On the economic efficiency of the use of boiler turbine ships

On the economic efficiency of the use of boiler turbine ships

The ship is designed for warfare at sea and is a complex engineering structure, which, carrying weapon and all the goods necessary to fulfill the tasks, depending on the tasks assigned to it, is capable of floating above water, on water and under water. The ship is a naval combat unit fleet. The ship’s weapons and equipment must function reliably in a marine environment. A ship is an engineering structure of a special kind, since it must have the ability to move, which is provided through the use of the main power plant (GEM).


Today, surface ships of the Navy of various countries are equipped with boiler-turbine, diesel, gas-turbine, diesel-gas-turbine, diesel-electric and nuclear power plants. Each power plant has its own characteristics of operation, advantages and disadvantages. Some are simpler in design and operation, have smaller mass and dimensions, are quickly prepared for work and put into operation, but they use expensive fuel. Others are more complex, have large weight and size characteristics, are longer prepared for work and put into operation, but they are simple to operate and operate on cheaper fuel.

Russia is a great maritime power and has its own internationally recognized schools of shipbuilding and marine engine, boiler and turbine construction. In the Concept of Qualitative and Quantitative Reformation of the Navy of the Russian Federation (Navy of the Russian Federation), priority is given to the construction of ships equipped with diesel, gas turbine, diesel gas turbine and nuclear power plants, while the construction of ships with KHPPs was practically abandoned. The majority of boiler-turbine ships were withdrawn from the fleet and subsequently decommissioned, which entailed a reduction in the specialty of military mechanical engineers of KTEU in the naval engineering university.

Today, ships with KTEU as part of the Russian Navy can be counted on the fingers. The decision to refuse KTEU or not is correctly made, time will tell.

At the end of the XVIII century, to ensure the movement of ships began to be equipped with steam boilers and steam engines that make up the steam power plant (PSU). As fuel for boilers, first firewood was used, and then coal. Since 1788, the world's first ship with CSP began to operate in the United States, after which all ships using steam became known as steamboats. Almost all watercraft from small boats to battleships were equipped with steam-powered installations at that time. After the invention of marine fuel tanks (the so-called Fram tanks) and fuel equipment, marine fuel oil began to be used as PSU marine fuel at the beginning of the XNUMXth century, at the same time steam engines began to be replaced with steam turbines, and the main power plant of the ships was called steam turbine (PTEU) . The emergence of a new power plant required the training of new technicians, later called mechanical engineers of steam-powered plants (CCP).

The steam-powered installation was used on ships and ships until the end of the 1970s, and the steam turbine, later called the boiler turbine, is still used, it is equipped, as a rule, with large displacement ships: aircraft carriers, cruisers and destroyers.

Since 1893, the steam engine of a steam-powered power plant became the prototype of all internal combustion engines, which from the beginning of the XX century began to equip ships.

The operating experience of boiler and turbine and diesel power plants showed that the former have a low efficiency, include a large number of complex mechanisms that occupy significant ship areas and volumes, and the latter are limited in power, complex in construction, heavy and require high-quality fuel for operation.

In the last quarter of the XNUMXth century, gas turbines were invented almost simultaneously with diesel engines, the prototype of which were steam turbines, but gas turbine installations were widely used on ships and ships only from the second half of the XNUMXth century after the development of reliable heat-resistant structural materials.

In the mid-1970s, surface ships began to be equipped with nuclear power plants (AEU) after they were tested in submarines. AEU is also a steam turbine installation in which a nuclear reactor with a steam generator is used instead of a boiler to generate steam.

In addition to these power plants, the ships were equipped with combined power plants, for example, diesel-steam-turbine (in Kriegsmarine, Navy of Nazi Germany. - Approx. Aut.), And are still equipped with diesel-gas-turbine and diesel-electric power plants.

The quality and perfection of any type of weapon and military equipment, as you know, is tested by war. This axiom is fully applicable to ship power plants.

Since the boiler-turbine plant was the first power plant to be equipped with ships, it passed the test of two world and several local wars and showed its high quality and reliability. At the same time, the diesel power plant (DEU) was tested by one world war and local maritime conflicts, and the gas turbine (GTEU) - only by local wars, for example, the war between Argentina and Great Britain over the Falkland (English) or Malvinas (Spanish) islands in 1982 year.

Experience in operating various types of power plants in real conditions in different climatic zones has shown that KTEU is most effectively used on ships of large displacement not lower than the destroyer and consumes relatively inexpensive oil fuel. At the same time, the operation of ships with DEU and GTEU requires a significant amount of high-quality light oil fuel. In addition, the experience of war and military conflicts showed that the use of diesel and gas turbine ships in the Arctic theater of operations in winter is possible only when they are refueled by the more expensive type of diesel fuel - the Arctic (DT A). The deterioration of the quality characteristics of light fuels (for example, tarring, watering, etc.) in ship conditions, as is known, in all cases leads to equipment failures, power failure to the ship and loss of course. Ships whose installations consume light grades of fuels have a higher likelihood of explosions and fires during combat and emergency damage. Repair of diesel and gas turbine ships in war conditions is more lengthy, including due to the high explosive fire hazard of the fuel and the need for its complete discharge, and then acceptance into the tanks for a full supply. In addition, many types of repairs on diesel and gas turbine ships should be carried out exclusively by highly qualified specialists in the manufacturers of technical equipment.

A boiler turbine installation eliminates many of the disadvantages inherent in DEU and GTEU. So, KTEU uses dark types of oil products - naval fuel oil and the deterioration of its quality does not significantly affect the operation of the installation, in particular, the operation of steam boilers. Power plants of boiler-turbine ships are more maintainable, which is important in extreme conditions and long separation from bases.

In addition, the experience of many wars has shown that, in the absence of oil fuel on a boiler turbine ship, a minimum course can be achieved by burning emergency wood, wooden objects, and other combustible items collected both on the ship and at sea in boilers.

Along with the combat experience in using various power plants (EA), sufficient experience has been gained in their operation on long long voyages in peacetime, which has shown the high survivability of a boiler turbine unit in case of emergency failures of its individual elements. So, a boiler turbine plant is able to provide the ship's progress without disrupting the functioning of the propulsive complex of the ship even when only one boiler is operating. At the same time, the operation of one engine on ships with DEU and GTEU can lead to disruption of the propulsion system and intense work of the main thrust bearing. In addition, the reliable operation of the diesel and gas turbine units depends to a large extent on the parameters of the ship's power supply than the operation of the boiler turbine unit.

High survivability, the ability to make progress with a minimum number of working mechanisms, good maintainability and a small dependence on the parameters of ship power supply are important factors for the functioning of a boiler turbine unit during long-term autonomous navigation of a ship in remote areas of the oceans in the absence of naval bases.

Evaluation of the military-economic efficiency of using ships is most relevant for peacetime, when ships are not used for their intended purpose, and at the same time require significant costs for their maintenance, training and crew training, target shooting and long-distance trips.

It is known that up to 70% of the cost of operating any ship is spent on fuel.

For an example, we compare the economic costs of marine fuel to ensure full speed operation of boiler-turbine ships of the Kronstadt type and gas-turbine ships of the Nikolaev type for an hour. It is known that a boiler-turbine ship uses naval fuel oil F-5, and gas-turbine one uses diesel fuel DT, respectively. The choice of these ships is not random, since the assessment can be correct and objective only if the ships have the same purpose and approximately the same tactical and technical characteristics. It should be noted that all ships of the Kronstadt and Nikolaev type have already been decommissioned from the Russian Navy for scrap.

