1 Steam Cars : Phorum
General Steam Car topics
Fuel Pressure
Posted by: Kobus van Jaarsveld (IP Logged)
Date: January 01, 2005 02:09PM
<HTML>We would like to wish all readers a happy New Year and great steaming in '05!
I am having a problem on our 1907 EX which I have not been able to solve thus far and I now seek help from readers please.
Ever since the car was recommissioned after it's restoration, it would occasionally, say after about 20 miles or less, while running, rapidly and for no apparent reason lose it's fuel pressure from the normal 90 psi to about 20 psi. The car uses the single gasoline system for both burners as per the original design.
I have thoroughly gone through everything, there is no vacuum that forms in the tank, there are no restrictions, the fuel flows freely and gushes out at the pump delivery valve if the cap is removed. There are no leaks, the system is whistle clean with an old style glass bowl sedimenter in the fuel line under the floorboards. The valve seats in the pump have been cleaned and polished and there are no leaks past the valves. The gland has new packing from Art Hart and does not leak. Valve lift space has been checked and is adequate.
The pressure regulator is new ex John Goold. I have opened it up and found it be what it is, new inside with no visible defect.
So what causes this irritating problem on a car which otherwise runs perfectly? I am coming to suspect that the problem lies with the pressure regulator though I cannot explain it. I think that for some bizarre reason the thing "dumps" the pressure and then resets itself. After such an event the pressure can be restored with the hand pump, the fires can be lit and one can drive off for miles with the pressure at it's normal 90 psi and then out of the blue, with no pattern to it's ocurrence, the pressure just vanishes. The rate of pressure drop is much faster than when one is stationary with the burners fully open.
Can the experts cast light on this one please?
Many thanks, Kobus</HTML>
I am having a problem on our 1907 EX which I have not been able to solve thus far and I now seek help from readers please.
Ever since the car was recommissioned after it's restoration, it would occasionally, say after about 20 miles or less, while running, rapidly and for no apparent reason lose it's fuel pressure from the normal 90 psi to about 20 psi. The car uses the single gasoline system for both burners as per the original design.
I have thoroughly gone through everything, there is no vacuum that forms in the tank, there are no restrictions, the fuel flows freely and gushes out at the pump delivery valve if the cap is removed. There are no leaks, the system is whistle clean with an old style glass bowl sedimenter in the fuel line under the floorboards. The valve seats in the pump have been cleaned and polished and there are no leaks past the valves. The gland has new packing from Art Hart and does not leak. Valve lift space has been checked and is adequate.
The pressure regulator is new ex John Goold. I have opened it up and found it be what it is, new inside with no visible defect.
So what causes this irritating problem on a car which otherwise runs perfectly? I am coming to suspect that the problem lies with the pressure regulator though I cannot explain it. I think that for some bizarre reason the thing "dumps" the pressure and then resets itself. After such an event the pressure can be restored with the hand pump, the fires can be lit and one can drive off for miles with the pressure at it's normal 90 psi and then out of the blue, with no pattern to it's ocurrence, the pressure just vanishes. The rate of pressure drop is much faster than when one is stationary with the burners fully open.
Can the experts cast light on this one please?
Many thanks, Kobus</HTML>
Re: Fuel Pressure
Posted by: Rolly (IP Logged)
Date: January 01, 2005 05:44PM
<HTML>Questions?
Is there a check in the line between the tank and the pump?
How much lift is there on the balls of the pump checks? There may be two much.
On the ex is there a low water fuel cut off? Have you checked seal of the diaphragm or packing? I don’t know how yours is made.
Rolly</HTML>
Is there a check in the line between the tank and the pump?
How much lift is there on the balls of the pump checks? There may be two much.
On the ex is there a low water fuel cut off? Have you checked seal of the diaphragm or packing? I don’t know how yours is made.
Rolly</HTML>
Re: Fuel Pressure
Posted by: Kobus van Jaarsveld (IP Logged)
Date: January 01, 2005 06:25PM
<HTML>Rolly,
In the original layout the engine driven fuel pump was fed through the hand pump and it's upstream check. In order to reduce the risk of cavitation, I changed this and the engine driven pump is now fed directly from the tank with no upstream check.
