Re: Turbines

[Steve Stegmann <stegmann@domain.elided>]

Greg,

There've been lots of these combined cycle powereplants.  They work.
Usually the capital cost and maintenance can't be justified.  Think what
you could achieve with a recip steam which condensed in the cylinder.  The
earilest steam engines worked this way, 1700's or so.

Steve

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steven A. Stegmann
     _/_/_/    _/      _/_/_/ "No free man shall ever be debarred the use
   _/    _/   _/_/   _/    _/  of arms.  The strongest reason for the 
   _/        _/ _/   _/        people to retain the right to keep and bear
    _/_/    _/  _/    _/_/     arms is, as a last resort, to protect 
       _/  _/_/_//       _/    themselves against tyranny in government"
 _/    _/ _/    _/ _/    _/    
 _/_/_/  _/     _/ _/_/_/         Thomas Jefferson, June 1776
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Mon, 3 May 1999, Greg Hermann wrote:

> >You're right, some of the others were gas turbines- why did they need the
> >extra water tender?
> 
> On the big blows--that was not a tender full of water--it was full of fuel
> oil!!!!
> >
> >>"messed around with"--they saw main line freight service between Ogden and
> >>Cheyenne for many years. Mostly on the big grades between Ogden and Green
> >>River and between Cheyenne and Laramie (the "Sherman" grade). The combined
> >
> >
> >Did you ever see the picture of one of them lashed up with a Big Boy?
> >Pretty neat shot.
> 
> never saw that picture. Have crawled around on the big boy that sits at the
> Forney transportation museum in Denver, tho. Pretty interesting machine.
> Some of the castings on it are truly amazing!
> >
> >>cycle locomotive I mentioned seeing--which was not publicized that I know
> >>of--appeared to be a gas turbine electric with a (condensed) recip steam
> >>bottoming cycle.
> >
> >
> >Mebbie that was the one with the two tenders.
> >
> The combined cycle gas turbine-recip steam unit ---I saw--in service on the
> main line-- in late '91. Never have seen ANY publicity on it. It was a
> relatively new thing at that time, so far as I know. Never have seen any
> mention of it anywhere!! And--as I said--no water tender, no steam plume. I
> think it had a condenser!! Maybe just carried enough water on its back for
> evaporative cooling of the condenser.
> 
> But--if you think about it --the last big steam hogs were about perfected
> for 300 psi steam. And 300 psi steam is about exactly what you can make off
> of the exhaust heat stream from a gas turbine!! A rather elegant bit of
> engineering if I really saw what I think I did! I would bet such a design
> could achieve a fuel efficiency in the low 60% range.
> 
> Regards, Greg
> 
> 
> 
>