If you register, you can do a lot more. And become an active part of our growing community. You'll have access to hidden forums, and enjoy the ability of replying and starting conversations.

Locomotive Front End Designs

Discussion in 'Steam Traction' started by ragl, Feb 19, 2016.

  1. ragl

    ragl Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2010
    Messages:
    1,551
    Likes Received:
    620
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Consultant Engineer
    Location:
    Shropshire
    Something that would most certainly give a Princess Coronation a boost is the the same exhaust fitment as a Tornado/Blue Peter/P2, that is a Kylchap, that would level things a wee bit more.

    Also, with regard to cylinder, wheel sizes, etc. and the relationship to outright power production, it's worth remembering the class of loco that achieved the highest IHP during the 1948 loco exchange trials.

    Cheers,

    Alan
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 4, 2016
  2. JJG Koopmans

    JJG Koopmans Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2014
    Messages:
    267
    Likes Received:
    232
    Gender:
    Male
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    The easiest would be just to fit multiple exhausts under the present chimneys. If the drawing in the books is correct the single exhausts
    are just plainly wrong.
    Kind regards
    Jos Koopmans
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 4, 2016
  3. JJG Koopmans

    JJG Koopmans Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2014
    Messages:
    267
    Likes Received:
    232
    Gender:
    Male
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Quite right and at 11:39 this morning I stated above that multiple blastcaps and the present chimneys would suffice!
    Kind regards
    Jos Koopmans
     
    andalfi1 likes this.
  4. class8mikado

    class8mikado Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2009
    Messages:
    2,098
    Likes Received:
    394
    Occupation:
    Print Estimator/ Font of all knowledge (useful, or
    Location:
    Bingley W.Yorks.
    Youre the Man. Maybe they will let you tune up a Double Chimney King in the near future
     
    andalfi1 likes this.
  5. JJG Koopmans

    JJG Koopmans Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2014
    Messages:
    267
    Likes Received:
    232
    Gender:
    Male
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Maybe, but that is not relevant as the King double chimney was properly proportioned by Ell and the doubles of the Princess do not fulfill
    his proportions.To sum up: chimneys too short, distances from orifice to chimney choke too large and as a consequence 4 7/16 inch orifices which should be larger but cannot due to these deficiencies. Another blastcap(s) will do at low-cost.
    Kind regards
    Jos Koopmans
     
    S.A.C. Martin and andalfi1 like this.
  6. Courier

    Courier New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2010
    Messages:
    176
    Likes Received:
    90
    attached is from:

    Problems Connected with Locomotive Design
    W. A. Stanier
    Journal of the Institution of Locomotive Engineers, January 1939; vol. 29, 147: pp. 13-35.
     

    Attached Files:

  7. Courier

    Courier New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2010
    Messages:
    176
    Likes Received:
    90
    also........

    extract from:

    The Development of L.N.E.R. Locomotive Design, 1923–1941
    B. Spencer
    Journal of the Institution of Locomotive Engineers, May 1947; vol. 37, 197: pp. 164-243.
     

    Attached Files:

  8. JJG Koopmans

    JJG Koopmans Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2014
    Messages:
    267
    Likes Received:
    232
    Gender:
    Male
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    This is regarding my reply to #1040 where it was supposed that a Kylchap would be better than the plain double chimney for the LMS Pacifics. Since the point is raised again, the drawing in the Stanier lecture shows a poorly scaled double chimney that could be greatly improved by fitting a multiple blastcap below both chimneys. This forces the chimneys to do what they are meant for: suck!
    Stanier could have known better since this was proven by Young of the University of Illinois back in 1933, I do not blame him however, since even Ell missed the point showing knowledge of Young during his comments on a 1953 lecture by Tuplin.
    Kind regards
    Jos Koopmans
     
  9. LMS2968

    LMS2968 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    1,734
    Likes Received:
    1,009
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Lecturer retired: Archivist of Stanier Mogul Fund
    Location:
    Wigan
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    But what would have been the point? The simple double chimney was demonstrably effective: the tests of 26th February 1939 proved that, and those on the rollers at Rugby showed that it could produce more steam than the engine could use before adhesion became a problem. The simple double chimney occupied less smokebox volume allowing easier maintenance for emptying, tube cleaning (everyday tasks), etc., and avoided the need to pay royalties, always an issue with locomotive CMEs.
     