Lift on the pump check balls? Interesting question. I measured these and found them to have very little movement, so to allow them more lift I put a copper washer under each check cap. This step has had no noticeable effect on the performance of the pump, but the question as to whether the balls could stay afloat under certain conditions did cross my mind. Is there such a phenomenon?
There is no low water fuel cut off. If it had one, this device could not possibly be the source of the problem as it is incapable of reducing the pressure of the fuel it receives. All it does is cut off the fuel supply to the burner.
Thanks, Kobus</HTML>
In the original layout the engine driven fuel pump was fed through the hand pump and it's upstream check. In order to reduce the risk of cavitation, I changed this and the engine driven pump is now fed directly from the tank with no upstream check.
Lift on the pump check balls? Interesting question. I measured these and found them to have very little movement, so to allow them more lift I put a copper washer under each check cap. This step has had no noticeable effect on the performance of the pump, but the question as to whether the balls could stay afloat under certain conditions did cross my mind. Is there such a phenomenon?
There is no low water fuel cut off. If it had one, this device could not possibly be the source of the problem as it is incapable of reducing the pressure of the fuel it receives. All it does is cut off the fuel supply to the burner.
Thanks, Kobus</HTML>
Re: Fuel Pressure
Posted by: Rolly (IP Logged)
Date: January 01, 2005 08:08PM
<HTML>Is there such a phenomenon? Yes.
I start off with .001 clearances and then increase this till I get the volume I need through the pump under pressure. The balls in this type of pump can hiccup. It’s a good idea to have another check between the tank and the pump.
1. The optimum diameter for the bore that the ball seats on, is 0.707 x OD of ball. (COS 45) This will ensure that the contact angle is 45°.
Rolly</HTML>
I start off with .001 clearances and then increase this till I get the volume I need through the pump under pressure. The balls in this type of pump can hiccup. It’s a good idea to have another check between the tank and the pump.
1. The optimum diameter for the bore that the ball seats on, is 0.707 x OD of ball. (COS 45) This will ensure that the contact angle is 45°.
Rolly</HTML>
Re: Fuel Pressure
Posted by: Rolly (IP Logged)
Date: January 01, 2005 09:34PM
<HTML>2. Lift should be restricted to no more then 1/6 th ball diameter
Rolly</HTML>
Rolly</HTML>
Re: Fuel Pressure
Posted by: Dick Vennerbeck (IP Logged)
Date: January 02, 2005 01:07AM
<HTML>Kobus,
I have had this same thing happen also. Was it unseasonably hot when this occured? I think the car can get a type of " vapor lock" on the suction side of the pump. When going quickly it forms a little gas bubble in the line on the suction side stroke and then no fuel gets pumped. Take a close look at all the check valves as Rolly discussed. To see if it is a vapor problem, try it on a cooler dayor you could also add a gallon of two of diesel to reduce the vapor pressure of the fuel.
Oh, for the Joys of Owning a Stanley! The pumps, the pilots, the pops, the whoofs, and others!
Happy New Year,
Dick</HTML>
I have had this same thing happen also. Was it unseasonably hot when this occured? I think the car can get a type of " vapor lock" on the suction side of the pump. When going quickly it forms a little gas bubble in the line on the suction side stroke and then no fuel gets pumped. Take a close look at all the check valves as Rolly discussed. To see if it is a vapor problem, try it on a cooler dayor you could also add a gallon of two of diesel to reduce the vapor pressure of the fuel.
Oh, for the Joys of Owning a Stanley! The pumps, the pilots, the pops, the whoofs, and others!
