The Anonymous Widower

The Stadler Data Sheet For A Class 777 IPEMU

This data sheet is now available on the Stadler web site.

These are my observations.

Battery Charging

The datasheet says this about battery charging.

While an IPEMU is running on the electrified network, the batteries can be charged from the third rail, as well as through regenerative braking.

I’m glad to see the trains have regenerative braking, which in a train with frequent stops saves electricity.

Battery Charging Time

The datasheet says this about battery charging time.

IPEMUs can be recharged in less than 15 minutes.

That time compares favourably with Hitachi’s time.

Expected Battery Life

The datasheet says this about expected battery life.

The IPEMU battery can undergo more than 10,000 charge/discharge cycles, which is about four times the lifetime of a battery used in EVs.

Stadler also give the battery a minimum expected life of eight years.

Transition Between Electrification And Battery

The datasheet says this about this important transition.

Transition between electrified and non-electrified networks without interruption, reducing travel times.

Stadler certainly do the changeover from electric to diesel smoothly on a Class 755 train.

A Comparison To Tesla

This is a paragraph in the introduction of the data sheet.

The battery/vehicle weight-ratio of a Tesla is about 25 per cent, while the ratio of the IPEMU is only about 6 per cent.

I suspect the rolling resistance, is also a lot less, than the rolling resistance of a Tesla, due to the superior properties of steel wheels on rail, as opposed to rubber tyres on road.

Battery Range

The data sheet gives the following.

  • Installed battery capacity – 320 KWh
  • Maximum speed (IPEMU mode) – 62 mph
  • Range in battery operation – 34 miles
  • Maximum demonstrated range – 84 miles

Note.

  1. I would assume the 55 km given for range on the datasheet is a guaranteed range.
  2. The maximum demonstrated range is from New Merseyrail Train Runs 135km On Battery.
  3. All other figures are from the datasheet.

In an article in the October 2017 Edition of Modern Railways, which is entitled Celling England By The Pound, Ian Walmsley says this in relation to trains running on the Uckfield Branch, which is not very challenging.

A modern EMU needs between 3 and 5 kWh per vehicle mile for this sort of service.

I don’t think the terrain of Merseyrail’s services are much different from the Uckfield branch, so what are the figures for the Class 777 trains on battery power?

  • 55 km range – 2.353 kWh per vehicle mile
  • 135 km range – 0.952 kWh per vehicle mile

The train appears to be very miserly with electricity.

But if the attention to detail in the electrical system of the train is of the standard of a Swiss watch, I don’t think they are unreasonable.

Operation With 25 kV Overhead Electrification

The datasheet says nothing about this, but the Wikipedia entry for the Class 777 train says this under Design.

Because current regulatory policy makes it unlikely that future extensions of Merseyrail’s unshielded third rail traction power supply will be approved, Class 777 units will be delivered with provision for the future installation of 25 kV 50 Hz AC overhead line traction equipment.

This is probably needed for charging at locations without third-rail electrification.

January 17, 2023 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , , , , | 6 Comments

My Current Thoughts On Electric Trains To Windermere

These are my current thoughts on electric trains to Windermere station.

Passengers And Battery-Electric Trains

I don’t think any reputable journalist interviewed passengers on either of the two battery electric services that have successfully run for longer than a couple of days.

Those that used British Rail’s Aberdeen and Ballater service in the 1950s, are probably thin on the ground, although I did meet an elderly lady, who’d regularly used it to go to school and she said the service was reliable.

She also said that the Queen Mother was an enthusiastic passenger.

I rode the Manningtree and Harwich battery electric train during its short trial.

But more significantly, since then I have met two passengers, who used it every day during the trial to commute.

Both would like to see the train return, as it seemed more reliable. I wonder, if like much of East Anglia’s overhead wires, the route suffers from the wind.

It does appear that providing a reliable service with battery electric trains is not a difficult problem.

Two Trains Per Hour To Windermere

In Passing Loop Hope For Windermere, I discuss a passing loop on the Windermere Branch Line to enable two trains per hour (tph) along the line.

The Treasury wouldn’t like this, as it would need twice the number of trains.

But hopefully, it would double the ticket revenue.

Battery-Electric Class 331 Trains

It has been some time now since in the March 2020 Edition of Modern Railways, that it was announced that CAF announced they were building a battery-electric version of the Class 331 train, which I wrote about in Northern’s Battery Plans.

