The SD45 had a "20-cylinder engine designed after a Japanese marine engine" - according to Williams/Bachmann

WBB should buy the Railking SD45 tooling from MTH, since MTH has lost interest in both versions of their SD45.

The photo - Looks like American made DD35 or DDA40X trucks, shortened fuel tank and extended platforms on an SD45.

Wait 'til Hot Water sees this! Hang on! It will be a wild ride. What a bunch of hogwash!

I also wonder where the various O gauge manufacturers get their info, and why they don't do any fact checking. The fact that the EMD 20-cylinder engine was a "stretched" 16-cylinder 645 is well known in the industry. If you have ever seen one, you would swear you were looking at a 645E...until you noticed how long it was!

If I recall correctly, it's also narrow gauge.

Rusty

Meter gauge, IIRC.

hello techie..........

WOW, 8 axles on a SD-45, I wonder its possible to make a standard 3 rail version of that engine ?

the woman who loves the S.F.#5021

Tiffany

Its official designation is DDM45, and yes, its meter gauge (hence the M in the designation).  I first came across these monsters in an issue of Extra 2200 South magazine in the late 1970's.

Stuart

They are so full of sh&% that their eyes must be brown!!!!!!

quote:

EMD stole the 567 design from the japs and that is why they bombed Pearl Harbor. I'm sure I read that somewhere on the internet so it must be true.

So, that's where Wakikipedia came from!

The internet also said the EMD 567 had ties back to the Winton 201 and Cleveland Diesel 278. Is this accurate info?

I don't know if I would call them direct ties, but GM bought the Winton engine company along with EMC to form EMD, and actually used some Winton engines up until they were able to begin production on the their own specific two cycle engine that started the 567-645 series.

Look up Gene Kettering, VP of Research & Development for GM, back in the 1920s and 1930s era. "Boss" Kettering was essentially responsible for the design & development of the two-stroke cycle, compression ignition engine we have all come to know and love as the 567/645/710 engines of today. 

"Boss" Kettering was also responsible for recommending General Motors Corp. invest heavily in both the Electro-Motive Engineering Company AND the Winton Engine Company,  both of which became wholly owned subsidiaries of GM, and eventually full "Divisions" of GM. Everyone is aware of EMD, but the Winton Engine Co. eventually became the Cleveland Diesel Engine Division, producing those famous 278 engines for the U.S. Navy, and the marine industry. CDED was eventually closed around 1960, and "combined" with EMD so that only the EMD line of diesel engines continued production for the railroad, marine, stationary power, and oil drilling market.

Not to be outdone.....Alco lifted the 251 engine from a Boer design, popular in

the Orange Free State/ Transvaal area, in the latter part of the 19th century!

.......The GE FDL series???    Use your imagination !

Ge first used the Cooper-Bessmer engine, and after having so much trouble with its design in the early 1960s, GE purchased the "rights/design" from cooper-Bessmer, and eventually "straightened it out" so to speak.

GM did something wrong with the v20 as it had crankshaft problems and I think has never produced a v20 again.  Didn;t most of the 45;s get v16 power when rebuilt.  The only 45 I see around mn is the original hustle mustle in original GN color scheme owned by MN Transportion Society and not sure but think it is still a V20.  Is that correct Hot h2o?

The EMD 20-645 engine did NOT have "crankshaft problems", there was a CRANKCASE structure/welding deficiency which RESULTED in crankshaft problems. Once the main bearing "A frames" where PROPERLY welded into the crankcase main structure, there were no further crankshaft issues. Virtually all the BN 45 series units got their earlier 20 cylinder "problem" crankcases replaced at time of overhaul, by way of a "policy adjustment" from EMD.

There are probably still many 20 cylinder 645 engines in service in the marine industry, as well as ALL the emergency stand-by units in nuclear power generating stations (called 999 units).  

Also, it is Hot Water!   NOT Hot h2o thank you.

The EMD 20-645E3 engines did have more than their share of crankshaft failures, although this seemed to be more of a problem in locomotives as compared to marine and stationary applications. EMD uses a fabricated (welded steel) engine crankcase as compared to cast blocks. I have to wonder if part of the problem was lack of attention to detail in alignment when engines were removed from locomotives and replaced after major rebuild. The V-20 engine was that much longer than a V-16, and it gets to be a really long crankshaft. The 20-cylinder engines generally fell out of favor by the late 1970's, and railroads quit buying them.          

When I worked for Transamerica Delaval on Enterprise engines, which are about twice the bore and stroke of the EMD 645 engines, we had to do crankshaft deflection measurements to be sure that the engine bed was in alignment, otherwise there was an increased risk of crankshaft failure - which is no small problem on engines of that size which may have a ship built around them.          

