by rail engineers for rail engineers
JUL-AUG 2021 – ISSUE 191
RETURN TO
PLANT FORCE
How rolling stock improvements have reduced the consequences of serious accidents.
Driving innovation in the development of machinery to improve the efficient delivery of infrastructure works. www.railengineer.co.uk
STATIONS & PASSENGER TECHNOLOGIES
CRASHWORTHINESS
PLANT & EQUIPMENT
Examining the extensive ongoing works to improve performance around Temple Meads.
FOCUS FEATURES
A BOOST FOR BRISTOL
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS
Okehampton
A Better, Safer Railway
Discover how industry, with support from RSSB, is keeping Britain’s Railways safe. Download RSSB’s Annual Health and Safety report. This report reviews the year’s health and safety performance, looks at the lessons that can be learned, identifies emerging risks, and outlines what the industry is doing to improve health and safety.
3 16
fatalities in a train accident
One passenger, two members of train crew
public fatalities at other locations
Eleven trespassers, five on level crossings
3
workforce fatalities
Not in train accidents
78
in % reduction passenger journeys
1
passenger fatality in a station
253
suicides or suspected suicides
Download the full report at: www.rssb.co.uk/AHSR
26 CONTENTS
PHOTO: JUI-CHI CHAN
78
40| 46| 52| 56| 62| 66| 68| 74|
Making light rail affordable
Can Coventry deliver a light rail system for a fraction of the price of a conventional tram network?
56+66=69
GB Railfreight needs more locomotives and has boosted its fleet cost-effectively by refurbishing an old workhorse.
Get a grip…again
More highlights from ADHERE 21, focussing on rail head cleaning and dependable speed measurement.
Depots: evolution and revolution
How can the industry improve depots on relatively slim budgets? A recent conference offered some options.
Feeding the train
Peter Stanton talks with a new entrant to the shore supply market, powering trains undergoing maintenance.
No time to stop
Ensuring the efficient operation of depots crucial to the smooth operation of the south-east’s train services.
Beyond HS2
Clive Kessell delves into the wider implications of the nation’s high-speed rail project on the areas it will pass through.
Classic delivery for HS2 works
Mark Phillips visits a crucial HS2 delivery hub saving 45,000 lorry journeys and 15Ktonnes of CO2 emissions.
10| 16| 22| 28|
3
Return to Okehampton
How 11 miles of track renewals has brought closer the reopening of a branch line into the heart of north Devon.
A boost for Bristol
Collin Carr examines the extensive ongoing works to improve performance around Temple Meads.
Cracks: a fact of life
David Crawley considers the inevitable appearance of cracks and how operators respond to their impacts.
Crashworthiness
Malcolm Dobell and David Shirres reflect on the rolling stock improvements that have reduced the consequences of serious accidents.
34
34|
CAF’s Mark 5 coaches
The benefits and challenges faced by TransPennine Express and Caledonian Sleeper through the introduction of new stock.
88
78| 82| 84| 88| 91| 92| 96| 100|
Connecting our stations
Paul Darlington considers how digital technology is transforming the way stations are managed for information and surveillance purposes.
Towards the inclusive railway
To support modal shift, can we make the railway as accessible as possible for all passengers?
A challenging Challenge
Despite Covid’s impacts, the 10th Railway Challenge took place in June, testing the ingenuity of young engineers.
Plant force
Driving innovation in the development of machinery to improve the efficient delivery of infrastructure works.
The hand safety premium
The high-impact hand tools that impose negligible safety risks on their operators.
The challenges of monitoring
Knowing something is going to fail before it actually does is becoming key to modern engineering practices.
The drive for net-zero
Providing situational advice for drivers by connecting them to the world beyond their cab.
Railtex
We look ahead to some of the products and services soon to be on show at Birmingham’s NEC.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
4
EDITORIAL EDITORIAL
Decarbonising TRANSPORT
HM Government’s Transport Decarbonisation Plan has much to commend it. No diesel or petrol cars and vans are to be sold after 2030, HGVs are to be zero-emission by 2040, public transport and active travel is to be encouraged and better planning will avoid new developments only being accessible by car. As far as rail is concerned, the plan requires a net-zero carbon railway by 2050, with diesel-only trains removed by 2040. To achieve this, there is to be an
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
ambitious programme of electrification guided by Network Rail’s Traction Network Decarbonisation Strategy (TDNS) and supported by the use of hydrogen and battery traction, with existing diesels cleaned up before they are withdrawn. Yet, whilst the case for rail electrification seems to be recognised, it remains to be seen if there will be a commitment to a large-scale rolling electrification programme. Whilst electrification is a costly investment, so is the billions of pounds needed for electric road vehicle infrastructure. Furthermore, rail electrification is a profitable investment as electric trains are cheaper to buy and operate, as well as being more powerful. This both attracts additional traffic and increases rail capacity. In this way it makes the railway of the future both environmentally and financially sustainable. Yet the financial benefits of electrification do not seem to be recognised. The Public Accounts Committee’s recent report ‘Overview of the English rail system’ noted that electrification is essential for railway decarbonisation but comes at a significant cost. Both this report and the Transport Decarbonisation Plan make no mention of electrification’s savings which, according to TDNS, generally give it a positive business case. This is of concern as it indicates that HM Government - and in particular the Treasury - does not
fully appreciate that electrification is an investment that offers value for money. The plan’s aim to encourage public transport will be supported by the Very Light Rail (VLR) National Innovation Centre that is being built at Dudley. We explain how VLR is being engineered to provide a whole-system solution to make light rail affordable for Britain’s smaller cities, with the first system to be introduced in Coventry in 2025. Yet the plan does not consider modal shift to rail for long distance journeys and so does not recognise the conclusion of the Government Climate Change Committee’s ‘Net Zero’ report that decarbonising transport requires behavioural changes such as taking fewer flights. Between Central Scotland and London, twice as many passengers fly, rather than travel by train. If decarbonisation is the aim, this cannot be acceptable in the future when HS2 and other enhancements could provide a three-hour journey time. Yet rail can only accept such additional traffic if it has the capacity provided by HS2, as Clive Kessell reports. Yet it seems that the future of HS2’s eastern leg to Leeds - and the significant additional capacity on the Midland and East Coast main lines that it would provide - is in doubt. Also, on the subject of HS2, Mark Phillips reports how work is progressing where it crosses the East West Rail route.
5
THE TEAM Editor David Shirres david.shirres@railengineer.co.uk
Acting Production Editor Graeme Bickerdike graeme.bickerdike@railengineer.co.uk
Production and design Adam O’Connor adam@rail-media.com
Engineering writers bob.wright@railengineer.co.uk clive.kessell@railengineer.co.uk collin.carr@railengineer.co.uk graeme.bickerdike@railengineer.co.uk grahame.taylor@railengineer.co.uk lesley.brown@railengineer.co.uk malcolm.dobell@railengineer.co.uk mark.phillips@railengineer.co.uk paul.darlington@railengineer.co.uk peter.stanton@railengineer.co.uk stuart.marsh@railengineer.co.uk
Advertising A much smaller project is reopening the 14-mile single-track Okehampton line which offers significant local benefits, as does the programme to enhance Bristol Temple Meads Station, helping to regenerate this area of the city. Collin Carr reports on the challenges of both these projects. As stations get busier there is increasing focus on Station Information and Surveillance Systems. Paul Darlington describes how these utilise the latest digital technology. Finding diesel traction for a growing rail freight business is problematic. One solution is repowering the 40-year-old Class 56 locomotives to produce a ‘new’ Class 69. We describe why and how this was done. Although locomotives don’t often haul passenger coaches on today’s railway, Caledonian Sleeper and TransPennine Express have bucked the trend for multiple units by acquiring coaches from Spanish train builder CAF, as we describe. Serious train accidents are now rare events, though, when they do occur, concerns are often expressed about the crashworthiness of older rolling stock. Yet our feature shows how coaches with monocoque construction - introduced in
DAVID SHIRRES
RAIL ENGINEER EDITOR
the late 1960s - have saved many lives since then. The risks of cracks in coaches are considered by David Crawley who explains that they are everywhere, how to identify which cracks matter and what to do about them. Another risk is that of poor wheel/ rail adhesion. We explain how this can be reduced by novel rail head cleaning and dependable speed measurement in our latest report on the industry’s Adhesion Research Group. Peter Stanton reflects on the ‘Evolution and Revolution: Railway Depots Today’ seminar which considered adapting old depots for current rolling stock and legislation. Easing Covid restrictions allowed the Railway Challenge to be held for real this year. Malcolm Dobell, one of the event’s judges, describes the event and explains how it supports the development of young engineers to the extent that it one of the most rewarding things in his 50+ year career. Both these events are examples of the way that IMechE’s Railway Division supports the industry. Finally, all at Rail Media were saddened to learn of the passing of our writer David Bickell who made a significant contribution to railway signalling and wrote many in-depth features for Rail Engineer. Our thoughts are with his family.