Little has been heard of CAF’s progress since, although I did write Battery-Electric Class 331 Trains On The Radar, which was based on an article in the June 2021 Edition of Modern Railways, which is entitled Northern Looks To The Future.

Lack Of Progress On Battery And Hydrogen Train Projects

Is this typical of battery and hydrogen projects?

Southern’s project on the Uckfield Branch and to close the electrification gap between Ashford and Hastings has only been conspicuous by its absence. This project is important as it releases the Class 170 trains, so that EMR can fulfil franchise commitments.

The project to use hydrogen trains on Teesside has also progressed at a snail’s pace.

It is almost as if someone in the Department of Transport or more likely the Treasury, feels that the best thing to do is to carry on using diesel, as it’s the cheapest alternative.

I don’t think it is any politician, as their public statements seem to be very much in favour of decarbonisation.

Other Electric Trains In The Lake District

I also think, that if battery-electric trains were to be run to Windermere, that they would also run to Barrow-in-Furness. Am I right in thinking that the Furness Line is rather flat, so would be ideal for battery-electric trains?

But I do wonder, if Sellafield and Direct Rail Services are pushing for electrification, as it would surely help their operations, as they could use Class 88 locomotives to bring in the flasks for processing.

Also in Battery-Electric Class 331 Trains On The Radar, I did say this.

I feel it would be possible to electrify the Cumbrian Coast Line using battery-electric Class 331 trains, with a range of at least fifty miles and some short sections of new electrification.

Surely, a battery-electric train along the Cumbrian Coast by the Lake District would be the ideal train for the area.

I can certainly see a small fleet of battery-electric working services between Barrow-in-Furness, Carlisle, Carnforth, Manchester Airport, Sellafield, Whitehaven, Windermere and Workington.

November 30, 2021 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 14 Comments

Network Rail’s Independently Powered Electric Multiple Unit (IPEMU) Trial Report

The report of the BEMU trial using a Class 379 train is freely available on the Internet, after a simple registration and download.

It is a very professional document, that goes a lot further than describe how the trial was carried out.

Other information includes.

  • Battery power can aid the introduction of power sources such as hydrogen.
  • Objectives included a target range of 50 km and speed of 60-100 mph.
  • The list of those contributing to the project were impressive.
  • Three different types of battery were comprehensively tested.
  • The batteries were able to handle the regenerative braking.
  • Testing included runs at up to 100 mph and an extreme range test.
  • It is suggested that battery power could enhance safety.
  • It is suggested that electrification could be simplified, if trains had batteries.

In addition, Bombardier have developed software to analyse routes to see if they are suitable for battery operation.

As someone, who has spent most of my working life looking at the mathematics of systems, I suspect that lots of useful ideas have been indicated by Bombardier’s modelling.

I suspect that the bi-mode Aventra I discussed in Bombardier Bi-Mode Aventra To Feature Battery Power, is one train that has been designed extensively by computer simulation.

Aircraft have been designed that way for decades.

 

June 26, 2018 Posted by | Computing, Transport/Travel | , , , , , | 14 Comments

Auckland Rows Back On Battery Train Plan

The title of this post is the same as this article on the International ailway Journal.

This is said.

Following approval by Auckland Council, the proposal went to the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) for final sign-off. However, in the run-up to New Zealand’s general election on September 23, a political consensus emerged in favour of bringing forward electrification of the Papakura – Pukekohe line, prompting the NZTA to reject the case for battery trains.

Can we assume the reason for the change of order is political?

Certainly, CAF, who are building the trains seem to have the required battery technology. This is also said.

CAF says the contract will include an option to equip the trains with battery packs at a later date if required.

I just wonder if battery trains are just too risky for politicians, who tend to be rather conservative and badly-informed about anything technological.

November 8, 2017 Posted by | Energy Storage, Transport/Travel | , , , , , , | 1 Comment

West Anglia Route Improvement – What Is STAR?

STAR stands for Stratford-Tottenham-Angel Road and is a proposed four trains per hour (tph) service between Stratford and Angel Road stations, calling at the following stations.

The main purpose is to provide a service to the new £3.5billion housing and commercial development project at Meridian Water, the developers of which will be rebuilding Angel Road station and renaming it to Meridian Water.

Brief details of the project are given in the March 2017 Edition of Modern Railways.

  • STAR will involve laying a third track between Stratford and Angel Road, alongside the West Anglia Main Line and the Temple Mills Branch to Stratford.
  • STAR will be completed at the end of 2018.
  • STAR will run at a frequency of four trans per hour (tph)
  • STAR  will help in the four-tracking of the West Anglia Main Line.

