Model Boat Mayhem

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length.
Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Down

Author Topic: ships engines  (Read 14014 times)

john strapp

  • Guest
Re: ships engines
« Reply #50 on: October 14, 2007, 06:23:38 pm »

On Shell Tankers, we had a large diesel emergency fire pump, situated in the focsle which we used to start by the insertion of cartridges and thjen wind it round like hell!
Logged

JayDee

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 957
  • Model Boat Mayhem is the VERY Best !
  • Location: Warrington Cheshire.
    • JOHN DOWD
Re: ships engines
« Reply #51 on: October 14, 2007, 07:41:32 pm »

Hello,
Years ago, while working in Sunderland, I was smuggled into Doxfords works by an ex employee , who was working with me.
He was going to show me the big engine they were building, which was nearly finished.

We were ushered down dark passages and though doors, crossed over an empty yard, finally arriving at a small door, set in a very large sliding door.
The small door was opened and my friend said  " What do you think of that?".

I was presented with a view of what I thought, was a row of Terraced houses, with 3 rows of walkways on the side !!!.
I had no idea that a Marine engine was so BIG !!.

Then we heard someone coming and we had to leg it !.

John.  :)  :)  :)
Logged
My Projects, Photos and Videos
http://www.john-dowd.

Roger in France

  • Guest
Re: ships engines
« Reply #52 on: October 15, 2007, 06:12:39 am »

I had an old, large garden rotovator, a "Howard Gem" which started with an explosive cartridge. You undid a screwed port on top of the cylinder head, inserted a cartridge, replaced the screw cap and then threw over the starting handle. It used to fire off with one hell of a bang and the starting handle could have broken your arm if you held it wrongly so that it did not disengage!

The machine was known as "The Beast" in the family as it was so powerful and heavy but it did the job very well. I once came across an unseen house brick buried in the soil and The Beast sliced it in half!

Only a little off topic but we were talking about starting cartridges.

Roger in France.
Logged

DavieTait

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,149
  • Location: Fraserburgh
Re: ships engines
« Reply #53 on: October 15, 2007, 11:40:09 pm »

Want to see a really REALLY Huge ships engine...
http://gcaptain.com/maritime/blog/the-wartsila-sulzer-super-engine/
Logged
Davie Tait,
Scotland

Colin Bishop

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12,186
  • Location: SW Surrey, UK
Re: ships engines
« Reply #54 on: October 16, 2007, 01:15:46 pm »

Where's the dipstick?  ;)
Logged

HS93 (RIP)

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,922
  • I cannot spell , tough
  • Location: Rainhill UK
Re: ships engines
« Reply #55 on: October 16, 2007, 02:19:01 pm »

He is on the middle Gantry.! :D

Peter
Logged

Tankerman

  • Guest
Re: ships engines
« Reply #56 on: October 16, 2007, 02:36:49 pm »

  With reference to the Doxford Opposed Piston Engines it was even hairyer when one of those hoses burst spraying cooling water all over the Main D.C. Switchboard just for'd of the main engine!

  Tankerman
Logged

Bunkerbarge

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,512
  • Location: Halifax, UK
Re: ships engines
« Reply #57 on: October 16, 2007, 06:48:37 pm »

Want to see a really REALLY Huge ships engine...
http://gcaptain.com/maritime/blog/the-wartsila-sulzer-super-engine/


That is the very engine that started this thread off.
Logged
"Dirty British coaster with a salt-caked smoke stack, Butting through the Channel in the mad March days"

Stavros

  • Guest
Re: ships engines
« Reply #58 on: October 16, 2007, 06:55:22 pm »

Ok what Tug did that fit in then O0

Stavros
Logged

polaris

  • Shipmate
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 0
Re: ships engines
« Reply #59 on: October 17, 2007, 05:53:28 pm »


What's the 0 - 60 performance?! ;D ::)
Logged

tubby tomo

  • Guest
Re: ships engines
« Reply #60 on: October 23, 2007, 05:43:21 pm »

hi everyone it just proves how good the mayhem works i just typed ships engines and what a fantastic  lot of good chat keep go lads
Logged

Martin (Admin)

  • Administrator
  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 23,414
  • Location: Peterborough, UK
    • Model Boat Mayhem
Re: ships engines
« Reply #61 on: May 10, 2009, 11:42:56 am »

The Wartsila-Sulzer RTA96-C turbocharged two-stroke diesel engine is the most powerful and most
efficient prime-mover in the world today. The Aioi Works of Japan 's Diesel United, Ltd built the first engines and
is where some of these pictures were taken. It is available in 6 through 14 cylinder versions, all are inline engines.
These engines were designed primarily for very large container ships. Ship owners like a single engine/single
propeller design and the new generation of larger container ships needed a bigger engine to propel them.
The cylinder bore is just under 38" and the stroke is just over 98".
Each cylinder displaces 111,143 cubic inches (1820 liters) and produces 7780 horsepower.
Total displacement comes out to 1,556,002 cubic inches (25,480 liters) for the fourteen cylinder version.