Asif Ahmed
asif@rail-media.com
Chris Davies
chris@rail-media.com
Craig Smith craig@rail-media.com
Rail Engineer Rail Media House, Samson Road, Coalville Leicestershire, LE67 3FP, UK. Switchboard: 01530 816 444 Website: www.railengineer.co.uk
Rail Engineer Videos http://rail.media/REYouTube
Editorial copy to Email: news@rail-media.com
Free controlled circulation Email: subscribe@rail-media.com
The small print Rail Engineer is published by RailStaff Publications Limited and printed by PCP Ltd. © All rights reserved. No part of this magazine may be reproduced in any form without the prior written permission of the copyright owners. Part of: ® www.rail-media.com
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
6
FEATURE
Weaning transport off petroleum In July, HM Government published its Decarbonising Transport plan. In the Foreword, Transport Secretary Grant Shapps stated that the plan is about fixing the harm from emissions to make sure transport shapes the country and the economy for the better. He also noted that the plan is “not about stopping people doing things: it’s about doing the same things differently.”
Yet for some sectors, the alternative to energydense petroleum is not clear. The technology readiness chart at the back of the plan shows a very high solution certainty for rail, buses, cars and vans, and medium solution certainty for HGVs, coaches, domestic shipping and aviation. For long haul flights, it shows that no zeroemissions technology has been identified. Hence there needs to be modal shift from less energy efficient forms of transport. The plan encourages the use of public transport and active travel, on which £2 billion is to be invested over five years. The aim is that
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
half of all journeys in towns and cities will be walked by 2030. The ‘Bus Back Better’ strategy, published in March, aims to join up public transport and includes a commitment to deliver 4,000 new zero-emission buses. No new petrol and diesel cars and vans will be sold after 2030. Before then, £2.8 billion is to be invested on a package to support the switch to electric vehicles, including £1.3 billion on charging infrastructure. The plan estimates that electrifying the UK car and van fleet needs a 20% increase in electricity generation by 2050, although smart charging could help reduce this. By 2040, there is a commitment to eliminate diesel HGV sales, for which the most suitable zero-emission technology is uncertain. Hence trials of battery, hydrogen and electric road systems are to be funded and the use of sustainable low-carbon fuels considered. The plan requires a net-zero carbon railway by 2050, with no diesel-only trains after 2040. It recognises that this needs an ambitious programme of electrification guided by Network Rail’s Traction Network Decarbonisation Strategy, supported by the use of hydrogen and battery traction. It also requires improved connectivity between rail and other modes of transport, with extra rail capacity needed to meet growing passenger and freight demand. For the maritime and aviation sectors, there is to be research into appropriate technologies such as ammonia produced from hydrogen on ships. For aviation, the Jet Zero Council is developing solutions for guilt-free flying, with the objective of zero-emission flights across the Atlantic within a generation. Yet the Council notes the limited evidence on cost and availability of such solutions. The plan has much to commend it. Whether the commitments will be delivered remains to be seen.
FEATURE
Bio-coal trials show promise Norfolk’s Bure Valley Railway (BVR) has held an extensive trial of bio-coal as the heritage rail sector looks towards a carbon-free future. The event, which took place in June, was the result of cooperation between members of the Advanced Steam Traction Trust (ASTT), Bure and the Heritage Railway Association. The first departure on the narrow gauge line burnt the usual Welsh coal from Ffos-y-fran as a base comparator under test conditions. Subsequent trips used Homefire Ecoal50, Briteflame and Homefire Ovals; all three products are from a range of manufactured smokeless fuel samples given to the BVR for the trials by CPL Industries. Andrew Barnes, Managing Director of the Bure Valley Railway, explained how careful measurements were taken during the experiment. “Fuel in the tender was weighed, the amount of water consumption and ash left in the ash pan and smoke box were also measured. Transducers were rigged to a computer in the lead carriage to measure smoke box vacuum, exhaust performance and speed. “All three fuels functioned well, but Homefire Ecoal50, made up of 50% biomass - notably crushed olive husks which would otherwise end
up in landfill with the associated risks of methane - and 50% traditional solid fuel fines was an unqualified success, giving the same performance as our usual Welsh coal whilst emitting up to 40% lower carbon dioxide emissions.” ASTT produced the test protocol, provided the test equipment and supervised the trials. John Hind, Chair of the ASTT said: “We are not only looking at performance here but how the bio-fuel burns and what will be acceptable to passengers? Homefire Ecoal50 is the nearest to recreating that unique ambience visitors expect, recreating the smell of heritage steam.” Of the three products, Homefire Ecoal50 came out on top with an exact match for the performance of coal. Briteflame showed 80-85% of coal’s performance, but with significantly higher ash output. Homefire Ovals had 95% of the performance of coal. Steve Oates from the Heritage Railways Association said: “It’s excellent to see one of our member railways taking the lead. The timing couldn’t have been better. As carbon came under the spotlight at the G7 summit, a UK steam railway has been testing an alternative to fossil fuel. Although heritage steam only produces 0.023% of total UK carbon emissions, we continue to be very focussed on finding ways to reduce this further.” Julian Martin, Sales Director at CPL Industries confirmed that his company “currently imports 200 thousand tonnes of coal a year for use by our industrial, domestic and heritage customers and we feel uniquely placed to play a key role in helping our customers move towards a low carbon and renewable future.”
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
7
8
FEATURE
Memorial installed for tunnel navvies Campaigners hoping to reopen a disused West Yorkshire railway tunnel as part of a new cycle route have installed a memorial to the ten men known to have died during its construction. Work on Queensbury Tunnel, between Bradford and Halifax, began in May 1874 when navvies started to sink a shaft close to its north end. Around 600 men were employed on the project which involved the excavation of 180,000 cubic yards of rock, as well as the manufacture and placement of over seven million bricks to form the arch. Progress was significantly delayed by the huge volume of groundwater entering the workings. Pumps at five of the seven construction shafts removed 63,000 gallons of water every hour. The 1.4-mile long engineering feat was eventually completed in July 1878, more than two years after the date specified in the contract. The greatest cost was borne by the workforce; dozens of injuries were overshadowed by ten deaths. The youngest casualty, 25-year-old Frederick Goulding, was crushed between a wagon and a large timber; the eldest was John Swire, 44, who was run over by wagons in the tunnel’s southern approach cutting. Newlywed Captain Pickles was the last to lose his life in
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
June 1877 when he was struck on the head by a half-ton roof support. Others succumbed to explosions, drownings and falls at the shafts. To honour the navvies, the Queensbury Tunnel Society has erected a memorial comprising two rows of railway sleepers - one for each of the ten men - which stand either side of the path connecting the Great Northern Railway Trail to the tunnel entrance. The materials were mostly donated by the Keighley & Worth Valley Railway whilst the installation work was carried out by industrious supporters of the campaign to save the tunnel. Norah McWilliam, leader of the Society, said: “The experiences of these men are beyond the comprehension of anyone in the 21st Century. Although they were paid comparatively well, the risks they faced were overwhelming. Every shift could realistically be their last. “Of the navvies involved in construction, one in every 60 lost their lives; even more would have suffered life-changing injuries. And every accident brought with it the threat of destitution for the family as there was no financial support from the companies involved. “What we fail to appreciate when we’re sitting in comfort on today’s modern trains is that the infrastructure we’re travelling on, through or over was mostly built 140+ years ago. We owe these men a huge debt for their determination in gifting us our railway network against the odds. The very least we can do is pause to reflect on the sacrifices they made.”
Britain’s Largest Specialist Transport Union
s er k or w t or p s Tran TIAL
EN S ES e _ar__ s er k or w
THE
TRANSPOR T WORKER
PAY
FREEZE
Protecting our members’ interests is our priority
Join us today rmt.org.uk
FREEPHONE 0800 376 3706
10
FEATURE
RETURN TO
Okehampton COLLIN CARR
I
t’s always a delight to write about reopening a railway to passengers. It’s nothing to do with nostalgia; it’s all about releasing the potential to local communities, tourism and commerce, which is all relevant when considering the planned rebirth of the line from Okehampton to Coleford Junction, a 14-mile single-track route that links Okehampton and surrounding north Devon areas to Exeter and beyond. The route was closed to passengers in 1972, 49 years ago. However, it was kept open to enable freight trains to maintain access to Meldon Quarry which, over the years, has provided high-quality track ballast for the railway network. The quarry closed in 2005 and the line was confined to occasional charter trains running as a Sunday Special, ensuring that the route was not completely forgotten. The original line continued beyond Meldon Quarry, down to Bere Alston and eventually to Plymouth. It crossed Meldon Viaduct - now a Scheduled Monument -
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
which soars 151 feet above the valley and comprises six warren truss spans supported by five lattice trestles. Over the years, problems with the Dawlish sea wall have prompted discussion about this line’s reinstatement as an alternative route into Cornwall, but I am drifting into subject matter worthy of a different article.
