LMOA · 2017. 9. 15. · delivery: diesel fuel, lube, oil, water heated hose reel cabinets (boom,...

LMOALocomotive Maintenance Officers Association

Proceedings of the

71st Annual Meeting

September 16-18, 2009

Chicago Hilton & Towers

720 S. Michigan Ave.

Chicago, Illinois

WORLD WIDE LEADER IN LOCOMOTIVEFUELING & SERVICING EQUIPMENT

SPECIALIZIKG IN VARIOUS TYPES OF LIQUIDDELIVERY: DIESEL FUEL, LUBE, OIL, WATER

HEATED HOSE REEL CABINETS (BOOM, COLUMN, PLATFORM)HEATED TOTE CABINETS

NEW & REQUALIFIED FUEL CRANES

FULL RANGE OF NOZZLES UP TO 300 GPM

NEW & REQUALIFIED DROP HOSES

NEW & REQUALIFIED PUMP SKIDS

WAYSIDE FUEL FILTERS

FUEL TANK ADAPTERS

SOLID STICK WHEEL FLANGE LUBE SYSTEM

EMD STYLE EXHAUST FLEX JOINTS

"0" RINGS

CUSTOM FABRICATION

TURBO SCREEN REQUAL1FICATI0N

1375 W. SNYDER BOULEVARD • NIXA, MO 65714 USAPH: 800-641-4512 • FX: 417-725-4846

www.snyderequip.com • EMail: [email protected]

Locomotive Maintenance Officers Association 1

2009 ADVERTISERS INDEX

LOCOMOTIVE MAINTENANCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION

AMGLO KEMLITE LABORATORIES 13

AMSTED RAIL GROUP 211

BACH-SIMPSON 193 & 195

CLARK FILTER CORP 67

GRAHAM WHITE MANUFACTURING 139

INDUSTRY SPECIALTY CHEMICALS, INC 61

KIMHOTSTART 105

LPI LIFT SYSTEMS 221

MAGNUS, LLC 231

MIBA BEARINGS, U.S 119

MOSEBACH MANUFACTURING 19

NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CARBON PRODUCTS 163

NATIONAL RAILWAY EQUIPMENT CO 87

PEAKER SERVICES, INC OUTSIDE BACK COVER

PENN LOCOMOTIVE GEAR INSIDE BACK COVER

Locomotive Maintenance Officers Association

POWER RAIL 125

PREDICT 44

RAIL PRODUCTS INTL. INC 207

RAILROAD FRICTION PRODUCTS 159

SAFETY KLEEN SYSTEMS, INC 31

SIMMONS MACHINE TOOL 217

SNYDER EQUIPMENT, INC INSIDE FRONT COVER

TAME, INC 229

TRANSPORTATION EQUIPMENT SUPPLY CO 215

ZTR CONTROL SYSTEMS 171, 173, 175, 177, 179

LOCOMOTIVE MAINTENANCE OFFICERS

APPRECIATES THESE 2009 SUPPORTING ADVERTISERS

AMGLO KEMLITE LABORATORIES MOSEBACH MFG. SIMMONS MACHINE TOOL

AMSTED RAIL GROUP NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CARBON PROD. SNYDER EQUIPMENT CO. INC.

BACH-SIMPSON NATIONAL RAILWAY EQUIPMENT CO. TAME, INC.

CLARK FILTER CORP. PEAKER SERVICES. INC. TRANSPORTATION EQUIP. SUPPLY CO.

GRAHAM WHITE MANUFACTURING PENN LOCOMOTIVE GEAR ZTR CONTROL SYSTEMS

INDUSTRY SPECIALTY CHEMICALS, INC. POWER RAIL MFG.

KIM HOTSTART PREDICT

LPI LIFT SYSTEMS RAIL PRODUCTS INTL. INC.

MAGNUS, LLC RAILROAD FRICTION PRODUCTS

MIBA BEARINGS U.S. SAFETY KLEEN SYSTEMS INC.

ATTENTION ALL MEMBERS:

WE DO NOT ENDORSE ANYONE'S PRODUCT, BUT WE DO APPRECIATE OUR ADVERTISERS.Listed above are the names of the ADVERTISERS whose ads appear in our ANNUAL PUBLICATION.We appreciate the fine financial support these advertisers provide.We hope to see these and many more advertisers' names displayed in this fashion at all of our future ANNUAL MEETINGS.Be sure to read their ads in the Annual Publication.

3

S

CD3

CO

COoo


INDEX

STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS - 2008 23

ACCEPTANCE SPEECH - 2008 25

FUEL, LUBE AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE 28-80

NEW TECHNOLOGIES COMMITTEE 81-114

DIESEL MECHANICAL MAINTENANCE COMMITTEE 115-158

DIESEL ELECTRICAL MAINTENANCE COMMITTEE ....160-203

DIESEL MATERIAL CONTROL COMMITTEE 204-209

SHOP EQUIPMENT AND PROCESSES COMMITTEE ..210-228

LMOA BY-LAWS 230-233

RECAP PRIOR TECHNICAL PAPERS 234-251


2008 LMOA MVP RECIPIENTS

The executive boardof LMOA wishes to congratulate the following individu

als who were selected as the Most Valuable Peopleof their respective commit

tees in 2008.

Name

Steve Fritz

John Hedrick

Chris Mainz

Bill Peterman

Randall Slomski

TadVolkmann

Committee

Fuel, Lubricants & Environmental

Diesel Mechanical Maintenance

Diesel Material Control

Shop Equipment and Processes

Diesel Electrical Maintenance

New Technologies

This honor is bestowed on an annual basis to those individuals who

perform meritorious service and makesignificant contributions to theirrespective technical committees.

LMOA EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE


THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF LMOA

WISHES TO EXPRESS THEIR SINCERE THANKS

TO THE NORFOLK SOUTHERN AND ESPECIALLY

TO DON FAULKNER AND HIS STAFF FOR

HOSTING OUR ANNUAL JOINT TECHNICAL

COMMITTEE MEETING IN

ALTOONA, PENNSYLVANIA ON

MAY 4TH AND 5TH, 2009

DON TOOK TIME OUT OF HIS BUSY

SCHEDULE TO CONDUCT SHOP TOURS OF

THE JUNIATA SHOPS

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, DON

WE ALSO WISH TO THANK LARRY CONRAD

OF BROOKVILLE EQUIPMENT CORPORATION

IN BROOKVILLE, PENNSYLVANIA FOR

TAKING MEMBERS OF THE LMOA COMMITTEE

ON A SHOP TOUR OF THEIR FACILITY

RICK ORTYL OF METRO EAST AND

BRIAN MARTY OF HELM HOSTED LUNCHES

FOR THE LMOA COMMITTEES ON

MAY 4TH AND 5TH IN ALTOONA -

WE APPRECIATE THEIH CONTINUED SUPPORT


LMOA ALSO WISHES TO EXPRESS THEm

DEEP GRATITUDE TO

DWIGHT BEEBE

OF TEMPLE ENGINEERING

FOR AGAIN HOSTING

THE LMOA LUNCHEON ON

TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 23,2008

DURING THE ANNUAL CONVENTION

AT THE CHICAGO HILTON AND TOWERS.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, DWIGHT.


PAST PRESIDENTS

1939 & 1949 - F. B. DOWNEY (Deceased) Shop Supt., C &O Ry.1941 - J. C. MILLER (Deceased ), MM, N.Y.C. & St. L.R.R.1942-1946, Inc - J. E. GOODWINN (Deceased) Exec. Vice President C. & N.W. Ry.1947 - S. O. RENTSCHILLER (Deceased) ChiefMechanical Officer, Bessemer and

Lake Erie R.R.

1948 - C. D. ALLEN (Deceased)Asst CM.O. - Locomotive, C. &O. Ry. & B.&O. R.R.1949 - J. W. HAWTHORNE (Deceased) Asst Vice-Pres.- Equipment, Seaboard

Coast Line R.R.

1950 - G. E. BENNET (Deceased) Vice-Pres.-Gen. Purchasing Agent, C. & E. I. Ry.1951 - P. H. VERD (Deceased) Vice-Pres.-Personnel, E. J. & E. Ry.1952 - H. H. MAGILL (Deceased) Master Mechanic, C. & N. W. Ry.1953 - S. M. HOUSTON (Deceased) Gen. Supt Mech. Dept Southern PacificCo.1954 & 1955 - F. D. SINEATH, Retired Chief of Motive Power, Seaboard Coast Line R.R.1956 - T.T. BUCKLE (Deceased) General Manager - Mechanical, A T. & S. F. Ry.1957 - J. T. DAILEY (Deceased) Asst to Pres.-Mech., Alton & Southern R.R.1958 - F. E. MOLLOR (Deceased) Supt Motive Power,Southern PacificCo.1958 - F. R. Denny (Deceased) Mechanical Supt, New Orleans Union Passenger

Terminal

1959 - E.V. MYERS (Deceased) Supt. Mechanical Dept, St Louis-Southwestern Ry.1960 - W. E. LEHR (Deceased) Chief Mechanical Officer, Pennsylvania R.R.1961 - O. L. HOPE,(Deceased) Asst Chief MechanicalOfficer,Missouri PacificR.R.,1962 - R. E. HARRISON (Deceased) Manager-Maintenance Planning & Control,

Southern Pacific Co.

1963 - C. A. LOVE, (Deceased) Chief Mechancial Officer, Louisville & NashvilleR.R.

1964 - H. N. CHASTAIN, (Deceased) Gen. Manager-Mechanical, A. T. & S. F. Ry.1965- J. J. EKIN, JR. (Deceased) Supt. Marine & Pier Maintenance, B. & O. R.R.1966 - F. A. UPTON II (Deceased)Asst Vice-President-Mechanical, C M.St P.& P.R.R.1967 - G. M. BEISCHER, Retired Chief Mechancial Officer, National Railroad

Passenger Corp. Washington, D.C. 200241968 - G. F.BACHMAN, (Deceased) Chief Mechanical Officer,

Elgin Joilet & Eastern Ry.1968 - T. W. BELLHOUSE (Deceased) Supt. Mechanical Dept, S. P. Co., - St. L

S.W. Ry.1970 - G. R.WEAVER (Deceased) DirectorEquipmentEngineering, Penn Central Co.,1971 - G. W. NEIMEYER (Deceased) Mechanical Superintendent, Texas & Pacific

Railway1972 - K.Y.PRUCHNICKI (Deceased) General Supervisor Locomotive Maintenance,

Southern Pacific Transportation Company1973 - W. F. DADD, (Deceased) Chief Mechanical Officer, Chessie System1974 - C. P. STENDAHL, Retired General manager M.P.-Electrical, Burlington

Northern Railroad

1975 - L H. BOOTH, (Deceased) Retired Assistant GM.O.-Locomotive, ChessieSystem,

1976 - J. D. SCHROEDER, Retired Assistant C.M.O.-Locomotive BurlingtonNorthern Railroad, 244 Carrie Drive, Grass Valley, CA 95942

1977 - T. A. TENNYSON (Deceased) Asst Manager Engineering-Technical,Southern Pacific Transportation Co.

1978 - EE DENT, (Deceased)SuperintendentMotivePower, Missouri Pacific Railroad,1979 - E. T. HARLEY, Retired SeniorVice PresidentEquipment, Trailer Train Company,

289 Belmont Road, King of Prussia, PA 19406


1980 - J. H. LONG, (Deceased) Manager Locomotive Dept, Chessie System1981 - R. G. CLEVENGER, Retired General Electrical Foreman, Atichison, Topeka &

Sante Fe Rwy.1982 - N.A. BUSKEY (Deceased) Asst General Manager-Locomotive,Chessie System1983 - F. D. BRUNER (Deceased) Asst Chief Mechanical Officer-R. & D. Union

Pacific Railroad1984 - R. R. HOLMES, Retired,Director Chemical Labs and Environment Union Pacific1985 - D. M. WALKER, Retired, Asst Shop Manager, Norfolk Southern Corp.,

793 Windsor St, Atlanta, GA 303151986 - D. H. PROPP, Retired Burlington Northern RR & Vice President, Ontrack,

8913 West 161st St, Overland Park, KS 660851987 - D. L WARD, (Deceased) Coord.-Quality Safety &Tech. Tmg. Burlington

Northern R.R.1988 - D.G. GOEHRING, Retired, Supt Loco.Maint, National RRPassenger Corp.,

1408 Monroe, Lewisburg, PA 178371989 - WILLIAM A. BROWN, Retired, l&M Rail Link,

9047 NE 109th St, Kansas City, MO 641571990 - P. F. HOERATH, Retired Sr. Mech, Engr. Shops, Conrail,

Box 134, R.R. 4, Hollidaysburg, PA 166481991 - D. D. HUDGENS, Retired,Sr. Mgr. R&D, Union Pacific, 16711 Pine St,

Omaha, NE 681301992 - K. ALLEN KELLER, Retired, Supt Loco. Maint, Reading, R.R.,

241 E. Chestnut, Cleona, PA 170421993 - W. R. DOYLE, Project Manager, Sound Transit, Seattle, WA 981041994 - M.A. COLES, Senior Mgr.-Loco. Engineering &Quality, Union PacificR.R.

1400 Douglas St, Stop 1050, Omaha, NE681791995 - C.A.MILLER, Retired, Mgr.-Loco. Engineering & Quality, Union PacificRR.

1728 S. 167 Circle, Omaha, NE 681301996 - G.J. BRUNO, Retired, Supt - Mechanical,

Amtrak, 14142 S.E. 154th PI., Renton, WA1997- D.M. WETMORE, General Supt - Fuel Opns., NJTRail Opns.

1148 Newark Turnpike, Kearny, NJ 070321998- H.H.(MIKE) PENNELL, Ellcon National, 1016 Williamsburg Lane,

Keller, TX 762481999- JAKE VASQUEZ, Retired, Asst Superintendent-Terminal Services,Amtrak

1130 Walnut Ave., Osawatomie, KS 660672000- RON LODOWSKI, Asst Shift Supt, CSXTransportation

Selkirk, NY 121582001- LOU CALA,Consultant, LJC Rail, Duncansville, PA 166352002- BOB RUNYON, EngineeringConsultant, Roanoke, VA240192003- BRIAN HATHAWAY, Consultant Port Orange, FL321292004- BILL LECHNER, Senior General Foreman-lnsourcing-Air Brakes, Governors &

Injectors, Norfolk Southern Corp., Altoona, PA 166012005- TADVOLKMANN, Director-Mechanical Engineering, Union Pacific RR,

Omaha, NE 681792006- BRUCEKEHE, Sr. Mech. Supvr., CN Rwy.

Gary, IN 464022007- LES WHITE, Technical Sales Rep., Bach-Simpson

London, Ontario N4W 2C22008- MIKE SCARINGE, Director-Locos., Amtrak

Beech Grove, IN 46109

HONORARY LIFE MEMBERS

F. W. BUNCE, Retired Chief Mech. Officer, Milwaukee Road.J. J. BUTLER, RetiredChief Mech. Officer, Consolidated Rail Corp., 158

Woodgate Ln., Paoli, PA 19301OWEN CLARKE, Retired Vice-President, Chesapeake & Ohio Ry., Cleveland, OhioB. A. CUMBEA, Retired Mgr. Loco. Maint-Engr., Chessie System, 310 Cherokee

Trail, Huntington, VW 25705

10

N. C ECKERLE,

W. EWING,

W. T. FARICY,

J. G. GERMAN,

J. j. GREGORY,

DONALD GRAAB,

S. GRAHAM HAMILTON,

W. j. HARRIS,

H. W. HAYWARD,

D. W. HENDERSON,

JOHN H. HERTOG,

JOHN W. INGRAM,

A. W. JOHNSON,

R. M. McDONALD,

J. F. McDONOUGH,

R. G. RAY BURN,

H.P. RODES,

F. R. RUSSELL,

L G. SALTS,

H. L. SCOTT, JR.,

C. M. SMITH,

R. D. SPENCE,

J. TAGGART,

M. L VARNS,

R. W. VITEK,


Sales Mgr. Specialty Chem., Nalco Chem. Co., 2901 ButterfieldRd., Oak Brook, IL60521Retired,Altoona Gear Co., Calbassas, CARetired Chairman of the Board, A.A.R.Retired V. Pres.-Engr. Missouri Pacific Railroad Co.Retired Project Mgr.-Heavy Repair Shop, Consolidated Rail Corp.,603 Ruskin Drive, Altoona PA 16602AVP-Mechanical, Norfolk Southern,1200 Peachtree, Atlanta, GA 30309President, GlobalGroup, Inc., P.O.Box 2024, Winter Park, FL32790

Retired V. Pres., Research &Test Dept, Assn. of AmericanRailroads, Washington, D.C.Retired Chief M.P. & R.S., CP Rail, Montreal 101, Quebec,Canada

V.P.-Technology, Engr. &Maint Burlington Northern RR, 9401Indian Creek Pkwy., Overland Park, KS 66210Retired V. Pres.Operations, Burlington Northern, Inc.,St Paul,MN 55101

Retired Pres. and Chief Executive Officer, Chicago, Rock Islandand Pacific Railroad Co.

Retired,V. Pres. of Opns. and Maint, Assoc, of American RR,Washington, D.C.Retired Dir. of Opns., Brd. of Transport, Commissioners forCanada, Ottawa, Ont, CanadaRetired Asst. V. P.-Mechanical, Union Pacific RR, 12225 FarnumSt, Omaha, NE 68154Retired Executive V.P.-Operations, Chessie System,Baltimore, MDPres., General Motors Institute, Flint, Ml 48502Retired Chief Mech. Off., Southern Pacific Co., San Francisco, CARetired, Asst. Manager-Locomotives AT&SF Rwy., Topeka, KSRetired Sr. V.P. and Chief Mech. Off. Norfolk Southern, Corp.Retired Mgr-Mech. Engr.-Passenger and Loco. Consolidated RailCorp., 3 Princeton Rd.,Strafford-Wayne, PA19087Retired Executive V.P.-Operations, Seaboard System RRRetired System Mechanical Officer-Motive Power, CN Rail, 655Richmond Road, Unit 45, Ottawa, Ontario K2A 3Y3

Retired, BN RR, 111 So. Greenfield Rd. #385, Mesa, AZ 85206VP - Sales and Leasing, Omnitrax, Cicero, IL


OUR OFFICERS

Our President

MR. DENNIS NOTT

Northwestern Consulting, LLCBoise, ID 83703

Our Chairman of the Nominating CommitteeMR. MIKE SCARINGE

Director-Locomotives

Amtrak

Beech Grove, IN 46107

11

12 Locomotive Maintenance Officers Association

OUR OFFICERS

1st Vice President

MR. BOB REYNOLDS

Sales Rep.Amglo Kemlite Laboratories

Calgary, Alberta T2Y 2V8

2nd Vice President

MR. JACK KUHNS

Senior Director Business

Development and SalesGraham White Manufacturing

Jacksonville, FL 32259

3rd Vice President

MR. GLENN BOWEN

Director - Laboratory & Testing Svcs.BNSF Railway

Topeka, KS

*4 MALIO*

AMGLO KEMLITE LABORATORIES

SEE AND BE SEEN

HIGH PERFORMANCE HALOGEN LAMPS

75V-30V

• Decrease fuel-operating expense.• Maintain light-output from start to finish.• Reduce maintenance due to longer life.• In-service lamp life exceeds 4000 hours.• Eliminate beam wander.• OEM approved.

Since 1935 Amglo has been lighting theway. We stand committed to therail transportation industry. State of theart technological advances are usedin allourproducts to provide better solutions for consumers. Visitus atGlorbal Railway Tech in Chicago, September 16-18 atBOOTH #514SoutheastHall to see the new productsavailable.

Amglo Kemlite Laboratories 8787 Enterprise Boulevard, Largo FL 33773 Tel:727-812-2000 Fax:727-812-2001www.amalo.com

ooo

3a

f2Q)

3O<D

O=*oCD

5>COCOon

a

o3


OUR PAST PRESIDENTS

MR. MARK COLES

Senior ManagerEngineering & QualityUnion Pacific Railroad

Omaha, NE68179

MR. BRIAN HATHAWAY

Consultant

Port Orange, FL 32129

MR. WEYLIN R. DOYLE

Project ManagerSound Transit

Seattle, WA 98104

MR. BRUCE KEHE

Senior Mechanical SupervisorCanadian National Rwy.

Gary, IN 46402


OUR PAST PRESIDENTS

MR. RONALD R. LODOWSKI

Asst. Shift SuperintendentCSX TransportationSelkirk, NY 12158

MR. ROBERT RUNYON

(Retired Norfolk Southern Corp.Engineering Consultant

Roanoke, VA 24042

MR. H.H (MIKE) PENNELLEllcon National

Keller, TX 76248

MR. TAD VOLKMANN

Director-Mechanical EngineeringUnion Pacific Railroad

Omaha, NE68179


OUR PAST PRESIDENTS

MR. DAVID M. WETMORE

General Supt. - Fuel OperationsNJT Rail Opns

Kearny, NJ 07032

MR. LES WHITE

Application EngineerBach Simpson

St. Hubert, Quebec J3Y6J1


OUR REGIONAL EXECUTIVES

MR. RON BARTELS

Director Electrical and Engine Sys.Via Rail-Canada

Montreal, Quebec

Kr~mMR. BOB HARVILLA

Asst. VP - Regional SalesPower Rail Distribution

Duryea, PA

MR. TOM PYZIAK

Senior Account Executive

Safety-Kleen SystemsPalatine, IL

17

R. BRAD QUEENGeneral Foreman-Locomotives

BNSF RailwayBarstow, CA

DAVE RUTKOWSKI

Chief Mechanical Officer

Providence & Worcester RR

Worcester, MA


Picture of Past President's Pin.

Picture of LMOA watch given to outgoing President.


OutgoingPresident Mike Scaringe, Amtrak, presents gavel to newly elected PresidentDennis Nott, Northwestern Consulting. Past President Les White, Bach Simpson,looks on.

Past President Bob Runyon presents watch to outgoing President Mike Scaringe,Amtrak. Past President Tad Volkmann, Union Pacific, attended the ceremony.


ssk

'<0^s f C^ Ji

Newly elected 3rd VP Glenn Bowen, BNSF, presents attache bag to new Chairmanof the Fuel, Lubricants and Environmental Committee, Bob Dittmeier, AftonChemical, as newly installed Regional Executive Tom Pyziak, Safety-Kleen, looks on.

Past President, Tad Volkmann, Union Pacific, presents Past President's Pin to outgoing President, Mike Scaringe, Amtrak. Ceremonywas witnessed by Past President LesWhite (far left), Bach Simpson, Past President Bob Runyon (far right), and PastPresident Bruce Kehe, Canadian National.


Past President Bruce Kehe, Canadian National, presents LMOA blazer to newly elected 3rd VP Glenn Bowen of the BNSF. Newly elected 1st VP, Bob Reynolds, AmgloKemlite Laboratories, looks on.

LMOA Executive Board - seated (left to right) - Outgoing Past President MikeScaringe, Amtrak; newly elected President Dennis Nott, Northwestern Consulting;Past President Tad Volkmann, Union Pacific; Past President Bob Runyon - standing(left to right) - Past President Bruce Kehe, Canadian National; newly elected 2nd VPGlenn Bowen, BNSF; Secretary Treasurer Ron Pondel; Past President Les White, BachSimpson; newly elected 1st VP Bob Reynolds, Amglo Kemlite Laboratories; andnewly elected 2nd VP, Jack Kuhns, Graham White Manufacturing.


STATE OF THE UNION SPEECH

President Michael ScaringeSeptember 22, 2008

Mr. Chairman, members of theExecutive Committee, Mr. Secretary-Treasurer, fellow members and honored guests.

Good afternoon and welcome to

the 70th annual meeting and conference of the Locomotive

Maintenance Officer's Association.

My name is Michael Scaringe,Director of diesel locomotives for

Amtrak and President of the LMOA.

I would like to personally thankeveryone for taking the time to support the LMOA by attending thisyear's conference and technical presentations.

The LMOA has faced many challenges over the past several years;loss of financial backing for nonexhibit years, decline in membership, and rising energy costs thathave caused the companies to putfinancial restraints on travel. The

LMOA continues to push the envelope on overcoming these adversities by strategically developingalliances with railroads, suppliers andnew organizations.

This year the LMOA ExecutiveCommittee reached out to form a

new alliance with an old supporter,the "American Short Line and

Regional Railroad Association." TheLMOA Executive Committee and

representatives from the DieselMechanical Committee and the

New Technology Committee attended the American Short Line and

Regional Railroad Association's 95thannual convention in San Antonio,

Texas in May of 2008. The LMOApresented technical papers duringthe convention. The paper given byJeff Cutright from Norfolk Southernon the new Federal Railroad's

Administration's, (CFR) Code ofFederal Regulations 49 Part 229.129"Horn Rule," will be the first in aseries that will be distributed to the

American Short Line and RegionalRailroad Association's members via

their "Tech Tracks" technical papers.This new alliance will hopefully

foster a long term partnershipbetween the two groups by providing technical papers on best practices and new technology on locomotive topics in the future. I wouldlike to thank Jack Kuhns of GrahamWhite Manufacturing Company forall his hard work in coordinating thispartnership between the two organizations.

The LMOA will continue to have

their next two annual conventions in

2009 and 2010 in Chicago, howeverdue to cost cutting measures the2011 annual convention will move

to Minneapolis.I have full faith in the commitment

and leadership of the LMOA executive committee and our regionalexecutives to preserve the future ofthe LMOA.

In May of 2008, the LMOA heldour joint technical committee meetings in San Antonio, Texas. I wish toextend the gratitude of the LMOA tothe Southwest Research Institute

Center and specifically to JohnHendrick of Southwest Research

Institute for sponsoring and coordinating the plant tours and meetingrooms. I would like to give a special


thanks to Dennis Nott, NorthwesternConsulting for coordinating andfinalizing the arrangements for ourwell-attended joint technical committee meetings at Southwest ResearchInstitute. In addition I would like tothank all of the railroads and suppliers who have hosted our individualcommittee meetings during the pastyear and continue to support theLMOA. I would also like to thank the

suppliers who place ads in theAnnual Meeting book. Without theirsupport, the printing of it would notbe financially possible. Without thecontinuing support of the supplierindustry, the LMOA could not survive.

On a personal note I would like tothank Ron Pondel. Without his helpand the commitment, this yearwould not have been possible. Iwould also like to thank my employer, Amtrak, for allowing me to be anactive participant in the LMOA forthe past 25 years.

Iwant to thank you and the LMOAagain for the opportunity to serve asyour President of the LMOAin 2008.

Editor's Note: There is a possibilitythat the 2010 convention may beheld in a location other than

Chicago.


ACCEPTANCE SPEECH

Dennis Nott

Tuesday, September 23, 2008

Ladies and Gentlemen, Mr.Chairman, members of the ExecutiveCommittee, Mr. Secretary-Treasurer,and fellow LMOA Members,:

I am indeed honored to assume

the responsibilities of this greatorganization that had its first meetings in 1939.

Over the years Ihave seen manychanges and challenges that haveaffected our railroad industry, locomotives and our organization. Somewere driven by mergers and consolidations, others by the need to bemore productive, safe and cost effective and, of course, those driven bylegislation or the AAR. The LMOA, ifnothing else, has been on the cuttingedge for all of these challenges andchanges.

Every year the LMOA brings to thetable the latest developments thataffect our world of locomotives. This

includes, but is not limited to, newlocomotive technology, the latestinformation on regulations such asemissions requirements and horntesting requirements; the latestdevelopments in fuel and lubricatingoils; the latest developments in shopequipment, locomotive maintenanceand purchasing/material handlingtechniques; and last, but not least,papers that address the best way toperform a locomotive maintenancetask that we at the LMOA like to call

"Best Practices."

This year was no different.

Of the eighteen papers presentedthere were four papers that had content relating directly or indirectly tolocomotive emissions; one paperthat covered new locomotive propulsion development; one paper thatupdated progress on RP 503; twothat covered maintenance on the

new Gen-Set switchers, six that covered locomotive maintenance

issues; one that covered electricalsafety issues; one that covered theins and outs of shop design; and twothat covered new material management concepts.

I ask you, where else, but theLMOA, can anyone involved in locomotives go to get such a diversifiedupdate on what the latest developments are; how to do locomotivemaintenance the best way; how towork safely; or get a layman's viewof the latest regulations?

That pretty well sums up the"why" of the LMOA and brings meto the topic of challenges.

As Mr. Scaringe pointed out in hisState of the Union address the

LMOA has faced many challengesover the past few years and hassome new ones on the horizon.

With respect to support from RSI,the LMOA has been informed that

the RSI will be reinstating their support of the Coordinated Associationsfor the non-exhibit years. We at theLMOA, as well as the other threemembers of the Coordinated

Association, are very appreciative ofthis news and the continued supportfrom the RSI, particularly since thenext two years will be non-exhibityears and are transitional years forthe move to the "big" outdoor


exhibit in Minneapolis in 2011.Speaking of the next two non-

exhibit years, it seems it is always difficult to get participation in the annual meetings in non-exhibit years. Iwould encourage the LMOA membership, the employers who supportour Committee Members and the

sponsors that host our Committeeand Joint Committee Meetings tocontinue their support of the organization through the next two years asif they were exhibit years. Whileplans have not been finalized for thenext two years, I'm sure there will besome discussion within the

Coordinated Associations regardingtable top displays; and if table topdisplays are on the agenda, I wouldhope that our suppliers will participate as they have in the past non-exhibit years. Editor's note:Approximately 70 suppliers will display their products and services atthe 2009 convention.

Mr. Scaringe also noted that theLMOA has formed an alliance with

the "American Short Line and

Regional Railroad Association" andthe LMOA will be providing information on "Best Practices," new technology, regulation changes andother locomotive maintenance topics for their "Tech Tracks" publication. This has been an important stepfor the LMOA as, with the consolidation and mergers of the Class 1railroads, the short line and regionalrailroads now outnumber the Class 1

railroads by about 100 to 1. TheLMOA has recognized that the shortline and regional railroads are a largeaudience within the railroad industryand we are confident that the infor

mation and networking that theLMOA can offer them will be to their

benefit

While we have recognized thatthe short lines and regional arebecoming a bigger part of the audience, we do not want to forget theClass 1 railroads and their contribu

tion to the LMOA as a source of

Committee members and informa

tion. After all, the Class 1 Railroadersare truly the ones on the firing linewhen it comes to new locomotive

development. Our goal would be tohave more Class 1 railroad

Committee members and I would

like to encourage the Class 1 railroadmanagement to recognize the technical and networking benefits thatyour employee will bring back to theoffice if they join a LMOACommittee.

The LMOA would also like to hear

more from you, the audience,regarding new topics for papers.Each year each Committee sets theiragenda for papers at this time. If youhave a burning issue that you wouldlike the LMOA to address, grab oneof the Committee members after this

session and let them know. I can't

guarantee that the topic will becomea paper, but we will surely considerit.

As we look to this next year andbeyond, there is no doubt in mymind that there will be a host of

changes that face the industry aswell as the LMOA. However, there isno question in my mind that theLMOA will again be at the forefrontready to meet those challenges and Ilook forward to the support that Iwill receive from the Executive


Committee, the Members of theLMOA and the supplier communityto help meet those challenges overthe next year.

In closing, I would like to recognize Mr. Ron Pondel who for over

two decades has been the Secretary-Treasurer of the LMOA and the gluethat keeps the LMOA together.

Thank you Ron, thank you ladiesand gentlemen.

28 Fuel, Lube and Environmental Committee

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE

ON FUEL, LUBRICANTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL

FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 20098:45 A.M.

D. Beebe

K. Bills

R. Dunn

S. Fritz, P.E.T. GallagherF. Girshick

L. Haley, Jr.D. Koehler

G. Lau

R. Lodowski

M. Maddox

D. MatteyD. McAndrew

J. McDonaldD. MeyerkordK. MylesT. SavageW. Strickland

D. Tuttle

P. Van SlykeK. WazneyP. Whallon

Chairman

BOB DITTMEIER

Customer Technical Service

Afton Chemical Corp.Richmond, VA

Vice Chairman

CHUCK KUNKEL

Sr. Mgr.-R&DUnion Pacific RR

Omaha, NE

COMMITTEE MEMBERS

Vice President

VP-RR OperationsConsultant

Mgr. Med. Spd. Dsl. Eng.Technical Liaison

TechnologistChief Chemist

SLS. Mgr.Sr. Rel. SpecialistAsst. Supt.Tech. SupportKey Acct. ManagerFuel & Lube Spec.Off. of Trans. & Air Qual.Sr. Engr.Mech. EngineerRR Program Mgr.Mgr.-Test & Lab Svcs.Mgr.-RR & Marine Sis.

Chemist/Testing Spec.Mgr.-Tech. Sales

Temple Engineering Liberty, MOSearle Petroleum Co. Council Bluffs, IACN Pierrefonds, QueSouthwest Research Inst. San Antonio, TXOronite Commerce, Ml

Infineum USA L.P. Linden, NJNorfolk Southern Corp. Chattanooga, TNPredict USA Cleveland, OHCanadian Nat'l Edmonton, AlbertaCSXTransportation Selkirk, NYIndustrial Specialty Chem. Harvey, ILAlfa Laval Inc. Hermitage, PAGETransportation Rail Erie, PAEPA

Electro Motive Diesels

Amtrak

ALS-Staveley Svcs.CSX TransportationAmerican Refining GroupOronite

Canadian Pacific Rwy.Clark Filter

Ann Arbor, MlLaGrange, IL

Wilmington, DEKansas City, KSJacksonville, FL

Roswell, GARichmond, CAWinnipeg, MB

Lancaster, PA

Fuel, Lube and Environmental Committee 29

PERSONAL HISTORY

Bob Dittmeier

Bob Dittmeier grew up in St.Louis, Mo. and has been anemployee of Afton ChemicalCorporation for over 35 years. Hereceived his education from

Rockhurst College, the Universityof Missouri and WashingtonUniversity.

His career with Afton (thencalled Ethyl Corporation and located in St. Louis, Mo.) started in theirmechanical research departmentin 1973. He held various positionswithin the mechanical research

group including managing automatic transmission fluid research

testing and the gear lubricantresearch testing group. Thisinvolvement with gear lubricantresearch also included formulation

and testing for gear lubricating oilsthat were developed and targetedfor U.S. military approvals. Duringthis timeframe he was also

involved with Afton field trial activ

ities for both gear and crankcasetechnologies. He transferred frommechanical research to chemical

research and into customer techni

cal service for gear oil additivetechnology. From that position he

was promoted to technical coordinator for medium speed diesel(MSD) research. He continueswith Afton's MSD group, managing the technical service aspects ofthis business while also directingthe field research for this group.

During his many years withAfton he has been involved in the

design, writing and editing of various manuals published by theCoordinating Research Counciland in addition to the Locomotive

Maintenance Officers Association

(LMOA) Fuels, Lubricants andEnvironmental Committee chair he

has also chaired the Society ofAutomotive Engineers (SAE)Technical Committee Nine which

was involved with medium speeddiesel engine and railroad locomotive technical issues.

He has enjoyed riding motorcycles for most of his adult life. Heand his wife Barb enjoy motor racing, world travel, and are avidskiers. They currently reside inRichmond, VA.


THE FUEL, LUBRICANTS ANDENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE

WANTS TO EXPRESS THEIR

SINCERE APPRECIATION TO

AMERICAN REFINING CORP

AND TO DAVE TUTTLE

FOR HOSTING THE COMMITTEE'S

MEETING IN NOVEMBER 2008

IN BRADFORD, PA

THE COMMITTEE ALSO WANTS TO

THANK AFTON CHEMICAL

AND BOB DITTMEIER

FOR SPONSORING THE

COMMITTEE'S MEETING

IN FEBRUARY 2009

IN DENVER, CO


Your 1stChoice for

Railroad Diesel Engine Oils

Formulated to provide year-round lubricationin 2-cycle and 4-cycle, Low and High Horsepower,

Turbocharged or Naturally Aspirated,Railroad, Marine and Stationary diesel engines

requiring Zinc-free lubrication.

Used and Approved by OEM's and Class l's.

• QUALITY • PROMPTSERVICE•DEPENDABILITY • COSTSAVINGS

Pleasecontact Tom Pyziakfor complete information.

Phone:847-358-2035

E-mail: [email protected] MtefltflllB.

Safety-Kleen Systems, Inc. • 5400 Legacy Drive, Clustern, Building 3, Piano,TX 75024www.safety-kleen.com • ©2004Safety-Kleen Systems,Inc Allrights reserved.

31


NEW GENERATION OIL

ADDITIVE TECHNOLOGY FOR

ENGINES OPERATING ON

LOW & ULTRA-LOW

SULFUR DIESEL FUEL

Prepared byChevron Oronite Company,

LLC

ABSTRACT

In March 2008, the EnvironmentalProtection Agency (EPA) finalizedstringent emission standards (Tier 3and Tier 4) for locomotive andmarine compression ignitionengines. Fuel sulfur levels in dieselfuel consumed in locomotive,coastal and inland marine applications have been decreasing since2006 (nominal 5,000 ppm) and areapproaching 15 ppm levels whichwill be mandated by the EPA in 2012for large refiners. In preparation ofthe issuance of these emerging regulations, locomotive engine manufacturers have redesigned their enginesto address Tier 2 mandates with the

capability of implementing additional modifications to effectivelyaddress the new Tier 3 and Tier 4

regulations.Current and future changes in

engine design and metallurgy mayresult in reducing oil consumption,and minimizing engine blow-by.Additional engine modification considerations, such as SelectiveCatalytic Reduction (SCR) to reducenitrous oxide (NOx) emissions andthe use of Diesel Particulate Filters

(DPFs) to reduce particulate matterwill impact engine oil additive technology properties and performanceattributes. Concurrent with these

drivers, modern railroad operationshave increased locomotive efficien

cy and utilization which has alsoinfluenced the engine oil's stress,degradation and overall useful operating life. Greater demands on theengine oil's performance have resulted.

Given the significant changes thelocomotive industry is experiencing,the development of an optimizedengine oil additive chemistry specifically designed for use with low andultra-low sulfur diesel fuels and tai

lored to meet the expected Tier 3emissions control systems with special consideration for possible Tier 4engine designs, was commissioned.This paper describes the development of a new low ash additive package formulation designed to meetthese requirements in support of theexpected Locomotive MaintenanceOfficers Association (LMOA)Generation 6 engine lubricants.

INTRODUCTION

The Generation nomenclature was

adopted by the LMOA Fuels,Lubricants & Environmental (FL&E)Committee to denote a significantadvance in lubrication technology.Its aim was to clearly identify a classification system for railroad lubricating oils, distinguishing majorchanges in oil performance from onegeneration to the next. Since 1940,only five generations of lubricatingoil have been defined. Though performance attributes of each

Generation's advancement have

been associated with alkalinity asmeasured by the American Societyof Testing and Materials (ASTM)


D2896 method, improved performance or advances in technology arenot limited to alkalinity alone. Table1 shows the transition from

Generation 1 through the currentLMOA Generation 5 / GEGeneration 4 Long Life (4 LL).

Generation 1 was introduced in

1940 with a Base Number (BN) ofless than 7 and represented lubricants as either straight mineral oils orones with minimal additive com

pounding with detergents or antioxidants. Dispersants had not yet beendeveloped. Many locomotive lubricants performed poorly, quickly losing alkalinity and causing lead corrosion and subsequent bearing failures. The most recent category,Generation 5 / GE 4 LL, was introduced in the mid 1980's with a typical BN of 13, 17 and 18. These oilsdemonstrated an overall improvement in performance, including oxidation, viscosity increase control,alkalinity control, liner and bearingcorrosion, and extended oil and filterlife.

During the 1990's new additivetechnologies were introduced toaddress the emergence of multi-grade oil formulations, handling anddisposal issues associated withengine oils containing high levels ofchlorine and the introduction of new

and highly effective dispersants.Individually these changes were notconsidered enough to warrant a classification change, but collectivelythey continued to improve locomotive engine oil performance.

Since the millennium, several factors have influenced the railroad

industry at a rate never experienced

before. There have been significantreductions in fuel sulfur levels and

allowable emissions levels forcingOriginal Equipment Manufacturer's(OEMs) to implement hardware aswell as operational changes at a timewhen railroads are experiencing highlocomotive utilization rates. These

industry trends were instrumental inestablishing the developmentrequirements of a new low ash additive chemistry for locomotives consuming low sulfur diesel (LSD) andultra low sulfur diesel (ULSD) supporting a proposal to define a newgeneration of engine oils, LMOAGen 6.

NORTH AMERICAN DIESEL FUEL

TRENDS

During combustion, diesel fuel sulfur leads to the formation of sulfur

oxides (SOx), which in turn reactwith water from combustion to form

sulfuric acids which can further lead

to the formation of sulfates and are

detected as exhaust particulate matter. In addition to the sulfur derived

particulates, soot and unburned oilare also contributors to the overall

particulate emissions of a dieselengine. In an attempt to addressdiesel engine emissions, the use oflow and ultra-low sulfur diesel fuels

was mandated for the on-highwaysegment. During the mid-1980's,the maximum allowable sulfur perASTM standard D975 for No. 2D

diesel fuel was 5,000 ppm (0.5 percent by weight of sulfur); and the sulfur for No. 2D diesel fuel in the U.S.

was typically between 0.3 and 0.4percent. By 1994, regulation of on-highway fuel was limited to a maxi-

34

mum of 500 ppm (0.05 percent) sulfur, known as LSD. It followed withthe phase-in of 15 ppm (0.0015 percent) sulfur maximum, ULSD whichbegan in mid 2006 and will continuethrough 2010.

Class 1 railroads consume approximately 4 billion gallons of diesel fueleach year. In May 2004, as part ofthe Clean Air Non-road Diesel Rule,the EPA finalized new requirementsfor non-road diesel fuel that would

decrease the allowable levels of sul

fur in fuel used in locomotives by 99percent. Lower sulfur fuels wereeven mandated for particulate filtertesting on switchers. The specificU.S. regulations for locomotive andmarine applications required largerefiners and importers to use LSD by2007. A grace period was allowedfor small refiners. Table 2 summa

rizes the EPA Regulations for non-road diesel fuel sulfur levels.

EMISSION REGULATIONS

Medium speed diesel engines arethe workhorse of the locomotive

industry in North America. Theseengines are also utilized in industrialmarine applications and for primaryand emergency electrical powergeneration. The EPA first issued regulations in March, 1985, for the on-highway heavy-duty trucking industry. These regulations defined specific emission reductions of particulate matter (PM), and NOx. The regulations proved to have a significantand lasting effect on the design ofhigh speed diesel engines used inthis service and consequently, onthe formulation of fuels and lubri

cants used in those engines. In addi

Fuel, Lube and Environmental Committee

tion, the California Air ResourcesBoard (CARB) passed new dieselfuel standards in December 1988,specifically addressing fuels sold inCalifornia.

Estimates placed the railroadindustry annual NOx emissions toexceed one million tons; representing 5% of the total NOx emissionsfrom diesel engines prior to any regulations. Having addressed the on-highway / high speed diesel marketbeginning in the mid 1990's, it wasjust a matter of time before similarregulations were mandated for therailroad industry. The EPA's first ruling for locomotive engine emissionswent into effect in April of 1998.The regulations encompassed threeseparate sets of standards, applicable depending on the original dateof manufacture of the locomotive

engine. Three levels of standardswere defined as Tier 0, Tier 1 andTier 2 which affected 1973 - 2001,2002 - 2004 and 2005 - 2012 loco

motive engine production modelyears, respectively. These regulations established standards for emis

sions of NOx, PM, hydrocarbon(HC), carbon monoxide (CO) andsmoke opacity.

The EPA has since updated theseregulations and established newexhaust emission standards which

will dramatically reduce even furtheremissions from medium speed diesellocomotives with specific limits forline haul, switcher and passenger railservice. The new regulations arebeing phased in commencing in2008 and will be fully in effect by2015. The regulations aim to reducePM emissions from these engines by


90% and NOx emissions by 80%.New Tier 3 emissions standards

were established along with idlereduction requirements for locomotives beginning in 2012. The newlyestablished standards also tightenedemissions from existing locomotiveswhen they are remanufactured,which will be effective as soon as

certified rebuild kits are available (asearly as 2008) but no later than2010. Longer term, Tier 4 standardsfor newly built engines have beendefined which may require catalyticafter treatment technology coupledwith DPFs beginning in 2015 forlocomotives, and 2014 for inlandmarine applications. The exhaustemission standards for locomotives

can be found on the EPA website,http://www.epa.gov/otaq/loco-motv.htm. Tables 3 and 4 detail the

specific Tier 3 and Tier 4 emissionsstandards for the locomotive indus

try.

LOCOMOTIVE UTILIZATION &

ENGINE DESIGN

As noted, significant changes haveoccurred in the railroad industry.Railroads have implemented operation practices to enhance efficiencyand increase locomotive utilization.

This has resulted in longer intervalsbetween scheduled maintenance.

Until the recent economic downturn

in 2008, freight movements hadbeen on a steady rise with hundredsof new locomotives being added toClass 1 fleets to meet traffic

demand.

Parallel to the increased demand

and utilization of locomotives is the

drive to significantly reduce emis

35

sions. The primary focus of emissions regulations is to reduce NOxemissions, and PM secondary.Unfortunately, the technology andemission strategy to reduce onetends to increase the other.

Retarding injection timing lowerspeak combustion temperaturesresulting in reduced NOx formation.However, this leads to increased PM,CO and smoke formation along witha decrease in peak cylinder pressureresulting in lower engine efficiency.

North American railroad locomo

tives represent a mixture of two andfour-stroke cycle engines. Four-stroke engines have traditionally utilized less engine oil than their two-stroke counterparts and have therefore been more sensitive to oil con

sumption changes. Typical oil consumption rates based on an oil tofuel ratio were averaging around0.5%. With the engine lubricantbeing a significant contributor to PMexhaust emissions, lowering oil consumption is one method of effectively controlling the volatile and nonvolatile fractions. However, loweringoil consumption not only increasesresidence time of the lubricant in the

crankcase, but also increases insoluble levels and accelerates the rate of

BN depletion and oil oxidation, thusnegatively impacting oil life. Table 5and Figures 1 through 3 detail theimpact oil consumption has on insoluble formation, BN retention and oiloxidation from models developed byM. R. Logan [17].

In combination, increased locomotive utilization, longer maintenanceintervals, extended oil drain intervalsand decreased oil consumption are


all factors which stress the engine oilleading to increased oxidation, viscosity, insolubles and wear metals.The extent of oil life is further influ

enced by the type of service, thediesel fuel consumed, terrain andother environmental conditions.

