Union Pacific Steam Shop • Rebuilding the Firebox • 7 New Photos

  Thanks for posting Gary !

Are staybolts always welded in?

CHOO-CHOO MIKE posted:

  Thanks for posting Gary !

Hi Mike: Your welcome: and Tommy I will have the answer shortly about the welding on the staybolts.  Staybolts remove the heat from the firebox. Like a fin on an automotive radiator that removes heat.  Going out to dinner, be back shortly.

Gary

Tommy posted:

Are staybolts always welded in?

Generally no. The flexible staybolts are driven-over with an air hammer on the inside of the firebox (the round head of the flexible staybolts must be able to move slightly in their respective sockets on the outside, and then there is a cap screwed or welded over the sockets). Ridged staybolts are also driven-over on both the inside and outside. Sometimes they are seal-welded, but generally not when newly installed. 

Thanks to the Union Pacific RR for willing to put money into these great machines, and into the shop. These machines are an important part of American history.

Good luck to Ed Dickens and the crew.

Jim

I thought the UPP 4014 was going to run on oil?

They only have 13 monrhs to get her steaming for the 150th aniv. of the meet with Central Pacific.

Dominic Mazoch posted:

I thought the UPP 4014 was going to run on oil?

Correct.

Tommy posted:

Are staybolts always welded in?

Hi Tommy: 

Union Pacific Steam Crew will start replacing over 500 ‘StayBolts’ this Monday.  They are replacing the ’Staybolts, because of acidic ash residue trapped behind the heads on ’Staybolts’ and behind the firebox wall. The new rear steel tube sheet and new heavy steal forged tube plate has brought back strength to the firebox.

In the Union Pacific on line Magazine “Inside Track” March 23, 2018. they give the procedures.  It looks like they will be welding the heads on the ‘Staybolts’ to the firebox and bolting the other end to the out side of the locomotive.  When they publish the April Issue, we should have a better understanding of the process and new photos.

Photo 1 • This is a closeup photo of the new ‘Staybolts’ - looks like there is a threaded end, protected by a shipping net. Hopefully there will be better photos next month.

Photo 2 • (Example) This is a closeup of the ‘Staybolts’ on a steam locomotive. Not the ‘Big Boy’

Photo 3 • This is a cross section drawing of ‘Staybolts’. The Steam Crew will not be using this process, but it will help us to learn more about how ‘Staybolts’ are used.

Photo 4 • This is a simple illustration of how ‘Staybolts’ can be installed. Due to the high temperatures in the ‘Big Boys’ firebox / combustion chamber this process will not work.

Burning 28 tons of coal about every 3 to 4 hours is no longer practical or safe.  Rail-fans like myself would like to see them use coal, to be historically correct. Burning oil will give the ‘Big Boy’ a longer range and longer life on the rails. 

* I am going to have to double check the coal burning rate.

Hope this helps: Gary

Gary, I know you are all wound up over this project, but there is so much incorrect information in your posts that I don’t know where to begin!

• Staybolts do not conduct the heat away from the firebox. That’s not their purpose. Why would you want to conduct heat AWAY from the firebox? The whole point of the exercise is to keep the heat IN the firebox to make steam!
• The flue sheet is made of 9/16” “steal?” Does that mean they stole it? The word is “steel.”
• The coal consumption rate is based on it working at 100% power. This thing is going to be shoved around by diesels and will never work hard.
• There are many more errors, but I don’t have 3 hours to correct them all.

First of all, the only "steal" involves C&O 1309. Boilers are made of steel.

Second, there are several types of "staybolts" and then there are "radial stays" Radial stays generally have the sealing cap over the end you see sticking out of the boiler. Staybolts on the other hand, are the flatter ones on the sides of the firebox sheets. Side stays that are flat on the outside are generally threaded on bolts ends, the side sheets are tapped with a special tap, the stay then threads into the holes in both sheets, then the ends are welded and/or peened over. The round ends on the flexible stays are not welded to the outside of the boiler. THere is a steel shell welded to the boiler that the stay goes through, kinda forms a "ball joint" type fastener that allows the firebox to expand and move within the boiler as it comes up to operating pressure/temp. Then there is a cap with a copper seal that screws into the shell of the stay that seals the stay. THis is the piece with the square sticking off the top.

Third, the purpose of side staybolts is not to conduct heat, but to support the sheets of the firebox, as it's suspended in the boiler with additional support from the mud ring. The stays keep the pressure in the boiler from bowing and collapsing the firebox. A coal fire only burns so hot, it doesn't care if it's in a 0-4-0 firebox or a big boy, it's only gonna get around 2500 degrees. Those crescent shaped areas around the stays are to protect the ends of the staybolts from being abraded by the coal cinders.

