1 Steam Cars : Phorum
General Steam Car topics
Draft Booster
Posted by: Mark Stacey (IP Logged)
Date: July 15, 2002 06:24AM
<HTML>Rather than break up the thread on burners I'd like start another to follow up on Jim's comment re the use of a diesel turbo charger as a draft booster.
This may be of interest to others and it fascinates me.
I take it the exhaust steam from the engine was run through the what was the IC exhaust side of the turbo and the combustion air was thru the IC compressor side.
Any comments if the steam side needed drains in the scroll casing or did any water that collected in there not matter?
Was any matching of housings and impellors under taken or is a big Turbo charger in this situation fairly forgiving?
As an alternative would the steam turbine from a Doble radiator fan turbine be suitable as a direct drive for the compressor section of a Turbo charger?
I can feel a whole new range of experiments coming on.
Cheers
Mark Stacey</HTML>
This may be of interest to others and it fascinates me.
I take it the exhaust steam from the engine was run through the what was the IC exhaust side of the turbo and the combustion air was thru the IC compressor side.
Any comments if the steam side needed drains in the scroll casing or did any water that collected in there not matter?
Was any matching of housings and impellors under taken or is a big Turbo charger in this situation fairly forgiving?
As an alternative would the steam turbine from a Doble radiator fan turbine be suitable as a direct drive for the compressor section of a Turbo charger?
I can feel a whole new range of experiments coming on.
Cheers
Mark Stacey</HTML>
Re: Draft Booster
Posted by: Jim Crank (IP Logged)
Date: July 15, 2002 01:31PM
<HTML>Mark,
The steam was run through the exhaust section of the turbo; but with some nozzle openings blocked to keep the velocity up. Not much, and you have to play with this so the booster comes in about 30-40 mph and takes the whole load off the motor. At least with the Doble, you don't want to see any more than maybe 10-12 pounds backpressure on the engine at 80 mph, or it really saps the engine's output.
Water in the turbine, forget it. When the car is being warmed up it is just blown out. No drains are necessary.
The fan turbine is huge, I think the wheel is some 14" or 16" in diameter. The draft booster is a 6" two stage impulse. E-24's turbo adaptation, I think is a 3" wheel. Radial inflow. And yes, Dobles tried variable nozzles, it wasn't worth the added complication and seems to have stuck rather soon from crud. Draft boosters are not highly critical, just so they work.
A Doble fan turbine will not turn anywhere near fast enough to run the squirrel cage air blower. If it did, it would blow up, the wheels were made out of bronze. Separate turbines.
One thing though, most Doble fan turbines are stamped "nozzle .75 sq in" so the actual nozzle area is small. You just have to play with this until you get the whole system balanced out. Maybe an 8 pound drop across the booster and 3 pounds across the fan turbine at 60 mph. Something like that.
One thing, DO NOT try to put any kind of booster on a Stanley. Carl Guth tried this years ago an immediately burned out the boiler and made a potato chip out of the crown sheet. He just used a little electric blower and made a box around the venturis and piped that to the blower. Stanley boilers cannot stand a really high firing rate, their circulation is so poor they just burn out.
Jim</HTML>
The steam was run through the exhaust section of the turbo; but with some nozzle openings blocked to keep the velocity up. Not much, and you have to play with this so the booster comes in about 30-40 mph and takes the whole load off the motor. At least with the Doble, you don't want to see any more than maybe 10-12 pounds backpressure on the engine at 80 mph, or it really saps the engine's output.
Water in the turbine, forget it. When the car is being warmed up it is just blown out. No drains are necessary.
The fan turbine is huge, I think the wheel is some 14" or 16" in diameter. The draft booster is a 6" two stage impulse. E-24's turbo adaptation, I think is a 3" wheel. Radial inflow. And yes, Dobles tried variable nozzles, it wasn't worth the added complication and seems to have stuck rather soon from crud. Draft boosters are not highly critical, just so they work.
A Doble fan turbine will not turn anywhere near fast enough to run the squirrel cage air blower. If it did, it would blow up, the wheels were made out of bronze. Separate turbines.