Changes in emissions regulationsand fuel sulfur levels continue to

impact the railroad industry as awhole. Though engine design strategies to meet Tier 3 and Tier 4 regulations have not yet been finalized,parallels may be drawn from the on-highway high speed diesel engineindustry.

While the operation of the on-highway heavy-duty diesel truckstends to be at high speed and transient in duty cycle, it is nonethelessinstructive to compare the emissionregulations impacting both industries. The on-highway segment hasbeen subjected to very restrictiveemissions standards since 1988 and

their designs and lubricant formulations have been significantly affected. A comparison of NOx and PMemissions for on-highway heavy-dutytrucks and locomotives is represented in Figure 5.

The railroad OEMs were able to

meet the first three Tiers of emission

regulations by a variety of techniques including retarded fuel injection timing, incorporation ofimproved engine intake air cooling,increased engine compression ratio,increased fuel injection pressure andinjection rate, optimized notch andduty cycle operations, and reducedoverall oil consumption.Tier 3 may require further reductionsin oil consumption while Tier 4 tar

gets will more than likely requireexhaust after treatment technolo

gies. Technologies alreadyemployed by the on-highway sectorinclude: Exhaust Gas Recirculation

(EGR), DPFs, Diesel OxidationCatalysts (DOCs) and SCR.

ENGINE OIL FACTORS & DRIVERS

It is well known that engine oil sulfated ash is a leading contributor tothe collection of incombustible

materials in DPFs. Research has

shown that the incombustible mate

rial is primarily derived from thecombustion by-products of lubricantadditives. In the case of zinc-free

railroad engine oils, the additives inquestion are associated with traditional calcium detergents. Duringcombustion, these detergents generate ash in the form of calcium sulfate

(CaS04). The deposition of thisincombustible ash on DPFs effective

ly shortens their service life. In addition, lubricant additive sulfur (similarto diesel fuel) as well as phosphorous are known to poison many SCRand DOC materials.

Oil formulation and its influence

on exhaust after treatment devices

are concerns which have been

raised by the OEMs prior to theEPA's final ruling. Though notrequired for their feasibility analysis,the EPA has commented that low

Sulfated Ash, Phosphorous, andSulfur (SAPS) engine oils would bebeneficial with regards to the durability, performance and maintenanceof exhaust after treatment devices

[9].The authors have also heard

reports from the field of excessive


ash deposits forming in the combustion chamber and exhaust systems ofengines operating in markets wheretraditional high ash (LMOAGeneration 5) lubricants are usedwith ULSD. Similarly, during theSeptember 2008 LMOA meeting(Diesel Mechanical MaintenanceCommittee), Standish [6] has alsoreported on excessive ash buildupcausing turbo screen plugging, andvalve failure stemming from the useof high ash oils with ULSD underlight load applications.

ADDITIVE PACKAGE

DEVELOPMENT

Development and commercialization of a new railroad additive package requires significant time andresources. All the OEMs have formal

approval systems in place thatinvolve bench tests, engine tests andextensive field tests, all of whichmust be successfully completed tosecure approval. The specificprocess of additive technology andnew engine oil development is proprietary for each company.Individual additive components aremanufactured and are then formulat

ed into additive packages whichcomprise a complicated blend of dispersants, detergents, wear and oxidation inhibitors which need to func

tion cohesively in order to preventcorrosive attack and wear of critical

engine components and keeping pistons and rings clean and free of carbonaceous deposits. The development process starts with establishingtargets and requirements, screeningnew additive technologies, developing prototype engine oil formula

tions, conducting numerous benchand engine tests. Successful candidates may undergo additional evaluation prior to selection of the bestcandidate for field performance andapproval testing.

FORMULATION & LAB TEST

DEVELOPMENT

Optimizing the detergent systemwas done around a significantlylower starting BN. Determining anappropriate starting BN was determined with a number of theoretical

equations, including one fromGeneral Electric TransportationSystem (GETS) that was used todetermine oil life, or time betweenoil changes. The variables are freshoil BN, oil consumption rate, oilsump volume, and fuel burned(mileage).The mathematical equation is:

BNL - BN0 - 0.35 *S * F*y *OSFwhere,BNl= Base Numberdepletionat agiven charge life LBN0 = BN of the fresh oilS = Fuel Sulfur content, (% m/m)F = Specific Fuel consumption,(g/kWh)y = percentage conversion of sul -fur into species neutralized by thebasicity of the oilOSF = Oil stress factor

Where OSF = 1/R * (1 -e (-Rt/V)),(kWh/g)[16]and,

R = Brake specific fuel consumption, (g/kWh)t = the oil charge life in hoursV = oil charge in g/kW


The dispersancy system of the newadditive package was determinedwith the aid of a proprietary soot dispersancy test which measured theability of an oil to disperse soot andkeep viscosity increase to a minimum. Individual and combinations

of dispersants were tested in a matrixto evaluate relative performance.With the expected lower oil consumption and subsequent increasedresidence time in the crankcase, amore robust dispersant system thanthat provided by current LMOAGeneration 5 / GE 4 LL was identified.

Special consideration was made toensure that in lowering the sulfatedash and BN, no compromise to current oil drain intervals (184 days)would result while increasing oxidation control to address the higherresidence time of the oil in the

crankcase. Improving wear protection was also taken into considera

tion due to the expected higherinjection pressures resulting inincreased thermal loading on pistons, and the need for robust yellowmetal wear protection. A number ofstandard and proprietary tests wereused to evaluate components.

FINISHED OIL DEVLOPMENT

Each OEM has a formal approvalprocess for engine lubricants. OEMsrequire that additives be screened insome tests before going into field trials. GETS allows a new candidate oil

formulation to be field tested once

granted "Fundamental Approval"and EMD refers to such a candidate

as being "Worthy of Full Scale FieldTest (WOFSFT)". The bench tests

which are used for approval includethe EMD Silver Corrosion test andGE Bronze Friction and GEOxidation test. Laboratory enginetesting includes the EMD 2-Holerand GE Power House endurance test

and the Caterpillar 1MPC enginetest.

The screening work detailed in theprevious section led to the development of a new candidate engine oilwhich passed all the OEM benchand engine test requirements. Thenew formulation embodied the fol

lowing characteristics:• Reduced ash content

o Lower fresh oil BN (TBN = 9)o Reduced non-VOF

o Reduced PM filter maintenance

• Advanced dispersant technologyo 180 Day maintenance intervalo Neutralize higher soot loadingo Maintain oil filter life

• Enhanced oxidation and thermal

stabilityo Addresses increased residence

time due to lower oil consumption• Improved yellow metal wear pro

tection

FIELD APPROVAL TESTING

As previously discussed, benchand engine tests are important todevelop and define performancecharacteristics of new additive packages. However, the performance ofthe new technology must be evaluated in numerous engine types operating under various conditions in thefield. No bench or laboratoryengine test can evaluate the performance of an oil as effectively asactual field service. As such, thenew 9 BN low ash, zinc-free technol-


ogy was rigorously tested in both GEand EMD engines under severe, realworld conditions.

GENERAL ELECTRIC ENGINE

PERFORMANCE

A one year field test was conducted in cooperation with GE to evaluate the performance of the new generation railroad engine oil additivesystem. The new additive package,nominal 9 BN, in a Group I base oilwith a constant fixed viscosity indeximprover (VII) dosage was field tested in six GE locomotives. Four were

designated as test units, and operated using the test oil while theremaining two were reference unitsand operated on the fleet oil, a 13BN LMOA Generation 5 / GE 4 LLoil. All units were in excellent operating condition and had been re-builtwithin the previous year. During thecourse of the one year field test, thelocomotives were in severe service,averaging 422 megawatt hours permonth while accumulating mileageat an average rate of 6,853 miles permonth. The locomotives operatedon a 92-day inspection schedule andthe oil was changed at 184 days.

After one year of testing, four pre-measured power assemblies wereremoved from each of the test and

reference units. The piston depositsof the test units using the new 9 BNadditive package were comparableto the reference units using the 13BN LMOA Generation 5 / GE 4 LLfleet oil. The average piston depositsfor the test units were 142 demerits

versus 149 demerits for the refer

ence units using the CoordinatingResearch Council (CRC) rating

39

method. The CRC engine sludge rating showed that the test units werevery clean throughout the test duration and were as clean as or cleaner

than the reference units. Figures 6aand 6b and 7a and 7b provide representative photos of ring belt andundercrown deposits for the 9 BNtest oil and the 13 BN reference fleet

oil, respectively.Engine cleanliness was evaluated

using the CRC engine sludge ratingmethod. The rocker box covers,rocker box and valve gear, crankcasecover and crankcase "A" frames

were all rated for sludge. The testunits exhibited comparable performance to the reference unit with verylittle measurable sludge depth. Theaverage sludge rating for the testsunits was a CRC rating of 9.70 versus9.68 for the reference unit, with 10.0designating a part devoid of anymeasurable sludge. Figures 8a and8b compare the rocker box of thetest and reference units, respectively.

The piston, liner and rings showedvery low wear. The liner, ring gaps,ring thickness, and ring weights weremeasured and evaluated. The liner

wear rates were less than 1 mil per100K miles, indicating good wearcontrol. Visual inspection showedthat all the liners had minimal bore

polishing in the upper ring reversalarea and no scoring or scuffing ofthe liners occurred. Ring wear wasalso minimal and well within GE

specifications, and near new specifications.

The used oil for the designatedunits participating in this test wasanalyzed and indicated good performance attributes overall.


Viscosity increase for both the testand reference oils show a slow but

positive slope during the timebetween oil changes and are indicative of superior viscosity control.Figure 9 summarizes the viscositydata. The initial test oil viscosity was14.83 cSt at 100oC as an SAE 40

while the fleet reference oil viscositywas 15.88 cSt at 100oC as an SAE

20W-40.

Midway through the second 184-day test interval, three of the units(Test Unit B and D, Reference Unit F)strayed from captured service.During the time the units were offline, no oil samples were taken andsome cross contamination of lubri

cants occurred.

The BN shows a steady decay rateand ends up averaging about 6 BN(3 BN decrease) for the four testunits and 8 BN (5 BN decrease) forthe two reference units, with allabove GE's condemning limit.Figure 10 summarizes the BN data,as measured per ASTM D4739.The insoluble levels in the test and

reference units were adequately controlled and the wear metals were

very low. Insolubles were run usingthe coagulated LMOA (0.45p filtration) procedure; ASTM D7317-07.

ELECTRO MOTIVE DIESEL

ENGINE PERFORMANCE

As with the GE field test, a oneyear duration test was conductedwith the new generation 9 BN testoil as an SAE 40 blended in Group IIbase oils with a fixed concentration

of viscosity improver. The benchmark reference oil was a commer

cially available 17 BN SAE 20W-40

LMOA Generation 5 / GE 4 LL technology.

Designated units utilized the testoil and one unit utilized the com

mercial reference oil while two of

the test units were used to evaluate

the silver piston insert bearing aspart of the EMD approval protocol.All units were in excellent condition

as maintained by Class 1 railroadpersonnel. During the course of oneyear of testing, the locomotives averaged 4,189 miles per month andwere known to experience verysevere duty cycles and highmegawatt hours per month utilization, as confirmed by the Class 1 railroad. At the end of the test four

power assemblies were removedfrom each unit. There was negligiblewear to the piston rings and cylinderliners. Piston deposits were comparable to the reference units and the

engine sludge levels were noticeablylower than the reference units. The

test oil also demonstrated good baseretention, viscosity control, insolublecontrol, and low wear metals

The total piston deposit levels inthe 9 BN test units were comparableto the 17 BN reference units, with289 demerits versus 299, respectively. The average top ring groove fillwith the test units was lower than

the reference unit, averaging 62demerits versus 75 demerits. Figures11 and 12 highlight the pistondeposit comparison.

The CRC sludge ratings revealedthat the test units were very cleanthroughout the year on test havingvery little, if any, sludge depth oraccumulation. The test units were

cleaner than the reference unit with


the reference unit exhibiting moresludge depth on the rocker cover,cylinder head and cam and coupling. The average CRC rating forthe test units was 9.7 versus 8.6 for

the reference unit. Figures 13 and14 compare top deck cleanlinessbetween the new generation 9 BNtest oil and the 17 BN reference.

Cylinder liner and piston ringmeasurements showed minimal

wear on the units using the newadditive technology with all linerswell under the EMD wear maximum

specification. Visual inspectionshowed the liners exhibiting cross-hatch over most of the liner surface

with no scuffing or scoring of the liners. There was slight bore polish inthe top ring reversal area on boththe reference and the test liners. The

ring wear measurements were minimal with most measurements within

the new limits. For both liner and

ring wear, the test units performedcomparable to the reference unit.

The new 9 BN additive technologywas also evaluated for connectingrod bearing, piston pin, insert bearing, and piston thrust washers wear.The bearings and thrust washerswere removed from each unit on test

and all were found to be in good,serviceable condition with no

mechanical or corrosive wear attrib

uted to oil condition. There was

only a small, approximately 5%,amount of overlay removal on theconnecting rod bearings of one testunit and reference unit, with theother test units showing no signs ofoverlay removal. It was determinedthat this over lay removal was frommanufacturing and not due to

41

mechanical or corrosive wear. The

insert bearings only exhibitedapproximately 2% overlay removal,and the silver bearings had onlyslight feathering of silver with no silver removed. The thrust washers

had very minimal wear with both thetest and reference bearings beingwithin the new washer specification.

The reference oil shows an initial

decrease in viscosity due to shearingand then low but positive slope during the time between oil changes.The test oil shows no significantincrease or decrease in viscosityoyer the course of the test. Figure15 summarizes the viscosity data.

For the reference units the BN

data shows a steady decay rate andends up averaging about 10 BN.There are several spikes in the datawhich indicate that oil changes wereperformed on both reference units.For the 4 test units, the BN shows aninitial drop at the beginning of thetest and then flattens between 6 BN

and 8 BN, well above the EMD condemning limit. Figure 16 summarizes the BN data.

Both the reference and test units

exhibit adequate insoluble control,neither rising above 3%. TheInductively Coupled Plasma (ICP)spectrometer results for the majorwear metals iron, lead and copperremained well below the EMD con

demning limits. One test unit startedto show a rise in the lead level

toward the end of the test but this is

likely due to the high incidence ofwater contamination the unit experienced throughout the duration ofthe test. Nevertheless, the unitremained below the condemning


limit. The reference units show highcopper levels, with both units beingdirectionally higher than the testunits. One reference unit reached

62 ppm copper at the 210- day markat which point the oil was changed.The copper level immediately startedto increase again after the oilchange-out. The other referenceunit reached 46 ppm copper at 108days, when the oil was changed.Again, copper immediately startedto increase reaching 74 ppm. Ironand lead levels remained in the nor

mal range for the duration of testing.Figure 17 and 18 summarizes theICP copper and lead levels, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

As witnessed in various LMOA

committee meetings and publishedpapers in 2008 and from additionalindustry documents and publications in recent times, a fundamentalchange in engine oil composition,function and performance wasrequired to work cohesively with thefuel and locomotive engine toensure optimal performance.

The consumption of LSD andULSD in locomotives operating inNorth America has increased sub

stantially over the past two years,and now accounts for the majorityof the diesel fuel consumed. To

keep pace with this dynamic market,a new generation additive technology has been formulated to successfully cope with the engine oil lubrication requirements and demands ofmodern locomotives and to address

emerging emissions trends. The proposed LMOAGeneration 6 perform

ance attributes entail:• Improved anti-wear perform

ance

• Advanced dispersant technology

• Optimized detergency andbase retention established at 9

BN

• Improved thermal and oxidativestability

Table 6 delineates the new proposed Generation engine oil categories for current and forthcomingemissions standards.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors acknowledge the support of Chevron Oronite CompanyLLC and the Fuels, Lubricants andEnvironmental Committee of the

LMOA for their support and permission to publish this paper. Mostimportantly, the authors gratefullythank the guidance and direction ofDennis W. McAndrew of General

Electric and of Daniel J. Meyerkordof Electro Motive Diesel for guidance and support during the earlystages of the development program.The authors would also like to

acknowledge the support of WesMiddleton (retired, Chevron OroniteCo. LLC), past LMOA FL&E committee chairman and 2001 MVP, whowas instrumental in the field testingof this new generation locomotiveengine oil. Wes retired in June of2007 after 37 years of service withChevron Oronite, with 25 of thosededicated to the advancement of

railroad engine lubricants.


REFERENCES

1.GETS Engine Oil CourseHandouts.

2.Thomas, F.J., Ahluwalla, J.S.,Shamah, E., Medium-Speed DieselEngineers: Part l-Design Trends andthe Use of Residual/Blended Fuels.

ASME paper No. 860/Vol. 106,October 1984.

3.Swanson, /., EMD Service Advisory- Ultra Low Sulfur Fuel Position

Statement 04/07/2006.4. Fuel and Lubricants Committee of

LMOA, History of the LMOALubricating Oil Classification System.Locomotive Maintenance Officers

Association, Chicago, 1987.5.Girshick, F.W., Operational Effectsof Low Sulfur Diesel Fuel in

Locomotives. Locomotive

Maintenance Officers Association,Chicago, 2008.6.Standish, T. Ultra-low Sulfur DieselFuel: Impact on LocomotiveMaintenance. Locomotive

Maintenance Officers Association,Chicago, 2008.7. Stewart, T. Exhaust AftertreatmentTechnologies - Definitions andMaintenance Requirements.Locomotive Maintenance Officers

Association, Chicago, 2008.8. EPA website,http://www.epa.gov/otaq/loco-motv.htm

9. EPA Publication, Summary andAnalysis of Comments: Control ofEmissions of Air Pollution From

Locomotive Engines and MarineCompression Ignition Engines LessThan 30L Per Cylinder. EPA 420-R-

08-006, March 2008.10. Van Dam, W., Narasaki K.,Martinez J., Diesel Engines Using

43

Low Sulfur Fuel Showing Excellent

Performance and Durability with

Reduced BN Lubricants. SAE PaperNo. 06FFL-300.

11. McGeehan, J.A., McNary, J.C.,Kahn, M.J., Performance of 1.0%and 1.45% Ash - SAE 15W-40 Oils

in On-Highwav Trucks with

Cummins. Caterpillar, and MackEngines. SAE Paper No. 880260.12. Takeuchi, Y., Hirano, S.,Kanauchi, M., Ohkubo.,H.,Nakazato, M., Sutherland, M., vanDam, W., The Impact of DieselEngine Lubricants on DepositFormation in Diesel Particulate

Filters. JSAE Paper No. 20030247,SAE Paper No. 2003-01-1870.13. McGeehan, J.A. et al, Ih£World's First Diesel Engine Oil

Category for Use With Low-SulfurFuel: API CG-4. SAE Paper No.941939.

14. McGeehan, J.A. et al, NewDiesel Engine Oil Category for 1998:API CH-4. SAE Paper No. 981371.15. McGeehan, J.A. et al, API CI-4:Diesel Oil Category for Pre-2007

Engines and New Low EmissionEngines Using Cooled Exhaust GasRecirculation and Diesel Particulate

Filters. JSAE Paper No. 20077237.16. Barnes, J. et al, Oil StressInvestigations in Shell's MediumSpeed Lfrborfrtory Engine,International Council on

Combustion Engines, Kyoto, 2004.17. Logan, M. R., Chevron OroniteCo. LLC Internal Technical Report onOil Consumption Influence onLubricant Properties, March, 2001.


CONTACT INFORMATION

Melanie F. Tobias

Staff EngineerChevron Oronite Company LLC100 Chevron WayRichmond CA, 94802E-mail: [email protected]

Peter Van SlykeProduct Development EngineerChevron Oronite Company LLC100 Chevron WayRichmond CA, 94802E-mail: [email protected]

Tom GallagherGlobal Railroad Technical Liaison

Chevron Oronite Company LLC3050 UNION LAKE RD, 8-F

Commerce Ml, 48382

E-mail: [email protected]

Joe Timar

Technical Team Leader - Industrial

Engine OilsChevron Oronite Company LLC100 Chevron WayRichmond CA, 94802E-mail: [email protected]

yo»-« «« r«s- missing.Predict will analyze your oil c| u iclclyand Ideritilfy problems and inefficiencies t>efore thejy cause m a c |-» I n edowntime and put a stop to production. We offer tr-i^ pre-'v^ntati'^r^ oilcondition monitoring services younêd to l<.eep your equipment running leaner, longer.

CZ>ur services will protect your eciulp-m^nt, Imprcove asset reliatblllty, maxl-mlze operating profits aancd ^xt^nci oilchange Intervals.

Used oil analysis

— Wea r particle analysis— Iûel &tric& coc»lant testing

SO-i- standardized >«VsnrfVl fluid

analysis t^sts

— Practical solutions

Sl-cilled onsit^ analyst

ISCZ> 900 1 iÔOO certified and

ISO 1 :70;2S:;200S accreditedla looratory

F» « EVE nJT~iVIH IVI t£y^.V5 t-J Ft tr.S.

"*rn>vr-s THE ^c^we R! c^> r" PREOIC I.


LMOA

Generation

Year Typical BN PerformanceMilestones

Formulation

Issues

1 1940 <7 Straight mineral oils Lost alkalinity, Pbcorrosion, bearingfailures

2 1964 7 Ashless dispersants,improved alkalinitywith Ca detergents

Reduced sludge &better oil filtration

3 1968 10 Improved alkalinityretention, higherdispersant levels, Cadetergents

Reduced piston ringwear

4 1976 13 Improved alkalinityretention with

improved detergents &dispersants

Increased protectionfor adverse engineoperating conditions

5/4LL 1989 13/17/18 Improved drainintervals in low oil

consumption engines

Longer life oils thatmeet LMOAdefinitions &

requirements

Table 1- LMOA Lubricant Generations

45


Non-road Diesel Fuel StandardsWho

Large Refiners &Importers

Large Refiners &Importers

Small Refiners &Other

Exceptions

Covered Fuel

NON-ROAD

LOCOMOTIVE &MARINE

NON-ROAD,

LOCOMOTIVE &MARINE

2006

ppm

500+

ppm

2007

ppm

ppm

500+

ppm

2008

ppm

ppm

500+

ppm

Except in California, compliance dates for Non-Road, Locomotive and Marine fuels in the yearsindicated are: June 1for refiners and importers, August 1downstream from refineries throughfuel terminals, October 1for retail outlets, and December 1for in-use.

In California, all diesel fuel transitioned to ULSD in 2006. Locomotive and Marine diesel fuelswere required to transition to 15 ppm ULSD effective January 1,2007.

Table 2


(g/bhp-hr)

Standards Apply To Effective Year PM NOx HC

Remanufactured Tier 0&Tler1

2008 as available -

2010 required0.22 7.4* 0.55

Remanufactured Tier 2 2008 as available -

2013required0.10 5.5 0.30

New Tier 3 2012 0.10 5.5 0.30

New Tier 4 2015 0.03 1.3 0.14

Note *: For Tier 0 locomotives originally manufactured without a separate loopintake air cooling system, these standards are 8.0 and 1.00 g/bhp-hr for NOx andHC, respectively

Table 3 - Line Haul & Passenger Locomotive Standards

(g/bhp-hr)

Standards Apply To Effective Year PM NOx HC

Remanufactured Tier 0 2008 as available-

2010required0.26 11.8 2.10


2013required0.26 11.0 1.20


2013required0.13 8.1 0.60

New Tier 3 2011 0.10 5.0 0.60

NewT«r4 2015 0.03 1.3 0.14

Table 4 - Switch Locomotive Standards

47


\ Oil/FuelRatio

Gallons

Oil/Month

Months to

Turn over

Crankcase

i 2.00% 600 0.7

i 1.00% 300 1.3

j 0.50% 150 2.7

! 0.30%

™0.05%™

90

—304.4

.„,,.„..._™.

™ 267"Assumptions:

•'Fud'BuiriecC'GaHcSump Sze, GaBor

ns/Mo= 30,006 |400I

Table 5 - Influence of OU Consumption on CrankcaseOil Volume Turnover

Time, Days

Figure 1 - Effect of Oil Consumption On Insolubles(Oil Consumption As % of Fuel)


30 -i

Baseline Case:

3 TBN In 180 Days ® 0.3% O/F Ratio400 Gatton Sump

-0-0.05%

-X-0.10%

-A-0.20%

-0.30%

-0.40%

200

Figure 2 - Effect of O0 Consumption on BN(Oil Consumption as % of Fuel)

Basefine Case:

16 DIR Oxidation in 180 Days @ 0.3 O/F Ratio

400 Gallon Sump

-0-0.05%

-x-0.10%

20%

0.30%

0.40%

200

Figure 3 - Effect of OQConsumption on Oxidation(OU Consumption as % of FUel

49

50

iIl «

ca


These cumulative effects on oil stress have graduallyincreased during the past twenty years, as representedin Figure 4.

it —

te

Figure 4 - Locomotive Engine OU Stress

tter 2 * 2DC8

TterO" 2012 isrw**

I H t I I 1 f6 « ? 3

urwHJUJWVgitp-ja-

Figure 5 - EPA Locomotive vs. Heavy-Duty ThickEmissions Regulations


Figure 6A - Test Oil Ring Belt Deposits

Figure 6B - Test Oil Undercrown Deposits


Fibure 7A - Reference Oil Ring Belt Deposits

Figure 7B - Reference Oil Undercrown Deposits


Fibure 8A - Test Unit Rocker Box

Fibure 8B - Reference Unit Rocker Box Cover


160 200 260

DaysonTeBt

Figure 9 - GE Viscosity Data

860 400 460

Figure 10 - GE Base Retention Data


Figure 11 - Test Oil Ring Belt Deposits

Figure 12 - Reference Oil Ring Belt Deposits


Figure 13 - Test Unit Top Deck

Figure 14 - Reference Unit Top Deck


Test Oilw Fleet Oi Wito GenV AdditiveVfecositylnaease Comparison

150 200 250

Day son Teat

Figure 15 - EMD Viscosity Data

Test O! vi Fleet Oi 1With Gen V Additive

BaseNumber Comparison

—i i 1 1—

100 160 200 250

Days an Test

330 350 400

Figure 16 - Base Retention Data

57


OLOA 40000 vi Fleet GU WthGen V Additive

CopperLevel Comparison

150 200 250

EnysonTest

300 350""- 3003 Cu level lowers and

itay bIo wot when testofl i sreplaced

Figure 17 - EMD ICP Copper Data

Test Oil *J Ffeet Ol With Gen VAddifive

Lead Level

EMD BorderEne Limit

Figure 18 - EMD ICP Lead Data

•-RefUmtE-RefUnitF

r Teat UnitA(.TestUmtB

-M-TestUoitC

• »-TestUmtD


LMOA

Generatio

n

Year Typical BN Performance

Milestones

Formulation

Issues

1 1940 <7 Straight mineral oils Lost alkalinity, Pbcorrosion, bearingfailures

2 1964 7 Ashless dispersants,improved alkalinitywith Ca detergents

Reduced sludge &better oil filtration

3 1968 10 Improved akafinityretention, higherdispersant levels,Ca detergents

Reduced piston ringwear

4 1976 13 Improved alkalinityretention withimproved detergents& dispersants

Increased protectionfor adverse engineoperating conditions

5/4LL 1989 13/17/18 Improved drainintervals in low oilconsumptionengines

Longer life oils thatmeet LMOAdefinitions &

requirements

6 2009 9 Optimizeddispersant &detergent system forLSD & ULSD fuel for

low consumptionengines

Proper balance ofalkalinity to fuelsulfur with no

compromise to oildrain life; significantreduction in oilsulfated ash

7 2015

?

? TBD - based on

Tier 4 requirementsTBD - based on

Tier 4 requirements

Table 6 - New Proposed LMOA Generation Engine OU Categories

59

THE CLEAN WATER ACT

AND HOW IT AFFECTS

RAILROAD OPERATIONS

Prepared byMike Maddox,

Industrial SpecialtyChemicals, Inc.

This paper focuses on updates toSpill Control and Countermeasures(SPCC) plans, the implementation ofrecent changes, and your involvement. In addition it includes infor

mation on Wastewater Treatment,and Storm Water Pollution

Prevention Plans (SWPPP).To begin, SPCC is not new to the

railroads but over the past few yearshas gone through quite a fewchanges. All railroad employees, inaddition to training for Mechanical,Electrical, Buildings & Bridges (B&B),and Maintenance Of Way (MOW),receive annual training regarding theSPCC plan. The railroad managerscarry the extra responsibility ofenforcement of these programs andin general all railroad personnel holdthe key to successfully adhering tothese federal laws. Failure to do socan lead to civil and/or criminalfinesfor those responsible, as well asunwanted public relations issues forthe railroad.

The background to this legislationis the federal Clean Water Act of1972 managed by the EnvironmentalProtection Agency (EPA). This actfederally protects surface andground waters in the U.S. from pollution generated by private industry.Other countries carry similar lawssuch as Canada's Clean Water Act


and Pollution Prevention and Control

Plan and Mexico's Ley General deEquilibrio Ecologico y Protection alAmbiente (LGEEPA), which are notaddressed in this paper but similar incontent. A 1974 amendment added

SPCC to the U.S. law. In 1977 the

law was amended to include how

spillswere to be handled and reported. It further authorized enforce

ment capabilities to federal and stategovernments. In 1987 wetlands andstorm water run-off were also includ

ed as important concerns; importantbecause most of America is now

considered as a protected area. In1990 the Oil Pollution Act further

regulated the transportation andstorage of petroleum products toprevent water pollution. Finally in2002 the Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) felt rail, farm and airline regulationswere too laxso it legislated several more stringent regulations on these petroleum users.Litigation over these changes haspushed the implementation of theselaws into the near future as clarification is sought for the proposedchanges. Railroad implementation iscurrently scheduled for November20, 2009.

The railroads have worked towardadhering to these new standardsbefore the law takes effect and haveprepared for the changes necessary.

The first of these Clean Water Actregulations to address is the compliance of waste treatment facilities.

These facilities are a demonstrationof a railroad's ability to meet the EPAregulations. If a railroad continuallydemonstrates unacceptable performance against the regulations at facili-


Industrial Specialty Chemicals, Inc.16880 S. Lathrop Avenue, Harvey, IL 60462

708-339-1313

info @ iscwater.com

Proud Supplier for Your Treatment Needsfor over 25 Years

Waste Water Treatment, Waste Oil Reduction, Environmental Solutions,Locomotive Coolant and Anti-Freeze, Corrosion Inhibitors, Locomotive

and Car Cleaners, Heavy and Light Duty General Purpose Cleaners

Freight and Light Rail

America Canada Europe Asia Mexico

ISO 9001 : 2000 Certified


ties with past documented contaminations it does not instill any confidence within the EPA of how well

that railroad will respond to an accidental release from either a derail

ment or a punctured fuel tank.Waste water collection points vary

in size and complexity but are critical points focused on by the government. The following are some pointsto consider based on size.

1) Smaller sites and fueling facilities will normally have an oil-water separator to remove andrecover petroleum drippage.Even with their small size, thesefacilities cannot be ignored. Ifspillage occurs outside thesecontrol systems, storm watercan be affected. They have limited holding capacity so shouldbe maintained to prevent fillingwith sand or fuel. Most states

require monitoring and sampling of discharges from theseareas quickly after rain events tofulfill environmental reportingrequirements. With the thinning of staff at railroad facilitiessome of the responsibility hasshifted to B&B or MOW departments. Local facility personnelshould receive training to understand their responsibilities androles to address any spill event.In addition the time to performpreventative maintenanceneeds to be included in the

daily schedules which allow thefacility to recognize their compliance to the government regulations between regulatedevents.

2) Larger shops often have fullwastewater treatment facilities.

These facilities remove contami

nants from the wastewater

which are typically introducedduring the regular maintenanceand washing of equipment.These treatment facilities can be

costly to operate and generatelarge amounts of waste oil andsludge mixtures that must bedisposed of properly. There arenew cleaners and chemicals

that have been or can be intro

duced within the shop toimprove treatability of the wastewater. Segregation of engine oildrains also limits treatment

needs. When these systemshave been installed in the shop,training and oversight is neededto ensure employees and contract employees adhere to proper disposal needs and chemicaluse. Within the treatment

plants waste oil demulsifiershave made great strides in maximizing the amount of sellablewaste oil, offsetting overall treatment costs, and sometimesbecoming a profit center. Thisalso leads to lower total envi

ronmental costs and improvedenvironmental impact realization.

3) In locations with over one million gallons of "hydrocarbon"storage capacity even morestringent regulations kick in.Monthly inspections must beconducted and personnel haveto conduct drills on spill


response. This is enough formost railroads to limit their

capacity below this threshold.

4 ) One final waste consideration isthe proper handling of wastesby 3rd party contractors. Yearsafter a mishandled spill;whether it occurred in a rail

yard or on a main rail line a railroad could be found liable

because of a previous contractor's mishandling of the railroadwaste. Rapid response is important, but tracking and follow upare also critical to managing theactivities of contractors. By utilizing contractors that areactively involved with the railroad's environmental initiatives

it can help to limit their level ofimpact at a localized site. Theirtraining should better preparethem to dispose of the wastescollected at a spill site correctly.In addition their education can

greatly facilitate any futureinquires by state or federal governing bodies.

The next point is the (SWPPP).Most of you have probably hadsome landscaping activity in andaround the yard. This is also due tothe EPA's new clean water initiatives.

Primary isolation is the directing ofnon-impacted rainwater away fromindustrial activity and is the best wayto handle storm runoff in your yards.If you don't have any rain water contamination, you don't have to handleit. By engineering your facility todivert storm water away, treatment isunnecessary. Adding this strategy toaccident and spill sites, further low

63

ers the total cost of the cleanup toyour railroad.

1) Limiting or minimizing theaffected area at any site is thebest way to reduce costs. Muchengineering work has takenplace since the 2002 regulations to direct storm water

runoff away from impactedareas and out of required regulatory rules. Landscapingaround storage tanks and ditches in the yard provide necessarysecondary containment whileproperly maintaining slopes andditches on the line offers the

most cost effective long termpractice to divert storm wateraway. If a spill was to occur inthese areas of the line, quickresponse will minimize the environmental and legal impact ofan incident

2) In known impact areas such asspill sites or fuel pads, not onlybest practices need to be followed but also proper collection of water and maintenance

of separator equipment isrequired. Personnel located atthese sites are the best candi

dates for monitoring and reporting the equipment condition.Their assistance to the environ

mental personnel will help keepa railroad in compliance. Oncetrained, non-environmental personnel from B&B or MOW can

perform simple inspections andsampling. Fixed position collection equipment normallyrequires storm water sampling


within 24 hours of a rain event,which can be a somewhat diffi

cult task if the only railroad environmental representative islocated on the other side of the

state.

3) Some new requirements of theSWPPP plan that have beenupdated in this recent legislation which build on previousrequirements already instituted:

1. Permitting of any impactedarea. This can be as inane

as clearing some trees or filling in a ditch. These activities, which previously werelargely overlooked can nowinvolve notifying the ArmyCorps of Engineers (COE),as well as the State and

Federal EPA. The COE has

stated they will try to not getinvolved, but without theproper COE permits additional fines could be issued

because of alteration of the

landscape.

2. Another new developmentis secondary containmentrequired for any oil orgrease storage container of55 gallons or greater. Thiscan be from something assimple as lube grease,bacon grease, motor oil orradiator treatment broughtout to trackside up to largefuel trucks performing directfueling.

3. But probably the most

4)

important change is thereduction of the size of the

impact area to be permittedwhen the location is outside

of a recognized rail yard.Previously a project or soildisturbance site under 5

acres did not necessarilyneed a permit. Now thenew limit is one acre so

unless there is a paved roadtrackside, it is very easy togo over that one acre limit.Several trucks and a back-

hoe working off the pavement by just 100 yards hasalready impacted enoughground to require permitting before the work begins.This can make any work,because of the needed permitting time consuming andthe contractor knowledgeof the permit needs isimportant. Space is a premium. Limiting traffic toand from the job site in anarrow corridor should min

imize the area impacted bywheel traffic all of which

must be included in the

acreage calculations.

The final point regardingSWPPP is that every State isdifferent. Some States have

approved the use ofstatewide permitting, allowing a quicker response forperforming necessary isolation and cleanup activities.Other States require individual site permits. With themovement of railroad per-


sonnel to new locations it is

important to insure that thisinformation is not beingoverlooked by incomingpersonnel. Additionally, thetraining of all employeesand contractors will helpbuild their understanding ofwhat's required to helpinsure adherence to the

plan rules.A railroad's Spill Prevention

Control & Countermeasures (SPCC)plan is another important point tocover. Understand that SPCC plansin general are not of the cookie cutter variety. The railroads of NorthAmerica do not all have the same

plan. Each facility that requires aplan must have one that is specific tothat facility. Further, how each railroad implements and oversees theirSPCC plan will, most likely be different than how another railroad implements its plan.

The primary purpose of the SPCCplan is to prevent oil spills into navigational waters hence the reasonwhy the COE could possibly use theCoast Guard to respond on behalf ofthe responsible parties involved. Anavigable waterway can be as smallas a depression in the ground thathas 3 inches of water in it for one

day every hundred years. The CoastGuard could then become involved

if a spill is related to a navigablewaterway.

The SPCC plan must include theseitems;

1. Spill history, spills that couldoccur, control measures,tank descriptions and maps

65

of piping, transfer operations, inspection records,security, lighting, rain waterlogs, training and must beapproved by a ProfessionalEngineer (PE).

2. The facility must have secondary containment for anypotentially impacted area,piping, pumps, tanks anddrums. All tanks when not

in use must have any potential release point locked outto prevent accidentalrelease. The entire facility isto be lit and fenced for secu

rity. Spill response equipment is to be on hand and

maintained. Tanks of anysize are to be tested and

inspected regularly.Records of all activities are

to be kept.

3. Other considerations are;petroleum of any kind;hydraulic, vegetable, asphaltor fuel. Fuel truck deliverypoints or holding fuel carson a siding for direct fueling.What alternate securitymeasures are in place toavoid the need of fencingthe whole yard? MOWactivities may need theirown plan including security.Work trucks with portablefuel tanks on the back need

to be included when in a

SPCC covered area.

The final concern about any SPCCplan should be liability. Some railroad facility managers may have


more potential liability than the envi- ment is everyone's responsibility,ronmental managers. I have beentold by railroads and the EPA (unofficially) that no one will go to jail orhave to dig in their own pockets forfines but these measures are writtenin the law. Why? Proper trainingand implementation of the SPCCplan will make everyone's life easier.

The final discussion point is that itnever happened unless there is adequate documentation to confirmthat it did happen.

1) Inspection records for all sites,tanks and former impactedareas should be maintained at

the facility. Copies of the PE'scredentials and approvalsshould be kept. State approvalsand permits should be kept atthe site and certainly afterward.All training records should bekept in detail as well as all disposal documentation.

2) Waste water treatment recordsand waste disposal recordsshould be maintained as well as

all operator certification. Anyrailroad activity requiring aSWPPP plan and/or permitsshould be kept.

With a firm understanding of whythese procedures are needed andhow personnel activities affect them,a railroad can avoid unnecessarycosts and possibly reduce spendingon environmental requirements.Environmental personnel and theemergency response center will handle most of the training and documentation, but know your part, anddo your part because the environ-


Total Railroad FiltrationCustomers are always #1 at Clark Filter.

We are driven to provide fair prices, con

sistent quality and the fastest deliveryin the industry.

67

ISO 9001

Registered

Call us, toll free at

1-800-55-CLARK

Or visit our web site:

www.clarkfilter.com CLARKF/LTER• CLMKOft lOTvvr

The premier producer of locomotivefilters worldwide.


LOCOMOTIVE TESTING OF

AN AUTOMATIC SELF-CLEANING

LUBE OIL FILTER & CENTRIFUGES

Prepared byDon Mattey,

Key Account &Rail Manager,Alfa Laval, Inc.

and

Leighton Haley,Chief Chemist,

Norfolk Southern Corporation

INTRODUCTION

The locomotive industry has historically used paper cartridge filtersfor lube oil filtration that must be

stocked, handled, and disposed of ateach servicing location. Increasingenvironmental concerns and initia

tives to reduce cost are driving theindustry to consider alternative technologies. A September 2007 LMOApaper described how the combination of an automatic self-cleaninglube oil filter and centrifuge increases oil quality and life, reduces enginewear, and lowers operating costs [1].The data presented showed thiscombined technology had beenproven in other areas such as marineand stationary as well as in miningapplications. The presentation alsonoted automatic self-cleaning filtersare used on locomotives in other

countries but they, nor the combined system with a centrifuge, haveever been tested on a locomotive in

the USA. However, in September2007 plans were already underwaywith an eastern US railway to provide proof of concept of the combined technology on an EMD GP60locomotive. This paper details theoperation, installation, and perform

ance of an automatic self-cleaning filter and two centrifuges on a locomotive utilized in general freightservice.

EQUIPMENTThe equipment used for this test

consisted of the following:• One 1991 EMD GP60 locomo

tive last overhauled in

November 2005

• One Alfa Laval T-280-30-A03

Moatti automatic self-cleaningfilter

• Two Mann & Hummel 600 cen

trifuges• One OCV 108-2 pressure con

trol valve

OPERATION

The primary difference between apaper cartridge filter and an automatic self-cleaning filter is a papercartridge traps particles on and within the layers of the filtration mediumuntil clogged, upon which time it hasto be replaced. The automatic self-cleaning filter collects particles onthe filter medium surface so they canbe easily removed as the filter iscleaned. This has several benefits

including the fact that cartridges nolonger have to be purchased,changed, or disposed of which helpsreduce environmental waste.

The automatic self-cleaning filterand centrifuge typically work together as shown in Figure 1 and detailedas follows.

As 100% of the engine oil flowenters the automatic self-cleaning filter, it passes through a strainer tocatch any large debris that may be inthe oil. The oil then enters a distrib-


utor where it flows along the lengthof the filter through a series of wiremesh elements. While approximately 97% of the oil continues to theengine for lubrication, about 3% isused to continuously clean the wiremesh elements in a back-flushingmode. The self-cleaning operation iscontrolled by a hydraulic motorwhich rotates the distributor in a stepwise fashion to automatically back-flush the screen mesh. This processis continuous and will completelyback-flush the entire filter systemevery two to three minutes.

The back-flushed stream from the

filter sends the concentrated particles directly to the centrifuge whichspins up to 3,900 RPM generatingextremely high centrifugal forces. Atthis high rotational speed, the highdensity particles are separated fromthe lubricating oil and collect on theinside of the centrifuge housing. Thelow density polished lube oil is thenallowed to drain to the engine oilsump.

Separation efficiency in the centrifuge is governed by Stoke's Lawwhich states the greater the densityof the particle relative to the densityof the fluid, the greater the efficiency. However, other parameters havea positive effect on separation efficiency including a large particle size,a high gravitational force, and a lowviscosity as shown in the followingformula.

V being the sedimentation velocity

due to gravityd is the diameter of the particlepp is the density ofthe particlePl is the density of the liquid

ti is the viscosity of the liquid9 is the acceleration due to gravity =co2r.

Although the centrifuge is highlyefficient, it will not remove lubricating oil additives. The additives aretypically sub-micron in size andbecome miscible with the oil.

Centrifugal force only increasesgravity so if additives are not separated over time by natural decanta-tion then a centrifuge will not impactthem either.

The particles removed by the filterare then separated by the centrifugeand trapped within the centrifugeforming a "cake" of compactedsolids. Should the centrifugebecome clogged, the filter operatesin a normal manner and the captured particles are simply returned tothe sump (there is no impact on theengine). The engine is still suppliedwith 100% filtered oil from the auto

matic self-cleaning filter.

INSTALLATION

When retrofitting and testing thecombined automatic self-cleaning filter and centrifuge on a locomotive, anumber of factors needed to be con

sidered including the type of automatic self-cleaning lube oil filter touse, the overall envelope of the system, the orientation of the filter, howmany centrifuges should be used (ifany), and the angle and diameter ofthe drain pipe.

70

The type of automatic self-cleaning filter used depends on the lubeoil flow rate to the engine. Sincelocomotives are used throughout theworld in hot and cold climates, coldtemperature starts with increased oilpressures had to be considered forthis application. Therefore, this testutilized an automatic self-cleaninglube oil filter with a maximum flow

rate of 450 gallons per minute (gpm)and a screen mesh size of 25 micron

absolute, 10 micron nominal. Theautomatic self-cleaning filter alsoincludes an internal pressure safetybypass. If the differentialoil pressureincreases over 2 bar (29 psi), thebypass opens to minimize the pressure throughout the filter system.The bypassed oil continues throughan 80 micron absolute safety meshso the engine is still protected fromlarger particles. This bypass also protects the filter elements from beingdamaged by abnormally high pressures. Once the lube oil warms and

the viscosity decreases, the bypasscloses and the automatic self-clean

ing filter operates normally.Due to its smaller size, the auto

matic self-cleaning filter did not haveany problem fitting in the same envelope as the existing paper filter canister. However, due to the low pressure oil flow to the EMD locomotive

engine, a pressure regulating valvewas used at the filter outlet to

increase the pressure within theautomatic self-cleaning filter so theback-flushing and centrifuge systemswould work properly. The additionof this valve added size to the filter

system which had to be consideredfor the installation. For future instal


lations a simple diaphragm can beused instead of the pressure regulating valve to increase the pressure inthe filter system if necessary.

The automatic self-cleaning filtercan be mounted vertically, horizontally, or at any angle in-between.There are some limitations on the

orientation of these filters but none

of those came into play with thisapplication or test. It was quicklydecided to mount the automatic self-

cleaning filter horizontally with aslight upward angle (about 15° offhorizontal) to create enough roomfor the installation and also allow

proper drainage and easier access tothe filter for maintenance duringengine overhaul. The installation ofthe automatic self-cleaning filter withattached pressure regulating valve isshown in Figure 2. Note the dark circle on the wall behind the filter

where the previous paper cartridgecanister was installed.

The automatic self-cleaning filter isoften used without the addition of a

centrifuge, however, that requireseither returning the removed oil particles back to the engine sump or, asis usually the case, an automaticdrain to a separate collection tank.Although this method protects theengine just as well, a secondary tankis required and creates potential oilloss and waste and adds space to thelocomotive installation. The most

optimized and efficient system is touse the automatic self-cleaning filterwith a centrifuge which cleans theoil to a very fine filtration level.Because of this, it was determinedthis combined system should beused. The resulting flow diagram is


shown in Figure 3.When using a centrifuge in con

junction with the automatic self-cleaning filter, routine servicing islimited to just the centrifuge. Whatwas unknown about the locomotive

application was just how much sootwould be removed from the oil and

how quickly that would fill the centrifuge. Based on prior experiencewith testing on a stationary GEengine of similar size, the decisionwas made to move forward with two

centrifuges with the capacity of sixliters each. If after six months operation it was determined that onlyone centrifuge was required, the second centrifuge would be shut offand/or removed.

