What are the specs of this engine? I know the 14 cylinder inline is mammoth.. Over 100k horsepower and 5 million ft lbs of torque or some un-Godly numbers like that..
@EETechs,@hiyadroogs I know it been sometime but I found your debate over cargo ship propulsion interesting & humors However I think the facts speak for themselves all large cargo ships today use single screw 2 stoke low speed diesels. I am quite sure shipping Co's such as Mærsk, Bergesen, Vale, OSG & others would choose another form of propulsion if more economical. One side note all US aircraft carriers regardless of class use or used Steam Turbines for Propulsion regardless of Steam source
Diesel-electric is more efficient on smaller ships with high-speed engines, and especially ships like offshore vessels and fishing vessels with varying load.
These types of engines, which are too large for the aforementioned, run at a constant speed, just like a generator. Throttling is done by adding more fuel, and the propeller blade pitch is varied to gain more thrust. In this application there is no need for the generator/motor setup.
@joffeloff, I'm quite sure this ship has a fixed-pitch propeller for maximum efficiency. I don't even know if CP propellers go up to that power (50+ MW).
To add my hypothetical two-cents worth ... It seems to me that the diesel-electric offers distinct advantages: The diesel can be run at its most efficient speed constantly, which is what I think 17473039 was trying to say. It would also provide better RPM response at the driveshaft/screw, because electric motors respond more quickly to speed-change demands than huge diesels. On the flip side, changing one form of energy to another always comes at a cost, so electric may be less fuel-efficient.
@Blankenmarch, there are losses in the electric system, so diesel-electric powertrain is only used when it offers advantages that exceed the increased fuel costs. On the other hand the electric azimuthing thrusters have better hydrodynamic efficiency, but then again are more expensive... designing a ship power plant is not easy!
One of the advantages especially in passenger ships is that you don't need auxiliary engines for the hotel load - everything is just connected to the same network.
The advantages of diesel electric is that you can tune the diesel engine to produce a high power/displacement ratio, because the engine will only have to operate in a very narrow rev range, unlike in a straight diesel where power will have to be compromised with flexibility of power accross a comparatively wider rev range...
@17473039, well, most large single-engine/single-propeller cargo ships spend most of their time underway at constant speed so that's not an issue. Also, if the ship has controllable pitch propellers, the main engine can operate at constant rpm or in combinator mode (both RPM and pitch are adjusted) to maximize overall efficiency. Still, when wide variety in load and speed is needed, diesel-electric is the answer.
LOL! The nice thing about ship engines is you can WALK to every part, you don't have to reach your hand into a small pocket of space to get to the air intake for instance.!
Yes, everything is big, but you are still down to fractions of millimeters when checking vital parts. The air intake, btw, would be right on top and well reachable. :D
LOL! Yeah, I considered that, still small measurements in parts of the ship engine and when I said about the air intake, I said, where am I? The air intake is on top. But you know what I mean, guys like this should get top dollar for their work, these machines hall ass on the sea all day and all night.
Does container ship diesel engines power electric generators or are they direct drive engines? I always thought they were like Diesel-electric locomotive for the most part. I know alot about diesel engines, just not anything this big. I like diesel powered anything, but I really like thing I can run/operate by myself.
One of the big advant. of huge cross head 2 stroke diesels is, that u can drive the (variable pitch) prop. directly: Engine - short prop.shaft - propeller - finish. No gears or anything in between exept may be a prop.shaft driven power generator (used only in good weather), so that u don´t need any aux. diesels for the long run. Very solid power train.
@XELA2T Awesome! Thanks for the info! I love learning new things about diesel engines and really want to know more about these massive 2-stroke diesels!
I did sail in the engines not my life long, but a couple of years where I met these huge 2 stroke crude oil diesels, whom I may consider as "sailors best friend".
I will answer your questions about the injektion system, but I am on my way to write a number of comments that will descripe a valveless 2 stroke marine diesel from the bottom to the top. Just give me some time, it will be interestig anyway.
There is also not to forget, that each prop. (the bigger the more) is creating a dangerous torque momentum to the engines crankshaft, that needs to be absorbed. This moment. likes to press the cranks. either into the engine or to drag it out of the eng. depend. if there is forward or reverse drive. This moment. is caught up by a pressure bearing that is able to deal with big axial forces in both direc. to keep them away of the crankshaft.
@Xx69roadrunnerxX --1- There are valveless and valve 2 stroke marine diesels ( like this one here in the clip that has one big hydro driven exhaust valve in the center of the cylinder).The bigger power is always with the valve 2strokers, this is because these are truly charged. The valveless are not truly charged (though still very big and strong) because the ex.ports are above the scaven. ports and with this still open when scaven. ports are already closed by the upgoing piston.
@Xx69roadrunnerxX --2- So the Turbo on a valveless 2 stroke marine diesel engine is mainly resposible for a (very strong) scavening that realy leaves a "sweeped out" cylinder after each combustion, while the timing on a valve 2 stroke engine allowes to close the ex. valve before the scaven. ports are closed what results in a true charging (though this supercharging is never extended to the limit on a marine 2 stroke diesel).
@XELA2T Again, great info! You really know your stuff! I would guess you work on big marine diesel for a living then? Whats the injection system like on these engines? Do they have an injection pump run off the crank? HEUI fuel system? Different fuel system than what I mentioned completey? What are the injectors like? Are the injectors huge?
