Railroad Forums 

  • Is the cost of Allunimun Coal Hoppers worth the Fuel savings

  • General discussion about railroad operations, related facilities, maps, and other resources.
General discussion about railroad operations, related facilities, maps, and other resources.

Moderator: Robert Paniagua

 #705782  by Littleredcaboose
 
A Unit train already gets 400 miles to the gallon. So with the cost of allunimum 30 times that of steel wheres the savings? Johnstown RR car makes the hoppers and we have seen allunimun salt hoppers which makes sence from a corrsion standpoint but we have not seen allnimum boxcars or intermodal containers.
 #705934  by wis bang
 
Aluminum is not a maleable as steel so it has a fixed service life b/4 it gets brittle and fails at less than max stress levels. Steel doesn't do this.
 #706104  by D.Carleton
 
Many moons ago when I started in the power generating business the coal would sometimes 'stick' inside of the steel rapid-discharge hopper cars especially if the train had encountered freezing weather en route. We would aid the unloading of the car by 'mechanically agitating' the side of the car with sledgehammers. Coal doesn't seem to stick to aluminum like it did to steel and the overhead car-shaker ultimately led to the retirement of 'hammer-time'. I'm guessing the aluminum body would not be as forgiving to 'deft blows of a mechanic's hammer' as was steel.

Just the amount of time saved by not stopping the train during unloading justifies the increased cost.
 #706185  by David Benton
 
Here in NZ , they have moved away from Aliminuim to stainless steel for the hopper bodies .
The weight penalty is probably more of an issue here , as the coal lines have heavy grade , are twisty , and of narrow gauge .I seem to recall that the stainless bodies would actually be lighter anyway , but no doubt more expensive .

now i need to go mechanically agitate something with a sledgehammer !!!.
 #706260  by Cowford
 
The aluminum vs steel decision has much less to do with fuel consumption than it savings associated wtih lower tare weights. A lighter aluminum car allows the shipper to load that much more without exceeding the gross weight limits. And the more product you put on a train, the fewer trains you have to run, which makes the railroads happy. Stainless hopper cars have also gained some favor for the same reasons, as stainless cars can be made lighter than carbon steel cars. Aluminum is more expensive on a per-lb basis, but it ain't 30x steel... I think it's more like 2-3x steel.

Aluminum "sheet and post" domestic containers are fairly common (many EMPU containers are alum). However, I'm not aware of any shipper/carriers buying aluminum now. The Chinese-built 53' corrugated steel box is now the container of choice. Like a lot of stuff from China, they're cheap, rugged, and easier to repair than aluminum. There is a slight tare weight penalty (about 1k lbs), but as most intermodal shipments cube out before weighing out, this isn't a big issue.

Why aren't there aluminum boxcars? That I'm not 100% sure, but I'd reckon it's a number of issues: Boxcar purchases are hard enough to justify at steel prices; Cube capacity is typically the issue with boxcars, now that 100- and 110-ton cars are available; boxcar utilization is far from stellar, so you'd be paying a premium on equipment that doesn't turn a lot of business.
 #706293  by NV290
 
As Cowford said, the aluminum cars are not simply to save fuel. they are to allow more coal per car without being over the weight restrictions. Sure, on the return trip the mine empty the lighter weight will reduce fuel costs, but when loaded, it's no different fuel wise then a steel car.
 #710993  by Cowford
 
A little more on this... aluminum cars are largely reserved for western (PRB) coal; eastern coal moves in steel/stainless steel cars. Didn't know why until recently: eastern coal is prone to freezing in the car, which means the cars need to go through thaw sheds. As aluminum cars "can't take the heat," so to speak, steel is used. Must be a moisture content issue, I suppose.
 #711944  by sd80mac
 
Cowford wrote:A little more on this... aluminum cars are largely reserved for western (PRB) coal; eastern coal moves in steel/stainless steel cars. Didn't know why until recently: eastern coal is prone to freezing in the car, which means the cars need to go through thaw sheds. As aluminum cars "can't take the heat," so to speak, steel is used. Must be a moisture content issue, I suppose.
PRB do go as far as Cleveland and Dunkirk, NY. as well as near pittsburgh. I had seen plenty of them going through Fostoria, Oh.

Also there's snow, freezing rain and rain out in west too.. no difference...
 #711974  by HoggerKen
 
Cowford wrote:A little more on this... aluminum cars are largely reserved for western (PRB) coal; eastern coal moves in steel/stainless steel cars. Didn't know why until recently: eastern coal is prone to freezing in the car, which means the cars need to go through thaw sheds. As aluminum cars "can't take the heat," so to speak, steel is used. Must be a moisture content issue, I suppose.