Happy New Year,
Dick</HTML>
Re: Fuel Pressure
Posted by: Ben in Maine (IP Logged)
Date: January 02, 2005 11:56AM
<HTML>#1,,,The Gosoline will still be in there and at whatever temp,,give the resultant vapor pressure. #2 Is the feed pipe on the side of the flue pipe,,my cars are flue on left , fuel pipes on right side,,Hope this helps,,and best of luck,,Ben P/S #1 is why I dont like to mix,,it can be daingerous if one doesn't consider the gas vapor angle,,cb</HTML>
Re: Fuel Pressure
Posted by: David Nergaard (IP Logged)
Date: January 02, 2005 12:58PM
<HTML>Is there a check valve, called the "Tee check" between the fuel pressure automatic and the pressure tanks. Most Stanleys were plumbed with the automatic connected directly to the pump and the inlet to the "Tee check". The two outlets of the "Tee check" connected to the pressure bottles and the main fire shutoff valve, in some cars. In others, only one outlet was used, through the pressure retaining valveto the pressure bottoles and the fire shutoof valve.
If there is a check between the pressure automatic and the bottles, they cannot drain back through a stuck automatic, and the automatic will usually clear it self as the pump output is a series of pulses.</HTML>
If there is a check between the pressure automatic and the bottles, they cannot drain back through a stuck automatic, and the automatic will usually clear it self as the pump output is a series of pulses.</HTML>
Re: Fuel Pressure
Posted by: SSsssteamer (IP Logged)
Date: January 02, 2005 01:36PM
<HTML>The EX has a single fuel system. Diesel added to the EX fuel tank will eventually make problems with the pilot light. Seperate fuel systems can mix their fuels in the main fuel tank with out any resulting problems to the pilot light. Too tight of fuel pump packing can also raise heat to make a vapor lock in the fuel system. Tighten the fuel pump packing nut only tight enough to not leak fuel. The routing of the fuel line from the fuel tank by keeping it away from any heat source is very important too. If the fuel line has to pass near the hot engine, the fuel line can be wrapped with insulation. ...Happy New Year, Pat Farrell</HTML>
Re: Fuel Pressure
Posted by: Kobus van Jaarsveld (IP Logged)
Date: January 02, 2005 02:41PM
<HTML>The T check is in place and has been plumbed in the manner you describe, with the two outlets connected to the bottles and main fuel valve. The pressure retaining valve is situated just before the inlet to the T check. It is clear to me now that the pressure stored in the bottles cannot drain back to the pressure regulator. Thanks for pointing it out. Regards, Kobus</HTML>
Re: Fuel Pressure
Posted by: Kobus van Jaarsveld (IP Logged)
Date: January 02, 2005 02:47PM
<HTML>As on your cars the flue is on the left and fuel pipes on the right. These do not pass close to any source of heat. Thanks, Kobus</HTML>
Re: Fuel Pressure
Posted by: Ben in Maine (IP Logged)
Date: January 02, 2005 03:25PM
<HTML>Pat,,Thanks for the info on the tight packing,,never thought of that,,,Cheers Ben</HTML>
Re: Fuel Pressure
Posted by: Dick Vennerbeck (IP Logged)
Date: January 03, 2005 02:28PM
<HTML>Ben and Pat,
Thanks I learned some new stuff too! We have switched Bud Leutza's model 70 to straight kerosene as the gas diesel mix caused pops and whoofs when stopped. I think what was happening was, when the main shut off, the gas in the vaporizer would boil off and find an ignition point at the pilot. I never thought that the vapor pressure would be the lowest of the two, but it makes sense. Thanks Ben.
I'm running straight gas right from the pump in my 60. Are there any long term problems from running pump gas?
Kobus,
Maybe you could try a partial tank of cold gas if that's feasible. Would a larger fuel line or slightly enlarged holes in the fittings help? It seems that if the problem is a vapor one, then less restriction in the line would allow easier flow.
Comments?
Dick</HTML>
Thanks I learned some new stuff too! We have switched Bud Leutza's model 70 to straight kerosene as the gas diesel mix caused pops and whoofs when stopped. I think what was happening was, when the main shut off, the gas in the vaporizer would boil off and find an ignition point at the pilot. I never thought that the vapor pressure would be the lowest of the two, but it makes sense. Thanks Ben.
I'm running straight gas right from the pump in my 60. Are there any long term problems from running pump gas?
Kobus,
Maybe you could try a partial tank of cold gas if that's feasible. Would a larger fuel line or slightly enlarged holes in the fittings help? It seems that if the problem is a vapor one, then less restriction in the line would allow easier flow.
Comments?