I still have a collection of photos of broken locomotive crankshafts and the lab reports on failure analysis, somewhere in my old files. There were more problems with reconditioned crankshafts and these lab reports often mentioned "circumferential grinding marks in the fillet area". I think this was on reconditioned crankshafts which often had the bearing surfaces built up to standard sizes with chrome plating.          

In 1995 EMD began making a 20 cylinder version of the 710 engine to produce 5000 HP for the SD80MAC locomotives.

Added note: I agree with Hot Water; I believe there was also a problem from EMD with their earlier versions of crankcases for the 20-645 engines.

No. I already explained, above, that it was a structural welding deficiency in the area of the main bearing A Frame forgings, which were/are welded into the main crankcase structure. Alignment of the engine to the main generator had nothing to do with the crankshaft failures. It was as simple as; when an A Frame main bearing forging "broke loose" from the crankcase, THAT specific main bearing was no longer in alignment with the other main bearings, thus leaving THAT journal UNSUPPORTED, resulting in a cracked/broken crankshaft.

Once that design/manufacturing deficiency was corrected, NO 20-645 crankcase/crankshaft problems occurred. Especially noteworthy were the improvements in the E3B and F3B crankcases manufactured after 1972, with serial numbers after 72J.

Also, those 20-710 engines are STILL going strong in SD80MAC service as well as marine service.

But Jack, where is the Japanese marine engine prototype which spawned the EMD 20-cylinder engine?

I can't seem to find it. 

I couldn't either. In fact, I'll bet the late "Boss" Kettering couldn't and is probably spinning in his grave over this crap!

I was referring to alignment of the engine on the locomotive frame. With the larger engines I used to work on, you could see changes in crankshaft deflection (measured between crankshaft webs at different stages of rotation) according to adjustments in the engine mounts. With larger engines like the Enterprise R and RV series there is more at stake and more attention given to this.

As older locomotives had engines changed out for major rebuilds, I'm not sure that much attention was paid to the possibility of the locomotive frames becoming distorted from draft action or accident damage.

As I mentioned, reconditioned crankshafts were more prone to failure, and the 20 cylinder crankshafts being that much longer could be more vulnerable. With a large and constantly aging fleet you get to see this over time. Sometimes crankshaft failures were part of a catastrophic engine failure that might have been triggered by a smaller component failure.

As I recall the E3B and F3B engine crankcases were beefed up to handle the low idle mod and higher HP output, respectively. Union Pacific's DDA40X locos had 16-645E3A engines set up for 3300 HP which preceeded development of the 3500 HP F3B engines. We were glad we didn't have a big fleet of 20-cylinder engines like SP and SF.

1) Since the oil pan on an EMD engine is essentially a structural sport member for the crankcase, the only alignment requirements are between the engine and the main generator, at the crankshaft output/coupling end, and the air compressor drive shaft, off the front end. It is VERY easy to determine alignment changes due to hard coupling buff loads on the under frame.

2) As stated above, it was/is very easy to determine any changes in under frame "alignment" relative to the diesel engine mounting pads. Actually, this is VERY rare anyway!

3) The crankshafts in EMD 16 AND 20 cylinder engines are two piece anyway, being bolted together in the middle. 20 cylinder crankshafts were no more "vulnerable" than 16, 12, or 8 cylinder crankshafts.

4) The crankcases for the E3B and F3 series engines were beefed up due to the increase in firing pressures which accompanied the improvements in piston and piston ring designs and materials, i.e. the stainless steel piston ring used on the "Fire Ring" piston design.

Hot Water, I see you are a wealth of information about EMD engines from your years of experience there. I got to visit the EMD factory at LaGrange several times and remember the wood block flooring, the long bays with overhead cranes, engine assembly area, a Rube Goldberg machine (correction: an INGENIOUS multi-tasking machine) that shaped and machined exhaust valves from raw hunks of metal, cafeteria in the basement, multiple buildings, two test tracks. Locomotive underframes riding around the plant upside-down on flatcars during the earlier stages of assembly, switched by an MP15AC demonstrator. Although when EMD production peaked at 5.5 units per day in 1980, everyone was working overtime and the paint shop was beyond capacity to do good work. But it was hunky-dory when the SD40-2 was king.

As I recall, the E3B engine incorporated various modifications for improved fuel efficiency and lower emissions including modified camshaft profiles and different injectors, and the low idle mod became standard on the E3B. But now I can't remember all the details that I used to know.          