The performance characteristics (TTX) of the large anti-submarine ships (BOD) "Kronstadt" and "Nikolaev" and their power plants


TTX BPK "Kronstadt" / BPK "Nikolaev":

- type of power plant: KTEU GTEU;
- total displacement: ~ 7.600 t / ~ 7.000 t;
- power rating of the power plant: 90.000 hp / 84.000 hp;
- full supply of fuel on the ship (type of fuel): 1.950 tons (fuel oil F-5) / 1.800 (DT);
- full speed: 33 knots / 32 knots;
- specific fuel consumption: 0,36 kg / hp. hour / 0,25 kg / hp hour;
- cruising range (at 18 knots): 5.200 miles / 6.500 miles;
- the average cost of fuel in July 2019 prices: 24.000 rubles / t / 42.000 rubles / t.

Multiplying the nominal power of the power plant by the specific fuel consumption and the cost of one ton of fuel, we get the financial costs of fuel to ensure full speed operation of the Kronstadt type ships and the Nikolaev type ships for one hour, which respectively amount to 777.600 rubles / hour and 882.000 rubles per hour. This means that the cost of fuel (naval fuel oil) for ensuring the long course (sailing) of the Kronstadt BPC will be significantly less than the similar costs (for diesel fuel) for the BPC Nikolaev.

The same economic calculations can be carried out for a ship with a DEU, but it is obvious that they will also exceed the fuel costs of a working boiler turbine plant.

Indeed, the operation of boiler-turbine ships is cheaper, as evidenced by their use (navigation) during the long-term parking of diesel and gas-turbine ships in their bases almost all the 1990s due to the high cost or lack of diesel fuel.

An important factor determining the life cycle of any ship is the quality and timing of the process of restoring its combat and operational properties, called repair. Unfortunately, the collapse of the USSR and the disruption of economic ties between the republics of the once united country had a negative impact not only on the construction process, but also on the process of repairing ship power plants. So, the Southern Turbine Plant (UTZ) in Nikolaev, which was the leading enterprise in the USSR for the production and repair of ship gas turbine engines, is now located outside of Russia, for this reason repair of ship gas turbine engines requires large financial costs, including currency. This means that today repairing a ship with a gas turbine installation is much more expensive than repairing boiler and turbine and diesel ships. In addition, the period of direct use of diesel and gas turbine ships is determined by the time of the motor resources of their main engines. According to the established order, the engine life of the main ship engines is extended by the fleet command based on the conclusion of the manufacturer’s specialists on the possibility of further operation of the engines. When working out motor resources, access to the sea of ​​ships is forbidden, as you know, and they stand idle in the bases for a longer time, which more recently was observed on almost all fleets of the Russian Federation with Soviet-built ships.

Each historical the period poses its tasks to the navy, which require the mandatory improvement of the combat and operational properties of the ship as a whole and its individual subsystems, including the power plant. New tasks also impose more stringent requirements on ships and their power plants. It becomes obvious that when deciding to equip the designed ship with one or another type of power plant, it is first necessary to take into account the operational experience acquired by the power plant and the ability of the selected type of power plant to be further improved in order to increase the efficiency of the ship.

To increase the efficiency of the use of ships, one or several elements of their power plant can be improved. The authors are convinced that today it is possible, for example, to reduce the fuel component of the cost of maintaining ships equipped with all types of power plants using oil fuel. The reduction of the fuel component can be achieved in the following areas:

- reduction of fuel consumption per unit weight of EU, for example, by introducing new structural materials on main engines and boilers;
- reduction of specific fuel consumption due to the improvement of fuel equipment and the intensification of the fuel combustion process;
- elimination of the “dead” fuel reserve in consumable tanks and the “minimum” reserve in the fuel system elements of engines and boilers;
- expanding the range of types of oil fuel used in EU;
- reduction of fuel losses, for example, from evaporation;
- preservation of qualitative and quantitative indicators of fuel during its storage in a ship, etc.

It should be noted that a decrease in the fuel component due to an increase in the efficiency of use of marine fuel in all cases leads, including to an increase in the environmental cleanliness and secrecy of the ship as a whole.

It is obvious that the boiler’s boiler turbine power plant, tested by wars and campaigns, has prospects, and most importantly, reserves for its further development, modernization and improvement, which is why it is premature to abandon this type of power plant. At the same time, today it is necessary to improve all other types of power plants in the direction of increasing their functioning efficiency taking into account world experience.
Author:
Photos used:
commons.wikimedia.org
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

116 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Sapsan136 4 February 2020 15: 12 New
    • 17
    • 1
    +16
    A boiler-turbine installation requires more attention, more frequent repairs (maintenance, if you like, with fault detection and maintenance) ... The biggest problem with boiler-turbine plants is that they enter the operating mode for a long time, which makes them unsuitable for installations on warships ... The fate of Sarych-class destroyers equipped with these installations is a prime example ... There are almost no ships of this type in the Russian fleet ...
    1. Winnie76 4 February 2020 18: 07 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Quote: Sapsan136
      There are almost no ships of this type in the Russian fleet ...

      And in China, for some reason, they run around
      1. Sapsan136 4 February 2020 18: 10 New
        • 6
        • 0
        +6
        In China there are only 4 ships of this type, on its new ships China does not use such power plants ...
        1. Shurik70 5 February 2020 15: 11 New
          • 0
          • 1
          -1
          Quote: Sapsan136
          The fate of Sarych-class destroyers equipped with these installations is a prime example.

          And what is fate?
          The usual fate of the ship. Pledged. Built. Worked out. Decommissioned.
          And that the last of the mortgaged ships was not completed - so 1992. Such a time was.
          What is not being built by Sarychev is the project of 1976. Deprecated
          1. Sapsan136 5 February 2020 15: 51 New
            • 3
            • 0
            +3
            And did it not occur to you to compare the resource of the power plant of Sarych-type destroyers with the BODs that were equipped with turbines that were simultaneously introduced into the fleet? Take the trouble to compare. ! Understand the difference ...
            1. Vladimir1155 7 February 2020 13: 21 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              especially in terms of write-offs
            2. Alexey RA 7 February 2020 13: 57 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Quote: Sapsan136
              And did it not occur to you to compare the resource of the power plant of Sarych-type destroyers with the BODs that were equipped with turbines that were simultaneously introduced into the fleet?

              This comparison would be correct if the situation with spare parts for gas turbines and gas control units would be the same. Boilers pr.956 were killed by the cessation of pipe production and the exhaustion of their reserves in the fleet's warehouses.
              If you take from GTU any of the critical and massively used spare parts, then they will also not have a good resource.
              1. Sapsan136 8 February 2020 13: 08 New
                • 3
                • 0
                +3
                Whatever it was, GTUs can start in a few minutes, and a boiler-turbine installation needs 40 minutes or more to get to its operating mode, and water pipes must be treated like any boiler room to prevent tubes from flying out like matches, which is an additional cost on quite harmful chemistry and the maintenance of chemists themselves in the carriage ... I have permission to work with gas equipment, the device of boilers and boiler rooms I know very well .. I have a certificate of a specialist .. The practical exam was passed perfectly ... Constant combat readiness KTU warship about basically can’t provide, for too long (uncover)
    2. Nitarius 5 February 2020 04: 18 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      where does this information come from? ... or regular sofa calculations?
      1. Sapsan136 5 February 2020 11: 51 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        And you do not ask stupid questions, but at least open Wikipedia and read about which engines in China they put on their new warships .. There are diesel-gas-turbine installations ...
    3. Obi-Wan Kenobi 5 February 2020 06: 40 New
      • 6
      • 2
      +4
      Author, why did you write this?
      Everyone has long understood that in Russia it’s not that there are problems with marine engines. These same engines, in principle, are not present, except for nuclear power plants.
      Do you now propose, so to speak, switching to steam draft? So you see a way out in this?
      And we will not move science?
      In that case, what are you modest about? You come right now:
      A sail and only our sail is everything! Only by the force of the wind to walk on the sea!
      And everything else is from the evil one, for it’s not figs ... We can’t do anything else ...
  2. iouris 4 February 2020 15: 15 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    You may not be a scientist ... but I have to offer a criterion for the effectiveness of "using boiler turbine ships," since I have taken up the effectiveness of "using boiler turbine ships". Well, or two criteria.
  3. Operator 4 February 2020 15: 18 New
    • 8
    • 15
    -7
    A heat engine - yesterday, a nickel-63 radioisotope generator with half a century of energy - that's all laughing
    1. gridasov 4 February 2020 15: 50 New
      • 2
      • 5
      -3
      Not only this, it is necessary to organize the process correctly in order to get hydrogen in interaction with water. To directly convert all this at the moment of rotor rotation. At the same time, strengthen the process with the effect of Yutkin and others. And others
      1. Operator 4 February 2020 15: 52 New
        • 8
        • 7
        +1
        Learn the materiel - the nickel-63 isotope directly generates electrons due to the characteristics of its non-radioactive decay.
        1. gridasov 4 February 2020 16: 00 New
          • 5
          • 0
          +5
          And where does he produce them?
          1. Operator 4 February 2020 16: 05 New
            • 8
            • 7
            +1
            In the power grid, of course.
            1. gridasov 4 February 2020 16: 11 New
              • 8
              • 0
              +8
              then maybe just a piece of radioactive nickel into the wiring insert. Have you thought about it? The monument put for an idea
              1. Operator 4 February 2020 16: 17 New
                • 11
                • 7
                +4
                They do so (include in the circuit) - but only in the form of a battery with a 50-year period of power generation.

