]

Seems like a successful design, had a long life and the engines did not seem to give much trouble. Imagine if Gresley had ordered these instead of building A4s...

[Fat Controller]

Seems like a successful design, had a long life and the engines did not seem to give much trouble. Imagine if Gresley had ordered these instead of building A4s...

Given Gresley's French connections, one wonders why he didn't trial the idea on the LNER. I notice that the PLM trialled both high-power and medium power engines; shades of the UK Lion versus Falcon trials two decades later. I believe a small production batch of these locos may have been supplied to one of the PLM's affiliates in North Africa.

[jonny777]

It seems to suggest that even pre-war the French were thinking of 4000hp as a reasonable prime mover.  Did I miss the axle loading, or was it not given?

[Titan]

Well the whole thing was 225 tons over 14 axles, so depending on weight distribution probably better than several UK diesels, and with the added advantage of fully suspended traction motors.

[Nearholmer]

FC and Titan

 

You have hit on one of my favourites. There was a comparator pair with MAN engines and Secheron electrical equipment, too.

 

I think that the very high power was needed to attain half-decent timings with the absolutely massive trains from a Paris to the Riviera, rather than to achieve, by current standards, very high speeds. Somewhere, I have read how many steam locos the envisaged could be replaced by each diesel-pair, and it was a knock-out figure that would have delivered quick pay-back, despite the whopping first-cost.

 

Then the war happened.

 

K

 

PS: long discussion about similar locos supplied to Romania here http://forum.lokomotiv.ro/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=3168I can't read Romanian, but the basics are intelligible if you can read French or Italian. But, now I've found them in English, its a lot easier! http://www.derbysulzers.com/cfrprototype.html

Edited January 26, 2016 by Nearholmer

[Fat Controller]

Thanks for the link to the Romanian ones; very similar looking, but intended to work a heavily curved and graded line, so slower than the French ones. Axle-load shown as 19 tonnes. I was surprised to see how long the Romanian ones lasted.

[Nearholmer]

At the other end of the scale, and really only just in scope, because they were built in 1949, there are some really neat 600hp DE Bo-Bo locos on the metre gauge Nice-Digne, CF Provence line. They look a bit like mini versions of Class 73.

 

I saw one in traffic on a ballast train about 15 years ago, and at that point I think it still had original equipment, but googling suggests that they have since been refurbished. https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemins_de_fer_de_Provence#/media/Fichier%3ACP_locomotive-Brissoneau-T66.JPG

 

Kevin

[jjb1970]

As with most technologies it is interesting to look at the development of diesels and the various ideas which were tried and how engines converged on common configurations. The British company Doxford was famous for its adherence to the opposed piston concept in which two pistons were opposed to each other in the same cylinder liner. That gave a smooth engine and eliminated inlet and exhaust valves as both scavenge and exhaust was via liner ports but it came at a cost of three times the number of piston and connecting rods, crossheads and bearings. Given that until the early 80’s many big diesels were loop scavenged and had neither inlet nor exhaust valves it is hard to see that the additional complexity and running gear of the Doxford was worthwhile although it shared something in common with the Deltic in that those who liked them really love them. The last Doxford was delivered in 1980, the story of the decline of Doxford was quite a sad one and displayed some recurring themes common to much of British industry in the 60’s and 70’s. At one time double acting engines were common, using the underside of the piston in effect as a second cylinder with fuel injection and combustion into the underside space. The advantages are clear but sealing the piston rod diaphragm against combustion pressure was problematic along with a few other issues. Again it is one of those ideas which sounds great but which was somewhat problematic in reality. At one time Grandi Motori Trieste/GMT (now the Trieste works of Wartsila, their production plant for engines like the W46) were quite famous for their eccentric crosshead pin idea. Crossheads are tricky things as the oscillating nature means you cannot use normal hydrodynamic lubrication and so engines use high pressure hydrostatic lubrication. GMT’s idea was to have an eccentric profile to part of the pin which physically lifted the pin up to promote oil flow. I was always happy I never had to find out how well that worked in practice. On another note, the finest model I have ever seen bar none (and I’ve seen some seriously impressive builders models of ships) is in the Trieste works, a large scale (1/10?) model of a GMT built Sulzer RTA. The thing is modelled with some crankcase doors, camshaft covers etc open (but no cut aways) and is the closest model I’ve ever seen to something that really does look like it is a real thing miniaturised. Every fastener, all of the compression fittings modelled on every bit of tubing (and you can imagine how much that is), cable glanding, pipe clips, conduit, etc etc, it really is a magnificent model. The model is mostly machined from metal too. I shudder to think how much it cost. On the Hornby/Drax biomass thread there is some comment on why Drax would want a promotional model, in this case GMT clearly felt it worth their effort to commission a model which must have been hideously expensive even by the standards of industrial models and which will only ever be seen by their own staff and visitors to the plant.