Dick</HTML>
Re: Fuel Pressure
Posted by: Howard Randall (IP Logged)
Date: January 03, 2005 04:10PM
<HTML>I have run pump gas in my 10 HP for 20 years with out problems. I do use Coleman stove fuel in the pilot though.</HTML>
Re: Fuel Pressure
Posted by: SSsssteamer (IP Logged)
Date: January 04, 2005 12:13AM
<HTML>Dick, If your main fuel vaporizer is the correct length for pump gas, then you will have years of enjoyment from your Stanley. If you main fuel vaporizer was made longer for straight kerosene use, then you will have carbon plugging problems from running pump gas through it. The longer vaporizer tube is necessary to get enough heat to vaporize the kerosene. I find a blend of pump gas and kerosene is sometimes a happy medium that works well for most.</HTML>
Re: Fuel Pressure
Posted by: Ben in Maine (IP Logged)
Date: January 04, 2005 12:01PM
<HTML>Hi,,If this the original system it will have a long coil at the top of the boiler so gas will be vaporized from boiler heat as long as pressure is up. Seems like a nice feature but most cars have been up?dated to kerosene and are STILL called all original,,Oh well little harm done..But,,, Cheers Ben</HTML>
Re: Fuel Pressure
Posted by: Kobus van Jaarsveld (IP Logged)
Date: January 04, 2005 06:13PM
<HTML>Ben, Of course you are right. I have what is believed to be the original or as original "instuctions for operating the Stanley steam car" handbook.
In it, there is a diagram of the "piping of the gasolene system" This diagram shows exactly what you say. A single fuel line comes from the T check valve and splits into two at a hand valve which admits fuel to the pilot vapouriser tube. This is the top tube of the three that sit together running from the back of the burner to the front where the venturis are.
The other split takes the fuel for the main burner through the coil you describe which sits on top of the boiler. From here the now heated/vapourised? fuel passes through the main burner control valve via the steam automatic to the two main burner vapouriser tubes.
You may find it interesting that I do have the original heating coil that sat on top of the boiler. The reason it was not returned to the car when the new boiler and burner "as original" which I bought from Don Bourdon was fitted, was that I had been advised that in practise it was found not to be necessary. My car still runs on the single fuel system burning gasoline only. If there is merit in fitting the top fuel heater coil to the car, I will do so. But I have my doubts about this, as the current level of main burner fuel vapourisation is entirely satisfactory. Cheers, Kobus</HTML>
In it, there is a diagram of the "piping of the gasolene system" This diagram shows exactly what you say. A single fuel line comes from the T check valve and splits into two at a hand valve which admits fuel to the pilot vapouriser tube. This is the top tube of the three that sit together running from the back of the burner to the front where the venturis are.
The other split takes the fuel for the main burner through the coil you describe which sits on top of the boiler. From here the now heated/vapourised? fuel passes through the main burner control valve via the steam automatic to the two main burner vapouriser tubes.
You may find it interesting that I do have the original heating coil that sat on top of the boiler. The reason it was not returned to the car when the new boiler and burner "as original" which I bought from Don Bourdon was fitted, was that I had been advised that in practise it was found not to be necessary. My car still runs on the single fuel system burning gasoline only. If there is merit in fitting the top fuel heater coil to the car, I will do so. But I have my doubts about this, as the current level of main burner fuel vapourisation is entirely satisfactory. Cheers, Kobus</HTML>
Re: Fuel Pressure
Posted by: Kobus van Jaarsveld (IP Logged)
Date: January 04, 2005 06:43PM
<HTML>Dick, Thanks for your input. To go back a little, the problem is not temperature related.
As a result of the contributions made by particularly Rolly and David Nergaard, I have dropped the notion that it could be the fuel pressure regulator and decided to concentrate on the pump itself. So I removed it from the car and a careful examination showed that although the valves were not leaking, things did not conform to Rolly's measurements. I also found that the "new" plunger was slightly tapered, to the extent that the seal was loose when the plunger was fully withdrawn and tight when pressed in. It is conceivable that this could have allowed air to be sucked in on the suction stroke without manifesting a leak, as the seal would be tight on the compression stroke.