One thing though, most Doble fan turbines are stamped "nozzle .75 sq in" so the actual nozzle area is small. You just have to play with this until you get the whole system balanced out. Maybe an 8 pound drop across the booster and 3 pounds across the fan turbine at 60 mph. Something like that.
One thing, DO NOT try to put any kind of booster on a Stanley. Carl Guth tried this years ago an immediately burned out the boiler and made a potato chip out of the crown sheet. He just used a little electric blower and made a box around the venturis and piped that to the blower. Stanley boilers cannot stand a really high firing rate, their circulation is so poor they just burn out.
Jim</HTML>
Re: Draft Booster
Posted by: Mark Stacey (IP Logged)
Date: July 17, 2002 07:39PM
<HTML>Thanks Jim
Invaluable information now safely filed for future developements for Black Betty's generator.
Cheers
Mark Stacey</HTML>
Invaluable information now safely filed for future developements for Black Betty's generator.
Cheers
Mark Stacey</HTML>
Re: Draft Booster
Posted by: peter heid (IP Logged)
Date: July 18, 2002 01:44PM
<HTML>My idea of a draft booster is a uniflow free piston engine running on exhaust steam. In IC form, there are few engines that can match its efficiency and none that share its simplicity and pumping efficiency. Opp Variable cutoff allows a variable stroke to control the pumping. Gas spring pressure and piston mass determine the SPM which is very stable and allows for the generation of electrical power at the same time. The use of free piston engines to pump air has allowed gas turbines to reach their highest levels of efficiency yet. They work well pumping from 0 to 60 PSI and higher pressures have been obtained but their true claim to fame is high output volume in a small package. As well as pressure, they can provide a great vacuum pump.
Peter Heid</HTML>
Peter Heid</HTML>
Re: Draft Booster
Posted by: David K. Nergaard (IP Logged)
Date: July 22, 2002 12:15PM
<HTML>Why not check out Pritchard's work with displacement exhaust motors; Rootes blowers used backwards. He used exhaust steam to run ALL his auxiliary loads.</HTML>
Re: Draft Booster
Posted by: Terry Williams (IP Logged)
Date: July 22, 2002 12:47PM
<HTML>I overhauled a couple of ships that had Foster Wheeler supercharged boilers on them. The superchargers ran on an electric motor at startup and low power, switching to a small steam turbine at medium power. At high power they ran on a gas turbine, combustion exhaust from the boiler. The boilers ran at 1200 psig steam temperature, 1050 degrees F. steam temperature and at high power, the combustion pressure was about 50 psig. Being in the fire room when these boilers went from mediuim to high power was a hair raising experience. Since in a boiler, the major heat transfer resistance is on the gas side, raising the combusiton pressure increases the heat transfer rate substantially.</HTML>
Re: Draft Booster
Posted by: Jim Crank (IP Logged)
Date: July 22, 2002 01:45PM
<HTML>Terry and David,
Terry,
Yes indeed, I have also seen such Foster-Wheeler boilers running.
Taken to the limit was the European version with the steam generator in the combustion chamber of a gas turbine. Just what you are talking about.
David,
The Roots blower is a good way to go just as long as you keep the pressure differential down. It has no compression and can see water without damage.
It can and has worked quite well.
Jim</HTML>
Terry,
Yes indeed, I have also seen such Foster-Wheeler boilers running.
Taken to the limit was the European version with the steam generator in the combustion chamber of a gas turbine. Just what you are talking about.
David,
The Roots blower is a good way to go just as long as you keep the pressure differential down. It has no compression and can see water without damage.
It can and has worked quite well.
