|
Valkyn posted:Is that 7 second 1/8 mile passes? Edited for accuracy. Truly a spectacular failure. I wonder what the sound of an engine block being busted up by the rogue end of a broken crank having a mad fit is. The site the image is hosted on lists the following: OKE020.com posted:21/3/2011 - We finally did it! on the 12th of March 2011 on the 2nd qualifier for Outlaw Radial, OKE020 went 7.977 @ 178.12mph! The 60' was only 1.406 so we were pumped for maybe even a more impressive ET to follow. On the 3rd round I decided to try and run a light on a pro tree, the launch rpm was to low but the car ran an 8.20 @ 179.5mph!. http://www.oke020.com/ 7.977 @ 178.12mph At least it died having the greatest loving party ever.
|
# ? May 10, 2011 22:37 |
|
|
# ? Mar 28, 2024 11:57 |
|
Looks like they actually posted a video of the failure on their website: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7cW6IfkpmC0
|
# ? May 10, 2011 23:44 |
|
that thing was in an old corolla? naaaaaasty
|
# ? May 11, 2011 01:26 |
|
ROFLBOT posted:One too many 7sec passes on your stock bottom end 2JZ... Tell me I'm not the only one that wishes that block could be rebuilt with clear plexiglass to replace the missing poo poo.
|
# ? May 11, 2011 02:15 |
|
Been a while since this was posted. Still makes my jaw drop every time.
|
# ? May 11, 2011 04:54 |
|
That needs to show up every few pages.
|
# ? May 11, 2011 04:56 |
|
Vanagoon posted:Edited for accuracy. Wanna eat that cake
|
# ? May 11, 2011 06:26 |
|
metalhead posted:Been a while since this was posted. Still makes my jaw drop every time. Did that get bent, or is it supposed to be bent and we should just be amazed at the loving size of the thing? Either way...
|
# ? May 11, 2011 06:27 |
|
JD Brickmeister posted:Did that get bent, or is it supposed to be bent and we should just be amazed at the loving size of the thing? Either way... An ocean liner had a boo boo was the general consensus.
|
# ? May 11, 2011 06:28 |
I've seen that photo in one of my lectures... I believe it was hosed up on a testbed. I want to say hydrolocking did that, let me see if I can dig up the link. Got it: http://www.marinediesels.info/Horror%20Stories/testbed_smash.htm If it doesn't go direct to the page, go to Horror Stories on the left, scroll down and find Test Bed Smash. While you're there, read the other horror stories - Cert of Incompetence in particular is a good'un. I don't think that engine was destined for a passenger ship, as a point of interest - they tend to use smaller 4 strokers rather than the big 2 strokes that container ships use. Comrade Blyatlov fucked around with this message at 07:27 on May 11, 2011 |
|
# ? May 11, 2011 07:20 |
|
Two Finger posted:I've seen that photo in one of my lectures... I believe it was hosed up on a testbed. I want to say hydrolocking did that, let me see if I can dig up the link. These stories are great. Want to gently caress up? Want to gently caress up BIG TIME? Become a Marine Diesel Mechanic!
|
# ? May 11, 2011 08:00 |
|
JD Brickmeister posted:Did that get bent, or is it supposed to be bent and we should just be amazed at the loving size of the thing? Either way... Marine engines are large.
|
# ? May 11, 2011 08:24 |
|
Two Finger posted:I've seen that photo in one of my lectures... I believe it was hosed up on a testbed. I want to say hydrolocking did that, let me see if I can dig up the link.
|
# ? May 11, 2011 09:22 |
InterceptorV8 posted:These stories are great. Want to gently caress up? Want to gently caress up BIG TIME? Become a Marine Diesel Mechanic! Haha, why do you think I do it? Reposting these from the aquatic insanity thread: Two Finger posted:
|
|
# ? May 11, 2011 09:27 |
|
Beast Pussy posted:that thing was in an old corolla? naaaaaasty Do Americans not run <10sec passes in tiny old Japanese econoboxes? Also, I want to know more about the Kingo wagon in the other vid on his page.