Hi there, yes, you can still spot one every now and then, but they are diminishing fast. There must be still thousands of them, though. I had one myself some 20 years ago. Were it not for its disproportionately high consumption and its dangerously weak cardboard chassis that made it a death trap in an accident, it would have made an ideal city car.
So the Rotor can not move faster or equal to the electrical field in the stator, this means that the more load applied to the shaft of the motor will slow it down, causing a greater difference in speed which helps develop more torque, right up until the point the motor becomes overloaded torque wise and slows down eventually to a stop.
Basically it is not synchronous and does not maintain the same speed.
Umm most modern ships use a brushless design on their motors, that means there is no physical electrical connection between the stator and the rotor. The speed of the electrical field as it rotates around the windings/stator is fixed depending on the input frequency and number of poles in the motor. As the direction of the electrical field rotates around the stator, it cuts across the squirrel cage bars in the rotor developing a current which allows the rotor to move.
EETechs, you may be right, but that would be entirely dependent on the revs that the electric motor developed said 100,000 hp. As you're aware, it's torque & rpm that produces HP. If quoted electric motor couldn't generate 68954 bhp down at 102 rpm, then its torque would be weaker than this diesel. But I fail to see your logic... A 100,000 bhp DIESEL would also out torque this 68954 bhp one. Also, even 100,000 hp is not spectacular in large jet engines. My point was about torque.
One thing about most electric motors is their torque increases under load where as I do not believe a diesel is capable of increasing its torque beyond it max. Another thing that is a particular characteristic of a synchronous 3-phase motor is they will maintain the same radial velocity even under HEAVY LOAD unless the pull out torque of the motor is exceeded in which case it will stall.
I did say 60-pole synchronous 3-phase motor. You got to remember more poles = low speed, but more torque.
EETechs, I think I understand your description. In diesel electric locomotives for example, the point is that the diesel prime mover can maintain max power revs independent of loco speed. The amperes driven into the traction motors increases & decreases inversely to the rail speed, thereby producing almost linear rail horsepower due to the increase in torque as the revs drop in the motors - at least in theory. But this is still finite dependent on the power source for the electricity.
What you are referring to is constant torque over a rev range, thus equating to a linear increase in horsepower. That is not the subject I am talking to you about. I am talking about taking any general type electric motor whether it be DC or AC hooked up to a power supply will increase its shaft torque if a load is increased upon its shaft. The difference only being an AC motor has breakdown torque (max torque is not at zero) where as a DC motor will have an increase in torque up to 0 RPM.
Part 1. EETechs, you certainly know your 'lecky' motors! But I was actually saying the opposite of your first sentence. Eg, variable torque, increasing as the revs drop, leading to linear horsepower over the working speed range. In theory, an electric motor can maintain constant rated horsepower down to the revs where torque output is unable to rise further, but that point is still entirely dependent on the strength of the magnets fitted & the amperage of the power supply to it.
Part 2. Irrespective of motor type, a motor can only increase torque within its rpm range up to the point within that range where maximum rated power is reached. For example, to generate 100 bhp @ 100 rpm requires 5257lbs/ft of torque. To develop 100 bhp @ 2000 rpm requires 263 lbs/ft, & at 4000 rpm only just over 131 lbs/ft. Therefore for any motor to maintain speed against resistance would require an increase in amperage to boost torque, which is limited by power supply & the rated output.
Part 3. For a motor to be able to continue to maintain its maximum rated torque at all speeds up to its maximum rated revs, would mean that its horsepower output would have to rise in a vertical straight line, which is not possible in practice except on a very minor scale. For an electric motor to equal the power of this diesel at 100 rpm, would require a stratospheric amperage that would need a generator set that would be too big to fit in the ship. Which is WHY it's diesel powered.
Well I tried to explain motor basics to you, but failed to give you a clear understanding. You are still wrong, but some of it right. I suppose you are not taking any electric machinery design classes, but that does not mean you cannot learn about the various electric motor characteristics. So If you enjoy reading then you need to pick up a book called "Electric Machinery Fundamentals" by Stephen J. Chapman.
Now school me in diesel engines or recommend me a book.
EETech, I'm picking up a note of exasperation from you, so I'm going to drop the discussion. I've enjoyed our debate because you know your subject well. My resistance wasn't because I dispute the superiority of electric motors, which is unquestionable, it was simply because of the parameters you described in your original post. Of course an electric motor 'could' be built to out-torque a diesel of this size, but is it possible in practice? Is there such a motor of 69000 hp in existance?
DRS makes a 50,000 hp electric motor that puts out 2,000,000 feet pounds of torque at 127 rpm. It needs a gas turbine generator to power it, but that alone with the motor is similiar in size with this. It actually saves money too. The reduction gears alone on a gas turbine can cost in excess of 40,000,000 dollars while the motor is around 13,000,000.
An asynchronous AC motor or a DC motor hooked up to a power supply will lose some RPM's to gain torque when a load is placed upon their shafts, but a synchronous AC motor will have the same RPM irregardless of finite load placed upon its shaft. In other words if you were to graph its torque curve it would be completely vertical up to maximum breakdown point which if exceeded then the motor will fall out of synchronization causing torque to decline, leading to motor stall.
I choose a synchronous 3-phase motor because in that horsepower size the other motor types are not available. You can only buy a 100,000 HP synchronous motor I believe which makes sense because of high efficiency versus a DC motor of that size and power factor of 1 which an asynchronous motor cannot attain such a power factor. I suppose their *could* be a 100,000 HP DC motor, but that would be totally ignorant to develop one unless it was for a definite purpose application.