    Black Jim likes this.
  10. JJG Koopmans

    JJG Koopmans Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2014
    Messages:
    267
    Likes Received:
    232
    Gender:
    Male
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    You are missing my point, alas. Already in 1933 Young showed experimentally the equivalence of a double length chimney and one with four orifices. See for yourself: https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/handle/2142/4435
    If you care to look at fig 16 page 76/77, fig 17 page 81 and fig 28 page 104. However, it appears that worldwide everyone missed this.
    Stanier choose for double chimneys which are the equivalent of a single chimney lengthened to a mere 141% which is of course the most expensive solution.
    Please note I do not blame Stanier and Ell at all, it only amazes me, but it also allowed me to write an interesting thesis with some proper theoretical explanations. It filled a gap left by others.
    Kind regards
    Jos Koopmans
     
  11. Spamcan81

    Spamcan81 Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2007
    Messages:
    25,509
    Likes Received:
    8,436
    Occupation:
    Training moles
    Location:
    The back of beyond
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Interesting that Crewe and eventually Swindon went the plain double chimney route, Brighton/Eastleigh went for Lemaitre and Doncaster/Darlington went the Kylchap route.
     
    Black Jim likes this.
  12. Eightpot

    Eightpot Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2006
    Messages:
    5,255
    Likes Received:
    649
    Location:
    Aylesbury
    Just get the impression that the Double-Kylchap system worked better on 3-cylinder locos than those with two or four.
     
  13. 8126

    8126 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2014
    Messages:
    487
    Likes Received:
    325
    Gender:
    Male
    But, with a more efficient exhaust back pressure is reduced for a given steam production, thus improving efficiency and reducing steam consumption. After all, if power is adequate then the goal should be to achieve the same power burning less fuel (for an LMS manager of the time). Since Jos' solution hardly represents an increase in complexity, the cost/benefit is sound.
     
  14. JMJR1000

    JMJR1000 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2009
    Messages:
    471
    Likes Received:
    204
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Cleethorpes
    How long has this discussion of the chimney exhaust been going on now...? Not that I'm complaining, it's just that for practically a few months now all I've seen in here is this topic! Never knew you could debate and discuss so long about chimneys... quite amazing really.
     
  15. JJG Koopmans

    JJG Koopmans Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2014
    Messages:
    267
    Likes Received:
    232
    Gender:
    Male
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    I am very sorry if I am boring you, however, I will "bite" whenever some explanation is needed.
    Quite a few people live with fairy tales which need a little contradiction, isn't education also goal of this forum?
    Kind regards
    Jos Koopmans
     
  16. W.Williams

    W.Williams Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2015
    Messages:
    439
    Likes Received:
    287
    Occupation:
    Mechanical Engineer
    Location:
    Aberdeen
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    I like the chimney discussions!
     
  17. LMS2968

    LMS2968 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    1,734
    Likes Received:
    1,009
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Lecturer retired: Archivist of Stanier Mogul Fund
    Location:
    Wigan
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Possibly, but let us look at the Gresley A1 class. 180 psi to 220. Short travel gear to long travel. Single chimney to Kylchap. All improvements, all more efficient of course. But then comes the temptation to make use of the extra capacity, and you finish up with the 4472 / 60103 scenario.
     
  18. JJG Koopmans

    JJG Koopmans Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2014
    Messages:
    267
    Likes Received:
    232
    Gender:
    Male
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Yes, but that was in the past! Right now with 70/75 mph restrictions our goal should be to hand over these beauties to
    the next generation in optimal condition meaning identical power against less effort!
    Kind regards
    Jos Koopmans
     
  19. JMJR1000

    JMJR1000 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2009
    Messages:
    471
    Likes Received:
    204
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Cleethorpes
    I think you'll find I was never criticising the fact people were going on about chimney exhausts, merely just that I found it both humorous and genuinely fascinating that that such a topic could bring up so much discussion.
    True I'll admit it's not a conversation that interests me much, but that doesn't mean I'd complain about it, as I know others do like the conversation. So I would not be so hasty to accuse me complaining of these topics as boring, if I were you, as that just isn't true.

    Besides, if were talking of a superior exhaust for chimneys, I'd place my money on the Giesl ejector myself...
     
  20. JJG Koopmans

    JJG Koopmans Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2014
    Messages:
    267
    Likes Received:
    232
    Gender:
    Male
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Well, sorry anyway! If you study the Giesl you will find there are reasons why there were quite a few single applications.
    If the test results of the 9F are studied that Giesl had a very poor performance at the top end, it was too small, Giesls error!
    Kind regards
    Jos Koopmans
     

Share This Page