Jim</HTML>
Re: Draft Booster
Posted by: tom ward (IP Logged)
Date: July 22, 2002 11:08PM
<HTML>Terry, Where can I find more info on the Foster-Wheeler? Did they pre-heat the combustion air supply by running it through the condensor? What waw the specific fuel consumption of the Foster-Wheeler?</HTML>
Re: Draft Booster
Posted by: Terry Williams (IP Logged)
Date: July 23, 2002 12:35AM
<HTML>Where can you find more information? I'd like to know that too. I used to have a data book on the boilers, had a light blue cover smaller than a regular book about 50 pages or so. I either loaned it out or misplaced it. The combusiton air was not preheated by running it through the condenser. And I don't know the specific fuel consumption. I'll keep looking for the book, maybe it will show up. I have searched the web with no results so far. Some of the engineering rates that were stationed on the ships that used these boilers may have a data book. The boilers were installed on the FF1040 and FFG1 class US Navey Frigates. These were originally DE1040 and DEG1 class.</HTML>
Re: Draft Booster
Posted by: Mark Stacey (IP Logged)
Date: July 23, 2002 04:06AM
<HTML>There is a site www.fwc.com but its so densely worded and full of acronyms I couldn't find if they were the company responsible to the presurised boiler system.
The Foster Wheeler sounds the same as the Velox boiler, correct? [www.dself.demon.co.uk]
As I've said before strangely appealing the silent power of steam with the whine of a gas turbine.
Cheers
Mark Stacey</HTML>
The Foster Wheeler sounds the same as the Velox boiler, correct? [www.dself.demon.co.uk]
As I've said before strangely appealing the silent power of steam with the whine of a gas turbine.
Cheers
Mark Stacey</HTML>
Re: Draft Booster
Posted by: Terry Williams (IP Logged)
Date: July 23, 2002 11:07AM
<HTML>Yes, I think www.fwc.com is the company. I sent them an e-mail last night requesting information on these boilers. We'll see.
The Foster Wheeler pressure fired boilers were similar to the Velox in the firing arrangement except operated at higher pressure, and were natural circulation boilers rather than forced circulation.</HTML>
The Foster Wheeler pressure fired boilers were similar to the Velox in the firing arrangement except operated at higher pressure, and were natural circulation boilers rather than forced circulation.</HTML>
Re: Draft Booster
Posted by: Jim Crank (IP Logged)
Date: July 23, 2002 01:35PM
<HTML>Terry,
The really high output VELOX boilers had circulating pumps, big ones. A souped up Lamont.
I have tons of papers on the VELOX and F-W systems, as at one time it looked really interesting on a small scale for a steam car. Then I discovered that such intense firing and NOISE was simply unnecessary.
Jim</HTML>
The really high output VELOX boilers had circulating pumps, big ones. A souped up Lamont.
I have tons of papers on the VELOX and F-W systems, as at one time it looked really interesting on a small scale for a steam car. Then I discovered that such intense firing and NOISE was simply unnecessary.
Jim</HTML>
Re: Draft Booster
Posted by: Terry Williams (IP Logged)
Date: July 23, 2002 01:58PM
<HTML>Jim,
I too looked into turbocharged pressure fired systems for a steam car but also thought that for a general use vehicle it was too much noise and too much complication. But for a sportscar or race car............?
Very high rates of combustion can be achieved by pulse firing too, but the noise level makes the above systems pale in comparison. Have you ever seen (heard) Jim Tangeman's pulse fired boiler?
What is the state of active noise suppression these days?</HTML>
I too looked into turbocharged pressure fired systems for a steam car but also thought that for a general use vehicle it was too much noise and too much complication. But for a sportscar or race car............?
Very high rates of combustion can be achieved by pulse firing too, but the noise level makes the above systems pale in comparison. Have you ever seen (heard) Jim Tangeman's pulse fired boiler?
What is the state of active noise suppression these days?</HTML>
Re: Draft Booster
Posted by: George Nutz (IP Logged)
Date: July 23, 2002 02:20PM
<HTML>Velox,
The Velox boilers developed by Brown-Boveri Co. around 1938 were very powerful and complex boilers, many were made for ship use in the 1940's.
Thay ran up to 1100+psi in the late 30's and had a maximum firing rate of
800-900,000 BTU per cubic foot of combustion volume, Jim's Doble will do more than that with the draft booster wailing. For high speed Naval use they could weigh as little as 1 pound per pound of steam output. With all this complexity(and a very big electrically driven circulating pump) they could not match the performance of a Doble"F" or a Lamont either in heat release per cubic foot or #steam/#boiler weight. A small Lamont can produce about 2+ pounds steam per pound of boiler weight with absolute safety and could be pushed considerably higher. The Velox is heavier due to all its auxilary equipment but has a higher total heat transfer rate in BTU's per square foot of boiler surface than either the Doble monotube or the Lamont---this is due to the extremely high gas pass velocities and gas pass pressure. Wouldn't want to build one for a car!! It is amusing that the lengthy chaper on the Velox in STEAM GENERATORS by Dagobert Rudorff( a great technical book on special boiler types) is the chapter before the Lamont!! May we pursue all of them.