                The radioactivity of nickel 63 consists of beta radiation - the emission of positrons and electrons, which are reflected by any metal screen (for example, foil).
                1. gridasov 4 February 2020 17: 11 New
                  • 6
                  • 0
                  +6
                  Interestingly, do you even have an idea about what electric current is in networks? What is radioactive radiation?
                  1. Operator 4 February 2020 17: 53 New
                    • 10
                    • 6
                    +4
                    The first is the directed motion of electrons in a conducting circuit, the second is the emission of fissile nuclei of subatomic particles and electromagnetic radiation, of course.
                    1. gridasov 4 February 2020 18: 07 New
                      • 3
                      • 2
                      +1
                      If we add that the current necessarily has a variable impulse, and also a combination of linear and rotating magnetic flux vectors, and the fact that the breakdown of the circuit or its formation is always associated with the optimum modulation of parameters and much more, and radioactivity is the same current but caused by by the interaction of magnetic fluxes of structural formations of the material and has also complex parameters of the propagation vector and algorithms of vibrational wave processes, then you said everything correctly.
                  2. Avior 4 February 2020 19: 18 New
                    • 7
                    • 1
                    +6
                    it looks like this

                    and the real battery that you can buy is like this
                    1. frog 4 February 2020 19: 31 New
                      • 2
                      • 0
                      +2
                      Since you are in the know, can you tell me what the foil is made of, since it shields antiparticles?
                      1. Avior 4 February 2020 19: 38 New
                        • 4
                        • 1
                        +3
                        nobody seems to bother with this material.
                        I don’t think that something very special, otherwise I would have noted

                        write something like this
                        radioactive isotope of tritium with a half-life of 12,3 years. In this case, radiation caused by the breakdown of tritium is considered safe, and is not able to harm even the upper layer of the skin.
                      2. frog 4 February 2020 19: 49 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        I, in fact, to the fact that [quote emitting positrons and electrons, which are reflected by any metal screen] [/ quote]
                        EMNIP, positron - antiparticle. So it became interesting.
                        Well, the tritium power plant on the same BOD or "how-it-there-now" interested ...
                  3. Operator 4 February 2020 20: 21 New
                    • 7
                    • 2
                    +5
                    Quote: Avior
                    it looks like this

                    If a power of 63 mW is removed from one cubic centimeter of a multi-element assembly of nickel-10, then a power of 10000 kW will be removed from one thousand cubic meters, which is quite a worthy value for moving an NK by an economic move.
                    1. bayard 5 February 2020 05: 59 New
                      • 1
                      • 0
                      +1
                      I don’t know how for NK, but for submarines ... than not a power plant for Kalina. And what is the price of this battery, which is our everything?
                    2. frog 5 February 2020 09: 33 New
                      • 3
                      • 0
                      +3
                      One thousand cubic meters of money hi
                    3. bayard 5 February 2020 14: 12 New
                      • 3
                      • 0
                      +3
                      It's a pity .
                      And I’m already thinking about breaking the battery! bully
                  4. timokhin-aa 3 March 2020 20: 55 New
                    • 2
                    • 0
                    +2
                    Do not read what Andryusha writes, it is very harmful to the brain of a healthy person without special preparation.

                    It would be better if he gives calculations of how much such a babarey will weigh 25 MegaWatts (about a corvette), and so that they can issue at least one military service (about 3 months continuously).
                  5. bayard 3 March 2020 22: 17 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Battery-powered corvette ... sounds romantic good
                    But we really have a big problem with energy-consuming batteries for submarines ... I thought it a sinful thing that I missed something in the domestic scientific and technological progress. hi
        2. frog 4 February 2020 18: 44 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          And what foil?
        3. fyvaprold 4 February 2020 19: 44 New
          • 3
          • 2
          +1
          Quote: Operator
          They do so (include in the circuit) - but only in the form of a battery with a 50-year period of power generation.

          The radioactivity of nickel 63 consists of beta radiation - emission positrons and electrons, which are reflected by any metal screen (for example, foil).

          Did you hear anything about antimatter? So it consists of antiparticles, one of which is positrons, which no nickel can emit. Radiation of plutonium also lies mainly in the alpha and beta spectra, but if you stick wires into it, electricity will not appear in them. I don’t know where you taught your "Alternative Physics", perhaps at the "Positronics Faculty" of the local vocational school, but even you do not know it well. laughing
          1. Operator 4 February 2020 20: 08 New
            • 7
            • 1
            +6
            Be afraid - protons, vestimo (positrons - for Gridasov) laughing
            1. fyvaprold 7 February 2020 19: 58 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Quote: Operator
              Be afraid - protons, vestimo (positrons - for Gridasov) laughing

              Well, thank God, otherwise I was scared for you laughing . And now I'm afraid for Gridasov. belay
  • Simargl 5 February 2020 00: 31 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    Quote: Operator
    a nickel-63 radioisotope generator with half a century of energy - our everything
    10MW on nickel-63 will cost as a kilometer-long destroyer with a displacement of one million tons. You can reserve it normally: two meters ... And put the nuclear power plant ... Novovoronezh NPP, for example ...
    The combat use is to disperse and swim by: a small island will be washed away by a wave ...
    1. Operator 5 February 2020 02: 12 New
      • 7
      • 2
      +5
      Share a source of information on the cost of serial nickel-63 batteries laughing

      Instead of doing demagogy, you just had to calculate the specific gravity of the experimental batteries, which is 2 W / kg (which is a lot even for an energy source on the economical course of a surface ship). The energy efficiency of serial batteries must be increased by at least an order of magnitude.
      1. Simargl 5 February 2020 03: 47 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: Operator
        Share a source of information on the cost of serial nickel-63 batteries
        Think I'm modest by?

        Quote: Operator
        The energy efficiency of serial batteries must be increased by at least an order of magnitude.


        Quote: Operator
        the proportion of experimental batteries, which is equal to 2 W / kg
        20 W / kg - also somehow not very thick. 10 MW =, 5 Mkg = 0,5 ct = 500 t ... it seems not a lot ... if it works out an order of magnitude, and so - 5000 t. But this is for bare elements, without strapping.

        Quote: Operator
        (which is a lot even for a source of energy on the economical course of a surface ship)
        It should be borne in mind that the battery is both a generator and fuel.
  • Kostadinov 4 February 2020 15: 20 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    A very interesting comparison. But it will be even more interesting to supplement it with a comparison with:
    - nuclear power plants;
    - coal boiler turbine installation (burning coal saw)
    - gas turbine installation;
    - burning elements for different types of fuel (gas, liquid, solid);
    - renewable energy (wind, sun);
    - a combination of some of the above.
    Perhaps I missed something but it is also enough.
    1. The Siberian barber 4 February 2020 15: 52 New
      • 6
      • 1
      +5
      Paddle / musculature and sail / wind ..)))
      1. dauria 4 February 2020 17: 52 New
        • 2
        • 1
        +1
        Paddle / musculature and sail / wind ..)))