|
# ? May 11, 2011 13:56 |
|
14 INCH DICK TURBO posted:Forgot to add this one to the other post, not so much horrible in what failed, more a package deal. Heater core on a Toyota Previa. This was what we had to do to get the climate control unit out of the Soarer track car ROFLBOT fucked around with this message at 15:58 on May 11, 2011 |
# ? May 11, 2011 15:53 |
|
Vanagoon posted:I wonder what the sound of an engine block being busted up by the rogue end of a broken crank having a mad fit is. Pretty much like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELiAoaZtbxw&feature=related&t=1m10s
|
# ? May 11, 2011 16:54 |
|
Alright, I just read through all 77 pages. Some lady brought her car in the other day, "I think I ran over something!" We also had a guy come in recently who had gone so long without replacing his brakes that the rotors were paper thin with a strip worn through them. One of the other guys took a picture of it, I'll see if I can get it from him.
|
# ? May 11, 2011 16:54 |
|
Two Finger posted:Haha, why do you think I do it? I believe that's called "A Trail of Chaos" or something that had to be awesome to watch from safety.
|
# ? May 11, 2011 17:29 |
|
Two Finger posted:I've seen that photo in one of my lectures... I believe it was hosed up on a testbed. I want to say hydrolocking did that, let me see if I can dig up the link. Man gently caress that guy and his javascript that tries to stop you from selecting text, I had to find a firefox extension (RighttoClick) to get around it. quote:A 200 litre drum of of oil for general lubrication purposes was stored in the steering flat. The oil was taken from the drum using a hand operated semi rotary drum pump. The pump was in need of overhaul, because it only picked up suction after a great deal of effort on the part of the operator.
|
# ? May 11, 2011 20:27 |
|
Gorilla Salad posted:Marine engines are large. I know they are huge but the kid in me wants that to be a R/C truck hauling around someone's honda engine..
|
# ? May 11, 2011 20:31 |
|
Tindjin posted:I know they are huge but the kid in me wants that to be a R/C truck hauling around someone's honda engine.. Couldn't be a Honda, because that engine has TORQUE.
|
# ? May 12, 2011 03:37 |
|
Gorilla Salad posted:When you get to this size, why not make a giant turbine? If it's running at one speed for hours and hours it has to be more efficient to have a turbine instead of a reciprocating piston engine.
|
# ? May 12, 2011 03:48 |
|
bidikyoopi posted:When you get to this size, why not make a giant turbine? If it's running at one speed for hours and hours it has to be more efficient to have a turbine instead of a reciprocating piston engine. These engines can be run off of the thick sludge left from oil distillation that noone else wants, which is cheaper than the cleaner fuel required for turbine engines.
|
# ? May 12, 2011 03:54 |
|
Actually those giant two-strokes are among the most efficient ICE engines produced. I believe the hover around 53% ish, where even a good modern car engine is lucky to get 35%. It's two-stroke, diesel, and kept at a very low RPM (redline at 108 or something.) Fun fact: the giant Wärtsilä engine sitting in the Maersk E-class container ships inject 90 liters of fuel per cylinder per stroke.
|
# ? May 12, 2011 04:26 |
|
bolind posted:It's two-stroke, diesel, and kept at a very low RPM (redline at 108 or something.) Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't this also allow them to direct drive the propeller? Couldn't do that with a turbine, at least not without an equally big gearbox (which would result in drivetrain losses.)
|
# ? May 12, 2011 05:05 |
bolind posted:Actually those giant two-strokes are among the most efficient ICE engines produced. I believe the hover around 53% ish, where even a good modern car engine is lucky to get 35%. I believe the best efficiency obtained from an ICE is 50.5% including heat recovery boilers, etc. Also, 90L of fuel per cylinder per stroke sounds just a bit high... If that was the case you'd be using something insane like 9 cubic metres of fuel per minute, per cylinder Wiki indicates specific fuel consumption is 171g/kW. At 80080 rated kW, that works out to 13.693 cubes per hour, which works out to around 3.8L per second. That sounds a whole lot more realistic. Geoj posted:Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't this also allow them to direct drive the propeller? Couldn't do that with a turbine, at least not without an equally big gearbox (which would result in drivetrain losses.) Yep, you're dead right. The engines are built around that principle - with the kinds of power outputs they're throwing around (in the thousands of kilowatts per cylinder) it becomes absolutely worth cutting down on even fractional percentage efficiency losses. It's all money straight out the door, otherwise. EightBit posted:These engines can be run off of the thick sludge left from oil distillation that noone else wants, which is cheaper than the cleaner fuel required for turbine engines. Yeah, this poo poo. Comrade Blyatlov fucked around with this message at 08:08 on May 12, 2011 |
|
# ? May 12, 2011 05:18 |
|