@uppitybunny It matters because the mass ignorance of the population is brought up into thinking that those reciprocating engines are godly when it comes to torque when in reality electric easily crushes them. Education is very important and so people should know the true god of torque. Only a rocket engine is more powerful or your futuristic view engine (if we ever get that far haha).
@EETechs, how do you measure the torque of a rocket engine?
.
It's also pretty stupid to compare 100k hp electric motor to a 70k hp diesel engine. Of course a 70k hp electric motor has more torque than a diesel engine of equal size, but 100k vs. 70k makes you just look stupid. Of course an F1 car is faster than a Prius etc.
.
Also, what was your point? Electric motors are not good for what this engine is designed for, i.e. propelling large cargo ships. They'll ruin the fuel economy.
@tupsumato With very complex mathematics as it is not possible to put a rocket on a pole connected to a torque measuring device. The forces are too great. People don't call rocket scientists the most intelligent people for no reason. Actually, lots of ships use electric propulsion drive where the diesel engine turns a generator like the set up of diesel-electric freight trains. Our air craft carriers are a fine example of this. Yes, even for equal HP, electric pretty much wins against diesel.
@EETechs, perhaps we could use a turbine to transform the thrust produced by the rocket engine into a rotary motion and measure the torque from the shaft, but otherwise I wouldn't say that such engine produced any torque.
@EETechs, I know that many ships use diesel-electric powertrain. It has its advantages, especially with azimuth thrusters. However, the best solution for large container ships (like this), oil tankers etc. is one low-speed diesel engine connected directly to a large fixed-pitch propeller. It's the most efficient solution, and because of that it's the most common type of propulsion machinery arrangement in the world.
fuel consumption is about 130 tons per day for running main engine for propulsion and about 25 ton per day for running generators for electrical power supply
Does anybody here know if the traditional injection Wartsila RTA96C uses an electronic control, or a mechanical one. A reply would be very much appretiated.
But it would be hard to operate this engine with out electronics. Maybe there is some electronic controls in diferent parts of the ships or on a differant place on this engine. Those electronics would be probably control engine temps and tuning on such a large machine. Some guys on this site think that common rail injection system's on Wartsila's are bad and have problems often. Is this true and is it true that electronic common rail on these engines make them quieter? Reply would be great.
These engines run so slowly (sometimes down to 60-70 rpm) that a ventilation system has the time to blow out the exaust gases, between the two strokes. So, the combustion chamber is clean as in a 4 strokes engine.
it's funny to think about how slow that piston is moving, but then think about the bore and the size of the thing...also I'm surprised they use 2 strokes because of emissions and all that good stuff, but there's probably a reason i just don't know of.
Engines on ships are pretty much exempt from any kind of emissions laws. The 2 stroke is lighter and makes more power for the RPM than a 4 stroke. It's not better, it's just more economical.
@mickeymoose76 The first Post Panamax containerships used about $500,000.oo dollars (U.S.) worth of Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO) per 35 day voyage to the Orient and back in about 1999 but fuel is considerably more expensive now. With a larger load of all electric refrigerated containers it takes more fuel. Many times 300 refrigerated conatiners of frozen and chilled cargo is worth more than the ship.
@tnphysics Mainly frozen or chilled perishable food products. Seafood, chilled beef (+29F) -1.7C, vegetables, fruit, and meats of all types. Also plants, pharmaceuticals, battery powered greeting cards, cream powder, eggs, milk, and other things. The five C-10 vessels built in 1988 in Germany exclusively for the U.S. flag, U.S. crew merchant mariners. The best and highest paid union engineers in the world. I many times brought 'live swamp eels' from Hong Kong to Kaosiung. I will post videos.
because there is a necessary for a power not for a spinning frequency! to move these ships the powerfull engines are needed, high rpm couldn't give such power!
Also big single propellers on ships like this need a low rpm to work as effective as possible. Slow speed engines can be connected directly to the propeller, without any big and very expensive gear box.
The bigger the prop, the slower you may turn it in the water.These ships have big single (variable pitch) prop`s. If if you let them run with too high revs, they cause cavitation whitch is not only extremly noisy but may destroy the prop. itself in the worst case. Therefore 4 stroke engines need (a simple but very big / expensive) reduction gearbox because they gain their power at revs. that are no more suitable for a direk driving.
I was wondering. When these shios are broken up for scrap, where does the engine go? is ti normally just scrapped or re used?...i meen its huge and vary powerfull. 51.420kW!! That a lot..nad hook up a mean generator to that baby and you got some power on hand.
engines are mostly bought back by the manufacturers and overhauled with new liners and bearings and components. crankshafts that's really hard to get cause the long deliverytime are also reused..
it's cuite cool that wärtsilä is making 6 brand new NOHAB Polar F212V engines.. a model they stopped manufacture in the early 80's or even earlier if i remember correctly..