More will certainly emerge in the next few months.

But I have a few questions about STAR.

Will STAR Services Go Beyond Angel Road Station?

The only STAR service at present is the two tph service to either ?Hertford East or Bishops Stortford stations that call at Lea Bridge, then in a rather haphazard pattern up the Lea Valley.

It is not a passenger-friendly service, as you turn up for the half-hourly train and find the destination you want is served on the alternate service.

I have a feeling the service pattern is designed by history, rather than a train planner with a brain.

What Type Of Train Will Be Used?

I think the route STAR will take, has a possible headroom problem at Tottenham Hale.

Ferry Lane Bridge At Tottenham Hale Station

Ferry Lane Bridge At Tottenham Hale Station

When I first saw this bridge and saw the height of the overhead electrification on the existing West Anglia Main Line under the far span, I immediately questioned if they could fit the electrification under either of the blue steel bridges, where STAR might pass, in a manner that would meet all the Health and Safety regulations.

Read this article on the Rail Engineer web site, which is entitled EGIP – electrification clearance woes, to learn more about how regulations are making electrification not just an engineering problem.

So will this mean that STAR will be built without wires?

Diesel trains would work, but wouldn’t fit the profile of Meridian Water as an ecologically-sound development.

I think we could see IPEMUs or electric multiple units with onboard energy storage working the route.

Will STAR Share Platforms With The West Anglia Up Line?

The space for putting the third track for STAR is narrow as this picture at Tottenham Hale shows.

 

Not Much Space For Two Tracks

STAR Will Go Through Here At Tottenham Hale Station

If STAR goes through in the space conveniently marked by green grass, the easiest way to create a platform would be to add a second face on the existing Platform 1.

  • A step-free bridge is being built linking Hale Village to a new station building with step-free access to the existing Platforms 1 and 2.
  • If STAR used the other face of Platform 1, it would share the step-free access of that platform.
  • STAR would have cross-platform access with services to Liverpool Street.
  • There would be step-free access between STAR and the Victoria Line.

It could be a very simple and affordable way of creating a new platform and interchange with full step-free access.

The technique could also be used at Northumberland Park station.

Could STAR Call At Stratford International Station?

One of the many proposals for the Docklands Light Railway was to extend the Stratford International Branch along the Lea Valley. This seems to have been dropped.

But there is a line called the High Meads Loop, that  would appear to allow trains to call at Lea Bridge station and Platform 11 at Stratford station, before looping round Eastfield and Stratford International station and returning through Lea Bridge station. In a forum, a claim is made by I assume a driver, that he’s done this.

If a platform could be built on the High Meads Loop to serve Stratford International station, then STAR services could go round the High Meads Loop and call at the platform.

But if the loop could be used to turnback trains, then it would allow a lot more trains to use Stratford as a destination.

Could A Similar Service To STAR Connect Stratford To Walthamstow And Chingford?

I have been past the work-site between Lea Bridge station and Coppermill Junction several times in the last few days and it would appear that the Hall Farm Curve that would make this service possible is being cleared of fifty-plus years of rubbish.

But, there are other problems in creating this service, like the level crossing at Highams Park station.

Could The Capacity Of STAR Be Increased?

The capacity on the East London Line, which runs a similar 4 tph service on four separate routes, was increased by the simple process of lengthening the trains.

Provided the platforms are built to accept longer trains, this would be the easy way to increase capacity.

What Will Happen To STAR When The Great Anglia Main Line Is Four-Tracked?

STAR will only affect the West Anglia Main Line between Coppermill Junction and Angel Eoad, as this is the only section, where the STAR and the new lines will co-exist.

In How Many Fast Services Will Go Through Tottenham Hale Station?, I concluded that there will be between ten and twelve fast trains per hour in both directions between Tottenham Hale and Broxbourne stations.

I also think, that these trains will go non-stop along the new lines only stopping at Broxbourne, as the timings of the new slow trains could be the same as the current fast ones. See Timings Between Tottenham Hale And Broxbourne Stations for full details.

As the four-tracking will not take place for a few years, I think it is likely that Stadler and Bombardier will be able to fit onboard storage to their trains, so could we see the two new lines squeezed into the small space between STAR and the development at Tottenham Hale without electrification?

Signalling technology would also probably allow such a line to be bi-directional, with trains running alternatively in both directions.

It would certainly save space to have a single bi-directional line without electrification handling the fast trains through Tottenham Hale!