        With such a salary, our "galley rowers" go broke. wink
        Compare even for horses per kilogram of engine mass, even taking into account boilers and fuel supply. In military affairs, combat qualities and reliability are more important than fuel economy (provided that there is a supply and it is enough for the war).
        1. The Siberian barber 4 February 2020 18: 55 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          Here the question is not even in the "rowers"))
          There was a firm understanding that the authors have a very indirect relationship to the topics they set out
        2. The comment was deleted.
        3. mark1 4 February 2020 19: 30 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          Quote: dauria
          Compare even for horses per kilogram of engine mass, even taking into account boilers and fuel supply.

          KTU - specific gravity of 9-10 kg per hp, consumption 300-350 g per hp * hour
          GTU - 2-5 180-190
          Medium speed 10-12 160
          DN High-speed 3-5 175
  • The Siberian barber 4 February 2020 15: 20 New
    • 11
    • 1
    +10
    To the authors, for starters, WOULD post another photo in their article)))
    Kohl we are talking about boilers and turbines))
    Well, and as usual: a lot of text swelled into bits / pixels)))
    This pair of "candidates" touches, excuse me)))
  • gridasov 4 February 2020 15: 23 New
    • 3
    • 9
    -6
    An excellent article giving a substantive overview of the basic physical principles of use in engines on ships. So, I am positioning a fundamentally new algorithm of the physical process and a device that makes it possible to use any liquid type of fuel and more, if not radically more efficient use of steam. And most importantly, it is important to understand the new type of propulsion giving radically new efficiency of movement both on water and under water. In addition, the power plant is also a current generator. The issue of using all types of fuel is that by homonizing any combustible fuel with water into a stable emulsion, plus the device itself is involved in the supply of fuel since it creates a reference flow. I will say more, the device can be placed on the side planes of the ship and use the force of the wind
    and directly transform the air support flow. Therefore, at this stage there is no alternative. Moreover, the physical principles are not taken from the ceiling, but obvious and reasonable. It is very important to say about the long term use of both the method and the device. I recall that many engine construction companies are considering the use of generators in the turbine core. We have solved this problem much easier and more efficiently.
    1. frog 4 February 2020 18: 28 New
      • 8
      • 0
      +8
      As for the magnificence of the article ..... To begin with, the Bukari, EMNIP, had a full VI of 8500 - 8900, and the Aziks, sorry, had 7600-7700. That is, from the very beginning does not pull to check everything written. With the "new physical principles" everything is already known. For now, the old ones work so-so ....
      1. Sadam 4 February 2020 19: 27 New
        • 0
        • 1
        -1
        I’ll ask you. I'm not a military man. is it possible to spell correctly a typo that with a deadweight of well or a displacement of 7-10 thousand tons, a power plant gives 70 thousand horses or 50 thousand kW ???
        100 thousand tanker - GD 14 thousand kW ...
        1. frog 4 February 2020 19: 30 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Sorry, but what specifically interests you? Can power be indicated in “mares” or in kilowatts? So maybe. Or the correspondence of the power of a power plant to a tanker and an unspecified ship?
          1. Sadam 4 February 2020 19: 39 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            yes second. what kind of propeller system is it that will master 70 thousand kW on such a small ship? Well, you can write off 1000 kW to the shaft generator ... even 30 knots anyway, the screw does not spin faster than 150 revolutions
            1. frog 4 February 2020 19: 59 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              And what is the problem there? Tankers "Dubna", full VI, EMNIP, 13 kt, GEM - 6 kiloponi. So what? And what does "small ship" mean? At 700 full 30 kiloponi mastered, but then suddenly a problem?
              1. Sadam 4 February 2020 20: 11 New
                • 0
                • 1
                -1
                Yes, your civilian example is close to reality 13 kt deadweight is 6 kilopon))
                military 7kt deadweight for 70 KILOPON !!!!! ????
                I wondered whether the couple really spend so many kiloponos))) but okay hammer))
                1. frog 4 February 2020 20: 17 New
                  • 3
                  • 0
                  +3
                  And you compare the speed? And immediately it becomes clear where the herds have gone ....
              2. savelii1805 5 February 2020 01: 46 New
                • 3
                • 0
                +3
                This is not small, it is a tiny trough. The power of the GD-6000 hp is nothing at all))) For comparison, after 2 weeks I fly to a container ship to which the power of the GD-35.600 kW (in the horse you will calculate), and from 4 each of them is 1.200 kW. And it is also considered small ...
      2. Serg65 5 February 2020 12: 59 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: frog
        Let's start with the fact that

        The Bukara’s swimming range is much larger than in the article, I'm not talking about autonomy ... well, if you count money! what
        1. frog 5 February 2020 13: 51 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Naturally. But he didn’t want to dig further repeat Because afftors break through a simple idea and they do not care about objectivity, customer needs and other nonsense. Boilers are cheaper wink
      3. gridasov 7 February 2020 13: 17 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Great! And with God! Only your superiors are also unlikely to think when they understand and know that others are searching and exploring new methods and devices. Get involved in development and tomorrow you will not have time to notice how you have already been swallowed
        1. frog 7 February 2020 19: 02 New
          • 0
          • 1
          -1
          What are you saying ??? We’ll stop in development right now and we will slip for 300 years. What relation do all these scientific delights (with all due respect to them) have for real and for production? In Bashkiria, they created an awesome luminous alloy. Not an alloy - a dream. That's just doing it for some reason in the dance. ICHSH, they do not sell us. Therefore, all these delights are certainly interesting, but they have nothing to do with real life.
    2. Vladimir1155 7 February 2020 13: 13 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: gridasov
      The issue of using all types of fuels is that by homonizing any combustible fuel with water into a stable emulsion

      An interesting idea, it occurred to me 30 years ago, but do you have a real working installation? and where did you get sulfur and ash (from fuel oil)? As I understand it, nitrogen just doesn’t work out for you.
      1. gridasov 7 February 2020 13: 25 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        In such cases, I reply that it is interesting to see the setup or the real physical effect that it produces. A new situation arises, and so on. So Imagine that everything is One Hundred !!! percent of the processes associated with the screw, propeller, and generally that rotates on the shaft have, more precisely, do not have one additional, but key component of the whole process that determines the entire operation of these devices. And this means that we make any technological operation related to this key process energy efficient. That is, the entire diversity of all devices and technologies we have transformed into a new one as a more effective technology. Because it is based on the same key physical process. Therefore, of course, it is possible to build a heat generator or homogenizing device to create absolutely stable emulsions from any substances, or a wind generator or propulsion device and in everyday life I use something. But I'm sorry, I’m not quite UO yet, so as not to see the consequences of any of my actions
        1. Vladimir1155 7 February 2020 13: 30 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: gridasov
          interest to see the installation

          it means you don’t have an efficient installation ...... and I can write words too ...... I wrote 5 thick monographs with print runs of up to 5000 and received a couple of patents
          1. gridasov 7 February 2020 13: 34 New
            • 0
            • 1
            -1
            I said only for myself and just what I wanted to say. I will only be happy for you and your successes, go other people. My situation - and I myself determine my criteria for consistency in my actions.
  • Constanty 4 February 2020 15: 24 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    I had an irresistible impression that the above article is related to the Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union Kuznetsov TAVKR and the rationale for updating its GEM.
    Given the time, cost and effect of the update, it is better to build a new nuclear power plant based on the modified ATAVKR Ulyanovsk ”project 1143.7.
    1. Vladimir1155 7 February 2020 13: 09 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      It was planned to replace the KUZE with a nuclear power plant, but I offered to fix what is, nevertheless cheaper, why spend too much on an old and unnecessary ship. It is better to conduct a VTG, and by the way even the increase in the hangar due to missiles and the replacement of granites with calibers was canceled ..... new patches are not put on old clothes ... and there are no plans to thank new AB
  • Constanty 4 February 2020 16: 09 New
    • 12
    • 0
    +12
    BTW Article about KTEU, and in the photo probably a diesel power plant laughing
  • Mik13 4 February 2020 16: 31 New
    • 16
    • 0
    +16
    With all due respect to the respected candidates of technical sciences, some inaccuracies in the article do occur.