Some facts on the 14 cylinder version:
 Total engine weight:  2300 tons (The crankshaft alone weighs 300 tons.)
  Length:  89 feet
  Height:  44 feet

Fuel consumption at maximum power is 0.278 lbs per hp per hour (Brake Specific Fuel Consumption). Fuel consumption
at maximum economy is 0.260 lbs/hp/hour. At maximum economy the engine exceeds 50% thermal efficiency. That is,
more than 50% of the energy in the fuel in converted to motion. For comparison, most automotive and small aircraft
engines have BSFC figures in the 0.40-0.60 lbs/hp/hr range and 25-30% thermal efficiency range. Even at its most
efficient power setting, the big 14 consumes 1,660 gallons of heavy fuel oil per hour.

Maximum power: 108,920 hp at 102 rpm
Maximum torque: 5,608,312 lb/ft at 102rpm

Logged
"This is my firm opinion, but what do I know?!" -  Visit the Mayhem FaceBook Groups!  &  Giant Models

BarryM

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,701
  • Location: West Lothian
Re: ships engines
« Reply #62 on: May 10, 2009, 01:32:30 pm »

Huh, while you are all going 'Ooh' and 'Aah' over these bits of unbalanced iron with their uncertain starting and fire-breeding high pressure fuel systems, I can only think "Mechanised Plumbing".  None of this matches the purity of Gentlemens' Engineering that was Steam Turbine powered.

Barry M
(Fist Class Engineer, Steam and Motor)
Logged

Bunkerbarge

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,512
  • Location: Halifax, UK
Re: ships engines
« Reply #63 on: May 10, 2009, 02:40:52 pm »

It always makes me smile when the steam engineers extol the virtues of the turbine and it's inherent perfect balance, quiet operation, size and reliability but completely omit to mention the monstrous great behemoth of a boiler, burning road tar at a staggering rate and requiring digging out on a regular basis with the thermal efficiency not much better than an average domestic kettle required to run the thing!! 

Then when you get into all the condensers, preheaters, economisers, superheaters, sootblowers, evaporators and all the other added complications needed to try to get the overall plant efficiency somewhere near acceptable it's not really surprising that the diesel engine took over.
Logged
"Dirty British coaster with a salt-caked smoke stack, Butting through the Channel in the mad March days"

BarryM

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,701
  • Location: West Lothian
Re: ships engines
« Reply #64 on: May 10, 2009, 04:15:08 pm »

There speaks the Diesel Plumber who has sold his soul to infernal combustion and unbalanced masses.  True, the condenser ensured that overall turbine plant efficiencies would never exceed 35% even if boiler efficiencies reached 80% (rather more than the "average domestic kettle") but then again you're from the younger generation who had little choice but to join motorships and pull units and dive crankpits for the rest of their seagoing careers.  Poor soul, you know no better.

Regards,

Barry M

PS. Remind me again, what is it the cause of  90% of engine room fires? Oh yes, cracked high pressure fuel lines on diesels.
Logged

Bryan Young

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,883
  • Location: Whitley Bay
Re: ships engines
« Reply #65 on: May 10, 2009, 06:31:35 pm »

That only seems like a lot of power of course because it is in a single engine but there are many ships around with higher powered multi-engined installations.

The QE2 for example has a total engine power of about 130,000 hp but that is split into 9 seperate and independant engines.

The biggest single engine I have sailed with was by the same manufacturer and was a 10 RND90.

That was a 10 cylinder 900mm bore engine.  They have upped the cylinder size now to 960mm.

As for fuel don't be fooled into thinking that the fact that it is a residual fuel means it is a poor quality.  Residual fuels actually have a higher calorific value than fractions from higher up the column which is one of the problems that used to be encountered when engines changed over from heavy to diesel in port.  You actually get less power out of it for a given rpm.