The fast line would revert to a normal double track at Coppermill Junction and Angel Road station.

As closing a rail route is often a difficult process, even after Crossrail 2 is providing a high frquency service between Tottenham Hale and Angel Road, STAR will continue into the future.

Conclusion

STAR is putting down some interesting markers for the future.

 

 

February 25, 2017 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , , | 2 Comments

A Station For Marlborough

Marlborough once had a pair of stations, as this map of the railways in the town shows.

marlboroughlines

Note the various stations in an area, where Marlborough the largest town has a population of 8,395.

This railway map shows the important Reading to Taunton Line that passes to the South of Marlborough. This Google Map shows that line as it crosses the A346 road.

The Reading to Raunton Line South Of Marlborough

The Reading to Raunton Line South Of Marlborough

Note.

There would also appear to be tracks of disused railways leading North-Westerly from Bedwyn towards Marlborough.

If Marlborough and the surrounding area were to be given a better rail connection, I would think that a possible solution would be a parkway station, perhaps where the A346 crosses the railway and the canal.

It should be born in mind, that modern trains are designed to perform fast stops at stations, so the extra station at Marlborough would not be the time penalty, it was a few years ago.

Transition Marlborough’s Proposal

But a local action group called Transition Marlborough have their own plans for a Marlborough Rail Link, which as this graphic shows are more ambitious.

marlboroughraillink

Their plans would involve restoring and electrifying the line to Marlborough, where a well-positioned station will be built.

These are my initial thoughts.

  • The route of the line appears feasible.
  • Electrification may be a problem given Network Rail’s expertise in this area.
  • Bedwyn would not appear to be the best terminus for a line to London.
  • I’ve not been to Bedwyn station, but I suspect it could be a bleak place in some kinds of weather.

After I wrote this list, a kind soul in the area sent me this message.

You’ll find that Bedwyn station is a pretty bleak place, especially in Winter. To reach it by road from Marlborough involves a 7.5 mile road trip, at least 3 miles of which is on an unmarked road through a forest. Bedwyn station is almost inaccessible for people without cars, as the connecting bus service is poor and unreliable.

My Version Of The Proposal

I think the best solution could be to create a single-track railway without electrification to a simple station with adequate parking at the proposed Salisbury Road Business Park location.

I would put the station in the car park of the Tesco supermarket in this Business Park.

The distance between Reading and Marlborough by train would be about 37 miles. Network Rail’s plans to electrify the line between Reading and Bedwyn are probably best described as fluid, but I suspect that electrification to Newbury could be possible, which would mean that only twenty miles between Paddington and Marlborough would be unwired.

So this would mean that when inevitably an electric train with onboard energy storage has a range of forty miles, Marlborough could get a modern electric service to and from Paddington.

The advantages of this strategy are as follows.

  • No ugly overhead catenary marching across the country.
  • Work would only include restoring a single track railway and building a simple no-frills station at Marlborough.
  • Marlborough station would not have any electrification and could be designed like a tram stop.
  • Fast Environmentally-friendly electric trains to and from Reading and Paddington.
  • The route would be designed for six-car trains in case Marlborough College put on a free concert featuring the Rolling Stones.
  • The route could be designed to allow two trains per hour (tph), as opposed to the current one tph service to and from Bedwyn.
  • Marlborough to Paddington would have a maximum time of around 80 minutes.

But the biggest advantage is that the scheme is that it could be affordable.

This article on the BBC is entitled Marlborough £30m railway line restoration plan.

If this branch line is developed as I believe Network Rail are now thinking, there could be money left over for a good launch party!

Conclusion

With the next generation of electric train with onboard energy storage or IPEMUs, a Marlborough station on a new Marlborough Branch Line can be used to create a two tph service to and from Paddington to replace the current one tph service from Bedwyn.

So a new Marlborough station would be a win for all those using stations on the Reading to Taunton Line to the East of Pewsey.

I also wonder how many other similar services can be developed by extending a service past a main line terminal to a new or reopened branch line, which is built without electrification and run using trains with onboard energy storage.

 

 

 

 

February 18, 2017 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , | 6 Comments

Is It Bi-Modes And Battery Trains To The Rescue?

This article in Rail Technology Magazine is entitled Further delays to GWML electrification as schemes deferred indefinitely.

The delayed schemes include.

