Lamont boiler
Posted by dullfig
|
Re: Lamont boiler January 24, 2011 09:58AM |
Hi Mike,
I say "nitpicking", because minor issues were all I could find to comment on. No major problems that I can spot.
Putting the Lamont coil outlet a couple turns down the reserve drum should overcome the "spread out" and "water trap" issues. Next time the grade reverses, or returns to level, any trapped and spread water should return to the original water-level. Plus it looks like you have a "steam dome" under the separator at the sat steam outlet/throttle, to help keep water where it needs to be.
Agree on a single-path "slow spiral" coil. Especially for 1.5" nominal [note that magic word "nominal" folks, it has messed me up in the past] Sched 40 pipe, adding a lot of fittings and interconnections for multiple paths gets troublesome. I had some Baker boiler factory blueprints, and gave Tom Kimmel a copy for the SACA archives on his last visit -- he said the Club files had no such item. So SACA HQ is (now) the place to go for detailed Baker boiler data folks. Anyway, from those 'prints the Baker's outer reserve coil definitely looks like the adjacent turns were interconnected with welded-in passages. Yep, lots of extra welding work, and might actually add problems with water level on grades, not to mention stresses from pressure/temp variations. The aforementioned height/diameter/tilt issue, blithely ignored at one's peril. I think that Jim is onto something with the outside-plain-barrel-coil reserve.
Mike, how could I forget the hills in your neighborhood! They were even a challenge for my brand-new 2005-model gas rentacar [I dubbed it "the dirtiest car in Britain" after the birds had at it at Haslemere and in the New Forest] -- and that was no slouch in the power department. Scaling those hills provided excellent first-hand demonstrations of effortless Stanley hill-climbing power. If only the Gatwick rentacar agency had a Stanley H5 available!
"See The Isles In Style". I think some of the grades we Stanleyed were steeper than 25%. There are many hills like that around here too, some even steeper [south end of Bandini Street, San Diego, for instance], so the "tilt issue" is always on my mind.
I also have early childhood memories of my Mom navigating the infamous "crookedest street in the world" [Google it] in San Francisco in a Mustang-engined (302V8) 1963 Ford Galaxie 500 Country Squire (station wagon; Estate in UK I believe), which left an impression. Later family cars included a 1973 Ford Gran Torino wagon with the astoundingly vast and gas-gobbling [& early California-smog-controlled] "400 Windsor" V8 mill; see "The Brady Bunch" early-1970s cheese-classic TV show for a look at that road-battleship. I learned driving in that beast. Like driving a giant wet sponge, though it did have some pep with less than 20 kids on board.
The big thing with Lamonts is that circulator pump and its shaft seal and motor/controls. Get that right, and you're "in like Flynn". Very doable, but no "piece of cake" despite initial appearances. Rotor, then housing and high-pressure shaft seals, then plumbing and motor/controls. You can handle it no problem Mike, and a great project/performance, but for other builders (& aspiring builders) I dunno. Personally I went over it fifteen ways from Sunday back in '06 and ended up designing an innovative and "hot" natural-circulation teakettle instead. Blueprints now on shelf awaiting build/test.
Lightweight 1923 car for your new Lamont/steam plant? Hmm. Could this be a particular very rare/amazing vehicle which I saw in your shop in '05, whose uber-legendary (Italian? French?) designer might roll over in his grave at the idea of steam-converting it? Well, if so, a good "steamversion" might be easier [and far nicer-running] than tracking down [impossible] original parts for authentic IC restoration... not to mention a really unique and cool steam car... hope I'm not assuming/guessing too much here, wow that would be fantastic...
Hi Caleb,
Interesting reference to the "lost generation" of 1930s-through-1950s steam car developers. Today most steam folk know about the pre-1930 "classic" era, and the 1960s-1970s "clean air car" era, of steam cars, but not about the extensive experimental steam car work done in-between. Both the iconoclastic "young bucks" of the 1960s-70s era, and the devoted fans/preservationists of the pre-1930-era production steam cars, seem to have written-off, ignored, and/or forgotten that hapless 1930s-50s "in-between" era. And almost all of the equipment from that time has been lost. This is an intriguing steam car historical niche for an ambitious steam "newbie" to specialize in, should anyone be looking for an obscure and neglected techno-historical specialty to explore. Who knows, significant work may have been done then, and lost/forgotten.
Caleb, the name Leslie rings a bell for me too. I think this was mentioned in the SACA Bulletin, some time within the last couple years. I recall photos of smiling young fellers in zoot suits, standing next to 1940s-era cars converted to steam power.