The Wartsila-Sulzer RTA96-C turbocharged two-stroke diesel engine available in 6 through 14 cylinder versions, all are inline engines. Each cylinder displaces 111,143 cubic inches (1820 liters) and produces 7780 horsepower. Total displacement comes out to 1,556,002 cubic inches (25,480 liters) for the fourteen cylinder version. That is a huge engine!!!Look it up, amazing.
the mechanic at ;25 looks gene simmons.Must be his night job?
mastersduhgree 1 month ago
My first car was a Trabant with a two-stroke engine, but that was smaller
istvanklein 3 months ago
@istvanklein This is a diesel 2 stroke, nothing to due with a common gasoline 2 troke
oiseautempete 2 months ago
@oiseautempete
I know. My comment was meant as a joke.
istvanklein 2 months ago
massive amount of CC's and it still goes ring a ding ding lol
DeeperDarkest 4 months ago
and how much does each piston weigh roughly? Sorry for all the questions...I'm just curious :)
scott93257 5 months ago
What are the specs of this engine? I know the 14 cylinder inline is mammoth.. Over 100k horsepower and 5 million ft lbs of torque or some un-Godly numbers like that..
scott93257 5 months ago
ring ding ding ding
msgoods100 5 months ago
@EETechs,@hiyadroogs I know it been sometime but I found your debate over cargo ship propulsion interesting & humors However I think the facts speak for themselves all large cargo ships today use single screw 2 stoke low speed diesels. I am quite sure shipping Co's such as Mærsk, Bergesen, Vale, OSG & others would choose another form of propulsion if more economical. One side note all US aircraft carriers regardless of class use or used Steam Turbines for Propulsion regardless of Steam source
gullreefclub 6 months ago
Huge turbo right there 1:16
96canon 6 months ago
@tupsumato, CP propellers are constructed for a power output of max. 30MW. But this is allready a lot of power.
bigcyz 1 year ago
Diesel-electric is more efficient on smaller ships with high-speed engines, and especially ships like offshore vessels and fishing vessels with varying load.
These types of engines, which are too large for the aforementioned, run at a constant speed, just like a generator. Throttling is done by adding more fuel, and the propeller blade pitch is varied to gain more thrust. In this application there is no need for the generator/motor setup.
joffeloff 1 year ago
@joffeloff, I'm quite sure this ship has a fixed-pitch propeller for maximum efficiency. I don't even know if CP propellers go up to that power (50+ MW).
tupsumato 1 year ago
To add my hypothetical two-cents worth ... It seems to me that the diesel-electric offers distinct advantages: The diesel can be run at its most efficient speed constantly, which is what I think 17473039 was trying to say. It would also provide better RPM response at the driveshaft/screw, because electric motors respond more quickly to speed-change demands than huge diesels. On the flip side, changing one form of energy to another always comes at a cost, so electric may be less fuel-efficient.
Blankenmarch 1 year ago
@Blankenmarch, there are losses in the electric system, so diesel-electric powertrain is only used when it offers advantages that exceed the increased fuel costs. On the other hand the electric azimuthing thrusters have better hydrodynamic efficiency, but then again are more expensive... designing a ship power plant is not easy!
One of the advantages especially in passenger ships is that you don't need auxiliary engines for the hotel load - everything is just connected to the same network.
tupsumato 1 year ago
The advantages of diesel electric is that you can tune the diesel engine to produce a high power/displacement ratio, because the engine will only have to operate in a very narrow rev range, unlike in a straight diesel where power will have to be compromised with flexibility of power accross a comparatively wider rev range...
17473039 1 year ago
@17473039, well, most large single-engine/single-propeller cargo ships spend most of their time underway at constant speed so that's not an issue. Also, if the ship has controllable pitch propellers, the main engine can operate at constant rpm or in combinator mode (both RPM and pitch are adjusted) to maximize overall efficiency. Still, when wide variety in load and speed is needed, diesel-electric is the answer.
tupsumato 1 year ago
That's a massive engine. Question, what are those big round things hanging on the wall at the top level of the engine room?
One more question, how old is the ship?
misterrasmussen 1 year ago
i can listen the whole day to this sound! :)
mmm, may be i need to think of a two stroke diesel in my boat ;)
thanks for the video,
bitonw 1 year ago
quit the place to see..
clnmyjts 2 years ago
Man, I'd love to hear what that thing sounds like at startup.
greenfruitface 2 years ago 3
It is a boat motor!!
dieselducy 2 years ago
IS THAT IN A SPACE SHIP
andrew125cr 2 years ago
SOMETIMES
Nupetiet 2 years ago
lol, your a dick!
DieselEngineering 2 years ago
Comment removed
65Dart 2 years ago
LOL! The nice thing about ship engines is you can WALK to every part, you don't have to reach your hand into a small pocket of space to get to the air intake for instance.!
mysticalwonder7 2 years ago 7
Yes, everything is big, but you are still down to fractions of millimeters when checking vital parts. The air intake, btw, would be right on top and well reachable. :D
AggemamManden 2 years ago 2
LOL! Yeah, I considered that, still small measurements in parts of the ship engine and when I said about the air intake, I said, where am I? The air intake is on top. But you know what I mean, guys like this should get top dollar for their work, these machines hall ass on the sea all day and all night.
mysticalwonder7 2 years ago
lol@mysticalwonder7
marjianto89 1 year ago
@mysticalwonder7 Yeah the engine is a room :P
danielcrawford1991 5 months ago
Prolly needs an oil truck to change the oil lol. Air filter must be the size of an average bedroom haha.
Hellknight3d 2 years ago
Comment removed
Ninehunid415 2 years ago
I assume that this is a nine cylinder Wärtsilä-Sulzer RT flex 96-C, no?
Koseiko2008 2 years ago 2
RTA, not a flex.
DieselEngineering 2 years ago
@DieselEngineering roughly what % of the new engines are the flex type?
tnphysics 9 months ago
what a beast!