  1. Bristol Parkway to Bristol Temple Meads
  2. Bath Spa to Bristol Temple Meads
  3. Oxford to Didcot Parkway
  4. Henley Branch
  5. Windsor Branch

There is no mention of the Marlow Branch or the Greenford Branch.

The article also quotes the Rail Minister; Paul Maynard, as saying.

Introducing newer trains with more capacity in these areas could be done without costly and disruptive electrification,

Is this a meaningless platitude or is there substance behind it?

A mix of Class 801 electric trains and Class 800 bi-mode electro-diesel trains were originally ordered for GWR.

But this is said in the Wikipedia entry for the Class 800 train.

In July 2016, it was announced that GWR’s intended fleet of Class 801s were to be converted from pure EMUs to bi-mode units. Subsequently these were reclassified as Class 800s.

So will we see bi-mode trains working the Bristol Temple Meads routes, which are numbered 1 and 2 above?

That would certainly allow the Minister to bathe in the glory of a run to Bristol via Bath and back via Bristol Parkway.

Five-car Class 800 trains could also work route 3, thus giving Oxford trains, that would increase capacity and run on electric power between Didcot and Paddington.

But what about the four branch lines; Greenford, Henley, Marlow and Windsor?

Note.

  •  The Minister used the word newer not new.
  • He also said capacity would be greater.
  • When I passed the Marlow branch a few weeks ago, it appeared electrification had started.
  • All branches are short, with the Marlow Branch the longest at 7.25 miles.
  • The Henley Branch has a 50 mph speed limit.

It should also be noted that the Mayflower Line, where the battery train trial was conducted in 2015 is just over eleven miles long.

So would it be possible to fit batteries to the Class 387 trains to fulfil the Minister’s statement?

  • The Class 387 trains are very similar to the Class 379 trains used in the trial on the Mayflower Line.
  • They are newer with greater capacity, than the current trains on the branch lines.

The answer could be yes! I reported on Rumours Of Battery-Powered Trains in August 2015. At that time Network Rail were calling the trains Independently Powered Electric Multiple Units or IPEMUs.

The possibility also exists that Class 387 trains with batteries could also work the lines between Didcot Parkway and Oxford, Reading and Basingstoke and Reading and Bedwyn.

Network Rail needs to convert a serious loss of face into at least a score-draw!

If the Great Western does use this approach, they’ll only be taking a similar route to the Germans, as I wrote about in German Trains With Batteries.

 

 

 

November 10, 2016 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , , | 1 Comment

Chiltern Are Being Very Serious

This article in the Oxford Mail is entitled Train timetable released for new Oxford to London Marylebone route.

This is said.

The new timetable shows services running every 30 minutes, starting at 6.02am from Oxford and returning at 23.10pm.

The line will open on Monday, December 12.

That is certainly a passenger magnet of a timetable.

Looking at the timetable of both Chiltern and Great Western,

  • Both services run at least two trains per hour (tph) all day.
  • Both services run fairly late in the evening.
  • Great Western has the fastest trains, with some doing the journey in under an hour.

It will certainly be interesting to see how these two heavyweights slug it out.

But this is only Round 1One.

Consider.

  • In December 2018, Crossrail services between Paddington and Abbey Wood, via Liverpool Street and Canary Wharf start.
  • In May 2019, Crossrail services between Paddington and Shenfield start.
  • In December 2019, full Crossrail services start.
  • The East West Rail Link will open.
  • Oxford to Didcot should be electrified, allowing electric trains to Oxford.

These developments may appear to favour Great Western services over Chiltern, but I doubt that Chiltern will sit back and do nothing.

So what will Chiltern do?

Consider.

What is needed is a comprehensive plan for Chiltern’s future.

I can’t believe that they’re not working on one!

It could include the following.

  • Line improvements to reduce journey times between Marylebone and Oxford.
  • Improvements to allow the longest possible locomotive-hauled sets to run the route.
  • Development of West Hampstead Interchange.
  • Creation of a second terminus at Old Oak Common.

One or both of the last two options will have to be implemented, due to the lack of capacity at Marylebone and that station’s bad connectivity.

But what would I do?

The Southern end of the Chiltern Main Line needs better connectivity and the best way to do this would be to link it to Crossrail.

When Crossrail opens to Paddington in December 2018, the direct link I wrote about in Paddington Is Operational Again, will enable passengers taking the Bakerloo Line from Marylebone to change easily to Crossrail.

Together with line improvements and longer trains, this should handle the traffic for a few years.

It is interesting to look at a few journey times.