The next and probably greatesthurdle of this installation was properdraining of the two centrifuges backto the engine sump. The center lineof the two centrifuges to the sumpwas over nine feet. Since the cen

trifuges are gravity drained, the pipelength, diameter, and angle all had tobe considered. If the pipe was toosmall or the angle was not greatenough, the oil may not drain properly and could flood the centrifugescausing them to reduce speed andefficiency or stop functioning alltogether. These factors were considered and instructions were providedto eliminate these piping concerns.Unfortunately the instructions werenot followed and the installation

yielded a smaller pipe inner diameterthan desired (with half inch pipewalls) and the pipe angle was lessthan half of the requirement (Figure4).

The oil was changed on the loco

71

motive with the same lube oil addi

tive package and base stocks thatwere used with the paper cartridgefilter. The locomotive was released

back into service and monitoring ofthis real world application began.Although not the perfect installation,it was sufficient for proof of conceptHowever, due to the concern aboutthe pipe run installation verses whatwas calculated to be required, thedecision was made to monitor the

centrifuges every three months(instead of six) to ensure they wereworking properly. During normalservicing of the locomotive, oil wasperiodically added as required, as isstandard practice with EMD locomotives and as was done when the

paper cartridge filters were used.

MAINTENANCE

December 2007 brought the firstservicing of the centrifuges. Sincethis was a new installation and none

of the mechanics were experiencedat servicing the centrifuges, just overan hour was required. Servicing of acentrifuge simply involves removingthe cover, draining and removing thebowl from the spindle, opening thebowl, removing the particulate"cake" or sludge, and reassembling.Approximately three pounds ofsludge was removed per centrifugefor a total of six pounds for the firstthree months with the new oil.

The next servicing took place inMarch 2008 and although differentmechanics were assigned to the task,the lessons learned from the priorservicing were applied and the totaltime required dropped to 45 minutes. Since the locomotive had been

72

sitting for over 24 hours the centrifuges were very cold whichincreased the difficulty of removingthe sludge. Approximately twopounds of sludge was removed percentrifuge for a total of four poundsfor the second three months of use

(a grand total of 10 pounds over sixmonths). The decreased amount ofsludge removed from the first to second servicing brought concernabout proper draining and functioning of the centrifuges.

The third servicing was in June2008 and provided the opportunityto check the efficiency of the centrifuges. Servicing of the centrifugeswas completed first, taking about 45minutes due to a full and completesolvent cleaning of the bowls.Approximately 3.5 pounds of sludgewas removed per centrifuge for atotal of seven pounds (a grand totalof 17 pounds over nine months).This was the most sludge removed todate and an indication the cen

trifuges may be functioning properly.Once reassembled, the locomotivewas started, the oil temperaturebrought up to 190° F, and atachometer used to determine the

rotational speed of the centrifuges.What the tachometer indicated,however, was the centrifuges wererotating at 3,200 RPM which waslower than expected. The tachometer was then placed on other parts ofthe locomotive to verify the centrifuge readings were not simplycaused by locomotive vibration.Although this centrifuge speed wasnot ideal, it did show the system wasnot flooding, at least not initiallyafter startup.


In order to increase the rotational

speed of the centrifuges, the pressure regulating valve was adjustedfrom the factory preset of 60 psi toalmost 85 psi. Measuring the speedof the centrifuges again at an oil temperature of 195° F showed anincrease to 3,650 RPM. This boostin RPM was calculated to increase

the gravitational force by 30%, thereby increasing efficiency based onthe equations found in Figure 5.The next servicing was in September2008. The decision was made to

service only one of the centrifugesso the service interval could start to

increase to the originally desired sixmonths. Servicing of the one centrifuge took only about 20 minuteswhich meant every servicing sincethe start of the test took less and less

time as more experience wasgained. The sludge removal fromthis single centrifuge was positive aswell yielding 4.75 pounds.

The September servicing was thelast to be performed during this testperiod. Locomotive auxiliary generator and turbocharger problemsunrelated to this installation and test

caused the locomotive to be

shopped for most of the remainderof 2008. However, since repairshave been made testing continueswith the automatic self-cleaning filterand centrifuges for further studies.

TEST RESULTS

All testing utilized a single locomotive although oil and locomotivestarting cleanliness conditions didvary between tests. Data collectionfor the paper cartridge began immediately after engine overhaul while


data collection for the automatic

self-cleaning filter and centrifugesbegan two years later. The oil waschanged during installation to promote similar starting oil conditionsfor each test. Analytical results foroxidation, soot and sulfate were collected on a Perkin-Elmer SpectrumOne Oil Express FTIR using JOAPsoftware, metal values were measured on a Spectro, Inc. Spectroil Mand viscosity measurements weredetermined on an ISL Automatic

HouillonVHI Viscometer.

Sufficient data was collected dur

ing the first operational year of theautomatic self-cleaning filter andcentrifuges to compare the performance against the paper cartridgedata previously collected. Oil samples were taken from a sample drainvalve located after the automatic

self-cleaning filter which was rightbefore the engine. Sampling frequency was scheduled for 15 dayintervals but in reality was less frequent as was the case with the papercartridge filter sampling. Regardless,the data obtained was adequate toallow for trend lines to be formed for

each product tested. When the testdata for the automatic self-cleaningfilter and centrifuges was comparedto the paper cartridge results,improved levels of oxidation, soot,sulfate, viscosity, and wear metalswere observed.

Soot levels in the lube oil initiallyappeared to be the same or evensomewhat higher with the automaticself-cleaning filter and centrifuges.These results were not totally surprising since the initial paper filter datawas after overhaul and the automat

73

ic self-cleaning filter and centrifugeresults were after a normal oilchange. However, later resultsbrought into question the return piping from the centrifuges to theengine sump and brought doubt thecentrifuges were functioning at maximum efficiency. The soot levelsstarted leveling off around 200 daysand began improving against thepaper cartridge data. Approximately270 days into the test the rotationalspeed of the centrifuges wasincreased and the results improvedeven more as shown in Figure 6.Based on this data, 184 day centrifuge service intervals are also possible.

The viscosity levels of the automatic self-cleaning filter and centrifuges verses the paper cartridgesseem to mirror each other (seeFigure 7). However, closer examination shows that throughout the testperiod the viscosity range for thepaper cartridges increased from 15.3cSt to 16.2 cSt, a change of 0.9 cSt(a 5.9% increase). The automaticself-cleaning filter and centrifuges,however, shows a trending increasefrom 14.9 cSt to 15.2 cSt, a changeof only 0.4 cSt (a 2.7% increase).This clearly shows a more stable viscosity and aids in longer oil life bycontinually removing the soot asindicated in Figure 5. It should benoted that no "day zero" viscositydata was available for either test and

the first sample dates are different(14 days for the paper cartridge and21 for the automatic self-cleaning filter and centrifuges). This, combinedwith the fact that new oil viscositycan vary, helps explain the 0.4 cSt

74

starting difference in the data.When larger oxidation particles

are removed from the lube oil the

oxidation number should stabilize.

Conversely, higher oxidation numbers indicate degraded oil and apotential for increased wear metalsin the oil which, in turn, reduces oillife as well as the life of the engine.As the power trend lines show inFigure 8, oxidation levels remainedrelatively stable with the automaticself-cleaning filter and centrifugesand were an improvement verses thepaper cartridges. After the centrifuge RPM was increased aroundday 270, the data indicates a potential for even lower oxidation levels

that should be confirmed as testingcontinues.

Studies show increased levels of

iron correspond to increased wearrates and, therefore, reduced fueleconomy, engine life, and even emissions profiles [2,3,4]. Figure 9 showsnot only an overall reduction of ironin the locomotive's lube oil using theautomatic self-cleaning filter andcentrifuges but also a significantreduction past the 270 day periodwhen the centrifuges were optimized.

Finally, another lube oil degradation indicator is the sulfate levels

in the oil. Although the initial levelfor the automatic self-cleaning filterand centrifuge was slightly higherthan for the paper cartridge, the levels dropped in comparison ratherquickly and stabilized in a muchsmaller range. The automatic self-cleaning filter and centrifugeincreased 17.6% with one anomalyverses an increase of 100% for the


paper cartridge as shown in Figure10. Again, it appears levels werereduced after the centrifuges wereoptimized.

WASTE DISPOSAL

Since this test was performed on a1991 EMD GP60 locomotive and

wear metals, such as lead, tend torun higher on older locomotives,there was some concern regardingthe nature of the cake removed from

the centrifuge. To characterize thismaterial for disposal purposes, aToxicity Characteristic LeachingProcedure (TCLP) for metals,volatiles, and semi-volatiles was performed and all levels were within

acceptable limits with the onlyexception being lead. Based on thisresult, the waste would have to beclassified as hazardous for disposalpurposes. However, informationreceived from other industries

including mining, marine, and stationary show that disposal is not anissue; the sludge cake is simply discarded in the same manner as anyspent paper cartridge filters. Giventhe fact that only one sample ofsludge cake was analyzed from thisolder locomotive and given the differences between locomotive and

engine types, ages, and servicing,additional testing should be performed in order to determine a proper disposal method for the locomotive industry.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on these test results from

this one locomotive, the automaticself-cleaning filter and centrifugecombination protects the engine at


least as well if not better than con

ventional paper cartridge filters.That being said, questions about thedisposal of the sludge cake remainand retrofit costs may push this technology toward new installations.Initial maintenance time was exces

sive but was reduced significantlywith proper tools and training.Additional testing will confirm if twocentrifuges are required or if onlyone will suffice.

Testing continues on the EMDGP60 locomotive with the cen

trifuges at optimized speeds andtesting on additional locomotives isbeing discussed in order to increasethe sample size and further verifythese results.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors wish to thank Norfolk

Southern for volunteering their time,resources, and locomotive for testingthis product, for analyzing the resulting data, and for being a leader inexploring new technologies for thelocomotive industry.

The authors also thank Alfa Laval

Inc. for contributing the automaticself-cleaning lube oil filter and centrifuges for this test and for assistingwith servicing of the locomotive.

Finally, the authors would also liketo thank the members of LMOA's

Fuel, Lube and EnvironmentalCommittee for their review andinput to this paper.

REFERENCES

I.Don Mattey, Alfa Laval Inc.,"Automatic Self-Cleaning LubeOil Filters and Centrifuges,"LMOA, September 2007

75

2. Brian Schwandt, Barry Verdegan,and Christopher Holm, StevenKelly, Michael Bohmann, andDavid Harvey, "OptimizingLubricating Oil Filtration Systemsfor Diesel Engines." SAE #930017,March 1993

3. Marty Barris, DonaldsonCompany, Inc., "Total Filtration:The Influence of Filter Selection on

Engine Wear, Emissions, andPerformance," SAE #952557,October 1995

4. Gordon Jones, AlliedSignal Filtersand Sparkplug Division and JohnEleftherakis, Fluid Technologies,Inc., "Correlating Engine WearWith Filter Multipass Testing," SAE#952555, October 1995

CONTACT INFORMATION

For more information on the products, procedures, or results in thispaper, please contact:

Don MatteyAlfa Laval Inc.

990 North Buhl Farm Drive

Hermitage, PA 16148Office: (724)342-5818

Leighton HaleyNorfolk Southern Corporation34 Scruggs StreetChattanooga, TN 37403Office: (423)697-1009


Filter Outlet Fitter Inlet

Return to sump

Figure 1 - Automatic Self-Cleaning Filter Combined with Centrifuge

Figure 2 - The Automatic Self-CleaningFilter with Attached PressureRegulating Valve Installed on an EMD GP60 Locomotive


Automatic self-

cleaning filter

From lube

oil pump Li-

Centrifuges <® <§.7£ 7^

J LO sump

To engine

Return from

hydraulic motor

tFigure 3 - Flow Diagram of the Automatic Self-Cleamng

Filter and Centrifuges

Figure 4 - Two Centrifuges at Six Liters Each Plus Partsof the Gravity Drain Piping to the Engine Sump

77

78

r.ontrrfiifm ^—j


For centripetal acceleration: a = <z?rWhere r = 97.5mm (centrifuge diameter)

f 7k]21) At3200 RPM : a = 3200 x— x0.0975 = 10938 ms*

*• 6oJ a 10938Comparing to gravitational acceleration (g) — = =1115

- 9 9.81

2) At 3650 RPM : a = 3650 x— x0.0975 = 14230 ms>*• 60j a 14230

Comparing to gravitational acceleration (g) — = = 14519 9.81

1115x(1+X) = 14230 X«30%Therefore, increasing the rotational speed from 3200 RPM to 3650RPM relates to a 30% increase in centrifugal force.

Figure 5 - Higher RPM Impact on Centrifugal Force

80 n

70

I

E

50

40

30

-S 20

10

14 38 72 84

Soot

CentrifiigeRPM increased

108 148 174 195 212 232 255 262 288 319 337 354 373

Days Since Oil Change

♦ Automatic Self-Cleaning Filter • Paper Cartridge

Figure 6 - Comparison of Soot Levels. Note the Increase in theCentrifuge RPM Around Day 270


16.5

16.0

15.5

15.0

14.514 38 72 84

Viscosity

~i—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—r—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—r

108 148 174 195 212 232 255 262 288 319 337 354 373


* AutomaticSelf-Cleaning Filter • Paper Cartridge

Figure 7 - Viscosity Power Trend Lines with the AutomaticSelf-Cleaning Filter and Paper Cartridges

WE 14.5"§ 13.5£ 12.5Jj 11.5i 10.51 951 8'55 7.5 2:

Oxidation

'**' • • « 1*

200 250


» AutomaticSef-Cteaning Filer • Paper Cartridge

Figure 8 - Oxidation Level Comparison

79


Iron

45 -iCentrifugeRPM increased

• • !E 40 • ♦

• "^—^-H^ OO _•. , •^s ou -

" ^7 v ♦3 25 -O 20 -

u

M « . "—^-^O • ^r* w ^c 10S in - ^*

#

JS iu ^5 i i i 1 1 i i i i

50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400


♦ Automatic Self-Cleaning Rtter • Paper Cartridge

Figure 9 - Significant Decrease in Iron with the AutomaticSelf-Cleaning Filter and Centrifuges

31

3~

z £

CO

26

21

16

11 -i—i—i—i—i—i—i—r14 38 72 84 99 108 148 174 195 212 232 255 262 288 319 337 354 373


Sulfate

-<*—

•• •

*Automatic Self-Cleaning Fitter - PaperCartridge

Figure 10 - Comparison of Sulfate in the Lube Oil

New Technologies Committee


ON NEW TECHNOLOGIES

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 17, 20091:15 P.M.

Chairman

JIM CHRISTOFF

Business Mgr.-Traction SegmentMorgan AM&T/National

Cicero, NY

Vice Chairman

RICH DALTON

Virginia Railway Express

COMMITTEE MEMBERS

81

D. Brabb Director-Bus. Develop. Sharma Associates Countryside, ILB. Kehe Senior Mech. Supvr. CNRR Gary, INT. Mack President/CEO AHL-Tech Milford, OHA. Miller President Vehicle Projects LLC Golden, CoC. Nordhues National Sales Exec. RJ Corman Railpower Erie, PAC. Prudian Senior Systems Engineer Electro Motive Diesels LaGrange, ILC. Riley Marketing Director Cummins, Inc. Columbus, IND. Sweatt Elect. Systems Engineer CSX Transportation Jacksonville, FLT. Volkmann Dir.-Mech. Engrg. Union Pacific RR Omaha, NEJ. Whitmer Loco. Rel. Specialist CNRR Homewood, ILB. Wolff MTU Detroit Diesel Detroit, Ml

Note: Bruce Kehe and Tad Volkmann are Past Presidents of LMOA

82 New Technologies Committee

PERSONAL HISTORY

Jim ChristoffBusiness Manager, Traction Segment

Morgan AM&T/NationalCicero, NY

Jim who was raised in WesternPennsylvania now finds himself living in Cicero, NY. His 25 plus yearsin the carbon business have givenhim a broad knowledge of DCrotating equipment and an understanding of the operating conditions and environments that are

present in railroad freight and passenger service.

Jim has worked for MorganCrucible pic (parent company ofMorgan AM&T/National) for 20

years. From 1989 thru 2001 hehandled the East Coast Transit,Industrial, and Consumer Business.In 2002 he started working exclusively on Transit, Traction businessand in 2005 he was promoted toBusiness Manager of Traction inthe Americas.

Jim and his wife Diane have 2children and 2 grandchildren.When work is done they enjoyboating, golfing, and visiting theirchildren.

New Technologies Committee 83

THE NEW TECHNOLOGIES COMMITTEE

WOULD LIKE TO EXTEND THEIR

SINCERE APPRECIATION TO

TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY

CENTER IN PUEBLO, COLORADO

FOR HOSTING THEIR COMMITTEE

MEETING IN NOVEMBER 2008

SPECIAL THANKS TO

ED GROVES AND ALAN POLIVKA

OF TTCI FOR HOSTING THE MEETING

ALSO THANKS TO RICH DALTON

AND WABTEC/MPI FOR

HOSTING THE DINNER IN DENVER

84

ETHANOL-ELECTRIC

HYBRID LOCOMOTIVES

PreparedbyTom Mack,

Alternative HybridLocomotive Tech

Although railroads have long beenconsidered one of the most fuel effi

cient and lowest emissions forms of

transportation, railroads have neverbeen more impacted by emissionsregulations than in the 21st century.The enactment of Tier 2 emissions

standards in 2005 required majorlocomotive manufacturers to devel

op new engines and engine technologies and redesign the locomotive offerings in order to meet significant NOx and PM reduction

requirements. EPA Tier 4 requirements, that take effect in 2015, willrequire the addition of diesel particulate filters (DPF), selective catalyticreduction (SCR), or other new technologies to reduce NOx and PM tolevels considered almost impossiblea few years ago.

In 2009 a new emissions requirement was introduced, although nottotally unexpected. This emissionsrequirement had to do withGreenhouse Gasses (GHG).Although many countries had previously taken a formal stand that GHGemissions, especially carbon dioxideproduced from burning fossil fuel,were detrimental to the environ

ment, a significant cause of globalclimate change, and in need of regulation, the United States had no formal policy on the issue. In fact,under the administration of

President George W. Bush, the


United States Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA) refused totake a formal stand on the regulationof GHG.

All of that has changed in 2009.Under the new administration of

President Barack Obama, the USEPA announced that regulation ofGHG would be one of its top threepriorities. Nevertheless, it was somewhat stunning to many in the transportation industry when the EPAmade a formal statement in April2009 calling carbon dioxide emissions a "significant human healthhazard." These statements and the

current EPA position on GHG makeit clear that regulation of GHG emissions will soon affect all industries in

the United States, including thetransportation sector. Regardless ofthe increased fuel efficiency andlower emissions found in today's Tier2 locomotives, GHG reduction willbecome a requirement for U.S. railroads, and no doubt Canadian railroads as well.

In order to meet upcoming GHGreduction requirements, as well as agrowing desire by the U.S. to reduceits dependency on foreign oil, railroads need to be exploring alternative technologies now so as to makewise decisions to deal with GHG

reduction and lessen dependencyon fossil fuels. This means taking aserious look at renewable fuels.

These renewable fuels are producedfrom biomass, such as corn andsugar cane (ethanol), and variousvegetable oils such as soy oil, palmoil, canola (rapeseed) oil, etc.(biodiesel).


The move toward GHG reduction

and reduced dependency on fossilfuel is a two-edged sword for today'srailroads. On the one hand, due tothe high efficiency of rail transportation, it makes sense to move moregoods and passengers by rail, thusbenefiting from reducing the number of high polluting cars and trucksfrom the nation's highway system.This will mean a growth in businessfor railroads as freight (and passengers) move to more fuel efficientmodes of transportation.

On the other hand, GHG reduction cannot be achieved throughadvances in fuel efficiency alone.Many proposed carbon reductionplans use the concept of "additionally" to measure GHG reduction.These proposals look to the adoption of additional technologies toreduce GHG reduction beyondwhat the standard or currently available technology provides. In otherwords, if the standard locomotiveofferings already provide a 10%increase in fuel economy (and thus adecrease in overall emissions), "addi-tionality" says that there is no "penalty" for adopting these technologies,thus there is no credit given for GHGreduction. If there is a technologyavailable that could reduce GHG

even further, but it comes at a costto the adopter, then this is going the"additional" mile, and these technologies would be eligible for subsidies, such as carbon credits, to offsetthe additional cost of the technolo

gy.

In addition to the environmental

benefits of GHG reduction throughthe adoption of biofuels, there is the

85

matter of energy security and independence. The massive fuel costspikes of 2008 are a clear indicatorof the effects that dependence onforeign oil can have on the NorthAmerican economy. Although fuelwas always available, the run up ofthe cost of crude oil to almost $150a barrel brought about unheard ofprices for transportation fuel (dieseland gasoline) at the pump. Althoughsome percentage of these high costscould be passed on to the shipper inthe form of fuel surcharges, there isno doubt that these high fuel costsate into railroad profits. Even withsome shippers switching to rail overtrucks, the additional business forthe railroads came at a high price.What concerns many railroads nowis that the next round of higher fuelcosts could be accompanied byreduced supply. This would beabsolutely disastrous to the economy.

The only way to reduce thesepotential fuel shortages is to look todomestically produced fuel. Thismeans taking advantage of the billions of gallons of biofuels produceddomestically in the U.S. and Canada.Under the U.S. Renewable Fuel

Standard (RFS), the production ofbiofuels is expected to increase tosome 35 billion gallons of fuel peryear. Sufficient quantities to supply alarge portion of the North Americanrailroads fuel requirements. By keeping the proceeds from the sale andproduction of these fuels in the localeconomies, there is a cyclical effectthat can also benefit the railroads,since local money means increasedpurchase of goods, many of which

86

ship by rail.

BIOFUEL TYPES

Over the years, multiple types ofbiofuels have been used by the transportation industry. In its early yearsthe railroad industry was a large userof biofuels. Locomotives were fueled

by wood, a renewable biofuel.(Today, wood used directly as fuel ismore commonly referred to as bio-mass, to differentiate it from liquidbiofuels.) Over the years, wood gaveway to coal and oil, both considerednon-renewable fossil fuels.

Today, the most commonly produced and used biofuels are

biodiesel and ethanol. Other alcohol

fuels such as methanol were also

heavily experimented with in the20th century. Methanol however,had many negative qualities, including a low BTU content and high cor-rosiveness which affected fuel systems and engines.

At first glance, the logical choiceof biofuels for a locomotive would

be biodiesel. According toWikipedia: "Biodiesel refers to anon-petroleum-based diesel fuelconsisting of long-chain alkyl(methyl, propyl, or ethyl) esters.Biodiesel is typically made by chemically-reacting lipids (e.g., vegetableoil, animal fat (tallow)) and alcohol. Itcan be used (alone, or blended withconventional petrodiesel) in unmodified diesel-engine vehicles. Biodieselis distinguished from the straight vegetable oil (SVO) (sometimes referredto as "waste vegetable oil", "WVO","used vegetable oil", "UVO", "pureplant oil", "PPO") used (alone, orblended) as fuels in some converted


diesel vehicles."

The most commonly producedbiofuel in the United States is

ethanol, also called ethyl alcohol, orgrain ethanol, because the mostcommon feedstock in the U.S. used

to produce ethanol is corn (wheat,barley, and other grains can also beused as feedstock for ethanol production). Ethanol is a "two-chain"alcohol, meaning it contains twoCH2 carbon chains (methanol contains only one CH2 carbon chain,hence it has a lower BTU content).U.S. ethanol plants have the capacity to produce over 12 billion gallonsa year of ethanol. Although corncontinues to be the feedstock of

choice, new plants are being built inthe United States that use sugarcane, waste sugar, municipal solidwaste (MSW), wood chips, wastepaper and other "cellulosic" feedstocks. These "cellulosic" ethanol

plants will produce ethanol with thegreatest GHG reduction potential,some estimates stating that GHGreduction will be over 90%.

In the future, there are other biofuels that hold promise as well.Unfortunately, these biofuels are currently produced in very low quantities, and it is doubtful that all thesefuels will become economicallyviable. Among these fuels holdingpromise are:

1. Renewable diesel and gasoline- fuels having virtually the samechemical and combustion properties as current diesel and

gasoline, but produced frombiomass feedstocks, and thusrenewable. These fuels could be


IMRE-Clark new EMDpower assemblies— Always meet or exceed O.E.M. specifications

For 645 engines:• New Diamond 9 Cylinder Heads• One piece Cylinder Liners• Laser Hardened Ring Land Pistons

87

NRE is the exclusive distributor for

Clark Industrial Power's EMD powerassembly components. Clark hasmanufactured and supplied new powerassembly components to the rail,marine, and stationary applicationsfor over 20 years and is well receivedworldwide.

locamotives@nationalrailway. conNational Railway Equipment Co.• 11OO Shawnee St

• Mt. Vernon, IL 62864• 800-253-2905

88

used in existing engines with nochange to the engine itself,engine fuel system, or fuel delivery infrastructure (pipelines, filing stations, etc.).

2. Biobutanol - Biobutanol is a

four CH2 carbon chain alcohol.

It is currently produced in quantity from petroleum, but newbiological technologies are producing butanol from corn andwood chips using microbes(similar to the yeast that produces ethanol from grain).Because the butanol is produced from biological feedstockinstead of petroleum, it is commonly called biobutanol to differentiate it from standard

petroleum based butanol.Biobutanol has a higher BTUcontent than ethanol due to the

two additional CH2 carbon

chains (114,000BTU for biobutanol vs. 78,000BTU forethanol). Because of this higherBTU content (comparable togasoline), biobutanol wouldhave distinct advantages overethanol for range and horsepower per gallon. It can also beshipped through existingpipelines due to the fact it doesnot attract moisture and con

taminants like ethanol. Because

biobutanol is an alcohol fuel,the transition from ethanol to

biobutanol would be fairlystraightforward, without majorchanges to infrastructure orengine systems. Unlike ethanol,biobutanol is not a human con

sumable. Hence, it does not


need to be denatured before

being shipped for fuel use.

3. Alcohol Mixes - Alcohol fuels,like any fuel, have trade-offs. Forexample, while biobutanol hasa higher BTU content thanethanol, it also has a loweroctane rating than ethanol.Hence, it cannot be combustedat the higher compression ratiosof ethanol (and higher compression equals higher efficiency).But alcohol fuels such as

ethanol and biobutanol can be

easily mixed to form a "hybrid"fuel. This would result in a fuel

have the best characteristics of

each fuel (the higher BTU content of biobutanol and the higher octane rating of ethanol). Themix ratios of the alcohols could

be varied, with higher biobutanol blends introduced over

time as more becomes avail

able. This would provide for avery gradual and controlledintroduction of higher BTU alcohol fuels with no need to

change infrastructure orupgrade existing ethanol-fueledlocomotives. Since these fuels

could be mixed at the alcohol

plant (in fact, a single plantcould potentially produce bothethanol and biobutanol from

the same feedstock) therewould be no need for an inter

mediate blender. And since

biobutanol is a natural denatu-

rant, the alcohol mix would notrequire a gasoline denaturant.


Use of any fuel (petroleum or biofuel), however, is not without prosand cons. So too, biodiesel andethanol both have pros and cons.Biodiesel, for example, has theadvantage of having a fairly highBTU content per gallon, although itis generally slightly lower than petroleum diesel. So the use of biodiesel

can result in a fuel use increase

penalty. Biodiesel blends can beused in many existing diesel engineswithout need for modification of the

engine (as long as the blend level isapproved by the engine manufacturer). Biodiesel has a substantial GHGreduction potential. The U.S.Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) estimates the GHG reductionof biodiesel at 67.7% per gallon. Thisis a fairly high GHG reduction potential, comparable to that of sugarcane based ethanol, and higher thanmost corn based ethanol.

However, there are a number ofnegative aspects of biodiesel thathave held back widespread use inthe transportation industry. First,there is the higher cost of biodieselover petroleum diesel. Biodiesel hasclassically run as much a $1 per gallon more than petroleum diesel.Although this cost has been offset bya U.S. government subsidy of thesame amount, it has not been unusual for the cost of biodiesel to run

higher than petroleum diesel evenafter the subsidy. Studies of the useof biodiesel have also shown that it

produces higher NOx levels thanpetroleum diesel. Since NOx is regulated by the US EPA locomotiveemissions "Tier" regulations, thisincrease in NOx cannot be ignored.

89

So the use of biodiesel will not do

away with the need for SelectiveCatalytic Reduction (SCR) or DieselParticulate Filter (DPF) systems toreach EPA Tier 3 and Tier 4 locomo

tive emissions requirements.Since biodiesel is produced from

vegetable or animal oils, the yieldper acre of biodiesel from thesesources is lower than that of fer

mented fuels such as ethanol.

Because of this, some studies haveindicated that it may be doubtful ifbiodiesel could fill the quantityneeds of biofuels. New technologies,such as using algae as a feedstockfor biodiesel may take care of theseproduction quantity issues.

There are also known issues with

using biodiesel in existing and evennew diesel engines. Many enginemanufacturers only warrant the useof low-level biodiesel blends, such asB5 or B20. At these low blends, theGHG reduction potential ofbiodiesel is almost eliminated. A B5

blend will only reduce GHG emissions by 3.4%, while a B20 blendreduces GHG emission by only13.5%. Neither of these levels is

enough to meet proposed GHGreduction goals which in many casesare in excess of 30% required GHGreduction. (The 2005 LMOA proceeding had a detailed study ofbiodiesel pros and cons, includingdetailed potential fuel system andengine issues.)

Ethanol fuel also has positive andnegative aspects. On the positiveside, ethanol is a very abundant biofuel. U.S. production capacity currently exceeds 10B gallons per year.Yields of 2.8 gallons of ethanol per

90

bushel of corn are very common.With the addition of new technolo

gies such as producing ethanol fromcorn cobs and corn stover, theethanol yield per acre of corn growncould increase by 25% withoutplanting any additional crop. Usingthis "cellulosic" feedstock (cobs andstalks), the overall GHG reduction ofcorn ethanol would increase sub

stantially, and corn ethanol couldequal the GHG reduction ofbiodiesel or sugar cane. So despitewhat the popular media portrays,there is no reason to consider corn-

based ethanol as a dead-end fuel.

Based on the current supply ofethanol and new plant capacity,ethanol can easily replace a largepercentage of the fuel used not onlyin automobiles, but by ethanolfueled locomotives.

In addition to corn ethanol, newtechnologies are being introduced toproduce ethanol sweet sorghum,sugar cane (not a common feedstock in North America), and from"woody" biomass such as switchgrass, wood chips, paper, and municipal solid waste. These "woody"feedstocks are commonly called"cellulosic" feedstocks, because oftheir high cellulose content. Becausecellulose is a tougher material thanstarch or straight sugar, it must firstbe converted with enzymes orthrough other processes to allowconversion to ethanol. These

processes are quite diverse, and thefirst production "cellulosic" ethanolplants should be coming on line in2010 or 2011. Not only does cellulosic ethanol hold promise to reducethe levels of what are currently con


sidered waste streams (MSW, forestresidue, waste wood chips and scrappaper), but because these feedstocks are either waste items or

require little if any farming, thereduction of GHG emissions for cel

lulosic ethanol is quite high. The EPAestimates GHG reduction for cellu

losic ethanol at over 90%. Thus the

use of cellulosic ethanol would have

a definite and dramatic effect on

GHG reduction, far exceeding the30-35% required to bring overallGHG levels down to pre-2000 levels,and offsetting the continued use offossil fuel GHG emissions.

In addition to reduction of GHG

emissions, ethanol can substantiallyreduce criteria emissions associated

with diesel fuel. Ethanol producesvirtually no particulate matter whenburned in a spark ignited internalcombustion engine. Also, a higherRPM spark ignited ethanol enginewill produce much lower NOx levelsthan a comparable horsepowerdiesel engine. In fact minimal or noaftertreatment should be needed to

reach EPA Tier 4 locomotive requirement. Thus an ethanol locomotive

engine would not require DPF orSCR to meet EPA Tier 4.

Because of the high octane ratingof ethanol (around 116 octane), alocomotive could use a high compression ethanol engine. Highercompression equals higher efficiency. Thus, some of the BTU differential between diesel fuel and ethanol

could be recouped because of thehigher efficiencies from an ethanolengine.

There are also potential benefits infuel prices using ethanol. Because


ethanol is produced domestically,and because an ethanol poweredlocomotive would not require theethanol to be blended with other

fuels, the railroads could purchasefuel directly from the producer. Thiswould cut out any "middle man"mark-up. It also means that any subsidies available for the biofuel could

be shared by the producer and therailroad.

As with biodiesel, there are alsonegative aspects to ethanol fuel. Firstand foremost is the lower BTU con

tent. Regardless of engine efficiency,ethanol vs. diesel will no doubt incur

a fuel use increase penalty. The useof ethanol will require a new fuelinginfrastructure. This issue can be min

imized by starting with truck or tankcar to locomotive mobile fueling.Also, by gradually phasing in ethanollocomotives into switching, local, orbranch line service, the number offueling points can be minimizedwhile fleet size is increased.

Another known issue with ethanol

is an increase in aldehyde emissions.This issue can be overcome byadding currently available aldehydecatalytic converters into the exhaustsystem. So while the production ofaldehydes is a known issue, the solution for the elimination of those

emissions is also well known and

readily available.

GREENHOUSE GAS (GHG)EMISSIONS REQUIREMENTS

Although the U.S. EPA does notcurrently regulate GHG emissions, ithas now openly stated that it plansto do so in the near future. The state

that has probably spent the most

91

amount of time studying the issue ofGHG emissions and formulating areduction plan is California. TheCalifornia Global Warming SolutionsAct of 2006 (AB 32) requires that theCalifornia Air Resources Board

(CARB) approve a statewide greenhouse gas emissions limit equal tothe GHG emissions level in 1990. In

2004 the rail sector in California produced 3.14M metric tonnes of C02,compared to 2.75M metric tonnesof C02 in 2003. That is a 14.5%

increase in C02. In 1990 the rail

road sector in California produced2.29M metric tonnes of C02. CARB

projections are that the rail sectorwill produce 3.7M metric tones ofC02 in 2020. To reduce the 2020

projected C02 levels to the 1990levels will require a decrease of1.4M metric tonnes of C02. 1.4M

metric tonnes equates to a 1.55MU.S. tons reduction. This means the

California plan is to reduce GHGemissions by 37.8% by 2020.

Locomotives produce approximately 11.192 tons of C02 per1,000 gallons of fuel consumed. Anaverage diesel locomotive in yardand local service can easily consume50,000 gallons of fuel per year. Thisequates to over 559 tons of C02 perlocomotive. Cellulosic ethanol is esti

mated by the EPA to reduce GHGemissions by -90%. Since even cellulosic ethanol would be blended

with gasoline as a denaturant, for thepurposes of projections, ethanolGHG emissions reductions are

based on an E95 blend (95%ethanol, 5% gasoline), whichequates to an 85.5% overall C02reduction for cellulosic ethanol, and

92

a 20.7% overall C02 reduction for

corn ethanol. Using these estimates,an ethanol powered locomotivewould reduce annual C02 emissions

per locomotive by 483 tons usingcellulosic ethanol and 116 tons

using corn ethanol, when comparedto a diesel locomotive consuming50,000 gallons of diesel fuel annually and producing 596 tons of C02.(It should be noted that newer cornethanol plants have substantiallylower carbon footprints, with somenew design corn ethanol plants touting GHG reduction credit of over70%.)

Based on the GHG calculation of

11.192 tons of C02 per 1,000 gallons of fuel consumed per locomotive, to reduce locomotive GHGemissions levels to 1990 levels will

require the replacement of at least130M gallons of diesel fuel with aGHG reducing fuel. These calculations suggest that 805 locomotives,each using 200,000 gallons of dieselfuel annually, must be replaced withlocomotives using cellulosic ethanolin order to meet just the Californiarequirements.

The CARB 2004 Intrastate

Locomotive Report shows that theaverage Intrastate locomotive on aClass I railroad in California (BNSF orUP) only uses 61,000 gallons of fuelper year. At that rate, it wouldrequire 2,640 intrastate Class I locomotives using cellulosic ethanol inorder to reduce the GHG emissions

to 1990 levels.

However, there is a large opportunity to begin C02 reductions by firstconcentrating on high horsepower,high fuel consuming intrastate loco


motives. For example, intrastatefreight locomotives in California consume 26.6M gallons of diesel fuelper year (CARB estimates) producing around 298,000 tons of C02emissions annually. If these werereplaced with locomotives poweredby cellulosic ethanol, this wouldmake a substantial contribution to

reducing current levels of GHGemissions. The 2004 to 1990 C02

differential for California is about

941,000 tons, so 32% of this differential could be quickly erased bymoving California intrastate locomotives to cellulosic ethanol hybrids.However, even with the replacementof all intrastate locomotives in

California, this still leaves a substantial shortfall in meeting the GHGreduction goal.

Although the use of biodieselcould also reduce GHG emissions,because of the lower blend levels for

biodiesel, GHG reduction would notbe sufficient (see Table 1). The EPAestimates the GHG reduction level

of 100% biodiesel at 67.7%. But

because biodiesel is normally blended at very low percentages withpetroleum diesel, the overall GHGreduction levels are quite small.Most diesel engine manufacturerswill support a B5 blend (5%biodiesel and 95% petroleum dieselper gallon) and some will support upto a B20 blend (20% biodiesel and80% petroleum diesel per gallon). Atthese blend levels, B5 only providesa 3.4% overall GHG reduction, andB20 a 13.5% reduction. So even if

every locomotive in California ran aB20 blend, this reduction would onlymeet 35% of the California AB 32


goal. So in order for biodiesel aloneto meet the California GHG reduc

tion goals, locomotives would haveto use a very high blend, somewherearound a B55 or B60 fuel.

ETHANOL POTENTIALS

While final GHG emissions

requirements for the U.S. will beshaped over the coming year, therailroad industry already is wellaware of what it faces to meet the

criteria emissions reduction requirements of EPA Tier 4.

First is a reduction of particulatematter. Since PM has been linked to

cancer, the reduction of PM is amajor issue with many communitiesand states. States like California are

even pushing to increase the PMreduction from locomotive fleets. A

spark ignition ethanol engine shouldmeet even the most stringent PMreduction requirements without theuse of any particulate filters. This isbecause alcohol fuel burns with vir

tually zero PM. Because ethanoluses gasoline as a denaturant, theremay be some PM produced, but atsuch low levels as to be negligible,even by EPA Tier 4 standards. Also,when coupled with hybrid technology, the engine start and powerincrease cycles most associated withPM production (the classic blacksmoke when throttling up a diesellocomotive) can also be eliminatedor minimized.

Probably the biggest challenge tomeet EPA Tier 4 for locomotives is

the reduction of oxides of nitrogen(NOx) which combined with ozonein the atmosphere create smog andcontribute to breathing difficulties.

93

(Recently it has also been suggestedthat GHG emissions contribute with

NOx to health issues, because thehigher global temperatures are moreconducive to the creation of smogthrough NOx emissions. Thus, bothNOx and GHG emissions are beinglinked as contributors to breathingproblems in humans.)

Current diesel technology suggests the use of selective catalyticreduction (SCR) to reduce NOx levels. This requires the introduction ofeither urea (an ammonia compoundproduced from natural gas, a fossilfuel) or perhaps the diesel fuel itself(known as hydrocarbon selectivecatalytic reduction or HC-SCR) as areductant to convert the NOX into

free nitrogen, water, and C02. Sinceethanol burns differently in a sparkignition engine than diesel in a compression ignition engine, andbecause an ethanol engine wouldrun at a higher RPM than a dieselengine of similar horsepower, thecreation of NOx is greatly reduced.An ethanol engine should be able tomeet EPA Tier 4 locomotive requirements with either no aftertreatment,or simply the addition of a standard3-way catalytic converter. There is noneed for the addition of SCR or car

rying a reductant such as urea.An issue that has been commonly

raised, however, with the use ofethanol is engine durability. Somepeople have expressed concernsregarding the durability of anethanol engine for several reasons.First, is that an ethanol engine wouldbe running at a higher RPM than adiesel engine. While it is true that ahigher RPM usually equals lower

94

durability and less engine hoursbetween overhaul, the cleaner burnof the ethanol fuel can have a

tremendous impact on increasingengine life. Lower polluting fuels,such as LNG, have been shown toproduce significantly less wear onengine parts such as rings and bearings. One reason for this is that thelubricating oil remains clean and assuch, the higher lubrication properties of the clean oil over a longerperiod of time offset the increasedRPM. This has been shown to be the

case with airplane engines runningethanol fuel vs. avgas (which contains lead, a natural lubricant).Airplane engines running ethanolshow substantially lower wear atoverhaul time than their counter

parts using avgas. Also, some lowerhorsepower engines using LNG fuelhave been shown to have a 20,000hour lifespan between rebuilds, thusrivaling many diesel engines.

The durability of an ethanolengine can also be increased by theuse of higher durability components,such as high durability treated rings,and low friction cylinder honingtechniques. The use of these components or techniques in enginepreparation and production is notwarranted in a low-cost automotive

application where current engine lifeequals or exceeds that of the automobile itself. (Why would GM spendeven an extra $10 per engine on amillion automobiles to increase

engine life by a few thousand hourswhen the engine already lasts the lifeof the car? It would be tantamount

to spreading $10M in cash throughout an auto salvage yard - not a wise


thing to do in this or any other economy.) But the addition of even$1,000 worth of high durability partsor assembly techniques into a locomotive engine to increase engine lifeby 2,000 or 3,000 hours will pay foritself within a few months on potential fuel savings and lifetime overhaulcosts. Thus an ethanol locomotive

engine would more closely match adiesel engine in components anddurability, than a spark ignited automobile engine.

Since an ethanol engine would besmaller overall than a diesel engineof similar horsepower, the smallerparts could be less susceptible to theshock and stress associated with

locomotive duty. Components,including the entire generator set,can be better shock isolated, thusextending durability.

It should also be noted that an

ethanol powered hybrid locomotive,since it uses smaller, lower horsepower generators, would be a multi-engine design. Thus the overall combined genset time between overhauls would be longer than thebetween overhaul time of any singlegenset. Thus a 5,000 hour gensetmay last 8,000-10,000 hours onlocomotive due to "load balancing"between multiple gensets. Load balancing may also include running twoor three gensets at lower RPM andhorsepower vs. one genset at higherRPM and horsepower (e.g. runningtwo gensets at 250hp but 40% lowerRPM than a single genset at 500hpat full RPM). Thus, there are methods for balancing engine efficiencyand durability besides the actualdesign and components used in the


ethanol generator set.Finally, the use of hybrid technolo

gies, specifically regenerative braking, will reduce overall engine runtime thus increase the time between

overhauls. Regenerative brakingcould supply 10-20% of the energyneeds of the locomotive (some studies have suggested as much as 30-40% of the energy needs). Thus, theethanol engines in an ethanol hybridlocomotive could last 20% longer(or more) between overhauls,although the actual engine hoursbetween overhauls would remain

the same.

PARADIGM SHIFTS

A switch to any new fuel, otherthan diesel (or a biodiesel blend) willno doubt require a paradigm shift inthinking about locomotive technology and maintenance techniques. Thekey is keeping the actual workrequired to a minimum, even if thechange in thinking is radical.

For example, as long as the actualtime between engine maintenanceand/or overhauls remains the sameas for current diesels, does it reallymatter if the engine itself runs at ahigher RPM than current diesels, orthe size of the engine is substantiallysmaller compared to its diesel counterpart? For many in the computerindustry, it was hard to imagine thata smaller size disk drive could actu

ally hold substantially more data, orbe substantially more robust andshock resistant than its bigger andheavier counterpart. But it wasshown that the smaller componentsactually increased the ability to storemore data on the disk, and the small

95

er components, due to their lighterweight and lower mass, were actually less vulnerable to shock and vibration. If the same holds true for small

er ethanol engines, is there any reason not to accept the technology?

We also need to realize that

ethanol engine technology is anengine change, not an engine modification. A true ethanol engine cannot be thought of as simply an automotive engine put in a locomotive.These are not diesel engines, gasoline engines, or even flex-fuelengines (capable of running oneither gasoline or ethanol). A trueethanol engine is a new category ofspark ignited engines (and may noteven require a spark ignition with theuse of some promising new technologies). All aspects of the enginedesign and development are forethanol, with no compromises forgasoline or diesel fuel.

The changes in the engine technology are quite widespread. Forexample, because of the extremelyhigh octane rating of ethanol, compression ratios can be significantlyincreased. As such, gasoline (exceptfor the highest octane racing fuel)could not be used in a true ethanol

engine. The bore and stroke of theengine, fuel injection system, intakeand exhaust manifolds, block andheads, bearings, pistons and rings,and all other components are chosen based on the design of theethanol engine, and not some previous gasoline or diesel engine.

The ability to take the base engine,and make incremental advances and

changes to the engine duringrebuilds will also allow an evolution-

96

ary approach to future enhancements in both efficiency and durability. Here again is where a paradigmshift in thinking must take place. Ifthe multi-year cost and downtime fora multi-genset vs. a single enginelocomotive is the same, how muchopportunity is there for:

1. Increasing efficiency at eachgenset swap? How much ofgenset swap cost can be quickly captured by efficiency gain?Just a 1% fuel efficiencyincrease on a locomotive using50,000 gallons of fuel per yearcan quickly add up. The 1% fuelefficiency increase wouldreduce fuel usage by 500 gal -Ions year. At $2 per gallon, thatis a $1,000 offset to "betweenoverhaul" maintenance costs.

At $4 per gallon of fuel, the offset is $2,000. And while effi -ciency gains will at some pointno doubt plateau, durability willno doubt also increase, increasing mean time betweenrebuilds, and decreasing maintenance cost. Thus new techn-

ogy adoption cost can easily beoffset by the positive results.

2. Decreasing emissions at eachgenset swap? For example,GHG reduction can equal carbon credits. Although these carbon credits are not formallyadopted yet, it is expectedthese will be adopted alongwith a cap-and-trade carbonreduction plan. But perhapsmore important is that theNOx/PM reduction availablethrough normal genset swaps


can mean moving to the nextEPA Tier without the cost of a

brand new locomotive. This will

allow railroads to competemore with trucks, which due tothe shorter lifespan of a truckcompared to a locomotive,have a faster turnover rate to

newer, cleaner, less expensive(compared to per locomotivecosts), and more fuel efficienttechnologies

3. Performing genset swaps duringregularly scheduled maintenance times, such as scheduledannual 2-day maintenance periods? This would mean that

unscheduled down-time due to

engine failures could be virtually eliminated. Engine replacement could be factored in to

the normal annual maintenance

costs of the locomotive, perhaps even becoming part of astandard maintenance contract.

Any "unscheduled" downtimedue to engine failure would bethe responsibility of the maintenance contractor (probably themanufacturer), rather than therailroad.

The actual time between rebuilds

for a true ethanol engine is stillunknown, so while all of the abovehas yet to be proven throughdynamometer and road testing, it iscertainly worth considering.

Another area of "paradigm shift"thinking has to do with the acceptance of hybrid locomotive technology. The term "hybrid locomotive"unfortunately has some bad reputations around railroad circles. But it is


justifiable to ask whether the first"hybrid locomotives" were truly"hybrids" or battery locomotiveswith on-board charge? There isstrong argument that earlier designsof "hybrid" locomotives were nottrue hybrids, since a true hybridwould normally have an almostequal horsepower rating of batteriesand engines, and the rate of batterycharge on a true hybrid would usually remain relatively high. A "battery"locomotive, on the other hand,could use a lower horsepower generator and would take the batterycharge down to a much lowercharge level than a normal hybrid.

We must remember that all this

new technology moves ahead and"new" technology may succeedwhere the first technology did not. Inthe development of an ethanol-elec-tric hybrid locomotive, the designcan use a totally different power mixof generator sets and battery. Sincean ethanol powered generator set issmaller than its diesel counterpart,the location and number of ethanol

generator can be different. Forexample, a six axle ethanol-electric hybridlocomotive could house six 500hpethanol generator sets producing acontinuous 3,000hp (the equivalentof an EMD SD40-2 or GE C30-7). Byusing a new design locomotiveframe, cab, and electrical cabinet,the locomotive could also house a

1,000hp battery set and an additional energy storage system (beyondthe battery set). With 3,000hp worthof generators, this is enough generator set power to power locomotivetraction needs and recharge the battery simultaneously. This is more in

97

line with proven hybrid technologywhere the system is not dependenton the battery system to be able toperform (i.e. even with a low-charged battery system the locomotive can still meet its duty requirements).

The battery technology chosenwill also greatly affect the performance of the locomotive. Different

battery technologies have been usedon prototype hybrid locomotives.These include: 1) Sealed lead acidbatteries; 2) Flooded lead acid batteries; 3) new generation NickelMetal Hydride (NiMH) or LithiumIon (Lilon) batteries; and even 4)Liquid Sodium batteries. Each battery type has its own pros and cons,but one of the biggest issues withNiMH, Lilon, and Liquid Sodium batteries is the price per kilowatt hour.A 1,000hp battery system for a locomotive could easily cost $750,000 to$1M. The ability to recoup this battery cost through fuel savings fromregenerative braking is questionable.So part of the paradigm shift in battery choice is to consider "old" technology flooded lead acid batteries.These batteries can be very costeffective in a hybrid locomotiveapplication, but require a redesign ofthe locomotive to take advantage ofmounting potentials on an ethanol-electric hybrid locomotive.

In addition to the choice of batter

ies, different control technologymust be employed. The charge levelsof the battery and/or actual batteryduty cycles can greatly change battery life and performance. Even thecharge level of individual batterycells within the battery set must be

taken into consideration. For exam

ple, a nominal 640VDC lead acidbattery set will have 320 2vdc cells.If just one of these cells starts to"misbehave" or gets out of synch incharge level with the other cells, thiscan have negative consequences tothe life of the entire battery set. In aworse case scenario, it can have disastrous consequences in the eventof a battery fire. Proper control technology, battery types, cycle modeling, and battery and cell management systems, can provide tremendous performance gains andincrease battery pack longevity.These technologies can allow energyto be stored at the same rate as dis

charge, with minimal efficiency lossfrom generator sets to battery. So inregard to hybrid technology, weneed to ask ourselves: Have we real

ly considered all these areas or justone or two projects that failed?

As hybrid technology becomesproven, with more empirical dataavailable for consideration by railroads, another area of thinking thatwill come in to play is ContinuousHorsepower (CH) rating (CH) vs.Continuous Duty Cycle (CDC) rating. Classically, locomotives havealways been measured by their CHrating. The CH rating is the maximum amount of horsepower that alocomotive is able to produce (e.g.2,000hp) at any time and for as longas liquid fuel lasts in the tank. Thus, aGE C30-7 was a 3,000hp locomotivethat in theory could be placed inthrottle notch 8 (full power), and leftin that throttle setting until the tankran dry. Refilling the tank wouldallow the locomotive to continue


running in that throttle setting untilthe next refueling. This CH ratingwas particularly critical for road usewhere locomotives spend longerpercentages of their time in higherthrottle notches, and also in multimodal (e.g. yard and branch line)operation where the locomotivemay operate some of its time in aswitcher duty cycle, but also beneeded to serve in road service at

times.

On the other hand, ContinuousDuty Cycle (CDC) rating takes intoaccount that very seldom does alocomotive operate continuously athigh throttle settings. Much of thelocomotive's time is spent at idle, orlower throttle settings (50-60% ofrated horsepower). Thus, as CDCrated locomotive must only be ableto produce its full horsepower rating(e.g. 2,000hp) at any time for as longas the normal duty cvcle requires it.It is assumed that the duty cycle willgive time for battery recharge andenough generator horsepower existsto not only recharge battery butpower the locomotive if need be.CDC ratings are more suited to yard,local, and branch line use wherehigher throttle notch percentage islow compared to lower notch percentage. It should be noted, however, that recharge time is not necessarily tied to idle time if the locomotive is put through heavy workbetween idle periods. This was a definite issue with earlier so-called

"hybrid" locomotives. If the actualwork time of the locomotive

stretched outside the "normal" CDC,the batteries became overly discharged, and there was no time dur-


ing this work period to recharge thebatteries. The on-board generatorwas simply not of sufficient horsepower to recharge the batteries during the work period. This issuebecomes less critical, and is virtuallyeliminated, if the generator power tobattery ratio is correctly matched tothe duty cycle.

Thus, a railroad needs to determine if "captive" service of locomotive allows it to take advantage ofCDC rating. This can set new paradigms for a railroad's choice ofpower mix (generator set horsepower vs. battery set horsepower) on ahybrid locomotive. For example,Railroad A may opt for a 1,000hptwin genset hybrid with a 1,000hpbattery system to create a 2,000hpCDC hybrid locomotive. However,Railroad B may opt to have 1,500hpin three gensets combined with thesame 1,000hp battery system to create a 2,000hp severe duty cycleCDC hybrid locomotive instead ofthe twin genset 2,000hp hybrid chosen by Railroad A. This power mixcan be left up to the railroad. Anddepending on locomotive design, arailroad could have the option ofincreasing or decreasing the numberof generator sets on an existing locomotive as more empirical operatingdata becomes available.

EVALUATING EFFICIENCY

TECHNOLOGIES

There is little doubt that new tech

nologies can be introduced toincrease engine efficiency and fueleconomy, as well as engine durability. This has been the standard fordecades - with each new generation

99

of locomotives there comes more

efficient or economical technology.The introduction of emissions con

trol, however, has changed this.While fuel economy is important tothe railroads, fuel efficiencybecomes less important to regulating bodies such as the EPA if emissions levels cannot be met. So if

increased back pressures or fuelburn to increase exhaust gas temperatures are required for introductionof DPF and SCR technologies, andthis requires a decrease in fuel efficiency to meet the Tier standards,locomotive manufacturers will need

to accept a next generation locomotive with poorer fuel economy thanthe previous generation of locomotives. This holds true for the multi-

genset locomotive world as well.There are technologies available

for smaller engines, such as off-roadtruck diesels or an ethanol enginethat could conceivably increase fuelefficiency, but are not currentlybeing applied to these engines.Oftentimes when such technology isdiscussed, the question that arises is:"If the technology is so good that weare going to use it on locomotives,why aren't the automobile or truckengine manufacturers using it?" Insome cases, this is a valid question inregard to the technology itself. But inother cases, it is not a valid technology question, but merely a questionof economics.

To illustrate: If an engine manufacturer wants to increase a 10,000hour engine's durability by 5,000hours, it could be as simple a matteras using a specialty coated or treated piston ring. But if the engine only

100

has to last 8,000 hours (the averagelife of the vehicle) and the enginewill meet that requirement using thecurrent less expensive piston rings,why would the engine manufacturerspend the extra money on a moredurable piston ring? Even if the ringsonly cost $1.00 more per cylindermore, on a V-8 the engine manufacturer would spend $8.00 additionalper engine. If 250,000 engines werebuilt per year, the increase in costwould be $2 million. That extra $2million in engine parts would end upin the junkyard along with a competitor's 10,000 hour engine that,while not having the durability of the"new" 15,000 engine, still outlaststhe life of the vehicle it is installed in.

There is no economic justification tousing the 15,000 hour piston rings.

On the other, if we want to putthat same engine in a locomotive,where the vehicle lifespan will be100,000 hours, we reduce the number of engine overhauls from 10(one every 10,000 hours), to 6.6 (a33% reduction). Is the elimination ofat least three engine overhauls,along with associated locomotivedowntime worth the extra $8.00 perengine for higher durability pistonrings? Absolutely!

A similar paradigm exists in regardto fuel efficiency technologies.While the so-called "200mpg" carburetor for automobiles may be amyth, there is no doubt that fuel efficiency technologies do exist thatcould decrease current engine fuelusage by 5%, 10%, or even higher.As with durability technology, thesetechnologies have not been widelyadopted because of economics.


Table 2 shows an example of howvehicle cost and annual fuel con

sumption are major determining factors in the economical feasibility offuel efficiency technologies.

The first thing to consider is howmuch the technology will add to theoverall cost of the vehicle. While the

cost may be the same for an automobile or locomotive, on a lessexpensive vehicle, the new technology cost could be perceived as amajor cost increase by the consumer. On a $30,000 automobile a$1,000 increase in cost is a significant 3.33% price increase on thevehicle. On a $1.5M locomotivewith three gensets, requiring $3,000worth of parts (one $1,000 systemper genset), the total price increasewould be just 1/5 of 1 percent, negligible in the overall cost of the unit(to match this ratio the technologyfor the automobile would have to

cost just $60).The next issue to consider is that

in either case, automobile or locomotive, any price increase in thevehicle must be justified in its payback. If our "new" fuel efficiencytechnology gives us just a 7% boostin fuel economy, while this is a significant boost, even at $3.00 per gallon for gasoline, it would take almosteight years to pay for the technologyin an automobile that gets 20mpgand is driven 12,000 miles per year.However, on a locomotive that usesonly 50,000 gallons of fuel per year(i.e. a switcher), at $2.50 per gallonfor diesel fuel, the technology wouldpay for itself in about four months.So while the technology could probably not be justified for a car or


truck, the technology can definitelybe justified on the locomotive.

BIOFUELS VS. PETROLEUM COST

COMPARISONS - NO SIMPLE

ANSWERS

A final paradigm shift that comesinto play when considering biofuelsoptions in locomotives has to dowith comparing new technologieswith current technologies. It is sometimes easy to compare potential biofuels options, such as ethanol, withexisting locomotive technologiesavailable today. But this would becomparing apples to oranges. Thedriving force for considering ethanolin locomotives is not the issues faced

today, but those that will be facedtomorrow. Today locomotives onlyhave to meet the EPA Tier 2 emis

sions standard. Every current manufacturer can meet or exceed these

standards. Some of the multi-enginegenset locomotive manufacturerscan show today that their locomotives already meet the EPA Tier 2standard that takes effect in 2012.

GE and EMD have both stated publicly that they expect their locomotives will meet Tier 3 standards with

out requiring major modifications ordesign changes.

The issue for the future is the Tier

4 standard that takes effect in 2015,along with any GHG reduction regulations that may be institutedbetween now and then. Not to be

ignored is the next set of EPA Tierstandards for locomotives. Can it be

reasonably assumed that once Tier 4levels are reached that the EPA will

not begin looking at Tier 5 or Tier 6emission levels? So while the empha

101

sis today is on getting to EPA Tier 4,within 5-10 years the locomotiveindustry will no doubt be talking Tier5 and Tier 6. Will diesel locomotive

engine technology be able to meetthose requirements? Or will itrequire a new clean fuel source,such as ethanol, biobutanol, oranother new generation biofuel? Sothe industry must consider not justtoday, but the long-term emissionsrequirements that appear to be onthe horizon under the new EPA and

the Obama Administration's renew

able fuel and GHG reduction agenda.

Although use of a lower BTU fuelsuch as ethanol may increase fuelcosts, it should not require the addition of expensive aftertreatmentdevices (DPF, DOC, or SCR) orreductant agents such as urea. Whatwill these devices cost? Since none

have been proven in locomotive use,the actual cost of these devices is

anyone's guess. EMD and GE havestated that aftertreatment devices

could double the price of theengine. So it is very conceivable thatthese devices could add $300,000to $500,000 to the cost of a newlocomotive. But again, this is justspeculation. The fuel efficiencypenalty on Tier 4 locomotives is alsounknown. Will it be zero, or will it befive or ten percent? Again, this is notknown. So how does one comparethe potential additional cost of thediesel aftertreatment systems to theadditional fuel cost of an ethanol-

electric hybrid locomotive? Onlytime and demonstration of the two

will tell.

Another cost issue has to do with

102

fuel prices themselves. In 2008 theworld saw the price of crude oiljump to $147 per barrel. By early2009 the price had dropped to $37per barrel. By mid-2009 the pricewas back up to over $70 per barrel.During this entire time the price ofethanol remained relatively stable atbetween $1.50 and $2.25 per gallon(there was a three month aberrationat the height of commodities speculation where ethanol spiked as highas $2.80 per gallon on the spot market, but within one month haddropped back down to $2.00 pergallon). Thus, even comparing fuelcosts has its difficulties. OPEC has

stated openly that crude oil needs totrade at between $75 and $80 perbarrel to be profitable.

To put this into historical perspective, from April 2006 to August 2006crude oil traded at an average ofbetween $70 and $73 per barrel.During this time, diesel fuel at thepump averaged $2.73 to $3.05 pergallon. From July 2007 to September2007 light crude oil traded at anaverage of between $74 and $79per barrel. During this time, dieselfuel at the pump averaged $2.87 to$2.95 per gallon. From July toSeptember 2007 corn was trading atbetween $3.03 and $3.50 perbushel (depending on state) withethanol prices between $1.50 and$2.00 per gallon (spot market price).Since October of 2008 corn priceshave remained below $4.00 perbushel, with ethanol prices rangingfrom $1.38 to $1.31 per gallon (spotmarket price).

So based on a historical perspective, if oil were to stay in a $70 to


$80 per barrel range, one wouldexpect diesel prices to be somewhere between $2.75 and $3.00 pergallon at the fuel pump. (Theseprices include road tax, so railroadfuel pricing would be less.) Spot market prices for ethanol, if cornremains at or below $4.00 perbushel, would be expected toremain in a $1.60 to $1.80 range.(Railroads could potentially takeadvantage of dealing directly withethanol producers, hence takingadvantage of spot market prices.)

Finally, there are the maintenancecosts associated with new diesel

aftertreatment technologies to meetEPA Tier 4 and beyond. As with thesystems themselves, the long-termmaintenance costs are unknown

since production DPF and SCR unitshave not been field tested. For exam

ple, it appears that DPFs will requireregular ash cleaning and even washing at regular intervals. DPFs havebeen known to allow exhaust blow-

by thus reducing their efficacy, andbecause they are made of a ceramicmaterial they can crack or breakapart in severe duty applications.DPFs produce back pressure andcan affect fuel consumption. Justhow much expense these issues willadd to long term maintenance costsis currently unknown.

The same is true for diesel oxida

tion catalysts (DOC) and SelectiveCatalytic Reduction (SCR) systems.But these systems are even morecomplex than the DPF and it isdoubtful that the catalytic elementswill last the life of the locomotive.

How often will these elements need

to be replaced? How much fuel will

New Technologies Committee 103

be used if exhaust gases need to beheated to ensure proper operationof the SCR system? How much willurea cost for SCR systems and howmuch will be consumed by the average locomotive? Will urea costs godown as more is produced or willdemand outpace supply and driveprices up? What type of maintenance costs will be incurred on the

on-board urea systems? Only timeand experience will provide theanswers.

So although there are still manyunanswered questions in regard toethanol-electric hybrid locomotives,the same holds true for the next generation Tier 3 and Tier 4 diesel loco

motives. One thing is certain: Thelocomotives of today, no matter howadvanced, will not be the locomotives of the near future. Renewable

fuel and GHG reduction will be keyelements in transportation systemsof the future. Railroads will be affect

ed, new technologies will emerge,and the winners will be decided byresults, not just ideas.


Fuel (Blend Level)

EPA

EstimatedGHG

EmissionsReduction

%ofBio

fuelIn

Blend

OverallGHG

Reduction

ForBlend

Ethanol GHGReduction Increase

OverBiodiesel Blend

Locomotive Fuel Usage (Gallons) -Showinq C02Reduction (tons)

B5

Biodiesel

B20

Biodiesel 50,000 61,000 160,000 150,000 200,000

Biodiesel (B5) 67.7% 5% 34% 18.94 23.11 37.88 56.82 75.76

Biodiesel (B20) 67.7% 20% 13.5% 75.76 9242 151.51 227.27 303.03

Com Ethanol (E95) am 95% 20.7% 511.8% 53.0% 115.87 141.36 231.74 347.62 46349

Sugar Ethanol (ES5) 56.0% 95% 53.2% 1471.6% 292.9% 297.65 363.14 595.31 89196 1,190.62

Cellulosic Ethanol (E95) 90.9% 95% 864% 2451.1% 537.8% 483.16 589.45 966.31 144947 1.932.62

Table 1 - Estimated GHG Reduction Per Locomotive

by Fuel Type (in tons)

Automobile Locomotive

Technology Cost ($$$'s) $ 1,000 $ 3,000

Vehicle Cost $ 30,000 $ 1,500,000

Percent Increase over base cost 3.33% 0.20%

Annual Fuel Consumption (Gals) 600 50,000

Average Fuel Cost Per Gallon ($$$'s) $ 3.00 $ 2.50

Annual Fuel Cost ($$$'s) $ 1,800 $ 125,000

Fuel Efficiency Increase 7% 7%

Fuel Savings Per Year $ 126.00 $ 8,750.00

Payback (Years) 7.94 0.34

Table 2 - Fuel Efficiency Technology Economics -Automobile vs. Locomotive


Which Would You Rather Idle?

•rwlii i

f3Hp ~XfR r.^3000hp

Stop idling and reduce yourfuel bill. With JUNIOR, your prime mover remainsshutdown and ina ready-to-start condition...batteries fully charged andengineabove 100°F...even in frigid weather.

JUNIOR isa simple, reliable APU that issmall enoughto easily install on yourlocomotive. Using an EPA certified, 13hp diesel engine, JUNIOR sipsjust 1/2GPH offuel instead ofthe4GPH consumed when idling your prime mover. The only bigthing about JUNIOR isyour fuel savings!

To learn more about JUNIOR and how much fuel you can save, please visitwww.hotstart.com. From the Markets tab, select Railroad.

'The JUNIOR isuncomplicated andsimple toinstall.WhatIlike best about the JUNIOR is we don't need totrain the crewon how to operate them. At the end of ashift,you shut the locomotive down and theJUNIORstarts right up."

Jake Jacobsen

LocomotiveMaintenance, LehighValley RailBethlehem, Pennsylvania

%MHOTSTART

SINCE 1942

www.hotstart.com

106

TESTING OF THE BNSF

FUELCELL SWITCH LOCOMOTIVE:

PART1

Prepared byArnold R. Miller*, Kris S. Hess,

Tomothy L. Erickson,and James L. Dippo,Vehicle Projects, Inc.

Golden Colorado, USAwww.vehicleprojects.com

ABSTRACT

A North American consortium - a

public-private project partnership -has completed the development of aprototype hydrogen-fueled fuelcell-battery hybrid switch locomotive forurban and military-base rail applications. At 127 tonne, expected continuous net power of 240 kW (320hp) from its fuelcell prime mover,and transient power in excess of 1MW, the hybrid locomotive will bethe heaviest and most powerful fuel-cell land vehicle yet built. At the timeof this writing, the locomotive iscomplete, has completed initialoperational testing at the BNSFSystem Maintenance Terminal (SMT)in Topeka, KS, and is presently at theTransportation Technology CenterInc (TTCI) for impact testing.Following impact testing, it will betested under working conditions atthe BNSF Commerce and Hobart rai-

lyards in the Los Angeles Basin andin the vehicle-to-grid application at aUS Army base. This paper focuseson the testing to-date of the power-plant subsystems (e.g., air and cooling modules), initial operational testsat the SMT, and it lays the foundation for the tests to follow at TTCI

and in the LA Basin. When the paper* Author to whom inquiries should be addressed;email: [email protected]


is presented at the LMOA annualconference on 17 September 2009,data from the impact tests at TTCIwill be included.

INTRODUCTION

A North American consortium - a

project partnership among BNSFRailway, the US Army Corps ofEngineers, and Vehicle Projects Inc -has developed a prototype hydrogen-fueled fuelcell-battery hybridswitch locomotive for urban and mil

itary-base rail applications (see Fig.1). At 127 tonne (280,000 lb),expected continuous net power of240 kW or 320 hp (but presently limited to 200 kW by the thermalcapacity of the powerplant DC-DCconverter) from its proton-exchangemembrane fuelcell prime mover, andtransient power well in excess of 1MW, the hybrid locomotive will bethe heaviest and most powerful fuel-cell land vehicle yet built. Previouspapers have discussed the theory[Miller, 2005; Miller, et al, 2006 A;Miller and Peters, 2006 B; Miller,2006 C] and engineering design[Miller, et al., 2007; Miller, 2007;Hess, 2008] of the hybrid locomotive. While the BNSF locomotive is

the largest and most sophisticatedfuelcell land vehicle to-date, it is notthe first fuelcell locomotive. The first

fuelcell-powered locomotive was anunderground mine locomotive successfullycompleted and demonstrated in a working gold mine by VehicleProjects Inc in 2002 [Miller, 2000;Miller and Barnes, 2002].

At the time of this writing, July2009, the locomotive is complete; ithas completed initial operational


testing at the BNSF SystemMaintenance Terminal (SMT) inTopeka, Kansas; it was showcased ina press conference at the SMT on 29June 2009; and it is at theTransportation Technology CenterInc (TTCI) to undergo extensiveimpact testing. The timeline for thefinal phases of the vehicle development and demonstration project,which commenced in May 2006, isshown in Fig. 2. Following impacttesting, it will be tested under working conditions at the BNSFCommerce and Hobart railyards inthe Los Angeles Basin and then tested in the vehicle-to-grid applicationat a US Army base. In the LosAngeles yards, its tests will includethe equivalent of tractive effort,quantitative noise measurements,and fuel costs. Naturally, as classifiedby the State of California, it is a zero-emissions vehicle.

This paper focuses on the testingto-date of the powerplant subsystems (e.g., air and cooling modules),initial operational tests at the SMT,and it lays the foundation for thetests to follow at TTCI and the LA

Basin. When the paper is presentedat the LMOA annual conference on

17 September 2009, data from theimpact tests at TTCI will be presented.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The hydrogen hybrid fuelcell locomotive is a prototype. Sound engineering design principles, state-of-the-art computer simulation, andCAD software were used throughoutthe development process. The use ofSolidworks CAD software allowed

107

the mechanical design to translatefrom sketch to a highly customizedlocomotive with very few designchanges. Simultaneously, the fuelcellpowerplant control system softwareunderwent months of simulated tests

to refine and tune control algorithms.

It was advantageous for the development team to use Ballard PowerSystems fuelcell stack modules, asthey have been used extensively inheavy-duty bus applications andhave several years of developmentand operational experience behindthem, collectively logging over 2 million km of service. Similarly, the carbon-fiber composite hydrogen storage tanks manufactured by DynetekIndustries have years of reliable usein multiple bus and truck operations.The combination of sound engineering, the proven Ballard fuelcell stackmodules, and Dynetek hydrogenstorage provided a solid foundationfor success. It was a challenge,nonetheless, to build and operatethe first fuelcell locomotive, whichrequired a systematic and methodical approach to ensure success.Methodical and rigorous testingtranslates to a more robust product,minimized risk to personnel andequipment, and directly correlates toan overall reduction in time and

money spent.

Table 1 outlines the four-stage (A,B, C, D) test approach and the phases within each stage, totaling 23 distinct phases and approximately oneyear of testing. The table outlines theactual series approach that was usedto test this unique fuelcell system.Some system modules, such as the

108

hydrogen storage and DC-to-DCconverter, were developed and tested in parallel with the fuelcell powerplant system. Additionally, themechanical fabrication of the loco

motive continued in parallel withtesting during the Oct 08 - Mar 09time period.

The four stages are: (A) Off-boardsubsystem performance testing, (B)off-board system performance testing, (C) onboard and functional locomotive testing, and (D) locomotiveperformance testing. "Off-board"refers to testing that occurred in alab setting versus onboard or in situtesting, in which the equipment wasmounted and operating in the locomotive. Every test phase began witha detailed written test plan, which isprepared before any power or media(coolant, gas, etc.) is applied andensures that the step-by-step processof executing the test and recordingdata is done correctly the first time.Each stage of testing is discussedbelow:

(A) Off-board SubsystemPerformance Testing

Subsystem performance testing isfoundational testing where individualsubsystems such as cooling or airprocess streams are operated to validate that the specific performancevalues for flow, pressure, etc. aremet. The control algorithms andphysical electrical system are alsoconfirmed at this stage, along withthe module testing of the hydrogenstorage and DC-to-DC converter.Subsystem validation is requiredbefore moving forward to the nextstage of system performance. Eight


of nine subsystems performed asdesigned and met the required performance metrics, the exceptionbeing the DC-to-DC converter,which was unable to handle its specified power rating of 250 kW netfrom the fuelcell module. The powerrating of the DC-to-DC converterwas thus lowered to 200 kW by thethird-party designer and fabricator ofthe custom unit. The locomotive did

not suffer performance degradationby the reduced net power becausethe former diesel engine, replacedby the fuelcell, had a maximum output of 200 kW. The compromise ofde-rating the DC-to-DC converteroffered greater benefits than thecosts of undertaking equipmentredesign.

(B) Off-board SystemPerformance Testing

System testing combines the previously validated subsystems into alogical progression. This validates theinteraction of the electrical and con

trol systems and continuously provides a baseline condition. First, allauxiliary systems were operated andtested without the fuelcell stack

modules in place. "Dummy" loopswith valves were used to simulate

pressure drop of the fuelcell stackmodules, which allows "bugs" to bediscovered before installing equipment, thus precluding damage tocostly hardware if problems didarise. The fuelcell stack modules

were then installed into the locomo

tive, and hydrogen fuel was suppliedto allow the first system start-up. Thisphase of testing continued until reliable start-up, reliable shut-down, and


step increases in power were successfully executed. This successfulphase was followed by several weeksof transient tuning. Transient tuningensured that changes in powerdemand could be met quickly without disrupting any process streamsfrom their specified operatingranges. A database was used to logall sensor data as well as control system inputs/outputs, which was thenreviewed to troubleshoot problemsand analyze trends. Finally, the DC-to-DC converter was tested off-

board, which accounted for approximately a week of transient tuning.Several challenges arose during transient tuning of the converter, butwere mitigated by the establishmentof a solid baseline of the fully functional powerplant in the previousphase.

(C) Onboard and FunctionalLocomotive Testing

The onboard functional locomo

tive testing combines all of the functional systems together for the firsttime. The powerplant was firstinstalled and run independently ofthe locomotive by using an off-boardload bank (as the same used in system testing) to accept the fuelcellpower. This ensured all systems wereproperly installed and no damagehad occurred during shippingbetween test facilities. The completehydrogen system was then purgedand tested to maximum pressurewith inert gas, followed by fuelingwith hydrogen. The onboard hydrogen detection and locomotive emergency stop circuits were alsoinstalled and tested. Following suc

109

cessful fuelcell powerplant start-up,communications between the loco

motive system controller and thefuelcell powerplant were established. After debugging, the systemcontrollers successfully communicated and the locomotive was ready foroperational testing. About 20 hoursof locomotive operation on the railhave since been logged over a period of one month of intermittent

operation and debugging. Thus far,no significant problems have beenidentified and the locomotive is

operating as expected.A notable aspect of the fuelcell

locomotive is its low acoustic emis

sions compared with diesel locomotives. Decibel measurements on the

walkway next to the powerplant areat most 85 dB when running at halfpower. In fact, when sitting in theoperator's cab, one cannot hear thefuelcell powerplant running. Thenoise from the locomotive primarilyoriginates from the multiple coolingfans for the traction batteries, traction motors, electrical cabinets, andtrack noise.

D) Locomotive PerformanceTesting

Testing of the locomotive at theTransportation Technology CenterInc. (TTCI) located in Pueblo,Colorado, will be the last testingphase before being shipped to theLA Basin for operational testing. Thelocomotive chassis, hybrid control,and traction control systems are fundamentally unchanged from theiroriginal design as a diesel-batteryhybrid locomotive. Therefore, performance testing will focus on dura-

110

bility of the new equipment duringimpact situations. As a switch locomotive, impact with other cars willbe a common occurrence, and theequipment must be able to withstand the daily rigors of switch operations. Each subsystem of the hydrogen fuelcell system (powerplant,cooling module, DC-to-DC converter, hydrogen storage) will bemechanically isolated from the chassis by some means, then instrumented with three axis accelerometers or

with string-pot sensors. Additionalaccelerometers will be attached to

the rigid mount structures of the isolated equipment as well as to thelocomotive chassis and couplers. Alldata will then be logged by a dataacquisition system for post-impactreview. Additionally, clay blocks willbe placed in multiple locations tomonitor equipment movement.Impact speeds will start at 1 mphand increase progressively after aseries of repeated impacts. Theexpected limiting factor of impactforce is the battery rack reaching itshard stop. This condition will beclosely monitored and will determine the maximum impact speedduring testing. Additionally, the locomotive impact-detection system willbe validated to trigger at or above ahit equivalent to 4 mph into a brake-locked locomotive. This limit pointwas previously established by themanufacturer of the platform diesel-hybrid locomotive.

Once confidence is established byextensive impact testing, the locomotive will go into service-testing inthe LosAngeles Basin.The real-worlddurability and performance will then


be put to the test of an actual working environment, providing theopportunity to validate fuel consumption models and determine thelength of service available from a single hydrogen fueling.

Conclusions

The development of a prototypehydrogen-fueled fuelcell-batteryhybrid switch locomotive for urbanand military-base rail applications,the heaviest and most powerful fuel-cell land vehicle yet built, is nowcomplete. It has finished initial operational testing at the BNSF SystemMaintenance Terminal (SMT) inTopeka, KS, and is presently at theTransportation Technology CenterInc (TTCI) for impact testing.Following impact testing, it will betested under working conditions atthe BNSF Commerce and Hobart rai

lyards in the Los Angeles Basin andin the vehicle-to-grid application at aUS Army base. Sound engineeringdesign principles, state-of-the-artcomputer simulation, and CAD software were used throughout thedevelopment process. Use of fuelcellstack and hydrogen storage technologies already used extensively infuelcell transit buses in Europe facilitated system development.Validation of fuel consumption models and determination of the lengthof service available from a singlehydrogen fueling will be part of therailyard demonstration phase in theLos Angeles Basin.


References

[Miller, 2000] A. R. Miller,Tunneling and Mining Applicationsof Fuelcell Vehicles. Fuelcells

Bulletin, May 2000.[Miller and Barnes, 2002] A. R.

Miller and D. L. Barnes, FuelcellLocomotives. Proceedings ofFuelcell World, Lucerne,Switzerland, 1-5 July 2002.

[Miller, 2005] A. R. Miller, FuelcellLocomotives. Proceedings ofLocomotive Maintenance Officers

Association conference, Chicago, 19September 2005.

[Miller, et al, 2006 A] A. R. Miller,J. Peters, B. E. Smith, and O. A. Velev,Analysis of Fuelcell HybridLocomotives. Journal of PowerSources, 157, pp. 855-861, 2006.

[Miller and Peters, 2006 B] A. R.Miller and J. Peters, Fuelcell HybridLocomotives: Applications andBenefits. Proceedings of the JointRail Conference, Atlanta, 6 April2006.

[Miller, 2006 C] A. R. Miller,Variable Hybridity Fuelcell-BatterySwitcher. Proceedings ofLocomotive Maintenance Officers


[Miller, et al, 2007] A. R. Miller, K.S. Hess, D. L. Barnes, and T. L.Erickson, System Design of a LargeFuelcell Hybrid Locomotive. Journalof Power Sources, 173, pp. 935-942(2007).

[Miller, 2007] A. R. Miller, FuelcellHybrid Switcher Locomotive:Engineering Design. Proceedings ofLocomotive Maintenance Officers


111

[Hess, et al, 2008] Kris S. Hess,Timothy L. Erickson, and Arnold R.Miller, Maintenance of the BNSFFuelcell-Hybrid Switch Locomotive.Proceedings of LocomotiveMaintenance Officers Association

conference, Chicago, 22 September2008.

AcknowledgementsWe thank the following funders fortheir generous support of the workdescribed in this paper: USDepartment of Energy (contracts DE-FC36-99GO10458 and DE-FG36-

05GO85049); Natural ResourcesCanada (Emerging TechnologiesProgram contract 23440-991022-001); US Department of Defense(contracts F42620-00-D0036,F42620-00-D0028, and W9132T-08-C-0045); BNSF Railway Company;subcontractors to Vehicle ProjectsInc who contributed project cost-share; and the Fuelcell PropulsionInstitute. Disclaimer: Funding support from the US Department ofEnergy, US Department of Defense,Natural Resources Canada,Government of Canada, or BNSFRailway Company does not constitute an endorsement by same of theviews expressed in this paper.

Authors' Biographies

Arnold R. Miller

Until founding Vehicle Projects Inc in1998, Dr. Miller was a research professor at research universities, including the University of Illinois. From1994 to 1998, he was foundingDirector of the Joint Center for Fuel-Cell Vehicles at Colorado School of

112

Mines. Prof. Miller published numerous papers in refereed journals suchas the Journal of the AmericanChemical Society. As President ofVehicle Projects Inc, besides leadingthe company, he frequently presentsits work at leading international conferences. In 2007, he founded theindependent company SupersonicTubevehicle LLC whose mission is

basic scientific and engineeringresearch on vehicles operating in ahydrogen atmosphere on aerostaticgas bearings. Dr. Miller received hisPhD degree in chemistry from theUniversity of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.

Kris S. Hess

Prior to joining the Vehicle Projectsteam in 2006, Mr. Hess worked atthe General Motors Technical

Center in advanced vehicle development beginning in 1998. His rolesincluded Subsystem DesignEngineer, Concept-Vehicle LeadEngineer, and Concept-VehicleProgram Manager. This diverse background has provided the depth ofexperience to successfully executeprojects at both the technical leveland total-vehicle integration level. AsDesign Engineer at Vehicle ProjectsInc, Mr. Hess is responsible for engineering design, CAD modeling, andengineering integration with projectpartners. He received his BS degreein mechanical engineering from theUniversity of Michigan-Ann Arborand MS degree in engineering fromPurdue University.


Timothy L. EricksonPrior to joining Vehicle Projects Inc,Mr. Erickson spent 10 years as a software engineer designing intelligentprocess control systems utilizingimpedance-sensing technology.Previous roles included Control

Systems Engineer for a system-integration company as well as servingsix years as a submarine officer inthe United States Nuclear Navy. AsControls Engineer at Vehicle ProjectsInc, Mr. Erickson works closely withthe Design Engineer developing thecontrol systems that run fuelcell vehicles. He earned his B.S. degree inelectrical engineering with a computer science minor from theColorado School of Mines.

James L. DippoPrior to joining Vehicle Projects Incin 2007, Mr. Dippo spent 25 yearsworking in research and development, both in the public and privatesector. Project work included alternative-fueled vehicles, catalysis, catalyst reactor design, data acquisition,laboratory design and construction,manufacturing-line development,intellectual property creation, patentprosecution, and project management. Mr. Dippo is Project Managerat Vehicle Projects with responsibilities that include interfacing with fun-ders, clients, and partners; negotiating agreements and contracts; andenforcing project timelines and projected work. He received his BAdegree at Fort Lewis College inDurango, Colorado.


Figure 1 - Hydrogen Fuelcell Locomotive during pressevent held at BNSF 29 June 2009.

113


2008 2009 2010

Oc No De Ja Fe Ma Ap My Jn Ju Au Se Oc No De Ja Fe Ma Ap My Jn Ju Au Se Oc No De

Fabrication of switcher-

Testing of swither |

] Demonstration in LA BasinI

]Demonstration on military base

Figure 2 - Final Schedule for the Fuelcell Locomotive ProjectThis project commenced in May of 2006.

TEST | STATUS | WHENA OFF-BOARD SUB-SYSTEM PERFORMANCE

1 Cooling module complete OCT 08

2 Primary cooling complete OCT 08

3 Lube oil (for fuelcell air system) complete NOV 08

4 Secondary cooling complete NOV 08

5 Fuelcell air complete DEC 08

6 Hydrogen {fuelcell powerplant only) complete JAN 08

7 Fuelcell stack modules, internal support systems complete JAN 08

8 Hydrogen storage - module test complete JAN 09

9 DC to DC converter - module test complete MAR 09

B OFF-BOARD SYSTEM PERFORMANCE

1 PH1 - all syslems using "dummy" loops, no fuelcell modules complete DEC 08

2 PH2 - full system run, start up, shut down, step power loads complete JAN 08

3 PH3 - full system run, transient tuning complete FEB - MAR 09

4 PH4 - full system + DC to DC converter, tune for start up, shut down, transients complete MAR 09

C ON-BOARO AND FUNCTIONAL LOCOMOTIVE TESTING - TOPEKA. KS

1 Powerplant start up and shutdown complete APR 09

2 Hydrogen system purge, fill, leak check complete APR 09

3 Locomotive emergency stop and hydrogen detection complete APR 09

4 Fuelcell powerplant and locomotive control communication complete APR 09

5 Functional traction battery charge with fuelcell powerplant complete APR 09

6 On-rail move and operation check out complete APR 09

7 Low-speed move, - 20 hrs run time complete MAY 09

8 Noise assessment - determine if additional measures needed complete MAY 09

D LOCOMOTIVE PERFORMANCE - TTCI * - PUEBLO, CO

1

2

Impact, durability and shock detection validation scheduled AUG 09

Fuel economy - validate fuel storage to duly cycle scheduled OCT 09

* Transportation Technology Confer, tnc

Table 1 - Hydrogen Hybrid Fuelcell Locomotive Test Plan

Diesel Mechanical Maintenance Committee 115


ON DIESEL MECHANICAL MAINTENANCE

FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 200910:30 A.M.

R. Aranda

I. BradburyS. Bumra

D. Cannon

M. Daoust

T. Frederick

D. Freestone

C. Fukala

J. HedrickT. KennedyJ. SherbrookT. Standish

T. Stewart

*R. Svoboda

*G. Winsel

*Standby

Chairman

JEFF CUTRIGHT

Senior General Foreman

Norfolk Southern Corp.Roanoke, VA

Vice Chairman

GEORGE KING, II

Chief Mechanical Officer

NYS&W RR

Cooperstown, NY

COMMITTEE MEMBERS

Genl. Foreman-Locos.

CEO

Fleet Engr.Mgr. Syst. Loco. MechChief Mech. Off.

Mech. EngineerMgr.-Loco Opns.CMO

Principal EngineerMgr.-Mech Engr IVice President & GM

Quality Mgr.V.P. EngineeringMech. Compl. OffAsst. Manager

Belt Railway of Chicago Bedford Pk., ILPeaker Services

Amtrak

BNSF Rwy.Tshiuetin Rail Transp.CSX TransportationAlaska RR

Rail America

SW Research Inst.

Union Pacific RR

Loco Docs, Inc.


Advanced Global Eng.METRO LINK

Canadian National

Brighton, MIChicago, IL

Ft. Worth, TXClarke City, Que

Jacksonville, FLAnchorage, AKSherwood, AB

San Antonio, TXOmaha, NE

Morris, ILLaGrange, IL

Atlantic Bch. FL

Los Angeles, CAEdmonton, Alberta

Note: Robert Wullschleger of New York & Atlantic Rwy. joinedthe committee in July 2009

116 Diesel Mechanical Maintenance Committee

PERSONAL HISTORY

Jeff Cutright

Jeff was born in West Virginiaand attended WVU earning aBSME in 1979. He joined NorfolkSouthern Corp. in 1980 as a management trainee after a year and ahalf with Weirton Steel. Jeff hasheld many positions in the NSMechanical Department, includingstaff and shop supervision. Hiswork experience includes allaspects of LocomotiveMaintenance, including running

repairand back shops that specialize in both GE and EMD overhaul

and components. Jeff has beenactive with LMOA since 1994 and

earned an MBA from Averett

University in 2004. Jeff and hiswife Leonita have two teenagedaughters Sarah and Haley that arevery active in sports.


THE DIESEL MECHANICAL

MAINTENANCE COMMITTEE WISHES

TO EXPRESS THEIR SINCERE

APPRECIATION TO THE

PROVIDENCE & WORCESTER RR

AND DAVE RUTKOWSKI FOR

HOSTING THEIR WINTER

COMMITTEE MEETING

IN WORCESTER, MA

THE COMMITTEE ALSO WANTS TO

EXTEND A SPECIAL THANKS

TO PAUL FOSTER AND POWER RAIL

FOR SPONSORING THE

COMMITTEE'S DINNER AT THE

NEW ENGLAND RAIL EXPO

ON MARCH 24,2009

WE ALSO WISH TO THANK THE

FOLLOWING INDIVIDUALS

FOR HOSTING A DINNER ON

MARCH 23,2009

CHARLES BOYLE - MAGNUS

PAUL FOSTER - POWER RAIL

JACK KUHNS - GRAHAM WHITE


VARIABILITY AND THE TOYOTA

PRODUCTION SYSTEM

Presented byIan Bradbury

Peaker Services, Inc.

Introduction

There has been a lot of effort to

apply methods from the ToyotaProduction System (TPS), whichdrew heavily from the work of W.Edwards Deming and Henry Ford.This has more recently been repackaged in the more generic form of"Lean Manufacturing System". It'salso sometimes referred to as the

"Just in Time (JIT) system".Application of the methods hasextended far beyond traditional massmanufacturing processes into service industries (e.g., healthcare), logistics, engineering and so on.Problems have resulted from application of these methods in an ad

hoc fashion, with the resultant admonition that the methods are interde

pendent and thus need to be appliedas a systemic whole. Different formsof managing variation appear asobjectives or methods within TPS.This paper explores whether managing variation is simply a method, ormore fundamental to successful

implementation of TPS.

The Toyota WayThe 14 Points of the Toyota Way area long-term philosophy used byToyota that contains the ToyotaProduction System:

• Having a long-term philosophythat drives a long-term approachto building a learning organiza

tion

1. Base your management decisions on a long-term philosophy, even at the expense ofshort-term financial goals.

• The right process will producethe right results1. Create continuous process flow

to bring problems to the surface;

2. Use the "pull" system to avoidoverproduction;

3. Level out the workload (heijun-ka)

4. Build a culture of stopping to fixproblems, to get quality rightfrom the first;

5. Standardized tasks are the

foundation for continuous

improvement and employeeempowerment;

6. Use visual control so no problems are hidden;

7. Use only reliable, thoroughlytested technology that servesyour people and processes.

• Add value to the organization bydeveloping your people and partners

LGrow leaders who thoroughlyunderstand the work, live thephilosophy, and teach it to others;

2. Develop exceptional peopleand teams who follow yourcompany's philosophy;

3. Respect your extended networkof partners and suppliers bychallenging them and helpingthem to improve.

• Continuously solving root problems drives organizational learning1. Go and see for yourself to thor-

"Discover The Locomotive EngineDaOfinn Cff<M»foffC#" Railways worldwide areDGaiIlly OyCkiailOl using MIBA Bearings intheir EMD, G.E. and ALCO Engines. They depend on MIBA forcontinuous research and development and for MIBA'smanufacturing quality assurance systems to provide the addedservice life that the railways want tor their engines.CALL OR FAX YOUR REQUIREMENTS TO US TODAY!

MibaUltimate Performance

and Durability

Miba Bearings U.S.5037 N. State Rt. 60

McConnelsville, Ohio 43756

AAR Quality Assurance CertificationM-1003

(740) 962-4242FAX (740) 962-8202

ooo

3o

<•(1)

50)

5"Q

013O<T>

o

>(/></>oo

Bl'

o'3


oughly understand the situation(Genchi Genbutsu);

2. Make decisions slowly by consensus, thoroughly consideringall options; implement decisionsrapidly;

3. Become a learning organizationthrough relentless reflection(Hansei) and continuousimprovement (Kaizen).

Levelingout the workload is reduction of variation in the scheduling ofwork. Task standardization is reduc

tion of variation in the performanceof work. Certainly management ofvariation appears here, but arguablyalso in basing management decisions in a long-term philosophy (constancy of purpose).

TPS ObjectivesThe three main objectives of TPSareto design out:

LMuri - Overburden;2. Mura - Inconsistency, and;3.Muda - Waste

a. Over-Production

b. Motion (of operator ormachine)

c. Waiting (of operator ormachine)

d. Conveyancee. Processing Itselff. Inventory (raw material)g. Correction (rework and scrap)

Managing Variation appears as atop-level objective in terms ofdesigning out inconsistency. Muchof the focus of applying TPS, however, has been reduction of the sevenforms of waste that has been

designed into existing productionsystems.

In Figure 1, Load Leveling (eliminating variation from the productionschedule) is depicted as being at thefoundation of TPS. It should be

noted that the ideal final stage ofTPS application results in processesthat exhibit "single-piece-flow",where production rates at each intermediate step are synchronized, andproduction matches customerdemand throughout the entire valuestream.

This brings us to question whethervariation reduction is just a part ofTPS, or is in some way at its foundation; an enabling strategy? To investigate this, we will look at simplequeuing systems. It is recognizedthat the TPS approach includesdefining and managing levels of standard-work-in-process to avoid largequeues, however this is not alwayspossible. The theory and discussionbelow applies to many actualprocesses.

A Simple QueueFigure 2 shows a generic simple

single server queue. In such a system, "inputs" arrive over time for"work/service". If the server is occupied by a previous arrival, the newarrival joins a queue and waits forservice. Once the server becomes

available, the work/service is performed and the inputs become outputs.

Any production system can bethought of in these terms; raw material or the work output of previousoperations arrives, queues as in-process inventory until the operation


becomes available, then work is performed to generate the finishedproduct.

This model can also be applied toservice systems, such as teller service or checking out at the grocerystore. In such cases, it is the customer who is waiting and obtaininga service, rather than material beingworked on.

The inspection and repair of locomotives can be seen fairly easily interms of the production queuingmodel. Perhaps less obvious is application of the service view to the

logistical operation of the railroad asa whole. In this case, customergoods are arriving with the server(railroad) performing the service oftransportation.Complex system models can be builtfrom this simple foundation.

Principles for a SimpleQueuing System1

The first principle for any simplequeuing system is that the averagerate of arrivals of units for service (*,)must be less than the average rate ofprocessing (Rp). If this is not the case,then over time the queue will justgrow and grow. For example, if locomotives arrive for service at a run

ning repair shop at an average rateof five locomotives per day, the shopwill have to average at least five locomotives serviced per day to avoidthis problem. For this example, let'sassume the shop is capable of servicing six locomotives per day, onaverage. Another way of looking atthis is that the average time betweenarrivals of locomotives for service is

h =1/5 day - 24/5 - 4.8 hours

(assuming 24 hour operation). Theaverage time to process a locomotive is tp = 1/6 day = 24/6 = 4 hoursThe requirement that the averageprocessing time must be less thanthe average time between arrivals isan alternative way of expressing thisfirst principle.

The utilization, p, isp= tp/ti = RJRp. In our example, we would havep = 4/4.8 - 0.8333, or 83.33%. Thisrepresents how much of the capacity is being used. The closer the valueis to 1 (100%), the more efficient theoperation.

If the locomotives were to arrive

for service with perfect uniformity(i.e., every 4.8 hours, on the dot) andthey were serviced with perfect uniformity (i.e., every locomotive serviced in exactly 4 hours), no queueswould ever build up. Naturally however, locomotives vary in the lengthof time between arrivals and the

length of time required to processthem. As the rate of arrival exceeds

the rate of processing from time totime, queues will inevitably develop.There can also be times when there

are no locomotives in the queue orbeing serviced.

In order to look at the impact ofvariation, we need some relativeidea of variability.

The standard deviation, °i (°P.) isused to describe the variability inarrival (processing) time respectively.The coeffficient of variation, C,=a i I iff Cp = Op/tp) is a standardmeasure of how variable the times

are. Conventionally for queuing systems, If Cv is the coefficient of variation;• Cv^0.75 is considered low vari-

1A summary of symbols used Is provided in Table 1


ability;• 0.75<Cv^1.33 is considered medi

um variability, and;• Cv > 1.33 is considered high vari

abilityWe will use these conventions to

frame the simulations that follow,intended to illustrate the effects of

variation.

The P-K formula

It is possible to gain an understanding of the impact of variationthrough queuing theory. A useful formula gives the expected (average)steady state time that a customer orjob must wait in the queue beforebeing served. This is known as themodified Pollaczek-Khinchine

(P-K)* formula:

T='„ fej W p

1-p

The average number of customersor jobs waiting in the queue is givenby the inventory version of this:

2 1-P/ =

In either case, the conclusion isthat average queue time or numberin the queue increases geometricallywith variation in arrivals and/or variation in processing time and exponentially with increase in capacityutilization. These formulae representthe steady state, not extremes ortransitions. To gain a better feel forthis, a simulator was built in Excel.

Service Shop Excel SimulatorFigure 3 shows the input values for

an Excel locomotive service shopsimulator. It is set up so that the user* In some texts, this approximation Is attributed to Allenand Cunneen.

inputs the number of locomotivesserviced by the facility (125 in theexample), the number of inspections(services per locomotive - quarterlyin the example) performed per yearand the number of active hours

worked per day (example uses 24 for3-shift operation). From this, thesteady state average number ofhours between arrivals is calculated

(see output values in Figure 4) as tx= (365*24)/125*4) = 17.52 hoursand Rr 1/^B 0.0571 locomotivesper hour. The standard deviation oftimes between arrivals of locomo

tives,0'/, is input manually - chosenin the example to give 'medium' variability with Ct = ot jtf =17.52/17.52=1. The example has asingle 'server' representing the ability to inspect just one locomotive ata time. The average time to inspect alocomotive is 16 hours, with standard deviation of 16 hours (corresponding to medium variabilityalso).In Figure 4, the utilization rateP =16/17.52 = 0.9132 is output aswell as calculating the average number of locomotives in the queue(9.6) and average time waiting (154hours, or 6.4 calendar days). In theexample, an average of 7.7% of thefleet would be waiting for inspections at any given time.

Of course, the average doesn't tellthe whole story. In Figure 5 are theresults of running a simulation withthe above assumptions for roughlytwo years. The top graph shows thenumber of locomotives shopped perweek, the second graph the numberof locomotives released back to

service per week. Both are stable.The average number of locomotives


in the queue for this simulation was10.53, so this run was slightly worsethan the theoretical steady stateaverage of 9.6. This is an averagelocomotive availability of 90.78% (ifthe locomotive is considered avail

able when being worked to and fromthe shop). The bottom two graphs inFigure 5 represent the number oflocomotives queuing and locomotive availability respectively. Theseboth look well behaved, but notethat even here, there were timeswhen the number of locomotives

waiting reached just above 40 -more than four times the averageand almost 1/3 of the fleet servicedby this facility!

Shops 2 and 3Now, let's assume that the results

shown in Figure 5 are the results forone of three equivalent regionalshops for the railroad. The total railroad fleet is 375 locomotives, with125 assigned to each shop. Eachshop is an identical design, with thesame equipment and equivalentworkforces. Scheduling of the locomotives for each shop is done usingthe same methods. The only differences seen from one shop to another are based on random differences

in locomotive condition, availabilityand time to get to the shop and performance of people and equipmentfrom day-to-day.

Hitting the 'run' button again onthe simulation generated the resultsdisplayed in Figure 6 (shop 2). Asbefore, the arrivals and departuresfrom the shop exhibit stability withnot much difference in appearance.However, the average locomotive

availability for shop 2 is almost 5%better at 95.51%, with an average of4.61 locomotives queuing.Furthermore, the number of locomotives queuing doesn't get above 20,but this is still 16% of the fleet at its

peak.Hitting the run button one more

time for this set of assumptions produced the outcomes shown in

Figure 7. The first two graphs againlook little different, but the averagenumber of locomotives in the queuewas 12.83 with more than 20 loco

motives out of service for well over

six months.

We should note here that these

three simulation results do not represent extreme cases, just three runsfor the same set of assumptions.There is no reason to conclude

based upon these differences inobserved performance that theschedulers are treating one facilityany different than another or thatone shop manager is managing theirfacility any differently to another. Inpractice, the performance of eachshop manager is not likely to be perceived as being the same with thesedifferences in results. A more likelyscenario is that shop manager onegets warned after six months thattheir performance had betterimprove. The warning clearly causedthe manager to shape up for the nextsix months, but then they becamecomplacent again. Three monthslater, an opportunity for early retirement is provided and shop managerone's replacement clearly sortsthings out. Shop manager two, onthe other hand, is clearly a star performer and obvious candidate for


promotion. Shop manager three alsoneeded a stern warning about theirperformance after six months, butthat was all that was needed for

them to permanently straighten up.It is easy to see how these differ

ences in observed performancecould be falsely attributed to differences in treatment or managementof the three shops. Such an interpretation, and action based on such aninterpretation, would be both unfairand at best ineffective.

Reacting to VariationIn the cases of the three shops

described in the last two sections,differences in performance of thedegree observed would cause reactions in practice. Examples of whatmight have been done are:

• Diverting locomotives to a different shop

• Delaying the removal of locomotives from service until the shopgets caught up (creating a moredifficult schedule later)

• Cutting corners on the work scope• Working overtime• Adding capacity• Sending locomotives to outside

vendors ...

There are many ways of reactingto the consequences of variation.The one thing that they all ultimatelyhave in common is added cost.

The Results of Increased Variation

Now, let's take a look at what happens when we bump up the amountof variation in times between arrivals

and in processing times. In the first

group of simulations, both had acoefficient of variation of 1. This is

considered 'medium' variabilityaccording to normal queuing theoryconventions.

Figure 8 and Figure 9 show theinput and output tables respectivelyfor this simulation. All that has been

changed from the prior simulationsis to increase both coefficients of

variation to 1.5 - a 50% increase in

o^and °P . The long run steady stateaverage number of locomotives inthe queue has increased from9.6131 in the prior case to 21.6294- an increase of 125% in the averagequeue size as a result of increasingvariability by 50%! This correspondsto increasing the average percent ofthe fleet waiting for service from7.7% to 17.3%.

This is bad enough, but asbefore, the average does not tell thewhole story - the size of the queuewill vary. Figure 10 shows the resultsof a simulation run for these assumptions. It is a little worse than the

steady state case, with an average of27.31 locomotives queuing for service, or 77.35% availability. However,availability ranged from 43.2% to99.2% with up to 70 locomotives inthe queue! Note that the numbers oflocomotives shopped and releasedper week are still stable here, thoughwith more apparent volatility. This isbetter behavior than many real lifesituations that are not stable (in thestatistical sense).

The Results of Reduced Variation

Finally, let's look at simulationresults where we reduce the variabil

ity from the base case coefficients of


TM W<kCW'J WWW.SPowerRail.com1

fSCCA-

- --'A ... J

PowerRail Mfg.Cooper Bearings

M .:•' a .

PowerRail Independent Electric

PowerRail Distribution Inc. offers a complete line of

New and Re-ftlanufactured products to support both

EMD & GE Locomotives.

Our full service repair facilities provides a

True Re-Manufactured product that meets any

Quality Budget with On-Time Proven Performance.

PowerRail Distribution Inc.205 Clark Road Duryea,Pa. 18642

Phone: 570-883-7005 Fax: 570-883-7006

125


variation of 1 to 0.5, considered'low' variability. The input and output tables are shown in Figure 11and Figure 12 respectively. Thesteady state average number of locomotives in the queue drops from thebase case of 9.6131 to 2.4033 - a

75% reduction in average queuesize for 50% reduction in variation,bringing average availability above97%.

Figure 13 shows a simulationresult that's slightly worse than thesteady state long term average (2.63vs. 2.40). This shows far greater consistency in the size of queue andtherefore consistency of locomotiveavailability.

Reduced Variation Results throughIncreased Capacity?

It is possible to achieve the sameaverage queue size observed for thereduced variation case (2.4033) withthe base case 'medium' variabilitythrough increasing capacity instead.To see how much capacity has to beadded, we need to solve the following inventory application of theP-K formula for p: 2*b-!£±*L£- ,

^ 2 1-pwhich gives p = 0.7598 . In otherwords, capacity has to be increasedtothe point that utilization is reducedto 76%. This is an increase in capacity of 0.9132/ . i 2019 or 20.19%.

70.7598 1ZUiy

The OM TriangleThe OM (Operations

Management) Triangle is depicted inFigure 14. This is a graphical representation of the fact that variability(in arrival and processing times),inventory/delays and capacity (utilization) are inextricably tied togeth

er in any work system.Systems with variability must be

buffered by some combination ofinventory, capacity or time.If you cannot (or choose not to)reduce variability, you will pay interms of high inventory (waitingtimes) or excess capacity.It is fairly common to see a push for"across the board" improvement inasset utilization within an organization. If this were the case in our rail

road model above, there wouldsimultaneously be a push for maximizing locomotive availability (minimizing out of service time) and maximizing the capacity utilization ofthe shop. What the OM triangle illustrates is that these two objectives aredirectly in opposition to each other,variation held equal. This can also beseen in Figure 15, which shows thatas you push harder and hardertowards 100% capacity utilization,queue size grows geometrically(with the level of variability as a nonlinear multiplier).

The leverage of reducing variability is therefore very clear - the lessvariability you have, the closer youcan get to 100% capacity utilizationand minimum out of service time.

Variation reduction helps simultaneously with two drivers of operatingefficiency that are otherwise in tension.

This is the real key to the ToyotaProduction System - minimizingarrival time variation through levelscheduling and minimizing processtime variation through standardizedwork are the key enablers to allowing the system to operate with suchhigh efficiency. Given the leverage


of variation reduction,we will end byconsidering some methods for applications previously considered.

Reducing variability in arrivalsAs mentioned above, in a produc

tion system (such as the typicalapplication of TPS), the option of'level scheduling' exists. The difficulty of this should not be minimized.Toyota fixes the production schedulefor months at a time. This means that

they produce more vehicles or fewervehicles of a particular model thanthe market actually demands. Theyhave determined that it is better to

resist the temptation to respond toshort-term fluctuations in market

demand for the system benefits ofhigh operating efficiency and assembly quality that result. Toyota alsoestablishes limits to the level of

inventory allowed before an operation, intentionally shutting down theprior operation when the limit ismet. The investigations of why theshutdowns occur result in manysmall improvement cycles and resultant variation reduction in continual

pursuit of the one piece flow ideal.In customer service operations, it

can be difficult to manage variabilityin arrival time. In many cases, it isnecessary to just design the servicesystem around it. Asking customersto schedule an appointment, as isdone for example with doctors' ordentists' offices, is an effort toreduce the variability of timesbetween arrivals.

In the example of the locomotiveservice facility we considered earlier,we could similarly schedule the loco

motives for service. Managing thelocomotives back to arrive for serv

ice appointments would likely addcost logistically - it would have to bedetermined whether the cost savingsfrom reduced out of service time are

a net benefit. It is also the case that

condition based maintenance and

run to failure will have more variabil

ity in their arrival times than scheduled maintenance. A cost/benefitanalysis of these practices shouldnot just compare the cost of parts,but also consider the variation

impact on operational efficiency.Finally, we consider provision of

freight service by the railroad. If welook at the movement of freight frompoint of receipt to point of deliveryas the service being performed, thearrival time variability is in the departure of trains. If we contrast waitinguntil the train is full to depart withdeparture on a fixed schedule, wecan see the latter as a method for

reducing variation in the arrival timedistribution. This should result in

improved operating efficiency andpredictability of final delivery andreduced average shipment time.

Reducing variability in processingGenerally speaking, the work

processes are what you manage, sothere should be more options here.

In a traditional production systemapplication of TPS, there are a number of things that can be done toreduce variation in process time.Looking back to the long term philosophy of TPS above, #5 - standardized tasks is most clearly aimedat (in part) reducing variation in thetime taken to perform the work.


Most of the other elements of "The

right process will produce the rightresults" can also be seen as supporting reduced variation in processtime. #1 (Create continuous processflow to bring problems to the surface), #4 (Build a culture of stoppingto fix problems, to get quality rightfrom the first) and #6 (Use visualcontrol so that no problems are hidden) are all aimed at fixing production problems at their root, whichshould lead to greater consistency(reduced variation) of process timesover time. #7 (Use only reliable,thoroughly tested technology thatserves your people and processes)also supports predictability anddependability of methods and therefore consistency (reduced variation).

In customer service applications,these same concepts can often beapplied. It is sometimes argued thatin such cases, you do not directlycontrol the variability in the servicerequested by the customer. Forinstance, a computer help line doesn't directly control the problems thatcustomers need help with and anemergency room doesn't directlycontrol the injuries patients come inwith. One variation managementmethod is to limit the range of services offered. This may be a goodapproach in some circumstances,but problematic in others (a patientbeing turned away from the ER dueto the hospital choosing to not treattheir type of injury, for instance).One ER practice may be illustrativehere though; that of triage. In triage,the receiving personnel classify theincoming patient according to severity and urgency of the injuries. In

general, customer service requestscan be 'triaged' according to thetype of service requested andaccordingly directed to service personnel. Bythis method, work can bestreamed to allow for greater standardization and consistency withinstream. Some overhaul shops havesuccessfully employed this methodology before, where they separatethe incoming work for instance as'standard' and 'special'. The standardoverhauls were sent down an inter

nal line that was able to work veryefficiently and consistently. The special overhauls were sent to outside

vendors, but could equally well havebeen sent to a separate internalgroup.

Establishing procedures or workinstructions, work stations with all ofthe required tools, standardizedtraining by dedicated trainers andimproved maintenance of serviceequipment are methods that can beemployed to reduce the variability intime required to perform a givenwork scope. Generally speaking, it isalso better if the order of operationscan be organized to place the standard operations first, leaving differentiation to the end of the process. Ifthere are predictable patterns to thevariation in arrival rates, labor capacity can also be scheduled to compensate for this.

The same concepts of task standardization can be employed for themovement of freight. Genericallyspeaking, variation in outcomescomes from variation in methods,equipment, environment, peopleand materials. Analysis of the maindrivers would be necessary, but stan-


dardizing training, jobs, equipmentand crew assignments to givenroutes could be considered. TPS

techniques for making problems visible could also be employed.

Conclusion

Reduction of variation should be

your focus if your interest is toimprove operating efficiency andservice level simultaneously. It hasbeen key to Toyota's success.

References

Download Excel Simulator -

http://files.me.com/isb1/oh05rcExcel add in -http://hometUChicago.qdM/-rrnygr^Qp/^ddins.htm

Managing Business Process Flows -Anupindi et al., Prentice Hall, 1999The P-K formulae & OM Triangle -http://www.neilsoniournals.com/OMER/sOMTrianele.pdfToyota Motor Corporation -http://www.tovota.co.ip/en/vision/TPS graphic -www.1000ventures.com

Wikipedia on TPS -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TovotaProduction System &

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The Toyota Wav


Symbol Description

t. Average time between arrivals of units

', Average time to process (service) units

a\ Standard Deviation of time between arrivals of units

°p Standard Deviation of time to process (service) units

"•-X Average arrival rate of units

*-x Average process (service, departure) rate of units

p-K Utilization - proportion of theoretical capacity being used

C<-X Coefficient of variation for time between arrivals of units

c>-ati Coefficientof variation for time to process (service) units

Table 1

Toyota Production System

5S

7 Wastes

Just Suggestion SystemIn Visual Controls

Time DefectWarning(JIT) Total Preventative

Maintenance (TPM)

Standard Operations

Load Leveling

Figure 1

Diesel Mechanical Maintenance Committee

Arriving

Queuing (waiting for service)Being served(in process)

Figure 2

Number of locomotives serviced by facility =

Number of inspections per year ••

Number of active working hours per day •

St. Dev. Time between arrivals

No. of locos able to be serviced at the same time '

Average Process (Service) Time (hours)'

Figure 3

131

^QQQBDeparting

Input values

125

4

24

o, 17.52

c 1

(p 16.00

°p 16.00


Average Arrival Rate (units/hr)

Average time between arrivals

Arrival (Demand) Coefficient of Variation =

Processing Rate (units/hour)

Process Coefficient of Variation

Utilization Rate

Average Number of Locomotives in QueueAverage Queue Time (hours)

Figure 4

Output values

Ri 0.0571

17.5200

c, 1.0000

RP

cP

0.0625

1.0000

P 0.9132

9.6131

153.8092

Humbar of Locomothraa Ralainad par Waak

ill!

Figure 5


NaotMr of LacomoOww SMppad par «M

-3S85S3S8S§

a S 3 3

2 S 2 5 2 § 5 2 S § 8 i ? 2 § 8

Figure 6

SSa333K8SS

WatwcoHjiuniuHiiiB rtptrWrti

3 K a 8 I

3 S 3 3 3 § 5 2 5 § s S»

Figure 7


Number of locomotives serviced by facility =

Number of inspections per year =Number of active working hours per day

St. Dev. Time between arrivals =

No. of locos able to be serviced at the same time =

Average Process (Service)Time (hours) =

Input values

125

4

24

a, 26.28

c 1

tp 16.00

°p 24.00

Figure 8


Average time between arrivals ••


Processing Rate (units/hour)


Output values

0.0571

17.5200

c, 1.5000

RPcP

0.0625

1.5000

p 0.9132

21.6294

346.0707

Utilization Rate =

Average Numberof Locomotives in Queue =Average Queue Time (hours) =

Figure 9


°l\j\rS\[y^^3 8 3 8 8 g

3 8 3 8 8

3 § 5 5 3 S 5 2 3 S 5 S 3

Figure 10

' Input values

Number of locomotives serviced by facility = :•. •-• ***Number of inspections per year = ;.;*

Number of active working hours per day = ! -MSt. Dev. Time between arrivals = Oi

No. of locos able to be serviced at the same time =

Average Process (Service) Time (hours) =

c

°p ' 8.00

Figure 11



Average time between arrivals


Processing Rate (units/hour) i


Utilization Rate

Average Number of Locomotives in QueueAverage Queue Time (hours)

• = = s z a

a«w»jrf»——» Hi HiH—wj,—,—«»l iPip,i I an.il

Figure 12

III

Figure 13

Output values

Rt 0.0571

17.5200

Q 0.5000

RPCP

0.0625

0.5000

p 0.9132

2.4033

38.4523

IIS


Capacity

Variability Inventory/Delay

Figure 14

•Low Variability Medium Variability -High Variability

* o- *• <>• o- o- o- o- *• *• * o- o- o- o- o- o- o- o-

Utilization

Figure 15


THE THOROUGHBRED

MAINTENANCE SYSTEM

Prepared byDon Craab,

Norfolk Southern

At Norfolk Southern, there are typically around 1300 people performing locomotive maintenance at sixrunning repair shops. These shopsare located in Bellevue, Ohio,Elkhart, Indiana, Pittsburgh,Harrisburg, Chattanooga, andRoanoke, Virginia. About another1000 persons perform work at twobackshops, located in Altoona, PAand Roanoke, VA. There are also 16division shops located throughoutthe network where as many asanother 300 persons perform maintenance, primarily on our yard andlocal fleet.

So let's take a few minutes to dive

into our locomotive maintenance

philosophy, which I have chosen tocall the Thoroughbred MaintenanceSystem. This is not a new system,but rather the product of twodecades and two mergers.Thoroughbred Maintenance contains the fingerprints of numerousMechanical Department officers,past and present, that have workedat Norfolk Southern.

Over the years, Norfolk Southernhas been recognized for having thelowest out-of-service ratio. For more

than a decade, we were averaging a4.5% bad order ratio. In fact, in1998, we had a 4.3% bad orderratio, our lowest for any calendaryear. Unfortunately, recent performance has not been as favorable with

our out-of-service ratio typically vary

ing from five to six percent over thelast 10 years.

In 2008, we again led the industrywith an out-of-service ratio of 5.65%.

CSX remains our strongest competitor on this metric, however UnionPacific has been on the move,emerging as a strong competitor.

We believe our success is attribut

able to some things we do differently than the other carriers. So, let'stake a few minutes this morning toreview six cornerstones of the

Thoroughbred Maintenance Systemthat we believe have contributed to

our success.

The first principle is foundationalin nature. We strive to buy newlocomotives and retire select older

units ever year. Since 1995 we'vespent over $2 billion dollars on newunits. Many older models, the B23-7's, B30-7A's, B36-7's, C30-7A's,C30-7's, C36-7's, GP38's, GP40's,SD40's, and others have beenretired. Our road fleet today is asnew as any major carrier. Our yardand local fleet, some 1300 unitsstrong, is comprised of almost allDash 2 or later model vintage withthe exception of a dozen or soSW1500 units.

It may interest you to know that Irepresent the MechanicalDepartment on a team of eight persons representing TransportationOperations, Purchasing, Finance,Marketing, and InformationTechnology. Each year this teammakes recommendations on what to

buy, lease, or retire in the way oflocomotives. We've also developeda number of programs using capitalfunds to keep our yard and local


ANYTOWN, USA— Graham-White's Remanufacturing Super Hero,REMAN, has been credited for saving thousandsof dollars with his swiftaction. Railroads across North America canmaximize carvelocity andlowercostsdue to his tireless dedication to truth, justice and theGraham-White way.

A satisfied customer exclaims, "afterflashing the GW signalforREMAN's rapid response rescue, ourtired and worn-out parts were madelike new again! Now, with the remanufacturing Powerof REMAN, wedon't worry about overall performance. Thanks REMAN for savingtoday."

To SignalREMAN: Virginia: 540.387.5620Lousiana: 318.429.4797

Nevada: 775.841.2700

reman.grahamwhite.comEwGRAHAM-WHITE

PRonmmi Reliable Transportation Solutions'"


fleet the best in the industry. As evidence of that, we have had substantial rebuild programs of GP38,GP40, and SD50 power, rebuildingapproximately 230 units in the lasteight years. We have also rebuilt anumber of slugs and recently constructed some with operator cabs.Few carriers have invested in their

yard and local fleet over the pastdecade as aggressively as NorfolkSouthern. Clearly, one of the cornerstones of our ThoroughbredMaintenance System is the acquisition of new units for the road fleet

and the on-going renewal of our yardand local fleet.

The second foundational element

of our Thoroughbred MaintenanceServices is what we call "programwork". I am now speaking of ourengine overhaul, truck overhaul,midlife tune-up and paint programs.When it comes to engine overhauls,Norfolk Southern has long been veryaggressive. On a percentage basis,we overhaul more diesel enginesthan perhaps any other railroad. Weperform the preponderance of theseengine overhauls at Altoona, PA,however, we also perform GEenginework at our backshop in Roanoke,Virginia.

We consistently overhaul ourtrucks, or as the Europeans say,"Bogies". I think we reap the benefits of that on fuel racks and during92-day inspections, where ourinspectors find running gear that iswell maintained and in good condition. I might also add that this levelof maintenance is well received byour Motive Power and Equipmentinspectors from the Federal Railroad

Administration.

We also perform what we call"mid-life" tune-ups between overhauls, which have helped usimmeasurably with diesel engineperformance. Fuel test data indicatethat mid-life tune-ups help with ourfuel efficiency as well. The mid-lifetune-up consists of a number of tasksthat are required by the emissions kitprovider, such as an injector change-out, as well as other tasks we atNorfolk Southern have found to be

necessary and best performed in abackshop. Mid-life tune-ups onGeneral Electric locomotives are performed at Roanoke shops, whileEMD units receive their mid-life tune-

ups in Altoona.The third element of our

Thoroughbred Maintenance Systemis what we call "routine mainte

nance". Perhaps it should moreappropriately be described as scheduled maintenance because indeed it

is scheduled around the federallymandated inspection requirementsat 92-day intervals. In 2008, wefocused on supplying the shops witha steady, predictable flow of units.As a result,we have experienced thebenefit of decreased dwell time. In

2008, we added four "LeanEngineers"at running repair shops topromote involvement of our employees and efficiencies of our processes. We continue to focus on loco

motive dwell time, quality of inspections and repairs at 92-day routinemaintenance. Currently, we areundertaking an initiative called "pinpointing", where we focus specificcrafts on improving specific locomotive issues that hinder our success on


post 92-day inspection performance.We encourage the system shops toaudit their 92-day inspections andour Manager of LocomotiveMaintenance, from our staff, completes unannounced "external"audits of 92-day inspection workquarterly.

The fourth element of our

Thoroughbred Maintenance Systemis what we call "SpecificImprovement Projects". Long ago,when 3M was on the property asour quality consultants, they talkedabout the virtues of specificimprovement projects in promotingsuccess with quality. No matter howgood a locomotive maintenanceprogram a large carrier may have,there are systemic locomotive problems emerging all the time. Theseusually affect specific models whichshare components or software. Aspart of our Thoroughbred approachto locomotive maintenance, we seekthe input of our locomotive teamsand our Mechanical Departmentstaff to generate proposals on projects we can initiate to improve locomotive maintenance. We developcosts, projected improvements, andjustification to move these 1-2 yearprograms ahead each year.

One of the realities of large scalerailroading with a fleet the size ofours is, some locomotives will belost in the shuffle and perform poorly in terms of reliability. To deal withthis we have a safety net we refer toas the "WOW" (Worst of Worst) program. We have a full-time staff person devoted to managing the WOWprogram. This person selects badactor locomotives from our active

fleet, routes them to shops, coaches'shop supervision on proper repairs,and then monitors post-treatmentperformance. Units that continue toperform poorly are returned to theshop where the work was performed. All of the running repairshops participate in this programand are ranked for their performance. Our smaller division shops arealso joining the battle as they workon bad actor yard and local enginesassigned to their divisions. We havefound that this technique of "pullingourselves up by the bootstraps" isvital to our success if we are to

reduce unscheduled shoppingevents.

The final element of our

Thoroughbred Maintenance Systemcan best be described as

"Troubleshooting Methods andTechnical Training". It is an unfortunate fact; the railroad industry is suffering from a continuous loss of locomotive knowledge. This is occurringin the face of increasingly complexlocomotive technology. At the endof the day, not knowing how something works results in delays, and youare less certain it is fixed when youare done.

To deal with this, we continue toramp-up technical training. In thefirst quarter of 2009, we finished anadditional classroom in Roanoke,located within what we call our

"Continuing Education Center. Thisclassroom is equipped with a fullyfunctional Dash 2 electric cabinet.

Perhaps you are questioning why wewould be training on this 35 year-oldtechnology in 2009. Well, with nearly 1000 Dash 2 locomotives in our


yard and local fleets, we expectsome of these units to be around for

a long time. Further, an employeewho understands the Dash 2 electri

cal system has a useful foundation ofknowledge for learning the controlsystems of more sophisticated locomotives. We've also finished an

inspection pit, to be used for groundrelay training. This facility is centrally located in Roanoke, where mostshopcraft employees are able todrive there within five hours. Our

two staff training positions, assistedby two dozen "Training GangLeaders", continue to develop newtraining materials every year. Ourcourse offerings, most of which are4-1/2 days in duration, are completewith quizzes, hands-on training, anda final exam. This year we introduced a 26L air brake class andbegan a course on SW and MP typeswitch engines. Also beginning in2010, we plan to start a CCBII electronic airbrake class and a course on

A C Evolution Series locomotives.At this time I want to tell you

about our locomotive teams; specifically our Dash 8/9, Evolution, SD70and SD60 teams. These teams arecomprised of shopcraft employeeswho voluntarily participate.Typically, these teams have one ortwo salaried supervisors and a service engineer from EMD and GE, inaddition to the six to eight agreement employees. Each team meets4-6 times per year and are thesource of many of our ideas for specific improvement projects to reduceunscheduled shopping events.

In summary, these are the six ele-

ments of success for our

Thoroughbred LocomotiveMaintenance system. It's a big system with many players. Althoughthere are things I wish we did better,we have demonstrated what we are

capable of in terms of safety, quality,and productivity.


AIR COMPRESSORS-

BEST PRACTICES-

BACK SHOP MAINTENANCE

PART II

PreparedbyJames Sherbrook,LOCODOCS, Inc.

Introduction

Continuing from last year's paperwith air compressor overview oftypes, drives, suggested preventativemaintenance practices and maintenance strategies, this paper willaddress failure corrective actions

and unaddressed concerns.

Failure Corrective Actions

Back shop preventative maintenance personnel have developedretrofit procedures to combat watercooled compressor freezing and lowoil levels. To prevent water cooledair compressors from freezing duringcold weather operation, an EastCoast railroad has drilled the blank

ing plate on WBG style compressorsand added freeze plugs. The samerailroad has also added freeze protection valves around the compressor. In the event of a freeze condi

tion, the water system will drainitself. If the compressor begins tofreeze internally, the freeze plug willpush itself out allowing water todrain (Providence & WorcesterRailroad).

A West Coast railroad has combat

ed water cooled compressor freezing by replacing the original manifold block assembly with a modifiedmanifold block assembly and freezeprotection valve, mounting thisassembly directly to the air compres

sor water inlet manifold. This elimi

nates freeze damage due to incomplete draining of the air compressorcoolant by allowing the air compressor to drain independently of theengine cooling system automaticdump valves (Union PacificRailroad).

To prevent inaccurate air compressor oil level readings, an East Coastrailroad has opted to remove oilgauges and install dipsticks on all ofits compressors. Dipstick readingshave proven more accurate (PWRR).

Oil specifications for air compressors have changed over the years byoriginal equipment manufacturers(OEMs) to improve performance.Earlier oil specifications allowed oilto travel by the piston and to bepumped into the cylinder heads,causing accumulation on the compressor valves. Air compressorintake and exhaust valves would

then operate at temperatures highenough to turn the oil into carbon.Smaller air passages resulted fromcarbon build up on valves. Thiscaused even hotter operation andreduced compressor efficiency. Bymodifying oil specifications and utilizing air compressor lubricating oilswithout anti-wear inhibitors, the piston rings will conform to the cylinderliner wall contours more closely andquickly after overhaul. As the pistonrings and oil control ring wear inquicker, oil bypass to the cylinderheads and compressor valves isgreatly reduced; thus, carbon buildup on the valves is slowed facilitatingcompressor efficiency (GEMS 6).

With the removal of anti-wear

inhibitors from the air compressor


crankcase oil, air inlet filter contamination from excess oil bypass in thelow pressure cylinder heads is avoided. Two major railroads using oilwithout anti-wear inhibitors extend

ed the air compressor running maintenance cycle to four years withoutring or valve replacement (GeneralElectric Maintenance Service 6).

Installation of Reed stylecrankcase breather valves assist byreducing crankcase pressure keepingoil in the crankcase, not above thepiston. This breather valve reducescarbon build up, oil pumping intothe air filters and oil consumptionwhen used with newly recommended air compressor lubricating oils(GEMS 6).

Heavy detergent oils form hardlacquer deposits on the cylinderwalls and in the cylinder heads. Thiswill result in oil carryover into the airsystem. Heavy weight oils causeexcessive wear in the piston pinbearings. High film or detergentstrength oils may improve piston pinbearing life, but cannot be usedbecause piston ring seating is affected and oil bypass is carried over intothe air system, which is more detrimental than piston pin bearing wear.The presence of any lacquer or carbon deposits indicates an unsuitablelubricant (Electro-Motive DieselMaintenance Instruction 1144).

Currently, EMD recommendsusing a compressor lube oil for aircompressors with deep crankcases(10.5 g and larger oil capacities) of aSociety of Automotive Engineers(SAE) 10 weight turbine type gradecontaining anti-foam, anti-oxidationand anti-rust inhibitors with the fol

lowing properties: Viscosity-SayboltUniversal American Society forTesting and Materials (ASTM) D88or D2161: 100 degrees Fahrenheit(QF) for 130 to 180 seconds and210QF for 42 to 45 seconds and a

pour point of ASTM D97 maximum0fiF (S00049EP).

For EMD applied compressorswith other than deep crankcases(2.65 to 3.5 g oil capacities), an SAE30 weight grade oil containing anti-form, anti-oxidation and anti-rustinhibitors with the follow properties:ASTM D88, D2422 or D446 and apour point ofASTM D97 maximum 15QF (M.I.1756).

GE recommends using hydraulicoil with a ISO Viscosity Grade of 68;flash point of 400 QF; a maximumpour point of 20SF; without detergents and anti-wear characteristics;and with foam, rust and oxidationInhibitors (GEK-76679B).

Seasonal changing of oil viscositymay be required, especially whenSAE 30 is used in small crankcase

capacity compressors (M.I. 1756) -Figure 1.

Compressor oil should be sampledand sent for analysis at half dutycycle (three months) (M.I. 1144).When analyzing compressorcrankcase oil, a rapid increase in calcium would indicate that enginelubricating oil has been addedinstead of compressor crankcase oil(GEMS 7). If a rapid increase in calcium is found, visually inspect thecompressor for abnormal conditionsand change the crankcase oil and oilfilter.

A rapid increase in silicon, fol-


lowed by an increase in iron, wouldreveal that grit or dirt may havebypassed the air filters and is nowpresent in the crankcase oil, accelerating cylinder wear. Inspect air filterseating. Clean the housing andreplace air intake filters. Changecrankcase oil and oil filter as well

(GEMS 7).One must know normal compres

sor operating conditions to determine abnormal conditions. Normal

air compressor intercooler pressureis around 45 pound-force per squareinch (psi). Normal main reservoiroperating pressure is between 130to 140 psi (GEMS 6). Air compressor oil pressure on start up will beapproximately 45 psi when the oil iscold. As the oil temperature increases, the oil pressure should drop within the normal operation rangebetween 15 to 20 psi. Normal compressor crankcase lube oil temperateoperates between 50SF and 300SF(M.I. 1100). At idle speed, the normal lubricating oil temperatureshould be 140QF with an oil pressurebetween 18 to 25 psi (GP38-2).

GE AC Evolution Series locomo

tive air compressors have two safetyvalves: one located on the inter

cooler and one on the aftercooler,set to open at 60 psi and 180 psirespectively (GEJ-6845).

The oil pressure relief valve, ifequipped, is preset at 20 to 26 psi(GEK-76313).

The intercooler safety valve is provided to relieve excessive pressurebuildup. This valve should be testedand adjusted as follows:

1. Air supply to the valve must beadequate and the piping to the

valve not less than the size of

the pipe fitting on the valve end.If air supply is inadequate, thevalve cannot be properly set.The valve must be fully assembled before testing.

2. The valve must not apply beforethe proper pressure setting.The valve blowdown must not

exceed 10 psi.3. The valve should lift at a static

air pressure between 64 and 66psi (M.I. 1100).

If a leak is detected in a compressor magnet valve (CMV or MV-CC)when the coil is not energized, thecause can be traced to either the

inlet seat or the "O" ring on the bottom cap. Replace the "O" ring andseats (M.I. 4707).

When investigating air compressordifficulties, troubleshoot all otherappurtenances before disturbing thesettings of the compressor controlswitch. Compressor control switches are designed to be maintenancefree (M.I. 5512). If the switch is suspected as faulty, remove and benchtest (M.I. 5514).

When replacing flexible couplingrubber bushings in elastomeric andflex gear coupling (GEJ-6693) indirect drive compressor systems,allow 24 hours to elapse before reattaching the couplings and aligning.This will allow the rubber lubricant to

dry. If the lubricant used to installthe rubber bushings is wet, the bushing can easily move from its desiredlocation (M.I. 1765).

In EMD switchers, v-belts drive offthe compressor powering the fronttraction motor blower and coolingfan. Should a v-belt break, the loco-


motive should no longer be operated, unless absolutely necessary. Thelocomotive should return to the

maintenance point for belt replacement (SW1).

Properly installed air compressorsuction and discharge valves requireboth the correct assembly procedure as well as quality componentsfrom the OEM. If one of the valves

is improperly clamped, it may workloose during operation. This couldresult in valve breakage and potential compressor failure (GEMS 7).

Intercooler pressures can be anaccurate indicator of air compressorvalve performance used to pinpointdefect valves without unnecessarilyremoving valves from the compressor. To perform the test, first blowdown the air system. Next, removethe plug in the intercooler tappedport at the top of the intercooler.Install an accurate zero to 100 psipressure gauge in the intercoolertapped port. With the gauge inplace, operate the locomotive at idleand manually load the compressor.Wait a few minutes for the intercool

er and main reservoir pressures tostabilize. Normal intercooler pressure reads 45 psi. Normal mainreservoir pressure reads between130 to 140 psi (GEMS 6).

Troubleshooting for DefectiveValves - Normal Operating

Conditions (GEMS 6)Above normal intercooler pressure

indicates that a valve in the highpressure head is defective. Lowerthan normal intercooler pressureindicates a problem with valves inthe low pressure heads (GEMS 6).

When testing is complete, ensurethat any installed test gauges areremoved and the proper sized plugis inserted and tightened beforereturning the locomotive to service(S00049EP).Other troubleshooting techniquesfor various improper operating conditions follow: Figure 2

1. Low oil pressure shutdown:Possible Causes:

1. Low oil level.

2. Blocked oil filter.

3. Blocked suction tube

Corrective Actions:

1. Fill oil to "SAFE" on dipstick.2. Replace oil filter and

crankcase oil

3. Clean suction tube and

replace oil filter andcrankcase oil (GEK-76313).

2. Excessive varnish on dischargevalves:

Possible Causes:

1. Air discharge temperature istoo high.

2. Improper intercooler function.

Corrective Actions:

1. Inspect for broken discharge valve.

2. Clean intercooler sections

per OEM maintenanceinstructions (GEK-76313).

3. Compressor knocking:Possible Cause:

1. Unloaders do not have

enough pressure to unload.Corrective Actions:

1. Inspect unloader suppl linesfor unusual conditions.

2. Inspect unloader pistonrings (GEK-76313).

4. Insufficient output pressure or


capacity:Possible Causes:

1. Air filter silencer may beclogged.

2. The pressure switch is out ofadjustment.

3. Valves leak, are stuck, aredamaged or may be carbonized.

4. Liners and pistons may bescratched or scored, pistonrings may be damaged.

Corrective Actions:

1. Inspect and clean.2. Inspect and adjust.3. Inspect and clean.4. Inspect (GEK-76313).

5. Noisy while running:Possible Cause:

1. Review compressor knocking.

2. Inadequate lubrication.3. Connecting rod caps may

be loose.

Corrective Actions:

1. For inadequate lubrication,check oil level and viscosity.Oil viscosity may be toohigh or too low. Change fi-lter and oil.

2. To troubleshoot loose con

necting rod caps, removecrankcase cover and inspect(GEK-76313).

Unaddressed Concerns

A recent study to find the cause ofwhy alternating current (AC) motordriven compressors were beingpulled from service found that aircompressors rarely failed. The studyfound that the majority of compressors pulled from service were due toAC motor failure. Many of the failed

motors could have been preventedby standardizing preventative maintenance practices (Norfolk SouthernRailroad). Preventative findings follow.

AC motor failure was viewed on a

locomotive sampling. Motor failurewas traced back to faulty motor control: air compressor control contactor, computer control software,motor connections, motor defectfailures and unknown issues (NS).

An on-site sampling of runninglocomotives in service found a third

had loose AC motor connections

and an additional third had loose

contactor connections. Motor con

nections had been repaired duringpreventative maintenance inspections, but numerous variations ofbolts and washers were used with

out standardization. Motor connec

tions were not consistently torquedto proper connection values.Contactor connections were found

in various states and repaired by various means. Contactor tips werefound with random stages of arcing.No consistency regarding a contactor change-out program was determined by (NS).

An in-house review of bad order

AC motors found a majority of failures were caused by: debris in theconnection boxes, arcing at connection points, loose standoffs andabsent lock washers at motor con

nection points. To remedy motorconnection point failures, the motorrepair vendor replaced all standoffswith a newly designed style standoffand applied Locktite® to the retaining studs from the frame to thestandoffs. New universalized motor


connection fasteners were suppliedto the end user (NS).

To standardize air compressor ACdriven motor preventative maintenance practices to prevent AC motorfailure:

1. Ensure only OEM recommended fasteners are used on motor

and contactor connection

points.2. Torque motor connection bolts

to OEM recommended torquevalues.

3. Inspect connection boxes fordebris and loose connections;clean and repair respectively.

4. Consistently clean contactortips and change out failing contactors (NS). Figure 3

Conclusion

In conclusion, a clean, dry, reliablesource of compressed air is essentialto a healthy locomotive. With theintegration of computerized technology and trends towards AC motordrive reciprocating style and rotaryscrew style compressor configurations, a consistent, documented,easy to follow maintenance planmust be outlined for all facets of the

railroad industry's maintenance personnel to follow. At present, maintenance for air compressor logic control components is addressed asnon-scheduled maintenance items

due to variations in component wearand life related to operating conditions (M.I. 1777A / M.I 5511).Contractor, pressure switches, transducer and magnet control valvemaintenance is suggested by OEMsand is not mandated by the FederalRailroadAdministration, Department

of Transportation (FRA). It is criticalfor modern locomotive air systemsto function and should be addressed

in a similar manner as are mandated

brake valve change-outs.

Resources

EMD M.I. 1110, Air CompressorsWBQf WXQf WXEf WBGf WXGrABO. API and ADX, Revision A,(November 1961): 1 and 4.

EMD M.I. 1144, Air CompressorModels WBO and WBG. Revision

A, (June 1976): 5, 7, 8 and 13.-EMD M.I. 1300, 3CD Type AirCompressors. (January 2002): 20 -22.

EMD M.I. 1726, LocomotiveStorage Procedures. Revision B,(February 1979): 2,4,5-8.

EMD M.I. 1756, LubricantSpecifications (Excluding Enginesand Governor), Revision E,(Undated): 2-4 and 9.

EMD M.I. 1765, Alignment ofRotating Equipment. Revision C,(July 1979): 7 and 8.

EMD M.I. 1777A, ScheduledMaintenance Program 60-Series GPand SD Rail Freight LocomotiveModels - Equipped with 710-SeriesEngines and DC TractionComponents. (March 1997): 5, 6,11, 13 and 14.

EMD M.I. 4707, Solenoid(Magnet) Valves. Revision B,(October 1975): 1 -3.

EMD M.I. 5511, TemperatureSensitive Switches. Revision B,(October 1983): 2.

EMD M.I. 5512, Pressure ControlSwitch - Type 9012. Revision A,(April 1975): 1.


EMD M.I. 5514, Pressure Switch -Type 9013. (December 1980): 3.

EMD GP38-2 Locomotive Service

Manual, "Compressed Air System",Section 5, 3rd Edition, (February1975): 1,6, 17.-EMD SD70MAC Locomotive

Service Manual, S00049EP, "GeneralInformation", Section 0, 3rd Edition,(August 2000): 3.

EMD SD70MAC Locomotive

Service Manual, S00049EP,"Compressed Air Systems", Section6, 3rd Edition, (August 2000): 1 - 7,9, 42 - 44, 46 and 59.

EMD SD70MAC Locomotive

Service Manual, S00049EP,"Electrical Equipment", Section 8,3rd Edition, (August 2000): 14, 74 -76.

EMD SW1 & NW2 OperatingManual, 600HP & 1000HPSwitching Locomotive. "Section 1 -General", No. 2303, 5th Edition,(January 1950): 125.

EMD SW1 & NW2 OperationManual, 600HP & 1000HPSwitching Locomotive. "Section 2 -Instruments and Controls", No.2303, 5th Edition, (January 1950):203.

EMD SW1 & NW2 OperationManual, 600HP & 1000HPSwitching Locomotive. "Section 3 -Operation", No. 2303, 5th Edition,(January 1950): 309.

Falk 438-110, Steelflex©Couplings - Installation andMaintenance. (December 2002): 1 -5.

Gardner-Denver (GD) 13-9/10-641 1st Edition, Electra-Saver -Operating and Service Manual.(2006): Section 3 Page 1 and

Section 5 Page 4.General Electric (GE) GEJ-6693,

Equipment Data (For Series-7Locomotives. (October 1984): 3.

GE GEJ-6845, AC Evolution SeriesOperating Manual Diesel ElectricLocomotive C45ACCTE. "Other

Equipment", (2003): 46, 49 and 50.GE GEK-61240E, Preparation of

Locomotives for Storage. Ml-00140E, (June 1988): 1 -4.

GE GEK-61241G, Removal ofLocomotives from Storage. Ml-00145G, (January 1992): 1 and 2.

GE GEK-76313, Ineersoll-RandModel YHE Air-Cooled Air

Compressor. MI-25104-003, (1992):1 -3, 14, 15 and 17.

GE GEK-76679, RecommendedFuel. Oil and Lubricants. Revision B,(May 2006): 11, 13, 15 and 20.

GE SMI-00013D, LocomotiveData Dash 9. (1999): 2 - 4 and 6.

General Electric Maintenance

Service (GEMS), "TroubleshootingThe Compressor - IntercoolerPressures Indicate Valve

Performance and Faults", Volume III,Issue 6, (August 13, 1982): 1 - 4.

GEMS, "Correct Assembly,Original Engineering Manufacturer(OEM) Parts Important in AirCompressor Valve Installation",Volume III, Issue 7, (August 20,1982): 1 and 6.

Norfolk Southern Railroad (NS),"Motor / Contactor ConnectionReview", (September 17, 2007): 1 -6.

Providence & Worcester Railroad

(PWRR), Interview.Union Pacific Railroad (UP),

"Locomotive Maintenance

Modification - Guru Manifold Kit, Air


Compressor Water Inlet", (June 12,2008): 1 - 2.


RECOMMENDED COMPRESSOR LUBRICATING OIL/ LUBRICANTS

Source Material Use Supplier

GEK-61240E

and M.I. 1726

Tectyl 823EM Petroleum based

anti-rust solution

Ashland Oil

GEK-61241G Nalco 41 Water treatment Nalco Chemical Co.

GEK-76679B D6B11D3 Air compressorhydraulic oil

(See Below)

GEMS 6 American Industrial Oil

68

Air compressorhydraulic oil

AMOCO

GEMS 6 DUROOilS-315 Air compressorhydraulic oil

Atlantic Richfield

GEK-76679B Energol HL-C 68 Air compressorhydraulic oil

BP Oil, Inc.

GEK-76679B Chevron AIO 68 Air compressorhydraulic oil

Chevron Global

Lubricants

GEK-76679B RANDO HD ISO 68 Air compressornydraulic oil

Chevron Global

Lubricants

GEK-76679B REGAL Oil R&O 68 Air compressorhydraulic oil

Chevron Global

Lubricants

GEK-76679B CITGO Pacemaker

T68


CITGO Petroleum

Corp.

GEK-76679B Mobil DTE Heavy-Medium


Exxon Mobil Oil Co.

GEK-76679B TERESSTIC 68 Air compressorhydraulic oil

Exxon Mobil Oil Co.

GEK-76679B HARMONY R&O AW-

68


Gulf Oil Limited

Partnership

GEK-76679B Shell Tellus 68 Air compressorhydraulic oil

Shell Oil Products,

USA

GEMS 6 SUNVIS 931 Air compressorhydraulic oil

Sun Oil

S00049EP and

M.I. 1756

SAE 10 Air compressorlube oil - for highcapacitycrankcase

compressors

Figure 1

151


Use Supplier

M.I. 1756 SAE 30 Air compressorhydraulic oil - forsmall capacitycrankcase

compressors

GD AEON 9000 Rotary screw aircompressor

synthetic lubricant

Gardner-Denver

GEK-76679B GE D50E24, KOP-

FLEX

Gear and couplinggrease

KSG Standard

Coupling Grease

GEK-76679B GE D50E6B, TexacoMarfak "0" Code 927

Special purposegrease - "O" ring

Chevron Global

Lubricants

M.I. 1756 Parker Super O-Lube Compressor clutchseals

M.I. 1756 N.L.G.I. No2E.P.

lithium grease(8413019-14.5ounces (oz.))

Grease lubricant

for mechanical

drives

Falk 438-110 Falk Long TermGrease (LTG)

13F (8153703)compressor endSteelflex"1 couplingpacking grease

The Falk

Corporation

M.I. 1726 MIL-B-131 Barrier Material,Water-vapor proof,flexible

M.I. 1726 MIL-B-121 Barrier Material,Greaseproof,waterproof,flexible

M.I. 1726 MIL-C-16173 Corrosion

Preventive

Compound, Grade4(P-19)

M.I. 1726 Petroleum Jelly Coat contact tipsfor long termstorage

Standard Oil Co. of

Indiana

M.I. 1726 MIL-P-3420-Type 1,Style C, Class 1 & 2

VPI-B (Vaporphase inhibitorDarrier paper)


TABLe.QEA!R.C.QMPHEaSOBSANDniLCAPACiTI£S

Source CompressorMake

Model Type #

CylindersOil

CapacityRecommended

Oil

GEK-76313 Ingersoll-Rand (IR)

YHE air

cooled

2 14.5

gallons (g)D6B11D3

SMI-

00002B/LS

M-1987

WestinghouseAir Brake

Company(WABCO)

3CMDCB8L air

cooled

3 16.25 g D6B11D3

SMI-

00013D

WABCO 3CDCLA air

cooled

3 16.25g D6B11D3

M.I. 1300

and M.I.

1756

WABCO 3CD air

cooled

3 small

crankcase

-3.25g,arge-

16.25 g

small - SAE 30,large-SAE 10

GEJ-6693

and M.I.

1756

Gardner

Denver (GD)WLN AVBO water

cooled

3 small

crankcase

2.65, largecrankcase

10.5g

small - SAE 30,arge-

D6B11D3 or

SAE 10

M.I. 1144

and M.I.

1756

GD WLG AWBG water

cooled

6 17.5g SAE 10

M.I. 1110

and M.I.

1756

3D WLO A/VXO air

cooled

3 small

crankcase

2.65, largecrankcase

10.5g

small - SAE 30,

arge-SAE 10

M.I. 1110

and M.I.

1756

GD WLE /WXE

(upgradedto WXO)

air

cooled

3 2.65 g SAE 30

M.I. 1110

andM.I.

1756

GD WHL/WXG air

cooled

6 17.5 g SAE 10

M.I. 1110

and M.I.

1756

GD WLP / ABO water

cooled

2 3.5 g SAE 30

M.I. 1110

and M.I.

1756

GD WLQ / ADJ air

cooled

2 3.5 g SAE 30

M.I. 1110

and M.I.

1756

GD ADX

upgradedto ADJ)

air

cooled

2 3.5 g SAE 30

S00049EP GD WLA air

cooled

4 17.5 g SAE 10

GD GD Electra-

Saver

oil

cooled

None -

rotors

11 5g AEON 9000

153


Troubleshooting for Defective Valves - NormalOperating Conditions (GEMS 6)

Stepl- Suspect Step 2 - Determine Valve to Notations

Determlne Fault, Go Condition InspectCondition to Step 2 Unloaded

Under Load

Intercooler Fault is Intercooler pressure Inspect high None

pressure is likely in the does not drop to pressure

higher than high normal reading dischargenormal pressure (dropping 15 to 20 valve if no

cylinder psi) within three normal drophead minutes

Intercooler Fault is Intercooler pressure Inspect high None

pressure is ikely in the holds between 15 pressure

higher than high to 20 psi suction valve if

normal pressure

cylinderhead

pressure holds

Intercooler Fault is Intercooler pressure Inspect low The faulty valve will

pressure islower than

ikely in alow

drops below 15 to20 psi

pressure

discharge

nave an erratic or

weak suction sound.

normal pressure valves if below discharge valve cover

cylinder normal drop date or biowback

head through the air lilterwhen pumping.

Intercooler Fault is Intercooler holds at Inspect low The faulty valve will

pressure islower than

likely in alow

15 to 20 psi pressure

suction valves

have an erratic or

weak suction sound,

an unusually hotnormal pressure if pressure discharge valve cover

cylinder holds plate or biowback

head through the air filterwhen pumping.

Figure 2


TABLE OF AC MOTORS

Source Application Make Model Description Phase

SMI-

00002B/LSM

-1987

-8

Locomotives

GE 5GYA28 air compressor

drive motor

Single

SMI-00013D •9

Locomotives

GE 5GYA28/30 air compressordrive motor

Single

NS SD90MAC EMD Delta air compressor

drive motor

Single

Figure 3

155


ALIGNMENT CONTROL

COUPLER REQUIREMENTSPrepared by,

George W. King, II,New York, Susquehanna

&Western Railway

Interchanging locomotives notequipped with alignment controldraft systems is a source of frustration within the short line community.Many connecting carriers will refuseto transport locomotives over theirlines if not equipped with properalignment control.

Why do many carriers take thisstance? Non alignment units havebeen identified as the root cause of

numerous derailments. Analysis ofthese derailments found severe

uncontrolled lateral movements dur

ing buff and draft events being amajor contributing factor. As a resultmany carriers refuse to move foreignlocomotives that are not equippedwith alignment control.

What is alignment controlas it relates to locomotive

couplers?Alignment control draft systems

use a mechanical means to control

lateral movement of the coupler.This normally consists of specificcouplers that use wings to compresswedges that push against the draftgear in the direction of swing. Nonalignment systems do NOT cushionnor control lateral forces.

Figure 1 displays the differencebetween alignment and non alignment control locomotive draft systems.

Why does this issue exist?Locomotives often were not

equipped with alignment controldue to the service application forwhich they were destined. Non A/Callows for a tighter negotiated radiuswith successful coupler operation.Application of A/C reduces the operational ability of the platform inquestion.

As can be seen in Figure 1 fullalignment control coupler swing islimited to 17". Non alignment control allows for twice the travel as

measured in the arc of the move

ment. Thus non alignment controldraft systems are best suited formany industrial applications andtrack engineered to standards thatexisted decades ago.

Compliance impact• Cost

• Practicality• Operational Needs

Aqtion planContact all carriers involved in the

transport from origin to destination.Ascertain each carriers requirements, any and all movement restrictions, train marshalling standards andobtain documentation clearly statingthe same. Establish a list of contact

names and numbers for each rail

road in the event of an unforeseen

stoppage in the transport plan.

PQ$sifrle solutions• Coupler lateral stopsNot a true alignment control sys

tem. The blocks are sometimes weld

ed in the coupler pocket or bolted inplace to limit the lateral swing of the


coupler. This is very cost effectiveand easily removable thus returningthe unit to original configuration.This was permissible in manyinstances two decades ago but is notacceptable in most cases today.

• Modified alignmentcontrolThis application uses the existing

pocket and draft gear mechanism. Itrequires the installation of anE7321/EMD # 8271631 "horned"coupler and welding two lateralstops in the pocket opening.

The coupler and stops are easilyremoved to restore the unit to original configuration. This method issomewhat expensive dependingupon the availability of the E7321coupler. This retrofit may or may notbe acceptable to some interchangepartners.

• Full alignmentcontrolThis is a very expensive retrofit as

it requires purchase of draft gears,couplers and yokes. In addition itrequires removal of the existing draftpockets and fabrication of new unitsto allow for insertion of the alignment control draft system.

This retrofit is not removable due

to complexity and cost. Applicationof full alignment control will reducethe capability of the locomotive toservice customers on tight track curvature.

Full alignment control brings theunit into compliance with connecting carriers but at a cost.

There are several companies thatperform the different levels of draftsystem work as described in thispaper. Using existing business pro

files as listed in the railway industryperiodicals and publications willallow one to establish a cost andscheduling time frame to adapt locomotives for interchange movementThe key issue is to fully understandand comply with ALL connectingcarrier requirements.


Alignment control vnon-alignment controlALIGNMENT CONTROL COUPLER &DRAFT GEAR NON-ALIGNMENT CONTROL

and couplers withstopb!ocks"doNOT ,

transfer forces of

"swiveling" couplerInto draft gear

Figure 1

BUILDING AMERICA*


Cobra|j

Railroad Friction Products CorporationIntroduces the

COBRA® Locomotive DayOneTreadGuard™

brake shoe

For Additional Information

contact our Sales [email protected]

(910)844-9700

Railroad Friction Products CorporationPO box 1349 (910)844-9700Laurinburg, NC 28353 Fax (910) 844-9733www.rfpc.com [email protected]

Registered FirmISO 9001-2000

AARM-1003

COBRA" is a registered trademark ol Railroad Friction Products Corporation.TREADGUARD"•' is a trademark ol Railroad Friction Products Corporation

159

160 Diesel Electrical Maintenance Committee


ON DIESEL ELECTRICAL MAINTENANCE

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 17, 20098:30 A.M.

D. Becker

J. BoggessD. Bruss

M. FitzpatrickF. FragaB. HathawayB. Kirdeikis

G. Lozowksi

D. MaryottB. McCaffreyK. Mellin

S. MuetingT. Nudds

D. Perkins

R. Slomski

R. StegeC. TaylorV. Trout

L White

Chairman

STUART OLSON

Regional Sales ManagerWabtec Corporation

Alpharetta, GAVice Chairman

MIKE DRYLIE

Electrical Systems EngineerCSX Transportation

Jacksonville, FL

COMMITTEE MEMBERS

Design Engineer Electro Motive DieselsSr. Mgr.-Motive Pwr.Engr. New Cap. Equip.Sales ManagerMgmt. TrainingConsultant

Sr. Rel. Specialist-Elec.Tech. Mgr-RR Prod.Mgr.-Locos.Consultant

N.E. Sis. Mgr.Field Service EngineerCust. Service ManagerConsultant

Sr. Genl. Foreman

Appl. SpecialistMgr.-Mech. Engrg.Application Specialist

Alaska RR

Amtrak

Cattron

CSX Transportation

CNRR

Morgan AMT/NationalBNSF RailwayTransupply, Inc.Peaker Services

Siemens Transp.ZTR Control Syst.Union Pacific RR

Norfolk Southern

Bach-SimpsonUnion Pacific RR

Bach-Simpson

LaGrange, ILAnchorage, AK

Philadelphia, PALyndhurst, OH

Jacksonville, FLPort Orange, FL

Edmonton, AlbertaGreenville, SCFort Worth, TX

Wilmington, DEBrighton, MlDenver, CO

London, Ontario

Omaha, NEErie, PA

Altoona, PALondon, Ontario

Omaha, NESt. Hubert, Quebec

Note: Brian Hathaway and Les White are Past Presidents of LMOA.Also, Ron Bartels, Regional Executive is also a very active member of this committee

Diesel Electrical Maintenance Committee 161

PERSONAL HISTORY

7. Stuart Olson

Stuart was born in

Jacksonville, FL and received aBachelor of Science degree fromthe University of Central Florida. In1974, following a six-year tour ofduty as a US Navy nuclear submariner, he began his railroadcareer with a relatively new company, Auto-Train in Sanford, FL.While at Auto-Train he advanced

from locomotive junior machinistto Draftsman, Project Engineer,Director of Facility Maintenance,and finally Director of Operations.

In 1979 he began serving theindustry from the other side of thetrack as Field Representative forNew York Air Brake. In 1983 he

took the position of Sales Engineerfor Aeroquip Corporation inChicago, IL, where he advanced toAccount Executive. In 1987 he was

promoted and transferred toWytheville, VA as AeroquipRailroad Products Manager.

After a brief stint with

Republic Locomotive Works asDirector of Sales, and Bach-Simpson as Regional SalesManager he continued to broadenhis knowledge by accepting a position at Q-Tron as Manager ofBusiness Development.

The railroad industry waschanging at a fast pace. Railroadsupply companies were mergingand in acquisition mode. Q-Tronwas purchased by Motive PowerInc., where Stuart transitioned tothe position of Regional SalesManager.

A short time later

Westinghouse Air Brake Co.merged with Motive Power forming Wabtec Corporation. He is theRegional Sales Manager forWabtec servicing Class 1, ShortLine and regional railroads in theSoutheastern US.

Stuart is a long time memberof the LMOA Diesel Electrical

Maintenance Committee servingas committee member and vice

chair, as well as presenting technical papers. He is a past recipient ofthe Committee MVP.

Currently living in Atlanta, GAwith his wife Winky, they have twochildren and five grandchildren.


THE DIESEL ELECTRICAL

MAINTENANCE COMMITTEE

WISHES TO EXPRESS THEIR SINCERE

APPRECIATION TO SIEMENS

TRANSPORTATION FOR HOSTING

THE COMMITTEE MEETING

IN FEBRUARY 2009 IN

SACRAMENTO, CA

SPECIAL THANKS GOES

TO STEVE MUETING

WE ALSO WISH TO THANK THE UNION

PACIFIC AND VICTOR TROUT FOR

ALLOWING THE COMMITTEE TO

TOUR THE UP'S ROSEVILLE, CA SHOPS

IN JULY 2009, THE COMMITTEE HAD

A MEETING AT THE NORFOLK

SOUTHERN IN CHATTANOOGA, TN.

WHICH WAS ARRANGED BY

RYAN STEGE - THANKS TO THE NS

AND RYAN


MorganAM&T

ATIONAL

A technology brand of:

THE RIGHT BRUSH

EVERY TIME

No matter what your locomotive application,National has the right brush for it.

> Traction Motor> Alternators> Generators> Blowers> Cab Heaters> Fuel Pumps

163

Original OEM brushes for all locomotivesTraining for resultsCommutator Profiler

Brush holders

Morgan AM&T800-876-6322 I 864-458-7777 www.morganamt.com

164

EMD SLIP RINGS -

BRUSHES & WEAR

By Jay BoggessAlaska Railroad Corporation

Photos by the Author UnlessOtherwise Noted

The carbon brush - the "lump ofcoal"1 that transfers electrical powerto the rotating portion of a motor orgenerator - may seem equivalent tobuggy whips and corsets when compared to computers, microprocessors and LCD screens, but they arestill essential to the operation of themost modern diesel locomotive.

Our father's and grandfather's diesellocomotive had dozens of brushes

all over the place. Let us look at the2400-HP SD24 of 1959 as an exam

ple: (Figure 1)• Six traction motors with a total of

72 brushes.

• One auxiliary generator with 8brushes.

• One fuel pump motor & one turbolube pump motor with 2 brusheseach.

• One load regulator rheostat(directly controlling the D22 battery field) with 1 brush.

• Two dynamic brake grid blowermotors with 4 brushes each.

• One D22 main generator with 12brush-holders & 60 total brushes

(5 brushes per holder).• One D14 alternator with 4 slip

ring brushes.• Plus various little motors for cab

heaters and refrigerators and such.

In the past 50 years, technologicalprogress has dramatically changed

1 Lump of coal - the literal translation of "traction motorbrush" from Egyptian to English.

Diesel Electrical Maintenance Committee

the carbon brush picture (perhapsmuch to the chagrin of the brushmakers), as exemplified by the 4300-HP SD70MAC: (Figure 2)• NO traction motor brushes

(replaced by Siemens inverterdrive & 3-phase traction motors)

• NO auxiliary generator brushes(replaced by brush-less AC auxgen & Battery Charging Rectifier)

• NO fuel pump or turbo lube pumpmotor brushes (replaced by brush-less DC motors)

• NO load regulator (replaced bycomputer-controlled injectors,load control & digital serial links)

• NO little brushes for cab heaters &

refrigerators (replaced by inverter-driven 74 VDC central HVAC

units).• Two 32-volt starter motors with 4

total brushes

• One DC series-wound grid blowermotor, still with 8 brushes.

• One TA17-6 / CA6 (or CA7) traction alternator / companion alternator, with 2 sets of slip rings & 8total slip ring brushes.

This paper concentrates on thoseeight remaining brushes in the modern EMD locomotive. Slip rings &brushes are also not going anywhere; unlike the 74V brush-less auxgen, the main generator demandsthe quick speed of response afforded by brushes in both steady-stateoperation and under adverse circumstances like traction motor

flashover & inverter crowbar. Thus

these 8 bits of carbon, somethingyou can hold in the palm of yourhand become the single threadedweak point that separates successful


locomotive operation from road failure, capable of turning the high-horsepower diesel into a 420,000-pound boat anchor.

OriginsThis project started back in 2007

when The Alaska Railroad was

approached by Tim Keck (then ofEMD) and Ron Delavan (still ofNational Carbon) and asked if wewould like to serve as the location of

a field test for a whole litany of maingenerator/ companion alternator slipring brush ideas. Before they cameto us, Tim & Ron had been busy trying to address slip ring/brush fieldproblems in the laboratory. Theywere:

1. Poor brush wear on the com

panion alternator (CA) brushes,especially the CA negativebrush.

2. Poor ring wear on the 3rd maingenerator (MG) ring, up to thepoint of visibly rutting of thering.

The obvious question that one cannow ask is: Why does the negativebrush wear faster? Let us look at the

brush/ring system and offer up somepossibilities: (Figure 3)

Because actual electron flow is the

opposite of "conventional current"flow (positive to negative), the faceof the negative brush will always bedepleted of electrons and thus (perhaps) causes mechanical weaknessand breakdown in the structure of

the carbon graphite, thus resulting infaster wear.

Let's look now at the rest of the

165

EMD main generator / companionalternator slip ring / brush arrangement. Figure 4 is a photo of an EMDslip ring assembly; Figure 5 is a cutaway diagram of the same assembly.The front two rings (labeled "1" &"2" in the cutaway) feed the EMDcompanion alternator (which supplies main generator excitation andvarious auxiliary fans and blowers).Without these brushes, the companion alternator has no excitation,there is no main generator excitationnor are there cooling fans, blowersor no motor-driven air compressorand thus no compressed air. These2 rings get 74 VDC from the aux genany time the diesel engine is running. Two different flavors of companion alternators exist on Alaska70MAC's; the CA7 (which most ofthe BNSF 70MACs have as well) andthe smaller CA6. The important difference is that the CA7 draws about

60 amps thru the slip rings, while theCA6 only draws about 40 amps.

The second set of slip rings (#3 &#4) handle the field excitation to themain generator. AC-drive locomotive have fairly constant (but fairlyhigh) field current requirements fromzero to maximum track speed. DClocomotives, on the other hand,have peaks of field current near stall,maximum speed and near generatortransition, with comparatively lowervalues in between; much like a pairof fishhooks. Since this field test was

run on AC-drive locomotives, theresults of the main generator brushes& rings may not be directly applicable to a DC-drive loco. Regardless ofdrive, when the brushes wear short,the locomotive will not move.

166

Tim and Ron were looking for aplace to test brushes & rings, theAlaska Railroad was happy to trysomething new, as we were personally experiencing the poor negativepolarity brush wear. One distinctadvantage of Alaska testing is noloco is EVER lost up here. Unless alocomotive learns how to swim, anyunit not in Anchorage will pass thruAnchorage in 48 hours or less. Atabsolute worst case, it can be seenin Fairbanks. Thus, every test subjectcan be seen quickly and often. Theonly real difficulty is that some of thetest locos ended up being stored inwinter due to the cyclic, seasonalnature of our railroad.

EMD/National Carbon provided11 sets of new test slip rings andbrushes, plus additional brushes totest a mitigation technique for existing slip rings (four more locos).Finally, Alaska had just purchasedfour brand-new SD70MACs from

EMD, so two of those became control units for comparison, totaling 17test locomotives. National Carbon

D689 brushes were used for all the

bronze rings, while the designationfor the steel slip ring brush isNational Carbon R1318 grade.

Variations Tested

Slip Ring MaterialIn days gone by, Electro-Motive

made generator slip rings out of tinbronze, a copper alloy with 5% to10% tin (abbreviated Sn-Cu), castinto an insulating plastic holder. Twosmall brushes are used on each CA

ring, two larger brushes used oneach MG ring. This design worked


very well for a very long time, withold-timers recalling that slip ringbrushes would easily last a year ormore.

At least 10 years ago, Electro-Motive instigated a cost-savings onslip rings,where the tin in the bronzerings was replaced with aluminum(since aluminum is cheaper than tin).Thus, the world entered the era ofaluminum-bronze (Al-Cu) and troubles began. The negative CA (#2)brush would wear about 3 times as

fast as the positive CA (#1) brush.Brushes had to be changed every 6months to insure they'd make it tothe next 92-day inspection. Somerailroads would swap field polaritiesto even out the wear.2 Similar wear

would also occur on the TA rings &brushes. One possible explanationwould be oxidation of the aluminum

on the surface of the ring, whichbesides being an insulator is alsoabrasive (just go check out "sandpaper" at the hardware store). It wasfelt a trial of the tin-bronze material

would eliminate the aluminum and

its problems.

CA Ring Spring Cell ProblemsIn the past few years, Tim Keckdis

covered various quality/dirt/wear-out issues with the "small" CA springcell (the spring cell is a clip with acoiled spring leaf riveted on to provide spring pressure for holding thebrush to the slip ring). Tim hasfound that the coiled spring leaf canaccumulate dirt and/or kink. Thiscan cause the spring to stick, thusleaving the brush with no pressure.

There are actually two leafs riveted2This isauseful technique buthas tobedone atthegenerator terminal boardof the brush-holders NOT at the slipringstuds themselves (Figure 1) as flipping the polarity of thefieldsalone does nothing for the wear.


together. By spot-welding the farend of the spring, the CA spring cellis made much more resistant to dirt.

EMDsupplied a quantity of this new-style CA spring cell for this test. Alltests of the "small" brush utilized

these new spring cells. This springcell is EMD p/n 40132923 andought to be replaced (at minimalcost and maximal benefit) after 3 to5 years.

Interestingly, the MG/TA "large"spring cell is not susceptible to thesame dirt effects and has not been

modified, nor new large cells appliedfor the test.

Pitch of the Slip Ring SpiralGroove

Current in a brush does not flow

to the ring uniformly across the contact surface. Instead the current

actually concentrates in very smallspots of high current density. Thepurpose of the spiral grove is toforce the "current spot" to moveacross the face of the brush.

The spiral on the original EMD slipring makes one revolution across the1/2 inch width of the slip ring -hence the name "1/2 inch pitch".The CA brush (for various reasons) isonly about 5/16" wide while theMG/TA brush is nearly 7/16" wide.In the case of the CA brush, the ringrotates for a major portion of thering rotation under the brush without any spiral groove under it, thuslosing the sweeping effect of the spiral groove. By halving the pitch ofthe spiral, there is always a grooveunder the brush face (this is the "tin-bronze 1/4 inch pitch" rings).

167

Besides forcing the "current spot"to move, the spiral groove cools thebrush face as well. EMD old-timersalso related to this writer that the

original AR10 slip rings of 1966 didnot have spirals and once they wereadded, brush performance improveddramatically.

Number of Brushes on the TA

Slip RingsOne of the subtle aspects of slip

ring design is achieving the propercurrent density on the brush; toohigh and the carbon wears awayelectrically or the current overloadsthe copper pigtail (also called ashunt), too low and the proper copper oxide film is not maintained andthe brush (or ring) wears awaymechanically. Classically, theMG/TA rings used two large brushes(as the MG field current varied fromzero amps when the unit was idlingand from 40 to 140 amps when theunit is loading). As an SD70MACspends a lot of time at around 80amps, EMD engineers felt theyshould use 3 large brushes per ring.However well this may or may nothave worked on a "traditional"

freight-only SD70MAC, EMD discovered excessive wear on TA17 MG

slip rings on units that make headend power (HEP), which include theAlaska 4300's and NJ Transit locos.Since these units spend significanttime at 370-490 engine rpm withonly 30 amps on the MG/TA fieldrings (while idling making HEP),EMD alerted the railroad to remove

1 of the 3 brushes per ring, so as toraise the current density and avoidthe low-amperage wear problem.

168

While the consensus is that in

nearly all cases 3 brushes per ring istoo much brush (especially with theolder aluminum-bronze rings), 3 TAbrushes per ring were being attempted with 1/4" and 1/2" tin-bronze as"control" experiments to make sureall possibilities are being tried and noexperimental combination is missed.

In a similar vein, combinations ofsmall and large brushes were triedon the CA rings. Here, we have theCA7 of the 4000-series SD70MACs

locos drawing 60 amps every second the diesel engine is running,while the 4300's have the CA6,which only draws 40 amps whilerunning.

Number of Slip Ring Brushes(In General)

EMD always made a consciouseffort to use two brushes per ringAND to position them one brush ontop of the ring and one on the bottom. This writer always was told thatif the locomotive (and brushes)bounced, there would still be at leastone brush in contact with the ring.So, it was with some trepidation thatwe attempted testing with just onebrush per ring. Because of this, welimited the one per ring to the non-passenger 4000-series SD70MACs,but as experience has been gainedand advantages of 1 brush per ringuncovered, a couple of single-brush-per-ring passenger-carrying 4300swere successfully added to the test.

Steel Slip RingsGeneral Electric uses steel slip

rings on their locomotives and hasdone so for many years. Obviously


steel is cheaper than either tin or aluminum bronze. They suffer fromtwo limitations:

1. Special "steel grade" brushesare required to "polish" therings. These are not interchangeable with bronze ringbrushes.

2. The rings tend to rust when aunit is placed in storage andneed to be cleaned up when aunit is returned to service.

The three steel ring locos (4320,4006, 4004) should be consideredthe most "experimental" of the testlocomotives. To our knowledgethese are the first steel rings appliedto an EMD locomotive in the field.

Because of time constraints, only1/2" pitch spiral grooves wereattempted. Two small and two largebrushes per CA ring were tried onthe 4000-series locos, with 2 and 3brushes per Main Generator ringtested at the same time. The 4320

test loco ran with a conservative 2

large brushes on both the CA & MGrings.

Mitigation Techniques For ExistingAluminum-Bronze Rings

Since a huge number of locomotives are out there with aluminum

bronze rings, the last four test locomotives attempted to get goodbrush performance without changing the aluminum-bronze slip ring.On the CA rings, a single large brushreplaces the two standard smallbrushes. By using the wide brush,there is always spiral groove underneath the brush face, by using onlyone brush, the CA current density is


not too low. The single large brushutilizes a larger shunt so that it canhandle the entire CA field current.3

On the MG/TA ring, the 3-brush configuration is reduced to two brushesper ring, since we know 2 brushesare a better idea.

Test Array & Detailed DescriptionThe best way to look at this flurry

of test items/variables/conditions isin a table. Table 1 describes the test

conditions. We attempted to catchnearly every combination to try asbest as possible to capture each possibility. In 20/20 hindsight, weshould have picked an existing 4000loco with small CA brushes to serve

as a control test unit.

Test Procedures

Test slip ring & brush installationbegan in July-August 2007. New"small" spring cells were supplied byEMD and installed on all "small"

brush positions. Where "large"brushes were installed on the CA

rings, EMD supplied new largebrush-holders with new spring cells-otherwise, all other large springcells were reused.

Brush inspection started about amonth after installation (so as to geta good "brush seated" length).Brushes were measured with the

same digital caliper operated by thesame individual, so that particularvariable was eliminated. At each

inspection, locomotive Engine "On"time, mileage, engine horsepower-hours and kilowatt-hours were

recorded. Inspections generallyoccurred on three-month intervals,but the passenger-service 4300's

3 This large shunt will/has become standard on largeNational Carbon D689 brushes.

169

were explicitly inspected at thebeginning and end of each summerpassenger season.

Expressing the ResultsIn a previous lifetime, this author

inspected DC traction motor brushes for life and commutator wear on

EMD locomotives. During thoseinspections, we used to expressbrush life in "Miles per Eighth" - thatis locomotive miles per one-eighthinch of brush wear. Since the

MG/CA slip rings rotate (and wear)anytime the engine is on, whetherthe locomotive moves or not, itseemed more appropriate to replacemiles with Engine On time (a number readily acquired from the EMDEM2000 Running Totals menu). Inorder to have a convenient unit size,we translated Engine On time into24-hour days.4 And, since our digitalcaliper is marked in 0.001" graduations & not 1/8ths, the brush wearrate unit quickly became "Days PerTenth".

Let us spend a little time translating brush wear rates into prospective/projected brush change-outintervals.

Figure 7 shows a nearly new smallCA brush in its brush holder. Figure8 shows a brush where the springcell is about to "submerge" into thebrush box. Electrician's experienceon the Alaska Railroad has taught usthat if there is a portion of circularspring still visible, then the brush caneasily go to the next 92-day inspection.

How does this change-out schemetranslate into lengths? Table 2 translates the new & change-out schemes

4 As if an engine ran all the time, like in the goodold daysbefore Auto-Start and $4/gal. diesel fuel.

170

for both small CA and large MGbrushes into brush lengths. As onecan see, by replacing brushes at thesubmerged spring cell point, a littleless than half the usable length is thereserve. Extrapolating these brushlengths into the range of brush wearrates gives us Table 3. Clearly, brushwear rate less than 60 days per tenthyield less-than-yearly maintenanceintervals.

Test Results

Below are three separate tables ofresults:

1. Conventional companion alternator brushes & rings.

2. Steel companion alternatorbrushes & rings.

3. Traction Alternator (MG) brushes & rings.

Since there is a negative and positive ring for each machine, and sinceone polarity (the negative ring)wears faster than the other, eachentry lists 5 numbers - the lowest &highest wear rate for faster-wearingring, then the lowest and highest forthe slower wearing ring, finally followed by the total number of EngineOn hours. If there is more than 1

locomotive in the configurationbeing tested, then the Engine Onhours shown is the sum of all loco

motives. Single brush per ring testsobviously can only show 2 wearnumbers - the lowest and highestwearing ring.

What does Table 4's mass of data

tell us about CA rings & brushes?Well, first of all, if we could makenegative slip rings go away, our problems will be over! With that not pos


sible, let us separate the low-fieldamperage CA6 from the higheramperage CA7.

The small CA brush under the lightCA6 field current barely performsacceptably under any bronze ringcombination. With 14,000 hrsunder 2 locos, the stock Al-Cu ringgave us only 39 days per tenth wearworst case. Replacing the aluminumbronze with tin-bronze did not reallychange the situation and only the1/4" pitch spiral makes the wear tolerable. Detailed analysis of the 1/4"pitch tin-bronze data shows that thesmall brush performed much betterfor the first 8 months of the test, thenmysteriously & inexplicably gotworse. Two large brushes on tin-bronze rings work pretty well, butone large brush (on either spiralpitch) is almost as good.

Everything works better at the 60-amp CA7 current - except aluminum bronze. Using just one largebrush with an existing 1/2" pitch aluminum bronze gives an unhappy 33days per tenth. Any form of tin-bronze is an immense improvement,quickly reaching 90 days or betterdays per tenth worst case wear.

For steel ring performance, let uslook at Table 5. One of the fun trou

bles with steel brushes & rings is thatthey wear so slowly, it takes quiteawhile to see wear results! These

results look quite good, but suggesttrying just one large brush per ringon the CA6 4300 Mac's and stan

dardizing on two large brushes onCA7 4000 Mac's. No problems withrusting were found, even after a couple of the steel units were storedover the winter. Of course while


L

JnteLevel„^^B^ ZTR CONTROL SYSTEMS

JnteLevel accurately measuresfuel and other liquid levels

for the railroad industry

InteLevel takes theguesswork outoffuel and other liquid measurement. This highperformance measurement technology includes solid state electronics and guidedmicrowaves that can make precise measurements accurate up to +/-1%.

ZTR's InteLevel is designed for the rigors of the railroad industry and all that theenvironmental extremes can offer. The system maintains accuracy throughout itsoperating temperature range of-40° F (-40°C) to 176° F (80° C) InteLevel can beapplied to virtually anytypeoftank.

How InteLevel Works

This patented leading-edge measurement technology operates on the principal ofsending guided microwave pulses along a tank mounted, stainless steel waveguide.The pulse is reflected from the surface of the liquid, measured and converted to adisplayed value ofgallons or liters. Unaffected by mounting angle, foam, rust,scaleor other commonly found tank conditions, the tank level can also be transmitted toanother site when InteLevel is combined with remote communications capability.Tell us your maximum tank capacity, define the tank style/shape, follow ourinstallation instructions and enjoy the benefits ofan accurate, maintenance free, fuellevel measurement system.

Contact us for further details

955 Green Valley RoadLondon, ON N6N1E4

519-452-1233

172

Anchorage is near the seacoast, it'snot an exactly balmy ocean spraykind of winter, so perhaps rust instorage may be a problem elsewhere. Even still, this is the best performing, longest-lived brush systemwe saw during the test.

Let us turn now to Table 6 and the

Traction Alternator results.

Here, we can quickly and definitively conclude that 3 brushes perring is a horrible idea for a HEP-equipped SD70MAC - 25 days pertenth in the worst case. It also provides no measurable benefit for the

non-HEP MAC - at least here in

Alaska (compare 81 days per tenthfor 2 brushes versus 89 days pertenth for the 3 brushes). The unanswered question would be how 3versus 2 brushes might compare ona BNSF SD70MAC (which wouldtend to have longer periods of muchhigher field current).

We can see a price for inverter-based HEP in terms of MG slip ringbrush wear. And the most obvious

place to see it is with the steel sliprings. On the HEP-less 4000's 2large brushes per ring yields a worst-case wear of 218 days per tenth, 3brushes gives 226 days per tenth.Steel rings on the HEP-4300's dropthe wear down to 116 days pertenth. Similar trends can be seen on

the other brush/slip ring materialcombinations. Fortunately, only usAlaskans have HEP-equipped SD70MAC's. The data suggests thatmaybe even less brush might be useful on our 4300 MAC's and it mightbe something we could explore.


Final Conclusions

Steel slip rings look extremelypromising, though only three setshave ever been used. If results hold,the setup ought to be 2 large brushes on the MG rings and (probably) 1large brush on the CA ring.

Three brushes per slip rings arenot useful on any loco, based on ourdata in Alaska.

Without steel rings, tin-bronzewith one brush on CA rings is best,irrespective of spiral pitch. On MGrings, two brushes on tin-bronzeworks good, but a possibility mightbe a combination of both old & new

materials. That is, new tin-bronze onCA rings, old aluminum-bronze onMG rings. Since it is possible tochange the first two rings while leaving the rear rings in place, this couldbe a viable strategy.

Thanks

I'd like to thank Ron Delevan of

National Carbon and Tim Keck (formerly of EMD, now of Parker-Hannifin) for providing the rings andbrushes to run this test, along withthe Alaska Railroad electricians who

did the work of applying all the testslip rings.


Plus!...It Provides Significant Built-in Capacity To Help Meet Your FutureRequirements.

The Benefits Prove It: Higher reliability • reduction/elimination of highmaintenance components • significant andconsistent improvement intractiveeffort under all weather conditions • superior wheel slip detection and controlcapabilities • effective main generator/traction alternator and traction motor voltagelimiting • main generator/traction alternator current overload protection • tractionmotor short term overload protection and annunciation • smoother control ofexcitation ramp rate • reliable transition control • KWH trip recording • extensivedata collection and systems diagnostics • remote communications interfacecapability

Nexsys II is Expandable and Mounting is Versatile: We can tailor the system tobe specific to your application. Itmounts directly into a Dash 2 cabinetandoccupies only four module slots. Other options provide for mounting innon-Dash 2 applications.


[email protected]

8050 Cty. Road 101 EastShakopee, MN 55379

952-885-8122

ZTRControl Systems

www.ztr.com


519-452-1233

173


Figure 1 - EMD SD24 Locomotive of 1959(from EMD Service Manual)

Figure 2 - EMD SD70MAC-HEP Locomotive of 2004(photo by author)


Helping you Turn oHigher Profit ByReducing Your Fuel Consumption

SmartStart, by ZTR ControlSystems, willimprove your profitability. Itwilldo thiswith a microprocessorcontrolled automaticlocomotiveshutdown/restartsystem.

The Benefits Prove It: reduction offuel consumption • less lubeoil consumption •reduction inemissions • extendedcomponent life • active365 days a year 24 hoursa day • automatic management of locomotive shutdown • continuous monitoring ofparameters beforeallowing shutdown • monitoring and restart of locomotive asrequired • maintains locomotive ina readyto use state • significant reduction inheavyexhaust smoking on restart• provides information on general locomotiveconditions • providesdocumentation and verification of fuel savings • offersyear-roundfuel savings even incolder climates.

SmartStart is Expandable and Mounting is Versatile: You can add additionaloptions such as Extended Fuel Savings which includes load shedding (lightingcircuitry) and the Road option, which is specifically designed for locomotivesoperating inmain line service. The system can be mounted directly into aDash2 Module Rackand occupies twomodule slots.


[email protected]

8050 Cty. Highway 101 EastShakopee, MN 55379

952-885-8122

ZTRControl Systems

www.ztr.com


519-452-1233

175

176

Groove

Bronze

Slip Ring


Neg.Brush

Electron

Flow

Conventional Current•

Figure 3 - Brush / Ring System

Figure 4 - EMD Slip Ring AssemblyWith Access Cover Removed


BOLT-ON ADHESION

iExcitation/Wheel Slip Control System ThatDramatically Improves The Pulling Power of YourLocomotives in Single or Host / Slug Applications

Retrofit your older locomotives with a BOA Excitation/WheelSlip Control System. It provides significant improvementsin operating performance and does not require any operatorinterface to prevent wheel over speed.

The Benefits Prove It: Increased Adhesion • Increases Drawbar

Pull • Smoother Excitation Control • Main Generator and Traction

Motor Overload Protection • More Efficient Train Handling• Solid State Replacement of Load Regulator • Easy Installation• Self Diagnostics

BOA is Easy to Install: Easy to install and does not require probesor axle generators.

[email protected]

8050 Cty. Highway 101 EastShakopee, MN 55379

952-885-8122

ZTRControl Systems

www.ztr.com


519-452-1233

178

Ml1rh


Collector Ring 3 2 mm +0 -0.8i A»©mbly <1/8" *0 -1/ 32")

> i I

Figure 5 - Cross Section of EMD Slip Rings(Adapted from EMD Maintenance Instructions)

Figure 6 - Double Brush on MG Slip Ring


JgZPace•MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMI

ZTR Control Systems

Accurate

low speed

P.uU

EZPace from ZTR Control Systems provides precise very low speed control in loading applications.The system utilizes microprocessor technology to enhance reliability. EZPace is designed with railroadenvironment inmind and hasbeen tested towithstand therigors oflocomotive applications.•

SpecificationsAccurate locomotive speed control between 0-10 MPH in 0.1 MPH increments that can beeasily switchedtoutilize metric equivalentSpeed control achieved by varying the DC excitation reference signalSimple push-button operation

• Stand atone, sell contained product available in aportable design {external active axle generator required)' Physical size: 10.25 X4.25 X12inches<True analog output from approximately 2VDC to 50VDC, 72VDC or custom OC voltage output |maxirnum3Aat72 VDCj toinsure compatibility with wide range oflocomotive excitation systems.

1 Integrated HMI displays target speed, actual speed and setup menu<Expandable I/O for future functionality '.>Mobility - Only one connection required when moving between locomotives

179

ZTR8050County Road 101EastShakopee, MN 55379952/885-8122

Call TodayTo learn more about EZPace

„ 955Green Valley RoadControl Systems L^ta,, Ontario N6N1E4

mmmm«•••"«"" 519/462-1233


Figure 7 - Small Brush & Brush-holder

Figure 8 - Spring Cell Nearing Change-Out


Ring

Configuration

Com

Bru

2 small

panion Altemih Configure

1 large

ator

ion

2 large

Traction Alternator (MG)Brush Configuration

2 large 3 large

4300's

(HEP&40-amp

CA)

Sn-Cu 1/4" 4317 4322 2ndTest 4322 4317 4322

Sn-Cu 1/2" 4324 4324 2ndTest not tested 43242ndTest 4324

Steel 1/2" not tested not tested 4320 4320 not tested

AI-Cu1/2" 4326.4327 not tested not tested 4326.4327orig.config,not tested

4000's

(No HEP&

60-ampCA)

Sn-Cu 1/4" 4008 not tested 4014 4008 4014

Sn-Cu 1/2" 4011 4005.4016 not tested4011.

4005.40164046

Steel 1/2" 4004 not tested 4006 4004 4006

AI-Cu1/2"all other

locos

4003.07.10,12

not tested4003,

07,10,12all other tocos

181

NOTES:• Sn-Cu: Tin-Bronze. Al-Cu: Aluminum-Bronze• V* :One quarter inch pitch of the spiral groove. K" (standard) one half inch pitch of groove• While itwasintended totest4016with 3 large brushes ontheMG rings, wefailed to install the3rd brush

&thus it was tested with only 2 large brushes per ring.• "4xxx 2nd Test" indicates thatafter a particular configuration wasrun tobrush wear-out, a newtest

configuration was ran.

Table 1 - Brush/Ring Test Array

Small

Brush

LargeBrush

New Length -Inches

2.205 2.140

Spring GoneLength

1.575 1.500

No Pressure

Length0.875 0.985

Tenths to

Change Out6.8 6.4

Tenths

Reserve To

No Pressure

6.5 5.15

Table 2 - Brush & Change-Out Lengths


Wear Rate

Days PerTenth

Small

Months

ToC/O

Point

Brush

Reserve

To No

Pressure

Large Brush

Months Reserve

To C/O To No

Point Pressure

25 5.5 5.2 5.2 4.2

30 6.6 6.3 6.2 5.0

60 13.2 12.6 12.4 10,0

80 17.5 16.8 16.5 13.3

100 21.9 21.0 20.6 16.6

150 32.9 31.5 31.0 24.9

200 43.9 41.9 41.3 33.2

300 65.8 62.9 61.9 49.8

400 87.7 83.9 82.6 66.5

Table 3 - Brush Wear Rates & Months To Change-Out

4300's

(HEP&40-amp

CA)

4000*8

(No HEP&

60-ampCA)

Configuration

sn-cu vr

Sn-Cu 54"

Steel K"

Al-Cu!4"

Sn-Cu YT

Sn-Cu Vi

Steel V?

AI-CuK"

Companion AlternatorBrush Wear Data - Days Per Tenth

2 small 1 large 2 large

73/75/107/108 5,151hrs53/55/98/104 4,655hrs

30/23/53/585.037hrs

not tested

39/47/69/100

14,258hrs

108/111/1807184 2.077hrs98/106/114/122 3,778hre

121/124/127/1367.160hrs

126/158/164/1988.216hrs

all other locos

74/89

1.285hrs

99/112

4,317hre

not tested

not tested

not tested

93/107/110712715,695hre

not tested

33/83/57/13728,801 hre

78/88/87/936,318hrs

not tested

1407140/155/138

8,628hrs

not tested

118/122/121/117

3,552hrs

not tested

202/212/182/218

7,745hrs

not tested

Table 4 - Companion Alternator Brush Wear Rate Results


Ring

Configuration

Companion AlternatorSTEEL Slip Ring Wear Data - Days Per Tenth

2 small 1 large 2 large

4300's Steel W140/140/155/138

8,628hrs

4000's Steel ,/4°126/158/164/198

8,216hrs

202/212/182/218

7,745hrs

Table 5 - Companion Alternator Steel Slip Ring Wear Rate Results

Ring

Configuration

Traction Alt

Brush Wear Data

2 large

arnator (MG)- Days Per Tenth

3 large

4300's

(HEP&40-amp

CA)

Sn-Cu %"77/78/114/117

9,806hrs25/28/28 3,304hrs c/o

91/98/100 5,747hrs

Sn-Cu W53/60/122/145

4.317hrs37/40/59/64

5,297hrs

Steel 14"116/136/264/292

8.628hrsnot tested

Al-Cu Yz"65/115/84/131

14.258hrsor ig.config-not tested

4000's

(No HEP&

60-ampCA)

Sn-Cu'/i"81/90/159/178

6,244hrs89/98/105/131

3,553hrs

Sn-Cu !4"59/134/116/161

23.125hrsnot tested

Steel %"218/230/326/329

8.216hrs226/227/448/576

7.745hrs

Al-Cu !4M82/173/144/230

28,801 hrsall other locos

Table 6 - Traction Alternator (MG) Brush Wear Rate Results

184

USING TEST INSTRUMENTATION

SAFELY ON GEN-SET

AND AC LOCOMOTIVES

Prepared bySteve Mueting,

Field Service EngineerSiemens Transportation Systems

Introduction

This paper is a continuation of thisCommittee's support of providingawareness to electrical safety. It isnot intended to replace existing safety procedures, but rather to act as anoverview of test instrumentation

used in high energy circuits. All"Safety First" practices should beobserved such as, but not limited to:work on de-energized circuits, connect ground lead first, use well maintained and calibrated tools, performa visual inspection first, etc.

Last year in 2008, Keith Mellin ofthis Committee presented the paperUsing Test Instrumentation Safely.The focus of this topic was safetyfeatures and operation of usinghandheld measuring devices. Thispaper is a continuation of this topicwith focus on the unique applicationof circuits in AC and Gen-Set loco

motives. These locomotives contain

electrical equipment and 'high voltage conditions' not found on traditional locomotives.

The high voltage circuit in AC locomotives is commonly called 'DCLink' and can reach potentials of3000V. Gen-Set locomotives can

reach a potential of 700V. A common voltmeter is not rated for, andcannot withstand this level of volt

age.

Other presentations in the past


concerning safety and AC locomotives are as follows:

1996 EMD SD80MAC tUghVoltage SafetyBy Mike Fitzpatrick ofConrail & Jerry Youngworthof EMD

GE AC Locomotive

Electrical Safety Features

ByJohn Chessario of GE1997 SD70MAC Discharge

Procedure

By Mike Barr of BNSFAll of the information in these past

papers and presentations is still validand practical. This paper offers anextension to these presentations, aswell as an overview of steps an electrician can perform to safely work onthese types of locomotives.

So What's New?

What does this paper have to offerthat hasn't already been covered inthe past? What's new? There arestill valid reasons for revisiting thistopic due to the growing presence ofGen- Set locomotives and questionsfrom new electricians working onAC locomotives of how, what, when,and why?

My work as a Field ServiceEngineer involves me with the workthe electricians do on AC locomo

tives, and I repeatedly hear thesequestions. My initial answers tothese are with reference to the

Safety Flow Chart in the locomotivecab, company safety policies andinstructions, and personal safetyevaluation. While all of these are

fine to begin with, it is just the beginning and not the full picture.

For example, on SD90MAC loco-


motives there is a "DANGER" sticker

on the high voltage electrical cabinetwith safety instructions (Pic. 1) aswell as the "DC Link CapacitorDischarge Procedure Flow Chart"posted in the cab of the locomotive(Pic. 2).

Both of these procedures recommend the verification of DC link volt

age using a High Voltage Probe /Meter. This is where the information

stops and the questions begin.Other than the probe manufacturer's general instruction sheet forproper use, there is no specificinstruction on safely using this non-traditional device on high voltage circuits in these locomotives.

So why and how does an electrician safely use this non-traditionaldevice on these locomotives? This

paper will overview this measuringdevice and other devices for safetyconcerns on AC and Gen-Set loco

motives.

Beyond the "DANGER" stickerTo begin, there are numerous

redundant safety features built in tothese locomotives such as the isola

tion and door interlock switches,computer self tests, and dischargeresistors to dissipate any DC voltage.These systems are reliable and helpprovide a safe working condition,and have been covered in pastpapers and presentations mentionedearlier in this paper. But what ifthere is a failed self test, no batterypower to perform a self test, or theunit has been in a catastrophic failure such as a fire or accident? The

electrician needs effective knowl

edge and instrumentation to safely

185

work in an area where the electrical

potential is unknown.There are three primary devices to

help with working on high voltageequipment:- High Voltage Probe with handheld meter

- Differential Probe with meter

- Discharge Resistor AssemblySo why is there a concern if the

locomotive is not running, and whyare these devices needed? The

answer is the DC Link Capacitors.AC locomotives require a stable,

stored, DC Linkvoltage which is provided by a bank of capacitors. Thesecapacitors hold a charge of voltagefor extended periods of time. If thecapacitors are not fully discharged adangerous voltage may exist onsome circuits. The redundant DC

Link discharge circuits and self testsare effective, but what does an electrician have to independently confirm this in the event of a failed selftest or no battery power?

High Voltage Measuring DevicesDevices for an effective safe

means of measuring high voltage onelectrical equipment are:

1.) High Voltage Probe with handheld meter

2.) Differential Probe/Meter3.) Discharge Resistor AssemblyAll of these devices have their

appropriate instruction guides andhere I will present their basic use.But first, always follow all relatedsafety procedures and companypolicies. Additional recommendations are face shields and high voltage gloves when using high voltagemeasuring devices. Another impor-

186

tant recommendation is a visual

inspection of the high voltage equipment, to look for damage, burn orarcing marks, and particularly looseconnections. A loose connection

can create a false voltage reading orresult in arcing if contact is made.

1.) High Voltage Probe with handheld meter

On the compartment doors arethe "DANGER" and "Discharge FlowChart" stickers and a reference to

the High Voltage Probe and a handheld meter (Pic. 3). This is the first,most suitable type of probe for thisapplication.

This high voltage probe can beplugged in to a hand held meterwhich will extend the measuringcapability of the meter to 6000V at a1000:1 division ratio. The probe hasa two terminal molded plug with a"Ground" side indicator, with theGround side plugged into themeter's common terminal. The

probe also has a grounding lead,designed to avoid electrical shock,and is to be connected to the car

body ground.Before probing, qualify the high

voltage probe by safely testing aknown circuit, such as a good operating battery knife switch voltage.There is no calibration required andis for functional purposes only.Probe and measure the target circuitand then retest the original knowncircuit.

2.) Differential Probe/MeterAt the next level of high voltage

measuring devices is a differentialprobe with an attached volt meterwhich has a maximum display of1999V, and is safe beyond the dis


play voltage to a maximum of4000V. This device is made of two,3 ft. fiberglass sticks with handles atone end and contact probes on theother. In the middle of the probesticks is a voltmeter connected to

the other stick with a wire (Pic. 4).This device is designed for use in

measuring circuits that may be located deeper in the compartment andallows the operator to measure at asafe distance.

3.) Discharge Resistor AssemblyThe electrician now has safely measured and confirmed the high voltagecircuit but has found it to be

charged. Why is it charged andwhat is to be done?

Assuming the alternator is notenergized, the reason for a chargedDC Link circuit is going to be due toa charged DC Link capacitor. Thiscapacitor will remain charged untilthere is an electrical path to dissipateor decay the charge either through aresistor or by shorting the capacitorterminals

But first, a capacitor which is notconnected to a circuit can build up aresidual charge if the terminals arenot shorted together. A capacitor ina circuit that has been electricallycharged will remain charged if itloses the electrical connection to the

circuit, such as a connection comingloose. It will remain charged until itregains contact with the circuit or bysome other inadvertent electrical

path. Both of these conditions,along with shorting the terminals ofa charged capacitor, can lead to ahigh discharge current resulting inarcing and potential harm to theelectrician and the equipment.


This is where the use of the

Discharge Resistor Assembly box(Pic. 5) can be used to safely andeffectively discharge the charged DCLink capacitor and circuit.

It is similar to the Differential

Probe/Meter containing two 3 ft.fiberglass sticks with handles at oneand contact probes at the other.Between the probes there is a4.4Kohm resistor box which will dis

charge a single charged capacitor ora block of charged capacitors. Theassembly will safely discharge voltages up to 3400V DC.

The lengths of the probe sticksprovide a safe distance for the electricians to discharge the charged circuit.

Other Devices

While a Clamp-on ammeter isanother useful instrument for meas

uring current, it is not being coveredin this paper. The safety concernsfor AC and Gen-Set locomotives

have to do with measuring the presence of DC Link high voltage.And finally, with all high voltagemeasuring, the use of high voltagegloves (Pic. 6) and a face shield ishighly recommended given the safety concerns working with this typeof equipment.

Conclusion

Maintenance staff may berequired to verify and discharge highDC voltage on modern AC locomotives and Gen-Sets. Knowledge ofon-board safety systems, and whatsteps to take in the event of systemfailure are critical to a safe workingenvironment. This paper is meant to

187

provide an overview of proper instrumentation, which the maintainermay then incorporate into existingsafe practices.

References

Safety Precautions SD80/90MACLocomotives - EMD Document

MM003010

Fluke Instruction Sheet 80K-6 HighVoltage ProbeUsers Manual for DifferentialProbe/MeterDischarge Resistor AssemblyOperating Instructions


M|IA mm n

. .W »ie;:^|PPS:-; |R|MN|' H. mk '

HIGH VOI rAQl MAY EXlSI Wl iI Ill I

CAB1NI r OR Al - 0T0B8 EVENAill' ,..N

THIS \

ANY I

THE FOLLOWING PBOCEDU ...f USED TODISCHARGE THIS VC

1. FOLLOW DISCHARGE PROCEDURE EXPLAINEDON HIGH VOLTAGE CAB

2. REMOVE TCC OOGRS.

3. RE - VERIFY THAT NO DC LINK CAPACITORVOLTAGE IS PRESENT USING HIGH VOLTAGEPROBE I METER. (EMD P • N40054122)

4. PROCEED WITH EQUIPMENT i. 'ECtlON ANDMAINTENANCE.

Figure 1 - Danger on High Voltage Cabinet


DC LINK CAPACITOR DISCHARGE PROCEDURE FLOW CHART

RUNNING ENGINE

TEST PASSES TEST FAILED

SHUTDOWN ENGINE

NOW-STARTABU ENGINE

PLACE KOLAftON SWITCHtH THE ISOLATE POSITION

AMD TAG

SHUTDOWN ENGINEFOLLOW DISCHARGEPROCEDURES FOR A

NOH-BTARTABLE ENGINE

PANELj

PROCEED WITH EQUIPMENTINSPECTION AND

uAiHit-.A'ice as mansWARNING .

If WORK IS REQUIREDUrtlOE THE TCC'S OR WtTHTHE IPR, DCL SW1TCMGEAR

AND I OR ASSOCIATEDCABLING TO THE DCL

SW1ICHQEAR RE-VERIFYrt4*T no dc link capacitorVOLTAOI («IS1 USsiiC. THE

H«" WJLTAfiE PHObE.MtrENHMO PIN 44XU1IM)

DISCHARGED

IHMUHE OCL 8W1TCIMWAR

Figure 2 - DC Link Capacitor Discharge

189


«. PROCEED WITH EQUIPMENT INSPEC^JJlAlNTENANqE

Figure 3 - High Voltage Probe with Meter

Figure 4 - Differential Probe/Meter


Figure 5 - Discharge Resistor Assembly Box

Figure 6 - High Voltage Gloves

192

EXTENDING LOCOMOTIVE

MAINTENANCE

Prepared byMichael (Mike) Drylie

Electrical Systems EngineerCSXTransportation

This paper deals mostly withextending the 92 day maintenanceinterval to 184 days. It deals withboth new and older locomotives.

The paper tries to provide a path forextending maintenance intervals bydescribing what has been done toget where we are today and what, atleast, one railroad is doing to extendmaintenance intervals.

Why would a railroad want toextend maintenance intervals?

Having locomotives out pullingfreight instead of occupying a spacein the shop "just for inspections" isone big reason. Reducing the opportunity for a person to be injured byreducing the number of times thatperson is exposed to risk is a reason.Reducing the fleet size by not needing spare locomotives is anotherbenefit. Finally, the EPA would beinterested in a reduction in environ

mentally un-friendly waste such ascontaminated sand and wash rack

water.

How do you reduce maintenancerequirements? This can be a longprocess and is one that needs carefulconsideration. Every maintenanceitem needs to be looked at to deter

mine; why it is done; why it is donethis way; can it be done differently;can it be eliminated; or what wouldwe need to do to eliminate this

inspection item. For example, CSX islooking to avoid the manual calibra


tion of the speed indicator by utilizing a digital "smart" speed indicatorcoupled with a GPS device so thatonce a day, if GPS speed is above acertain level; the "smart" speed indicator would use GPS speed to re-calibrate.

Each requirement needs to belooked at individually, but it is possible that changes to eliminate arequirement may impact/eliminateanother requirement Eliminating arequirement is not inexpensive, butlooking at other requirements to seeif more than one item can be

addressed at the same time reduces

the "per item cost". Additionally,while trying to obtain an extra 92days, it makes sense to strive forannual, or no maintenance, requirements.

Other things that need to be considered are items that are not neces

sarily inspection items, but actualmaintenance items. For example,locomotive batteries have requiredwatering at 92 day intervals fordecades. If you move maintenanceto 184 days how do you handle thewater requirements? One way is toincrease the volume of water above

the plates. Two other ways are to usesealed cell batteries or batteries with

a slightly different chemical make-updesigned to use less water. Railroadsare testing all these solutions withgood results. Increasing the volumeof water above the plates can bedone in at least four ways. You canlower the plates in the battery(reducing life due to long term sediment build up), you can add room atthe top by making the cells taller,you can use the larger capacity bat-

194

teries which provide you with widercells (locomotives built after 1972can accept the larger batteries), oryou can redesign the battery to haveshorter plates and the same overallheight. The last item provides youwith similar capacity by having moreplates but each plate has less capacity than the original.

Ok, so where did we start andwhere are we now? This paper doesnot start back in the 1800's, but justthe "middle" of the last century, the1970's. Prior to 1980 our locomo

tives were on a 30 day maintenanceinterval as can be seen in Figure 1which shows those items the OEM

said had to be serviced every 30days. There were also FRA items thatneeded to be done.

As technology improved maintenance moved to 92 days. See Figure2 for some of the improvementsmade to locomotives to obtain a 92

day maintenance interval.Locomotives built in the 1970s and

later had increased filter capacities,improved lubricants, and improvedtraction motor axle bearings. A fewsupplier maintenance itemsremained on 30 day maintenancecycles and items like train controlwere on less than 92 day cycles, butoverall, maintenance was allowed tobe moved to 92 days.

Anyone that has a computer, cellphone, car or television can see thattechnology is improving at a fantastic pace. It is because of the fastgrowing technology, and suppliers'abilities to implement that technology, that we can make plans for 184day locomotives. Many of theimprovements on new locomotives


are shown in Figures 3 and 4. Someof these improvements; BrushlessFuel Pumps, AC AuxiliaryGeneratorsand AC Traction Motors have elimi

nated many, but not all, brushinspections. Electronic Fuel Injectionhas eliminated greasing linkages andoil filled governors. Digital Displaysextend meter calibration/certifications from 92 to 365 days. Improvedlubrication and gear cases haveallowed 184 day lubrication intervals, and oil filled support bearingshave eliminated that maintenance.

The two major locomotive OEMsmade improvements to obtain a 184day maintenance interval locomotive. With the suppliers providing184 day locomotives is it time for theFRA to allow 184 day FRA inspections? This author thinks so.

This paper started out just beingabout going to semi annual maintenance intervals. The railroads are

going way beyond that We arespecifying components that do notrequire any maintenance for 1 year;trying to get component change outafter 8 years; and trying to extendbattery life to 9-10 years. The goal isto extend overhaul periods. If youhave to change everything at 5 yearsthen what good does it do to extendthe overhaul period?

In a locomotive rebuild programCSX is replacing the reliable and userfriendly 26L air brake system with anelectronic air brake package. Why?With fewer components the reliability should increase. With fewer components in the system there arefewer components to replace. Thesystem has an increased componentchange out period of 8 years. It may

196

not be practical to replace the airbrake system on every locomotive,but in a rebuild or major overhaulprogram the cost equation changessomewhat. In these programs youare already changing everything, sowhy not make it simpler?

CSX is also changing the overallcontrol stand and cab display package in its rebuild program and thisplayed a large part in system selection. Eliminating the separate eventrecorder, alerter, speed indicator, airgauges, stand alone Head of TrainDevice, power meter and replacingthem with an integrated EventRecorder and Alerter along with anAAR LSI compliant display eliminates many maintenance items andincreases reliability.

What about locomotives that are

not being purchased new or beingrebuilt? What do you do aboutthem? Several railroads are now

experimenting with replacing gaugesand indicators on the control stand

with digital gauges. Old and newstyle gauges can be seen in Figures 5and 6. The power meter, flow meterand speed indicator are also beinglooked at for upgrading. How far doyou go? This is a cost benefit analysis exercise. Do you develop a fullyAAR LSI compliant display or do youdevelop a screen with only the basicinformation that is on the gauges.Eitherway you need to consider sensors, power supply, fitting a screeninto the control stand and gettingyour crews to accept it.

There are draw backs to extendingmaintenance intervals. Eventually alocomotive will fail. When this happens the repairs must be done prop


erly and the rest of the locomotiveneeds to be looked at to determine if

something else might break in thenext few weeks. The goal of reducing maintenance is to keep the locomotive out of the shop. With effective repairs your semi-annual maintenance practices need to be adheredto more stringently. Of course noone ever skips an FRA required item,but it would not be surprising to findthat a few "headquarter" requireditems might be "overlooked just thisonce" since the locomotive will be

back in the shop in a few weeks anyway. Trying to go longer betweenoverhauls and making locomotiveslast longer is a way of doing business. Most railroads recognize thatyou can not just improve the partsand extend the intervals.

Maintenance and inspections performed during the maintenance period need to be more precise andeffective. It does little good toincrease the water capacity of locomotive batteries to allow 184 day or365 day watering intervals if thecharging system is not maintained tokeep the batteries charged. It alsodoes not help if problems that existand are seen, but are not on thework report, are ignored becausethey must not be that bad. If a locomotive comes in every 60 days forrepairs then again for 184 day maintenance, or even 92 day maintenance, then the maintenance program is not efficient or effective.

In order to take advantage of OEMtechnology advances at least onerailroad has moved 92 day inspections to service centers and performs184 day maintenance in the major


shops. This is not a true 184 daymaintenance cycle but many benefits are obtained.

Some of the benefits are good forthe environment With 184 daymaintenance less time is spent idlingin the shops, burning precious fueland exhausting emissions. Increasedfilter sizes doesn't just extend maintenance, it reduces the oily wasteproduced that must be disposed ofin an environmentally friendly fashion. Fewer locomotive shoppingsresult in fewer locomotive washings,another source of environmental

waste.

Besides the environmental benefit,there is also a potential safety benefit obtained with extended mainte

nance intervals. Since the 1980's

the railroads safety record hasimproved significantly. By reducingthe opportunity to get personnelinjured, safety can be furtherimproved.

From a revenue and cost stand

point, with work performed at service centers the locomotives are

returned to freight service manyshifts/hours sooner. This coupledwith fewer locomotives in the shopallows the fleet size to be decreased

slightly. A 1% reduction in fleet sizecan be expected with 184 day maintenance.

In conclusion: It can be seen that

manufacturers are designing outthose items that require 92 daymaintenance. Railroads are lookingfor opportunities to improve systemsand eliminate inspections where itmakes sense. Both are looking forlonger life out of traction motors,fans, air compressors and other

197

equipment. The suppliers because itreduces their warranty costs andmakes them a "better buy" than thecompetitor and the railroadsbecause locomotives in the shop arenot earning revenue. It is only a matter of time before the railroads are

truly on a 184 day maintenancecycle.


1972-1980 Vintage GE Locomotive Maintenance RequirementsFRA Periodic inspection required every 30 days

30 day GE Required maintenance cycle items:DC brush fuel pump motorFuel filters

Oil filters

Engine air filtersMechanical fuel injection linkage requires greasing

Technology:U Series

Dash 7

Crater type gear cases (30 day maintenancecycle)

Oil filled supportbearings(30 daymaintenance cycle)

Figure 1 - 30 Day Maintenance Items on GE LocomotiveInformation provided by GE

1981-1991Vintage GE Locomotive Maintenance RequirementsFRA Periodic inspection required every 91 days

92 day GE Required maintenance cycle items:DC brush fuel pump motorFuel filters

Oil filters

Engine air filtersMechanical fuel injection linkage requires greasing

Technology:Dash 7

Early Dash 8

GE Increased filter capacityand capabilityto run 92 daysAbo utilized improved lubricants,brushesand bearingsto run 92 days

Figure 2 - GE 92 Maintenance LocomotiveInformation provided GE


1992-2007 Vintage GE Locomotive Maintenance RequirementsFRA Periodic inspection required every 91 days

92day GE Requiredmaintenance cycleitems eliminated or extended to 184days:DC brushless fuel pump motor, no maintenanceFuel filters, capacityincreased, lifeextended tobeyond 184daysOil filters,capacity increased, life extended to beyond 184daysEngineair filters,capacity increased, life extendedto beyond 184daysEnginesupgradedto Electronicfuel injection,no linkageto grease

luiifl **—:raE'-'.'.i'JJ'-US-'a

tjjjg^SBaa i- aa U

t

Technology:Late Dash 8

Dash 9

CW44AC

CW60AC

ES44DC (EVO)

Crater type gear cases replaced with oil filledgear case which has proven leak reduction andextended top off interval to beyond 184 days

Oil filled support bearingseliminatedwith rollerbearings,no maintenance

Figure 3 - Improvements to GE Locomotives to Obtain184 Day Maintenance

Scheduled maintenance for EMD

The SD70ACe feature ay maintenance cycle

SD70MAC: 90 day maintenance c cle

199

ADVANCED

TECHNOLOGIES FOR184 DAY

MAINTENANCEINTERVAL

* Increased oil capacitytraction motor gear case

* Enhanced lube oil filter

element

* Increased capacity fueloil (titration

» 3 element design

* New design engine airfilter

Figure 4 - EMD 184DayMaintenance Locomotive(photo provided by EMD)


Original GaugeConfiguration

Figure 5 - Older Locomotive Air Pressure Gauges92 Day Calibration Required

^*Manifolds use same mountinghardware as factory gauges. Nomodification to piping is required.

Figure 6 - Digital Pressure GaugesAnnual Calibration Required


710ECO™REPOWER

Prepared byDean Becker,


Rebuilt locomotives using the710ECO Repower concept give newlife to older units. Although rebuilt,these locomotives offer the performance, reliability, and maintainabilitythat approach that of new locomotives. These locomotives meet cur

rent EPA requirements for Tier 2emissions, which is significantECOIogically. Furthermore, theselocomotives use considerably lessfuel than before, which is significantEconomically.

Just what is a 710ECO Repower?It is an older locomotive where most

of the equipment has been removedabove deck and replaced with apackage of new or UTEX (unitexchange) equipment. The newequipment includes:

• New 710 engine• New or UTEX AR10 main gen

erator with CA6 companionalternator

• New engine cooling system(radiators, cooling fans, AC cabinet)

• New high voltage cabinet containing the EM2000 microprocessor control system

• Automatic Engine Start Stop(AESS)

The 710 engine has a provendesign with more than 8000 enginesin service. It is certified to meet Tier

2 emissions. An 8-cylinder versionof the engine delivers 2000 THPwhile a 12-cylinder version of theengine delivers 3000 THP. These

201

engines use electronic unit injectorscontrolled by an EMDEC computer.Both engines can operate continuously at maximum rated horsepower. The 710 engines use much lessfuel oil and lube oil than their predecessors. For example, lube oil savings exceed 50%.

A rebuilt longhood provides theengine cooling system necessary toachieve Tier 2 emissions. In addition

to the traditional radiators to cool

engine jacket water, a second radiator loop is present for aftercoolerwater cooling. Lower water temperatures contribute to improved fueleconomy and lower emissions.Furthermore, three, two-speed cooling fans are used, where the multiplespeeds help to reduce fuel usage.Fan contactors are contained within

a new AC cabinet.

A new high voltage cabinet is partof the ECO Repower. It contains theEM2000 control system as well asnew or UTEX contactors/switchgear.The remaining wiring/cabling andincidental equipment are new, whichhelps increase locomotive reliability.

The EM2000 control system provides basic locomotive control func

tions. In contrast with the originallocomotive, the new control systemprovides increased adhesion performance and thermal protection forthe traction motors. To assist with

fuel savings, the EM2000 control system provides optimum control of theengine cooling fans, intelligent logicfor automatic engine shutdowns andrestarts. A display screen is providedas a user interface. This providescrew messages, maintenance messages, and operating statistics.

202

The 710ECO Repowers can beginwith virtually any GP or SD core.Units as old as a GP9 or as new as a

rebuilt "-3" units have been trans

formed into ECO locomotives. Since

the rebuild process includes a single,smaller engine, space has becomeavailable within the longhood compartment. This space can be usedfor future after-treatment equipmentas emissions regulations evolve.

Emissions Reduction

The ECO Repower units providesignificant improvements in emissions. Particulate matter (PM), nitrogen oxide (NOx), carbon monoxide(CO), and hydrocarbons (HC) havebeen reduced by 50% to 70%.While certified to meet EPA Tier 2

locomotive standards, the engineperforms to even better levels. Notethat the significant reductions inemissions qualify the ECO Repowersfor various governmental funding asclean air projects.

Fuel SavingsWithin the engine, technological

improvement has led to reduced fuelusage. This includes an improved firing chamber and a turbochargerwith increased efficiency. Also, alow idle engine speed (200 RPM)helps to save fuel. Perhaps thelargest single contribution is using anengine with fewer cylinders. The 8-710 engine has half the cylinders ofthe 16-645 engine of the originalunits. When compared to locomotives with a "fresh" (new or recently-rebuilt) 16-645 engine, ECO locomotives deliver dramatic fuel sav

ings. For example, an ECO locomo


tive with an 8-710 engine uses up to25% less fuel and still achieves Tier

2. Moreover, since the core enginesare worn and probably ready for anoverhaul, the actual fuel savings maybe as much as 30% to 40%.

In addition to the new 710 engine,fuel savings are achieved by newauxiliary equipment and its control.Reduced fuel is achieved by the useof two-speed cooling fans. Quiteoften, the full capabilities of the cooling system are not needed. In theseinstances, one or more fans may berunning at half speed. A fan runningat half speed uses one-eighth theenergy than a fan running at fullspeed. Hence, a significant amountof fuel is saved.

More fuel is saved with a fully-integrated automatic engine start stop(AESS). Byshutting down the enginewhen the locomotive is not in use,even more fuel is saved.

Improved MaintainabilityThe ECO Repowers have a 184

day maintenance cycle. Theirengines have a 15,000MWh overhaul cycle. These locomotives willspend less time in the shop.Due to the use of a 710 engine,AR10, and EM2000 controls, there isa high degree of parts standardization. A 90% parts commonality withexisting locomotives with 710engines means there are fewer newparts to maintain. Within railroadshops, labor personnel are alreadyfamiliar with this technology.Furthermore, there is only a smallimpact to parts inventory.Finally, the EM2000 control systemprovides diagnostic information,


keeps track of fault information andaccumulated operational data.

Other Benefits

By using new components, theECO Repower units have improvedreliability.

There is reduced noise with the

AESS system.The introduction of the EM2000

control system provides other benefits. Increased all-weather adhesionis achieved through wheel creepcontrol. Traction motor thermal protection is inherent. Indeed, thenumerous control algorithms developed for new locomotives are usedfor the ECO Repower units.

SummaryThe ECO Repower concept pro

vides new life to older locomotives.

Performance, reliability, and maintainability rival that of new locomotives. And all this is done in an eco

nomical and ecological manner.

204 Diesel Material Control Committee


ON DIESEL MATERIAL CONTROL

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 17, 200910:45 A.M.

Chairman

RON SULEWSKI

Sales & Marketing Mgr.Business Development

Rail Products International Inc.

St. Louis, MO

Vice Chairman

C. MAINZ

Director New Business DevelopmentCoast Engine & Equipment

Tacoma, WA

COMMITTEE MEMBERS

C. Aday Inventory Manager SCRRA/Metrolink Los Angeles, CAD. Behrens Managing Director ALSTOM Transport Naperville, ILJ. Brix Sr. Mgr.-Strat Sourcing Union Pacific Omaha, NER. Delevan Mgr.-Transp. Prod. Nat'l Electrical Carbon Duryea, PAE. Fonville Supt. Loco Material Norfolk Southern Atlanta, GAP. Foster President Power Rail Dist. Inc. Wilkes Barre, PAJ. Fronckoski Senior Procure. Mgr. CSX Transp. Jacksonville, FLM. Gast Sr. Materials Mgr. CSX Transp. Huntington, WVJ. Hartwell VP - Locomotives Progress Rail Jacksonville, FLC. Mainz Dir.-New Bus. Dev. Coast Engine & Equip. Tacoma, WAF. Miller VP - Sales JMA RR Supply Carol Stream, ILP. Pinson Purchasing Manager Rail America Jacksonville, FLB. Young Matls. Manager Montana Rail Link Livingston, MTM. Zerafa Purchasing Mgr. Nat'l Rwy. Equip. Dixmoor, IL

Note: John Minnie of BNSF is on standy by.

Diesel Material Control Committee 205

PERSONAL HISTORY

Ron Sulewski

Ron Sulewski was born in Erie,Pennsylvania and earned his BSMEfrom Rensselaer PolytechnicInstitute in 1970. He joined GEupon graduatoin and worked inErie Locomotive and the GESt.

Louis Apparatus Service Shop forover eighteen years with variouspositions in Sales Management.Ron joined Gardner Denver forseven years as a distributorRegional Manager and rejoined GETransportation for a Parts

Aftermarket Sales Managementposition in Denver.

Ron has been in his current

position as National Sales Managerfor Rail Products International

since 2005. Ron and his wife Marjehave five grown children and currently reside in St. Louis. He hasbeen active in LMOA activities for

over thirty years.

206 Diesel Material Control Committee

THE DIESEL MATERIAL CONTROL

WISHES TO EXPRESS THEIR

SINCERE APPRECIATION

TO CSX TRANSPORTATION

FOR HOSTING THEIR

COMMITTEE MEETING IN

JANUARY 2009 IN

JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA

THANK YOU TO CSX FROM THE

MATERIAL COMMITTEE


Keeping YouOn Track

At Rail Products International, Inc. we

repair, rebuild and remanufacture DC

traction motors, armatures, field coils,

alternators, generators and supporting

components with manufacturing

quality that meets ISO 9001 -2000

and AAR M-1003 registrations.

More importantly, ourpersonalized

customer service will get you back

ontrack - maybe even before you

realize you're off.

EMI RAIL PRODUCTSINTERNATIONAL INC.

800 KingAvenueColumbus, OH 43212Phone 614.488.1151

FAX 614.488.3075

Ron Sulewski,National Sales ManagerPhone 314.872.9175

www.RailProductslnternational.com

ISO 9001

2000

(AARM-1003)

207

208

CSX SUPPLIER QUALITY"SUPPLIER RATING SYSTEM"

Prepared byCSX Supply Team

The objectives of the supplierquality program are as follows:

• Develop new and existingCSX suppliers to provide safe,reliable and cost effective

components and services forCSX

• Hold CSX suppliers accountable for their performance

Six CSX Departments areinvolved in the supplier rating system

Locomotive OperationsCar OperationsEngineering (Track Structure)SignalsMaintenance of Way (MOW)TDSI

There are a number of supplierquality tools used in implementingthe system

• Formal supplier approvalprocess (P&M 270)

• On site supplier audits whichinvolve both review of the

product and the process• Formal corrective action pro

gram involving the utilizationof AAR 7.1 Material

Nonconformance reports andCSX 5 step Corrective ActionProcess

• Supplier development projects

Diesel Material Control Committee

• Supplier Rating System

The CSX supplier performancerating system was conceived usingbenchmarked programs such asTrailer Train, General Electric andothers. The General Electric model

was selected.

Suppliers were tracked by criti-cality of the parts and/or howmuch CSX spent with them.Scores were updated on a semiannual basis. There were manybenefits derived from using the GEmodel. The system was uniformfor all CSX Departments. It allowsinput or feedback from end user. Ituses "fact based" data to supportscoring. Provides objective feedback to the supplier. Performanceis tracked consistently over time.Supplier is held accountable fortheir performance and the systemcreates an effective negotiatingtool for Purchasing Managers.

The categories that the vendorsare rated on are

• Quality• Cost

• Delivery

Scoring is as follows:

• "Green"

• "Yellow"

• "Red"

30 points20 points10 points

Additionally, the CSX InitiativesIMPACT Program is factored in. Ifa vendor submits an impact idea,they earn 10 bonus points.

Supplier "Quality" is measuredusing the following factors:

Diesel Material Control Committee

1. Survey responses from keyCSX representatives

2. Product and process auditreports from the SupplierQuality Group

3. End user complaints reportedfrom the field

4. Warranty issues5. Corrective action responses

Supplier "Cost" is measured bycomparing the supplier's currentpricing for common parts over lastyear's prices against the averagefor all suppliers within that commodity group

Equal to or below average for allsuppliers - 30 (green) pointsawarded

2% above average for all suppliers - 20 (yellow) points awarded

Over 2% for all suppliers -10 (red) points awarded

Suppliers "Delivery" is measuredby the date of purchase order vs.date of invoice - the number of

days from P.O. date to invoice dateand orders shipped complete

95% invoiced within 15 days95% shipped complete -30 (green) points awarded

85%-94% invoiced within 15

days 85%-94% shipped complete -20 (yellow) points awarded

84% or less invoiced within 15

days 84% or less shipped complete -10 (red) points awarded

209

The CSX Initiatives are measured

through the IMPACT program.Suppliers are awarded 10 (green)points if their ideas are in progressand/or being implemented.Suppliers are not awarded anypoints if they have not submittedany ideas through the CSXInitiatives/IMPACT program.

The Overall "Scorecard" Rating• Final score is derived by aver

aging scores for Quality, Costand Delivery

• CSX Initiatives/IMPACT canadd 10 bonus points to theaverage

• Suppliers have the ability toaccess their scorecards on

line giving them immediateresults on their performance

• Suppliers can get feedbackthrough the PurchasingManagers

• An example of the supplierperformance rating systemscorecard is indicated below.

The CSX Supplier Quality RatingSystem is an ongoing program.CSX continues to add critical suppliers to the performance ratingsystem. A list of key individualsfrom each department to completethe surveys continues to grow.Suppliers, not currently being evaluated, can still receive feedback ontheir performance by contactingthe Purchasing Manager and/orManager of Supplier Quality.

210 Shop Equipment And Processes Committee


ON SHOP EQUIPMENT AND PROCESSES

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 17, 20093:15 P.M.

Chairman

BILL PETERMAN

President

Peterman Railway Technologies, Inc.Baie D'Urfe, Quebec

Vice Chairman

TOM STEFANSKI

President

Tom's Locomotives and Cars

Plainfield, IL

COMMITTEE MEMBERS

R. Begier Consultant Portec Rail Products Inc. Broomfield, CO

R. Collen Project Mgr. Simmons Mach. Tool Corp. Albany, NYC. Fette President TESCO Erie, PA

D. Louder Product Manager Macton Corp. Mount Airy, MD

J. Morin President NEU International Inc. Paoli, PA

R. Quilley Reliability Spec. CNRR Winnipeg, MB

M. Scaringe Dir. Locomotives Amtrak Beech Grove, INS.G. Smith Engr. Lean Prod. Systems Norfolk Southern Chattanooga, TN

Note: Mike Scaringe is a Past President of LMOA


Below the deck...we're a cut above.

•Truck systems

• Side frames

• Bolsters

1Constant contact

side bearings1Couplers

1Draft sills

1Coil springs

•Center plates1Draft gears

•Bearing adapters•Cushioning units

•* End-of-car

•* Center-of-car

• Wheels,

curved-plate,

heat-treated

i Roller bearings

AmstedRail

311 S. Wacker, 53rd Floor • Chicago, IL60606 • (312) 922-4501amstedrail.com

211


PERSONAL HISTORY

8/7/ Peterman

Bill was born and raised in

Ontario Canada and has worked

and lived in various parts ofCanada during his railway careerincluding major stints in Calgaryand Montreal where he presentlyresides. His business career includ

ed 25 years with Canadian PacificRailway and several years withDominion Bridge Canada innumerous industrial and facilities

engineering positions includingvarious positions in the maintenance facilities and head office.

Gained a world of rail experienceworking in all aspects of servicefacilities. His railway career beganas a Time and Motion Analystcompleting his time with the railway as Manager FacilitiesEngineering.

Currently Bill is President ofPeterman Railway Technologies acompany specializing in assistingwith Rail Maintenance Facilitydesigns, equipment and processes,providing specialized rail maintenance services and acting as a liaison between railroads and non rail

road entities.

He has been Chairman of the

Shop Equipment & ProcessesCommittee for several years. Billlives in Montreal and is married

with 5 children and finally has onegrandchild.

Shop Equipment And Processes Committee 213

GOING GREEN

IN THE MAINTENACE

FACILITY

PreparedbyTom Stefanski,

Tom's Locomotives & Cars

In general the trend in the railroad industry has been to concentrate it's efforts to reduce energyconsumption by improvements toit's motive power fleets. We knowthat the cost of diesel fuel is the

major cost that affects the railroad's bottom line and every effortto reduce diesel fuel consumptionis of prime importance. But now itis time for us to take a look at what

we can do in the shops and otherfacilities to save and/or reduce ourenergy consumption.

First we need to look at what we

are currently doing and then try todetermine what steps we can taketo make improvement. With all ofthe technological advancementsthat have taken place over the lastdecade, the door is wide open tothe changes we can make. Thecost of some improvements maybe higher initially but it is far andaway offset by the potential costsavings over it's life.

We can start by looking at theways we currently use the systemsthat are available and ways that wecan improve their usage. We canreduce our electrical consumptionin many ways. I will now try todefine some of the potential areaswhere we can make improvementsand how they can provide cost savings. Then again this list is not allinclusive because each and every

shop has it's own characteristics.

1.First let us look at lighting,what we can do and what is

available in today's market.Some of these items apply tointerior as well as exterior use.

a. CFL (compact fluorescent lights), a 26 watt CFLprovides as much light asa 100 watt incandescent

bulbs. Average life ofapproximately six to 8years. These are availablefor indoor and outdoor

use.

b. LED (light emitting diode),a 5 watt LED can provideas much lighting as a 50watt incandescent bulb.

These are available for

indoor and outdoor use as

well.

c. New technology skylightscan provide additionalindoor lighting at no costafter installation.

d. Motion detectors can be

installed that will turn

lights on and off as needed. Did you ever thinkabout the lights in thelocker room, bathroomsor lunch room staying oneven when nobody isoccupying those facilities?

e. Photo cells can be used to

turn outdoor lighting on atsunset and off at sunrise.

2. What about those power sucking motors used for many differentpurposes within your facility. Theyare used for heating, air condition-


ing, ventilation, cranes, pumps, aircompressors, drop tables and dooroperators just to name a few.There are now numerous manufac

turers out there that are producing"ENERGY STAR" motors that

reduce electrical consumption. Iam sure that someone will have

one that fulfills your requirements.

3. Compressed air systems can beanother power robbing proposition. Many air compressors arerunning excessively in order tomake up for the line pressure losses due to leakage at pipe joints,hoses and various connections.

Most older compressed air systemsrun on average 25 to 50% morethen they have to. Additionally amajority of the older piston varietyof air compressors are less thendesirable. If you are going to havean air compressor, have one that isof the rotary screw type configuration. To add to this problem, usageof inefficient pneumatic air toolscompounds the compressed airproblem. Did you ever stop andthink about the fact that when youuse a pneumatic tool you convertelectrical energy to pneumaticenergy in order to use that tool.Why bother with this additionalenergy drain. Consider using anelectric impact wrench.Technological improvements havebeen made to electric impact toolsof all varieties and are available

today. Check with your suppliersI'm sure they will have somethingthat will fit your needs.

Enough said about what we can do

with the systems that we currentlyhave available to us. Let us now

step into the future and considerwhat we can do beyond that point.What about solar energy? The useof photovoltaic (PV) panels to generate electricity is now available inmany forms. You know that afterthe initial cost of purchase andinstallation the operating cost ispractically free with a grid tied system. Thank you Mother Nature.Dependent upon your locationand system size, solar energy canprovide up to 100% of you needs.It just depends on how large of asystem you need and the length oftime that you consider as practicalfrom a payback standpoint.

You can also use solar energy toprovide hot water and heat. Theuse of solar heat exchangers canprovide supplemental heat and hotwater for a facility. Again locationplays a large part in whether or notthis will work for you.

Wind energy is also an availableoption. It is another one of thosethings that Mother Nature can provide at no cost after initial installa

tion and limited maintenance. The

wind is free and all you need to dois harness it to get your free energy. There are numerous types ofsystems available on the markettoday. Wind turbines/generatorscome in many different configurations and there is one out there

that can meet your needs. Againthe use of wind generation isdependent upon location. You willhave to decide if you want to beself sufficient and supply 100% ofyour needs or only provide a por-


JTTESCO *jTRANSPORTATION EQUIPMENT SUfPLY COMPANY

Transportation Equipment Supply Company8106 Hawthorne Drive

Erie, PA 16509

(814)866-1952fax (814) 866-7307

Contact us for all your special tooling needs!

215

www.tescotools.com


tion of what you use.This is just a broad brush

approach to point out items thatcan be used to reduce energy consumption in the shop and facilities.The choice is yours, what do youwant to do?


^SIMMONS^^ MACHINE TOOL CORPORATION

MOBivwmm®WHEEL TRUING SERVICES

innovative Mobile Technology

Simmons Machine Tool Corporation (SMTC) is excited to announce its latesttechnological development in the North American market; "Mobiturn® WheelTruing Services".

The Mobiturn® is a CNC mobile wheel lathe that maintains a variety of profilesrangingfromlightrail vehicles to locomotives. The Mobitum providescustomers with cost effective wheel truing as an alternative to their presentwheel maintenance processes.

Services are easily implemented at customers' facility. There are NOspecialrequirements needed to execute the services. Contact us to schedule yourMobiturn® Wheel Truing Service appointment:

Simmons Machine Tool Corporation1700 N. Broadway P: (518) 462-5431Albany, NY12204 F: (518) 462-0371

www.smtqroup.com [email protected]


SHOP EQUIPMENT FORTRUCK REMOVAL,

MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR

Prepared byDenise Louder of the

Macton Corporation

There are several different types ofequipment used for the removal ofrail trucks and wheel set assem

blies:

Drop Tables are used as an efficient means to replace truck andwheel set assemblies. Full truck

drop tables as seen in Figure 1 areused to replace a complete truckassembly. Some full truck droptables also have a smaller auxiliaryto remove single axles with traction motors. Single axle droptables are smaller in size and

capacity and are used to removeonly the wheel set and tractionmotor assembly.

To better understand how the

drop table operates we willquicklyreview the major components ofthe drop table:

The Service Top (pictured inFigure 2) is the area of the droptable where the locomotive is positioned for truck or single axleremoval. The service top securelylocks into the foundation walls

when the drop table is not in useto prevent crossover loads frombeing transferred to the drop tablecarriage.

The Body Stands (as shown inFigure 3) are positioned under thejacking pad of the locomotive andare used to support the locomotiveso that the truck may be lowered.

The Carriage (as shown in Figure4) is the component that is used toraise the locomotive so that the

body stands may be moved intoposition to support the locomotive. Once the locomotive is supported by the body stands, the carriage then lowers the truck orwheel axle assembly and transports it, usually under the shopfloor to the release area. Full truck

drop tables use screw jacks to raiseand lower the carriage and the single axle drop table may use eitherscrew jacks or hydraulic mechanisms to raise and lower the car

riage.Drop tables typically have one of

three types of Release Areas:The Bascule Release Top (as

shown in Figure 5) consists ofdoors, in the shop floor, that openup to allow the truck to be raisedto shop floor level and eitherpushed off of the drop table railonto the shop rail or lifted with anoverhead crane. When the droptable is not in use and the bascule

doors are closed, there is no openarea and the track may be used asa through track.

The Canopy Release Top (asshown in Figure 6) is a flat top thatcovers the release area. The toprises up with the truck assemblyunderneath. With this type ofrelease top the truck assemblymust be pushed from the droptable rails onto the shop rails, withthe truck assembly under thecanopy top, it cannot be accessedwith an overhead crane. The

canopy top may be used to loadtruck assemblies onto a flatbed


truck by placing the trucks on topof the canopy top and raising thetop to the level of the flatbed truck.

With the Open Release Area (asshown in Figure 7)the area of theshop floor where the truck assembly is raised to the shop floor levelis left open and the area is usuallyclosed off using safety railingwhich means that this area of the

shop can not be used when thedrop table is not in use.

A set of four Portable Jacks (asshown in Figure 8) may also beused to raise a locomotive so that

the truck assembly may be disconnected and pushed out from underthe locomotive. The jacks areplaced under the locomotive jacking pads and then the jacks synchronously raise the locomotive.Portable jacks employ a machinescrew jacking mechanism for raising and lowering the locomotive.

Overhead Cranes (as shown inFigure 9) may be used to raise alocomotive off of the truck assem

blies or lower the locomotive onto

the new truck assembly. The overhead crane is also used to move

the truck and wheel set assemblies

through the shop.Split Rail Systems (as shown in

Figure 10) are used primarily fortransit and coach cars to remove

wheel sets. The split rail carriagemay use either a machine screw ora hydraulic jacking mechanism toraise the rail car to allow the truck

to be supported. The rail is thenmoved out of the way so that thewheel set may be lowered onto adolly and taken away and a newwheel set to be raised into place.

There are several different types ofshop equipment that are used tomove truck and wheel set assem

blies through the work shop:As mentioned earlier, Cranes are

commonly used to move the truckand wheel set assemblies throughthe shop to the truck repair shop.