Forced-circulation boilers on the road? Let's not forget our good friend and fellow SACA member Tony Grzyb, with his "build it, run it, and find out" philosophy and nice-running forced-circulation-boiler steam motorcycle. He independently developed his plunger-pump-circulated boiler before ever hearing about Lamont's work, in fact even before George Nutz published his Lamont paper. I well remember hanging out at the Gingerman racetrack in southwest Michigan, at the summer 2005 SACA "Nationals", with Tony enjoying endless solo laps around the racetrack grounds on his steam motorbike in the distance while everybody else was kicking tires and talking about steam theory and other machines. Next Nationals I get to, I'm hanging with the T-Man.
As for IC-engine steam-conversions, somebody once said "radically different working fluids require radically different expanders". Oh, wait. That was me.
Andy is right, lots has been written about converting IC engines to run on steam. Serious understatement.
New folks, please take the time to check out the HUGE amount of archived/older posts in this Forum. You'll find lots of "treasures" in those older posts from 5-10 years ago, or more. Folks who have been studying/building/running steam vehicles for many years, or even many decades, often (and very understandably) get tired of repeating themselves again and again on various topics, and they give up on it. But if you, dear reader, will take the time to scroll back to the lively and often friendly discussions from many many years ago, which are archived here, then you will find all sorts of fun, fascinating, and useful insights on all sorts of steam-technology topics.
From my own experience, I can say that researching the steam literature, both internet and print, takes a lot of time and effort. But hidden here and there in the literature, often in unsuspected and surprising places, and often in unassuming and easily-overlooked brief comments, you will find useful pieces of information -- "gold nuggets" lost and hidden in huge amounts of worthless gravel and sand -- which may transform your thinking, your ideas, and your projects, from a "kooky amateur dud" into a great-running, and perhaps world-changing, success.
Best wishes and abundant success to all!
Peter Brow
[www.angelfire.com]
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/30/2011 07:15AM by Peter Brow.
I say "nitpicking", because minor issues were all I could find to comment on. No major problems that I can spot.
Putting the Lamont coil outlet a couple turns down the reserve drum should overcome the "spread out" and "water trap" issues. Next time the grade reverses, or returns to level, any trapped and spread water should return to the original water-level. Plus it looks like you have a "steam dome" under the separator at the sat steam outlet/throttle, to help keep water where it needs to be.
Agree on a single-path "slow spiral" coil. Especially for 1.5" nominal [note that magic word "nominal" folks, it has messed me up in the past] Sched 40 pipe, adding a lot of fittings and interconnections for multiple paths gets troublesome. I had some Baker boiler factory blueprints, and gave Tom Kimmel a copy for the SACA archives on his last visit -- he said the Club files had no such item. So SACA HQ is (now) the place to go for detailed Baker boiler data folks. Anyway, from those 'prints the Baker's outer reserve coil definitely looks like the adjacent turns were interconnected with welded-in passages. Yep, lots of extra welding work, and might actually add problems with water level on grades, not to mention stresses from pressure/temp variations. The aforementioned height/diameter/tilt issue, blithely ignored at one's peril. I think that Jim is onto something with the outside-plain-barrel-coil reserve.
Mike, how could I forget the hills in your neighborhood! They were even a challenge for my brand-new 2005-model gas rentacar [I dubbed it "the dirtiest car in Britain" after the birds had at it at Haslemere and in the New Forest] -- and that was no slouch in the power department. Scaling those hills provided excellent first-hand demonstrations of effortless Stanley hill-climbing power. If only the Gatwick rentacar agency had a Stanley H5 available!
"See The Isles In Style". I think some of the grades we Stanleyed were steeper than 25%. There are many hills like that around here too, some even steeper [south end of Bandini Street, San Diego, for instance], so the "tilt issue" is always on my mind.I also have early childhood memories of my Mom navigating the infamous "crookedest street in the world" [Google it] in San Francisco in a Mustang-engined (302V8) 1963 Ford Galaxie 500 Country Squire (station wagon; Estate in UK I believe), which left an impression. Later family cars included a 1973 Ford Gran Torino wagon with the astoundingly vast and gas-gobbling [& early California-smog-controlled] "400 Windsor" V8 mill; see "The Brady Bunch" early-1970s cheese-classic TV show for a look at that road-battleship. I learned driving in that beast. Like driving a giant wet sponge, though it did have some pep with less than 20 kids on board.