Long term campaign I met with Daniel Parkes, Programme Director for Network Rail, responsible for the work involved in reopening the line to Okehampton Station. He reminded me that
there has been a long-term campaign by the Oke Rail lobby and other supporting bodies to develop plans to revive the line. Recognising the potential benefits of such a venture, about 12 months ago Network Rail procured the services of AECOM Design consultants, based in Bristol, to carry out a structural assessment of all assets on the existing railway. The study concluded that 11 miles of track would have to be renewed. More than 40 cuttings and embankments were identified for work, with five in very poor condition. There were 11 level crossings, of which three have been closed. Network Rail is looking to upgrade six others with Miniature Signal Lights and there is the potential to close the remaining two. However, significant work will probably be needed to bring the crossings up to current standards.
FEATURE
Barnstaple Coleford Junction
Okehampton Exeter
Bere Alston
Plymouth Longitudinal timbers Amey acted as resident engineer for the inspection of the structures, of which there are 60 bridges and culverts. The company carried out visual and detailed inspections of them all. Minor structural work was required on most of these structures. The longitudinal timbers on one bridge with needed replacing, along with the supporting structural members. At the time I met Daniel, he explained that all this activity was progressing according to plan, alongside the level crossing work and an additional 14km of fencing that has to be replaced. Linbrooke Services was responsible for installation of a GSM-R driver-signaller communication system which enables train drivers to speak directly with the signaller and control, thus removing the need for much of the traditional lineside equipment. Okehampton is close to Dartmoor in the middle of Devon’s lovely countryside. There were potentially many environmental issues that Daniel and his team would have to take into account as they knew that they would be disrupting a considerable amount of natural overgrowth, as well as badgers, nesting birds, goshawks and pheasants to name a few (but apparently no newts).
A depot and compound was set up at Exeter Road Industrial Estate, located two miles west of Okehampton Station. It was designed to act as a hub for managers, supervisors, technical and project teams - as well as visitors - and was designed to help keep traffic off the country lanes, ensuring that everything would be provided on this site. The value of the scheme is approximately £40M which includes the activity outlined above and the track renewal. Replacing single-line track can be quite complex logistically.
particularly helpful and supportive whilst all this work was in progress. They clearly understood the benefits to the community that the reopened line would bring.
The last regular passenger train arrived at Okehampton on 3 June 1972.
Good drainage The first priority was to sort out the track and lineside drainage, enabling the formation to dry out. Years of vegetation growth and silting had to be removed. Road-rail vehicles equipped with digging, flushing and vacuum equipment were used to remove and expose the old drainage system, allowing the necessary repairs to be carried out. The Railvac proved to be particularly useful, helping to clear the significant volumes of silt away from the formation. Also, Daniel was keen to point out that local landowners and neighbours have been
The project's first priority was to sort out the track and lineside drainage. Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
11
12
FEATURE Most of the legacy structures have required minor structural works.
it be adequate? Well, experience and good judgement prevailed and 130 continuous welded rails were delivered without incident. Road/rail vehicles were then used to cut the existing track into 3m sections which were stacked five high to the side of the formation. A procession of bulldozers and excavators was used to remove the top ballast, consolidate the formation and calculate/mark a centre line for the new track. More than 26,000 sleepers had been stockpiled at the Okehampton compound and the CWR was now lineside. So, how do you put it all together? By using an NTC, which stands for New Track Construction train and Balfour Beatty owns two of them.
Conveyor-belt renewals
More than 26,000 sleepers were stockpiled at a compound in Okehampton.
Once the drainage work was completed, 22 miles of rail was delivered using CWR trains, placing the rail alongside the existing line on one side. This was not a straightforward part of the process because the existing track consisted of components going back to 1922. Some sections were not in a healthy state and a judgement had to be made regarding the track’s ability to carry the weight of the CWR trains without incident.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
Strengthening old track There was some concern about the quality of the existing Bullhead track which, in places, dated back to 1927. Would it be able to withstand lateral forces from engineering trains? So, to reduce the risk of gauge spread, a decision was made to install in additional wooden sleeper after every existing five. This is not an exact science, so would
The company was invited by Network Rail to install the 11 miles of single-track railway. The NTC is definitely an impressive piece of machinery. It is in fact a conveyor belt, with the sleepers being fed onto the machine by gantry from a sleeper train at one end and then placed with the correct
FEATURE spacing on the formation at the other. Then the CWR - which is now located either side of the NTC - is fed into the sleepers and clipped-up leaving a fullyfunctional railway line ready to receive ballast and for the rails to be destressed. The NTC machine works with a team of eight fully-trained operators. Communication is critical because it is a continuous process that requires everything to work according to plan and, when that happens, the machine is able to install 400m of completed track in an hour. Daniel and his colleagues planned the work so that the sleepers stockpiled at Okehampton could be delivered to the machine without external influence which ensured that they were in control of every aspect of the relaying process. Well, that was the theory and it worked very effectively almost all the time. Occasionally, of course, Murphy’s Law
intervenes. The renewal work was carried out in four stages, working from Coleford Junction toward Okehampton. Each one was to take place in a week, with Stage 1 being 3km, Stage 2 - 6km, Stage 3 - 4km and Stage 4 - 3km. Once the NTC had finished its work, additional ballast was dropped to stabilise the track which was then tamped and aligned before restressing.
Hot in April? The first stage was planned in April - a month not renowned for its hot weather - so it was decided to weld the CWR beforehand at the lineside, only to be confronted with recordbreaking temperatures for April, in the high 20s Celsius. This had an impact on the stability of the track laid, so welders had to quickly introduce a number of joints to avoid any buckling.
Balfour Beatty's New Track Construction train was used to relay the single line.
FINDING YOUR WAY AT NIGHT AND IN FOG! pedeSOLAR - The optional LED lighting for pedeSTRAIL level crossings. ¬ Technology: solar-powered LED
¬ Service life: more than 8 years
¬ Output at full power: up to 240 hours without additional solar radiation
¬ Temperature range: -20°C (- 4°F) to 85°C (185°F)
¬ Colours: yellow, red, white, green, blue (two colours per cover possible)
¬ Charging time: approx. 3 hours on a sunny day
¬ LED configuration: one-sided and two-sided reflectors
STRAIL (UK) Ltd. - Richard Whatley Tannery Lane // Send / Woking // GU23 7EF // Great Britain // Phone +44 (14 83) 22 20 90 // Fax + 44 (14 83) 22 20 95 // richard@srsrailuk.co.uk
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
13
14
FEATURE
Around 400m of completed track could be installed in an hour.
The team then reverted to welding all the CWR at the end of the relaying process, before destressing the track. That minor incident aside, all has worked to plan and the completion date of December 2021 looks to be achievable. So who knows, maybe a Christmas Santa Special to Exeter - Covid permitting - will be an option for those who live in north Devon. At present there is an intention to carry out some additional building work at Okehampton Station. However, there are no other plans to reopen old stations or build any new ones on the route. But a proposal is being developed for a new Okehampton Parkway Station and, who knows - as I alluded to at the start of this article - Bere Alston to Tavistock might not be too far away, which could in turn resurrect possible links with Plymouth and a second route into Cornwall. This, of course, would all depend on how the Dawlish sea wall behaves over the coming months and years. Meanwhile, for college students, businesses and the Devon tourist industry, the Okehampton extension must be a huge boost to the local economy, environment and the railway network. Good news for everyone.
The project has involved laying 11 miles of singletrack railway. Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
Watch // TRS CEO Paul Bateman talking about HVO at Rail Live 2021
Scan this //
total rail sustainable Total Rail Solutions ditches diesel and switches to a cleaner, greener fuel for a more sustainable rail network . •
Alternative HVO fuel from Crown Oil to be supplied in all plant
•
Further improving the environmental impact on the rail network
We are one of the first hirers in rail to make this change and are committed to protecting all our futures.