Best, George</HTML>
The Velox boilers developed by Brown-Boveri Co. around 1938 were very powerful and complex boilers, many were made for ship use in the 1940's.
Thay ran up to 1100+psi in the late 30's and had a maximum firing rate of
800-900,000 BTU per cubic foot of combustion volume, Jim's Doble will do more than that with the draft booster wailing. For high speed Naval use they could weigh as little as 1 pound per pound of steam output. With all this complexity(and a very big electrically driven circulating pump) they could not match the performance of a Doble"F" or a Lamont either in heat release per cubic foot or #steam/#boiler weight. A small Lamont can produce about 2+ pounds steam per pound of boiler weight with absolute safety and could be pushed considerably higher. The Velox is heavier due to all its auxilary equipment but has a higher total heat transfer rate in BTU's per square foot of boiler surface than either the Doble monotube or the Lamont---this is due to the extremely high gas pass velocities and gas pass pressure. Wouldn't want to build one for a car!! It is amusing that the lengthy chaper on the Velox in STEAM GENERATORS by Dagobert Rudorff( a great technical book on special boiler types) is the chapter before the Lamont!! May we pursue all of them.
Best, George</HTML>
Re: Draft Booster
Posted by: Terry Williams (IP Logged)
Date: July 23, 2002 02:47PM
<HTML>Burning wood, the boiler in the steam outboard "Sprite" puts out about 3 pounds of steam/hour per pound of boiler weight, flat out. How much of the auxiliaries weight etc. are included in your figures? And at what boiler efficiency?</HTML>
Re: Draft Booster
Posted by: George Nutz (IP Logged)
Date: July 23, 2002 03:13PM
<HTML>Terry,
Almost possible to imagine that kind of steam output from a wood fire, 3# steam per # boiler weight?? Please tell what kind of boiler it was. In the case of the Lamont it is total gross boiler weight as it now stands including burner and circulating pump, insulation and external drum, with a 1# steam output per # gross boiler weight about 82 % efficiency with flue temperature around 450 degrees. Will let you know how the next test goes---unfortunately all of my old Lamont data does not give boiler weights, otherwise I would be glad to post that historical data.
Best, George</HTML>
Almost possible to imagine that kind of steam output from a wood fire, 3# steam per # boiler weight?? Please tell what kind of boiler it was. In the case of the Lamont it is total gross boiler weight as it now stands including burner and circulating pump, insulation and external drum, with a 1# steam output per # gross boiler weight about 82 % efficiency with flue temperature around 450 degrees. Will let you know how the next test goes---unfortunately all of my old Lamont data does not give boiler weights, otherwise I would be glad to post that historical data.
Best, George</HTML>
Re: Draft Booster
Posted by: Terry Williams (IP Logged)
Date: July 23, 2002 03:35PM
<HTML>George,
The boiler is a monotube with tube layout like a Serpollet plus a waterwall around the firebox. Fuel input about 240,000 BTU/hour. At high power I have measured stack temperatures above 1000 degrees F. When weighed, the boler was 35 pounds including insulation, stack etc. not counting the feed pump.
The top photo on the page below shows motor running at about 75% power. That's Miles in the boat Oly, on the left.
[www.geocities.com];
The boiler is a monotube with tube layout like a Serpollet plus a waterwall around the firebox. Fuel input about 240,000 BTU/hour. At high power I have measured stack temperatures above 1000 degrees F. When weighed, the boler was 35 pounds including insulation, stack etc. not counting the feed pump.
The top photo on the page below shows motor running at about 75% power. That's Miles in the boat Oly, on the left.