The big thing with Lamonts is that circulator pump and its shaft seal and motor/controls. Get that right, and you're "in like Flynn". Very doable, but no "piece of cake" despite initial appearances. Rotor, then housing and high-pressure shaft seals, then plumbing and motor/controls. You can handle it no problem Mike, and a great project/performance, but for other builders (& aspiring builders) I dunno. Personally I went over it fifteen ways from Sunday back in '06 and ended up designing an innovative and "hot" natural-circulation teakettle instead. Blueprints now on shelf awaiting build/test.
Lightweight 1923 car for your new Lamont/steam plant? Hmm. Could this be a particular very rare/amazing vehicle which I saw in your shop in '05, whose uber-legendary (Italian? French?) designer might roll over in his grave at the idea of steam-converting it? Well, if so, a good "steamversion" might be easier [and far nicer-running] than tracking down [impossible] original parts for authentic IC restoration... not to mention a really unique and cool steam car... hope I'm not assuming/guessing too much here, wow that would be fantastic...
Hi Caleb,
Interesting reference to the "lost generation" of 1930s-through-1950s steam car developers. Today most steam folk know about the pre-1930 "classic" era, and the 1960s-1970s "clean air car" era, of steam cars, but not about the extensive experimental steam car work done in-between. Both the iconoclastic "young bucks" of the 1960s-70s era, and the devoted fans/preservationists of the pre-1930-era production steam cars, seem to have written-off, ignored, and/or forgotten that hapless 1930s-50s "in-between" era. And almost all of the equipment from that time has been lost. This is an intriguing steam car historical niche for an ambitious steam "newbie" to specialize in, should anyone be looking for an obscure and neglected techno-historical specialty to explore. Who knows, significant work may have been done then, and lost/forgotten.
Caleb, the name Leslie rings a bell for me too. I think this was mentioned in the SACA Bulletin, some time within the last couple years. I recall photos of smiling young fellers in zoot suits, standing next to 1940s-era cars converted to steam power.
Forced-circulation boilers on the road? Let's not forget our good friend and fellow SACA member Tony Grzyb, with his "build it, run it, and find out" philosophy and nice-running forced-circulation-boiler steam motorcycle. He independently developed his plunger-pump-circulated boiler before ever hearing about Lamont's work, in fact even before George Nutz published his Lamont paper. I well remember hanging out at the Gingerman racetrack in southwest Michigan, at the summer 2005 SACA "Nationals", with Tony enjoying endless solo laps around the racetrack grounds on his steam motorbike in the distance while everybody else was kicking tires and talking about steam theory and other machines. Next Nationals I get to, I'm hanging with the T-Man.
As for IC-engine steam-conversions, somebody once said "radically different working fluids require radically different expanders". Oh, wait. That was me.
Andy is right, lots has been written about converting IC engines to run on steam. Serious understatement.
New folks, please take the time to check out the HUGE amount of archived/older posts in this Forum. You'll find lots of "treasures" in those older posts from 5-10 years ago, or more. Folks who have been studying/building/running steam vehicles for many years, or even many decades, often (and very understandably) get tired of repeating themselves again and again on various topics, and they give up on it. But if you, dear reader, will take the time to scroll back to the lively and often friendly discussions from many many years ago, which are archived here, then you will find all sorts of fun, fascinating, and useful insights on all sorts of steam-technology topics.
From my own experience, I can say that researching the steam literature, both internet and print, takes a lot of time and effort. But hidden here and there in the literature, often in unsuspected and surprising places, and often in unassuming and easily-overlooked brief comments, you will find useful pieces of information -- "gold nuggets" lost and hidden in huge amounts of worthless gravel and sand -- which may transform your thinking, your ideas, and your projects, from a "kooky amateur dud" into a great-running, and perhaps world-changing, success.
Best wishes and abundant success to all!
Peter Brow
[www.angelfire.com]
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/30/2011 07:15AM by Peter Brow.
|
Re: Lamont boiler January 24, 2011 03:25PM |
Peter Brow Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hi Mike,
>
> Lightweight 1923 car for your new Lamont/steam
> plant? Hmm. Could this be a particular very
> rare/amazing vehicle which I saw in your shop in
> '05, whose uber-legendary (Italian? French?)
> designer might roll over in his grave at the idea
> of steam-converting it? Well, if so, a good
> "steamversion" might be easier than tracking down
> original parts for authentic IC restoration...
> not to mention a really unique and cool steam
> car... hope I'm not assuming/guessing too much
> here, wow that would be fantastic...