Visit totalrailsolutions.co.uk or call 01962 711642 to find out more
16
FEATURE
A boost for
Bristol COLLIN CARR
T
he continuous regeneration and development work carried out over the last 30 years in Bristol is now focusing on the city’s Temple Meads Station and its surrounding area. The station itself is a primary transport hub for the whole of the south-west and by regenerating the area around and including the station, the commercial opportunities become significant, with new housing and jobs. This programme could attract a considerable injection of additional funding, estimated at £1.6 billion per annum. It’s an appealing opportunity for the whole city. So let’s focus on the Bristol Temple Meads Station area itself. There are three specific packages of work that are all currently in progress: » Remodelling of the crucial Bristol East Junction, between the four Filton Bank lines leading to South Wales, Bristol Parkway and the Midlands, and the main lines to Bath Spa and London Paddington » Refurbishment of the station’s Grade I-listed train shed roof, built in 1871-4 and the most visible improvement for passengers » Construction of a new access route from the station to an under-utilised area to its east side, with great economic potential just waiting to be tapped.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
Gantry installation I spoke to Molly Evans, Network Rail’s Senior Project Engineer, who is responsible for the remodelling work on Bristol East Junction. She explained that work on site has been in progress for some time, with one of the crucial developments taking place on 27 December 2020, when AmcoGiffen delivered a 20-tonne 33.6-metre gantry span by road to Network Rail’s Queen Ann Road Depot in three sections. It was then constructed into a single structure beside the Filton Down Main during the week before Christmas.
FEATURE PHOTO: GOOGLEEARTH Bristol Temple Meads Station
Barton Hill Depot
Gantry
Queen Ann Road Depot
Bristol East (Temporary) Depot
BRISTOL EAST JUNCTION
Fabrication and installation work for this gantry was carried out by Loughboroughbased Adey Steel, working to a design by FJD Consulting Ltd, based in Birmingham.
During an extended Christmas possession, a Kirow crane was used to lift the gantry span onto two rail trailers which were then towed by a road/rail excavator to site, where the Kirow lifted it onto two towers that had been erected in the autumn, using normal possession arrangements. This new gantry - now spanning seven tracks remains alongside the existing structure whilst this summer’s trackwork is completed. New signalling equipment will subsequently be installed on it, prior to commissioning and being brought into service. The existing gantry will then be removed.
Junction remodelling Equally important, although less visible to those travelling by train, is the remodelling of the Bristol East Junction. Alongside many other supporting engineering activities, it is valued in the region of £130 million.
Kingsland Road Depot
The junction is located just to the east of Temple Meads Station and is mainly surrounded by industrial units and rail depots. When complete, it will improve
replaced five S&C units at Bristol East Junction and a further six on the Up and Down London lines and the Down Filton Main Line. The new panels were transported and placed using a combination of a Kirow crane and Geismar PEM-LEM sets, followed by electrical works to switch heating and signalling works. More than 1,200 tonnes of old ballast, rails and sleepers were removed by road-rail excavators and loaded onto engineering trains for off-site recycling. The main blockade started in July 2021. It was focussed on Bristol East Junction and
(Above) An overview of the station, junction area and depots.
(Left) The new signalling gantry being craned into place.
capacity, flexibility and reliability, making more efficient use of platforms at the station and therefore significantly improving the potential for operators to reduce train delays. An extra line is also being introduced to support additional suburban services being planned for the future as part of Bristol City’s MetroWest Project. The renewal and improvement of the 50 point-ends at Bristol East Junction began in March 2020. AECOM, design partner in the South Rail Systems Alliance with contractor Colas and client Network Rail, designed the new track layout, with the components delivered loose to Network Rail’s Kingsland Road Depot where they were built up into panels ready for installation using various S&C renewal techniques to suit the local circumstances. However, during a possession from 25-28 December 2020, the Alliance
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
17
18
FEATURE
(Above) Renewal and improvement of the junction began in March 2020.
conditions. Of course, we cannot ignore the impact of the Coronavirus pandemic and the teams’ use of Covid Marshalls to monitor plans and personal behaviour on site.
(Inset) The main blockade started in July 2021.
Temporary depot
included the replacement of 58 S&C units with 50 new units to form the improved track layout. This intensive period of work will be completed by late autumn 2021. The improvements have been translated by Network Rail into passenger seating, indicating that there will be an additional 4,000 daily seats available on completion. This is undoubtedly an important development which will help the city to achieve its objectives linked with the MetroWest initiative to dramatically improve transport within Bristol.
Innovative thinking Molly explained that there was an original construction plan of 12 weeks; however, this presented substantial disruption for passengers. The team was challenged to reduce this to eight weeks using an innovative approach. The process of building up S&C units with
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
loose components on the available ground was reviewed and it was instead decided to refine the process with an easier construction and delivery methodology. This was done by developing the S&C Modular Plus design whereby smaller panels are prefabricated and transported to site, then the longitudinal bearers that tie the unit together are delivered separately and installed on site. It is a relatively straightforward adjustment, but this revised approach has delivered enormous savings, offering a satisfying outcome for all concerned. Care has had to be taken to ensure that all contaminated ballast is removed safely and additional precautions introduced to ensure the River Avon - which skirts round the station complex - is not affected by any changes to ground
There was another substantial problem that had to be addressed to ensure that all railway activities could carry on as normal throughout this work. For many years, Cross Country trains have used Barton Hill Depot for cleaning, refuelling and day-to-day maintenance. Access is via East Junction and was therefore denied throughout the blockade. To overcome this difficulty, a scheme was developed to relocate activity to a temporary depot in sidings near North Somerset Junction. New cleaning equipment, walkways, lighting and fuel tanks have been installed ensuring that the effect on Cross Country trains has been kept to a minimum. There is a strong possibility that this temporary facility known as Bristol East Depot - might be used as a lay down area for MetroWest, with the track layout to the depot kept in place. It will also remain a strategic freight site. As Molly pointed out, the opportunities for both
FEATURE Network Rail and MetroWest are significant, with the current freight-only Parson Street-Pill route being converted for passenger services alongside reopening for the Pill-Portishead line. These schemes will help to boost Bristol’s transport and economy, together with the remodelling of Bristol East Junction providing an immediate step forward.
The station roof Whilst the development of the new track layout is underway, Network Rail has been developing detailed plans to restore the Grade I-listed station roof which was designed by Francis Fox and constructed in 1874. So it is approaching 150 years old! The programme also incorporates full refurbishment of the 1930s Culverhouse platform canopies and structures, including the large glazed area between the booking hall and restaurant on Platform 3 - known locally as ‘Bonaparte’s Alley’ due to the company name of a previous business occupying the site. The original 1874 forecourt canopies will also be refurbished. In addition to this substantial work on the historic areas of the station, a new eastern entrance is being created to provide access to a new Bristol University campus complex (and beyond) which is being developed in conjunction with WECA and Bristol City Council as part of the Temple Quarter Enterprise Zone.
This work involves some major engineering challenges including piling the foundations of the new passenger subway extension, temporarily removing the canopy on Platform 15 and punching through the original 1930s railway retaining wall.
Two years to complete The refurbishment of 153-metre long 38-metre span Grade I-listed train shed roof and canopies is expected to take more than two years and is valued at approximately £24 million. Taziker, the principal contractor, is working to Network Rail’s brief to repair and strengthen the structures, replace the glazing and completely repaint all steel/ironwork to a new colour scheme agreed with Historic England. There is little doubt that the element with most impact on passengers and visitors will be the restoration of the main train shed roof. It is more than 30 years since it was last refurbished and, understandably, the existing paintwork, timber boarding and glazing have become dirty and discoloured over time. As a consequence, natural light entering the station is limited and what should be one of the showpieces of railway architecture has badly deteriorated, becoming a somewhat gloomy and dull environment for passengers and not the ‘cathedral for railways’ that the city of Bristol deserves. There is no doubt that this work is timely and will have a hugely positive impact.
A temporary depot has been established for Cross Country Trains.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
19
FEATURE
An overview of Temple Meads, looking towards Bristol East Junction.
PHOTO: ALEX FEDOREN
20
The restoration work to the train shed and canopies will be closely monitored and approved by local conservation officers and Historic England at every stage.
Maintain a safe environment To ensure the programme is carried out safely for both workers and passengers, Network Rail will install scaffolding and a crash deck beneath the train shed between Platforms 3-5, thus providing a huge safety screen over the associated tracks and platform areas. The 5,800m2 access scaffold structure has been designed by RDG Engineering, with foundations and back-propping designed by FJD Consulting. Temple Meads Station lies between two watercourses and there are challenging geotechnical conditions beneath the platforms, as well as a network of historic structures, cellars and other voids. To support the vast temporary works structure, each of the scaffold towers’ foundation bases have been designed individually. Some
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
locations were found to have voids beneath the platforms which have had to be filled with injection grouting to stabilise the ground, whilst others have required innovative structures to spread and transfer the loads safely to the original Victorian foundations beneath without damaging the historic building fabric. The temporary scaffold will be fully decked out to ensure passengers and station staff are protected from the work progressing directly overhead. The worksite will also be encapsulated, sealed and wrapped to prevent dust and other materials from escaping into the operational station environment below.