    After the invention of marine fuel tanks (the so-called Fram tanks) and fuel equipment, marine fuel oil began to be used as marine fuel for PSU at the beginning of the XNUMXth century

    Fram's tanks are not even fuel tanks at all. Fram tanks are a mechanism for damping pitching. They have no effect on the use of fuel oil as fuel ...
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Mikhail3 4 February 2020 17: 10 New
    • 19
    • 2
    +17
    The impression is that the authors stole a student from one of their students.
    The ship is a combat unit of the navy.
    Sobbed like a child ...
    It is only a pity that the student who (obviously against his will) presented this epoch-making creation to his teachers was not too burdened with intelligence. Because comparing the efficiency of shipboard vehicles by hourly consumption is something. In my time, such a “calculation” would have come down for the Pioneer House, but the student would never have accepted it.
    I understand the world of these Ph.D. it will never be the same, but different types of machines have a different range of maximum efficiency with minimum fuel consumption. And therefore, even a rough comparison of these parameters should be carried out on the basis of a whole campaign conducted by vehicles of different types in the same ship's hulls, and a ton of other parameters should be taken into account, for example, total travel time, etc.
    In general, it is clear that nothing is clear about the issue raised. Since in the years 60-70, Soviet scientists carried out a huge array of research, which the whole world is using now (recently I read with a laugh from a speech by a physicist at a conference - if we take any complex physical problem, it is usually already solved in the 70th by Russian physicists ), then most likely, the REAL comparison of the efficiency of using engines of various types was carried out at the same time. Unfortunately, such a study probably lies somewhere on a shelf under the heading "secret."
    But it would be a passion to read it, how interesting!
    1. gridasov 4 February 2020 17: 49 New
      • 3
      • 4
      -1
      The author simply limited the dimension of the question raised and nothing more. You dig deeper. At the same time, everyone is right. By the way, our development has some connections with the past, but without due attention the topic was closed. I will not voice the article hanging on the Internet. At the same time, it can be said that Schauberger and Tesla and other inventors contributed pieces of rational ideas before we created the whole agreed theory. Therefore, the theoretical basis for the fact that tomorrow and in a very short period of time can be recreated in reality is extremely important. To some extent, I also provoke industrial spies to increase their knowledge in order to carry out their feasible work. In general, smart people have long realized that any design bureau is a strong personality. Only a person is able to own the density of energy of his intellect, which others can develop further. I always repeat that the depth of knowledge about the world does not depend on the number of people
    2. Sergey S. 4 February 2020 20: 29 New
      • 12
      • 1
      +11
      Quote: Mikhail3
      The impression is that the authors stole a student from one of their students.

      The most reasonable thing that has been reported on this topic.
      Quote: Mikhail3
      Sobbed like a child ...

      As I understand you ... I personally lost my appetite, tried to drink dinner with tea, but was reading .... bewitched ... I confess, I expected an engine offer with an efficiency above 100% ...

      And what is the penetration of the topic!
      The authors distinguish between KTEU, PTEU, PSU!
      What is the term here ??? Especially wrong.
      Commonly called:
      Steam installations - in ancient books there were no steam turbines yet.
      Vocational schools - civilian textbooks - steam turbine.
      KTU - military textbooks - are also steam turbine, focusing not on the type of turbine, but on the composition of the installation of boilers and turbines.
      The steam power plant was used on ships and vessels until the end of the 1970s, and the steam turbine, later called the boiler turbine, is still used

      ,,, ??? ,,, !!!
      Since 1893, the steam engine of a steam-powered power plant became the prototype of all internal combustion engines

      ??????????????????? ,,,, - to eat !!!!
      In addition to these power plants, the ships were equipped with combined power plants, for example, .... diesel-electric power plants

      Information for authors and non-specialists - This is not a combined installation, but a diesel engine with an electric transmission.
      Since the boiler-turbine plant was the first power plant that ships were equipped with, it passed the test of two world and several local wars

      The steam engine fought from the Crimean War ... and in all wars, including the Vietnam ...
      I suppose that the Anglo-Argentine war can also find a steam-engine boat. some tug ...
      In addition, the experience of many wars has shown that, in the absence of oil fuel on a boiler turbine ship, a minimum course can be achieved by burning emergency wood, wooden objects, and other combustible items collected both on the ship and at sea in boilers.

      I close my eyes and see how the grandfather opens the KVG-6, and logs, logs ... Nearby the youngsters bring firewood from the boatswain who organized the deck half-sail and the sailors throw their ends into the sea in the hope of lumbering logs ... And the messengers to officer cabins are digging books and chairs, and in their furnaces ...
      I’ll open my eyes ... read it .... I’ll close it again ... This is something !!! One thing I don’t understand is why in Russian. Zadornov promised that stupid Americans ....
      At the same time, the operation of one engine on ships with DEU and GTEU can lead to disruption of the functioning of the propulsive complex and intense work of the main thrust bearing.

      There is no power left to comment ... Homework is distracting with tips.
      It is known that up to 70% of the cost of operating any ship is spent on fuel.

      It would be nice to be able to distinguish a barge from a destroyer ...
      And TTX 1134A and 1134B in each line ... to put it mildly not exactly.

      And photo!!!! A masterpiece with a stepladder between diesels.

      There are big doubts that the authors are Ph.D.
      Most likely unlucky stems, or ... lucky stems.
      1. savelii1805 5 February 2020 02: 02 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        I agree 100%. After 2 weeks I’ll fly to the ship, I have an Aalborg boiler with a Monarch nozzle there. I already wondered how I would fill steam up to 7 kg / cm with firewood in it))) The author of this nonsense would first learn a little . Especially touched me
        A boiler turbine installation eliminates many of the disadvantages inherent in DEU and GTEU. So, KTEU uses dark types of oil products - naval fuel oil

        But it’s nothing that for 100500 million years everything has worked absolutely completely on fuel oil, including boilers, auxiliary equipment and main engines (in particular, I already forgot when I saw IFO-180 fuel oil, I always work on IFO-380 (numbers are viscosity))
      2. Mikhail3 5 February 2020 09: 13 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        I respect your patience. I couldn’t do this)) About steam turbine and boiler turbine installations - this is someone from the candidate of technical sciences when the USSR managed to hook energy. There, in the last 15 years of its existence in the energy sector, a cycle of renaming many things (needed like a fish umbrella), a transition from calories to joules and other nonsense has gone through. Including this stupidity was.
        Domestic apparently distracted with tips to drink some water, or even grunt cognac, seeing how dad rolls on the floor laughing, unable to stop? I suppose my relatives were seriously alarmed) As to whether the real Ph.D. You can not even doubt it.
        I somehow begged a friend to show me her dissertation. She hesitated, but handed me a landmark work. I've read. Fallomorphs. I began to search the network for other materials ... In general, it is strange that all this is not a doctor’s. The guys could well. The level of current "scientific" works is now such that it’s not even scary. Already anyway ...
        Sometimes I climb into portals like “text.ru”, there is a cool tool for checking the text (every time I am denied a publication on the website with a wording like “insufficient literacy”, this is a separate humor), which allowed me to find out, for example, that I quite popular in RuNet author. Honestly - in my life I would not have thought. So - the current "scientists" often post their dissertations there. Since they no longer possess either general literacy, and even more so the ability to compose a coherent text, they order services to increase the uniqueness and put in order of these "works".
        Take a peek sometime. The technical and general degradation of our country is not just a fact. These processes are raging uncontrollably, demolishing the remnants of the former technological and scientific Power ...
  • A1845 4 February 2020 17: 57 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    In addition, the experience of many wars has shown that in the absence of oil fuel on a boiler turbine ship, a minimum course can be achieved by burning emergency wood, wooden objects and other combustible products in boilers collected both on the ship and in the sea
    .