>>
> Peter Brow
> [www.angelfire.com]
No Peter not that one but another rather more peculiar car - a 1923 GN. One of these was converted to steam in the 1930's by Alex Moulton who achieved fame later by designing the rubber suspension of the 1960's Issigonis Mini, and the Moulton bicycle. The Moulton GN still exists - pictured last year in The Steam Car Magazine. Dr Moulton himself is still on the go. We have a GN on the shelf and if I can convince myself that I can solve the pump seal problem and make a nice light Lamont generator I propose to fit a 1911 Model 60 Stanley engine, under the floor, driving by chain from a countershaft drive off the Stanley crankgear. The GN also had chain drive with three sets of chains engaged to choice by dog clutches on the countershaft. It looks a complete natural to instal the Stanley engine but it depends on me being convinced it will work!
GNs were not noted for their reliability and my chums who know of this say I must have flipped.
The "legendary designer" did of course build a steam car. He also made a superb straight eight steam railcar engine which is in the French National Railway Museum in Mulhouse.
Mike
Mike
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 01/24/2011 05:10PM by Mike Clark.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hi Mike,
>
> Lightweight 1923 car for your new Lamont/steam
> plant? Hmm. Could this be a particular very
> rare/amazing vehicle which I saw in your shop in
> '05, whose uber-legendary (Italian? French?)
> designer might roll over in his grave at the idea
> of steam-converting it? Well, if so, a good
> "steamversion" might be easier than tracking down
> original parts for authentic IC restoration...
> not to mention a really unique and cool steam
> car... hope I'm not assuming/guessing too much
> here, wow that would be fantastic...
>>
> Peter Brow
> [www.angelfire.com]
No Peter not that one but another rather more peculiar car - a 1923 GN. One of these was converted to steam in the 1930's by Alex Moulton who achieved fame later by designing the rubber suspension of the 1960's Issigonis Mini, and the Moulton bicycle. The Moulton GN still exists - pictured last year in The Steam Car Magazine. Dr Moulton himself is still on the go. We have a GN on the shelf and if I can convince myself that I can solve the pump seal problem and make a nice light Lamont generator I propose to fit a 1911 Model 60 Stanley engine, under the floor, driving by chain from a countershaft drive off the Stanley crankgear. The GN also had chain drive with three sets of chains engaged to choice by dog clutches on the countershaft. It looks a complete natural to instal the Stanley engine but it depends on me being convinced it will work!
GNs were not noted for their reliability and my chums who know of this say I must have flipped.
The "legendary designer" did of course build a steam car. He also made a superb straight eight steam railcar engine which is in the French National Railway Museum in Mulhouse.
Mike
Mike
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 01/24/2011 05:10PM by Mike Clark.
|
Re: Lamont boiler January 25, 2011 08:28AM |
Hi Mike,
How did I overlook our mystery carmaker's steam work! I was just reading about it a couple months ago...
The GN [General Notors? ] car sounds interesting. I never heard of it, and will look it up.
Many years back I planned to mount a Stanley-type engine solidly on a VW chassis and drive the vehicle through a VW transaxle with an extra gear to compensate for the drive ratio. Among other issues that turned up later, the inherent frame flex/shake of this type of engine made me glad that I never built that drivetrain as designed. It probably would have shaken my teeth out. In Stanleys of course the axle-mounted engine is isolated from the chassis, and the wheels/brakes act as giant flywheels; both features keeping that engine flex/shake away from the chassis.
But it just occurred to me that with special engine mounting and/or a flywheel, a non-axle-mounted Stanley [or similar] engine might run very nicely. Your chain drive idea could easily be part of that...
Hi Van,
For my own project anyway, and possibly other projects with relatively limited resources, I think that steam car engines with double-acting cylinders, piston or D-slide valves, and insulated cylinders thermally isolated from the crankcase -- among other radically different [from IC] features -- log more road miles and perform better than steam-converted IC engines and "IC-like" steam engines. With a larger budget, top professional engineers, and/or some hard-to-quantify [or unknown to me] project/design advantages, then IC-like engine design features might give better results on the road.
I hear ya on saving design/fabrication work by converting IC engines to run on steam. It is a very attractive idea. Personally, every time I tried to figure out how to do it, my efforts to solve the problems reported by others always led me to more work and expense overall than building a simplified "classic" steam engine. Alas, I had to get pretty deep into design attempts before this showed up. Before arriving at my current plans around 2000, I "flip-flopped" between the "scratch-built classic" and "IC-style or IC-conversion" approaches many times. Most steam guys seem to brainstorm many different things before settling on one to build. Comes with the territory.
