Steam & Excursion > 4014 Oil Burner Conversion

So the 4014 was converted from a coal burner to an oil burner. (sorry if this is a repeat subject recently).

I know UP tried this in the 50's with less then stellar results. What was different this time besides 70+ years of time and newer technologies to use ?

Technical details woud be great!

Thanks,
Mike

Quoting Hotwater in an earlier thread:

-------------------
I can't recall exactly which book Bill Kratville discussed the 4005 conversion to oil burning (actually Bunker C), but what NOT discussed/explained in Bill's book was the fact that once the shop forces corrected the burner alignment, and added additional firebrick, the end result was that 4005 steamed VERY well. Even though the 4005 turned out to be very successful as an oil burner, the main issue was fuel consumption westbound on Sherman Hill. There was a coal facility on "The Hill" in order to refuel the 4000 class and 3900 class coal burners, as needed (with a full tonnage westbound train the 4000 did indeed require a coaling stop on 'Th Hill').

The end result was, the UP was not about to spend the necessary funds required to install an oil fueling facility on "Th Hill", for only one class of locomotive. All the other oil burning locomotives could make it over "The Hill", without having to take on fuel, prior to Laramie. Thus, the 4005 was reconverted back to coal burning.
-----------------
https://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?10,4556809

I'm sure the oil being used now is much better than the old Bunker-C (hot tar) and has more BTU's. SP converted the AC-9's to oil also.

HardYellow Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm sure the oil being used now is much better
> than the old Bunker-C (hot tar) and has more
> BTU's. SP converted the AC-9's to oil also.

Not only that, the current oil fuel, i.e. reprocessed waste oil, is MUCH easier to deal with/handle, as it doesn't have to be heated to making move.

HardYellow Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm sure the oil being used now is much better
> than the old Bunker-C (hot tar) and has more
> BTU's. SP converted the AC-9's to oil also.

The AC-9's were converted to oil because they were being moved to a territory that used oil for fuel.
They were built for the only part of the SP empire that used coal for fuel because of a contractural obligation of the previous owner of the line.

I think we all understand that 4014 will probably never be asked to run at a maximum continuous power either.  Therefore the oil conversion does not have to generate 100% the output of the 1950's coal grates...

The UP engineering drawings (available through the UP Historical Society) show that the railroad removed the security circulators from the firebox when the 4005 was converted to oil firing. Security circulators are tube structures in an inverted “tee” configuration designed to provide a water path from the water spaces on either side of the firebox to the crown sheet forming the top of the firebox. This was apparently UP’s practice as the 3977 Challenger (preserved at North Platte, NE) also does not have circulators in its firebox and that is presumably the way it was when it was retired from service.

During the 4014’s conversion from coal to oil, the circulators were left in the boiler. This promotes natural circulation of water from the relatively cooler water spaces along the side walls of the firebox to the region of very vigorous boiling above the crown sheet. As water is the cooling medium for the steel sheets surrounding the firebox and combustion chamber, this circulation should improve the temperature uniformity in the boiler steel and (hopefully) reduce stresses in the staybolts and boiler structure. It is interesting to note that photos of the firebox work in Santa Fe 2926 show that that railroad also used a form of circulator tubes in their oil-burning fireboxes as well.

Scott Griggs
Louisville, KY

Posted from iPhone

HardYellow Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm sure the oil being used now is much better
> than the old Bunker-C (hot tar) and has more
> BTU's. SP converted the AC-9's to oil also.

Easier to handle, yes. Better than Bunker assuming that said Bunker was properly heated, not necessarily.  

Are they burning used crankcase oil, or is it a specific heating oil?

So what you are saying Wes and Jack, Ed needs to pull a stack train from Cheyanne to Omaha.

CPRR Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So what you are saying Wes and Jack, Ed needs to
> pull a stack train from Cheyanne to Omaha.

Well,,,,,,,at least from Cheyenne to North Platte, Nebraska.

Boring, Pocatello to Silver Bow!

Out