Canadian Rail No306 1977
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Canadian Rail ;:; No 306 JULY 1977 .....~IAN ISSN 0008 - 4875 Published monthly by The Canadian Railroad Historical Association P.O. Box 22, Station B Montreal Quebec Canada H3B 3J5 EDITOR: M. Peter Murphy EDITOR EMERITUS: S. S. Worthen BUSINESS CAR: John Welsh LAYOUT: Joe Smith CALGARY & SOUTH WESTERN L. M. Unwin, Secretary 1727 23rd Ave. N.W . , Calgary Alberta T2M lV6 OTTAWA COVER PHOTO: D. E. Stoltz, Secretary Rated fifteenth in the point score of P. O. Box 141, Station A, Ottawa, the top twenty canadian Steam Locomo Ontario K1N 8Vl tives is CNR class U-l-f, 4-8-2 road numbers 6060 to 6079 represented here PACIFIC COAST by No. 6064 in pool train service at R. Keillor, Secretary the cross-over from the CPR line to P. O. Box 1006, Station A, Vancouver CN at Dorval, Qu~bec on August 8, British Columbia V6C 2Pl 1948. Photo from the CRHA Archives, E. A. Toohey Collection. ROCKY MOUNTAIN C. K. Hatcher, Secretary P. O. Bo x 6102, Station C, Ed~onton OPPOSITE: Al berta T5B 2ND Rated No. 1 in the overall point score is CPR's famous SELKIRK series TORONTO & YORK DIVISION road numbers 5930 - 5935 and repre J. C. Kyle, Secretary sented here by the last in the series. P. O. Box 5849, Terminal A, Toronto 5935 was the last steam locomotive Ontario M5W lP3 built for the Canadian Pacific Rail way, and is presently on display at WINDSOR-ESSEX DIVISION the CANADIAN RAIL~JAY MUSEUM in St. R. Ballard, Sr., Secretary Constant, Quebec. Photo courtesy 300 Cabana Road East, Windsor, Canadian Pacific Railway. Ontario N9G lA2 ~---- canadian Steam Locomotives The During and after the age of the On the surface, this seems to steam locomotive on Canada's be an easy question to answer, railways, one question has per until you begin to examine it sisted and has not, to date, in a little more detail and, been answered satisfactorily: in the process, become a little which was Canada's largest more specific. "Largest" in steam locomotive? what sen s e ? To ta 1 wei g h tin working order? Weight on driv ers? Starting tractive effort? Or just horsepower? CANADIAN 198 R A I L An evaluation and answer based on any of these factors alone will yield a different response and thus the original question will still remain unanswered. As a mechanical engineer specializing in motive power for Can- adian National Railways, I have had occasion to calculate the per- formance of steam locomotives, the information being required to rate the Company's remaining steam engines for purposes of scheduling and tonnage capacity. These calculations have interested me in fur ther independent research on steam locomotive technology. One fundamental conclusion can be drawn from this research: the best mechanical engineers of the steam era were never able to pre dict precisely the ultimate performance for a particular locomotive, because there were a myriad of factors affecting its performance. Chief amongst these was the manner in which the air supply was conducted into and through the firebox, boiler and smokebox. This drafting was, obviously, critical to the production of steam. To the end of the steam era, this remained a "black art", which could only be perfected to its highest degree by testing, ideally in a station ary test plant. Significant increases in locomotive horsepower capa bility could be realized simply by making small adjustments, one after another ("fiddling"), with smokebox and blastpipe arrangements until the maximum evaporation rate of the boiler was achieved.Occas ionally, on older engines, these improvements were frustrated by the diameter and stroke of the cylinders and pistons, which could not make use of all of the steam produced by the boiler. In spite of this problem, towards the end of the steam age meth ods were developed for determining the "average" maximum performance of a steam locomotive. W.F.Kiesel, Motive Power Officer, Pennsylvania Railroad, working with extensive test data from the Company's sta tionary test plant at Altoona, Pa., developed a formula,subsequently named for him, which accounted for most of the factors essential to the computing of the horsepower of a reciprocating steam locomotive. An excellent treatment of this whole subject of steam locomotive technology, including this most important aspect, may be found in "The Steam Locomotive" by R.P.Johnson, Chief Engineer, Baldwin Loco motive Works, Eddystone, Pa.,U.S.A.