It is a huge topic, vastly more complex than it appears at first. If the steam bug bites hard enough, it can turn into a lifelong learning process.
Yes, finding accurate and useful information on steam cars can be very difficult, but on the bright side, it has become much easier with the internet. I learned more in my first few years of internet access than I had learned in my preceding 20 years of print media. People discovering steam today have it a lot easier. A lot of difficult critical thinking and "reading between the lines" is often needed. I share your concern about the loss of steam knowledge and steam equipment.
Lamont circulator pumps move 5x as much water, or more, by weight, not volume, as the steam generated in the boiler. See Keenan & Keyes Steam Tables for density of water at high pressure at boiling point -- lower than room-temperature water. For a steam car Lamont, centrifugal pump shaft seals and pump rotor housings need to resist high rpms, 500psig or higher, and temperatures of ~470 degrees F or more, and pressure/thermal cycling from ambient to maximum. Seals and housings must be very strong for safety. Component flex under load and differential thermal expansion during both operation and on/off cycling, can be issues. I ran into all sorts of things.
George Nutz used about a 5 psig pressure differential between pump inlet and pump outlet, and this will vary depending on the flow resistance in the evaporating circuit -- depends on bore, length, bends of tube/effective-length, flow rate, and other factors. Circulating-pump horsepower can be minimal, as George has demonstrated and reported in his paper and in many fascinating posts on this Forum.
Boiler tubes in water-tube boilers are indeed exposed to exhaust gases -- and often to intense radiant heat from the fire.
For condensing steam systems, I plan to use only non-detergent and non-compounded oils throughout. Detergent and compounded oils emulsify with water in both crankcases and water tanks and are harder to separate. Result: "mayo" to explode out of crankcase, clogged condensers, and cloudy feedwater to foul boiler. Compounded special steam cylinder oils contain tallow and other ingredients which break down into acidic byproducts and corrode/contaminate almost every part of a condensing steam car powerplant. Compounded oils are formulated for use in _non-condensing_ steam systems. All condensing steam car manufacturers advised against using compounded oils in their cars. Modern experimenters like Barrett used non-detergent synthetic oils, 30W or 40W. Doble used 40W non-detergent petroleum-base motor oil. Mobil SHC634 ND synthetic oil is reported to give excellent results in condensing Stanleys. Inexpensive petroleum-base non-detergent motor oils are also available.
Hi Ben,
Personally I very much appreciate the importance of David Nergaard's extensive on-the-road real-world experimental work. I follow all of his reports with great interest, and have made many important design changes in my own project based on his results.
Peter
How did I overlook our mystery carmaker's steam work! I was just reading about it a couple months ago...
The GN [General Notors?
] car sounds interesting. I never heard of it, and will look it up.Many years back I planned to mount a Stanley-type engine solidly on a VW chassis and drive the vehicle through a VW transaxle with an extra gear to compensate for the drive ratio. Among other issues that turned up later, the inherent frame flex/shake of this type of engine made me glad that I never built that drivetrain as designed. It probably would have shaken my teeth out. In Stanleys of course the axle-mounted engine is isolated from the chassis, and the wheels/brakes act as giant flywheels; both features keeping that engine flex/shake away from the chassis.
But it just occurred to me that with special engine mounting and/or a flywheel, a non-axle-mounted Stanley [or similar] engine might run very nicely. Your chain drive idea could easily be part of that...
Hi Van,
For my own project anyway, and possibly other projects with relatively limited resources, I think that steam car engines with double-acting cylinders, piston or D-slide valves, and insulated cylinders thermally isolated from the crankcase -- among other radically different [from IC] features -- log more road miles and perform better than steam-converted IC engines and "IC-like" steam engines. With a larger budget, top professional engineers, and/or some hard-to-quantify [or unknown to me] project/design advantages, then IC-like engine design features might give better results on the road.
I hear ya on saving design/fabrication work by converting IC engines to run on steam. It is a very attractive idea. Personally, every time I tried to figure out how to do it, my efforts to solve the problems reported by others always led me to more work and expense overall than building a simplified "classic" steam engine. Alas, I had to get pretty deep into design attempts before this showed up. Before arriving at my current plans around 2000, I "flip-flopped" between the "scratch-built classic" and "IC-style or IC-conversion" approaches many times. Most steam guys seem to brainstorm many different things before settling on one to build. Comes with the territory.
