Railroad Forums 

  • Higher speed rail- 125mph will put GE at disadvantage

  • General discussion of passenger rail systems not otherwise covered in the specific forums in this category, including high speed rail.
General discussion of passenger rail systems not otherwise covered in the specific forums in this category, including high speed rail.

Moderators: mtuandrew, gprimr1

 #1138026  by mtuandrew
 
Good question, Mr. Benton, though I would guess something similar to a Genesis. It also doesn't show what prime mover it has, what sort of traction motor design (though it hints that they won't be nose-suspended like most American locomotives), and whether it would be third-rail or Penn Station loading gauge compatible.

Keeping in mind this is an artist's conception only, I'm not sure what purpose EMD has in releasing the design, or who it is aimed at attracting as a customer.

Also, hammersklavier, I agree. Why would a domestic HST 125 clone have been so difficult?
 #1138323  by mtuandrew
 
dowlingm wrote:Isn't this the F125 Metrolink just ordered?
Good call.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EMD_F125

As for David's earlier question, a maximum axle load of 72,000 lbs (Wiki above) gives a maximum weight of 288,000 lbs, as opposed to 260,000 lbs for the Genesis. (Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GE_Genesis#P42DC) I don't know how closely either of those sets of numbers adheres to reality.

EDIT: For further discussion specifically about the F125, as opposed to the competition between GE, EMD and others, see http://www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopi ... =6&t=86709.
 #1138777  by mtuandrew
 
David Benton wrote:So has this monster actually managed to achieve 125 mph in testing ? 32.6 tonne axle load at 125 mph is just ridiculous . track will be hammered .
Maximum weight, Mr. Benton, not actual. I'd be surprised if it weighed more than a Genesis. Also, it hasn't been built yet, unless EMD has a test mule they aren't telling us about.
 #1138820  by David Benton
 
I'm just wondering if they are claiming 125 mph , in the knowledge its unlikely to be required for quite some time .
AFAIK , no nobody has achieved 125 mph with a single diesel engine , they all have a engine on each end of the train .
 #1139662  by amtrakowitz
 
David Benton wrote:I'm just wondering if they are claiming 125 mph in the knowledge its unlikely to be required for quite some time. AFAIK, no nobody has achieved 125 mph with a single diesel engine; they all have a engine on each end of the train.
The Class 67 (Prima/EMD JT42HW-HS) is a single diesel locomotive that operates at 125 mph alone on trains, and was tested at a top speed of 143 mph on the Madrid–Toledo high-speed line.
 #1140251  by David Benton
 
The following article mentions axle loading problems , and it appears it is not used above 100 mph in Britain .Limited route avaliability (class 8 only ) .
I concede the point it is possible to have 125 mph from a single diesel locomotive , but i think these articles make it clear it is very hard on the track . It seems to me a engine on each end is alot easier on the track and has other advantages . and the class 67 "only" weighs 88 tonnes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_67
 #1140543  by mtuandrew
 
amtrakowitz wrote:Just to go back over a half-century, the ALCO DL 109 was geared for 120 mph.
I seem to recall some early E units being geared that high as well, though I can't put my finger on which. Technically they have two prime movers, but being within a single carbody I count it as a single unit.

Regardless, the difference between 110 and 125 mph still isn't that great. A regeared P42 could hit 125 mph, assuming the trucks didn't hunt and there were fewer trailing cars than normal - no 15 car trains or anything.
 #1140565  by David Benton
 
There is a huge difference between 110 mph and 125 mph , as far as h.p required goes , and then it starts to cube as you go faster than that . thats when aerodynamics really comes into play , as air resistance increases to the power of 8 or something like that over 100 mph . (100 mph isnt just the magic "ton" because of the number , in the old days few vechicles could go much faster .
 #1140649  by The EGE
 
Mr. Benton and other interested parties: some notes on the physics.

Aerodynamic drag is proportional to the square of the velocity; thus, doubling the speed quadruples the drag. Power required to overcome that drag is equal to the force times the velocity; thus, power is proportional to the cube of the velocity. Doubling speed, then, requires an eightfold increase in power.

125 mph is about 14% greater than 110mph; this is equal to an increase of about 50% in aerodynamic drag.

A typical locomotive is about 3 meters wide and 5 tall. With a midrange drag coefficient of 0.75 (about what I'd expect for a moderately streamlined locomotive), it will require about 1140 horsepower at 110mph and 1680 horsepower at 125mph to overcome drag. (This number is 630hp at 90mph and 420hp at 79mph).

A typical consist of locomotive and 6 passenger cars weighs around a million pounds. Rolling resistance is directly proportional to velocity; doubling the speed doubles the power required. Using a typical coefficient of rolling friction of .002, our theoretical train will require 590 hp at 110mph and 670hp at 125mph.

These results lead to several conclusions. First, that 125mph is significantly more difficult for a diesel locomotive than 110mph; in this example, it's about 60% more power required. Second, that if one locomotive can do 110mph then two can (if geared properly) do 125mph, since you're getting another 4000 hp from that second locomotive for about 200hp worth of extra resistance.

Third, we see how important streamlining is at higher speeds. Below 90mph, rolling resistance is the dominant resistive force no matter what your drag coefficient - as any commuter agency can tell you, you can go 90 driving a box twice as old as I am. With a typical diesel like the Genesis, by 110mph air resistance is the majority of your power consideration, and is completely dominant by 125mph. A well-streamlined trainset with a drag coefficient of 0.3 would let you go 150mph with the same power as 125mph requires with a standard train.

Fourth, we see why electrics dominate everything above 125mph worldwide. At 200mph, even that streamlined trainset requires 3800 hp in this idealized simulation, and 5000hp at 220mph. (A good estimate seems to be to double the numbers given to give actual power consumption rates). A Genesis gives 4250 horsepower, while even an old toaster gives 5800 hp. The ACS64 is speced for 8600 hp, while the Acela runs at 12,300hp with both power cars online.
 #1140738  by David Benton
 
Thank you , the EGE , Those are pretty much the kind of %'s i remembered . Not impossible for a single diesel at 125 mph , but requiring alot more energy than the same load at 110 mph . I'll pm you my email . That kind of info is very hard to find on the web , by the way .

A related question , how do grades effect power requirements ?
i have often asked , would a train of the same weight use more energy going up a grade twice as fast ? ignoring aerodynamics , would the train use more than twice the energy for 1/2 the time to climb the grade ?