Thanks for the memories of LaGrange.

Why would you call that exhaust valve manufacturing machine "Rube Goldberg"? That friction wielding patented process, which welds the steal valve stem onto the Inconell head, was develoved by a GMI student as his fifth year theses project. It became so efficient, with such a very low "reject ratio" that the valve line sometimes only ran three days a week.

By the way, production may have "peaked at 5.5 units per day in 1980", but that was no where near the REAL "peak production". For example, the McCook plant was producing 10 units a day during the war years of WWII (the engine line was something OVER 15 567 engines per day), and during the mid 1970s, it was not uncommon to be at 8 units a day, with one of being a difficult to build Amtrak SDP40F!

Thanks for the nice photos too.

Why would a SDP40F be hard to build?  The water tanks for the steam generators?

hello guys an gals.........

Very interesting !!!!!!!!! I learned few things today.  Keep up with the stories 

the woman who loves the S.F.#5021

Tiffany

Water tanks were the least of the problems:

1) The SDP40F model was a full width carbody unit.

2) A completely new design of cab signal/automatic train stop/automatic train control system capably of operating on the old PRR, C&NW, UP, AT&SF just for starters.

3) Twin steam generators in the rear of the carboy, but with "provision for" HEP generator sets to be possibly added at a later date (after the steam generators were removed, of course).

4) An internal boiler water supply tank with a special set of valves so that the internal tank could NOT be filled with water when the units operated over those railroads requiring lighter total unit weight.

5) Blended dynamic brake.

6) Amtrak specified type H tight-lock couplers, which had not been made for years, installed in an alignment control draft gear assembly.

That's all I can remember right now.

Interesting story about Amtrak's short-lived SDP40F:

http://atsf.railfan.net/cowls/sdp40f.html

"In September 1984, a deal was struck that gave Amtrak 25 CF7's and 18 SSB1200's from Santa Fe in exchange for 18 SDP40F's. Santa Fe quickly pressed several of the SDP40F's into freight service ..."

"As freight locomotives, the SDF40-2's experienced none of the derailment problems that had plagued them as passenger units."

Correct! For two main reasons:

1) The Santa Fe had good track!

2) When used in freight service, they didn't that light-weight, pice of junk Amtrak baggage car coupled right behind the SDP40F units.

Thanks everyone, this has been fun to read.

Bachmann should correct their on line catalog ASAP.  Unfortunately the print version may haunt them for a while.

"In September 1984, a deal was struck that gave Amtrak 25 CF7's and 18 SSB1200's from Santa Fe in exchange for 18 SDP40F's. Santa Fe quickly pressed several of the SDP40F's into freight service ..."

 

"As freight locomotives, the SDF40-2's experienced none of the derailment problems that had plagued them as passenger units."

And none of the SDP40F derailments occurred in passenger service on the ATSF.  The ATSF had good track and a lot of other railroads in the 1970s did not.  Guess where the derailments happened?

GM did something wrong with the v20 as it had crankshaft problems and I think has never produced a v20 again.  Didn;t most of the 45;s get v16 power when rebuilt.  The only 45 I see around mn is the original hustle mustle in original GN color scheme owned by MN Transportion Society and not sure but think it is still a V20.

Not so.  The Santa Fe kept many of their SD45 and F45 locomotives in service into the 1990s.  In fact one of the fun things for railfans in the Pacific Northwest was watching all the 45 series ATSF power running on Stevens Pass after the BNSF merger.  If the V20 had a reliability problem at that point why would one of the worlds largest railroads assign those locomotives to intermodal trains from a Pacific sea port carrying hot traffic to the east over two major mountain passes?

EMD also offers a 20 cylinder version of the 710.

And you should have visited the Montana Rail Link.  They assigned SD45s as the primary power to their heaviest main line trains over Mullan and Bozeman Passes until they received SD70ACes in 2005.

Many SD45s remain in service on railroads today with their 20 cylinder prime movers.

Look up Gene Kettering, VP of Research & Development for GM, back in the 1920s and 1930s era. "Boss" Kettering was essentially responsible for the design & development of the two-stroke cycle, compression ignition engine we have all come to know and love as the 567/645/710 engines of today. 

 

"Boss" Kettering was also responsible for recommending General Motors Corp. invest heavily in both the Electro-Motive Engineering Company AND the Winton Engine Company,  both of which became wholly owned subsidiaries of GM, and eventually full "Divisions" of GM. Everyone is aware of EMD, but the Winton Engine Co. eventually became the Cleveland Diesel Engine Division, producing those famous 278 engines for the U.S. Navy, and the marine industry. CDED was eventually closed around 1960, and "combined" with EMD so that only the EMD line of diesel engines continued production for the railroad, marine, stationary power, and oil drilling market.

