Nostalgia & History > MILW electrification question

How much of the MILW ended up under wire? (where did it start and where did it end)?

As near as I can tell, the vast majority of the electrification was done in 1914-1916. They lasted for another 65 years or so. Why didn't they put any more of the road under wire in all that time? (Or did they?)

The electrified territories were Harlowton, MT to Avery, ID, 440 miles, and Othello, WA to Tacoma, WA, 216 miles. Avery to Othello known as "The Gap" never got wire account some bankruptcy issues on the railroad.

Posted from Windows Phone OS 7

fbe Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The electrified territories were Harlowton, MT to
> Avery, ID, 440 miles, and Othello, WA to Tacoma,
> WA, 216 miles. Avery to Othello known as "The Gap"
> never got wire account some bankruptcy issues on
> the railroad.
>

Pacific Extension completed in 1909.

Huge forest fire wipes out the white pine forest in Idaho in 1910.

Panama Canal opened in 1914.

Harlowton - Avery in full electric operation in 1917.

Othello - Tacoma in full electric operation in 1920.

Black River - Seattle in electric operation in 1927 (10 miles).

Purchase of the Southeastern (CTH&SE) in 1921-22.

First of three bankruptcies in 1925.

Best regards,

Rob L.

Do you know if they ever looked at wiring 'the gap', or going east of Harlowton?

lwilton Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Do you know if they ever looked at wiring 'the
> gap', or going east of Harlowton?

Going east of Harlowton, no.

The Gap (Idaho Division) was always planned for electrification (freight line via Malden, not passenger line via Spokane). The substation numbers on the Coast Division left room for the substations planned across the Idaho Division.

As fbe reported, bankruptcies got in the way and the Gap never got electrified. Last proposal concerning the Gap was from GE and the power companies in 1972. They proposed to electrify the Gap, raise the line voltage to 4,000V DC, provide additional electric motive power to eliminate need for diesels on the main line Harlowton - Tacoma, all with very attractive financing. But by then the Board of Chicago Milwaukee Corp. was determined to get out of the railroad business, not commit to it for the long term.

Best regards,

Rob L.

The substation locations for the Gap were selected and surveyed and needed connections with A/C providers were known. There might have plans for Boxcab II EF units which might have come out if the Gap had been delayed a decade or more or something like the Joes designed for the Mikwaukee with copies built for the Soviet Union. This is speculation on my part I have never heard of anyone talking with Lawrence Wylie about his long term vision and making notes for posterity.

Beyond Harlowton eastward, who knows. Once diesels became common place the advantages of electric traction motors over steam became available without the substantial fixed costs of electrical distribution infrastructure.

I have wondered how an established electrification system between Chicago and Tacoma would work out against the diesels especially if the electrification had been kept up to date like diesels were with new models every several years and full retirement after 15 years or so. When the SP was considering Donner Pass electrification it was decided an SD45 had 85% of all needed components necessary to make these fully electric locomotives. New electric units did not have to be custom designed at huge expense they could use off the shelf diesels with the prime mover replaced with solid state devices to convert line voltages to something the traction motors could use. A complete Harlotown to Tacoma electrified rail system could have been quite a testing ground.

Posted from Windows Phone OS 7

> When the SP was considering Donner Pass electrification it was decided an SD45 had 85% of all needed components necessary to make these fully electric locomotives.

Actually, the SP first started considering electrifying Donner c1908. Somewhere out there is a GE proposal from that era for it which escaped the the SP archives about 40 years ago. There were at least two types of locomotive proposed, one of them a bi-polar. Dynamic braking would be available even when there was a trolley power failure. I recall something about 3rd rail too (at 1,200 volts). I wish I had made a xerox copy of it when I had the chance because it disappeared shortly after I looked through it. PG&E sited and built it's American River power plants with this electrification in mind, however the Colorado River flooded the Salton Sink, Harriman died, and Julius Krutschnitt subsequently axed the idea. The SP revisited electrification several times over the succeeding decades, but the financial benefits were never there.

