Greetings:
The titled incident is refered to in Matt Austin's posting in re-The Lynn Boiler Explosion in 1906. I don't want to further hijack Matt's posting, so I'll make my comments here.
As Trevor's photos graphicly illustrate, EFDTC No. 312, a meter gauge 2-10-4 built by ALCO suffered a exploision on August 15, 1981.
Unlike the Lynn boiler, No. 312 did not have a lap riveted boiler, it had typical butt strap construction.
More importantly, this explosion was due to mechanical failure, not low water.
In February 1982, Dennis Daugherty and I visited Tubaro, Brazil and were given a tour of their extensive shop facilities by one of their Assistant Mechanical Engineers, who spoke excellent English. As part of the tour, he showed us the remains of No.312.
The welded seam between the left side sheet and the combustion chamber "ear" was torn open for about 18". The weld had been inspected and no fault could be found with it.
The weld had failed because it had insufficient support due to mulitple broken adjacent flexible staybolts.
It was stated that the railroad had experience an upsurge in traffic and that to keep the locomotives out on the road, broken staybolts were often plugged rather than renewed, the shop planning to do the renewals in the future. One problem was that no record was kept of which bolts were broken...
Eventually enough adjacent bolts broke and the seam, now with insufficient support failed.
Interestingly, neither EFDTC nor the State government had a written proceedure for doing an investigation of a boiler explosion. Dennis and I sent them copies of old ICC boiler explosion investigations.
Remember 49CFR Part 230.39a...
J.David

This sounds like human error to me, with forseeable mechanical consequences. The value of critical documentation shouldn't have to be learned this hard.

dave

This image on the same subject was sent to me recently.

I'd never heard of this before, is there any further info on it somewhere?

Sorry, do not understand your question. Did you read the opening post?

What further information do you require?

FYI Here is a photo of the loco taken a few days before the incident

TH

I think we've discussed the EFDTC's locomotive situation in the 1980's here previously. There was a contemporary article in Railfan & Railroad about this railway. By this time, most of their locomotive's boilers were in very poor condition and basically warranted complete replacement. Apparently there was nowhere in Brazil that could handle the fabrication of replacements, so the railway was researching alternatives, including purchasing boilers from SAR 4-8-2's and retrofitting them to the 2-10-4's, importing complete 4-8-2's from South Africa, and even importing Garratts.

They eventually wound up importing a few 2-10-2's from Argentina, some of which were modernized by L. D. Porta.

All correct Hugh....just adding a photo sent last week that had not been previously seen by anyone outside the EFDTC railroad.

One of the Porta modified ex Belgrano 2-10-2's is still in operating condition and hauled a revenue coal train last July.

TH

The first posting says "built by Alco," but the photo shows a BLW builder's plate.

Which is correct?

There was some talk of this line going back into steam again. No?

David, et al:
You are correct: EFDTC No. 312 was built by Baldwin, not ALCO.
J.David

Tom,

The July 2012 revenue run with 18 loaded coal cars was the first for many years. It is correct that from time to time the railroad asks to borrow a steam loco from the museum while a diesel is being overhauled but this is usually for shunting only.

The primary reason for the July 2012 run was to validate the ability of the loco / crew for a week of steam hauled activity in July 2013 for the German tour operator FarRail when it is intended to replicate the daily activity from the late 1980's including loaded coal trains to the port of Imbituba an activity that is now completely finished steam or diesel.

TH

A couple of tidbits that I found on the internet while trying to find out some info on the 2-10-2 replacements for the 2-10-4's:

1. The engines were originally numbered in the 400's when in Argentina, but EFDTC renumbered them into the 200's (the one in the photo above is apparently then #205) not in numerical sequence from their old numbers.

2. The EFDTC liked the looks of the boiler front hanging bells on the 2-10-4's so put NON-WORKING bells of that type on the "used" 2-10-2's. Kind of interesting I think.

3. L.D. Porta "improved" some of the engines and from the larger stack on number 205 in the photo, it looks like this might be one of them.


Les

There's a section on my page about Porta's work at the railway:

http://www.trainweb.org/tusp/sergio/ter ... stina.html

According to info I received, he modified 3 locomotives which I believe included one 2-8-2 and two 2-10-2's. Modifications included the Gas Producer Combustion System and Lempor exhaust. In fact, it appears he was developing his Lemprex exhaust on these locomotives as the nozzle arrangement is slightly different from previous Lempors.