Electric TM blowers and cooling fans

[EDM5970]

When did EMD go to electric TM blowers and cooling fans, thus getting rid of belts? I know the FTs had belts, but how about the F-3s? Also, what about passenger engines and switchers? I think the three phase system for those motors is one of EMD's best innovations, along with the unit injector (which really came from Winton).

Did EMD ever market a separate, belt driven, alternator for those aux. motors? I've seen RS-3Ms with electric fans and blowers, but the prime movers and main generators came out of E-units and had the combination D-12/D-14 or something similar. But what about some of the rebuilt switchers? UP had SW-10s with at least electric fans, and IC/ICG had SW-14s. I've also seen an SW-1 with electric fans. Just where did the three phase come from?

[mxdata]

The three phase AC auxiliary power system was introduced in the F-units with the F2 and F3, and in E-units with the E8. It was applied to the BL, GP and SD units from the beginning of production. The switchers in production at the time (the 1940s) retained mechanical drive auxiliary systems. The AC auxiliary system made installation and removal of components much simpler and allowed for sequencing of cooling fans. A few railroads later initiated programs to retrofit this system to switchers during major upgrade programs and occasionally applied it to re-engined ALCO RS units that got EMD engines and generators. Most of the machinery for these programs came out of E8 and E9 locomotives that were retired. As far as I know, all of these used the AC companion alternator that bolts up to the end bell of the main generator.

[EDM5970]

Mxdata, thanks for the information. I would imagine then that even the little six cylinder SW-1s got E unit main gens and alternators.

I am aware that Alco used an additional GY-27 for TM blowers on the PAs and all but the last FA/B-2s and the FPA/B-4s, but they were DC, with all those brushes to keep after. BLW and perhaps Lima used DC as well. EMD seems to have come up with a winner with that three phase system.

[Typewriters]

Interesting stuff! As an aside, Fairbanks-Morse initially used DC auxiliaries but, with the C-Line, changed to much the same concept of AC blowers that EMD employed.

Except in switchers, which later changed to mechanically-driven radiator fans, at least in a few examples. (Wouldn't have known that had my stepson not produced a manual which shows this very clearly!)

-Will Davis

[EDM5970]

I didn't mention F-M above because they used both AC and DC at different times. They also started out with Westinghouse electricals, then used (some) of their own and/or GE's electricals; and I forget in which order. Time to re-read Kirkland and some of my manuals-

[Allen Hazen]

FM's locomtive electrical history is very complicated!
The Erie-builts had GE electricals (including, I think, d.c. motors for a bunch of auxiliaries). Then they went to Westinghouse for the main, traction, electricals, and adopted a.c. for auxiliaries. I'm not sure how much of the smaller stuff was from Westinghouse: F-M had in-house electrical manufacturing capability.
Then the went to GE... but made their own traction motors for switchers.
---
Aside: sticking with d.c. for things other companies use a.c. for seems to be something of a GE tradition! Apparently the d.c.auxiliary motors (fan motors?) on the Erie-builts were part of what made them uncompetitively expensive: switching to a.c. for these things on the C-liners was a cost-reduction. ... Or so I hazily recall.

[railroadcarmover]

I own an FM H12-44 and it has DC accessories.
It has a DC "cooling fan" generator that runs the cooling fan motor as well as a DC "traction motor blower".

[Allen Hazen]

railroadcarmover--
Thanks for that... reality check!
I **thought*8 I remembered reading that F-M went from dc motors to ac for cooling fans as part of the design change change ftom the Erie-built to the C-liner (which was about the same time as the change from H10-44 to H12-44).
Possibilities:
(1) Switcher design didn't change when design of road units did.
(2) I misremembered.
(3) Both.

[Typewriters]

The switchers didn't change from DC to AC as far as I know -- but later units DID have mechanically-driven radiator fans. Wouldn't have known that except my stepson showed me an F-M manual that clearly shows this change.

-Will Davis

[timz]

"The three phase AC auxiliary power system was introduced in the F-units with the F2 and F3, and in E-units with the E8. It was applied to the BL, GP and SD units from the beginning of production."

But in the GP40 generation (and all the other 1950-1965 models?) the traction-motor blower wasn't powered by any electric motor-- it was somehow coupled to the diesel. The compressor always was too, in those days?

