Author Topic: Tores mailbox VIIC and VIIC/41 operation and technical details  (Read 576469 times)

0 Members and 18 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Katuna

  • Lt Cdr
  • *
  • Posts: 185
  • Gender: Male
Re: Tores mailbox VIIC and VIIC/41 operation and technical details
« Reply #4170 on: 06 Dec , 2019, 09:40 »
That's very interesting. I never realized they used a crosshead like that. Just like a steam locomotive only vertical.
Modeling U-371 on 16.10.43 at 1800 off of the Algerian coast in CJ7722.

Offline Don Prince

  • Admiral3
  • *
  • Posts: 1,039
  • Gender: Male
Re: Tores mailbox VIIC and VIIC/41 operation and technical details
« Reply #4171 on: 06 Dec , 2019, 16:15 »
Hello Mr. Tore,

I think your original description was correct about how the Lubricator functioned. I think the lubricator used the lubrication oil onboard (Clean Oil); the reason for the lubricator having it's own source of oil was because they didn't want to use the engine circulated Lube oil source because it was dirty and picked up impurities and carbon. They didn't want to dirty up and plug the Lubricators flow lines and journals. There is also the possibility that the U-Boat Lube Oil was of a higher quality with some additives to counter any sulfuric acid created during combustion. After all, the U-Boat was an advanced piece of machinery which was vital to Germany's war effort.

I'm still doing some internet research on Diesel engine lubricators...

Regards,
Don_
A man's got to know his limitations...
Harry Callahan, SFPD

Offline Don Prince

  • Admiral3
  • *
  • Posts: 1,039
  • Gender: Male
Re: Tores mailbox VIIC and VIIC/41 operation and technical details
« Reply #4172 on: 06 Dec , 2019, 21:28 »
Hello Mr. Tore,


The Japanese still make the Lubricator... www.yasec.co.jp


Regards,
Don_
A man's got to know his limitations...
Harry Callahan, SFPD

Offline tore

  • Tore
  • *
  • Posts: 2,539
  • Gender: Male
Re: Tores mailbox VIIC and VIIC/41 operation and technical details
« Reply #4173 on: 07 Dec , 2019, 00:35 »
Don, I don`t think the GW engine requires a special luboil to compensate for the sulphurecontent in the diesel fuel. The major problem for a submarine luboil is water emulsion. As we have discussed before a submarine diesel is susceptible to waterintrusion contaminating the lubeoil. In some cases the luboil gets emulsified which ruins the lubrication properties of the oil, hence you want to have a lubeoil with additives that counteracts emulsion, this is in contradiction to the old time steam engine where we were squirting water on the crosshead guides to make luboil emulsion. On KNM Kaura ex U-995 I experienced twice a ruin of the luboil due to emulsion caused by water intrusion, in spite of separate lubeoil systems, the operation is costly.
Tore
« Last Edit: 07 Dec , 2019, 00:43 by tore »

Offline Don Prince

  • Admiral3
  • *
  • Posts: 1,039
  • Gender: Male
Re: Tores mailbox VIIC and VIIC/41 operation and technical details
« Reply #4174 on: 08 Dec , 2019, 01:09 »
Hello Mr. Tore,

When surfacing from a dive:
1.  Use HP air to blow the cylinders with the test cocks open to assure no water?
2.  If water is seen, then you would manually crank the engine with the test cocks open to clear the water form the cylinders, or would HP air do the job alone?
3.  Manually crank the engine with the test cocks open to clear the water from the cylinders, If the CO will not permit the increased hull pressure.

Basically would the use of HP air or manually cranking be the standard starting procedure?


Regards,
Don_
« Last Edit: 08 Dec , 2019, 03:08 by Don Prince »
A man's got to know his limitations...
Harry Callahan, SFPD

Offline tore

  • Tore
  • *
  • Posts: 2,539
  • Gender: Male
Re: Tores mailbox VIIC and VIIC/41 operation and technical details
« Reply #4175 on: 08 Dec , 2019, 03:58 »
Don.


