Steam Engines

People miss the point, steam engines are pleasing to both the eye and the nose, their efficiency or lack of it is irrelevant.

Just the faintest hint of steam and I'm scuttling over with camera, never felt the same urge with a diesel.
 
Why are most power stations steam turbine powered if the overall efficiency of a diesel engine is higher?

The diesel engine also has the advantage of being able to be stopped and started quickly.

Its really a question of whats possible.

The 12 cylinder engine Vyv Cox mentioned produced 75MW

A generating set at a power station will typically produce 600MW

I can't begin to imagine the problems of building a 96 cylinder engine -

Add to that the fact that a steam turbine has far fewer moving parts and so is more reliable and can go much longer between "services"

Further, steam can be produced by a number of fuels to give a level of diversity of supply whereas a Diesel engine requires oil based fuel.

Really the best fuel for power generation must e nuclear - but that's a whole new(ish) story.
 
1st.jpg


Maximum power: 108,920 hp at 102 rpm – abot 80 MW at 102 rpm
( A locomotive engine might be 3 Mw at 1500 rpm)
The Wartsila-Sulzer RTA96-C turbocharged two-stroke diesel engine is the most powerful and most
efficient prime-mover in the world today. The Aioi Works of Japan’s Diesel United, Ltd built the first
engines and is where some of these pictures were taken. It is available in 6 through 14 cylinder versions,
all are inline engines. These engines were designed primarily for very large container ships. Ship owners
like a single engine/single propeller design and the new generation of larger container ships needed a
bigger engine to propel them. The cylinder bore is just under 38″ and the stroke is just over 98″. Each
cylinder displaces 111,143 cubic inches (1820 liters) and produces 7780 horsepower. Total displacement
comes out to 1,556,002 cubic inches (25,480 liters) for the fourteen cylinder version.
Some facts on the 14 cylinder version:
Total engine weight: 2300 tons (The crankshaft alone weighs 300 tons.)
Length: 89 feet
Height: 44 feet
Maximum power: 108,920 hp at 102 rpm
Maximum torque: 5,608,312 lb/ft at 102 rpm
Fuel consumption at maximum power is 0.278 lbs per hp per hour (Brake Specific Fuel Consumption).
Fuel consumption at maximum economy is 0.260 lbs/hp/hour. At maximum economy the engine exceeds
50% thermal efficiency. That is, more than 50% of the energy in the fuel in converted to motion.

For comparison, most automotive and small aircraft engines have BSFC figures in the 0.40-0.60 lbs/hp/hr
range and 25-30% thermal efficiency range.

Even at its most efficient power setting, the big 14 consumes 1,660 gallons of heavy fuel oil per hour.
Wow!
Stu
 
>People miss the point, steam engines are pleasing to both the eye and the nose, their efficiency or lack of it is irrelevant. Just the faintest hint of steam and I'm scuttling over with camera, never felt the same urge with a diesel.

I agree, we went to a steam engine rally at the Weald and Down museum yesterday. I asked one of the owners how old it is, 1897, how heavy it is, 12 tons, and how much it can pull. On that one he explained it had been used in a quarry in the Forest of Dean and can pull three trucks with twenty tons of rocks in each. Amazing.

There was also a steam engine that was producing electricity for the lights on a steam powered carousel, which I've never seen before. Apparently they were always used in fairgrounds. It was a wonderful day out, highly recommended.
 
If we buy as a co-op perhaps we can get discount.

Still a bit dear for me.

Perhaps if you slipped up the road a bit one dark night you could slip in he place and errr borrow a bit of the hot stuff.

I don't think the guards are armed any more.

I'll gladly supply the pressure cooker and we'll be away -
[
[
[
At least you will, I'll stay ashore and take notes.
 
Top