RAF92Warhawk 2 years ago
i would hate to change the oil on that lol
cumminonchevy 2 years ago
it is easy...just open some valves to line up the system, and start the LO transer pump.
smytb 2 years ago
A guy at my work would fill it one gallon at a time and thats just 5 gallons of engine oil lol
cumminonchevy 2 years ago
it's rather simply operation and you will not even touch any oli drop. Just open the proper valves and start the oil feed pump :)
rabinowsky 2 years ago
Hmm... Looks like a Sulzer RTA
Fireman208134 2 years ago 2
thats a huge bitch...
6redline3 2 years ago
umm will this fit on my moped?
XboxNerd08 3 years ago
it depends on how big your moped is.
Jasoniscool1 2 years ago
lol i know its sarcasm
XboxNerd08 2 years ago
at 1:25 r they turbos he is walking past
r3000sky 3 years ago
yes they are
clessielc 3 years ago
wow lol never seen 1s so big
r3000sky 3 years ago
thats what she said!!!
philritter21 2 years ago
Man, can you imagine the airflow needed to turn one of those monsters? That's crazy!
farrisk 2 years ago
i no each cylinder cc must b like big lol
r3000sky 2 years ago
what a wonderful place to work...
mogyi69 3 years ago
holy cow thats 3,550,455 ft/lbs of torque
jdsanchez473 3 years ago
Not to mention a motor is much more durable, and there is much less of an upkeep.
Pingletons 3 years ago
Great Vid!
CAPINAUS 3 years ago
Does container ship diesel engines power electric generators or are they direct drive engines? I always thought they were like Diesel-electric locomotive for the most part. I know alot about diesel engines, just not anything this big. I like diesel powered anything, but I really like thing I can run/operate by myself.
Xx69roadrunnerxX 3 years ago
@Xx69roadrunnerxX
One of the big advant. of huge cross head 2 stroke diesels is, that u can drive the (variable pitch) prop. directly: Engine - short prop.shaft - propeller - finish. No gears or anything in between exept may be a prop.shaft driven power generator (used only in good weather), so that u don´t need any aux. diesels for the long run. Very solid power train.
XELA2T 1 year ago
@XELA2T Awesome! Thanks for the info! I love learning new things about diesel engines and really want to know more about these massive 2-stroke diesels!
Again, thanks for the info man! Appreciate it!
Xx69roadrunnerxX 1 year ago
@Xx69roadrunnerxX
I did sail in the engines not my life long, but a couple of years where I met these huge 2 stroke crude oil diesels, whom I may consider as "sailors best friend".
I will answer your questions about the injektion system, but I am on my way to write a number of comments that will descripe a valveless 2 stroke marine diesel from the bottom to the top. Just give me some time, it will be interestig anyway.
XELA2T 1 year ago
@XELA2T Awesome, thanks! Feel free to send me a personal message if you want. Could be easier that way.
Xx69roadrunnerxX 1 year ago
@Xx69roadrunnerxX
There is also not to forget, that each prop. (the bigger the more) is creating a dangerous torque momentum to the engines crankshaft, that needs to be absorbed. This moment. likes to press the cranks. either into the engine or to drag it out of the eng. depend. if there is forward or reverse drive. This moment. is caught up by a pressure bearing that is able to deal with big axial forces in both direc. to keep them away of the crankshaft.
XELA2T 1 year ago
@XELA2T Thanks for the great info!
Xx69roadrunnerxX 1 year ago
@Xx69roadrunnerxX --1- There are valveless and valve 2 stroke marine diesels ( like this one here in the clip that has one big hydro driven exhaust valve in the center of the cylinder).The bigger power is always with the valve 2strokers, this is because these are truly charged. The valveless are not truly charged (though still very big and strong) because the ex.ports are above the scaven. ports and with this still open when scaven. ports are already closed by the upgoing piston.
XELA2T 1 year ago
@Xx69roadrunnerxX --2- So the Turbo on a valveless 2 stroke marine diesel engine is mainly resposible for a (very strong) scavening that realy leaves a "sweeped out" cylinder after each combustion, while the timing on a valve 2 stroke engine allowes to close the ex. valve before the scaven. ports are closed what results in a true charging (though this supercharging is never extended to the limit on a marine 2 stroke diesel).
XELA2T 1 year ago
@XELA2T Again, great info! You really know your stuff! I would guess you work on big marine diesel for a living then? Whats the injection system like on these engines? Do they have an injection pump run off the crank? HEUI fuel system? Different fuel system than what I mentioned completey? What are the injectors like? Are the injectors huge?
Thanks!
Xx69roadrunnerxX 1 year ago
I learned alot reading your comments! You guys know your stuff.
Xx69roadrunnerxX 3 years ago
In Eastern Europe, 2 stroke engines are normally associated with Trabant cars
istvanklein 3 years ago
In the US of A, chain-saws and GM/Detroit diesels (at least, up to 4200bhp, in locos.)
Any Trabbies still running?
woodscritter 3 years ago
Hi there, yes, you can still spot one every now and then, but they are diminishing fast. There must be still thousands of them, though. I had one myself some 20 years ago. Were it not for its disproportionately high consumption and its dangerously weak cardboard chassis that made it a death trap in an accident, it would have made an ideal city car.
istvanklein 3 years ago
Nice engine, Chief.
kimmer6 3 years ago
So the Rotor can not move faster or equal to the electrical field in the stator, this means that the more load applied to the shaft of the motor will slow it down, causing a greater difference in speed which helps develop more torque, right up until the point the motor becomes overloaded torque wise and slows down eventually to a stop.
