2cyl verse 1 cyl

[t19]

T19 is your 10/1 aluminum piston? How/where is it mounted if I may ask?

Thanks
SteveU.

Damn Steve that is a fine question... I have not got a clue, I'll have to ask JohnF what it is.  think Aluminum but not sure

Mounted on steel I beams with just two concrete screws in place, not tight (did not want them to snap)  the are there to stop the walking of the motor... other wise it just sits on my garage floor, no big vibrations or anything... yeah I know we had a long thread on this, but mine does not need it... one day I will build a nice shed for it, and mount it perm but for now, it does not seem to be a problem

[SteveU.]

Thanks for the feed back T19.
I suspect your piston will be aluminum just like Diesel Guys in his 16/1 becouse of the lack of "rapid up and down unwanted motions" you are not having.
I've gotten most all of my spare parts on hand for my 12/1 except for the huge/heavy God Awful Big 130MM cast iron piston. And I may have a line on an aluminum piston. Sounds like it may be worth having to rebalance the crank counter weights for a lighter piston.
Yeah, I still think I made the right engine choice in a large single--worst case I'll just use More concrete.
Thanks
SteveU.

[RJ]

Has anyone tried the or seen one of the 30/2 's run? Been told they are essentially two 16/1's. I was thinking of running one at ~550 rpm coupled to a 7.5kw ST head. Nice and slow, yet plenty of get up and go.

and speaking of CMD has anyone seen there 3 cyl engine that they have now, 45 HP at 1500 RPM.

[diesel guy]

RJ,

It sounds like a great idea, I thought that way a few years ago.

Knowing more on how these engines operate and how they like to run. Lister had it right back 70 years ago, I run 600 RPM for AC power and the frequency regulation is acceptable but 650 - 750 RPM would provide the better quality output.

I think 550 RPM would allow to much droop in the engine RPM when a heavy surge is engaged and it might fall off the useable cycle speed, before the governor would bring the engine back up to proper regulation.

I like t19 idea of running two engines and generators. You can have two separate circuits one for the small loads and the second for the high surge loads. Two 12/1’s would cost the same as one 30/2 and offer greater flexibility and fuel economy.

One could run long durations, at 600 RPM and put out 3,600 watts continuous and the second could run short durations, at 850 RPM and put out 5,000+ watts continuous.

I like the CMD - 45 HP at 1500 RPM engine but it would need a 10 KW load minimum to operate properly. Fuel economy is very important in designing the best generator to your needs.

Just my two cents.
Diesel Guy

[Mark-k]

Just a thought..

Could you have say a 24/2 with one genset running the main load on one side and a second one with an electronic clutch to kick in when additional power is needed on the other side?

Mark-K

RJ,

It sounds like a great idea, I thought that way a few years ago.

Knowing more on how these engines operate and how they like to run. Lister had it right back 70 years ago, I run 600 RPM for AC power and the frequency regulation is acceptable but 650 - 750 RPM would provide the better quality output.

I think 550 RPM would allow to much droop in the engine RPM when a heavy surge is engaged and it might fall off the useable cycle speed, before the governor would bring the engine back up to proper regulation.

I like t19 idea of running two engines and generators. You can have two separate circuits one for the small loads and the second for the high surge loads. Two 12/1’s would cost the same as one 30/2 and offer greater flexibility and fuel economy.

One could run long durations, at 600 RPM and put out 3,600 watts continuous and the second could run short durations, at 850 RPM and put out 5,000+ watts continuous.

I like the CMD - 45 HP at 1500 RPM engine but it would need a 10 KW load minimum to operate properly. Fuel economy is very important in designing the best generator to your needs.

Just my two cents.
Diesel Guy

[SteveU.]

Hi Mark-K
What your dual gen. head idea does not address is diesel engine loading for maximun combustion heat to get the best efficiency in term of fuel economy and how often you will force yourself to have to teardown to decarbonize everything. There has been feedback info posted on other current running threads where members are haveing to ADD unnesasary extra electrical loads to get thier larger engines to run clean.
These diesel engines want to be loaded at a min. of 70% of capacity to get hot enough combustion. Go back and look at the posts of Blacksea7 a former Lister/Petter engineer to confirm this. Other member has found out this out through real world experience.
Another advantage of haveing two smaller set ups is Downtime issues: odds are even if one is down the other will still be able to be produce something usable. That gives good argument to keeping two smaller units exactly the same. Start small then add a second if you still feel you can actually use/need that much power.
So why do I have one 12/1 instead of two 6/1s?? 
Aw, 'cause I didn't join this forum and ask BEFORE I made an engine purhase. I would now go with an 8/1 as long as it had the Lister speced' aluminum piston and heavier high speed flyheels; and then added a second one later. You are asking the right questions at the right time.

All my own opinions
SteveU.

[matt]

Hi Mark-k,

I have to say I am a little confused about the popularity of the 6-1 over the 8-1 or even 10-1. The 8-1 is the same engine as the 6-1, only with higher RPM flywheels for pretty much the same price.
I would have thought that with all of our concers about flywheel explosions, the extra security that the 8-1 flywheels bring would be worth having.
You could still have an original Lister spec Listeroid, but with a little less worry. Not to mention the higher 850 RPM available if you need the extra horse power.
The 10-1 has smaller flywheels but they are much heavier than the 6 or 8-1, which may be to great advantage in reducing flicker.
The 10-1 is still IDI but has a counter weighted crank - instead of the weights being cast into one part of the flywheels. These 10-1 flywheels are rated at 1000rpm so if you de-rate these down to 600-800 rpm the likelihood of a flywheel explosion is exponentially reduced - especially in accidental over speed (up to a point). 

 
I agree with the consensus that seems to be appearing in this thread...ie stick with a larger single instead of going for the twin. If you need to generate a LOT of power then by all means go for a 28-2 or 30-2. Otherwise I would recommend a single.

I think Diesel Guy has a good idea with the 16-1 down rated to 750rpm. At this speed you get the same longevity as 6-1 but with extra few horse power and heavier flywheels to boot. You have also saved yourself nearly half the work than a twin in rebuilding, both originally and later when the time eventually comes.

I have a Jkson 10-1 de rated to 750rpm.

Personally, I would go for 2 singles over a twin. This also has advantages of having a spare engine running while the first is in pieces for servicing.

Others please feel free to correct me if I am wrong in anything I have posted here

All the best for your search and purchace.
Matt

PS I am pretty sure CMD sells Powerline Listeroids

[jzeeff]

Higher RPM will give better fuel efficiency.    Less time for the combustion process to lose heat before it can be turned into motion.