EtoinShrdlu Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > When the SP was considering Donner Pass
> electrification it was decided an SD45 had 85% of
> all needed components necessary to make these
> fully electric locomotives.
>
> Actually, the SP first started considering
> electrifying Donner c1908. Somewhere out there is
> a GE proposal from that era for it which escaped
> the the SP archives about 40 years ago. There were
> at least two types of locomotive proposed, one of
> them a bi-polar. Dynamic braking would be
> available even when there was a trolley power
> failure. I recall something about 3rd rail too (at
> 1,200 volts). I wish I had made a xerox copy of it
> when I had the chance because it disappeared
> shortly after I looked through it. PG&E sited and
> built it's American River power plants with this
> electrification in mind, however the Colorado
> River flooded the Salton Sink, Harriman died, and
> Julius Krutschnitt subsequently axed the idea. The
> SP revisited electrification several times over
> the succeeding decades, but the financial benefits
> were never there.

The 3300VAC power system for the Visalia Electric was a test bed for the Donner Pass electricification project.
But like you said, other things got in the way.

>The 3300VAC power system for the Visalia Electric was a test bed for the Donner Pass electricification project.
But like you said, other things got in the way.

Please remove a zero, as in 3,300 v AC. AC electrification voltages higher than 15 kv didn't arrive on the scene until after WWII (not sure about Europe).

The VE was 15 cycles (Hz to you kids), the Napa Valley Route, also an AC pioneer, was 25 cycles (upgraded from 330 v, 3,300 v a few years after opening for service). The reason for the low frequency is that it acts like AC in a transformer and DC in a traction motor. Frequencies much higher than 25 seriously overheat the commutator in traction motors. It was also a balancing act between the reduced costs of not having AC-DC conversion equipment in the substations and inductive problems in the iron rails (which was a bit of a chimera when all things were considered). Shortly after the time the PRR settled on 25 cycles, based on the New Haven's operations, 15 2/3 cycles was found to be the optimum frequency, which is what the early Swiss Federal Rys used 15 cycles (still does in places).

I've also been told by people who are in a position to know that the electrifications in Oakand and Portland were the first stages of electrifying all the way through between the two points. No matter which was the most serious test bed, the voltages being considered (3,300 AC and 1,200 DC) were way too low considering the power necessary for class 1 usage. Even the Milw's 3,300v DC is at the low end of practicality. In those days, there was also the question of adequate insulating materials. AC voltages of 25kv and 50kv at 60 cycles are practical these days because of solid state conversion equipment. The drawback, and deal killer, is still the cost of the overhead system.

I would have been fascinating had Donner been electrified (DC or AC).

EtoinShrdlu Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Even the Milw's
> 3,300v DC is at the low end of practicality.

Minor correction: After Laurence Wiley's upgrades in the 1950s, Milw Rd substation output was 3,400V. The 3,300 figure was conservative in that it reflected the worst case - the lowest it got between substations.

The 1972 proposal from GE and the power companies to Milw Rd called for raising the line voltage to 4,000V DC.

Best regards,

Rob L.

I suspect from notes I've read on the MILW electrification that there was a considerable amount of variation in practice. The original design seems to have called for a 100KV AC tie line between the substations, and then either 3MW or 6MW of rotary converters in a substation, making the nominal 3.3KV DC on the line. However, there was a requirement that the power drawn from the line could be adjusted from a 20% leading to 20% lagging power factor, which would affect the voltage on the 100KV end. There was also supposed to be a "load dispatcher" located at Deer Lodge, who had a knob that could be used to raise and lower the voltage output from the whole system; or rather two knobs, one for east and one for west of Deer Lodge.

The original setup was based on a train every two hours, of 4000 tons in one direction and 6000 tons in the other direction (I forget if the heavier load was east or west, I think it was eastbound). The line voltage could drop as much as 18% below nominal due to line resistance between substations. Track speeds were assumed in the 15-20 MPH range for trains.

You know more details about the original design than I know or have in my head.

