Talk:Napier Deltic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| See also: WikiProject Trains to do list | |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. (assessment comments) |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale within the Trains WikiProject. |
 |
This article is maintained by WikiProject UK Railways. |
 |
This article is maintained by the Locomotives task force. |
Hmmmm... Everything2 articles are copyrighted isn'it ? Ericd 15:03, 20 Aug 2003 (UTC)
Morven states that he is the author, so he can do with the article whatever he wants.—Eloquence 15:06, Aug 20, 2003 (UTC)
Yes—to clarify, the original uploaded revision was an exact copy of my E2 writeup on this topic and thus mine to release here if I wish. Morven 16:01, 20 Aug 2003 (UTC)
Sorry I've read to quickly I didn't see the "my". Ericd 16:49, 20 Aug 2003 (UTC)
No problem! I plan to add in some of my other E2 contributions in the near future. Morven 17:10, 20 Aug 2003 (UTC)
Great article. I'm still confused on the basic design concept, though. A diagram would be a great help. Rossami 16:04, 24 Oct 2003 (UTC)
- As always, a diagram would be a great help (when it comes to how things look, words can be cumbersome). Unfortunately all will be copyrighted and thus unusable here. I'm going to see what I can do to draw one. --Morven 16:27, 24 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Would some of the manuals at http://www.intertrader.net/ptfdeltic.htm be in the public domain to copy for illustrations?
Oh, and is that last paragraph really NPOV?
I am certain that German engineers attempted to design such an Engine before Napier tried. I understand the the Germans couldn't get it to work because they hadn't twigged that one crankshaft had to rotate the opposite way.
[edit] Animation Added
I worked the cylinder timings out on paper, i hope this animation helps, ive managed to include the lag between exhaust valve and inlet valve and get everything running in phase. If anyone notices a fault i havent twigged to, please let me know, i had to remove the inside inlet manifolds for space reasons, but everything else is actually to scale. Emoscopes 22:21, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] 2-stroke Diesel
It's a 2-stroke Diesel, however I have no idea how to introduce it the article. Ericd 22:38, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] What happened to the Deltic?
Fantastic article, especially the animation. I've got a few questions about the Deltic design which I'm chucking around in the direction of anyone who might be able to answer, however:
- Is a Deltic-type engine inherently inferior in power output to a four-stroke engine of the same displacement?
- Just how unreliable are Deltics? I've heard accounts saying they proved highly reliable and accounts saying they were constantly breaking down.
- Would a Boxer, or an X- H- or W-block engine of the same displacement be superior in performance?
Any help with these would really be appreciated!
- My thoughts are not to think of the Deltic in terms of displacement, but in power to weight ratio. As a uniflow, 2-stroke, opposed piston engine, it lacks heavy cylinder heads and valve gear, and comparable 4-stroke arrangements are likely to be of a lower power to weight ratio. Emoscopes Talk 00:53, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
That's what I always thought - that the Deltic might well be inefficient, but that was the price you got for a light, compact engine that chucked out a lot of power. However, while I was trying to get some basis for comparison, I came across these (http://www.maesco.com/products/iveco/iveco_vector/iveco_vector.html) which I then compared with the engine description outlined here (http://www.55s.co.uk/ - Technical > Engines and scroll down). I'm no expert on diesel engines (steam is much more my thing), and thus I may well be comparing two engines that ought not to be compared at all; but as far as I can see, the Vector 40 produces more power, at a lower weight and with smaller dimensions, using an inherently more efficient combustion cycle. Even accounting for the advances made since the D18-25 was introduced (which, I admit, I have probably underestimated), I can't see how that's possible given the wisdom I've conventionally received regarding the Deltic. (By the way, I do apologise for the poor links and generally rubbish standard of formatting; Wiki's esoteric system is one with which I'm not exactly comfortable :))
- Vector 40 - 16 cylinders, 40.16l, 1,440kw (1,930hp), 2,900kg engine weight - 0.49kW/tonne
- DT18-25B - 18 cylinders, 88.2l, 1,231kW (1,800hp), 5,574kg engine weight - 0.22kW/tonne
- DT18-37k - 18 cylinders, 88.21l, 1,709kW (2,500hp), 3,435kg engine weight - 0.50kW/tonne (http://www.ptfnasty.com/ptfDeltic2.html)
- Some brief thoughts on this; the Deltic 25 was a rail deltic, and therefore was (as far as I know) derated for rail use and designed to produce 1,650hp continuously. The Vector 40 does not state a continuous rating, and fairs far more favourably with the Deltic 37 (marine deltic) in terms of peak power and weight. This place is a bit of a goldmine anyway; http://www.ptfnasty.com/ptfTechnical.html Emoscopes Talk 07:36, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
A question re diagram in Napier Deltic/History. As I read the description all 3 cranks should each have an inlet and an exhaust piston. In that diagram, one crank has this, one has two inlets and one has two exhausts?