Basically it is not synchronous and does not maintain the same speed.
ephoricone 3 years ago
Umm most modern ships use a brushless design on their motors, that means there is no physical electrical connection between the stator and the rotor. The speed of the electrical field as it rotates around the windings/stator is fixed depending on the input frequency and number of poles in the motor. As the direction of the electrical field rotates around the stator, it cuts across the squirrel cage bars in the rotor developing a current which allows the rotor to move.
ephoricone 3 years ago
nothing beats the sound of a two stroke engine
honborg 3 years ago 7
@honborg Unless it is the sound of compound steam
Robkat3751 1 year ago
68954 bhp @ 102 rpm, means that this mighty diesel engine is grunting out 3,519,399 lbs/ft of torque!!!! Or, the equivalent of 1600 metric ft/tons!!
hiyadroogs 3 years ago 3
youd be hoping the prop is efficient or its just an egg beater....a very big one lol
trahcceb 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
A 60 pole 100,000 HP synchronous 3-phase motor would destroy this diesel in a torque contest easily..
EETechs 3 years ago
And?
DieselEngineering 3 years ago 5
so what?
majorsztos 3 years ago
EETechs, you may be right, but that would be entirely dependent on the revs that the electric motor developed said 100,000 hp. As you're aware, it's torque & rpm that produces HP. If quoted electric motor couldn't generate 68954 bhp down at 102 rpm, then its torque would be weaker than this diesel. But I fail to see your logic... A 100,000 bhp DIESEL would also out torque this 68954 bhp one. Also, even 100,000 hp is not spectacular in large jet engines. My point was about torque.
hiyadroogs 3 years ago
One thing about most electric motors is their torque increases under load where as I do not believe a diesel is capable of increasing its torque beyond it max. Another thing that is a particular characteristic of a synchronous 3-phase motor is they will maintain the same radial velocity even under HEAVY LOAD unless the pull out torque of the motor is exceeded in which case it will stall.
I did say 60-pole synchronous 3-phase motor. You got to remember more poles = low speed, but more torque.
EETechs 3 years ago
EETechs, I think I understand your description. In diesel electric locomotives for example, the point is that the diesel prime mover can maintain max power revs independent of loco speed. The amperes driven into the traction motors increases & decreases inversely to the rail speed, thereby producing almost linear rail horsepower due to the increase in torque as the revs drop in the motors - at least in theory. But this is still finite dependent on the power source for the electricity.
hiyadroogs 3 years ago
Part1
What you are referring to is constant torque over a rev range, thus equating to a linear increase in horsepower. That is not the subject I am talking to you about. I am talking about taking any general type electric motor whether it be DC or AC hooked up to a power supply will increase its shaft torque if a load is increased upon its shaft. The difference only being an AC motor has breakdown torque (max torque is not at zero) where as a DC motor will have an increase in torque up to 0 RPM.
EETechs 3 years ago
Part 1. EETechs, you certainly know your 'lecky' motors! But I was actually saying the opposite of your first sentence. Eg, variable torque, increasing as the revs drop, leading to linear horsepower over the working speed range. In theory, an electric motor can maintain constant rated horsepower down to the revs where torque output is unable to rise further, but that point is still entirely dependent on the strength of the magnets fitted & the amperage of the power supply to it.
hiyadroogs 3 years ago
Part 2. Irrespective of motor type, a motor can only increase torque within its rpm range up to the point within that range where maximum rated power is reached. For example, to generate 100 bhp @ 100 rpm requires 5257lbs/ft of torque. To develop 100 bhp @ 2000 rpm requires 263 lbs/ft, & at 4000 rpm only just over 131 lbs/ft. Therefore for any motor to maintain speed against resistance would require an increase in amperage to boost torque, which is limited by power supply & the rated output.
hiyadroogs 3 years ago
Part 3. For a motor to be able to continue to maintain its maximum rated torque at all speeds up to its maximum rated revs, would mean that its horsepower output would have to rise in a vertical straight line, which is not possible in practice except on a very minor scale. For an electric motor to equal the power of this diesel at 100 rpm, would require a stratospheric amperage that would need a generator set that would be too big to fit in the ship. Which is WHY it's diesel powered.
hiyadroogs 3 years ago
Well I tried to explain motor basics to you, but failed to give you a clear understanding. You are still wrong, but some of it right. I suppose you are not taking any electric machinery design classes, but that does not mean you cannot learn about the various electric motor characteristics. So If you enjoy reading then you need to pick up a book called "Electric Machinery Fundamentals" by Stephen J. Chapman.
Now school me in diesel engines or recommend me a book.
EETechs 3 years ago
EETech, I'm picking up a note of exasperation from you, so I'm going to drop the discussion. I've enjoyed our debate because you know your subject well. My resistance wasn't because I dispute the superiority of electric motors, which is unquestionable, it was simply because of the parameters you described in your original post. Of course an electric motor 'could' be built to out-torque a diesel of this size, but is it possible in practice? Is there such a motor of 69000 hp in existance?
hiyadroogs 3 years ago
DRS makes a 50,000 hp electric motor that puts out 2,000,000 feet pounds of torque at 127 rpm. It needs a gas turbine generator to power it, but that alone with the motor is similiar in size with this. It actually saves money too. The reduction gears alone on a gas turbine can cost in excess of 40,000,000 dollars while the motor is around 13,000,000.