Horrible Mechanical Failure.. Locomotives have 6 axles. They do not have individual control. You only have control of braking or throttle of them as a group. They can be cut out individually or in a group of 3 (by cutting out one whole "truck"). When you see the locomotives on the front of a train they are all connected by cables to behave as one giant locomotive. As some of you may have seen, we sometimes use locomotives at the rear or in the middle of a train using equipment that allows it to mimic the control inputs from the lead locomotives by radio. This radion input is translated by computer. In this case something was lost in translation. When the train stopped somewhere, half of the locomotive running by radio (we call it distributed power) decided to stay under power. Weird things like this have happened from time to time but usually to the front power set and since that is manned you stop things, report it, shut it down, or just generally get it fixed. Since that locomotive was unmanned nobody knew what was happening. I have no other specifics for you about what happened because of this, where it was, etc. edit: What we don't see here is the thousands and thousands of dollars in damage to the wheel sets/traction motors. The damage to the rail is a pittance and could be fixed by 6 guys in under an hour. B4Ctom1 fucked around with this message at 06:14 on May 12, 2011 |
# ? May 12, 2011 06:09 |
|
B4Ctom1 posted:
|
# ? May 12, 2011 06:32 |
|
EightBit posted:These engines can be run off of the thick sludge left from oil distillation that noone else wants, which is cheaper than the cleaner fuel required for turbine engines. Bunker Oil 4 Lyfe. B4Ctom1 posted:Horrible Mechanical Failure.. Surprised that poo poo didn't burn. Rail Car Explosions Roseville, CA April 1973- A railroad accident draws the Navy's attention to the hazards caused by fires and sensitive munitions. A train loaded with bombs had just entered the yard in Roseville, CA, when a fire was observed in one of the boxcars. Before the fire department could react, a massive explosion demolished the boxcar and spread the fire. In the next few hours, 18 boxcars exploded in succession. There were no fatalities in this accident, but 48 people were injured and property damage totaled $24 Million. http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...=www.google.com
|
# ? May 12, 2011 07:39 |
|
You Am I posted:Pretty awesome burnout done by the train bro Oh god, thank you for making me spit my coffee out this morning.
|
# ? May 12, 2011 11:18 |
|
Enough of this big poo poo, here's a quick demonstration of the importance of proper mountain bike maintenance: Bonus video and more pics.
|
# ? May 12, 2011 11:50 |
|
Two Finger posted:Yep, you're dead right. The engines are built around that principle - with the kinds of power outputs they're throwing around (in the thousands of kilowatts per cylinder) it becomes absolutely worth cutting down on even fractional percentage efficiency losses. It's all money straight out the door, otherwise. I have a friend who runs a refinery for Conoco-Phillips. He was telling me that because of the scale, if they can manage to get a ship full of crude from Saudi Arabia to the US a day or two faster, that can translate to hundreds of thousands of dollars in increased revenue. The oil sitting in the tanker is like capital that isn't doing anything, so it's like sitting on $100,000,000 dollars (I don't know the exact numbers, but this is the size of the ballpark at least) that isn't earning interest, etc. One day of interest on that much money is significant, so not only are they trying to get the max horsepower out of the engine, but they have to factor in the cost of the cargo. When you start to think of the scale these businesses operate on, physically as well as financially, it is truly mind boggling.
|
# ? May 12, 2011 15:59 |
|
Two Finger posted:Engine talk. You're right, 90 liter per stroke is ridiculous, dunno where I've got that from. And I've worked at the shipyard that built the Maersk E-class ships. The wiki page for the Wärtsilä engine says that the amount of fuel per cylinder per stroke is 160g (at full load). Which is still a heck of a lot, when you think about it. But, yes, it's direct drive. I've heard someone say, that you measure the load on the engine by measuring how many degrees the driveshaft is twisted. Any truth to that? Other fun fact: you can stop the engine, take one cylinder completely out of service, that is, remove it, and start the engine again.
|
# ? May 12, 2011 17:11 |
|
Two Finger posted:
Does that have to be heated to decrease viscosity or does the engine use some kind of hammer of the gods injection system to ram it into the cylinder at room temperature?
|
# ? May 12, 2011 17:34 |
|
Geoj posted:Does that have to be heated to decrease viscosity or does the engine use some kind of hammer of the gods injection system to ram it into the cylinder at room temperature? According to wikipedia, that poo poo has to be heated before it can be used for fuel. I wonder how much energy is wasted doing that, or if there is some fancy heat capture system that keeps it hot with the engine exhaust?