Strangely enough the industry has gone away from that now for a number of years and heavy fuels are used all the time but new legislation being considered around the world may force ships to use diesel in port again for the purposes of emmission control.
Interesting, that reply. Many years since was on a "heavy oil" ship. Is FFO a bit of a mixture then? I know that FFO is still very dark brown in colour but is still pretty "runny"when handled. Just asking. BY.
Logged
Notes from a simple seaman

Bryan Young

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,883
  • Location: Whitley Bay
Re: ships engines
« Reply #66 on: May 10, 2009, 06:39:46 pm »

On the question of fuel oil and its propensity to thicken and even solidify at lower temperatures, it would seem logical to conclude that should one of these vessels sink in deep water, the low temeratures found at great depths would solidify the stuff sufficiently to prevent it leaking out of the bunkers. Yes/No?
Deep, deep water does not necessarily mean "cold". Temperature thermals exist at every depth....apart from pressure, life seems abundant "down there" (and also in Australia). BY.
Logged
Notes from a simple seaman

Jimmy James

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 987
  • Location: Kings Lynn Norfolk
Re: ships engines
« Reply #67 on: May 10, 2009, 08:53:02 pm »

early 60's Sailed with Doxford J's & P's (heavy fuel engine's ( No 9 Bunker oil))on two of the Baron Boats and the Prospero (Ex Regent Springbok) Seamed to me that the Doxford's either ran well or gave no end of trouble .....We were 42 days in the Prospero on passage from Panama to Auckland N Z  stopping every 2 or 3 days for repairs ....in the end we were so short of diesel the chief dis connected one piston and we steamed for about 2 weeks at 4.5 kits because we didn't have enough diesel to restart the main engine if we stopped it. spent 6 weeks (very nice it was too) in N Z waiting for spares and repairs.
Freebooter
Logged
Retired  Ships Officer/ Master.
Experience: 50+ years at sea under Sail, Steam & Motor
Kings Lynn

Bunkerbarge

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,512
  • Location: Halifax, UK
Re: ships engines
« Reply #68 on: May 10, 2009, 09:22:48 pm »

That only seems like a lot of power of course because it is in a single engine but there are many ships around with higher powered multi-engined installations.

The QE2 for example has a total engine power of about 130,000 hp but that is split into 9 seperate and independant engines.

The biggest single engine I have sailed with was by the same manufacturer and was a 10 RND90.

That was a 10 cylinder 900mm bore engine.  They have upped the cylinder size now to 960mm.

As for fuel don't be fooled into thinking that the fact that it is a residual fuel means it is a poor quality.  Residual fuels actually have a higher calorific value than fractions from higher up the column which is one of the problems that used to be encountered when engines changed over from heavy to diesel in port.  You actually get less power out of it for a given rpm.

Strangely enough the industry has gone away from that now for a number of years and heavy fuels are used all the time but new legislation being considered around the world may force ships to use diesel in port again for the purposes of emmission control.
Interesting, that reply. Many years since was on a "heavy oil" ship. Is FFO a bit of a mixture then? I know that FFO is still very dark brown in colour but is still pretty "runny"when handled. Just asking. BY.

The fuel we use is pretty much a high density fuel having an SG of sometimes over 0.99.  You have to get it over 40 deg C to pump it and over 130 deg C to be able to atomise it in an engine.

As for Doxfords I sailed on the last production Doxford, a three cyliner, 375 rpm engine.  Fascinating to watch in operation and to work on and I have a number of stories related to that particular engine that would raise an eyebrow or two.
Logged
"Dirty British coaster with a salt-caked smoke stack, Butting through the Channel in the mad March days"

Bunkerbarge

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,512
  • Location: Halifax, UK
Re: ships engines
« Reply #69 on: May 10, 2009, 09:24:42 pm »

There speaks the Diesel Plumber who has sold his soul to infernal combustion and unbalanced masses.  True, the condenser ensured that overall turbine plant efficiencies would never exceed 35% even if boiler efficiencies reached 80% (rather more than the "average domestic kettle") but then again you're from the younger generation who had little choice but to join motorships and pull units and dive crankpits for the rest of their seagoing careers.  Poor soul, you know no better.

Regards,

Barry M

PS. Remind me again, what is it the cause of  90% of engine room fires? Oh yes, cracked high pressure fuel lines on diesels.


Well if you want to make sweeping assumptions about my career I'm going to be the last one to enlighten you.
Logged
"Dirty British coaster with a salt-caked smoke stack, Butting through the Channel in the mad March days"

Bob

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 46
  • Location: Invercargill, NZ
Re: ships engines
« Reply #70 on: May 11, 2009, 10:21:58 am »

This would have made a noise.
Bob
Logged

polaris

  • Shipmate
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 0
Re: ships engines
« Reply #71 on: May 11, 2009, 01:25:46 pm »


Dear Bob,

I presume the failure of the crank bearing caused a sudden dead stop to bend the con rod?

Meanwhile... what happend to the piston?! - let alone the rest of the engine...

Regards, Bernard
Logged

Martin (Admin)

  • Administrator
  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 23,414
  • Location: Peterborough, UK
    • Model Boat Mayhem
Re: ships engines
« Reply #72 on: May 11, 2009, 01:54:41 pm »


                                           :o :o :o
Logged
"This is my firm opinion, but what do I know?!" -  Visit the Mayhem FaceBook Groups!  &  Giant Models
Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Up
 

Page created in 0.109 seconds with 21 queries.