Paint design The plan is to strip all the paintwork back to bare metal and recover with a carefully designed and approved series of paint coatings. The colour scheme has been chosen to approximately ‘bookend’ the recently restored train shed roofs at Paddington, although, as the structures here are unique,
PHOTO: ALASTAIR CAMPBELL
FEATURE
the final paint colours will also be bespoke to Temple Meads. With a palette of white, light/ dark grey and with architectural detailing picked out in copper and dark red, the station will look completely refreshed and remain clean, light and airy for years to come. In addition to refurbishment of the roof and canopy structures, the improvement programme will also include the complete rewiring of the station’s electrical system to bring it up to modern standards. Designed by Arup Consulting, the
work will improve the stability of the power supply at the station and allow for future expansion. Heating, ventilation and mechanical cooling will also be replaced and all lighting will be upgraded to energy efficient LEDs. The roof renovations at Bristol Temple Meads are due for completion in 2023. I would imagine that the city would want to celebrate completion of this work and the additional gateway into an expanding commercial area of opportunity.
(Above) The train shed roof project will relieve the station's gloom.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
21
22
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS
Cracks: a fact of life I DAVID CRAWLEY
n spring 2021, cracks were found in yaw damper bracket mountings on some EMUs and DMUs operated by Northern Trains, and in yaw damper mountings and jacking points of Intercity Express Trains. These issues caused significant disruption and were therefore reported extensively in the media. Rail Engineer asked David Crawley, a specialist in this field, how asset operators, owners and engineers manage cracks. Cracks are everywhere. Some matter, some don’t. How do we know which are which and what do we do about them? There is no such thing as a perfectly homogenous defectfree material of any practical use. Even if there was, by the time it is joined to others, shaped, bent, drilled, crimped, welded, subjected to heatinduced loading and treated chemically, it would no longer be ‘perfect’. Competently manufactured items will, at best, contain only microscopic defects - hardly worthy of the name ‘crack’ - but they will seed
Sudden brittle fracture starting at the centre and running in both directions across the flange.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
the large-scale cracks that may emerge with use. Any design process must assume that a multiplicity of defects come naturally with the materials. This is, mostly, built into the applicable standards for design and manufacture, and QA inspection processes weed out the rest. So why do large-scale cracks still emerge? However ‘perfect’ any manufactured item is, it can only be as good as the design process allows it to be. Loading is usually conservatively estimated over the intended life (measurements can deal only
with a moment in time), but it is still an estimate. Usage can change, the environment can change, mistakes of analysis can be made, standards can be used inappropriately, materials can be selected incorrectly, residual loading from manufacturing processes can be inadequately accounted for, and testing and inspection can miss material defects and emerging problems. These things are not all necessarily the ‘fault’ of anyone; who can criticise the Victorian engineers in the 1880s designing Hammersmith Bridge for failing to understand the amount of yet-to-be-invented motorised traffic it would carry, or failing to anticipate the increase in structural thermal loading due to human-induced global warming? Or that bearing failures over a century later would remain untreated until they caused real damage? In the last 20 years, there has been a worldwide average of 6.3 bridges per year suffering structural failures. Even the iconic Cheesegrater (The Leadenhall Building) suffered a major failing in structural bolts in 2014, with all having to be replaced. After hundreds of years of design experience - with modern materials, standards and construction
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS methods - this is a surprisingly high number and makes the point that the discovery of cracks in service is something to be expected and must therefore be accommodated in operating and maintenance processes.
Beyond fatigue The two principal defences are inspection and maintenance, to detect defects and to prevent them. Both are matters of judgement and should, ideally, be constantly revised according to any evidence emerging in their use. Mistakes can be made, but even if they are not, aficionados of fracture mechanics know that there is another problem. The process by which microscopic defects grow into detectable cracks under cyclic loading if it is high enough sometimes missed in the design process - is well understood and termed ‘fatigue’. Less well appreciated is that once those cracks reach a certain critical length, they can grow
catastrophically if the conditions are right. A high tensile stress field in combination with large enough cracks can cause a structure to shatter like glass; the Comet airliners were among the first visible examples of this phenomenon and two London Underground rolling stock fleets have had localised, and contained, examples. If a design is not properly understood, such behaviour remains a risk.
The now-common use of aluminium rather than steel for rail vehicles is driven by weight and consequent energy saving, leading to a reduction in whole-life costs. It is possible, for a given duty, to build a lighter structure in aluminium than steel, but great attention must be paid to highly-stressed areas such as bogie/car-body interfaces, door openings, buffing and draw-gear structures, and lifting points.
1983 tube stock bogie, showing three of the four crack locations.
The unstoppable crack on the crashed Comet.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
23
24
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS
(Above) The 'swan neck' on a tube train underframe showing the weld is a high stress position. (Right) Detail of the cutout material showing the cracked weld.
Close attention must be paid to the characteristics of aluminium having one-third the strength of steel and more sensitive fatigue characteristics. The greater difficulty in welding aluminium must also be taken into account in design details to ensure that premature failures do not occur. Design details can make or break a design. Sudden changes of section, or welding, in highlystressed areas don’t work well.
Checks and balances For railways, there are some examples of things being done very well; axles and rails both receive a high degree of attention in design, inspection and maintenance as they represent a true opportunity for single-point failure leading to high risk of loss of life. For vehicles, it is usually the case that a crack that is detected could
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
only become dangerous if left untreated. Service suspensions to maintain safety risk acceptably low while solutions are found are not the norm. There is a well-established routine applied when a crack is discovered. How prevalent in the fleet is the defect? Cracks emerge across a fleet - one by one - according to some distribution of probability and, if the defect is one of design rather than of some externally applied random events, they are often normally distributed in growth. Many found on the first inspection indicates rapid growth as more frequently applied inspection regimes would otherwise have detected the first few as they emerged. This knowledge contributes to the solution. A rapid check of the entire fleet would follow after discovery of a crack if
it were in any location which could cause a serious failure - a primary load-bearing member, with no other load path being available, or a location which, on crack extension, could cause gauge fouling or loss of equipment. Any of these could be the root cause of a derailment at speed with significant risk of loss of life. Any vehicles with such defects would be quarantined. Others may be allowed into service with an enhanced inspection regime applied if it could be shown that the rate of crack extension is slow enough to allow a crack to be found before its length became unacceptably great. No permanent solution could be applied until either the reason for the emergence of the defect was understood or it was rendered irrelevant by some other change. Typical of the latter is the application of secondary supports to equipment at risk; if the primary support fails then the secondary support would temporarily take over the duty. This is only a short-term solution until a permanent one is found, but it would allow some resumption of service until that point.
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS Determining root cause Occasionally, the existence of a crack indicates the relief of significant residual stresses, often from the build technique employed. In the case of the now-defunct 1983 stock running on the London Underground’s Jubilee Line, a series of 200mm long cracks were discovered on almost all bogie transoms. They were there from the first few weeks in service so had certainly grown very rapidly. However, no further movement was noted as the residual stresses which had contributed to the cracking had been relieved and the cracks were so long that they changed the gross torsional stiffness of the bogie beneficially. A simple bolted patch repair was employed which lasted without incident until the fleet was scrapped. This was a failure of both design and manufacture, with changes of section at high-stress locations and high residual stresses from the build methodology. Some cracks simply stop growing because they are moving into a compressive stress field. It is possible to initiate a crack in a component under cyclic net compressive loading if it experiences plastic deformation locally to a stress-raiser like a sharp corner. When the load is removed, there is a range of relative tensile stress experienced on the ‘rebound’ which causes the crack. As it grows, the relative tensile stress range reduces because the crack has moved beyond the stressraising feature and into a net compressive stress field. This is a defect that might be associated with the stop brackets for trams’ magnetic track brakes and they usually require no repair.
The machined replacement part.
