No more Gen Sets - Cheaper with gearbox to OEM Alternator?

All about locomotive rebuilders, small locomotive works, and experimental works

Moderator: Komachi

No more Gen Sets - Cheaper with gearbox to OEM Alternator?

Postby bengt » Sun Jun 17, 2012 4:11 am

"Over the last five years, an important trend in the U.S. freight railroad industry
has been the introduction of "GenSet" locomotives to reduce fuel consumption and air
pollution. While a proven technology, widespread use of GenSet locomotives has been
slow due to high capital costs compared to the older-technology locomotives that
they would replace. A new GenSet locomotive is approximately six times more
expensive than the cost of a traditional diesel locomotive in rebuilt condition."


http://www.gwrr.com/about_us/community_ ... motives.be

Probably a cheaper way would be to have a gearbox as for the Knoxville
loco but with input from two (or when possible, three) truck type diesel-engines by cardan shafts and couplings.
http://www.knoxvillelocomotiveworks.com ... _flyer.pdf
bengt
 
Posts: 112
Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2004 2:00 am

Re: No more Gen Sets - Cheaper with gearbox to OEM Alternato

Postby RickRackstop » Thu Jul 12, 2012 1:22 pm

Its a lot more complicated to rig up an connection between a 1800 rpm high speed diesel to a medium speed locomotive alternator designed to operate at half that. The first thing as explained in the Knoxville thread is that the original alternator is a single bearing unit, that is that the weight of the front of the alternator is carried by the rear engine crankshaft bearing through the flywheel connector. To get the correct rpm from the MTU engine, it is equipped with a 2 to 1 speed reducer and then they have to have some sort of connecting drive shaft with flexible joints to relieve the alignment problem. Also the gear reduction will have to be an inline double reduction so that the alternator will spin the right way.

Using multiple engines is only feasible with each engine driving a pinion on a bull gear through a clutch and in this case they would all have to be right hand rotating instead of the standarf left hand rotating. I think this set up will be too wide to fit under the hood anyway.If you really want to use the standard alternator its best just to buy the 22ECO package from EMD.
RickRackstop
 
Posts: 237
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 2:10 pm
Location: Poulsbo, Washington

Re: No more Gen Sets - Cheaper with gearbox to OEM Alternato

Postby mtuandrew » Thu Jul 12, 2012 8:59 pm

RickRackstop wrote:Its a lot more complicated to rig up an connection between a 1800 rpm high speed diesel to a medium speed locomotive alternator designed to operate at half that. The first thing as explained in the Knoxville thread is that the original alternator is a single bearing unit, that is that the weight of the front of the alternator is carried by the rear engine crankshaft bearing through the flywheel connector. To get the correct rpm from the MTU engine, it is equipped with a 2 to 1 speed reducer and then they have to have some sort of connecting drive shaft with flexible joints to relieve the alignment problem. Also the gear reduction will have to be an inline double reduction so that the alternator will spin the right way.

Using multiple engines is only feasible with each engine driving a pinion on a bull gear through a clutch and in this case they would all have to be right hand rotating instead of the standarf left hand rotating. I think this set up will be too wide to fit under the hood anyway.If you really want to use the standard alternator its best just to buy the 22ECO package from EMD.

Maybe it's just me, but that still doesn't sound very difficult in the grand scheme of things. A steel support with a bearing for the alternator shouldn't be hard to fabricate, though I'd expect Knoxvilles to have trouble with failures unless they have a very good R&D department. Also, multiple engines could be accommodated with an extension drive shaft past the first engine, or with multiple engines geared to the same driveshaft (like a Shay locomotive driveshaft in reverse.)

That said, this certainly seems like Red Green's answer to locomotive repowering. :-)
User avatar
mtuandrew
 
Posts: 4132
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 2:59 am
Location: the Manassas Gap Independent Line

Re: No more Gen Sets - Cheaper with gearbox to OEM Alternato

Postby RickRackstop » Thu Jul 12, 2012 9:54 pm

More like Rube Goldberg.
RickRackstop
 
Posts: 237
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 2:10 pm
Location: Poulsbo, Washington

Re: No more Gen Sets - Cheaper with gearbox to OEM Alternato

Postby DutchRailnut » Thu Jul 12, 2012 10:07 pm

lets see they build 1 or 2 or 3 locomotives and foamers already know that this company is succesfull??
If concept is viable the orders would stream in and we would see a lot of them, but so far , nahh not much of a improvement.
If Conductors are in charge, why are they promoted to be Engineer???

Retired Triebfahrzeugführer
User avatar
DutchRailnut
 
Posts: 21236
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 8:02 pm
Location: released from Stalag 13


Return to Rebuilders & Smaller Locomotive Works

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest