Could GE learn from F1 technology?

Sounds like a neat idea but I wonder how well an electric motor attached the the impeller shaft of a turbo will handle the heat. An F1 engine only has to go a few hundred miles and then get rebuilt after the race. Maybe GE would benefit more from a dual-sequential turbo setup. Or maybe use a variable-vane turbo (VVT). Or do like Ford does and have two impellers, one small, one big, on the same shaft as the turbine.

EMD solved the turbo lag problem more than 50 years ago with gear drive and an over-running clutch. It still works.  

The 2-stroke EMD engine is quite a bit different. 

Most 2-stroke diesel engines (like Detroit Diesel) use a supercharger to force feed air through the intake ports in the cylinder liners. The EMD turbocharged 2-stroke doesn't use a supercharger. Instead, the turbos are engine driven at startup and low RPM. Once RPMs pick up and exhaust flow increases, the turbo spins freely on it's own without the need to be engine driven. Also, a 16 cylinder 2-stroke engine has twice as many exhaust pulses per crankshaft revolution as does a 16-cylinder 4-stroke engine. Which in turn makes the turbos more responsive to changes in engine RPM. 

Gee whiz! One reply, then, the whole thread gets hi-jacked!

Well, what do you think Jim?

 

How long might an electrically driven turbo hold up under the hood of a locomotive?

The turbo on a F1 V6 engine is pretty small. Will only need a small electric motor to get it spun up. How big of an electric motor do you think it will take to get the turbo spun up on that GE engine?

 

Here is another idea. 

Since locomotives make and carry their own supply of compressed air, maybe some of that air could be shot into the turbo housing to get it to speed up?

Of course, this would be a different air reservoir from the brakes. 

 

What do you think about that?

Well let me try to get it back on track.

 

I can see how the ERSH system could work on a large diesel.

An electric motor withstanding the heat is absolutely no problem. There are many types of electromagnet wire. One type is a stainless steel clad copper wire with ceramic insulation. This type of wire is good for temperatures in excess of 700 C (1300 F). One probably would not use a brushed motor for this application, but there are a variety of synchronous and asynchronous motors that are already designed and used in high temperature hostile environments.

 

Even if one developed a instantaneous responding turbocharger would it make much of a difference? The computers control practically every aspect of locomotive operation. Do not the computers dictate how fast a locomotive loads? Even if the engineer could go from 0 to 8 in an instant, the computers would only apply power to the wheels slowly due to anti slip control, correct? 

 

Is the purpose of a different turbo charger to prevent engineers from purposefully making "throttle adjustments" to make flames shoot out the stack as seen in many you tube videos? 

I wouldn't go with compressed air. I think that it would take way too much under certain conditions. Some of you may be surprised at how quickly an air reservoir can be pulled down just using the sanders. Finding space for more air reservoirs with sufficient size could pose a problem and how much air pressure would be needed? The air compressors are only good for so much and under switching conditions could be taxed to their limit of recovery.

quote:

Even if the engineer could go from 0 to 8 in an instant, the computers would only apply power to the wheels slowly due to anti slip control, correct?

The odd thing about a GE is that, yes, you can go from idle to run 8 as fast as you can skin the throttle back and it normally won't shut the engine down (If you do that with an EMD, it will shut down as it is trying to catch up with throttle settings above run 5. You have to wait a little until you hear the engine catch up before going to run 6 +). Along with that, you are going from running 40-50 mph downhill in dynamic and then needing power to get up the hill. So, wheel slip is not a factor as the engine spools up.

 

Far be it for me to explain exactly how computers control everything (Wyhog has studied this much more than I ever did), but, the load regulator (and wheel slip system) figures into it somewhere. I have had GE's that would load very well starting a train and take you right up speed. Then again, no one that I know likes to switch with the darn things as they take too long to load. Especially, a single unit trying to start full tonnage up a grade before the weight shoves you the wrong way! But, this is straying from the intent of the question.

quote:

...would it make much of a difference?

That depends on the lay of the land. Flatlanders and going up long grades where more or less constant throttle setting are the norm, not so much. It is when you have a territory where there are a lot of throttle changes due to undulating track profiles, speed changes due to curves, or both. That is where power on demand makes the big difference.

 

PS.

BTW Rich, you are very correct.

Who says the motor has to withstand any excessive heat? Even a standoff of just a few inches from the turbo with some airflow in between would lower the temperature by dozens if not hundreds of degrees. That should be enough for some simple heat shielding between the motor and turbo to be adequate.

 

It's not like these machines don't already have extensive electrical systems on them.

 

However, the cost of retrofitting the fleet is probably prohibitive.

 

I bet you will see this on future locomotive designs, once it has had a few years to mature on the racing circuit.

GE's are 4 stroke.  But it sounds like some of these issues are computer program driven; maybe the programs controlling the prime mover could change.  Also, some of hese issues could be caused by the "Tier Series" polution control requirements.