Temporary solutions, particularly those employing enhanced inspection, cannot be employed indefinitely, not least because natural crack growth would soon keep the whole fleet out of service. The hunt for a permanent solution can be difficult as it demands a good understanding of the root cause of the failure. That requires clear evidence of the actual loading environment and the design details. Nobody can claim to have fixed a problem if they don’t know why it happened. This is the reason for what can seem like extended delays before fullservice resumes after a major defect is found. Another temporary solution that usually doesn’t work is drilling a hole at the end of the crack which is supposed to reduce stress by ‘blunting’ the crack tip to stop it growing. There are three problems -
finding the end of the crack reliably enough to know that it isn’t still there further on in the path, ensuring that the stress field isn’t so great that a new crack will just initiate again inside the hole after a brief pause and continue, or, worse, in the case of the 1983 bogies example, guarantee that the crack reaches a critical length by extending it before it would have reached that length naturally, but more slowly. Removing strength by drilling rather than replacing lost strength is not a reliable strategy unless the crack is caught at a very short length and the stress is low enough anyway not to reinitiate a crack.
Drawing board How to repair a crack? The most ‘obvious’ remedies are no remedies at all, for example, welding the crack. If the crack happened in parent metal, then the repair would certainly be weaker than the original which had already
The relatively complex repair: 'swan neck' with welds in low stress areas.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
25
26
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS Crack initiated by inappropriate location of welded bracket.
Structure’ - in which the risk is less immediate - and monitoring and load reduction can be employed safely to allow the structure to remain in service. All of this can be summarised as: find and quarantine defects that are a threat, monitor the rest well enough to ensure they don’t become a problem in service, understand the root cause of the defects and use that information to develop a permanent solution which will usually require some redesign, then change the inspection and maintenance regime to reflect the new reality. proved to be substandard. If the crack happened in weld material, then the repair may fail again even more rapidly. All this assumes that welding would even be possible; some aluminium alloys require very specialised techniques to be used. Valid permanent solutions usually involve some element of redesign and have some combination of load reduction, possibly through partial diversion of load through additional load paths, or possibly through change of use, the use of details that are
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
less prone to crack initiation, or the use of different materials or fastening techniques. Additional monitoring may also be employed. These techniques are commonly applied to rolling stock, but apply equally to other structures such as bridges. For example, Highways England standard CS 470, Management of sub-standard highway structures, has the concept of ‘Immediate Risk Structure’ and the management techniques follow the same principles that apply to rail vehicles. The next category is that of ‘Substandard
David Crawley joined London Underground in 1983 following work in British Aerospace on airframe design. He developed the processes and procedures for managing cracked components on London Underground’s trains, investigating and designing repairs for many such examples. Later, he held several senior management roles in LU and the Metronet public-private partnership consortium before founding and leading engineering consultancy Xanta Limited.
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS
25
Confidential Reporting Est Safety 1996 for
Speak up confidentially. We’ve been listening for 25 years. Raise a concern for any company – not just your employer.
Work environment
Rules & procedures
Welfare facilities
Equipment
Occupational Safety hygiene practices
Training & competence
Fatigue
www.ciras.org.uk Report hotline: 0800 4 101 101 Rail Media - This is CIRAS ciras@25.indd 1
27
Report textline: 07507 285 887
Freepost: CIRAS
05/08/2021 09:55:28
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS
DAVID SHIRRES
MALCOLM DOBELL
Crashworthiness
28
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
The 1984 Morpeth accident in which there were no fatalities.
ANL SHUTTERSTOCK
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS
R
olling stock crashworthiness is often discussed in the media after a serious train accident, usually accompanied by graphic images of the wreckage. Collisions between trains and with obstacles dissipate large amounts of energy and it is almost impossible to forecast the outcome given the unique combination of vehicles and accident site.
As such events are now exceedingly rare, Rail Engineer examined serious accidents over the last 40 years to show how their frequency has been reduced and consequences made less severe, with reference to the role of crashworthiness. Railways learn from accidents and adopt inquiry recommendations with the aim of preventing recurrence. Following serious accidents in the 1980s and 1990s, the industry formalised a five-part strategy based on good risk control principles: 1. Eliminate the risk by preventing derailment or collision. 2. If an accident occurs, vehicles should be capable of absorbing impact energy in a way that minimises risk to occupants. 3. Motion needs to be controlled to keep the vehicles upright and in line so that the forces can be managed. 4. Interiors must be designed to protect occupants as effectively as possible. 5. If all else fails, vehicles and procedures must facilitate escape and rescue.
Stock
16/2/80
Bushey
Mk2/3
0/48
96
Broken rail
24/6/84
Morpeth
Mk 3
0/35
90+
Overspeeding into 50mph curve
30/7/84
Polmont
Mk2/3
13/44
80
Train hit cow and derailed
19/9/86
Colwich
Mk3
1/60
95
SPAD
Mk1
35/484
40
Defective signalling
8/1/91
Cannon St
Mk 1
2/542
10
Buffer stop collision
15/10/94
Cowden
Mk 1
5/13
55-65
SPAD
4/3/89
Purley
Mk 1
5/88
21-39
SPAD
8/9/96
Watford Jnc
Class 321
1/69
50
SPAD
19/9/97
Southall
Mk3
6/150
80
SPAD
23/9/99
Winsford
Mk 3
0/27
50
SPAD
5/10/99 Ladbroke Grv
Mk 3
31/523
130
SPAD
17/10/00
Hatfield
Mk 4
4/70
115
Broken rail
28/2/01
Great Heck
Mk 4
10/82
140
Hit road vehicle, then collision
10/5/02
Potters Bar
Class 365
7/76
100
Defective points
6/11/04
Ufton LX
Mk 3
7/71
100
Hit car on level crossing
23/2/07
Grayrigg
Pendolino
1/68
95
Defective points
16/6/16
Watford
Class 350
0/2
34
Landslip
12/8/20
Carmont
Mk3
3/6
73
Landslip
Minimise the consequences In an accident, rail vehicles should be capable of absorbing impact energy in a way that minimises the risk to occupants. Casualty figures in the table of accidents show that the Mark 1 coach was unable to do this. These coaches with their 1930s design - had been introduced in the 1950s and had a strong underframe supporting a relatively light superstructure. By the late 1980s, they had been replaced by more modern designs except for a few brake and catering coaches, and many Southern electric multiple units. The latter were involved in the
6
Significant train accidents since 1980 – those shaded would have been prevented by effective Automatic Train Protection.
Average number of accidents over preceding ten years
4
2020/21
2017/18
2014/15
2011/12
2008/09
2005/06
2002/03
1999/00
1996/97
1993/94
1990/91
1987/88
1984/85
1981/82
1978/79
0
1975/76
2
1972/73
Train accidents with passenger of workforce fatalities
Of the 19 incidents, nine would have been prevented by an effective train protection system. Thanks to TPWS - introduced from 2002 - there have been no incidents of these types since the 1999 Ladbroke Grove accident. Broken rails or defective points caused the accidents at Bushey, Hatfield, Potters Bar and Grayrigg. Today, the number of broken rails per year is 10% of that in 2000 and there have been significant improvements to point design and maintenance. Five accidents were caused by obstructions on the track, involving a cow (Polmont), road vehicles (Ufton level crossing and Great Heck) and landslips (Watford and Carmont). Significant work has been done to minimise landslip risk. Clapham Junction, in 1988, was caused by defective signalling equipment.
Notes
Location
12/12/88 Clapham Jnc
Eliminate the risk
Deaths/ Speed/ Injuries mph
Date
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
29
30
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS
(Above) Mark 1 coach destroyed in Clapham Junction accident. (Top) The 1988 Clapham Junction crash.
The underframe was all that remained of a Mark 1 coach involved in the 1994 Cowden accident.
accidents at Clapham Junction, Purley, Cannon Street and Cowden where almost all fatalities occurred due to the loss of survival space. The Clapham Junction report noted that compression of the passenger space caused most of the 35 fatalities. The Cowden inquiry stated that a feature of accidents involving Mark 1 rolling stock was “one train or part of a train overriding another, the frame of one coach slicing through the bodywork of another.” In the 15km/h bufferstop collision at Cannon Street, fatalities were caused as one coach overrode the buffers of the adjacent coach and destroyed its superstructure. Mark 2 and 3 coaches, introduced in the 1960s and 1970s, were of monocoque construction (i.e. the chassis is integral with the body), with a welded steel stressed skin, in line with the standard approach to vehicle design adopted since the 1930s by most European railways and in the United States. In the 1980s, such vehicles were involved in four accidents at speeds of around 140km/h. The 1980 Bushey derailment was caused by a broken rail; the 1984 Morpeth derailment resulted from overspeeding whilst the 1986 Colwich collision between two trains resulted from a red signal being passed. Although a driver died at Colwich, all passengers survived these three accidents,
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
despite coaches overturning, falling down embankments or piling into each other. Sadly, the 1984 Polmont collision with a cow resulted in 13 fatalities when the shallow cutting side forced the derailed leading coach into a vertical position during the accident. More recent fatal accidents involving Mark 3 coaches were those at Southall, Ladbroke Grove, Ufton level crossing and Carmont. These were particularly violent accidents involving severe rates of deceleration. The inquiry reports (noting that Carmont is still awaited) commented on how the survival space of the Mark 3 coaches had generally been well maintained. However, there was concern about the number of casualties. The Ufton level crossing report highlighted the requirement for bogie retention as two coaches lost survival space due to an impact from a detached bogie. It also noted that some of the fatalities were of passengers ejected through broken windows and recommended that laminated glass - which was already mandatory for new trains - should be fitted to existing coaches when undertaking refurbishment.