  • Chiltern has trains scheduled between Marylebone and High Wycombe in around 24-28 minutes.
  • Crossrail services from Paddington will take 27 minutes to Sloughbold step of creating a Crossrail .
  • Crossrail services from Paddington will take 45 minutes to Reading.

I would take the bold step of creating a Crossrail branch to High Wycombe.

  • High Wycombe would receive 4 tph from Crossrail.
  • There could be cross-platform interchange between Crossrail and Chiltern services to Oxford and Birmingham.
  • The Acton-Northolt Line would be double-tracked and electrified to connect Crossrail at Old Oak Common to the Chiltern Main Line at Northolt Junction.
  • The Chiltern Main line would be electrified from Northolt Junction to High Wycombe.
  • Chiltern’s Oxford and Birmingham services could use Class 88 electro-diesel locomotives, to take advantage of the limited electrification.
  • Extra services could run from High Wycombe to Oxford and Birmingham, if traffic required more capacity.

Except for the electrification and some track layout changes, there is no substantial investment required in new lines and stations.

If this approach is taken, there will probably be eough eletrification on the Chiltern routes to use Aventra trains with an IPEMU-capability to provide the services out of Marylebone.

 

October 25, 2016 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , | Leave a comment

Parallel Thinking From Bombardier

Bombardier’s New Talent 3 Electrical Multiuple Unit

This is the data sheet on Bombardier’s web site announcing the new Talent 3 EMU, which has recently been announced at Innotrans 2016. It is the successor to the Talent 2.

These are some phrases picked from the sheet.

  • Flexible and efficient when operating as commuter, regional, or intercity train.
  • The use of proven and optimized components, recognized in operation in several European countries,
  • For the first time a TALENT EMU train is compatible with the BOMBARDIER PRIMOVE Li-ion battery system.

Reading the data sheet the train seems very similar to the Aventra, except that in the case of the Talent 3, they mention batteries.

Primove

This Bombardier press release is entitled New PRIMOVE battery for rail presented at InnoTrans exhibition.

This is said.

The TALENT 3 EMU with PRIMOVE battery system will provide an environmentally friendly alternative to diesel trains operating on non-electrified lines. The results will significantly reduce noise pollution and emissions while making rail passenger transport cleaner and more attractive. Operators and passengers will also benefit from a battery technology that eliminates the need to change trains when bridging non-electrified track sections.

Other documents and web pafes emphasise how Primove is for all tranport applications. Thjs is the Primove web site.

In their data sheet, Bombardier said this.

For the first time TALENT EMU train is compatible with the BOMBARDIER PRIMOVE Li-ion battery system.

Reading about Primove, it would appear to be various standard modules.

Supposing you fit a train with the a standard Primove battery. This will give a defined range and performance to a p[articular train or tram with a specfic size battery.

As an electrical engineer and a control engineer in particular, I would suspect that the connections and the control system are the same for all batteries and that provided the battery can fit within the space allocated, all sizes will fit all trains.

So a suburban trundler would probably have less battery capacity, than a fast regional express, that stopped and started  quickly all the time.

If you want more range and performance, you just fit a bigger or more efficient battery.

I suspect too, that if an innovative company came up with another battery design, perhaps based on something like several miles of strong knicker elastic, so long as the plugs fit and it goes in the standard space, Bombardier would at least look at it.

So it looks like the fitting of batteries could be totally scale-able and future-proofed to accept new innovative battery technologies.

Aventras And Batteries

There has been no direct mention of batteries on Aventras

This is the best information so far!

This article in Global Rail News from 2011, which is entitled Bombardier’s AVENTRA – A new era in train performance, gives some details of the Aventra’s electrical systems. This is said.

AVENTRA can run on both 25kV AC and 750V DC power – the high-efficiency transformers being another area where a heavier component was chosen because, in the long term, it’s cheaper to run. Pairs of cars will run off a common power bus with a converter on one car powering both. The other car can be fitted with power storage devices such as super-capacitors or Lithium-Iron batteries if required.

Bombardier have confirmed the wiring for onboard power storage to me.

But you have to remember that the Talent 3 is for the more generous European loading gauge.

So could it be that Bombardier’s standard Primove system fits the Talent 3 and it’s too big for an Electrostar and an Aventra designed on standard lines?

But possibly, splitting the various heavy electrical components between two cars, as indicated in the Global Rail News article, gives more space for fitting a standard Primove battery and distributes the weight better.

Perhaps they can even fit a standard Primove battery into an Aventra, if it has the underfloor space to itself!