[mxdata]

The air compressor(s) in the older EMD products we have been discussing were mechanically driven from the engine, either directly or by an extension shaft on the bearing end of the main generator armature.

When the central air system was introduced to the EMD road locomotive product line starting with the GP22 (which became the GP30) the traction motor blower fan was positioned with the main generator blower fan in the central air compartment, driven by an auxiliary power takeoff which also drives the auxiliary generator. This PTO mounts on the turbocharger housing of turbo units. On roots blower road units with a central air compartment, the PTO shaft and bearings are enclosed in the crankcase ventilator support.

[EDM5970]

I thought that I had an answer, or was willing to accept the fact, that all of the road unit repowerings done by EMD used the D-12/D-14 main generator and alternator combination. But I received a Frisco locomotive diagram book yesterday which shows the RS-2s and FA-1s being repowered with 1500 HP 567Cs, but retaining the GE 564 main generators. I have seen photos of at least the RS-2s, and they had Geep hoods, radiators and electric fans. So, where did the three phase come from? Someone has to know-

I can see holding the units at 1500 HP because of cooling system constraints. The 564, and it's little brother 581, were used in RS-27s and C-424s, both at 2400 HP, so a 1750 HP 16-567-C would not have been a problem.

Did EMD manage to adapt the D-14 to the 564, bringing the field sliprings out the flywheel end? I think using a belt driven alternator, in place of the GE amplidyne exciter, (assuming use of EMD's battery field and faceplate load regulator) would have been easier than making up a custom 564.

Just academic curiosity here; I'm involved in a repowering project right now, but its not as complex as what EMD did for the Frisco, Rock, NKP and others. Replacing a 244 with a 251 is mostly a matter of footprint, all the auxilliaries are the same-

[mxdata]

Since the GE generator was originally designed to be bolted up directly to the ALCO 244 engine, and the EMD 567 does not have enough room under the roots blower supports to take the diameter of the GE generator frame, it would have required an additional spacer piece to get the generator further from the engine, and maybe an intermediate pedastel bearing to support the spacer shaft. I never got to see a GE generator adapted to an EMD like this, but I did see a considerable number of Westinghouse DC marine generators that were adapted to EMD engines, and they all had very long shaft extensions to get them away from the EMD engine blower supports. With the 16-567 already several feet longer than a 12-cylinder 244, and an ALCO FA carbody interior pretty cramped to start with, something doesn't sound right about this. It would sure help a lot if we were able to find someone who actually saw the arrangement they used and could describe it for us.

[EDM5970]

In an FA-2, I can see a space problem, with everything being skrunched together to make room for the optional boiler. The FA-1 was more spread out. (I've spent hours measuring both, coupled back to back.) Perhaps in the space (added) between the EMD 567 and the GE 564 there was room for an additional bearing and a modified D-14 alternator.

I think the usual EMD "plumbing stack" may have taken up a bit less room than Alco's equivalent as well. Maybe it got placed, with the compressor, way aft under the fans (EMD) and radiators, which were up high in an FA.
The EMD fans meant no eddy current clutch and right angle drive. That would have helped with space.

(The RS-3M, with a 12-567 from a passenger unit, retains the Alco side mounted radiators, with EMD fans on top. The 16 cylinder rebuilds used Geep hoods, with radiators and fans up high, which points to a length issue with the 16 cyl. engine.)

The Frisco RS-2s, NKP BLWs, and many others seemed very much like Geeps built on different frames and trucks, with different looking cabs and short hoods. But in the case of the NKP BLWs, I don't know if the Westinghouse main generators were retained.

All we can do is speculate, but yes, someone that saw these units could answer all my questions. Photos would be nice, too. They have to be in some engineering file, somewhere-

[Allen Hazen]

Indirect evidence at best...
I ***think*** I have read (in abelievable souce) that the BLW roadswitchers repowered by Alco for the Nickel Plate got General Electric GT581 generators in the process. Which makes me think that probably the EMD re-engined ones also got new generators.
---
As for Missouri Pacific: I have a vague recollection that the Alco roundnose (RS-2/RS-3) roadswitchers they re-engined were classed "GP-12", and I assumed that this meant they got 12-567 engines rated at 1200 hp. Their re-engined RS-11, on the other hand, had a railroad-assigned class designation suggesting a 16 cylinder engine.
---
Sorry, can't give any documentation on these: just memories of things read long ago.