I just saw the update to the T-1 thread with the completed boiler barrel and that got me to thinking about the ASME/FRA issue. There are three new boilers being constructed in St. Louis, each one designed by a different team. I have been hearing rumors about trouble with these boilers over the conflicting ASME and FRA regulations regarding engineering standards. I thought that argument was firmly in the past and that there was at least tacit agreement about how a new locomotive boiler should be engineered and constructed.

Anyone know what is going on? This is kind of important to those folks who are risking hundreds of thousands of dollars on freshly designed boilers.

I have never heard anything of the sort. Obviously a new boiler is going to be superior to the old one. They are almost always thicker than the original. Locomotive boilers are small potatoes compared to those used in power plants, merchant ships, industrial plants, and other industries. I have seen water tube boilers the size of a small house with thousands of tubes. Boilers running steam turbines can run over 1,000 PSI. If they can build something like that and pass inspections I wouldn't worry too much about failing the FRA standards. The FRA standards and not difficult to accomplish. I have never heard of the FRA failing a steam locomotive test after a rebuild.

RTFC.

Reference to a "National or Industry Code" applicability are included.

I have never heard anything of the sort. Obviously a new boiler is going to be superior to the old one.

Really? then why did the Texas State only get 400 service days out of 316 boiler? They got 0 days out of the 500 new boiler. I have heard of several cases where the new boiler did not match the old frame and could not even be attached

They are almost always thicker than the original.

Going to thicker sheets does not allow the boiler to flex creating more internal stresses. So going thicker may not help flexibility and result in cracking.

Locomotive boilers are small potatoes compared to those used in power plants, merchant ships, industrial plants, and other industries.

But locomotive boilers are exposed to more people than power plants of freight shipping and so more people can be injured by an accident.

I have seen water tube boilers the size of a small house with thousands of tubes. Boilers running steam turbines can run over 1,000 PSI. If they can build something like that and pass inspections I wouldn't worry too much about failing the FRA standards.

New boilers have failed FRA inspection because the stress on the staybolts meet ASME but not the FRA lower stress. And boiler repairs have failed FRA inspections. Look at the list of banned topics on RYPN for a few.

The FRA standards and not difficult to accomplish.

True


Robby Peartree

These sound like engineering and design issues, not code issues. I also do not know how a new boiler can be built to replace an old one and it doesn't fit. The old boiler is sitting RIGHT THERE! Just go measure it, and then remeasure as needed.

Google "3801 german boiler"

That is one of several. One had a twist in it so the mud ring was at an angle when attached to the smoke box.

Robby Peartree

We seem to be beating around the bush here. It has been 18 years since CFR49 Part 230 became the rule for FRA steam locomotive boilers. Since then there have been LOTS of arguments about the ASME code and how it differs from Part 230. AND there were several boilers that died at birth because they followed ASME practice and not Part 230. I thought all of those issues, like stay bolt tension, full penetration versus fillet welding, etc. have been put to bed and we are now able to safely, and with confidence, build a new locomotive boiler. The rumors that I am hearing is that this is still an issue with the boilers currently under construction and is causing delays and redesign.

Is anyone willing to offer informed commentary?

The problem is simple..... How many shops around specialize in locomotive boilers?

How often do these shops get it wrong?

How many shops that DID get it wrong, were working on their first or second full locomotive boiler build, in modern times?

Pegasuspinto --

BINGO!!

Thank you! I was thinking the very same thing. The steam era is over, and it is never going to come back.

And all of the people who worked in it full-time as specialists in one particular job for many years are almost all gone, and the ones who are sill alive are all quite out of practice. All of the locomotive buiders and suppliers are gone, and so is almost all of the knowledge they had.

PCook's superb thread, "The Edge of History," is very important to this discussion.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=41304

You have to be trained by people who really know what they are doing, from doing it theselves successfully full-time for many years., and then do it yourself successfully full-time for many years, as part of a big industry that has been doing that work for many years, and be in an era when there are a lot of other businesses doing the same things in the same industry, in order to keep the essential kowledge base of that industry alive.

Respectfully,
Margaret

Not any kind of expert at all -- not an M.E., not ever in charge of a seam locomotive restoration -- but I have not spent the past +70 years asleep!

The key to doing well under both codes is to understand both codes and the differences and then go with the most "restrictive". Finding someone who understands both codes and writes the contract specifications so that both codes are meet is key to any projects success. Texas State RR two boilers engineering stamp was from an engineer in Electrical Engineering. Not exactly a dsipline that studies Locomotive boiler design.


Robby Peartree

As a result, at least in part, of Linn Moedinger and other's work, part PL was included in the 2015 ASME code. Section I, "Power Boilers" is the ASME code to which high pressure boilers are constructed. It is made up of many "parts" which are applicable to the style of boiler being built. Now, any code shop building a locomotive boiler will use part PL to do so. This will fix the issues that have caused ASME/FRA problems in the past. Rivets, stay load calculations, etc. are addressed.

Quality Assurance / Quality Control (such as warpage) is not a code issue.

The "L" in PL stands for "Locomotive", the first time that the US has had a boiler code specifically for locomotive boilers since 1952 (IIRC).

Mark, I thought it was brought back in the 2017 edition, though not sure? Maybe that was the modification to the safety valve rule? Not at work this week to check.

ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Section I Committee, Subgroup Locomotive Boilers (SG-LB) was created in 2010 to take on the task of creating a new Part of ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section I, Rules for Construction of Power Boilers that would specifically address rules for the construction of locomotive boilers 30" OD or greater and operating on track 24" gauge or larger and all locomotive boilers of riveted construction.

Part PL, Requirements for Locomotive Boilers was first published in the 2015 Edition of the Code. Requirements for locomotive pressure relief devices and fillet welded stays were added in the 2017 Edition. One of the primary missions of SG-LB was to create a Part that aligned the ASME rules for locomotive boilers with CFR 49, Part 230 more clearly. In fact, the Data Report, ASME Form PL-1, is based on the FRA Form 4. An FRA compliant boiler could always be built under the ASME Code, but the designer needed to be aware of the rules of both Codes in order to accomplish this. The rules for fillet welded stays were added, in part, to codify an attachment method accepted in Jurisdictions outside the United States. The rules for pressure relief devices were added to address the unique characteristics of locomotive boiler relieving devices.

By the second Subgroup meeting it became clear the historic boiler industry would benefit from a modernization of Part PR, Requirements for Boilers Fabricated by Riveting and supporting non mandatory appendices. The modernized Part PR and supporting parts Mandatory Appendix V and Non Mandatory Appendix A1 through A6 and A75 were first published in the 2013 Edition of the Code. The new roles included an upper temperature limit for heating rivets before driving of 2250° F. This generated quite a debate as the previously accepted upper limit was 1900° F. The ASME sponsored a study to determine the effects of heating rivets to 2250° F which determined no detrimental effects occur in rivets heated to this temperature.

SG-LB continues its work of creating and modifying rules for locomotive boilers and answering inquiries regarding specific Code issues. ASME Committee meetings are held once a quarter at different venues around the country. SG-LB does not meet in person every quarter. The next ASME meeting is in August in Washington, DC.

Thank you, Mr. Boschan for the exact information that I, as an interested layman, was looking for. It now appears that any new boiler being engineered and constructed has a consistent set of requirements. Finally!