Obviously, using the same batteries in a Talent 3 and an Aventra must have cost and development advantages. Especially, if you can size the battery for the application.

Electrostars And Batteries

It has always puzzled me, why some Electrostars with an IPEMU-capability have not appeared. Could it be, that the amount of electrical equipment required is too much for a standard design of train running on a UK loading gauge?

Bombardier must have a target range for a train running on batteries. Perhaps, the Electrostar can’t get that range, but the Aventra with its twin power-car design can!

I wonder if the Electrostar with batteries and an IPEMU-capability will borrow from the Aventra design and have twin power-cars. That could be a much more major modification than that performed on a Class 379 train to create the BEMU denonstrator early last year.

But it could enable the use of a standard Primove battery and obtain the range needed for a viable Electrostar with an IPEMU-capability.

Crossrail And Energy

Crossrail is unlike any other railway, I’ve ever seen, with the exception of the RER under Paris.

  • Crossrail will be deep and all stations will have platform edge doors.
  • Crossrail will have twenty-four trains per hour.
  • A fully loaded Crossrail train going at the design speed of 145 kph has an energy of 105.9 kWh.

All of these and other factors will lead to lots of energy and heat being introduced into the stations, trains and tunnels.

One way of minimising problems is to design the the tunnels, trains, stations and electrical systems together.

As an example of how systems interact consider this. A train pulling away from the station needs a lot of energy to get to line-speed. In a traditional design, there could be a lot of energy wasted as heat in the overhead wires getting the electricity to the train. This heat would then need more air-conditioning to cool the platforms and the train.

So in this and many ways, saving energy, not only saves costs, but leads to further energy saving elsewhere.

Because of enegy problems, railways like Crossrail have to be designed very carefully with respect to energy usage.

Class 345 Trains

A few facts about Class 345 trains, for Crossrail, from their fact sheet.

  • They have been specifically designed for Crossrail.
  • Regenerative braking is standard.
  • High energy efficiency.
  • Acceleration is up to 1 m/s² which is more than an |Electrostar.
  • Maintenance will be by the manufacturer in purpose-built depots.

From this I conclude that it is in Bombardier’s interest to make the train efficient and easy to service.

I also founds this snippet on the Internet which gives the formation of the new Class 345 trains.

When operating as nine-car trains, the Class 345 trains will have two Driving Motor Standard Opens (DMSO), two Pantograph Motor Standard Opens (PMSO), four Motor Standard Opens (MSO) and one Trailer Standard Open (TSO). They will be formed as DMSO+PMSO+MSO+MSO+TSO+MSO+MSO+PMSO+DMSO.

As the article from Global Rail News  said earlier, the power system of an Aventra is based on two cars, with the heavy equipment split. So as each half-train seems to have be DMSO+PMSO+MSO+MSO in a Class 345 train, could the trains be using a three-car power system, with one car having the converter and batteries in the other two, all connected by a common bus.

It should also be noted that most Electrostar pantograph cars, don’t have motors, but the Class 345 trains do. Thus these trains must have prodigious acceleration with thirty-two diving axles in a nine-car formation.

There are also sound engineering and operational reasons for a battery to be fitted to the Class 345 trains.

  • Handling regenerative braking in the tunnels. As a train stops in a tunnel station, the regenerative brakes will generate a lot of energy. It would be much more efficient if that energy was kept in batteries on the train, as the tunnel electrical systems would be much simpler. There could also be less heat generated in the tunnels, as the overehead cables would be carrying less power to and from the trains.
  • Remote wake-up capability. Trains warm themselves up in the sidings to await the driver, as doiscussed in Do Bombardier Aventras Have Remote Wake-Up?
  • The depots could be unwired. I’ve read that the main Old Oak Common depot is energy efficient. Batteries on the trains would move the trains in the depots.

But the biggest advantage is that if power fails in the tunnel, the train can get to the next station using the batteries. In a worst case scenario, where the train has to be evacuated, the batteries could keep the train systems like air-conditioning, doors and communication working, to help in an orderly evacuation via the walkway at the side of the track.

How do you open the doors on a boiling train with fifteen hundred panicking passengers and no power? An appropriately-sized battery solves the problem.

Incidentally, I have calculated that a Class 345 train, loaded with 1,500 80 Kg people travelling at 145 kph has an energy of 105.9 kWh. As s Nissan Leaf electric car can come with a 50 kWh battery, I don’t believe that capturing all that braking energy on the train is in the realm of fantasy.

