Steam & Excursion > Hydrostatic tests

The recent pics of the Cheyenne Shop tour and the subsequent remarks discussed hydrostatic testing.

There are several reasons behind performing these pressure tests.
The 'politics' of hydros tends to cloud the issue.

The purpose of the hydros is to reveal leaks.
Because WHERE they are is more important than if there are any.
Leaks that reveal faulty welds are of grave concern.  Repairs to welded joints require greater care in correcting.

Leaks from threaded, and other 'mechanical'  joints/seams are easily stopped, and are virtually free of concern.
One important purpose of the hydros is to stretch the staybolts, to open up any cracks in the stays.  
Certain staybolts are hollow-drilled, and cracks may open up leaks.  Any of these bolts leaking out the tell-tale holes are considered broken bolts &  must be replaced.  Doing a hydro early in the repair-planning stages can reveal repairs that will be required.

The ultrasound testing and report, depending on the the qualifications of the testing crew, can be a better test for verifying the overall integrity of the boiler's steel.   

Without greater explanations about the actual sources of these reported leaks, we're only kicking up dust, and speculating about things.

My concerns are more about this team's record around the 'operations' of this abused loco.
The best crews use various teams to perform specific duties --- excursion operations, scheduling, staffing.
Separate  crews to perform routine maintenance, a crew dedicated to the 1472-day work, financial expertise, etc

It is a mistake to try to do it ALL, no current practitioners of the restoration & operations of steamers think that they KNOW it all about every aspect of operating these beasts.  Anyone so arrogant is inevitably setting up his own path to failure and will have no one else to blame.

Do not fret over the passing of  'political' hydrostatic tests.
'Show-and-tell'  hydros have little to reveal, as they are late in the process--  you want to find broken staybolts at the beginning,
not near the end of repairs...

Successfully OPERATING theses locos is vastly more important.
The record of serious incidents already cased by this group, does not look good for a trouble-free future of running excursions.

We will have to wait and see, while following the steps of returning this great machine to operations.

W.

 



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 05/22/16 09:39 by wcamp1472.

That would be threaded joint leaks vs leaks indicating potential catastrophic failure. I'm still
harping on all those weld seams in the rear/door sheet area. With as much time as he's had, a
new, large patch could have been formed to eliminate about half those welds. Sheets move
under heat and pressure, the metal itself moves in a different manner than the material at
and around a weld. But hey, enough flex stays and some good luck and you're in!!

Out

callum_out Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That would be threaded joint leaks vs leaks
> indicating potential catastrophic failure. I'm
> still
> harping on all those weld seams in the rear/door
> sheet area. With as much time as he's had, a
> new, large patch could have been formed to
> eliminate about half those welds. Sheets move
> under heat and pressure, the metal itself moves in
> a different manner than the material at
> and around a weld. But hey, enough flex stays and
> some good luck and you're in!!
>
> Out

Not to mention that the current manager used DIFFERENT THICKNESS STEEL.  Shouldn't such "modifications" require an "amendment/revision" to the Form 4?

That would be a Form 19.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/22/16 10:33 by NathanNon-Lifting.

NathanNon-Lifting Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That would be a Form 19.

And a full re-calculation of the stresses.

ESPECIALLY along and either side of the weld line where
the thicker steel is welded to the the originally-specified
thickness steel.

Also new stress calculations where they installed staybolts
right in the weld lines.

       And if ( or when ) a catostrophic error occurs it will also require a visit to and include the 'assumed innocents' in Omaha. In these days of due diligence and the trail of responsibility I have yet to understand how those think ' all is well and nothing to see here '. Continue on, cocktails at 4:30 at the club, discuss our stock options and monthly XXX K salaries. 

Don't look Ethel!   With some of the KNOWN issues, it isn't exactly  warm & fuzzy wondering about what isn't known.
I'll sit out the steamup when it happens from Missouri.
Ross,  you'll die of loneliness waiting for someone to take you up on your bet.
IF different thicknesses are used in the side sheets or whatever, that's not good.  I don't look for it on the CFD trip because the old crew of drunks broke the frammus and a new one will have to be designed out of Kryptonite and there won't be time.
I hesitated for over a year before I joined in the fray on TO because when there gets to be that much smoke, there's gotta be a fire.  Just not in a UP engine.
There should be a memorial service for the poor 3985.  A good machine cut down in her prime.

Frisco1522 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There should be a memorial service for the poor
> 3985.  A good machine cut down in her prime.

Cut down DELIBERATELY in her prime!

Lest we forget  (Oct 2010, Topeka)

---

WHOA!

Look at those 2 dents in the tender!!

No wonder the Great One wants to retire this engine!

I've been thinking lately, how involved the local FRA steam man will be. Technically he doesn't have to be there for the hydro, so will he be there?

I'm just guessing here, but I think the FRA will play a big part in the future operations (if there are any) in Cheyenne. 