    The impression is that the authors stole a student from one of their students


    what do students smoke?
    1. Mikhail3 5 February 2020 09: 23 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: A1845
      what do students smoke?
      Lectures of their teachers. In general, this is from art books about the very first steam engines installed on ships. The books often come across multi-day chases, when the pursued heroes break out of the villainous traps by burning the piano, pork hams, and the most soulful - vast reserves of alcohol.
      1. A1845 12 February 2020 14: 07 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        something like that was in Around the World in 80 Days!
  • magadan72 4 February 2020 18: 18 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    I read the article with interest. It was written interestingly .... But I noticed several significant mistakes.
    We will omit the description and principle of operation of steam engines, since they are not used and whether they will lie ...
    Consider the installation of different types. The most common diesel power plant. .Up to 20000 Kw, this is the most efficient installation in terms of weight and fuel economy (we consider only four-stroke, light-two-stroke ones are heavy and are not used in modern military shipbuilding). With a further increase in power, the weight of the installation increases sharply and for military shipbuilding becomes uninteresting. There is a limitation on cylinder power after which the weight of machine parts increases sharply, in addition, a workable engine crankshaft of more than 12 cylinders in a row is vryat possible, even when installing vibration dampers. The installation of lightweight "stars" with their scanty motor resources on ocean-going ships I cast doubt on because of low reliability, as an extremely lightweight and complicated unit (can be used as afterburners and even on small ships). It is possible to increase the installation capacity by installing diesel-gear units, but all the same, the power will be limited (more than 4 engines cannot be installed on one gearbox, forced to increase the speed by drastically reducing engine life). In addition, the noise and especially the vibration of the installation are beyond the limits (installing on the shock-absorbing pillows of a power plant is problematic due to the connection with the propeller shaft). IN GENERAL VIBRATION DOES NOT LIKE MODERN ELECTRONICS.
    In terms of fuel economy, a modern diesel engine will give odds to any type of power plant. It is theoretically possible to burn heavy fuel in diesel engines, but the navy is too troublesome. The maintainability of the installation is average, but it requires qualified personnel, repair in a combat campaign is difficult, spare parts are expensive, engine life is limited (somewhere around 12000 hours, and even ideally) The installation can quickly gain full speed, you can turn off several diesels for economical running with a diesel gear installation / reverse gear is relatively simple compared to gearboxes KTU, GTU.
    BUT AGGREGATE POWER IS LIMITED!
    We pass to the boiler turbine installation. The most bulky and uneconomical power plant. An undoubted advantage of the installation is the highest power, practically limited only by the dimensions necessary for placement in its place in the case. Therefore, it is installed on ships of maximum displacement. Modern high-pressure boilers have a relatively low weight and use a small amount of working water. The maximum service life of the installation is subject to competent operation. I repeat that it is not necessary to carry out any repairs during normal operation in military services (except for not complicated routine maintenance). Spare parts practically do not need to carry. Highly qualified repair personnel are not needed. But you need highly qualified personnel to operate mainly boilers, a complex water treatment system. OPERATION OF THE “AVOS” INSTALLATION LEADS TO A GUARANTEED FULL AT THE EXIT OF THE BOILERS.
    Previously, the Sarychs went to long-distance without tugboats, and the Chinese seem to be operating the former “our” destroyers with KTU without any problems. Apparently the service personnel became smaller.
    KTU is the most "gluttonous" installation of those considered. It can work on heavy grades of fuel, but there will be high steam consumption on fuel oil, complicating the installation due to coil heating tanks and fuel preparation. It seems that "our former" and now the Indian aircraft carrier is working on a solarium.
    (The Navy has never been cheap)
    Due to the lack of translational-reciprocal movements, the noise and especially the vibrations in this installation are low. Which has a positive effect on electronics and acoustics. Theoretically, the machine part of the installation (TZA) resembles the TZA nuclear power plant. In general, there is a point in installing large ships on ships where, for whatever reason, a nuclear power plant does not occur.
    You can write of course about the gas turbine and about the combined installation ...
    1. Mihail2019 4 February 2020 19: 55 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Thanks for the sensible and detailed comment!
      The topic is extensive, I also inserted my "five cents" ..
    2. savelii1805 5 February 2020 02: 18 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Dear, I read your conclusions, and ... neighing ... Once upon a time, the fleet switched to fuel oil. And if you explain on the fingers, the boiler is started on a solarium, the pressure is 5-7 kg / cm is filled in it, then the valves for heating the storage tanks open heavy fuel (fuel oil), when this fuel oil reaches the required t-ry (depending on the type of fuel) the entire system is transferred to this fuel oil (for example, the heating temperature of IFO-380 is 125-130С, which provides a viscosity of 11-13 cSt) .Diesel, in fact, is necessary for passage in special areas (such as SECA) or in emergency x cases. In general, we work on fuel oil. You just need to monitor separators and fuel treatment stations (automatic and indicator filters, a viscometer and heater cleanliness). I’m telling you as a working mechanic of a container ship with a capacity of more than 35.000 kW. And we have people in our car 6 persons
      1. Sadam 5 February 2020 03: 13 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        do not get excited Saveliy. yet the military seems different. we were taught at the department BCh5 a small anti-submarine main engine with a star of 50-60 pistons - on a diesel engine. when it gives 30 knots in the back, it is impossible to stand there rain with unburned MAO from the exhaust - it certainly will not eat fuel oil - it’s not real consumption - if the poacher hasn’t caught a hole in the cap commander’s budget to the Korean zone.
        I generally intresno them some sort of marpales spreading by sulfur content in the exhaust ??? Went from PMP to Evgekinot Carrying out Pevek .... it’s the uzhos military littered the entire Arctic
        1. savelii1805 5 February 2020 17: 51 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Yes, I agree, on military ships there are high-speed star-shaped diesel engines of 54 cylinders each and they work on a solarium, but ... At full power they are used only for a specific combat mission. After its completion, the diesel engine stupidly changes, because it will cost more to repair it, than to put in a new one. Because at maximum load on such diesels the maximum Pz goes and the CPG wear is increased. Therefore, in normal conditions they go to shared loads. And at shared loads the diesel is more economical than KTU, because it eats fuel In the boiler, it is necessary to constantly maintain pressure, so the fuel consumption is maximum, part of the produced steam goes to the turbine, from there to the gearbox and screw, part goes to heat the tanks, rooms and other household needs, and most of it goes to the steam separator, t .e. stupidly cooled and returned to the warm box in the form of condensate.
  • Glebovich 4 February 2020 18: 21 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    The problems of all modern gas turbines are that they are made on the basis of aircraft turbojet engines, the compressor and the “foil” turbine are weak bearings, any adherence of dust or sea salt to the compressor blades and carbon deposits from poor-quality fuel on the turbine lead to an imbalance and they are being built. The solution to the problem of shipborne power plants is the redesigning of gas turbines, the strengthening of the compressor and turbine, the use of metal-fluoroplastic bearings (the load is two times that of the babita, the operating temperature is 120 degrees, the service life is also twice as long). Increasing the efficiency and reducing fuel consumption is solved by installing a waste heat boiler flue gas turbine engine, it is also a backup boiler, the steam from which is supplied to the heat pump (steam turbine with gearbox). KTU song, not yet sung, the use of high-pressure boilers with oxygen blast can be very interesting and profitable, the technology for producing oxygen on the membranes has been developed and reliable.
    1. Avior 4 February 2020 19: 30 New
      • 7
      • 0
      +7
      The problems of all modern gas turbines are that they are made on the basis of aircraft turbojet engines, the compressor and the “foil” turbine are weak bearings, any sticking of dust or sea salt on the compressor blades and low-quality fuel deposits on the turbine lead to an imbalance and they are built out