Pingletons 3 years ago 2
Thanks for the information, Pingletons.
hiyadroogs 3 years ago
you are full of knowledge. that is beautiful.
cornholio114 3 years ago
Part2
An asynchronous AC motor or a DC motor hooked up to a power supply will lose some RPM's to gain torque when a load is placed upon their shafts, but a synchronous AC motor will have the same RPM irregardless of finite load placed upon its shaft. In other words if you were to graph its torque curve it would be completely vertical up to maximum breakdown point which if exceeded then the motor will fall out of synchronization causing torque to decline, leading to motor stall.
EETechs 3 years ago
Part3
I choose a synchronous 3-phase motor because in that horsepower size the other motor types are not available. You can only buy a 100,000 HP synchronous motor I believe which makes sense because of high efficiency versus a DC motor of that size and power factor of 1 which an asynchronous motor cannot attain such a power factor. I suppose their *could* be a 100,000 HP DC motor, but that would be totally ignorant to develop one unless it was for a definite purpose application.
EETechs 3 years ago
@EETechs And the warp drive from the Starship Enterprise would destroy that. Who cares?
uppitybunny 1 year ago
@uppitybunny It matters because the mass ignorance of the population is brought up into thinking that those reciprocating engines are godly when it comes to torque when in reality electric easily crushes them. Education is very important and so people should know the true god of torque. Only a rocket engine is more powerful or your futuristic view engine (if we ever get that far haha).
EETechs 1 year ago
@EETechs, how do you measure the torque of a rocket engine?
.
It's also pretty stupid to compare 100k hp electric motor to a 70k hp diesel engine. Of course a 70k hp electric motor has more torque than a diesel engine of equal size, but 100k vs. 70k makes you just look stupid. Of course an F1 car is faster than a Prius etc.
.
Also, what was your point? Electric motors are not good for what this engine is designed for, i.e. propelling large cargo ships. They'll ruin the fuel economy.
tupsumato 1 year ago
@tupsumato With very complex mathematics as it is not possible to put a rocket on a pole connected to a torque measuring device. The forces are too great. People don't call rocket scientists the most intelligent people for no reason. Actually, lots of ships use electric propulsion drive where the diesel engine turns a generator like the set up of diesel-electric freight trains. Our air craft carriers are a fine example of this. Yes, even for equal HP, electric pretty much wins against diesel.
EETechs 1 year ago
@EETechs, perhaps we could use a turbine to transform the thrust produced by the rocket engine into a rotary motion and measure the torque from the shaft, but otherwise I wouldn't say that such engine produced any torque.
tupsumato 1 year ago
@EETechs, I know that many ships use diesel-electric powertrain. It has its advantages, especially with azimuth thrusters. However, the best solution for large container ships (like this), oil tankers etc. is one low-speed diesel engine connected directly to a large fixed-pitch propeller. It's the most efficient solution, and because of that it's the most common type of propulsion machinery arrangement in the world.
tupsumato 1 year ago
@tupsumato haha, yeah, no twisting force in a rocket
impavitus 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@EETechs And the warp drive from the Starship Enterprise would destroy that. Who cares?
uppitybunny 1 year ago
@EETechs And the warp drive from the Starship Enterprise would destroy that. Who cares?
uppitybunny 1 year ago
@EETechs
Not many 3 pahse supplies in the middle of the ocean
Petterjunior 1 year ago
I would love to see one of those things up close and personal..
scott93257 3 years ago
fuel consumption is about 130 tons per day for running main engine for propulsion and about 25 ton per day for running generators for electrical power supply
nirvanazen 3 years ago
The ammount of fuel it burns is beyond belief....
JXDeaLz 3 years ago
2STROKEs 4-ever
2StrokeBurnOut 3 years ago
awesome, thanks for that m8 :)
RacewallFan 3 years ago
Does anybody here know if the traditional injection Wartsila RTA96C uses an electronic control, or a mechanical one. A reply would be very much appretiated.
25HNA6 3 years ago
RTA96C are mechanical.
This is a RTA96C, mechanical pumps can be seen on the second level.
DieselEngineering 3 years ago
But it would be hard to operate this engine with out electronics. Maybe there is some electronic controls in diferent parts of the ships or on a differant place on this engine. Those electronics would be probably control engine temps and tuning on such a large machine. Some guys on this site think that common rail injection system's on Wartsila's are bad and have problems often. Is this true and is it true that electronic common rail on these engines make them quieter? Reply would be great.
25HNA6 3 years ago
69 MILA cavalli @ 102 rpm!! V'immaginate la coppia e soprattutto la cilindrata di questo bestione??
maidiremirko 3 years ago
These engines run so slowly (sometimes down to 60-70 rpm) that a ventilation system has the time to blow out the exaust gases, between the two strokes. So, the combustion chamber is clean as in a 4 strokes engine.
loodoveeko 3 years ago
What kindda cylinderlubricators on this one? Accumulator system? (Its a RTA, right?)
W4t3rg4t3 3 years ago
it's funny to think about how slow that piston is moving, but then think about the bore and the size of the thing...also I'm surprised they use 2 strokes because of emissions and all that good stuff, but there's probably a reason i just don't know of.
Winters517 3 years ago
Engines on ships are pretty much exempt from any kind of emissions laws. The 2 stroke is lighter and makes more power for the RPM than a 4 stroke. It's not better, it's just more economical.