HP air (205 kg/cm2 as stored in the hp air flasks) is a vital important medium to a submarine, topping up same is noisy and takes time, hence you try to save the HP air as much as possible. Surfacing happens under many different situations and the procedure varies under the various conditions, like the activity on the surface, the submarines depth, weather and the reason for surfacing. The ideal surfacing is as mentioned before, ascending dynamically by speed and hydroplanes, checking the surface by periscope and then blow your tanks at periscope depth using as little HP air as possible, this takes an experienced man as the air in the ballast tanks expands after you have shut the blowingvalve. The idea is to get the submarine in a stable semi surfaced position, then switch over to exhaust blowing, starting with the ballast tanks highest up ( least backpressure) until you are on the required draft. The exhaust blowing is not commonly used on all submarines. In the RN the final blowing is done with an electrically driven LP air blower but the purpose is the same, saving HP air.
The intrusionof seawater into the engines is not a frequent reason during normal surfacing, the most common reason would be during diving via the outboard main exhaustvalve (before the silencer) having a major leak due to carbon formation on the seatings. As you know the valvedisk on this valve was rotated by a pneumatic drive during diving, this grinding was not always successful as the possible grinding intervall was too short (Beckpressure became to big on the valve) causing a massive leakages into the exhaust manifold on the main engines and the via the exhaustvalves into the cylinder and luboil system .
Tore
« Last Edit: 08 Dec , 2019, 04:21 by tore »

Offline Don Prince

  • Admiral3
  • *
  • Posts: 1,039
  • Gender: Male
Re: Tores mailbox VIIC and VIIC/41 operation and technical details
« Reply #4176 on: 08 Dec , 2019, 04:41 »
Hello Mr. Tore,

My question was which method is the normal operating procedure:
1. Manually cranking the diesel engine before startup?
or -
2. Using HP air to blow the cylinders out before startup?

Regards,
Don_ :)
A man's got to know his limitations...
Harry Callahan, SFPD

Offline tore

  • Tore
  • *
  • Posts: 2,539
  • Gender: Male
Re: Tores mailbox VIIC and VIIC/41 operation and technical details
« Reply #4177 on: 08 Dec , 2019, 04:49 »
Don.
When you had a massive intrusion of water after a dive we always were careful when starting the engines. Of course the indicator cocks were open, I preferred to turn the engines manually, some times the water was squirting out of the cocks. Blowing by air was risky as you was using the startinghandle to admit air into the cylinders and you could run the risk of turning the engine by air and get a waterstroke as a result. Blowing through was a starting procedure for checking by a skilled man and not when you have a massive waterintrusion. Turning the engine by hand needs no permission from the CO as it does not influence the submarines internal pressure as pneumatic grinding and airturning would do.
Tore
« Last Edit: 08 Dec , 2019, 05:54 by tore »

Offline Don Prince

  • Admiral3
  • *
  • Posts: 1,039
  • Gender: Male
Re: Tores mailbox VIIC and VIIC/41 operation and technical details
« Reply #4178 on: 08 Dec , 2019, 05:19 »
Hello Mr. Tore,


Thank You that was exactly what I was looking for...


I apologize, but another question... If when cranking the engine and you got water from the indicator/test cocks, How did you check the lube oil supply tank or the crank case for water?


Regards,
Don_
A man's got to know his limitations...
Harry Callahan, SFPD

Offline tore

  • Tore
  • *
  • Posts: 2,539
  • Gender: Male
Re: Tores mailbox VIIC and VIIC/41 operation and technical details
« Reply #4179 on: 08 Dec , 2019, 05:30 »
Don.
We always checked the lubeoil visually any emulsion would immediately change the colour and  structure of the oil to grey mayonnaise.
Tore

Offline Don Prince

  • Admiral3
  • *
  • Posts: 1,039
  • Gender: Male
Re: Tores mailbox VIIC and VIIC/41 operation and technical details
« Reply #4180 on: 08 Dec , 2019, 16:01 »
Hello Mr. Tore,

Once, you cleared the cylinders of water, the lube oil in the crank case and the lube oil supply tank would not have emulsified yet because the Diesel engine has not been running to mix the oil and water; any water that passed through the piston rings would be in the bottom of the crank case or the lube oil supply tank?

The crank case on the GW Diesel engine looks to be fairly shallow, so would all of the water settle down to the lube oil supply tank?