      Meet the General Electric LM2500 Turbine
      870 propulsion systems on this turbine of various versions have been used in 24 countries on various warships, including light aircraft carriers and UDC, since the 60s of the last century. Made just on the basis of the General Electric CF6 aircraft engine. Dozens of years already, and everyone is happy.
      1. Glebovich 4 February 2020 20: 45 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        I have a relationship with the operation of Solar Turbines, it is produced in the USA and they also have a marriage, it’s good that the service center is in the Czech Republic. You know how often you need to spend those. maintenance and cleaning of the LM 2500, and where these aircraft carriers are being repaired for repair, they also sang songs for us, but in fact everything doesn’t work out so smoothly. To increase reliability, they underestimate power. Ours tried to squeeze out 90 MW from PS-25, it doesn’t work, in good weather only 22 pulls out and endless repairs. What I suggested above allows you to forget about the gas turbine engine, that somewhere somewhere down there it works on any fuel and clean it on the go, throwing a soda shovel from a bag. Not arranging around GTU dances with tambourines and shamans.
        1. Avior 4 February 2020 21: 19 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Yes, I realized that they’ve been using it for 50 years in dozens of countries, this is only because they can’t do any other option, as well as generally
          And what the whole world considers very successful and reliable, so they don’t read smile
          hi
      2. Glebovich 4 February 2020 21: 07 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        I forgot to add, it suits everyone because they have no choice, I do it on the basis of GTU aircraft engines because it’s cheaper, and then they raise the budget of a small European country for maintenance and repair.
    2. Sadam 4 February 2020 20: 40 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      I thought it’s already beaten in the textbooks))) right now all sorts of ceramics with plasma spraying ....
      we are sitting at the 5th year of a diploma in internal combustion engines we are writing here the professor for turbines suffered - what kind of gravitap will drive the next generations .... The efficiency of their turbines is higher but the diesel manufacturers do not let them in - the loot decides)) but in the future they will grow.
    3. Bobrick 5 February 2020 18: 20 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Such a question: why then ships do not use industrial gas turbines (Siemens, for example)?

      In industrial gas turbines, plain bearings are used (if not magnetic at all), and they have many times more service life, lower temperatures and thicker blades (lower efficiency and more weight, with the same traction).

      The use of recovery boilers is not entirely advantageous at gas turbines, since it requires a reduction in the efficiency of the main cycle in order to increase the temperature of the exhaust, and if soot forms on the turbine blades, then the horror will begin on the recovery boiler.
      1. Vladimir1155 7 February 2020 12: 50 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        because industrial turbines LMZ, SImens (energy) are very large and too powerful
        1. Bobrick 8 February 2020 07: 44 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Why, there are 50 and 100 MW cars, which, in principle, are suitable for destroyers. Yes, and you can create a specialized gas turbine engine, it is painfully a lot of alterations to be made to the gas turbine engine (starting from the hulls, blades and beyond).
          1. Vladimir1155 8 February 2020 11: 27 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Are you talking about gas or steam turbines? I didn’t see the big gas turbines ... just you can create a lot you need only specialists and money, there isn’t any other way, somehow you set up a slightly modified copy of ukroturbines in Rybinsk that were actually developed dozens of years ago, by the way the destroyers are not planned at all, and the frigates will continue the series Gorshkova, everything has already been set up there and is not planned, Karakurt and minesweepers do not require turbines .... and there are no more warships planned, except for the submarines .... so why is your turbine?
    4. Vladimir1155 7 February 2020 12: 57 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      the problem of the recovery boiler is that the size of the gas turbine is increasing, and that’s what it depends on transport, but the fact that large combat ships are simply not needed, and there’s not enough space on the corvette, only diesel, oxygen blasting is the melting of the turbine, and there is no fresh water in the sea, just like places to the oxygen station ....
  • Mihail2019 4 February 2020 19: 48 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    Well, the first power plant on the ships was not KTU, but KMU (Boiler Machine Installation).
    It is interesting that the authors, Ph.D. Dubrovin’s chronologically describe everything in general, it’s true, and then they admit such a pearl: “Since the boiler turbine plant was the first power plant that ships were equipped with, it passed the test of two world and several local wars and has shown its high quality and reliability. " Once again - the first was the CMU, the KTU began in the fleets after the impudent passage of "Turbinia" in front of the entire fleet of Her Majesty Queen Victoria.
    I wouldn’t even be let down on the 4th year course.
    Next - the maintainability of the turbines: sorry, but I saw the rotors of industrial steam turbines and the rotors of industrial gas turbines: breakdowns of either one are treated the same - by replacing the blades, or they are not treated at all - change the rotor!
    Production technologies, of course, differ - either keep 350 degrees of water vapor, or 1100-1200 hot gas. But a free (power) turbine of a gas turbine engine works already at lower temperatures - 600-700 degrees. And from the point of view of operation, the turbine (any) is many times more complicated than the CMU.
    1. Vladimir1155 7 February 2020 13: 35 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      GTU is small, and GTU is sooo big and heavy
  • dgonni 4 February 2020 20: 44 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    Authors take away bread in the form of teaching at the department?
    Wild dissonance provoked the assertion of the atom that the boilers can be roasted with firewood. Have the authors even seen in the picture KVN-98/64? Well, the rest of the pearls from the same opera.
    P.S. Unfortunately, our extreme boiler turbines were not a fountain. The most annoying is that both because of the quality of production and because of the useless water treatment in general. Guilty of the designer as always appointed maslopups. Ho I bull 5 fought like a fish on ice but the technical puncture was not eliminated. Goby 5 and his brethren in fact lived on iron constantly because of the peculiarity of the boilers
    1. Vladimir1155 7 February 2020 13: 36 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      everything is true and true, at first forgot how to make reliable boilers, and now they cry that they were abandoned
  • Undecim 4 February 2020 21: 18 New
    • 5
    • 1
    +4
    Is it really necessary to use as many as two candidates of technical sciences to write this work?
    And here we are scolding authors who have no scientific degrees at all.
    Gentlemen are candidates of technical sciences. The choice of the KEU of a combat ship is made primarily on the basis of ensuring the possibility of the most effective performance of combat missions. For a warship, the economic performance of KEUs is of secondary importance, since they can directly conflict with its purpose.
    But if you decide to compare the efficiency indicators, then you need to compare not the hourly and specific fuel consumption, but the effective efficiency of the installation.
    As for the ode to a steam turbine, then it is better to return immediately to the steam engine.
    Traditional type of ship power plants at this stage have already exhausted their potential.
    Therefore, the leading shipbuilding countries are working hard on a new generation of power plants such as the Integrated Power System (IPS), which provides the implementation of the concepts of “Full Electric Propulsion” and “Fully Electrified Ship” (Full Electric Ship). And here "two of the casket" write a story about steam turbines. Right back to the future.
    By the way, the engine room of a ship with steam turbines, and not with diesel engines.
  • Luty 4 February 2020 21: 18 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    A boiler turbine installation requires thorough water treatment. And of course he does not tolerate sloppiness. That is why the Black Sea Fleet had a special vessel for these purposes. And RKR "Admiral Glovko" was able to serve with KTU for 50 years. But this did not happen on other fleets. And it will not happen anymore. The opinion of the authors is erroneous and divorced from real life.
    1. dgonni 4 February 2020 21: 47 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Well, he and the boilers had less heat stress. Although in fact the same thing.
      There are no handsets but you hold on. Something like this ended in the late 80s early 90s BPC and 956e
  • Operator 5 February 2020 11: 47 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    Quote: Simargl
    Think I'm modest by?