Fork Trucks are also commonlyused to move wheel set assemblies

and other truck componentsthrough the shop.

Truck Turntables (as shown inFigure 11) are used to transfer atruck from one track to another so

that the truck, once removed maybe pushed to the truck repair area.There are several different types ofshop equipment used to performmaintenance and repair work onlocomotive trucks and truck com

ponents in the work shop:The Truck Repair Hoist (as

shown in Figure 12) is used inmany truck shops to raise the truckassembly to a height that allowsshop personnel to easily accessboth the side and underneath the

truck while standing.Truck Rotators (as shown in

Figure 13) may also be used intruck repair shops to rotate trucksor truck frames to allow easyaccess to the under side of a truck

assembly. There are two types oftruck rotators; the first will lift androtate the truck assembly and withthe second the truck assembly isloaded into the rotator with a

crane and is then rotated.

Locomotive maintenance facili

ties have options in equipment andmethodology when maintainingand servicing locomotive truck and


wheel set assemblies. Fleet and

shop size are important considerations when deciding on the appropriate shop equipment for truckremoval maintenance and repair.


rrrr

LIFT SYSTEMS

£RGONOMXC

LIFTING SYSTBMSPRODUCTIVE SOLUTIONS

PERSONNEL LIFTS & WORK PLATFORMS

SYSTEMS FOR:• BLASTING

• PAINTING

•WASHING

• SANDING

• MAINTENANCE

• REPAIR &

OVERHAUL

Total Product Access

High Return on InvestmentOSHA/ANSI Compliant

Provide a safer work environment

Improve positioning while reducing fatigue

Increase capacity and save time

Hd 'r^'r-****—W1 In

i

II i

u — ... . ul IDll

H

115ii . _ L* ~>^Sn^H _> >^j|

•iii »^c*j WB^Bt 1

1 W*If.*m l V ..

r >_tp 1

t»*£*7 rfc!

800-657-6956

Eau Claire, Wl

[email protected]

View additional lifts & video clips at:

www.lpi-inc.com


Figure 1

j^p~§];- j!..~ "|*J|i:cffH«PJ

Figure 2


Figure 3

Figure 4


Figure 5

Figure 6


Figure 7

Figure 8


Figure 9

Figure 10


Figure 11

Figure 12


Figure 13


TIME-SA VMG Tools and Machinesfor Locomotive Maintenance,Parts Reclamation, and Testing

INCREASESHOPPRODUCTIVITY

REDUCELOCOMOTIVE DOWNTIME

IMPROVEYOUR OUALITY ASSURANCEPROCRAM

MAIN BEARING WRENCHESEMO &GEEngines

CRAB NUT TORQUE WRENCHESEMO Engines

TRACTION MOTOR SUPPORTBEARING CAPWRENCHES

EMO 4 GE Traction Motors

LOWER LINER INSERTPULLER/INSTALLER

EMO Engines

CYLINDER HEAD ANDLINERWATER TEST MACHINES

EMD Engines

EXHAUST VALVE SPRINGDEADWEIGHT TESTER

EMD Engines

and otherSPECIALTOOLS & MACHINESdesigned to

SAVE YOU MONEY

229

TAME, INC.Toots a*** fcttfrglgigcj Bgggngg Co . <nc

2523 Cnattanooga Vaiioy Dnv» • PO Bo« 250Rimsiorw. Goorgia 30725 -USATntopnon* (706) 820-0397Fa* (706; B20-98O2


CONSTITUTION AND BY-LAWS

LOCOMOTIVE MAINTENANCE

OFFICERS ASSOCIATION

Revised September 22, 2003

Article I - Title:

The name of this Association

shall be the Locomotive

Maintenance Officers Association

(LMOA).

Article II - Purpose of theAssociation

The purpose of the Association,a non-profit organization, shall beto improve the interests of its members through education, to supplylocomotive maintenance infor

mation to their employers, toexchange knowledge and information with members of the

Association, to make constructiverecommendations on locomotive

maintenance procedures throughthe technical committee reportsfor the benefit of the railroad

industry.

Article III - MembershipSection I - Railroad Member

ship shall be composed of personscurrently or formerly employed bya railroad company and interestedin locomotive maintenance. Mem

bership is subject to approval bythe General Executive Committee.

Section 2 - Associate

Membership shall be composed ofpersons currently or formerlyemployed by a manufacturer ofequipment or devices used in con

nection with the maintenance and

repair of motive power, subject toapproval of the General ExecutiveCommittee.

Associate members shall have

equal rights with railroad membersin discussing all questions properlybrought before the association atthe Annual Meeting, and shallhave the privilege of voting orholding elective office.

Section 3 - Life membershipshall be conferred on all Past

Presidents. Life membership mayalso be conferred on others for

meritorious service to the Associa

tion, subject to approval by theGeneral Executive Committee.

Section 4 - Membership duesfor individual railroad and associ

ate membership shall be set by theGeneral Executive Committee and

shall be payable on or beforeSeptember 30th of each year. Themembership year will begin onOctober 1 and end September 30.Members whose dues are not paidon or before the opening date ofthe annual convention shall not be

permitted to attend the annualmeeting, shall not be eligible tovote and/or shall not be entitled toreceive a copy of the publishedPre-Convention Report or theAnnual Proceedings of the annualmeeting. Failure to comply willresult in loss of membership at theend of the current year. Life members will not be required to paydues, but will be entitled to receivea copy of the Pre-ConventionReport and Annual Proceedings.


Magnus Farley loc. • P.O. Box 1029 Fremont. Nebraska 68026 • uiiuui.rnaonus-farleii.com


Article IV - Officers

Section 1 - Elective Officers of

the Association shall be President,First Vice President, Second VicePresident and Third Vice President

Each officer will hold office for one

year or until successors are elected. In the event an officer leaves

active service, he may continue toserve until the end of his term, and,if he chooses, continue to serve asan executive officer and be

allowed to elevate through theranks as naturally occurs, toinclude the office of President.

Section 2 - There shall be one

Regional Executive officerassigned to oversee each technicalcommittee. Regional Executivesshall be appointed from the membership by the General ExecutiveCommittee for an indefinite term,with preference given to those having served as a TechnicalCommittee Chairperson. ARegional Executive who leavesactive service may continue toserve as such, and shall be eligiblefor nomination and election to

higher office.Section 3 - There shall be a

General Executive Committee,composed of the President, VicePresidents, Regional Executives,Technical Committee Chairpersons, and all Past Presidentsremaining active in the Association.

Section 4 - There shall be a

Secretary-Treasurer, appointed by,and holding office at the pleasureof the General Executive

Committee, who will contract for

his or her services with appropriate compensation.

Section 5 - All elective officers

and Regional Executives must beLMOAmembers in good standing.(See Article III, Section 4.)

Article V - Officer, Nominationand Election of

Section 1 - Elective officers shall

be chosen from the active mem

bership. A Nominating Committee,composed of current elective officers and the active Past Presidents,shall submit the slate of candidates

for each elective office at the

annual convention.

Section 2 - Election of officers

shall be determined by a voicevote, or if challenged, it shallrequire show of hands.

Section 3 - Vacancies in anyelective office may be filled bypresidential appointment, subjectto approval of the GeneralExecutive Committee.

Section 4 - The immediate Past

President shall serve as Chairman

of the Nominating Committee. Inhis absence, this duty shall fall tothe current President.

Article VI - Officers - Duties of

Section 1 - The President shall

exercise general direction andapprove expenditures of all affairsof the Association.

Section 2 - The First Vice

President, shall in the absence ofthe President, assume the duties ofthe President. He shall additional

ly be responsible for preparing andsubmitting the program for the


Annual Meeting.The Second Vice President shall

be responsible for selecting advertising. He will coordinate with theSecretary-Treasurer and contactadvertisers required to underwritethe cost of the Annual

Proceedings.The Third Vice President will be

responsible for maintaining astrong membership in theAssociation. He will ensure that

membership applications are properly prepared and distributed,monitoring membership levels andreporting same at appropriate timeto the General Executive

Committee.

The Vice Presidents shall perform such other duties as are

assigned them by the President.Section 3 - The Secretary-

Treasurer shall:

A. Keep all the records of theAssociation.

B. Be responsible for thefinances and accounting thereofunder the direction of the General

Executive Committee.

C. Perform the duties of the

Secretary of the NominatingCommittee, and General ExecutiveCommittee, without vote.

D. Furnish surety bond inamount of $5000 on behalf ofhis/her assistants directly handlingAssociation funds. Association will

bear the expense of such bond.Section 4 - The Regional

Executive officers shall:

A. Participate in the GeneralExecutive Committee meetings.

B. Monitor material to be pre

sented by the technical committees to ensure reports are accurate

and pertinent to the goals of theAssociation.

C. Attend and represent LMOAat meetings of their assigned technical committees.

D. Promote Association activi

ties and monitor membership levels within their assigned areas ofresponsibility.

E. Promote and solicit supportfor LMOA by helping to obtainadvertisers.

Section 5 - Duties of General

Executive Committee:

A. Assist and advise the

President in long-range Associationplanning.

B. Contract for the services and

compensation of a Secretary-Treasurer.

C. Serve as the Auditing andFinance Committee.

D. Determine the number and

name of the Technical

Committees.

E. Exercise general supervisionover all Association activities.

F. Monitor technical papers formaterial considered unworthy orinaccurate for publication.

G. Approve topics for theAnnual Proceedings and AnnualMeeting program.

H. Approve the schedule for theAnnual program.

I. Handle all matters of

Association business not specifically herein assigned.

Section 6 - The General

Executive Committee is entrusted

to handle all public relations deci-


FUEL, LUBRICANTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEETWENTY-SEVEN YEAR INDEX

2008

1. Prevention of Fuel and Fuel FilterHeadaches

2. Locomotive Idle and Start-UpExhaust Emissions Testing

3. Operational Effects of Low SulfurDiesel Fuel in Locomotives

2007

1. Automatic Self-Cleaning Lube OilFilters and Centrifuges

2. Diesel Fuel 2007 and Beyond -What will be in Your Tanks?

2006

1. Fuel Additives-A Possible Methodto Reduce Fuel Consumption inRailroad Diesel Locomotives

2005

1. Engine Oil 202 - Refined BaseOils and their Importance inLubrication

2. Biodiesel - A Potential Fuel Sourcefor Locomotives

2004

1. Discussion of the LMOA Fuels,Lubricants and EnvironmentalCommittee Pentane InsolublesProcedures Revision 4

2. Engine Oil 101 - Viscosity andAdditives

3. Used Oil Analytical Results, Whatdo they Mean, How to Interpretthe Results and How do youRespond?

2003

1. Laboratory Results May Put YourLocomotive at Risk

2. Top of Rail Friction ModificationStudies on the BNSF

2002

1. Improved Generation 5 Lubricant Provides Potential forExtended Lube Oil Filter Life

2. Corrosion Protection ofLocomotive Cooling Systems

2001

1. On-Board Oil ManagementSystem

2. Evaluation of Locomotive EngineOil Analytical Laboratories

3. Fuel Additives - Friend or Foe2000

1. Biodegradability and its Relevance to Railroad Lubricants andFluids

2. Engine Lubricating Oil Evalua-tionField Test Procedure

3. Detecting Abnormal Wear of ACTraction Motor, Pinion End,Armature Bearings ThroughLubricant Wear Debris Analysis

4. Further Development in Top-of-Rail Lubrication Testing

19991. Lube Oil Analysis-Achieving

Quality Results2. Effects of Engine Lubricants on Oil

Filtration3. Recycling and Re-refining of Used

Lubricated Oils1998

1. Safety and Chemical Cleaners2. Development of a Low Emissions,

Dual Fuel Locomotive3. Fuel Oil Stability Update4. Ten Questions on EPA's

Locomotive Exhaust & EmissionRegulations

1997

1. Ferrography-Used Oil AnalysisProgram

2. 2000 - A New Millennium forLocomotive Maintenance: EPAExhaust Emissions RegulatoryImpacts

3. Standardized Test Procedures -Current Developments

4. Industry Updates and NewDevelopments

19961. Standardized Test Procedures-The

Annual Subcommittee Update2. Diesel Fuel Standards and their

Applications to Railroad FuelQuality Issues

3. A Look at Generation 5 OilPerformance and Future OilNeeds


4. LNG as a Railroad Fuel1995

1. MSDS'S - What do they tell us?2. Applying Satellite Communi

cations Technology to On-LineOil Analysis of Crankcase DieselEngine Lubricants

3. Standardized Test Procedures -Past, Present & FutureDevelopments

4. Locomotive Exhaust EmissionsRegulations

19941. TBN-A Review of Currently

Accepted Methods.2. GE Multigrade Lubricating Oil

Testing and Specification.3. The Economic Impact of Low-

Sulfur Diesel Requirements.1993

1. Used Oil Analysis of MultigradeOils and Condemning Limits.

2. Insoluble Determination with theAdvent of Multigrade DieselEngine Oils

3. Bioremediation1992

1. Environmental Issues Relating toMultigrade Railway Issues

2. Readily Biodegradable and LowToxicity Railroad Track Lubri-cants

3. Support Bearing Oils4. Recycling and Re-refining Loco

motive Oils1991

1. Infrared Spectroscopy as anAnalytical Tool

2. Diesel Exhaust: Health EffectsResearch and Regulations

3. Traction Motor Gear Case Sealsand Lube Containment (OilLubricant)

4. Partnership in Development1990

1. The Responsibility of Railroadsand Facility Managers in theHandling and Disposal ofHazardous Materials

2. Update on Diesel FuelRegulations

3. Diesel Exhaust and WorkerExposure

4. Field Experiences with Multi-

grade Railroad Locomotive Oils.5. Conrail Wheel/Rail Lubrication

Update1989

1. Field Test Data Follow-Up andDescription of "Generation 5"Locomotive Crankcase Oil

2. Diesel Emissions: Regulations andFuel Quality

3. Petroleum Storage TankRegulations - Guest Speaker -George Kitchen, InternationalLube & Fuel Consultants

1988

1. Used Oil Analysis andCondemning Limits

2. Review of A.A.R. Procedure RP -503, "Locomotive Diesel FuelAdditive Evaluation Procedure"

3. Update on Improved Oils -Multigrade

4. Wheel Flange Lubrication Update- Lubricants Being Used

5. Survey of Disposable Practices orLocomotive Engine Lube Oil andLube Oil Filters

6. Speaker on Overview ofEnvironmental Requirements forThe Use of Petroleum Products inThe Railroad Industry - PeterConlon - AAR

1987

1. Common Fuel Additives and theirEffectiveness

2. History of LMOA Lubricating OilClassification System

3. Performance RequirementsNeeded by the Railroads for aNew Generation Lube Oil

4. How do we Provide thePerformance Needed for a NewGeneration Oil

1986

1. Extended Performance Lubricants Through Better Chemistry

2. Fuels and Lubricants HandlingHygiene

3. Fuels Availability and PriceOutlook


4. Selection of Lubricants for WheelFlange and Rail Lubricators

1985

1. Disposal of Lube Oil Drainings2. Non-ASTM No. 2 - D Fuel3. Oxidation Analysis4. Wheel Flange and Rail

Lubrication1984

1. Locomotive Filters2. Traction Motor Gear Lube Field

Test

1983

1. Field Test Update of MultigradeOils

2. Update of Alternate Fuel Testing3. A Review of Locomotive Fuels

1982

1. Energy Conserving Lube Oils2. Alternative Fuels Update3. Availability of Medium and High

Viscosity Index Railroad Oils4. Journal Box Oil and Aniline Point.5. Traction Motor Gear Lubricant

Update6. Traction Motor Gear Case Seals

1981

1. Effects of Using Alternate Fuels onExisting Diesel Engines

2. Update on Cold WeatherProcedures for Fuels

3. New Techniques in Lube OilAnalysis

4. Traction Motor Gear Lubri-cation.5. Multi-Viscosity Oils as an Energy

Conservation Technique


1.

2.

1.

2.

3.

1.

2.

3.

1.

2.

3.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

1.

2.

3.

NEW TECHNOLOGIES COMMITTEE

TWENTY-FIVE YEAR INDEX

2008

Maintenance Experience withGen Set Switcher Locomotives toDate

Maintenance of the BNSFFuelcell- Hybrid SwitchLocomotive

2007

Fuelcell Hybrid SwitcherLocomotive: Engineering DesignLocomotive Digital VideoRecorderCN Distributed Braking Car

2006

Variable Hybridity Fuelcell-BatteryRoad SwitcherGETransportation-Hybrid FreightLocomotiveDynamic Brake Status Reporting

2005

PL42AC Locomotive-OverviewFuel Cell LocomotivesLocomotive Electric Hand-brakeSystems

2004

GE Evolution Locomotive - AnOverviewEMD SD70Ace Locomotive-Reliability for 2005 and BeyondGet Them into Condition:Condition Based Traction MotorReliabilityMaking the Switch - An Updateon the EMD GP20D/GP15DSwitcher Locomotive"Fuel Proof Tank Repairs" - A BestPractice for your Locomotives

2003

New MPXPRESS CommuterLocomotive Models MP 36PH-3S& MP36PH-3CThe Green Goat HybridLocomotiveObservation on Auto EngineStart/Stop

2002

On Board Rider - A Remote Locomotive Condition Monitoring

System2. Cool Your Jets: A Low Cost High

Performance Rooftop Air Conditioner

2001

1. Performance and EconomicAspects of VariousEnvironmentally Friendly Coatingsfor Rolling Rail Equipment

2. Non-destructive Testing: CrackDetection Technology - EMFaCIS

2000

1. FIRE: EMD Turns up the Heat onRailroad Electronics Integration

2. Put the Chill on Air Condition-ingCosts

3. Do Not Get "Steamed" Over FuelTank Repairs

4. Industry Responses to EmissionRegulations

5. Improved Adhesion Through theUse of Individual Axle Inverters

1999

1. Locomotive Filteration-Where are

We Going?2. EMD Markets a New Line of

Switchers

1998

1. Expert Systems2. EMD SD90MAC 6000 HP

Locomotive - Where Are WeToday? GE AC6000CWLocomotive - Where Are We

Today?1997

1. An Overview of the Electro-pneumatic Train Brake

2. Locomotive 6724, Where AreYou? GPS, Mobile Telemetry andGIS Technologies in a RailroadEnvironment

3. Runout Measurement Using Non-Contact Sensor Tech-nology

4. Common Rail Fuel Injection1996

1. Activities Toward New Safety


Standards for PassengerEquipment

2. SP-3 Thin Sensor Technology forVariable Force Measurement

3. Top-Of-Rail Lubrication4. Traction Motor Vibration and its

Effects

1995

1. Beltpack Locomotive ControlSystem

2. The MK1200G Switching Locomotive

3. Advanced Traction Motor Testing1994

1. Electronic Fuel Injection Sys-tems.2. Status of Distributed Power in

Freight Trains.3. Advances in Distributed Power-

Iron Highway.1993

1. New Technology to Solve OldProblems

2. Developments in Off-ShoreTechnology

3. Updates on AC TractionDevelopments

1992

1. Talking to the "Smart' Locomotive2. Cab Noise Abatement

3. Electronic Management ofLocomotive Drawings

4. Update on High ProductivityIntegral trains

5. AC Traction - A New

Development1991

1. Locomotive Cab Integration andAccessory Management

2. Improvements in LocomotiveAdhesion Performance

3. The Role of Duty cycles inLocomotive Fuel Consumption.

4. What's New in Gadgets andBlack Boxes: What do our

Locomotives Really Need?

5. FailureAnalysis1990

1. Motor Driven Air Compressorsfor Diesel-Electric Locomotives

2. Locomotive Cab (HVAC) Heating,Ventilation and Air ConditioningSystems

3. Effect of Technology onStandardization of Cab Control

Equipment

4. Locomotive Durability, Relia

bility and Availability

Understanding Your Abilities1989

1. A Rational Approach to TestingLocomotive Components

2. New Developments in Locomotive Cab Design

1988

1. Amtrak F69 PH AC PassengerLocomotives

2. New Component Develop-mentsRetrofittable to Older Model

Locomotives

3. Locomotive Applications ofCatepillar Engines

4. Wheelslip Control for IndividualAxles

1987

1. Electronic Fuel Injection Sys-tems2. Update on Electronic Gover-nors3. Recent Advances in Steerable

Locomotive Trucks - the E.M.D. 4

Axle, 4 Motor HT-BB Articulated

Truck

4. Converting an F40 Locomotive toA.C. Traction

1986

1. Future Train Control Systems2. Bringing Future Train Control

Systems Back to Earth


3. Low Maintenance Locomotive

Batteries

4. Electronic Engine Control Systems1985

1. The Sprague Clutch for E.M.D.Turbocharged Engines

2. A.C. Traction Locomotives

Update3. Natural Gas Locomotive Update4. Ceramic Coated Engine Com

ponents

4. Locomotive Cab Develop-ments1984

1. G.E. Dash 8 Locomotives

2. E.M.D. 50A Series Locomotives

3. Natural Gas Locomotives

4. Appraisal of the A.C. TractionLocomotive

1983

1. Microprocessors for LocomotiveControl and Self Diagnosis.

2. Locomotive Fuel Tank Gauges3. Locomotive Aerodynamics4. Bombardier HR 616 Locomotive

5. Missouri Pacific - Phase III

Locomotive Heavy Repair Facility,N. Little Rock, Arkansas


DIESEL ELECTRICAL MAINTENANCE COMMITTEE

TWENTY-SEVEN YEAR INDEX

2008

1. Challenges with Retrofitting NewSystems to Old Locomotives

2. Locomotive MaintenanceConventional vs Genset

3. Using Test Instrumentation Safely4. Electric Motor Preventative

Maintenance

2007

1. Finding Open and Short Circuitson AC Traction Motors

2. Locomotive Cab Signal Failuresand Troubleshooting

3. Maintaining Main Generators -Some Safer Methods

4. Locomotive SoftwareManagement

2006

1. Application of 2,000 HP HybridYard and Road SwitcherLocomotives

2. Portable Troubleshooting DataLogger

3. Adapting a Freight Locomotiveinto a Passenger Locomotive

2005

1. Wireless CommunicationTechnology Overview

2. Maintenance Benefits of theGreen Goat - Part A

Hybrid Switcher Update - GreenGoat - Part B

2004

1. Electrical Maintenance Benefits ofthe SD70ACe

2. Remote Monitoring &Diagnostics: Development andIntegration with MaintenanceStrategies

3. Carbon Brushes Revisited - anUpdate for 2004

2003

1. Diesel Driven Heating System2. Trainline - ES TIBS as Applied to

CN/IC Locomotives

3. Head End Power (HEP) SafetyIssues

4. Fuel Savings, Using LocomotiveConsist Management

2002

1. Commutator Profiling2. Basics of an Operations Center3. Diagnostics for Older Locomo

tives

4. Traction Motor Protection Panel5. "Locomotive Auxiliary Power

Units" - Lessons Learned2001

1. Diagnostic and PredictiveMaintenance

2. Locomotive Replacement ControlSystem

3. Automatic Shutdown StartupControls - Fuel Savings throughTechnology

4. Locomotive Alternative Air

Conditioners2000

1. Custom Electronics and theirApplications

2. Locomotive Wire Update3. Integrated Air Brake & Distributed

Power Under EMD Fire System4. Carbon Brushes - A Fresh Look5. RM&D - What It Is, What It Does6. An Alternate Adhesion System

19991. Transition Panels for Older

Locomotives2. R.S. A.C. Crash Worthy Event

Recorder Update3. Traction Motor Suspension

Bearing TemperatureMonitoring System

4. EMD SD90MAC 6000 HPLocomotive-An Update

5. IGBT-What's New for GE AC6000Locomotives

19981. Locomotive Troubleshooting

Assistant


2.3.4.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

1.

2.

3.4.

1.

2.

3.

4.5.

LocomotiveMaintenanceSD70MAC Capacitor DischargeProcedurePower Savings for ElectricalLocomotivesAuto Stop/Start and LayoverSystems

1997Review of Battery Maintenanceand Available OptionsBattery Charger/BoosterLocomotive System IntegrationElectronic Governors

1996EMD SD80MAC High VoltageSafetyGE AC Locomotive ElectricalSafety FeaturesElectromagnetic Interference(EMI on AC Locomotives)QTRAC 1000 Adhesion ControlSystemLocomotive Health Monitoring-The Key to Improved Main-ten-ance

1995Canadian National Battery WaterUsageRemote Diagnostics-RadioDownloadProgrammed Preventive Maintenance

Commutation Monitoring inLocomotive DC Traction MotorsThe EMD Diesel Engine Control(EMDEC) System

1994

Safety First - Video on ElectricalSafetyLocomotive Health MonitoringSystemsEvent Recorder UpdateSD60 Dynamic Brake Improvements

1993Automatic Engine Shutdown andRestart SystemLayover Systems/Standby PowerSystemsCN North America - ElectronicTemperature ControlSpeed Sensing DevicesAdhesion Alternative

Electronic Brake 6. Modern Tooling Update

19921. Nickel-Cadmium Batteries as an

Alternative2. Overview of Locomotive

Microprocessor Based Controls3. Locomotive Air Conditioning4. Testing Traction Alternator Fields

on EMD Locomotives5. Flange Lubricators

19911. Locomotive Rebuilding

Something Old - Something New.Standardization of Elec-tricalEquipment

2. Locomotive Batteriesa. Storage Handling Proced-ures

b. Recommended MaintenanceProcedures

c. Recommended Repair Procedures

3. Amtrak's AC Traction Locomotives

4. Modern Tooling for ElectriciansRecorders

3. Why Can't We Have One CentralComputer?

4. EPA and Regulation DrivenCleaning

1990

1. Modern Tooling of ElectricalTroubleshooting

2. Maintaining Solid State EventRecorders

3. Why Can't We Have One CentralComputer?

4. EPA and Regulation DrivenCleaning

19891. Modern Tooling for the

Troubleshooting Electrician: a)test meters available (single function); b) test meters available(multiple functional); c) analysisand diagnostic tools

2. Sound Electrical Repairs andPractices for: a) traction motors;b) grids and fans; c) wire andcable solderless termination

3. Guidelines for PreparingElectricians for the 1990s


1988

1. Utilizing MagneticRecorders forMaintenance

2. Solid State LocomotiveRecorder

3. Improved Utilization of GE DASH8 Data Recording Systems

4. Locomotive Health Data and ItsUses To The Railroad

5. Improved Data Acquisition FromEMD's 60 Series DisplayComputer

1987

1. Proper Maintenance of ElectricalFuel Savings Options

2. Preliminary Report on AARTraction Motor Study

19861. Cleaning, Handling & Storage of

Electrical EquipmentA. Solid State ComponentsB. Rotating Equipment

2. Qualification of LocomotivePower plants through self load

Tape EventLocomotive

Data

19851. Locomotive Microprocessor

Technology in Retrospect2. Dynamic Brake Protective devices

and Troubleshooting EMD-2 andGE-7 Locomotives

3. Indicators and Recorders forLocomotive Retrofit Application -Fuel, Speed, Power and SelectedEvents

1984

1. On-Board Diagnostics2. GE's CATS (Computer Aided

Troubleshooting System)3. Fuel Conservation Through4. Electrical Modifications5. Performance of Locomotives

After Storage

19831. Ground Relay Trouble Shooting2. Specification for remanu-factured

D87 Traction Motor Frames(Using D-77 Armature Coils)

3. Locomotive Storage (Electrical)

4. Water Cooling and RefrigeratingMethods for Locomotive CabApplication

19821. Tests on Traction Motors2. Transition Trouble-Shooting3. Onboard Diagnostic Systems4. Starting Systems

19811. Evaluation of Improved Test

Methods2. Teflon Bands3. New Generation Locomotives4. Electrical Troubleshooting5. Batteries and Charging Systems6. Troubleshooting EMD AC

Auxiliary Generator System7. Selection of Locomotives for

Major Locomotive Overhauls


SHOP EQUIPMENT AND PROCESSES COMMITTEETWENTY-SEVEN YEAR INDEX

2008 3.

1. Vehicle Progression Systems2007 4.

1. Evolution and Improvements inLocomomtive Rerailing Cranes 1.

2006

1. Wheel Gauge Technology 2.2. Train Washing3. EnvironmentalRailroad 3.

Containment Products2005 4.

1. Mobiturn Wheel Truing Services2004 1.

1. Under the Hook Lifting Devices2. Sanding in the Railroad Industry- 2.

Part III - A Gentle Answer for anAbrasive Situation

2003

1. Locomotive Shop SupportSystems and Equipment 1.

2. Hand Tools - An Ergonomic 2.Update

3. Locomotive Lifting Systems2002 1.

1. NOTE: PAPER ON LIFTING SYS- 2.TEMS WAS PRESENTED BY RON 3.BEGIER OF PORTEC AT THE

2002 CONVENTION; HOWEVER IT DID NOT APPEAR IN 1.PUBLICATION - WILL APPEAR

IN THE 2003 PROCEEDINGS 2.PUBLICATION

2001 3.

1. Standing in Railroad Industries - 4.Part II - How to Specify Reliableand Safe Sanding Systems 1.

2000

1. The Tandem Wheel Truing 2.Machine at Amtrak's Ivy Shop

2. Shop Talk 2000: Fall Protection 3.Technology 4.

3. Sanding in the Railroad Industry1999

1. Increasing Diesel Shop Capacity 1.2. Conrail-Cold Asphalt Processing

of Environmental Waste Sand and 2.Sludge 3.

Dry Ice Cleaning of GE IntakePorts

AAR-LFIS No Spill Fueling System1998

Smoke Opacity Testing-EmissionDetection Equipment and its UseHydraulicTensioning Tools and itsUse

High Speed Portable Align BoringSeriesLocomotive Mobile Servicing

1997

Wheel Truing as PreventiveMaintenanceConrail-Selkirk Diesel TerminalWastewater Treatment FacilityRecent Evnironmental Improvements

1996

Locomotive PaintingDrop Table Tooling for New EMDand GE Locomotives

1995

Pre-Maintenance InspectionRailroad Turntable ModificationMobileVehicle

Locomotive Service

ElectronicTooling.Locomotive Roller SupportBearing Tooling.Fall Protection and Man Lifts.Locomotive Washing Systems.

1993

Dynamic Balancing for GE Dash 8Model LocomotivesAir Compressor AutomatedStation

Ergonomics in the Work PlaceHydraulic Traction MotorShimming Table

1992

Automated Test and ProductionEquipmentSafety Corrective Action TeamAutomated Locomotive Wheel

1994

Fuel/Unit Injection


Shop4. Cleaning and Surface Pre-paration 1,

with Sodium Bicar-bonate BasedAbrasive Blasting

5. Trainline Continuity Tester 2,6. BN - Railroad Power Assembly 3.

Shop of the 1990's1991 4,

1. Economic Separation of 5,Emulsified Oil from Waste WaterUsing Ultra Filtration Membranes

2. EMD Cylinder Head Valve Seat 1,Machining

3. Automated Barring Over Machine 2.for EMD Diesel Engines 3,

4. New Equipment for Testing EMD 4,Engine Protectors

5. Compressed Air for Railroad 1.Facilities Issues and Solutions toAchieve Clean, Dry, Oil Free Air 2,

1990

1. EMD Valve Bridge Machine2. GE Traction Motor Roller 3,

Suspension Bearing Replace-mentEquipment and Pro-cedure.

3. Locomotive Component Re- 1,placement ForkliftAttachment.

4. Locomotive Sanding, Fueling andDrop Tables. 2,

5. Hazardous Waste Disposal1989 3,

1. Automated Locomotive WheelShop

2. Laser Guided Material Handling 1,Vehicles

3. Bulk Rail Lubrication Storage & Fill 2,Systems

4. Pilot Plate Straightening Equip- 3,ment

1988

1. Fuel Management Control 4,Systems 5,

2. Locomotive Mounted Rail 6,Lubrication Fill Systems.

3. Comparison of Shop Air 1.Compressors 2.

4. Locomotive Toilet ServicingEquipment 3,

5. Innovations in Blue Flag and 4,Derail Protection 5.

1987

Modern Servicing Facility forImproved Reliability andAvailabilityNew Developments in GE Tools.Implementation of a QualityProcess

A Quality Traction Motor Shop.Wheel Truing Machine Tech-nolo-gy

1986

Robotics Update 1986 - NowWhat?CNC Machine ToolsA New GE Power Assembly AreaLocomotive Wash System -1986

1985

Computer-Assisted PreventativeMaintenance

New Tools for Material Handlingand Overview of BalancingTechnologyEffect of Governmental Regulations on Locomotive Finishing

1984

Shop Tools.A. New ToolsB. Shop-Made Tools

Traction Motor Shop EquipmentUp-DateHazardous Waste Handling andDisposal

1983

Locomotive Maintenance Using aProduction Line ProcessShop Tools to IncreaseProductivity and Improve Quality.Dynamic On-Line Performance ofLocomotives Without On-BoardTele-MeteringManagement in ActionNew GE Training CenteWelding Qualifications

1982

Tools

Rebuild line for EMD turbocharg-ers

Air brake equipment lineIndustrial robotsAutomated machines


6. Safety related items and equipment

1981

1. Training Aids.2. Testing Devices Inspired by New

FRA Laws

3. Tools and Training for Pro-ductivi-ty

4. Changes to Shop FacilitiesRequired by Newly Adopted EPA& OSHA Regulations

5. Tour through Conrail AltoonaShop

6. Supply/Service Facilities7. GEAssembly Shop


DIESEL MATERIAL CONTROL COMMITTEE


2008

1. Lean Manufacturing as it Appliesto Material Handling

2007

1. Insourcing vs. Outsourcing "TheAltoona Story"

2006

1. PDAs for Inventory Control2. Inventory Management System

2005

1. Centralized MaterialsManagement

2. Centralized Component CoreManagement-CentralizedWarehouse-LocomotiveComonents - Part A: BNSF Rwy.Centralized Component CoreManagement-Rotable Warehouse- Part B: Norfolk Southern Corp.

2004

1. Milk Run: Norfolk Southern'sDedicated Locomotive PartsShipping System

2003

1. Just in Time Delivery - The Juniata- Shop Material Control Program

2. The Continuous Improvement

Approach2002

1. "Mentored Champion Process" -CSX Supply and Service Management

2001

1. RAILMARKETPLACE.COM

The Industry's Market Exchange2000

1. GE Global exchange Services2. My.SAP.Com

1999

1. Composite Floors and Doors forLocomotives

2. Packaging Standards

1998

1. Tighter is Not Better2. Are Vending Machines the New

Wave for Safety Items?1997

1. Raising Our Standards for Safety2. The Rail Industry's Electronic Parts

Catalog Exchange Standard(EPCES) - A Better Way

1996

1. Technology Transfer-The HotProcess of the 90's-Condition

Based Maintenance

2. Warehouse Automation

1995

1. Warranty and Reliability Man-age-ment

2. Railroad Industry Group (RIG)Exchange Standard for PartsCatalog Information

1994

1. Material Consignment2. The Next Step in Electronic

Information ManagementInteractive Technical Manuals.

3. Electronic Catalog Alternatives.1993

1. Technology Transfer2. Electronic Cataloging from a

Material Perspective3. Computerized Reordering from

the Mechanical Employee's Pointof View

4. Electronic Catalogues: OEM/Supplier Point of View

1992

1. Warranty Overview and Issues2. Recycling-19923. Bar Coding4. Material Packaging

1991

1. The World of Recycling2. Problems with Solution


3. Problems with Opportunities1990

1. Waste Minimization.

2. Hazardous Materials End Cost

3. The Role of the Suppliers1989

1. Packaging and Containerizationfor Today's Railroad.

2. Innovations in Material

Distribution Resulting from ShopConsolidations.

3. Outsourcing! Does Anyone ReallyUnderstand the Difference

Between UTEX and Repair andReturn and the Affect on the

Budget?4. "Stuff" Happens! - A Skit About

the Necessity of Feedback fromSuppliers - Suppliers to the endUser

1988

1. Communication - The Vital Link in

Materials Acquisition2. Quality Assurance Through

Communications and Feed-back

3. Paperless Requisitions4. A Practical Application of Bar

Coding in the Railroad Industry

1987

1. Suppliers Selection for Component Failure Analysis

2. Vendor Performance or ServiceLevel

3. Bar Codes

4. Bar Coding - Railroads5. Material Handling Innovations by

the Airline Industry1986

1. The In-House Electronic Requisition System

2. Electronic Data Interchange.3. RAILING and Electronic Pur-chas

ing4. Quality Evaluation

Sourcing Decisionsof Material 1,

1985

Evaluating Locomotive Maintenance ProjectsReconditioning Material: In-House vs. Vendo

Identification and Disposition ofSurplus MaterialCost of Carrying SurplusEvolution and Future Directions

of Material Handling Equipmentin Railroad Use

1984

BarCoding of MaterialForecasting Material Requirements

a. Fuel Security - Are YouGetting What You Pay For?

b. Fuel Oil Is ExpensivePros and Cons of Material

Purchasing Contracts (SingleSource - Just In Time Inventory)

1983

Improved Locomotive Productivity Through Computerized DatInbound Material InspectionMinimize Maintenance Cost

Through Material ManagementSystemsNew Ideas In Material StorageContainers

1982

Use of kits in locomotive mainte

nance

Cost effective methods of shipping material from vendors.Union Pacific's ComponentInventory Maintenance System(CIMS).Advantages of using shipping containers

1981

Disposal of UnserviceableComponent Parts: What is the


Most Profitable Method?

2. Innovations in Stores Material

Handling, Via ComputerTechnology

3. Locomotive Held for Material: an

Update for the 80's4. The Best Approach to Procuring

Material; New, UTEX, Repair andReturn or Shop Repair


DIESEL MECHANICAL MAINTENANCE COMMITTEE


Ultra-LowImpact onMaintenance

ExhaustTechhnologies:Maintenance

EPA Emission Requirements forLocomotives

Air Compressors-Best Practices-Identification and Maintenance,Parti

2007

Training a New Work ForceLocomotive Horn TestingDiagnostic TechniquesPredictive/PreventativeMaintenance-Exploitation of NewTechnologyLocomotive Particulate MatterEmssions Reduction throughApplication of ExhaustAftertreatment Systems

2006

Lost Opportunities of RebuildingTrucksGP/SD38-2S Locomotive-A NewClass of PowerHeavy Diesel Engine Field RepairBenefits of Mobile Maintenance

2005

Crankcase Overpressure Today -Concentrating on EMD and GELocomotives

Cold Weather LocomotiveOperationsImportance of Cooling SystemHealth, EPA Compliance ImpactOverhaul Extension

2004

GE Evolution Series-Maintenanceand ReliabilityEMD 70ACe and SD70DC-Tier 2Locomotive Models-MechanicalMaintenance EnhancementsBest Practices Series-For Regionaland Shortline Railroads-Managing

2008

Sulfur Diesel Fuel:Locomotive

AftertreatmentDefinitions and

for

Locomotive Wheel Wear4. Maintenance Savings -

Mother/Daughter Units2003

1. Training 60/30 Impact NowBeyond

2. Condition Based Maintenance,Practical Approaches andTechniques

2002

1. Detrimental Effects of Locomotive Engine Idling

2. Emissions Standard Compliancefor the GE Dash 8 Locomotives

3. Tier 0 Emissions Compliance forthe GE Dash 8 Locomotive

4. Locomotive Inspection Training -A Preview of CFR 229/238

5. Computerized Record KeepingtoImprove Performance and Reduce Maintenance Expense forShortline and Regional Railroads

2001

1. Troubleshooting ElectronicFuel Injection on GE Locomotives

2. Troubleshooting ElectronicFuel Injection-EMDEC ElectroMotive Division Two-StrokeEngine

3. How to Maintain ALCOLocomotives in the 21stCentury

4. Catastrophic Engine Failures:Shortlines & Regionals (BestPractices)

5. Are We Ready for Reliability-Centered Maintenance?

2000

1. 2000 Emissions Review - GE

Perspective2. 2000 Emissions Review - EMD

Perspective3. EMD Diesel Engine Crankshaft

Main Bearings Edge-Load Condition (Description, Detection andResolution)

&


4. 2000 - LMOA Best PracticeSeries: Locomotive Truck Overhaul Procedures

1999

1. Vibration Analysis2. EMD Power Assemblies Change

Out Practices for Regional andShortline Railroads

3. Improved Access to GE7FDLEngine Intake Manifold forCylinder Inlet Port Cleaning

4. What's Ahead in Plastics forLocomotive Applications

5. Cast Iron, Composition BrakeShoe Arrangements vs. Type-JRelay

1998

1. LMOA Best Practices Series: GM

Engine Crankcase PressureTroubleshooting

2. Union Pacific's New EMD DieselEngine Rebuild Line AtDowning B. Jenks LocomotiveFacility-No. Little Rock, Arkansas

3. GE Turbo Rebuild Procedures4. Mechanical Impact of Locomotive

Emissions Regulations5. Locomotive Engine Bearing

Developments1997

1. LMOA Best Practices - GE Water

Leaks2. Locomotive Update - MK 1200G

LNG Powered Switcher3. Proper Use of Gaskets and Seals

1996

1. Air Brake Trouble Shooting-Where We Are Now

2. Best Practices - Internal WaterLeaks on EMD Locomotives

3. Best Practices - Oil Out Stack1995

1. General Electric New 7HDL 6000HP Diesel Engine

2. LMOA Best Practices Series - Low

Oil Pressure Trouble-shootingProcedures for EMDTurbocharged Locomotives

3. How Can a Regional or ShortlineJustify a Wheel Truing Machine?

4. EMD SD60M Natural GasLocomotive Development

1994

1. Electronic Fuel Injection.2. ICAV - The Physical Affects on

Instantaneous Crank ShaftAngular Velocity Technology

3. Maintenance Practices Com-pari-son Between Regionals and ClassI Railroads

4. Amtrak Document Manage-ment.1993

1. EMD's Three-Axle Radial SteeringTruck

2. The Natural Gas Locomotive atBNRR

3. Locomotive Waste Oil Reten-tion4. Fragmented Maintenance

1992

1. Mechanical Quality ProgressDeveloping on Major Railroads.

2. Coal Fuelled Diesel LocomotiveDevelopment.

3. 18:1 Upgrade for the 645E Engine4. Automatic Stop and Start Control

System5. Acquiring Locomotives for

Regionals and Shortlines1991

1. Recommended Practices forupgrading 567 to 645 Design.

2. Conversion of SD40 Locomotives to SD 40-2 on CSX

3. Update: Diesel Engine EmissionControls

4. Stationary and Dynamic TestProcedure for Locomotive FuelEfficiency Measurement

5. Personnel training on NewTechnology.

1990

1. Caterpillar Power in Reman-ufac-tured Locomotives.

2. The EMD 710G3A Engine3. Improving Performance of

Traction Motor Friction Suspension Bearings.

4. Fluid Leaks on GE 7FDL Engine.5. Rebuild of the EMD F3B Fuel

Injector.


1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

1.

2.

3.

4.

1.

2.

3.

4.

2.

3.

1.

2.

1989

Wheel Axle Gear Wear/Impacton Traction Motor Life710 Engine - Operational andOverhaul UpdateGE Power Assembly Improvements on Welded Head-to-LinerAssembly Rework Procedures.EMD Engine Oil Leaks.SecondaryAir Filtration - Barrier vs.Impingement

1988

Low-idle Operating Costs vs. FuelSavings.Rebuilding GE's EB LinerThe Extended Maintenance TruckFlange Lubricator UpdatePermaspray II - Cylinder Liner

1987

EMD Water Pump RebuildingOn Board Flange LubricatorGear Case, Bull Gear and PinionGear Longevity in the 1980's -Gear Cases - Canadian NationalExperience.Maintenance of LocomotiveFueling Systems for a Spill FreeOperation

1986

Rebuild of Valve BridgeAssembliesUpdate of New LocomotiveService Problems, EMD and GEEffecting Quality PerformanceChromium Plating and Its UsesDevelopment of a New DieselEngine for Heavy-Duty Locomotive Service

1985

Procedures for StoringServiceable Locomotives forQuality PerformanceNew Locomotive Service

Problems, EMD and GE92 Day Service Requirements:EMD, GE and Bombardier

1984

Mechanical Aspects of NewLocomotive DesignsMaintenance of Locomotive

Components1983

1. Leaks: Cooling Water, Lube Oil,Fuel Oil and Air

2. Torquing Recommendations.3. Update on Fuel Efficient

Locomotives4. Radiator Screens5. Alternate Starter Systems

1982

1. Fuel Conservation - Effects onMaintenance

2. Fuel Conservation - What It Costs.3. Diesel Fuel Receipt and

Disbursement

4. Turbochargers1981

1. Running Gear2. Filtration

3. FRA Rules

4. Follow-up on Previous Topics


COPIES OF TRANSCRIPTS

FROM PREVIOUS

TECHNICAL PAPERS

ARE AVAILABLE

UPON REQUEST.

CONTACT

OUR SECRETARY-TREASURER,

RON PONDEL,

AT

(630) 860-5511 x217

PMC

Setting the Standard inLocomotive Gears and Pinions

• Triple Alloy Steel

a Carburized and Hardened

• Cubic Boron Nitride Ground

• Lower Life Cycle Costs withPMC SUPER GEARS

• Five-Year Wear Warranty

• Reprofiling Services

• Over 85 Years of GearManufacturing

• AAR Certified

Contact Us Today forAdditional Information...

Penn Locomotive GearA Division of Penn Machine CompanyJohnstown, PA, U.S.A.

[email protected], PA 814-288-1547 ext. 211

Blairsville, PA 724-459-0302 ext. 322

TilMAFt/CN

&. AMarmonGroup/BerkshireHathawayCompany

When budgets are limited and engine failure occursuse Peaker Services Custom Engine Repair"

Peaker Services offers catastrophic enginefailure repair without complete disassembly.

•

' bit

f

Usually 60-80% lessthan the cost of a totalremanufacture

CNC machiningLine bore without

power assemblyremoval

Parts not damagedcan be reused

Reduce out-of-servicetime

Engine failuresoccurring beforescheduled

remanufacture can berepaired.

N

psi

peakerservices,inc. i

Business: 800-622-4224 Fax:248-437-8280 [email protected] •

•i

• Engine Remanufacture • Components • Power Assemblies

• Woodward Governor CompanyCentral Distributor

Factory Authorized Service

•

LMOA · 2017. 9. 15. · delivery: diesel fuel, lube, oil, water heated hose reel cabinets (boom,...

Documents

Transcript of LMOA · 2017. 9. 15. · delivery: diesel fuel, lube, oil, water heated hose reel cabinets (boom,...