It is a huge topic, vastly more complex than it appears at first. If the steam bug bites hard enough, it can turn into a lifelong learning process.
Yes, finding accurate and useful information on steam cars can be very difficult, but on the bright side, it has become much easier with the internet. I learned more in my first few years of internet access than I had learned in my preceding 20 years of print media. People discovering steam today have it a lot easier. A lot of difficult critical thinking and "reading between the lines" is often needed. I share your concern about the loss of steam knowledge and steam equipment.
Lamont circulator pumps move 5x as much water, or more, by weight, not volume, as the steam generated in the boiler. See Keenan & Keyes Steam Tables for density of water at high pressure at boiling point -- lower than room-temperature water. For a steam car Lamont, centrifugal pump shaft seals and pump rotor housings need to resist high rpms, 500psig or higher, and temperatures of ~470 degrees F or more, and pressure/thermal cycling from ambient to maximum. Seals and housings must be very strong for safety. Component flex under load and differential thermal expansion during both operation and on/off cycling, can be issues. I ran into all sorts of things.
George Nutz used about a 5 psig pressure differential between pump inlet and pump outlet, and this will vary depending on the flow resistance in the evaporating circuit -- depends on bore, length, bends of tube/effective-length, flow rate, and other factors. Circulating-pump horsepower can be minimal, as George has demonstrated and reported in his paper and in many fascinating posts on this Forum.
Boiler tubes in water-tube boilers are indeed exposed to exhaust gases -- and often to intense radiant heat from the fire.
For condensing steam systems, I plan to use only non-detergent and non-compounded oils throughout. Detergent and compounded oils emulsify with water in both crankcases and water tanks and are harder to separate. Result: "mayo" to explode out of crankcase, clogged condensers, and cloudy feedwater to foul boiler. Compounded special steam cylinder oils contain tallow and other ingredients which break down into acidic byproducts and corrode/contaminate almost every part of a condensing steam car powerplant. Compounded oils are formulated for use in _non-condensing_ steam systems. All condensing steam car manufacturers advised against using compounded oils in their cars. Modern experimenters like Barrett used non-detergent synthetic oils, 30W or 40W. Doble used 40W non-detergent petroleum-base motor oil. Mobil SHC634 ND synthetic oil is reported to give excellent results in condensing Stanleys. Inexpensive petroleum-base non-detergent motor oils are also available.
Hi Ben,
Personally I very much appreciate the importance of David Nergaard's extensive on-the-road real-world experimental work. I follow all of his reports with great interest, and have made many important design changes in my own project based on his results.
Peter
|
Re: Lamont boiler January 26, 2011 06:26AM |
Hi Van,
No problemo. Check out the Babcock & Wilcox book, older editions, for info on the fascinating subject of boiler design, covers all the basics and far beyond. Kent's Mechanical Engineer's Handbook, 1936 edition, is good too.
A lot of things in a project like this are very vehicle-specific. You are considering converting a BMW. If I am not mistaken, these use (used?) the same oil supply -- and very special(/pricey) oil -- for both crankcase and transmission? Water content of oil might cause problems with the tranny -- especially corroding antifriction bearings.
Even if you avoid mayo with ND oil, and use a steam loop in crankcase or a Barrett centrifuge (tested blueprints available) to remove water, there is still water in the oil & crankcase. There will always be some in there, working away at rings, bearings, cams, and so on. Doesn't take much to accelerate the corrosion rate of various IC parts which were not designed to operate in a wet environment. Some post-run engine dry-out procedure/equipment might minimize this. Water can settle out in strange and unsuspected places.
BMW head gaskets and custom gears/drive ratio? Good questions!
Another issue is that in-line engine blocks, and/or multi-cylinder heads, can warp at steam engine temperatures, bending the whole engine. Hot top, cold bottom, differential thermal expansion. This is one reason why Barrett and many others chose to convert aircooled VW engines. Cylinders in those are separate and removeable rather than cast several into one block, and for a "steamversion", each jug can be given a separate cylinder head. Harry recently mentioned that this is why his engine has separate cylinders and heads. Barrett and others tried straight-6 Mercury outboard engine conversions back in the 1960s and 1970s, and had engine-bend problems from differential expansion of top and bottom of the long head/block.