    I think that you have confused the cost of experimental products with serial ones.
  • Operator 5 February 2020 11: 51 New
    • 6
    • 2
    +4
    Quote: bayard
    I don’t know how for NK, but for submarines ... than not a power plant for Kalina. And what is the price of this battery, which is our everything?

    It is unknown - in Zheleznogorsk, Rosatom has not yet launched irradiation of stable nickel isotopes and the production of nickel-63 batteries.

    The batteries will need continuous cooling with water or air at power modes less than the maximum, because of the impossibility of regulating the energy release. Therefore, they are primarily intended for space satellites (constantly included in the work), automatic weather stations (also constantly monitoring the environment), electronic equipment of foot soldiers, energy sources of active exoskeletons and robots (of relatively low power).
    1. Operator 5 February 2020 12: 17 New
      • 6
      • 2
      +4
      The efficiency of the batteries developed by Rosatom is 20% (limitation on the possibility of converting beta radiation into electric current in a diamond semiconductor), the degree of nickel-63 purification is 80%. Those. there is a reserve for the future to increase specific power by an order of magnitude (transition to graphene, laser isotope separation)
      http://strana-rosatom.ru/2016/03/25/%D1%8F%D0%B4%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%8F-%D1%8D%D0%BD%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B3%D0%B8%D1%8F-%D0%B2-%D0%BC%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B0%D1%82%D1%8E%D1%80%D0%B5/
      1. minus 5 February 2020 13: 49 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        We read on the same topic: † Scientists from MIPT, TISNUM and MISiS optimized the thickness of the layers of the “nuclear battery”, which uses the beta decay of the nickel-63 isotope to generate electrical energy. About 3300 milliwatt-hours are stored in one gram of the battery they created, *
        Energy resource 3,3 watts per gram !!!! Total!!!!
        We consider how much one gram will give per hour when working for 50 years. We calculate as if every year is a leap year. 3.3 / (50 * 364 * 24) = 0,00000755494 watts per hour !!!! the weight of the battery giving 1 kW per hour will be 132363724,927 grams !!! Such a good battery, more than 132 tons .... Nickel cost to remind you ???? And that's all for a kilowatt per hour! And if you need a thousand? The ship will carry a battery weighing 132 thousand tons ???? For a pacemaker, it’s just fit, but for the power supply of electronics consuming currents measured in nanoampers ..... So go ahead with your battery in the forest!))))
        P.S. I did not mention the real amount of nickel that can be obtained per year at the reactors ... Believe me, there aren’t even hundreds of kilograms))) They get in grams)))
        1. Operator 5 February 2020 13: 57 New
          • 6
          • 1
          +5
          The neutron flux from any nuclear reactor is huge and sufficient throughout the country to produce hundreds of tons of nickel-63 per year. The problem is different - the development of production facilities for the enrichment of the resulting mixture of nickel isotopes, which costs a lot of money.
          1. minus 5 February 2020 14: 08 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Well, even though they were not convinced))) Let there be hundreds of tons, although this will never be achieved) Even for the reason that this cannot be done without altering the reactors))) Let there be billions of tons) You will carefully look at the mass-energy characteristics. Let there even be 300 watts hours in gram one day. Attention! This does not mean that it gives 300 watts per hour, but that it will give 300 watts per hour for its service life! It will be either 300 watts per hour or give 30 watts in 10 hours .... And it will be discharged! While maintaining operability for decades, it is possible to remove scanty power per hour from the battery. Do not confuse the power output per hour and capacity in watt hours!))))
            1. Operator 5 February 2020 14: 48 New
              • 5
              • 1
              +4
              I'm not talking about specific capacity, but about specific power - according to the data given in the comments above (not mine, mind you) a battery power with 20% semiconductor converter efficiency and 80% nickel-63 enrichment with a volume of 1 cc. meter and weighing 5 tons is 10 kW.

              And the specific capacity of such a battery can be calculated by multiplying the power by the number of hours in 50 years of continuous operation of the battery - 4 million 368 thousand kWh.
              1. minus 5 February 2020 15: 15 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Read carefully what sources you specify))))) watt hours in grams or watt hours in a liter or cubic centimeter is exactly the capacity! There the parameter is indicated everywhere watt hours)))) If the power given in watts / hour was indicated, then you would are right. The fact of the matter is that you confuse capacity and specific production per hour.
                1. Operator 5 February 2020 15: 21 New
                  • 5
                  • 1
                  +4
                  Strange - but in the illustration of the battery circuit in the lower right corner is written "specific power".
                  1. minus 5 February 2020 15: 31 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Well, ours can write in every way) But everywhere in watts, that is, they indicate exactly the specific capacity) Magazines what to take from them)))
                  2. minus 5 February 2020 15: 35 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Sometimes you read something and you even have to look for old textbooks of physics, higher mathematics or economics, for example) So everyone will be confused that you stop believing in yourself)
  • Victor Leningradets 5 February 2020 12: 39 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    It is necessary to analyze the possibilities of a combined installation consisting of diesel engines to ensure cruising and KTU to ensure full speed. Theoretically, this allows to achieve significant fuel economy and reliable provision of full speed. However, the fuel is diesel.
    Another thing is if a ship of significant displacement is considered. In this beam, it is possible to use low-speed two-stroke diesel engines to ensure cruising, and they are capable of eating fuel oil by 90 - 92%.
  • Operator 5 February 2020 15: 32 New
    • 5
    • 1
    +4
    Quote: Minus
    our can write any

    Well, if only so laughing
  • Alceers 6 February 2020 22: 07 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Oh again, these non-candidates publish themselves for doctoral
  • Vladimir1155 7 February 2020 12: 47 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    In the merchant fleet, boilers are very beneficial. But the question is a little outdated, due to the obsolescence of the concept of large combat surface ships, in principle, the declared 7000 tons is too much, it is optimal to have a surface frigate ship of no more than 4000 tons and their Navy need no more than 10 in total of five per ocean. Unlike merchant ships the Navy’s economy does not require a permanent stay at sea; in reality, no more than 2-10 percent of the NK’s life is allocated, so using fuel oil boilers does not make sense, in the Navy, on the contrary, they use afterburning gas turbines, which by definition are very voracious s and require expensive TC1, RT, DT.
    1. Sergey S. 7 February 2020 23: 58 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: vladimir1155
      In the merchant fleet, boilers are very beneficial. But the question is a little outdated, due to the obsolescence of the concept of large combat surface ships, in principle, the declared 7000 tons is too much, it is optimal to have a surface frigate ship of no more than 4000 tons and their Navy need no more than 10 in total of five per ocean. Unlike merchant ships the Navy’s economy does not require a permanent stay at sea; in reality, no more than 2-10 percent of the NK’s life is allocated, so using fuel oil boilers does not make sense, in the Navy, on the contrary, they use afterburning gas turbines, which by definition are very voracious s and require expensive TC1, RT, DT.

      I do not agree.
      1. In the merchant fleet, KTUs are ruinous ... in the full sense.
      2. The optimal ship of the ocean zone of 4000 tons is clearly not optimal. But how much. 7000 or 12000 tons. This can be discussed.
      3. Have 10 frigates of 4000 tons each and sleep peacefully ??? This is with the "peace policy" Sasha ???
      4. The economy of the Navy in this case requires something disproportionate to strategy and tactics.
      1. Vladimir1155 8 February 2020 11: 35 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: Sergey S.
        The Navy's economy in this case requires something disproportionate to strategy and tactics.

        it is the proportionality to modern weapons, the strategic and tactics of the Navy, that does not require any surface ocean ships, there are no tasks for them other than ensuring the release of nuclear submarines from the bases, and for this, minesweepers, small corvette frigates, stationary underwater detection systems and coastal aviation are quite enough.
  • brostem_2019 9 February 2020 13: 10 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Or maybe even return to the rowing fleet, we’ll hire Uzbeks and Tajiks and forth ..... Some kind of nonsense.
    1. iouris 11 February 2020 00: 06 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      And I love Uzbeks and Tajiks.