I have to second that and then some. Eugene Kettering was deeply personally involved in the development of the General Motors Diesels in the 30s.

His father Charles "Boss" Kettering is one of the most under appreciated men of science in the 20 century.  Any of his inventions alone would rank him as a significant figure but his entire body of work is astounding.  GM bought Dayton Engineering Laboratory Company (DELCO) to get Kettering and his patents on breaker point ignition and the electric starter.  He advocated GMs acquisition of Winton because of his assessment of their diesel injector design and went on to oversee the development on not just the Winton 201, the Cleveland diesels like the 278 and the EMD 567 but the GM 71 series of diesels as well.  And he oversaw the development of the modern high compression overhead valve V-8 automotive engine that hit the market in the 1949 Cadillac and Oldsmobile.  He also worked with the oil companies to ensure that high octane gasoline was available for the modern high compression engines.

Kettering did more than any man to make more power available to more people at higher efficiency and less cost than any single individual before or since.  That increased efficiency also lead to the use of less fuel and the production of dramatically less pollution than the power sources that his engines replaced.  It is hard to imagine what our economy and our environment would look like without the revolution in marine, rail and highway transportation, agriculture, fishing and electrical generation that came about through the advances made by the Ketterings. 

If that sounds overstated I'll defer to Winston Churchill on the importance of one of Kettering's inventions in World War II.  He famously stated "The destinies of two great empires ... seemed to be tied by some god-****ed things called LST's."

Every LST had 2 EMD 567s as it's main engines. 

23 years later those LSTs could have had more power with just one 20 cylinder EMD 645.

Thank God the Japanese Navy never had an engine like that. 

Now back to the SDP40F.....

Why would a light weight baggage car derail a locomotive?  I would think it would be the other way around?

Did Amtrak ever consider a GP40P-2?  I think three were made for SP in '75-76?  BB's would have been easier on bad tracks.

Why did GM go with 2cycle and the others 4 cycle.  If GM had known about air pollution laws would they have gone with 4 cycle? 

Did Amtrak ever consider a GP40P-2?  I think three were made for SP in '75-76?  BB's would have been easier on bad tracks.

Amtrak called that the F40PH.  They went to a B-B unit in no small part because of the bad track they had to run on in the east.

Why did GM go with 2cycle and the others 4 cycle.  If GM had known about air pollution laws would they have gone with 4 cycle?

Two cycle engines are simpler, lighter for the same HP and less expensive to manufacture.  GM did develop a 4 cycle engine for the SD90.  Now, with advanced computer modeling the 2 cycle engine actually offers an emissions advantage.  EMD can do exhaust gas recirculation within the cerylinder to lower combustion temperature and reduce NOX emissions below that of a 4 cycle engine.  I wish computer models had been more advanced before Detroit Diesel ended 2 stroke engine production.  The 92 series were fantastic engines.

There were no "air pollution laws" to worry about in the 30's when this design came to be.

There are a number of advantages to a 2-cycle design. The engine is lighter with fewer moving parts (only an exhaust valve to worry about - no intake valve train at all.)

I was thinking BB from the get go instead of the SDP.  Then again, nobody thought Amtrak would last.

Rich,

The EMD 567, 645 AND the 710 engine series ar ALL 2 stroke cycle. The "new" EMD 265 H series engines are 4 stroke cycle.

Boss Kettering+Dick Dillworth=  Unstoppable !

Yep...my mistake. I got the 710 confused with the 256 H series. Thanks for correcting that.

It's called a brain f**t.

History repeats itself..and the ghost of the underwhelming success of " competitive" Fairbanks Morse locomotives with adapting marine service diesel engines lurks in the scrap yard.

The Fairbanks Morse opposed piston engines were an interesting beast. Two pistons per cylinder, two crankshafts, no cylinder heads, no valves, just two sets of ports in the cylinder walls. The lower crankshaft was advanced 12 degrees relative to the upper crankshaft, which provided advantageous assymmetrical port timing for uniflow scavenging.

Unfortunately I never got to see or hear FM's with OP engines in action. I believe the last significant fleet of FM locos was used for the SP commuter trains on the San Francisco peninsula up to 1974. Apparently they had good acceleration in that service. Someone told me that one reason why they lasted there was because the SP roundhouse crew had ex-Navy men who were experienced with maintenance of the FM opposed piston engines.

http://www.psrm.org/roster/diesel/fm/index.html

http://www.american-rails.com/fm-train-master.html