[Nearholmer]

JJB

 

Can I ask you to act as "technical consultant" on something?

 

This patent http://www.google.com/patents/US457459

 

The engine was used in tramcars in the USA, and a trial tram locomotive in England, and is described in the patent and elsewhere as a "compound". My consultancy question being: to what extent do you think it was actually acting as a compound?

 

My impression is that, in fact, the second cylinder was probably having a far more useful affect in scavenging than in extracting work from the energy in the exhaust gasses.

 

When I'm at my desk computer, I will ferret-out the article from The Engineer describing the English loco that (initially) used it.

 

Kevin

 

PS: The Lenoir gas engine was, of course, double-acting. I went to have another look at the one in the Science Museum over the Christmas Holiday, and it is so obviously steam-engine derived that it is hard to look at it and think i.c.

Edited January 27, 2016 by Nearholmer

[PhilJ W]

One of the pioneers of internal combustion locomotives was McEwan-Pratt of Wickford, Essex. The factory that was built for them still exists and is still in use manufacturing conservatories and double glazing. If you can find a copy 'The British Internal Combustion Locomotive 1894-1940' by Brian Webb (David & Charles 1973) ISBN 0 7153 6115 5 is well worth seeking out as it is a comprehensive history of the British petrol/diesel locomotives.

[Nearholmer]

Phil

 

Webb's book has been one of my primary guides since it was first published in the early 1970s, and when I started delving back beyond what he had written about, Mr Webb himself wrote me a very encouraging letter - I was deeply chuffed!

 

There is now a great big detailed history of Baguley-Drewry (Civil & Etherington), which contains everything known about McEwan Pratt, and b fascinating it is, but there are mysteries that will probably remain unsolved, the greatest being whether or not they built a 100hp loco c1911, and, if they did, whether or not it had a Diesel engine.

 

Mark Smithers, who wrote the standard history of 18" gauge railways, is currently working on a further book, which will add a lot more knowledge about the Akroyd-Stuart engined locos from 1896 onwards, including the monster bogie loco with opposed-piston engine. He was kind enough to show me the drawings he has unearthed, including drawings of never-built locos.

 

Roundabout way of saying that (1) Webb's book is brilliant, but (2) enough knowledge has emerged in the past forty years to make a successor volume necessary.

 

Kevin

[jjb1970]

JJB

 

Can I ask you to act as "technical consultant" on something?

 

This patent http://www.google.com/patents/US457459

 

The engine was used in tramcars in the USA, and a trial tram locomotive in England, and is described in the patent and elsewhere as a "compound". My consultancy question being: to what extent do you think it was actually acting as a compound?

 

My impression is that, in fact, the second cylinder was probably having a far more useful affect in scavenging than in extracting work from the energy in the exhaust gasses.

 

When I'm at my desk computer, I will ferret-out the article from The Engineer describing the English loco that (initially) used it.

 

Kevin

 

PS: The Lenoir gas engine was, of course, double-acting. I went to have another look at the one in the Science Museum over the Christmas Holiday, and it is so obviously steam-engine derived that it is hard to look at it and think i.c.

Interesting, it could be compounding but would need to see more info on the thermal cycle and something like a P-V diagram. Compounding a diesel engine (I'll use diesel in the generic sense) is not something that really adds up in terms of a reciprocating arrangement as providing the fuel injection and exhaust timing are correct you can expand the gas right down in the cylinder. With a turbo-charger you open the exhaust valve early as the gain in power and efficiency from the turbine driven blower massively outweighs the loss in expansion in the cylinder. In a sense a turbo-charger is a form of compounding as it is extracting energy from the exhaust. On bigger diesels it is not uncommon to have power take in or take off arrangements where exhaust gas is directed through a turbine which is connected either to a generator or geared back to the shaft to boost shaft power, basically because modern turbo-chargers are so efficient. That is certainly a form of compounding I think. At lower loads the gas goes through the turbo-chargers then as load picks up a valve opens to the PTO/PTI turbine. Another technique is to drive a generator from the turbo-charger shaft. One issue with all of these ideas is where do you want to extract the energy as many applications need a lot of heat and it is often more efficient to take waste heat to generate steam than to start playing with fancy turbo arrangements. There is only so much energy to extract, especially the big modern two strokes are up above 50% efficiency. There was a proposal to use a turbo-compounded Deltic but by the time Napier dreamt that one up the market for the engine had moved onto gas turbines.