The originally intended line voltage was 3,000V DC, and I believe that is what the voltmeters read at the substations before 1954 when the MG sets were running. In the early 1950s Wiley proposed to management to raise that to 3,400V DC. He was told the system couldn't handle it. But he didn't heed them. He went to the substations on the Coast Division and changed the meters to read 3,000V DC when the actual output was 3,400V DC. Everything worked fine, and the horsepower of the Box Motors was suddenly higher. (A 10% rise in voltage enables about a 21% increase in power.) So management relented, and Wiley went back and re-calibrated the meters. Substation maximums were raised from 3,200 to 3,600, enabling 3,300 out on the line. When I photographed the substations, the voltmeters read 3,400 when the MG sets were running. I was told they tried to avoid going up to 3,600 for fear of damage.

To boost output in the mountains, Wiley had to buy some more MG sets. He got two big ones for pretty cheap when Cleveland Union Terminal shut down their electrification. The CUT MG sets were installed at Janney (Rocky Mountains) and Cle Elum (Cascade Mountains), and the original MG set at Cle Elum was moved to Doris, raising Janney to 7,500 KW, Doris to 6,000 KW and Cle Elum to 3,000 KW. The Janney substation had to have a new wing added to accommodate the CUT MG set.

Best regards,

Rob L.

Voltages are "nominal", which means there is a target voltage around which there is a certain percentage of variation (+ or - so many per cent). This is the reason your 120v house power actually varies between 115 and 125 (occasionally a little more). The Milw was originally 3,000 v, but this was upped (don't know when) to 3,300. That 3,400 v figure (at the substation) was well within the tolerances of "nominal" and was for counteracting line losses at points furthest from the substations.

The idea is that higher voltages bring more power for what you're going to do. House power was originally 110; now it's approaching 125. Similarly, other RRs, like the South End of the SN, started out at one voltage (1,200) which was subsequently raised (to 1,500). Sprague designed all his apparatus around 550 dc. This quickly became 600, and revival "light rail" operations have upped this to 750. Running 550 volt apparatus on 750 is ill advised because that's a 40% increase in voltage, and "nominal" implies not much more than + - 10%. When you compare the voltages of electrfications between 1890 and 1920, you can see a steady increase in trolley voltage.

Who was Wiley? He seems to be about 40 years past my current readings. I'm guessing he possibly replaced Beowoukes as the chief electrical engineer?

The original M-G sets were designed to operate continuously at 10% overload, and for (5, 15? I forget) minutes at 50% overload without damage. So running them at 3400V uses up their safety margin, but was certainly within the original design.

There were memos early on about possibly running the line at 4KV or 6KV. As best I could determine (and remember with my failing memory) 6KV was decided by GE to be prohibitive to handle in locomotives. I don't recall why they decided to go to 3KV instead of 4KV. It is possible that much of the insulation would have been good for 4KV, though at the current point in my readings they are having a good deal of problems with insulator breakdown over time, though mostly on the 100KV line.

Yes, L. Wylie was later in electrification history. While you are reading the design and construction phase Wylie is the maturation and improvement era.

Russ Austin headed the substation gang out of Alberton. I don't know if he covered Harlo to Avery or if there was another crew on the east side of the Rocky Mountain Division. The MG sets got rewound in place by Russ' crew and improved insulation meant insulation was thinner so copper could be thicker. This meant more tons of copper in the MG leading to higher capacities.

For 60 year old machinery these substations were in amazingly good shape.

Posted from Windows Phone OS 7

lwilton Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Who was Wiley? He seems to be about 40 years past
> my current readings. I'm guessing he possibly
> replaced Beowoukes as the chief electrical
> engineer?

Milwaukee Chief Electrical Engineers:

Rainier Beeuwkes 1914 - 1947
Laurence Wylie 1948 - 1956 (Wylie continued as a consultant to Milw Rd during his retirement)
Earl Barnes 1957 - 1962
Barry Kirk 1963 - 1971
George Frazier 1972 - dismantling

>
> The original M-G sets were designed to operate
> continuously at 10% overload, and for (5, 15? I
> forget) minutes at 50% overload without damage.