OGR Webmaster posted:

Gary, I know you are all wound up over this project, but there is so much incorrect information in your posts that I don’t know where to begin!

• Staybolts do not conduct the heat away from the firebox. That’s not their purpose. Why would you want to conduct heat AWAY from the firebox? The whole point of the exercise is to keep the heat IN the firebox to make steam!
• The flue sheet is made of 9/16” “steal?” Does that mean they stole it? The word is “steel.”
• The coal consumption rate is based on it working at 100% power. This thing is going to be shoved around by diesels and will never work hard.
• There are many more errors, but I don’t have 3 hours to correct them all.

I am on my iPhone /. Watching March Madness / Florida State vs Michigan /. I will check back with you later. Take care Gary

steam fan posted:

Second, there are several types of "staybolts" and then there are "radial stays" Radial stays generally have the sealing cap over the end you see sticking out of the boiler.

Steam fan, you are better informed than Gary, but allow me to make a couple of corrections.  As far a types of staybolts, there are "rigid", and "flexible" staybolts, and "crown stays" which have either a tapered thread or "button head" on the crown sheet end.  A third type would be what Gary shows in his third post in the cross section with the red arrow is a "crown bar", kind of a bridge above the crown sheet, which is supported by "sling stays", what the red arrow is pointing at.  Crown bars generally disappeared from new construction prior to 1910, though there are still a number of them in service today.

As far as locations, there are "staybolts", either rigid or flexible, which are generally found between mainly parallel sheets on the sides, backhead, throat, and combustion chamber of a firebox, "radial bolts", either rigid or flexible, which are in the transition area between the side sheets and crown sheet, and "crown bolts", either rigid or flexible, that are over the crown sheet.

Gary please download (it takes a while) read and reread the Flannery Catalog pdf attached here.  It will clear up a lot that you don't seem to understand about staybolts.

Thanks, Kelly.

Yours is a well-written post with a good link to authoritative reference material.

Is the UP using contractors in rebuilding UPP 4018.

Dominic Mazoch posted:

Is the UP using contractors in rebuilding UPP 4018.

Yes.

Ed Dickens: Union Pacific Heritage Operations, Senior Manager

In his own words: Steel eyebrows are welded to the firebox to protect the ’Staybolts’.

Source: Union Pacific Railroad

Gary: A model rail roader who is also a enjoys rail-fanning with the Union Pacific Steam Crew

trainroomgary posted:

Ed Dickens: Union Pacific Heritage Operations, Senior Manager

In his own words: Steel eyebrows are welded to the firebox to protect the ’Staybolts’.

Except, those "eyebrows" were for when the 4000 class and 3900 class locomotives were burning coal, i.e. to reduce "cinder cutting" of the staybolts.  There would be absolutely no need for those "eyebrows" after 4014 is converted to oil burning. 

 

Source: Union Pacific Railroad

Gary: A model rail roader who is also a enjoys rail-fanning with the Union Pacific Steam Crew

 

Hot Water posted:

trainroomgary posted:

Ed Dickens: Union Pacific Heritage Operations, Senior Manager

In his own words: Steel eyebrows are welded to the firebox to protect the ’Staybolts’.

Except, those "eyebrows" were for when the 4000 class and 3900 class locomotives were burning coal, i.e. to reduce "cinder cutting" of the staybolts.  There would be absolutely no need for those "eyebrows" after 4014 is converted to oil burning. 

 Source: Union Pacific Railroad

Gary: A model rail roader who is also a enjoys rail-fanning with the Union Pacific Steam Crew

 

Well: What is your proof ?  •  That the "eyebrows" are not needed after the 4014 is converted to oil burning?  Ed Dickens and his crew is starting this project tomorrow.  I would like to send him an e-mail on this issue to protect this historic locomotive.

Gary: A model rail roader who is also a enjoys rail-fanning with the Union Pacific Steam Crew

Maybe because there's no bed of coal on grates alongside the firebox sheets?

Maybe because there's no cinders in oil soot???

steam fan posted:

Maybe because there's no bed of coal on grates alongside the firebox sheets?

Maybe because there's no cinders in oil soot???

Sorry: On a multi million dollar project, “Maybe” does not work.

Show me the proof, all you have is speculation:  The steam crew has the same facts about the acidic ash issue, causing erosion.  They will follow the correct procedures. 