|
# ? May 12, 2011 19:16 |
Geoj posted:Does that have to be heated to decrease viscosity or does the engine use some kind of hammer of the gods injection system to ram it into the cylinder at room temperature? Absolutely - you want this stuff at about 10-12 centistokes which will normally involve the fuel being heated to around 120* celsius. There's a reason it gets so hot in the engine room - the purifier room in particular is hellish. The fuel is absolutely awful poo poo, by the way. You can see it clinging to my hand there where my knuckles rubbed against it - that day I was scraping waste fuel out of the boiler and once it gets on you, it's all kinds of fun trying to get it off. Using diesel to loosen it helps, but only so much. JD Brickmeister posted:When you start to think of the scale these businesses operate on, physically as well as financially, it is truly mind boggling. Honestly, I try not to think about it. On my ship we were bunkering about a thousand cubes at a time, X amount of fresh water, god alone knows how much food... I'll stick to making poo poo work, I think. bolind posted:I've heard someone say, that you measure the load on the engine by measuring how many degrees the driveshaft is twisted. Any truth to that? Eh... not 100% sure how load is calculated but I have a vague memory of hearing something like that. It would certainly be a valid way, the torsional rigidity of the crank would be a known factor. What was it you did at the shipyards? EightBit posted:According to wikipedia, that poo poo has to be heated before it can be used for fuel. I wonder how much energy is wasted doing that, or if there is some fancy heat capture system that keeps it hot with the engine exhaust? Yep, has to be treated. We run it through a centrifugal purifier which helps to remove any water/contaminants and heat it at the same time to around 90*. It's then heated further to that 120ish* mark before entering the pumps leading to the engine. I can't find a decent link in a quick glance but have a look for centrifugal seperators if you want to know more. The heating itself is almost invariably done with steam generated either from a regular boiler or from an exhaust gas boiler - basically using water tubes in the funnel to take advantage of some of the heat the engine is sending skywards. Edit: Sorry for the massive derail, hit up the aquatic insanity thread if you have any other questions. Comrade Blyatlov fucked around with this message at 19:30 on May 12, 2011 |
|
# ? May 12, 2011 19:19 |
|
EightBit posted:According to wikipedia, that poo poo has to be heated before it can be used for fuel. I wonder how much energy is wasted doing that, or if there is some fancy heat capture system that keeps it hot with the engine exhaust? Yeah, it's usually heated by the exhaust somehow. In fact, when you start up a cold engine initially, it's done with marine diesel, so things can get flowing. And it's way more expensive than that near-asphalt, so the beancounters really stress over it. Two Finger posted:What was it you did at the shipyards? Tried to get the hell out of there as soon as possible, primarily. I got a job right out of university programming post-processors. It's basically a script that processes CNC G-code used for cutting the massive steel plates a ship is made of. I was employed for seven months, and holy hell, were that dept. ever incompetent. I didn't spend six years getting my Master's and a published scientific article to have a coworker, dead serious, ask out in the room, to noone in particular: "How many miliseconds is two seconds?" The yard workers also went on strike if the weather was good or it was a funny date or just because. Think General Motors, just with ships. The whole shipyard is, unsurprisingly, closed today. Anyways, I was pretty far removed from the actual nitty gritty, but I still saw the ships just before it was finished, bridge, engine, the works. Fun facts: The Maersk E-class have a swimming pool. It's about three by three meters, and you fill it with seawater (presumably only on certain latitudes.) The thickest steel plates are 98 mm, and positioned near the center of the ship. (It's actually a giant crossbow, so it needs to be strongest in the middle.) The reason they're 98 mm and not an even 100 is that at 100 and above, maritime certification agencies require that you do not assume it's just a 2D object, and instead begin modelling them as 3D. Edit: yeah, derail now officially over. Let's take this to the Aquatic Insanity thread. Resume posting of broken poo poo.
|
# ? May 12, 2011 19:35 |
|
bolind posted:The yard workers also went on strike if the weather was good or it was a funny date or just because. Think General Motors, just with ships. The whole shipyard is, unsurprisingly, closed today. Sounds like Lindø to me Not sure where I got these (perhaps this very thread!), but it sure is a failure:
|
# ? May 12, 2011 21:49 |
|
|
# ? Mar 28, 2024 11:57 |
|
KozmoNaut posted:Sounds like Lindø to me How far connecting rods will stretch and bend before failure always makes me laugh when guys tell me, "I need to get me some of them H-beams!"
|
# ? May 12, 2011 23:42 |