(1944). Armed with the data generated by my research work, I have de cided to risk incurring the wrath of the proponents of the various "lal"gest" Canadian steam locomotives by rating the latter on a scientific basis, taking into account the various dimensional and performance factors which suggest their candidacy for the title of "the largest steam locomotive in Canada". The Factors: Table I, which follows, sets forth the statistical data for ~y "top twenty" steam locomotives in Canada. A word of clarification 1S necessary regarding the engines which have been included.Locomotives belonging to United States railroad companies, occasionally running in Canada, such as those of the Delaware & Hudson and SOO Line, have not been included, although the direct U.S. subsidiaries of Canadian National Railways (Central Vermont Railway and Grand Trunk Western Railroad) have been included, since their engines did run in Canada for considerable distances. Canadian Pacific Railway Company's class T-4-a, 2-10-4 Number 8000, has been excluded because it was an ex perimental locomotive whose features did not lend themselves to a CANADIAN 199 R A I L direct comparison with conventional steam locomotives. Where engines of various subclasses existed, the one with the highest evaporative boiler capacity and horsepower has been selected. Locomotive length over couplers has been dismissed as a rating factor, being essential ly meaningless in the evaluation. ! The following is a brief explanation of the rating system for the factors selected. For each factor chosen for comparison, the I largest engine in 'that category has been given 100 points. All the " other locomotives being compared were then given points proporcional to the ratio of their factor to the largest in that factor-category. In all, seven factors were selected for comparison, to determine the "largest" locomotive; hence, 700 points would be the maximum possible score. Now for the "group of seven": 1. Total engine weight: While the heaviest engine is not necessaiily the "largest", weight is one measure of size. 2. Percent of total weight on drivers: The greater the proportion of the locomotive's weight on her drivers, the better she does the basic job of producing trac tion; thus, the better the rating score for thi~ factor. 3. Nominal tractive effort: The low-speed, "drag"-hauling capacity of the engine is one important measure of "largeness". Tests often showed a TE greater than the nominal, which was based on 85% of the boiler pressure. However, since all locomotives have been rated on the same basis, the relative ranking should be suf ficiently accurate. In this respect, the older, pre-1925 lo comotives are given a slight advantage by this method, as advances in steam porting and passage design in the valves and cylinders in the 1930 and '40 engines have been excluded. 4. Firebox grote-area: The firebox grote-area is a good measure of the ability of the steam locomotive to sustain the combustion process and thus the production of steam in the boiler, to maintain a constant, high-horsepower output. 5. Calculated maximum sustained boiler evaporation rate: Each word in this rother long expression is important. The rapid, sustained production of steam by the boiler is essen tial optimum operation of the engine. The formula used for this calculation is a relatively conservative one,recommend ed by the Baldwin Locomotive Works. This formula takes into account the firebox and tube-heating areas, with an allow ance for a feedwater heater and a deduction for auxiliaries. Once again, tests showed that locomotive boilers were able to produce steam in excess of the nominal rating, always at the expense of pity fully low thermal efficiencies. For com parison purposes, the use of a formula with consistent co efficients of heat transfer will yield accurate relative re sults :;' :.. ., . : {:{ ~'.".~ ':~~ : TABLE I Basic Statistical Data Engine weight Nom. Cal.max. Calc. Diam. Rail- Rwy. Whyte Road Year '000 % on tract. Grate 2sust.evap.max. drivers ~ class class numbers built ~ drivers eff.'OOO area ft lbs./hr. DB hp ins. () CPR T-1-c 2-10-4 5930-35 1949 [Wl 69.3 89.4 B 93.5 72420 3160 63 l> CPR K-1-a 4-8-4 3100-01 1928 435 57.4 72 8 B 93.5 IlliaQ\ 133701 75 2 l> CNR T-2-a 2-10-2 4100-04 1924 409 79.4 80.3 71970 3015 57 o TH&B As 2-8-4 201,202 1928 383 65.1 lI'OQ:"3l 68690 3320 63 l> CVR T-3-a 2-10-4 700-709 1928 419 68.0 84.4 69270 3020 60 Z GTW U-3-a 4-8-4 6300-11 1927 399 59.6 59.0 84.3 68970 3170 73 CNR U-2-a 4-8-4 6100-19 1927 396 59.9 66.1 (B) 84.4 66200 3020 73 CNR T-3-a 2-10-2 4200-09 1919 352 78.4 69.6 76.3 66770 2795 57 CNR U-4-a 4-8-4 6400-04 1936 380 62.1 52.5 73.6 59510 2750 77 III CPR 5-2-a 2-10-2 5800-13 1919-20 362 78.7 65.9 74.2 ~ 56930 2355 58 o CPR H-1-b 4-6-4 2810-19 1930 369 51.2 57.3(B) 80.8 58950 2780 75 o TH&B (J1 d) 4-6-4 501,502 1930 363 53.3(B) 81.5 58820 2650 79 CNR T-1-a 2-10-2 4000-09 1916 320 ~g:gl 64.5 77.3 59380 2490 57 T&NO/ONR - 4-8-4 1100-03 1936,37 371 58.8 54.5 70.3 58410 2655 68 III CNR U-1-f 4-8-2 6060*-79 1944 356 66.6 52.3 70.2 57370 2610 73 CNR S-4-b 2-8-2 3801-05 1936 339 69.9 60.6 70.3 56150 2600 63 )J CPR P-2-h 2-8-2 5417-36 1943 339 73.3 57.5 70.3 54030 2480 63 CNR T-4-a 2-10-2 4300-14 1929 348 73.3 70.5(B) 66.8 55050 2325 57 l> CNR K-5-a 4-6-4 5700-04 1930 356 52.9 53.3(B) 73.6 54820 2575 (]Q] AC&HB 2-10-2 50, 51 1929 339 73.3 60.3 66.7 54990 2340 57 r * Canadian National Railways' Number 6060 is the last steam locomotive in revenue passenger service on the CNR.