Is there a valve or plug at the very bottom where you could drain the crank case or the lube lube oil supply tank before startup because the water would have settled to the bottom of those tanks?

If you did not have time to test the crank case or the lube oil supply tank, then would you switch over to running on other lube oil supply tank. Now, both engines are running on the non-contaminated lube oil supply tank until you have time to inspect the possibly contaminated oil supply tank?

Regards,
Don_
« Last Edit: 08 Dec , 2019, 19:34 by Don Prince »
A man's got to know his limitations...
Harry Callahan, SFPD

Offline Don Prince

  • Admiral3
  • *
  • Posts: 1,039
  • Gender: Male
Re: Tores mailbox VIIC and VIIC/41 operation and technical details
« Reply #4181 on: 08 Dec , 2019, 20:28 »
Hello Mr. Tore,

Also, is Cylinder. #1 next to the Maneuvering panel?

Regards,
Don_
A man's got to know his limitations...
Harry Callahan, SFPD

Offline tore

  • Tore
  • *
  • Posts: 2,539
  • Gender: Male
Re: Tores mailbox VIIC and VIIC/41 operation and technical details
« Reply #4182 on: 09 Dec , 2019, 00:59 »
Don, The GW crankcase was never designed to contain lubeoil (dry sump design) hence any contamination would drain into the system tank below the engine no valves except a selection valve case to select which systemtank to take the drain.. Originally the luboil sentrifuge could be connected to either system tanks, cleaning the oil, later a large filter substituted the oilseparator and to a certain extent handle limited amount of water, after a massintrusion of water the filter was not able to handle the contamination and we exchanged the luboil source. You are able to connect the lubeoil suction of one engine to the other systemtank by the emergency electrically driven luboilpump.
We named the cylinder next to the maneuvering stand no 1, I guess the Germans did the opposite.
Tore
« Last Edit: 09 Dec , 2019, 01:25 by tore »

Offline Don Prince

  • Admiral3
  • *
  • Posts: 1,039
  • Gender: Male
Re: Tores mailbox VIIC and VIIC/41 operation and technical details
« Reply #4183 on: 09 Dec , 2019, 20:57 »
Hello Mr. Tore,

Thank you for the info... I sent you an email with one page attached. Would you please look it over and let me know if it looks OK. I'm going to give myself a Christmas present and have the book printed at a local shop to insert into my leather covered metal post binder. The cost for the print job is about $400 plus Georgia state tax (7.75%)...

Regards,
Don_
A man's got to know his limitations...
Harry Callahan, SFPD

Offline tore

  • Tore
  • *
  • Posts: 2,539
  • Gender: Male
Re: Tores mailbox VIIC and VIIC/41 operation and technical details
« Reply #4184 on: 10 Dec , 2019, 02:21 »
Don you are certainly going to give yourself an expensive xmas gift. I guess I better repeat my previous ( primitive) description of the exhaust system through the pressure hull and  silencer. As you see on the bad sketch below there are a lot of means to prevent waterintrusion via the main exhaust system. Primarily the outer (before the silencer) main exhaust valve (flap valve with a pneumatically driven rotating disc) which very often had a leakage due to carbon deposits on the seatings, this leakage entered the pressurehull to the group exhaustvalve (mechanically rotated flapvalve) with a leakage container before the valve, able to drain the water into the bilge. If further leakages occurred the waterintrusion continued to the exhaust manifold along the engine way below the exhaustvalves in the cylinderheads. The exhaustmanifold had ample drainage to the bilge. Hence a water intrusion via the engine exhaustvalves would only happen if the elaborate system of main exhaustvalves and massive drainage of the main exhaust system failed causing the leakage to rise up to the top of the mainengine and enter the cylindercover exhaust ducts. This did not happened frequently and flooding of the main engines was a rare event. Yet it could happened lets say once or twice a year.

The normal starting procedure is always to "blow trough" as we called it (mainly running the engine by starting air with open indicator cocks without fuel) prior to a normal upstart. Blowing out the waterintrusion by starting air is as mentioned previously  risky.
I am impressed by your stamina on the Skizzenbuch and shall revert with further comments, if any later.
Tore   
« Last Edit: 10 Dec , 2019, 02:24 by tore »