Gary: A model rail roader who also enjoys rail-fanning with the Union Pacific Steam Crew.

It's true, the eyebrows are not needed on an oil burner.  On the other hand, having them there isn't going to hurt anything, though they may, repeat may create hot spots on the sheets.

Kelly Anderson posted:

It's true, the eyebrows are not needed on an oil burner.  On the other hand, having them there isn't going to hurt anything, though they may, repeat may create hot spots on the sheets.

Yes: This is the way to go. If there is no major issues.  Just leave the 'eyebrows'.  Removing over 500 'eyebrows' would not be cost effective. 

Gary: Just out rail-fanning, somewhere in the Great State of Michigan......

Yawn...

OK, not to drag this off into another tangent, but here's another "somewhat neophyte" question about the conversion from coal to oil:   Isn't the smoke created by the oil combustion going to be less be dense (read: less prototypical) than that of coal? 

Dan Fender posted:

OK, not to drag this off into another tangent, but here's another "somewhat neophyte" question about the conversion from coal to oil:   Isn't the smoke created by the oil combustion going to be less be dense (read: less prototypical) than that of coal? 

All smoke from a real steam locomotive be it fired by wood, coal or oil, is "prototypical." 

However, smoke is unburned and therefore wasted fuel.  Smoke on an oil burner is also a result of "sanding" the flues to clean out some of the soot build-up.

The sign of a good fireman is little to no smoke.

Rusty

Ed Dickens: Union Pacific Heritage Operations, Senior Manager

In his own words: Patch welding procedures & installing over 500 ’staybolts’. Using all code materials.

Source: Union Pacific Railroad; Cheyenne, Wyoming

Gary: A model railroader who also enjoys rail-fanning with the Union Pacific Steam Crew.

Gary, What is the point you are trying to make? No one is disputing the scale of the work involved with the project; rather it seems to be only your occasional enthusiastic misinformation that riles some people up. When the experts - Rich, Hot, Kelly - go out of their way to provide their knowledge to clear things up; it is best not to become confrontational in return - it does not make you look good. 

hullmat991 posted:

Gary, What is the point you are trying to make? No one is disputing the scale of the work involved with the project; rather it seems to be only your occasional enthusiastic misinformation that riles some people up. When the experts - Rich, Hot, Kelly - go out of their way to provide their knowledge to clear things up; it is best not to become confrontational in return - it does not make you look good. 

It is called learning together....

Sir: Now have a suggestion for you.

Read this rule at least three times,   •  OGR Forum Rule 6

Sometimes things can get heated in a discussion. While it's OK to dispute facts and opinions, it's not OK to engage in personal attacks of name-calling of ANY kind. That's a great way to start a fight and we do not allow fighting on this Forum.

Gary

Can we "please" stop putting "quotes" around the "word" staybolt? We all "know" what staybolts "are," and the "term" isn't so "unusual" that we "need" to "continually" put "quotes" around it "every" time.

trainroomgary posted:

 

 

You're going to need a bigger hammer......

smd4 posted:

Can we "please" stop putting "quotes" around the "word" staybolt? We all "know" what staybolts "are," and the "term" isn't so "unusual" that we "need" to "continually" put "quotes" around it "every" time.

Thank you!

Gary - no one is personally attacking you or calling you names.  Several gentlemen in this forum have extensive hands on experience is full size steam locomotive operation and maintenance and are trying to simply supply correct information.  As a power plant professional engineer I deal with boiler of all kinds and I can guarantee that if I was performing what is likely a permanent fuel change I would remove those eyebrows as well. The purpose of those things is to prevent abrasion of the fasteners, in this case the stay bolts, so that they don't get mechanically eroded.  

I love the fact that in this day of bottom line driven decisions the UP continues to support this program.

From a lot of the UP steam threads, I notice that you're the one who tends to get people fired up, because when someone from the holiest of them all at the UP doubletalks his way through what they're doing to a steam locomotive gets corrected by someone on here who has actually run a steam locomotive, you start posting like a teenager discovering Photoshop for the first time.

What Ed Dickens says in a video to justify his own existence at the UP isn't the final word.  He's had a track record of mishandling steam locomotives before, I believe.  He really isn't someone that should be regarded as a "be all and end all" for steam restoration.

Because you run a "steam engine" in your basement by turning the 'throttle' on a ZW doesn't make you an expert on a real locomotive, any more than I am.  But I know enough to listen on here when people who have run the real thing know what's needed.

Well...had quite a few alerts to this thread and had to take valuable time to edit out the obvious problems....so I will close this for now until things cool down.....