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS Eliminate the risk Research in the 1990s attempted to understand these issues better so that suitable requirements could be mandated for new trains. For crashworthiness, these are covered by two British Standards. BSEN12663 specifies the longitudinal compression and tension forces that locomotives and passenger coaches must withstand. BSEN15227 concerns the dissipation of a train’s kinetic energy in an accident - in a much shorter distance than usual - by such features as antioverride devices, provision of survival space and crumple zones. BSEN15227 includes four collision scenarios for different types of railway operations: 1. front-end impact between two identical trains 2. front-end impact between different types of railway vehicle 3. front-end impact with a large road vehicle on a level crossing 4. impact into a low obstacle (car on a level crossing, animal, rubble etc). EN15227 recognises that there are limits to what any structure can withstand. It requires main line trains to withstand a collision with another train at the low speed of 36km/h and with a 15-tonne deformable object at a level crossing at a speed between 50km/h and 110km/h that must be determined by the railway authority, based on the railway’s characteristics. Serious train accidents often occur at much higher speeds, with a considerable effect on the energy to be dissipated. The standard defines “withstand” to mean: » reduce the risk of overriding » absorb collision energy in a controlled manner » maintain survival space and structural integrity of the occupied areas » limit the deceleration » reduce the risk of derailment » limit the consequences of hitting a track obstruction.
There were no passenger fatalities in the 1986 Colwich accident. Keeping vehicles upright BSEN15227 assumes that the train is on the track at the time of the collision and aims to retain it on the track during and following the collision. This affects the design of couplers and the effect of ‘weight transfer’ or ‘unloading’ arising from the shock of a collision. The standard accepts that no rail vehicle can be expected to withstand a particularly severe collision without some loss of survival space as some collisions are not within its scope. It notes that collisions following derailment are relatively uncommon events and it is not possible to predict the behaviour of a derailed train. However, the standard’s protection measures are considered to mitigate the effects of such incidents. Even low-speed collisions can have unexpected outcomes, such as the derailment of a new Intercity Express Train at Neville Hill depot during a circa 20km/h collision with a High Speed Train in November 2019 where some bogies unexpectedly derailed. This was the first accident in the UK involving a train designed to comply with BSEN15227.
The Mark 3 coach was introduced in 1975.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
31
32
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS
PHOTO: RSSB
Seven people lost their lives in the 2004 Ufton level crossing accident.
The 2007 accident on the West Coast Main Line at Grayrigg.
Train interiors
New standards, existing vehicles
Research into what happens in a train accident identified that people might be ejected though broken windows, injured by outside objects entering a vehicle, flying fixtures and fittings, or that people might be injured when hitting unyielding fittings. The inquiries into the Hatfield, Great Heck, Ufton level crossing and Grayrigg accidents made recommendations to address these issues, which included fitting laminated glass to the windows and interior divisions, preventing seats coming adrift, shaping tables to minimise injury and preventing interior fittings turning into missiles in an accident. Many of these requirements are incorporated in Railway Group Standard GMRT2100 for new vehicles and they are also often implemented on existing vehicles during refurbishment. Inquiry recommendations have also been made about bogie retention and designing couplers to keep vehicles upright and coupled. However, in extreme conditions, vehicles may become uncoupled and bogies become detached - as they were at Hatfield - despite their securing method being to specification. Furthermore, in extreme circumstances, people inside trains will be subject to forces that are, sadly, not survivable, such as in the 1984 Polmont accident.
Introducing a new crashworthiness requirement does not make the existing vehicles unsafe. UK railways generally apply new standards in the expectation that improvements applied to new products will gradually filter though the network and, where feasible, to existing vehicles when they are refurbished. In addition, older vehicles in front-line service tend to be transferred to less arduous duties as they age. HSTs and their Mark 3 coaches are now mostly used on secondary Intercity services with a top speed of 160km/h - rather than the former 200km/h - and have been upgraded with laminated exterior glass, more sturdy interior fittings and improved means of escape. An exception was the Mark 1 coach design - which was considerably less crashworthy than modern designs - and the 1999 Railway Safety Regulations mandated that they should be withdrawn from main-line service by 2005, subject to certain exemptions, such as charter and heritage fleets. There have been suggestions that the almost 50-year-old Mark 3 coach design should similarly be withdrawn as it lacks modern crashworthiness features. Yet various inquiries have commented favourably on the Mark 3 coach’s crashworthiness. For example, the Ladbroke Grove report stated: “Other accidents involving mark III (sic) vehicles have demonstrated good crashworthy performance, providing excellent protection for passengers.” Furthermore, it is difficult to assess the actual safety benefit of modern crashworthiness features such as crumple zones and override protection due to the relatively small number of accidents since 2000. Of these, three involved modern but pre-BSEN15227 stock - a Class 365 at Potters Bar in 2002, a Pendolino at Grayrigg in 2007 and a Class 350 in Watford Tunnel in 2016 when a comparatively low speed (55km/h) two-train collision occurred after one vehicle derailed on a landslip. At Potters Bar, the bogies of the rear-most vehicle of a four-vehicle unit travelling at 160km/h took different tracks due to defective points. This vehicle came to a halt on the station platforms at 90 degrees to the track. The coach remained intact. Its crumple zones
PHOTO: PRESS ASSOCIATION
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
PHOTO: PRESS ASSOCIATION
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS
Dissipating energy
The Carmont accident in 2020.
did not collapse as there were no high longitudinal forces induced on the vehicle. Its bogies became detached and the inquiry concluded that it was unreasonable to design for bogie retention in such an accident. The coaches of the Pendolino train involved in the 150km/h Grayrigg accident suffered little loss of survival space and their rigid couplers generally kept vehicles attached and in line with each other as the train came to a stand within 13 seconds in a flat muddy field at the bottom of an embankment. Only two of the 18 bogies on the train detached completely. The report noted that features such as crumple zones and override protection were not required in this event and that research was needed into the way multi-axis accelerations cause injuries in such derailments. By contrast, in the recent fatal Carmont accident, the Mark 3 coaches were all detached from each other and some suffered severe damage. The preliminary report’s photographs show that the locomotive did not travel further after it hit the embankment adjacent to the bridge. Of all the accidents considered in this article, Carmont was particularly violent as it was the only one where a train was stopped by an immovable object. This shows that it is unhelpful to make specific comparisons between derailments. However, the historical record shows that Mark 3 coaches have ensured the survival of all their
occupants in similar high-speed impacts. Furthermore, as collisions between trains and with obstacles are rare events, crumple zones and override protection have yet to prove their worth, noting again that these features may well be ineffective if a collision follows a derailment. In the 13 years between the fatal Grayrigg and Carmont accidents, Britain’s train fleet travelled around ten billion miles. So, whilst this article has of necessity focused on the awful consequences of high-energy train accidents, the reality is that rail travel is extremely safe in the UK. During this period, the average passenger or train crew member would have had to make the equivalent of roughly 10 million return journeys from London to Glasgow before their train was involved in a serious accident. It is also a testament to the railway’s high safety standards that a high priority is given to ensuring that such rare incidents are survivable, as far as possible. In its interim report into the Carmont accident, RAIB advised that the final report will consider this issue by investigating the “crashworthiness of rail vehicles in high energy accidents”. Rail Engineer will return to this topic after publication.
Energy is half the mass multiplied by the square of the speed. Using an example of a typical four-vehicle train travelling at the BSEN15227 specified 36km/h, hitting an obstacle will dissipate its kinetic energy of circa 7.5MJ very rapidly. For a buffer stop collision at circa 15km/h, the kinetic energy is circa 1.4MJ. With modern stock, it is reasonable to expect such a collision to be survivable compared with the Mark 1 stock involved in the 1991 Cannon Street buffer stop collision which offered little protection. At higher speeds, the energy to be dissipated increases significantly. A train travelling at 160km/h has over 20 times the kinetic energy of its 36km/h value. For heavier and faster trains, the value is higher still. For example, the kinetic energy of an 11-coach Pendolino travelling at 200km/h is nearly 900MJ. The front end of the Class 390 can absorb 3MJ and an intermediate carriage end about 1MJ. In normal operation, this large amount of energy is dissipated gradually as the train is braked to a halt. In a collision, the damage suffered is a function of the rate of energy dissipation which, in turn, is a function of the deceleration rate. For a train collision at high speed, the deceleration rate depends on the stopping distance. Whereas the normal service stopping distance from say 100km/h might be 750m, a collision might lead to a train stopping in just 5m and the deceleration would be in the order of 8g, leading, sadly, to damage and injury.