SakoTGrimes 3 years ago
thats one massive engine, how many gallons to the mile do you get?? bet it costs a hell of a lot of money to get anywhere with it? LOL
mickeymoose76 3 years ago
if i recall correctly the last tanker i was on with a two-stroke engine (MAN B&W 6L50MC) had a specific fuelconsumption of about 190 gm/kW/hr ..
Dizypline 3 years ago
@mickeymoose76 The first Post Panamax containerships used about $500,000.oo dollars (U.S.) worth of Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO) per 35 day voyage to the Orient and back in about 1999 but fuel is considerably more expensive now. With a larger load of all electric refrigerated containers it takes more fuel. Many times 300 refrigerated conatiners of frozen and chilled cargo is worth more than the ship.
3Mudbone1 1 year ago
@3Mudbone1 and what would that cargo be? food?
tnphysics 9 months ago
@tnphysics Mainly frozen or chilled perishable food products. Seafood, chilled beef (+29F) -1.7C, vegetables, fruit, and meats of all types. Also plants, pharmaceuticals, battery powered greeting cards, cream powder, eggs, milk, and other things. The five C-10 vessels built in 1988 in Germany exclusively for the U.S. flag, U.S. crew merchant mariners. The best and highest paid union engineers in the world. I many times brought 'live swamp eels' from Hong Kong to Kaosiung. I will post videos.
3Mudbone1 9 months ago
has anyone tried a boxer engine on a ship ?
cfhasib 3 years ago
Why do marine engines use low RPM?
Travellinghobo2 4 years ago
because there is a necessary for a power not for a spinning frequency! to move these ships the powerfull engines are needed, high rpm couldn't give such power!
johnyfromthejungle 4 years ago
Aah I see, thank you.
Travellinghobo2 4 years ago
Could you imagine the vibration of a 1 ton piston going up and down 5000 times a min? I couldn't... Lols.
grahamid403 4 years ago
Good call :)
Travellinghobo2 4 years ago
Also big single propellers on ships like this need a low rpm to work as effective as possible. Slow speed engines can be connected directly to the propeller, without any big and very expensive gear box.
Chiefen66 4 years ago 2
@Travellinghobo2
The bigger the prop, the slower you may turn it in the water.These ships have big single (variable pitch) prop`s. If if you let them run with too high revs, they cause cavitation whitch is not only extremly noisy but may destroy the prop. itself in the worst case. Therefore 4 stroke engines need (a simple but very big / expensive) reduction gearbox because they gain their power at revs. that are no more suitable for a direk driving.
XELA2T 1 year ago
@XELA2T, I'd say most ships equipped with engines like this use fixed pitch propellers for maximum efficiency. There's no need for CP propellers.
tupsumato 1 year ago
I was wondering. When these shios are broken up for scrap, where does the engine go? is ti normally just scrapped or re used?...i meen its huge and vary powerfull. 51.420kW!! That a lot..nad hook up a mean generator to that baby and you got some power on hand.
christiandusk 4 years ago
Well, after 25-30 years of almost continuous running the engines are probably more valuable as scrap metal.
tupsumato 4 years ago
engines are mostly bought back by the manufacturers and overhauled with new liners and bearings and components. crankshafts that's really hard to get cause the long deliverytime are also reused..
it's cuite cool that wärtsilä is making 6 brand new NOHAB Polar F212V engines.. a model they stopped manufacture in the early 80's or even earlier if i remember correctly..
Dizypline 3 years ago
i wish the ship's engines would move, like the old ships around 1912, like the ones in the movie Titanic. It would be more exiting.
Chubs1995 4 years ago
Hehe, actually they do, now it's just all hidden inside the closed crank shaft housing :D
Ebbeboy 4 years ago
(68954hp)@ 102rpm :O:O:O puts a top fuel dragster to shame
freshsi165 4 years ago
How about lb/hp? A T/F engine is the pinnacle of piston engine output given size. Apply the same ratio to the displacement of the ships engine.
falcon8r 4 years ago
took me a while to understand that but yea i get it now .. how big is the ship engine then ?
freshsi165 4 years ago
The Wartsila-Sulzer RTA96-C turbocharged two-stroke diesel engine available in 6 through 14 cylinder versions, all are inline engines. Each cylinder displaces 111,143 cubic inches (1820 liters) and produces 7780 horsepower. Total displacement comes out to 1,556,002 cubic inches (25,480 liters) for the fourteen cylinder version. That is a huge engine!!!Look it up, amazing.
falcon8r 4 years ago
woah .. makes a 3.0litre supra sound like a 50 cc bike in comparison hahaha
freshsi165 4 years ago
Where are the lubricators? And what kind are those?
Christianhansjensen 4 years ago
i want to see how big the turbo is! cause this is a twin turbo right?
therockeronner 4 years ago
No it has three turbos, you can see them in the video.
DieselEngineering 4 years ago
ok i saw them, and then i creamed my pants.....those are insane
therockeronner 4 years ago
those turbos are insane. i could live inside them if the compressor wheel wasnt spining
shinobistyle86 4 years ago
Largest two-strokes in operation are RTflex-96s...that's what I understand, anyway.
douro20 4 years ago
The RTA96 is as big as a RTflex. The RTflex higher output and is common rail
DieselEngineering 4 years ago
Now *that* is an engine....
I can see why they're called cathedrals sometimes anyway
DartzIRL 4 years ago