Pumping exhaust gases through the coolant passages? Maybe. Possible problem: while warming up engine, exhaust condenses in there, leaving corrosive residues. Some North American fuel has sulphur in it, meaning SO2 and [with H2O] sulphuric acid. Run the fire hot enough, and there can be NOX and [+H2O=] nitric acid. And burner hiccups depositing carbon are not unknown in experimental work. Also separate blower for that, need blower rotor/housing good to 300F at least, and another HP loss and more equipment to buy or build, squeeze-in/install, and work out drive means for. Only about 10-20% of the fuel energy is still left in the exhaust gas anyway, not sure how helpful that would be when warming up a big gas-engine block (lots bigger and lots slower to heat up than a couple insulated steam cylinders) -- especially with engine and boiler running at low load/developed HP most of the time under road conditions, and with a high expansion ratio.
You might even end up with the cylinders _heating_ the exhaust blown thru the coolant passages, and exhaust gases _cooling_ the cylinders/steam. Cylinders/heads, towards the top, will run hotter than boiler exhaust gases, if the boiler has a decent economizer and if the engine has high expansion...
Correct, with a big enough boiler and fuel budget, the heck with engine heat loss and efficiency. But will enough boiler fit, and if so where? I'm not suggesting it won't, just that it needs looking at.
Custom camshaft and/or custom cam drive if it will fit, to open/close each exhaust valve once per revolution, instead of once per 2 revolutions as in a 4-stroke IC engine. Solenoid injector valves for high-pressure superheated steam are not off-the-shelf, a whole R&D project all by itself, venturing far into little-explored territory. Though possibly Jeremy Holmes could help out there.
Does your BMW engine have an aluminum block and head? If so, will those handle steam engine temperatures? I don't know of any aluminum IC conversions which propelled a car. All the VW-engine converters I know of, replaced the aluminum heads with custom steel heads -- and used iron cylinders.
Barrett's last engine had thin titanium disks bolted onto the crowns of stock aluminum pistons, with sealed air gaps machined into pistons beneath the disks. This was to prevent crankcase splash from cooling the steamed surface of the piston crown from the underside. Baffles to keep oil splash off the insides/bottoms of pistons, with slots for conrods to go through, have been mentioned. Also Barrett probably didn't want 800F steam contacting bare aluminum piston crowns.
Barrett also used stock iron VW cylinders in that engine, with the fins machined off. It was a counterflow engine, with separate OHC poppet valves for intake and exhaust. His earlier engines had custom unaflow cylinders and bash valves, but reportedly he got fed up with the short service lives of bash valves.
Well, those are a few of the (re-)design issues which I have picked up from people who have been involved in IC-to-steam engine conversion projects. I still find it fascinating, and it is certainly controversial and challenging. Lots of guys have had many years of fun, and learned a lot, with these kinds of projects. I learned a lot just trying to design one.
I should probably hand off the question-answering on this topic to the guys who have actually built and run steam-converted IC engines. They know a lot more about it than I do.
=======
Hi Caleb,
Definitely a shame. On the bright side, WW2 resulted in many kerosene-powered Stanleys being rescued from junkyards and sheds and returned to service, providing useful transportation and a morale boost during a time of severe gasoline and tire rationing. They "did their part for the war effort".
=========
Peter
No problemo. Check out the Babcock & Wilcox book, older editions, for info on the fascinating subject of boiler design, covers all the basics and far beyond. Kent's Mechanical Engineer's Handbook, 1936 edition, is good too.
A lot of things in a project like this are very vehicle-specific. You are considering converting a BMW. If I am not mistaken, these use (used?) the same oil supply -- and very special(/pricey) oil -- for both crankcase and transmission? Water content of oil might cause problems with the tranny -- especially corroding antifriction bearings.
Even if you avoid mayo with ND oil, and use a steam loop in crankcase or a Barrett centrifuge (tested blueprints available) to remove water, there is still water in the oil & crankcase. There will always be some in there, working away at rings, bearings, cams, and so on. Doesn't take much to accelerate the corrosion rate of various IC parts which were not designed to operate in a wet environment. Some post-run engine dry-out procedure/equipment might minimize this. Water can settle out in strange and unsuspected places.
BMW head gaskets and custom gears/drive ratio? Good questions!
Another issue is that in-line engine blocks, and/or multi-cylinder heads, can warp at steam engine temperatures, bending the whole engine. Hot top, cold bottom, differential thermal expansion. This is one reason why Barrett and many others chose to convert aircooled VW engines. Cylinders in those are separate and removeable rather than cast several into one block, and for a "steamversion", each jug can be given a separate cylinder head. Harry recently mentioned that this is why his engine has separate cylinders and heads. Barrett and others tried straight-6 Mercury outboard engine conversions back in the 1960s and 1970s, and had engine-bend problems from differential expansion of top and bottom of the long head/block.
