I'm surprised with the above answers. I had thought this was a Diesel only club. It's nice to know that there are some knowledgeable members here.

Here's another term that is used with steam power. "Blowing down the boiler" Anybody?

Bernd

Gentlemen,

One group is talking about past locomotives and one group is talking about future locomotives. Great forum Bernd.

I know that Jerk Water Town was a place you had to use a bucket and jerk water from the creek for your locomotive. For a crew this would be a place to avoid if at all possible.

Regards,

John

************************************************************************************************************************************************

"Warning! You want a warning? O.K, I'm warning you not to do that again or I'll   give you another ticket." >>> South Carolina State Trooper

As the water is turned to steam, minerals dissolved in the water remain in the boiler and settle down toward the foundation bar of the firebox which is aptly called the "mud ring".  Left alone, the mud would build up and cut off water circulation causing the fire to burn through the firebox.  To prevent this, there are valves installed in the lowest points outside the firebox.  These valves are opened at regular intervals to blow out the mud.  The roar of high pressure hot water flashing to vapor is spectacular.  Who will be the first to produce a sound decoder to simulate this?

Sediment also collects in the barrel of the boiler, on the crown sheet, and on the tubes and flues.  Washout plugs are located at strategic points to allow monthly boiler wash routines to hose the mud and scale out of the boiler.

Water treatments were added to help precipitate minerals in the water and reduce the formation of scale (hard mineral deposits).

Oh yeah, the reason for using pure water to top off a lead-acid car (or locomotive) battery is that minerals can precipitate out of the water and insulate the battery plates or short them out at the bottom.  Electrolysis can convert water into oxygen and hydrogen if the battery is overcharged.  And thus, we tie in the battery power engine theme that started this thread.

Bernd, I did run into the use of blowers as I was researching this last night.

From what I understand, the blower is used to manage airflow up the stack, a pipe from the steam dome or turret, to produce an induced draft.

LIFE - Sep 27, 1963 - Page 23
http://books.google.com/books?id=NFIEAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA23&dq=firing%20steam%20locomotive&pg=PA23#v=onepage&q=firing%20steam%20locomotive&f=false

 Standard Mechanical Examinations on locomotive firing and running: ... - Page 373
Q13, 14, 15, 16, http://books.google.com/books?id=_7ZKAAAAMAAJ&dq=firing%20steam%20locomotive&pg=PA371#v=onepage&q=firing%20steam%20locomotive&f=false

The Operation of Steam Locomotives: Locomotive Engine Running and Management - Page 33 http://books.google.com/books?id=fSrKMIEgwYwC&lpg=PA338&dq=firing%20steam%20locomotive&pg=PA342#v=onepage&q=firing%20steam%20locomotive&f=false

I found some interesting numbers in the latter two volumes - same material, different words.

For instance,

1 lb of coal turns 6-8 [7-10]lbs of water into steam.

1lb of coal requires 200-250 cubic feet of air

1 open pop valve wastes 15 pounds of coal per minute.

I thought I saw a number for what a blower uses, but I can;t find it.  I have also run across a refernce on firing an oil locomotive, but I have passed over it.

I was wrong about one thing: I thought it was the water that was being controlled; it is indeed the airflow, by use of dampers, natural draft, induced draft [blowers], etc.  In otherwords, the fireman uses the flow of water to determine how much fuel and air to add and when.  The water itself flows into the boiler as it is needed by the boiler.

Paraphrase/quote:
Q13: If there is not enough air, the combustible gases escape through the flues and the stack, which means a loss of fuel. If there is too much air, the firebox sheets and the flues are cooled and the temperature of the water and steam in the boiler is reduced; the expansion and contraction produce leaks in the flues and staybolts, and fuel is wasted by the temperature of the gases being reduced below the igniting point.

Now for those of us who took Atmo/Metereology 101, we know that white clouds are not water vapor; clouds are water condensation. Further, the closer the water vapor is to the dew point in temperature, the quicker the vapor condenses into clouds. The higher in elevation one goes, the lower [the difference between ambient temperature/pressure and] the dew point is. If your locomotive is running cold [too much air] then your exhaust is of a lower temperature, hence you will see more condensation and sooner above the stack than you will if you are running where you need to be. At optimum firing conditions, your exhaust is of such temperature that it nearly fully dissiapated before it condenses, hence we don't see a cloud or we see a large very thin one.

Now this whole concept of black smoke bad, white smoke bad, gray wisp good appears to be what is the behind the "Smokeless Method of Firing," though I can't find much more to it.  Remember, the response is what would be expected of a first year candidate.

Q26: Have you made an effort to practice the smokeless method of firing? What results?

I have tried and on some locomotives and under certain conditions made success.  But failed on other engines and runs when conditions where adverse.[this is what a first year candidate should say; the question is repeated in the second year]

We have then this "Smokeless Firing." 

How much experience does it take to perfect "smokeless firing?" By first year firemen should have made an attempt and had some success.  By second year, I'd have to see what the next year's results should be - those results are not publicly viewable without buying the book...