[www.geocities.com];
Re: Draft Booster
Posted by: George Nutz (IP Logged)
Date: July 23, 2002 04:10PM
<HTML>Terry,
Truly amazing, at that stack temperature the boiler would probably be around 66% efficient and put out around 120#/hour of steam. You can chuck 34# of wood per hour thru that little boiler!! Looks like you are going at a really good pace, any idea of your sustainable speed? Thanks for the link.
In the old days of model boat racing they had little gasoline fired monotube boilers that put out up to 100#/hr steam and weighed probably 10# all up, can't say much about their durability. You must have your hands full stoking that little firedoor and controlling everything. You must astound some of the gas guys. That means you are burning almost 1# of wood/hour for every pound of boiler weight--awesome.
Best, George</HTML>
Truly amazing, at that stack temperature the boiler would probably be around 66% efficient and put out around 120#/hour of steam. You can chuck 34# of wood per hour thru that little boiler!! Looks like you are going at a really good pace, any idea of your sustainable speed? Thanks for the link.
In the old days of model boat racing they had little gasoline fired monotube boilers that put out up to 100#/hr steam and weighed probably 10# all up, can't say much about their durability. You must have your hands full stoking that little firedoor and controlling everything. You must astound some of the gas guys. That means you are burning almost 1# of wood/hour for every pound of boiler weight--awesome.
Best, George</HTML>
Re: Draft Booster
Posted by: Terry Williams (IP Logged)
Date: July 23, 2002 05:12PM
<HTML>George,
You hit the figures pretty close. As you suspected, it is very hard to keep this firing rate up for a long time. I have done it for 15 minutes at a time or so, that's how I got the fuel consumption figures. Also burn coal at times. I usually don't measure speed, but had my fish finder on one day and saw a speed ot 12.3 MPH.
The steam hydroplane racers are still at it in England, as far as I know. Last I heard top speeds now are around or better than 120 MPH. I think those boilers have abysmal efficiencies. But they go fast.
Are your efforts with the Lamont boiler available on the web somewhere?
Keep your steam up,
Terry</HTML>
You hit the figures pretty close. As you suspected, it is very hard to keep this firing rate up for a long time. I have done it for 15 minutes at a time or so, that's how I got the fuel consumption figures. Also burn coal at times. I usually don't measure speed, but had my fish finder on one day and saw a speed ot 12.3 MPH.
The steam hydroplane racers are still at it in England, as far as I know. Last I heard top speeds now are around or better than 120 MPH. I think those boilers have abysmal efficiencies. But they go fast.
Are your efforts with the Lamont boiler available on the web somewhere?
Keep your steam up,
Terry</HTML>
Re: Draft Booster
Posted by: peter heid (IP Logged)
Date: July 23, 2002 06:44PM
<HTML>George / Terry,
If I get a chance I will check some Lamont boiler weights versus their output. I think I have 3 complete specifications 2 marine and 1 stationary safety valve test boiler, but remember most of these boilers were not run even close to the maximum firing rate because they ran out of burner before finding the limits of the boiler. Also weight may not have been as much of a concern to the marine and stationary Lamont builders. Many lamont tidbits mention the ability to run at 500% or more and some even say 1000% over the rated output. The velox doesn't seem advantagous compaired to the Lamont if for no other reason, the complexity. The book mentioned by George is the steam generator bible and before getting hooked on a specific design other than the Lamont, try to get this to read.
Peter Heid</HTML>
If I get a chance I will check some Lamont boiler weights versus their output. I think I have 3 complete specifications 2 marine and 1 stationary safety valve test boiler, but remember most of these boilers were not run even close to the maximum firing rate because they ran out of burner before finding the limits of the boiler. Also weight may not have been as much of a concern to the marine and stationary Lamont builders. Many lamont tidbits mention the ability to run at 500% or more and some even say 1000% over the rated output. The velox doesn't seem advantagous compaired to the Lamont if for no other reason, the complexity. The book mentioned by George is the steam generator bible and before getting hooked on a specific design other than the Lamont, try to get this to read.
Peter Heid</HTML>
Re: Draft Booster
Posted by: d (IP Logged)
Date: July 14, 2004 09:54PM
<HTML>@!#$</HTML>
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.