Oil Firing.

It depends what you mean by 'heavy oil', of course. IFO40, whilst black and pretty thick, only requires heating to about 75 Deg.C to get good atomisation, but can be pumped at normal ambient temperatures without heating. IFO180 requires some warming in order to pump it, but needs 100-110 Deg.C for proper atomisation. IFO380 - best not go there

I can't see too much difficulty in using IFO40, other than, perhaps, a supply problem. It's certainly cheaper than distillate oils such as Gas Oil. Marine Diesel Oil might be an option too; only trouble there is quality. For both MDO and IFO40 you would need to get the fuel already centrifuged and filtered, which again adds to costs.

 

Many thanks Ralph. The only reason I haven't started a thread on this was because I thought there must have been one before.

Anyway. We've got a new one.

I am a bit cold on this issue re the UK. I only returned to my interest in UK steam circa 2007, so have a lot of catching up still to do.

That includes knowing what has been considered re oil firing of main line steam locos.

There are obvious advantages. Virtually no lineside fire risk during hot and dry spells and easier and quicker lighting up times for instance. Although in the preservation I know the issue of "thermal shock" could be an issue, i.e with rapid heating and cooling times.

One thing I didn't know was this:-

That raises some issues to me.

Does it mean most/all other UK main line steam locos don't have flat stay heads, and is that a major obstacle to oil firing? Even to me with my very poor engineering knowledge it would seem to be a colossal, (economically untenable?) job to make the changeover if it was an essential prerequisite to oil firing.

And was Tornado so equipped to ensure that loco can keep running in prolonged hot and dry spells? Or, considering the time it would possibly take to raise finance, design, equip, test, change the operating infrastructure etc etc, that the potential for oil firing Tornado was only done to cope with any future change in policy regarding main line steam in the UK.

Bit of a jumble above. Sorry. But having experienced superb main line steam running in Germany behind oil fired pacifics from February 1971 onwards I am very interested to know if it could ever become a feature of UK main line steam operation.

 

I cant be sure about this but I remember something about the A1 Trust not going for oil firing due to large quantitys of volatile liquid and the NR regs around 2007? Just an article I read around that time. I'm sure someone will be be able to shed more light on this though.

Neil.

 

8RPHsaid in the Clan Line thread...I believe the lads at Tyseley have a lot of the kit, burners etc, made up for the Great Western oil firing equipment. I believe it was looked into after one of the previous summer steam bans but the need to progress further and actually fit it hasnt arisen yet.

I seem to recall a conversation with someone when 5043 was being brought back to life that she might be converted to an oil burner. Why it didn't happen I don't know, but I will ask about this when I go into work next week.

 

Hmm. I hadn't thought about the issue of a large quantity of volatile oil. I wonder how much of an issue that is. And how it is being handled in Germany. I had quite a lot to do with the Rendsburger Eisenbahnfreunde and their involvement in the operation of oil fired pacific 012 100-4 from 2001 to 2005, and it was an issue that never got raised when I was around. And I had a number of footplate rides, knew some of the crews and a number of the other club members very well. I saw first hand, and also talked about many aspects of the locos operations, like you do. But any special precautions, concerns and regulations etc regarding the oil never got mentioned.

My initial thoughts on this are that the volatility issue is not about the oil in it's cold and "inert" (not sure that is the right word here), state whilst in the tender. But more so if the loco gets involved in an accident with a fire starting elsewhere and spreading to spilled oil which could get heated to the point of combustion.

Formula One has shown the technology exists to contain very volatile fuel in lightweight tanks that can survive tremendous forces in accidents, so I wonder if that same technology could have an application here. But not at Formula One prices!

 

Re your last sentence. Yes there has, the HST at Paddington in 1999 for one.

 

I think it is reference to the Ladbroke Grove Crash. There was a fire then.

 

It was the Labroke Grove crash, but the media always called it Paddington for some reason. Several people killed or very seriously burnt.

 

To throw my 2 cents in to the ' fire ' -- we use recycled motor oil in Royal Hudson 2860 over here in Canada. It was designed for bunker C oil in the first place , but we have no shore supply of steam to heat it and it's difficult to obain over here now . We tried diesel fuel a couple of years ago but the expense got in the way, as well it's too fluid , so at lower tank levels it surges and the fire goes out . We have been happy with our used oil - it's cheap , easy to obtain and needs no other adjustment when firing .

 

Here in NSW, there were two classes of oil fired steam locomotives.

The D-55 Class, a few were converted to burn oil during teh 1949 coal strikes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_South_Wales_D55_class_locomotive

The conversion burnt Bunker C Oil (or something like it with a consistency of tar) which required a steam coil heater in the tank to keep its viscosity down and a separate heater near teh burner to get it somewhere near hot enough to burn.

The D-59 Class was teh other type, built as oil burners.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_South_Wales_D59_class_locomotive

http://www.nswrtm.org/exhibits/the_exhibits/5910c.html

 

I was thinking the same. As far as I am aware the sort of oil firing equipment used on steam locos usually involves gravity feed and steam assistance in the form of steam jets entraining the oil, not pressurised through a nozzle. I didn't come across fuel centrifuges until I moved from steam turbine powered container ships to diesel powered ferries.

 

Well, given today's fuels, and the fine nozzles compared to marine boilers' burners, I'd think that good purification would be prudent - 'sitting down' because of choked filters/burners wouldn't endear one to NR...

 

The burner we use is named after it's inventor -- 'Von Boden ' - and works as you stated , the oil is gravity fed from the top section and steam from the bottom section - using the atomizer valve, control can be had over the spray pattern into the firebox , the firing valve controlling the amount of fuel admitted through the burner .

 

Finding this topic interesting as I'm involved with the Sentinel railcar set (SMU?) at Quainton that returned from Egypt. This has a 3-drum Woolnough (Yarrow type - similar to, but a shorted version of that fitted originally the Gresley's No. 10000), oil-fired using Laidlaw-Drew equipment. This has angled tangential air tubes in what would be the grate area. When running in Egypt it ran on the 'Super-Gludgo' Bunker C oil, no doubt the ambient temperature there keeping it sufficiently fluid - a different matter here, though. Has a 250-odd gallon fuel tank, but no obvious means of heating it. Current thinking is to use Gas Oil, but this 'in-between' oil could be a possibility if it is available.

Bearing in mind that the boiler contains the best part of 400 gallons, anyone any ideas as to what the fuel consumption is likely to be per hour?

Are there any written operating instructions for such burners and boilers available?