However, if we say that the average work week is 40 hours, and the work year is 50 weeks long, then after a proposed 2000 hours of firing an engine, an acceptable candidate will have success roughly half the time on half the engines he runs, most often when all conditions are most favorable. 

I ask any one of us this: how many firemen do you think there are left who have that kind of experience under their belt?  The more I read about this subject, the more I get the sense that firing a steam locomotive with coal is a very delicate process; one does not just hop up onto the tender and do it.  It requires years of daily work on the same route[s] and and with the same locomotive[s] to "get it right."  I dare say the fireman was the most important person on the entire steam-run railroad, on the entire train, above even the engineer.  His actions alone pretty much determine to how long the engine would last between shop service. 

If we go back to AndreChapelon 's initial offering,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tmm4H6alHCE&feature=player_embedded

This is a chinese road where they still have [had?] the steam based infrastructure to support training and sustaining well seasoned firemen.  Let's look at the engines in a couple instances. 

This footage was all presumeable shot within the same time period, so we can assume the conditions are presumed to be similar, as is the fuel in either locomotive.  In some cases, we see two engines passing each other, two trains two tracks, both moving in the same direction and under load, so we can assume similar operating conditions.  The only variables left are the locomotives and their firemen.

From 0:00 to 0:40 we can see that the fireman on the left track has almost mastered smokeless firing on that engine in that moment.  The outer track[right] fireman is still working on it. From 0:48-1:05, again, that's near perfect. 5:48-6:03, about as good as you can get...

One other thing I notice is all these firemen are not running too rich [black smoke] in almost their entire run by.  All of them are seemingly well seasoned.

@ John, thanks. I did this more as a fluke. Seems like it turned into quite a discussion on steam and it idiosyncrasies. I'm hoping non-steam people read this come to the conclusion that a steam engine can run clean.

@ Rick, Your knowledge of steam is great.  I've been a steam fan ever since I was a little kid. Now I'm an older kid. I've built small stationary steam engines in my metal shop. I was going to build a 1½" scale 3 truck shay. Even have all the castings. But alas I need to narrow down my hobby interests to just one. HO scale won out.

Bernd

With a coal or wood burning locomotive, there are usually enough cinders going through the flues and tubes to knock out any soot build up.  With an oil burning locomotive, sand would be poured through the peep hole in the firebox door while the locomotive was working hard and creating enough draft to blow the sand through the tubes and flues to knock out the soot.  This would create a rich black cloud of smoke.

West Side Shays burned bunker crude oil and had a steam line to the fuel tank which would heat the oil on cold days.  The steam blew directly into the oil making a rumbling sound if it was opened wide.  There was also a large rectangular sand box mounted on the front of the fuel tank which formed the back of the cab.  When the tourists would come up into the cab, the kids would ask what was in the box (sand box).  The fireman would say that there was an alligator in there and would crank open the heater valve to create a loud rumble.  After this startlement, he would explain the use of the sand to knock soot out of the tubes and flues.  Flue sanding was actually done after the morning steam-up, as the Shay was backing down to the train.  The locomotive was worked hard against the independent brake to create a strong draft.  The soot and sand would not fall on the locomotive or train by doing this.

Oh yes, at West Side, we did weld together two electric golf carts to make a narrow-gauge speeder... speaking of electric engines.

the invention of the "sand blaster".

Rick, any pictures of that electrical contraption?

Bernd

Sorry, Bernd, no pics of the electric speeder.  It was built as a handy way for PR folk to show visitors around the West Side park.  The PR folk were not railroad savvy, and I saw one gentleman stop and line a switch, fail to check the point alignment, remount the speeder, and then go all over the ground trying to go through a wrong switch.  While the electric dinner boats were well maintained and operated by regular staff, the electric speeder did not get routine attention, and sort of faded away.  Going on the ground probably damaged the batteries.  Note that the first attempts at NS battery power suffered from 4 MPH couplings.  At West Side, for longer trips down the canyon line, we preferred the old Model 'A' Ford motors.  Track maintenance was handled off-rail or with a work train powered by a Plymouth locomotive.

We did replace gas motors with golf cart motors and electrics for a park railway in Oakland.  In this case, slow speed was essential and the battery electric components were proven through the years of golf cart use.  At the time, electronic speed controls and battery chargers helped make battery electric systems more reliable than small gasoline engines.  Note that railroads have settled on electric motors for final drives.  Hydraulic drives (Krauss-Maffei, Alco) have not been successful in this country, but small hydraulic drives have been developed that work on park locomotives.  Direct mechanical drives have not been successful except for small units like the Plymouth locomotive... you just need to weigh over 150 pounds to push in the clutch.

Anyway, I too have focused on HO while forsaking live steam.  You can build a big operating HO layout for the same time, money, and effort that would go into that 1 1/2 inch scale Shay.  And there is something undignified about squatting down on a little locomotive and chugging around the track with your knees up by your chin. 

Interest in steam locomotives seems to have taken over this thread, so let's start a new thread on "Steam Locomotive Lore".