Be that as it may, we are restoring the pump to all the specs I have been given and I fully expect to have overcome the problem. Will keep everyone posted.
What is cold gas? Cheers, Kobus</HTML>
As a result of the contributions made by particularly Rolly and David Nergaard, I have dropped the notion that it could be the fuel pressure regulator and decided to concentrate on the pump itself. So I removed it from the car and a careful examination showed that although the valves were not leaking, things did not conform to Rolly's measurements. I also found that the "new" plunger was slightly tapered, to the extent that the seal was loose when the plunger was fully withdrawn and tight when pressed in. It is conceivable that this could have allowed air to be sucked in on the suction stroke without manifesting a leak, as the seal would be tight on the compression stroke.
Be that as it may, we are restoring the pump to all the specs I have been given and I fully expect to have overcome the problem. Will keep everyone posted.
What is cold gas? Cheers, Kobus</HTML>
Re: Fuel Pressure
Posted by: Ben in Maine (IP Logged)
Date: January 05, 2005 01:03AM
<HTML> Hi Kobus,,I think the benefit of the top coil would be to have a vapor ready for ignition for longer stops,,as temp will be around 350+ if pressure is up. I always thought it was a neat idea,,but never heard anything against it, only that it was unnessary. My feeling is that if they [Messrs Stanley] saw no benefit from it they certainly wouldnt ad to expense of the car. This was a far cry from that horrid firing iron of earlier days. Cheers Ben</HTML>
Re: Fuel Pressure
Posted by: Dick Vennerbeck (IP Logged)
Date: January 05, 2005 11:04AM
<HTML>Cold Gas. Fuel at a lower temperature has a lower vapor pressure. I thought you might try a gallon or two of gas kept cold in an ice chest. Then try to recreate the problem and add the "cold gas" as a way of isolating a temperature / vapor problem. I guess it was just a silly idea.
Dick</HTML>
Dick</HTML>
Re: Fuel Pressure
Posted by: Kobus van Jaarsveld (IP Logged)
Date: January 13, 2005 06:09PM
<HTML>Good evening everybody,
I have corrected the settings in the pump to what Rolly specified and fitted a check to the inlet upstream from the pump. After a distance of about 5 miles the old horror presented itself again.
Disgusted I fired up and drove off. Out of sheer frustration I fiddled with the pressure retaining valve while on the move. I could see the fuel pressure drop when the valve was shut and at about 60 psi, before air gets sent to the vapouriser, I would open it and see the fuel pressure rise to its normal level again. It occurred to me that I was simulating the ugly phenomenon I was trying to eradicate. So I opened the valve many turns more than I had been doing all this time and, hooray, problem gone!
Yes, you may say it, only here in the Southern tip of Africa can we be that stupid! Thanks for all the advice. I now have the the sharpest fuel system in the world. Cheers, Kobus</HTML>
I have corrected the settings in the pump to what Rolly specified and fitted a check to the inlet upstream from the pump. After a distance of about 5 miles the old horror presented itself again.
Disgusted I fired up and drove off. Out of sheer frustration I fiddled with the pressure retaining valve while on the move. I could see the fuel pressure drop when the valve was shut and at about 60 psi, before air gets sent to the vapouriser, I would open it and see the fuel pressure rise to its normal level again. It occurred to me that I was simulating the ugly phenomenon I was trying to eradicate. So I opened the valve many turns more than I had been doing all this time and, hooray, problem gone!
Yes, you may say it, only here in the Southern tip of Africa can we be that stupid! Thanks for all the advice. I now have the the sharpest fuel system in the world. Cheers, Kobus</HTML>
Re: Fuel Pressure
Posted by: Dick Vennerbeck (IP Logged)
Date: January 17, 2005 03:32AM
<HTML>Kobus,
Thanks for the insight. May we all remember this little tid-bit of valuable information. May we all have better systems by hands on experience shared via this website.
Thanks Kobus, and John Woodson too!
Dick</HTML>
Thanks for the insight. May we all remember this little tid-bit of valuable information. May we all have better systems by hands on experience shared via this website.
Thanks Kobus, and John Woodson too!
Dick</HTML>
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.