What is the largest ship diesel?

Discussion in 'Diesel Engines' started by DennisRB, Sep 30, 2010.

  1. Dude, you watch too much TV.. I'm not spamming here. If this is the most professional boat related forum then it's the place for me cuz i'm a professionist. You'll better get used to my avatar all around cuz i'm a the worst post ***** you'll ever meet. I am on a dozen of related forums and i usually post at least 400 posts per day.
     
  2. apex1

    apex1 Guest

    Dude, I can believe you are a *****.

    I do not own a TV btw. I am poor.:D
     
  3. Very cool pics Troy, actually these engines were born for industrial applications, directly from the experience of the big steam engines used in textile industry, pumping stations etc. and then moved to boats to replace the steam engines. Has anybody ever seen the first diesel engine? It was designed by Rudolf Diesel in 1897 at MAN facilities and was something like ten meters tall. Something that not many people know is that the Diesel invented the diesel to work with SUNFLOWER OIL, diesel fuel was invented a couple of years later...
     
  4. jehardiman
    Joined: Aug 2004
    Posts: 3,034
    Likes: 549, Points: 113, Legacy Rep: 2040
    Location: Port Orchard, Washington, USA

    jehardiman Senior Member

    One of the important thing about these large LSD's are that they are not installed in ships....the ships are designed and build around them....;).
     
  5. apex1

    apex1 Guest

    Well, that is all wrong. Almost all...

    The first proper working application was a ships Diesel, hence all others are the successors.

    Rudolf Diesels first experiments were done with petrol, but failed, more or less. The first successful trial was made with kerosene (which is technically the same as diesel fuel, a medium destillate).
    Only in Paris he experimented to some succes with peanut oil and other vegetable oil. But on these days they were far too expensive to be used in such engines. So kerosene was the fuel until the destillates were further split into the then known Diesel fuel and heavier or lighter medium destillates.

    It is not sufficient to know parts of the topic, this is not the "Granny´s cookbook.net"

    Regards
    Richard
     
  6. BS.
    "The first diesel for the market was assembled inside a distillery in USA in 1897" (Source: Wiki)

    "Between 1901 and 1934 the first four stroke trunk type piston engine was developed, a large diesel engine power plant was established in Kiev, the motor ship Selandia was outfitted with the first marine diesel engine and the first four stroke turbo charged diesel was developed." (source: FAS, Federation of American Scientists)
     
  7. DennisRB
    Joined: Sep 2004
    Posts: 1,270
    Likes: 26, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 228
    Location: Brisbane

    DennisRB Senior Member

    So what is the starting procedure for an engine this large? And what cranks it over?
     
  8. there is only one thing that powerful to crank such monsters: compressed air.
    air at approx 30 bar is pressed in the cylinders, when the engine reaches 20-30 RPMs the diesel is injected and the monster starts turning on its own.
     
  9. RHP
    Joined: Nov 2005
    Posts: 836
    Likes: 86, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 1183
    Location: Singapore

    RHP Senior Member

    Thats a magnificent picture but at the same time surely there must be massive inertia with such large cylinders, my gut feeling tells me 3 or 4 smaller engines might be more more flexible and efficient?

    Bear in mind this is the same gut that tells me when its beer time.
     
  10. troy2000
    Joined: Nov 2009
    Posts: 1,743
    Likes: 170, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 2078
    Location: California

    troy2000 Senior Member

    That's how our compressor units are cranked when starting: compressed air is injected into the cylinders in sequence, at roughly 220 psi (15 bar). Of course they're a lot smaller than those monsters, so it takes less pressure to roll them.
     
  11. troy2000
    Joined: Nov 2009
    Posts: 1,743
    Likes: 170, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 2078
    Location: California

    troy2000 Senior Member

    Three or four times as many parts and pieces, plus the problems of coordinating output from multiple engines?
     
  12. RHP
    Joined: Nov 2005
    Posts: 836
    Likes: 86, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 1183
    Location: Singapore

    RHP Senior Member

    Thats why ships have engineers. Plus when you're light you can run on fewer engines?

    Anyway it was just a thought.
     
  13. gunship
    Joined: Jun 2009
    Posts: 144
    Likes: 11, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 137
    Location: Sweden

    gunship Senior Member

    My grandpah told me once he was involved in a design of a ferry type that was run on several truck diesels with diesel-electric transmission. This enabled them to when service was due, unbolt an engine, load it on a truck, install another one and then take the old one home for service.
     
  14. powerabout
    Joined: Nov 2007
    Posts: 2,925
    Likes: 66, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 719
    Location: Melbourne/Singapore/Italy

    powerabout Senior Member

    Thats coming back into vogue for 80-100m offshore vessels as the running costs are less.
    Offshore vessels not being passage vessels (box ships etc) have a varying load requirement.
     

  15. troy2000
    Joined: Nov 2009
    Posts: 1,743
    Likes: 170, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 2078
    Location: California

    troy2000 Senior Member

    from: Shafting a Ship

    by Stuart Slade
    Updated 09 July 1999


    ...The first consideration is weight economy. The propeller, shaft and gearing all represent dead weight that is duplicated with multi-shaft arrangements. In addition, the curve of engine output power as compared to size and weight is not linear; two smaller engines together weigh substantially more than a single larger unit of the same output. It may, therefore, seem that an ideal arrangement will involve keeping such duplication, that is the number of shafts, down to a bare minimum. Provided the total power in question is below the maximum that can be absorbed by a single propeller, then a single shaft arrangement would seem to be the most efficient. If the installed power is greater than the maximum that can be absorbed by a propeller, then the most efficient arrangement would be that involving the fewest number of shafts; in most cases two. Another way of saying this is that the most efficient design for shafting is to load the propellers as highly (that is, to put as much power through) as possible.

    For merchant ships this is indeed the case. Merchant ships are designed for economy of construction and use, not for the most efficient use of high power settings. In their case, the economic advantages of a single shaft outweigh any disadvantages from the layout. What this really proves is that merchant ship practice does not carry over into warship design. It is not possible to make arguments for a given configuration for a warship by quoting merchant ship practice. The demands of the two are so different that a comparison between, for example, a liner and a battleship are essentially meaningless.

    http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-036.htm
     
Loading...
Forum posts represent the experience, opinion, and view of individual users. Boat Design Net does not necessarily endorse nor share the view of each individual post.
When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. Your circumstances or experience may be different.