Edited January 27, 2016 by jjb1970

[PhilJ W]

Plenty of engines here >>

http://www.animatedengines.com/

Click on the engine type and see how it works. There is also a 5-stroke engine being developed, just Google 5-stroke.

Edited January 27, 2016 by PhilJ W

[BernardTPM]

Seems like a successful design, had a long life and the engines did not seem to give much trouble. Imagine if Gresley had ordered these instead of building A4s...

It was a little later than the original builds of A4s, but in interesting beast! I did do something based on what Armstrong Whitworth's Diesel Traction Department (right in the heart of LNER territory, of course) was doing in the early to mid '30s here, which could have been early enough to run alongside the A4s to provide head-to-head comparative trials.

[jjb1970]

Diesel is used as a generic description for any pressure ignition engine, and for power plant and marine engines it isn't even just pressure ignition as spark ignition gas engines which are generally Otto or Stirling engines are still commonly called "gas diesels". A true diesel is an engine designed around the Diesel thermodynamic cycle.

[Nearholmer]

Bernard - I like your AW LNER loco! nice livery! There are pictures of a real AW on trial on the LNER here http://www.derbysulzers.com/aw.html

 

K

[BernardTPM]

AW built a large variety of designs and mine was an amalgam of several of them. Brian Webb's Armstrong Whitworth book was very useful in the process as some of the diagrams even give the breakdown of the weight of components. It is also obvious from the book that what they built was just a fraction of what they designed.

[jjb1970]

A friend of mine did an exercise a couple of years ago to trace the evolution of the Lloyd's Register class rules for diesel engines and it was interesting to trace the increase in knowledge with service experience starting at a base which was rather bare. The concept of crankcase explosions and how to prevent them and mitigate risk if they did occur were not really understood until the 1950's when there was a flurry of research after the Reina del Pacifico catastrophe. The fire risks associated with leaking fuel and hot surfaces was appreciated at quite an early stage but there were quite a few fires before some accepted the wisdom of double skinned HP pipes and robust rules for exhaust screening. The key part of the engine for durability is the crankshaft, from an early stage there were quite prescriptive rules for crankshaft design, changes of section, oil channels etc. One of the biggest causes of crankshaft breakage (and damage to shafts, gearboxes and other parts of the shaft line was torsional vibration and marine shaft line systems have had to meet quite robust torsional requirements for many decades. I tend to think this is an area where rail and industrial engines still lag. Some of the American engine builders especially are constantly whinging because building an engine to marine rules tends to result in a heavier and more expensive crankshaft and I regularly achieved requests for meetings to demand an opt out on the basis of "trust us, we make loads of train engines and they're great, your rules are pointless". My attitude was always "OK, bring the data for crankshaft failures with you and how many you break so we can have an informed discussion" and then it always went very quiet. Breaking the crankshaft of a marine engine is very rare and when it does happy there are major investigations to establish what went wrong, I got the impression from looking at the records for some of the American engine builders in rail traction it is considered a risk of business and if they break you just buy another one.

[PenrithBeacon]

One of the pioneers of internal combustion locomotives was McEwan-Pratt of Wickford, Essex. The factory that was built for them still exists and is still in use manufacturing conservatories and double glazing. If you can find a copy 'The British Internal Combustion Locomotive 1894-1940' by Brian Webb (David & Charles 1973) ISBN 0 7153 6115 5 is well worth seeking out as it is a comprehensive history of the British petrol/diesel locomotives.

Just bought one! See http://www.amazon.co.uk/Internal-Combustion-Locomotive-1894-1940-locomotive/dp/0715361155 .

 

The new example at £999.11 wasn't the one I bought!

 

Regards