Pumping exhaust gases through the coolant passages? Maybe. Possible problem: while warming up engine, exhaust condenses in there, leaving corrosive residues. Some North American fuel has sulphur in it, meaning SO2 and [with H2O] sulphuric acid. Run the fire hot enough, and there can be NOX and [+H2O=] nitric acid. And burner hiccups depositing carbon are not unknown in experimental work. Also separate blower for that, need blower rotor/housing good to 300F at least, and another HP loss and more equipment to buy or build, squeeze-in/install, and work out drive means for. Only about 10-20% of the fuel energy is still left in the exhaust gas anyway, not sure how helpful that would be when warming up a big gas-engine block (lots bigger and lots slower to heat up than a couple insulated steam cylinders) -- especially with engine and boiler running at low load/developed HP most of the time under road conditions, and with a high expansion ratio.
You might even end up with the cylinders _heating_ the exhaust blown thru the coolant passages, and exhaust gases _cooling_ the cylinders/steam. Cylinders/heads, towards the top, will run hotter than boiler exhaust gases, if the boiler has a decent economizer and if the engine has high expansion...
Correct, with a big enough boiler and fuel budget, the heck with engine heat loss and efficiency. But will enough boiler fit, and if so where? I'm not suggesting it won't, just that it needs looking at.
Custom camshaft and/or custom cam drive if it will fit, to open/close each exhaust valve once per revolution, instead of once per 2 revolutions as in a 4-stroke IC engine. Solenoid injector valves for high-pressure superheated steam are not off-the-shelf, a whole R&D project all by itself, venturing far into little-explored territory. Though possibly Jeremy Holmes could help out there.
Does your BMW engine have an aluminum block and head? If so, will those handle steam engine temperatures? I don't know of any aluminum IC conversions which propelled a car. All the VW-engine converters I know of, replaced the aluminum heads with custom steel heads -- and used iron cylinders.
Barrett's last engine had thin titanium disks bolted onto the crowns of stock aluminum pistons, with sealed air gaps machined into pistons beneath the disks. This was to prevent crankcase splash from cooling the steamed surface of the piston crown from the underside. Baffles to keep oil splash off the insides/bottoms of pistons, with slots for conrods to go through, have been mentioned. Also Barrett probably didn't want 800F steam contacting bare aluminum piston crowns.
Barrett also used stock iron VW cylinders in that engine, with the fins machined off. It was a counterflow engine, with separate OHC poppet valves for intake and exhaust. His earlier engines had custom unaflow cylinders and bash valves, but reportedly he got fed up with the short service lives of bash valves.
Well, those are a few of the (re-)design issues which I have picked up from people who have been involved in IC-to-steam engine conversion projects. I still find it fascinating, and it is certainly controversial and challenging. Lots of guys have had many years of fun, and learned a lot, with these kinds of projects. I learned a lot just trying to design one.
I should probably hand off the question-answering on this topic to the guys who have actually built and run steam-converted IC engines. They know a lot more about it than I do.
=======
Hi Caleb,
Definitely a shame. On the bright side, WW2 resulted in many kerosene-powered Stanleys being rescued from junkyards and sheds and returned to service, providing useful transportation and a morale boost during a time of severe gasoline and tire rationing. They "did their part for the war effort".
=========
Peter
|
Re: Lamont boiler February 04, 2011 07:11AM |
Stumpf prefered a steam jacket around the head and upper part of the cylinder.
Another way is Bill Ryan's hot head gokart, I believe it was quite lively.
Brian
Another way is Bill Ryan's hot head gokart, I believe it was quite lively.
Brian
|
Re: Lamont boiler March 02, 2011 02:01PM |
George, I've sent you a private message. I hope it gets to you.
Andy
Everything I have read about lamonts and monotubes indicates that for similar outputs the lamont is smaller and weighs less. The recirculation allows it to be pushed hard without worry of burnout while the separator tank on a lamont gives it more reserve thus making it easier to control. But I await georges input as he has actual experience and I've just got some book learning. And real experience is by far the best.
Andy
Everything I have read about lamonts and monotubes indicates that for similar outputs the lamont is smaller and weighs less. The recirculation allows it to be pushed hard without worry of burnout while the separator tank on a lamont gives it more reserve thus making it easier to control. But I await georges input as he has actual experience and I've just got some book learning. And real experience is by far the best.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