Given the conditions in which coal travels, no matter where it is loaded, it will freeze up. I recall a case of coal from Energy, CO to Mason City arrived like an iceburg due to a snow storm in Nebraska. The loads ended up going to another plant in TX. Steel or aluminum, the contents are open to the elements, and thus, will freeze up no matter what you do. And given the environment in places like Wausau, Green Bay, WI and Stillwater, MN it is amazing they can process a unit as fast as they do in the winter. PRB coal does contain less moisture when mined, but once it gets in an open car, all bets are off. S. IL coal which is higher in sulfur and moisture is also hauled in aluminum cars. Most of this coal is used for blending with PRB "dirt".
 #712059  by Cowford
 
To be clear SD, I stated that the freezing conditions had to do with the coal's moisture content, not with ambient conditions... and the need for putting eastern coal through thaw sheds. I was told this by a car builder. If this is not the case, can anyone explain why eastern coal is not loaded in aluminum cars?
 #726206  by scharnhorst
 
wis bang wrote:Aluminum is not a maleable as steel so it has a fixed service life b/4 it gets brittle and fails at less than max stress levels. Steel doesn't do this.
I used to work at an Amuminum foundry and rember seeing the hundreds of Coal gons come in by the railcar and truck load all cut up and ready to be remelted down. Many of them were Conrail, CSX, and NS cars.
 #726237  by sd80mac
 
wis bang wrote:Aluminum is not a maleable as steel so it has a fixed service life b/4 it gets brittle and fails at less than max stress levels. Steel doesn't do this.
I was told that Conrail and CSX's bathtub hopper cars (rotatary type ones) which are steel.. Couple of bathub cars had failed and dropped to the trackbed, some of them just split at the seam and spilled the coal along the line.

CSX are getting rid of them. I'm seeing less CR/CSX bathtub now.. I cant speak for UP and BNSF as I dont see them in west.
 #726250  by HoggerKen
 
sd80mac wrote: I was told that Conrail and CSX's bathtub hopper cars (rotatary type ones) which are steel.. Couple of bathub cars had failed and dropped to the trackbed, some of them just split at the seam and spilled the coal along the line.

CSX are getting rid of them. I'm seeing less CR/CSX bathtub now.. I cant speak for UP and BNSF as I dont see them in west.
UP has what ever is left of the steel bathtubs in cross tie service. Those sold by utilities have become scrap haulers, with reporting marks, MWCX, CEFX, KEYX, and CEPX to name a few. Am forgetting a few we see all the time. This is all new business for us with a dealer/crusher opening up on the Iowa Traction. They can easily load 25 per week.

AMGX still has their aluminum high gons (Some with solid draw bars moving in pairs) running around as well, hauling scrap. These are former DEEX cars. There are also a bunch running around from Wisconsin utilities, Dairyland and WPSX.
 #726275  by HoggerKen
 
Cowford wrote:To be clear SD, I stated that the freezing conditions had to do with the coal's moisture content, not with ambient conditions... and the need for putting eastern coal through thaw sheds. I was told this by a car builder. If this is not the case, can anyone explain why eastern coal is not loaded in aluminum cars?

I will retract some of my previous post, as some research explained that Cowford was correct on one point. Eastern coal is part of the reason CR and NS went with the Hybrid BethGon with stainless. But ambient conditions do impede unloading of coal in areas where winter weather is more adverse than the east coast. No matter what the source.

NS did a study in 1995 to examine new technologies in thaw sheds. They found several using quartz infrared lamps being computer controlled as not damaging hoses, AEI tags, or aluminum/composite sides. These types of heaters in thaw sheds are becoming more commonplace where cold climates hamper unloading operations. Utilities cannot slow down because of winter.
 #726625  by scharnhorst
 
sd80mac wrote:
wis bang wrote:Aluminum is not a malleable as steel so it has a fixed service life b/4 it gets brittle and fails at less than max stress levels. Steel doesn't do this.
I was told that Conrail and CSX's bathtub hopper cars (rotatary type ones) which are steel.. Couple of bathub cars had failed and dropped to the trackbed, some of them just split at the seam and spilled the coal along the line.

CSX are getting rid of them. I'm seeing less CR/CSX bathtub now.. I cant speak for UP and BNSF as I dont see them in west.

Seems like I read some where that the Conrail bathtub gons opened up on the bottom like a hopper dose and as you said they had trouble with the bottoms splitting open. I think the solution was that the hatches were welded shut and the cars converted with rotary couplers. I'll have to chek a bit deeper into my Conrail history books and see.