Defective_Detector Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I've been thinking lately, how involved the local
> FRA steam man will be. Technically he doesn't have
> to be there for the hydro, so will he be there?

Actually an FRA inspector MUST be present for the "official" hydro, and must be scheduled in advance, i.e. the current manager MUST give the inspector advance notice, and a choice of dates that are then MUTUALLY agreed upon.

> I'm just guessing here, but I think the FRA will
> play a big part in the future operations (if there
> are any) in Cheyenne. 

We can only hope so, but I'm not holding my breath. The current manager may just have been "snow jobbing" the newer FRA folks, just like he has been "snow jobbing" management in Omaha.

I am a total outsider here, but how is this happening? Would a word from an influental member of congress change things?

Role for Congress?
This is a private business enterprise.  Not a publically funded operation, like some other XXXXXTOWN organizations.

Congress's role went into generating the Law(s) that regulate Railroads.
The FRA is the proper authority to oversee, within the Law, the safe operation and regulatory oversight.
Refer to the applicable Law(s) that regulate Steam Locos.

Congress's purpose is to generate law proposals that fit the general population, and applies to all States,,equally.
The Law drafting process does not do well for applications to single-instance needs.

PLEASE KEEP CONGRESS OUT OF THIS.

You have no way of controlling what that bunch will do,  if they get to mucking around where they don't need to be.

W.
 

49 CFR Part 230.16 indicates the rules related to notifying FRA prior to the annual Hydro test.  As this is a 1472 day inspection, the boiler will need a hydro test prior to being placed into service.   

http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=8b4208f9d7a0a2ba7996d8939ce9de81&mc=true&node=se49.4.230_116&rgn=div8

It would be unlikely that FRA would elect to not attend the test.  Further, even when FRA does not attend a hydro, they do request the opportunity to attend a steam test prior to the locomotive being placed into service.  Steam test is not a "test run", it is a steam test that is designed to examine the boiler under steam as well as appliances.  Many groups (two of which come to mind in Colorado) performed an FRA Hydro (which took about 45 days to schedule) AND a steam test, all prior to a first break in run. 

When 844 was finished in 2005 FRA attended three events......four actually.  Internal inspection, hydro test, steam test and break in runs.  Why would it be different this time?

Did 844 pass an FRA hydro?  If it did you can rest assured that it would be posted on the official UP Facebook and Instagram pages.  The current trivia question quiz on the official Facebook page has a question about the debut of the 844.  If and when it passes, it will be a global media event.
 

wcamp1472 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> The purpose of the hydros is to reveal leaks.
> Because WHERE they are is more important than if
> there are any.
> Leaks that reveal faulty welds are of grave
> concern.  Repairs to welded joints require
> greater care in correcting.
> W.

This just kinda is driving me nuts.  You don't test welds with a hydro anymore then you check to see if a gun is loaded by pulling the trigger.  Any weld that leaks should of been rejected long before it ever leaks.  Even a crappy weld full of inclusions and prosity would hold quite a bit of pressure....

That is if you judge a weld by looks only.  Even a good looking weld can contain incomplete fusion.  It happens in the "code world" but usually only when you don't follow a procedure like pre heat or post weld heat treatment or when sheets are not properly prepared.  Leaking welds are items that "commissioned inspectors" would be very, very concerned with.  Qualified welder so normally do not face such events.  Just saying.....

Re: welds, above...

"Any weld that leaks should of been rejected long
> before it ever leaks....."   WHAT????
A little more clarity would help, here.

Yes, I have used ambient tempresture water, and "city"  water pressure for preliminary pressure testing.
During these types of testing, there is rarely a need to go to the 125% of MAWP.

Most items that leaked were resolved by readily available means.

And, yes, hydros are not designed to be the testing means for certifying secure welds.....BUT, hydros DO reveal welds that may have cracked over the service period of the loco.



[ Note:  My intent, during most of these 'essays' is to make the explanations simple enough for the interested public,
Not to write a complete treatise that causes MEGO ( my eyes glaze over) in most readers' tepid interest.  

For most folks the arcane methods of keeping these engines operational causes them to try to satisfy their aroused curiosity.  
My intent is to encourage those few folks that they can, indeed, grasp the basic concepts, and then find ways that take their current area of knowledge and expand it.

 By understanding something that they already have a solid grasp, and by analogy, they can gain enlightenment about an aspect of a whole new area of an ancient technology.  I attempt to preach the language of understanding, not the orthodoxy of text books...
.I have found that hungry minds, when curious enough, will soon get ALL  thecnical explanations they can handle.  But that level of interest is determined by the individual --- Today, with the Internet, there is an abundant source of mind boggling technical details ,
Laws, Regulations & detailed texts within easy reach).]

W.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 05/22/16 21:12 by wcamp1472.

Thank you Wcamp ...

Appreciate your efforts to educate and inform ... it certainly helped in my case ...

Odyssey
Evergreen, CO



 

What Odyssey said. d