One big problem with regenerative braking on a big train with these large amounts of energy, must be that as the train stops 105.9 kWh must be fed back through the pantograph to the overhead line. And then on starting-up again 105.9 kWh of energy must be fed to the train through the pantograph, to get the train back up to speed.

As this is happening at a crowded station like Bond Street, twenty-four times an hour in both directions, that could mean massive amounts of energy flows generating heat in the station tunnels.

Remember that London’s tube train are smaller, have similar frequencies and have regenerative braking working through a third-rail system.

Surely, if the train is fitted with a battery or batteries capable of handling these amounts of energy, it must be more efficient to store and recover the energy from the batteries.

Batteries also get rid of a vicious circle.

  • Feeding the braking energy back to the overhead wire must generate heat.
  • Feeding the start-up energy to the train from the overhead wire must generate heat.
  • All this heat would need bigger air-conditioning, which requires more energy to be drawn by the train.

Batteries which eliminate a lot of the high heat-producing electricity currents in the tunnels at stations, are one way of breaking the circle and creating trains that use less energy.

After writing this, I think it is obvious now, why the trains will be tested in short formations between Liverpool Street and Shenfield.

The trains could be without any batteries during initial service testing, as all the reasons, I have given above for batteries don’t apply on this section of Crossrail.

  • Regenerative braking can either work using two-way currents on the upgraded overhead wiring or not be used during testing.
  • Remote wake-up is not needed, as the trains will be stored overnight at Ilford depot initially.
  • Ilford depot is still wired, although the jury may be out on that, given the depot is being rebuilt.
  • There will be no need to do rescues in tunnels.

Once the trains have proven they can cope with herds of Essex girls and boys, batteries could be fitted, to test their design and operation.

You have to admire Bombardier’s careful planning, if this is the way the company is going.

Could the following be the operating regime for Crossrail going from Shenfield to Reading?

  • The train runs normally between Shenfield and Stratford, using regenerative braking through the overhead wires or batteries.
  • The train arrives at Stratford with enough power in the batteries to come back out or get to a station, if there was a total power failure.
  • The train uses regenerative braking with the batteries between Whitechapel and Paddington.
  • In the tunnels, the power levels in the batteries, are kept high enough to allow train recovery.
  • Once in the open, regenerative braking could use overhead wires or batteries as appropriate.
  • The train even handles complete power failure and perhaps a problem with one pair of power cars, as the train is in effect two half-trains coupled together, with at least two of everything.

Has there ever been a train design like it?

Conclusions

It looks to me, that the Aventra and Talent 3 trains are just different-sized packages for the same sets of components like Flex-Eco bogies and Primove batteries.

One train is for the UK and the other for Europe and the rest of the world.

But have the two design teams been borrowing ideas and components from both sides of the Channel?

You bet they have!

Brexit? What Brexit?

The engineers of Crossrail, have not only dug one of the biggest holes in Europe for a long time, but with Bombardier’s engineers, they could also have designed a very efficient and different way of getting passengers through it.

I am very strongly of the opinion, that putting batteries on the trains to handle regenerative braking in tunnels, is almost essential, as it is simpler, possibly more affordable and cuts the amount of heat generated in the tunnels.

 

 

September 24, 2016 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Japanese Trains With Batteries

If Bombardier in Derby and the Germans in Chemnitz (Karl Marx Stadt to Jeremy and the Corbedians)  are addressing battery technology, you could be sure that the Japanese would have ideas and there is this article in Railway Gazette, which is entitled Emergency batteries for Tokyo Metro trains.

This is said.

Nippon Sharyo Series 1000 trainsets operating on Tokyo Metro’s Ginza Line have been fitted with Toshiba onboard emergency batteries so that they can reach the next station under their own power in the event of a traction supply failure.

Toshiba says the SCiB lithium-ion battery is well-suited to emergency use, being resistant to external shock, internal short circuits and thermal runaway. It recharges rapidly, has a long life and a high effective capacity over a wide range of environmental conditions.

The battery draws power from the third rail during normal operation, and can supply the traction system in the event of power outage or other emergency. It can also be used for train movements within depots.

I also said this in Bombardier’s Plug-and-Play Train,

I wouldn’t rule out that all Class 345 trains were fitted with some form of onboard energy storage.

The main reasons are all given in the article about Japanese trains.

September 19, 2016 Posted by | Energy Storage, Transport/Travel | , , , | 1 Comment