No. M-G sets could provide 150% of rated power for up to two hours.

> So
> running them at 3400V uses up their safety margin,
> but was certainly within the original design.

That was not the way they achieved it. Wylie's scheme to increase voltage involved shimming the air gap between the generator rotors and stators from 3/8ths of an inch to 3/16ths on an inch. He quietly did this on the Coast Division in 1950 and changed the voltmeters to read 3,400 when they were actually putting out 3,000. It worked. It even worked when the M-G sets were being short-time overloaded. So then he went back to management and got formal approval for his fait accompli. And the voltmeters were re-calibrated to show the actual voltage. And then similar modifications were made on the Rocky Mountain Division. And this is why the continuous HP rating of the Joes was raised to 5,530.

So the "rated" point for measuring an allowed overload (up to 50% above that) on the M-G sets was raised by the same factor.

>
> There were memos early on about possibly running
> the line at 4KV or 6KV. As best I could determine
> (and remember with my failing memory) 6KV was
> decided by GE to be prohibitive to handle in
> locomotives. I don't recall why they decided to go
> to 3KV instead of 4KV. It is possible that much of
> the insulation would have been good for 4KV,
> though at the current point in my readings they
> are having a good deal of problems with insulator
> breakdown over time, though mostly on the 100KV
> line.

I have not read the detailed 1972 GE proposal so I don't know what specific set of modifications were proposed to achieve 4,000V. I do know that in the 1950s or 1960s Milw Rd changed out the original feeder wire for much heavier aluminum feeder wire which could deliver more current.

Best regards,

Rob L.

This was a good discussion. I have several books on the MILW, and I find it fascinating that the electrics operated as long as they did. I would like to model the Bipolar in 1 inch scale one day.

BTW the Little Joe's were made for the Soviet Union, and they (GE) could not sell they because of the Cold War. So they where offered to MILW. Wiley liked the Joe's, as did the crews. Again, I wish any railroad in the west would electrify their lines. It is so efficient.

CPRR Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This was a good discussion.

Thanks.

> I have several books
> on the MILW, and I find it fascinating that the
> electrics operated as long as they did.

Once the "locomotive" is sitting in a building, it doesn't wear out. And once all the money is spent to put the system up, it is very hard to walk away from its compelling economies.

The only reason the Milw Rd system ended when it did was because corporate management was determined to get rid of the entire railroad. A confidential deal for BN to take the Milwaukee had been reached, and as part of the deal BN insisted that there would be no investment in electrification or anything else on Lines West while the deal was pending.

>
>
> BTW the Little Joe's were made for the Soviet
> Union, and they (GE) could not sell them because
> of the Cold War.

Truman blocked the sale, asserting that the Joes were critical technology that should not fall into Soviet hands.

> So they were offered to MILW.
> Wiley liked the Joe's, as did the crews.

The tests went poorly. The Russian-style pantographs wouldn't maintain contact with the Milwaukee catenary. The tractive effort left much to be desired; they had a lot of problems with slipping trying to start a train. The Milw Rd Mechanical Dept. concluded that a Joe "is worth less than a GP7."

Wiley felt differently.

Best regards,

Rob L.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/30/14 18:03 by rob_l.

Thanks Rob. Great stuff

Much European AC electrification is at 16 2/3 Hz. I've not heard of 15 Hz but perhaps there is confusion with 15 kV.

The advantage of commercial frequency power (50 or 60 Hz) is so that conversion (rotary or solid state) is NOT needed. Although the lower frequency power is not needed for modern locomotives that either rectify the power to DC for DC traction motors or run inverter-driven AC induction motors (AC/DC/AC), there are still some technical advantages to it. Not enough to install it new but enough advantage to keep it where it exists such as much of our NEC. At the 1997 IEEE/ASME Joint Railroad Conference, a paper was presented that touted the continuing advantages of modern rotary converters over electronic (static) ones. ...presented by a manufacturer of them. (The conference papers as a bound volume is available at some university libraries.)