With grateful thanks to many colleagues who have contributed to the debates that led to this article being written and for generously reviewing the text.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
33
34
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS
CAF’s
Mark 5 coaches R
olling stock designers face many obvious design constraints. Yet, as will be seen, a not-so-obvious constraint for the new Mark 5A coaches in TransPennine Express (TPE) service between Liverpool and Scarborough was the length of London Euston’s longest platforms.
DAVID SHIRRES
These coaches were built by Spanish company Construcciones y Auxiliar de Ferrocarriles (CAF) as one of its many recent orders for UK rolling stock. CAF secured an order for 75 coaches for the Caledonian Sleeper in 2015. The following year, it won one of its biggest orders, a £490 million contract financed by Eversholt Rail to supply Northern Rail with 149 Class 195 DMU vehicles and 141 Class 331 EMU vehicles (see Issue 162 April 2018). Later that year, CAF received an order to supply TPE with 60 Class 397 EMU vehicles and 66 locohauled coaches. Since then, CAF has received further orders for 321 vehicles from Transport for Wales and West Midlands Trains, 215 vehicles for the Docklands Light Railway and 21 trams for the Midland Metro to whom CAF had previously supplied trams,
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
as well as those to Edinburgh in 2010. To satisfy this demand, CAF built a rolling stock factory in Newport, South Wales, which started to produce trains in 2018. This feature focuses on CAF’s loco-hauled Mark 5 coaches operated by Caledonian Sleeper and TPE which are part of CAF’s UK CIVITY platform. Hence, they share features of CAF multiple units supplied to other UK train operators. These include extruded aluminium car body structure, bogies and braking systems.
The long and short of it The coaches CAF supplied to Caledonian Sleeper are designated Mark 5 whilst their TPE coaches are Mark 5A. They significantly increase the size of the UK’s now small fleet of locohauled coaches used for a small
number of regular timetabled daytime trains and sleeper services. This fleet consists of Mark 3, 4 and 5 coaches. Whilst the Mark 3s and 4s are 23 metres long, the Mark 5 is only 22.2 metres. Speaking at an event organised by the IMechE’s Railway Division in Scotland, CAF’s UK Programme Director, Graham Taylor, explained why London Euston presented a design constraint for the length of the Mark 5 coaches. With the exception of Eurostars, the 16-coach Caledonian Sleeper trains are the longest UK trains internally and have to fit into Euston’s longest platforms 1 and 15, which are respectively 398 and 402 metres long. Until a few years ago, these trains comprised a Class 92 locomotive, 12 Mark 3 sleeper coaches (276 metres) and 4 Mark 2 day/club coaches (80 metres). When another locomotive was added to remove the train, this just fitted into the platforms. However, if all 16 coaches are to be the same type, their maximum length cannot exceed 22.2 metres.
PHOTO: PAUL SMITH
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS
As CAF’s production run for the TPE Mark 5A coaches followed its order for these sleeper coaches, they were constructed with the same length. However they were not built to the same width. The Mark 5 is 2.75 metres wide whilst the Mark 5A is a little narrower at 2.7 metres. Graham explained that this was the result of train manufacturers being responsible for the gauging risk when new trains are introduced. He felt that this risk should be owned by the organisation best suited to deal with it and noted that this was the intention of the Scottish High Level Output Specification (HLOS) which requires Network Rail to maintain the loading gauge and provide accurate gauging information without the need for bespoke surveys. There is no mention of gauge in the HLOS
CAF’s Mark 5 sleepers were introduced in 2019 and branded as a 'hotel on wheels'.
produced for England and Wales. This issue has resulted in CAF paying Network Rail an eight-figure sum for gauging surveys and modifications. He felt that the whole system approach in the Great British Railways plan is an opportunity to allocate gauging risk where it can be best managed. In the discussion that followed Graham’s presentation, concern was expressed that, on occasions, manufacturers have built trains smaller than they need be as a result of current gauging arrangements.
Extract of gauging requirements in Transport Scotland’s High Level Output Statement By the end of Control Period 6, all Scottish routes are maintained to be capable of accommodating the gauge of all locomotives and passenger rolling stock which have run in Scotland in CP4 and CP5, or are known to be planned to run in Scotland in CP6. Infrastructure, maintenance and renewal works should be controlled so as not to reduce or restrict the gauge. Passenger and freight operators should not be asked to pay for gauging surveys, since these should be kept up to date as part of Network Rail’s asset database, nor for rectification works for clearances that have been permitted to deteriorate. New stock introductions should not be expected to pay the cost of restoring clearances and track position that has been allowed to move from clearances required for existing stock.
Hotel on wheels When CAF’s Mark 5 sleepers were introduced in 2019, they were branded as a hotel on wheels, with the new sleeper trains offering double rooms and en-suite facilities that enabled passengers to shower on the move. Operating the longest UK train is a complex operation. The Lowlander sleeper is split/joined at Carstairs into two eight-coach trains for Edinburgh and Glasgow, whilst the 16-coach Highland sleeper is split/joined at Edinburgh into three sections for Aberdeen, Inverness and Fort William of varying length, according to demand. These shunting moves benefit from the Mark 5’s Dellner Type 12 coupler which provides semi-automatic mechanical and pneumatic coupling from ground level and have regenerative dampers to avoid disturbing sleeping passengers during shunting moves. These couplers are also fitted to locomotives that haul the sleeper trains. These are the 5,000kW Class 92 electric locomotives and the 1,200kW diesel Class 73/9 which hauls portions of the train on non-electrified Scottish
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
35
36
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS
(Above) A standard sleeper berth. (Top) A double sleeper berth.
routes. As the Highland sleeper serves some small stations in the north of Scotland, the coaches have Automatic Selective Door Operation. The coaches are designed to operate in temperatures as low as -25C. To do so, roofmounted freshwater tanks are insulated and the underframe wastewater tanks have heated covers with heating wires for water pipes. The heating and ventilation system has a stabling mode which maintains a minimum temperature of 5C. The order for 75 Mark 5 sleeper coaches comprised 11 Seating coaches, 10 Club coaches, 40 Sleeper coaches and 14 Accessible coaches.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
Seating coaches have 31 cradle seats which recline by 11º from the upright position. Passengers are provided with footrests, electrical sockets, USB chargers, a reading light, host call bell and personal secure storage underneath the luggage rack. The club coach seats 23 in its restaurant area and seven at bar stools. It has a comprehensively equipped galley which includes a refrigerator, coffee machine with a milk reservoir, water boiler, toaster, microwave ovens, holding oven, combination oven, ice machine and dishwasher. Sleeper coaches have four Standard Class berths, each with two bunk beds and wash basins, and six Business Class berths with en-suite toilet facilities which provide a shower cubicle when the lid of the toilet bowl is down. A standard toilet and attendant’s cubicle is provided at each end of the coach. Accessible coaches have two toilets for persons of reduced mobility (PRM), a single and double berth adapted for PRM usage, two en-suite double berths and two Standard Class berths.
The Nova 3 fleet TPE recently invested £500 million on three different Nova fleets comprising 220 new coaches. The Nova 1 fleet is 19 Hitachi-built five-car Class 802 bi-mode units, each with 342 seats. These operate between Liverpool/Manchester and Newcastle/Edinburgh via the East Coast Main Line. 12 CAF-built five-car Class 397 EMUs make up the Nova 2 fleet which each have 286 seats. These run between Manchester Airport/Liverpool and Glasgow/Edinburgh on the West Coast route. The Nova 3 fleet comprises 13 five-car sets of Mark 5A coaches plus a spare driving trailer coach. Each set has 291 seats. They are hauled by 2,800kW Class 68 locomotives. The Nova 1 fleet is maintained by Hitachi in Doncaster and Edinburgh, whilst Alstom maintains the Nova 2 and 3 fleets in Manchester. TPE’s procurement of its three small and quite different Nova fleets contrasts with orders from other train operators for uniform fleets. From statements made by the company, it seems that its rationale for procuring different Nova fleets
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS Accessible coach
The arrangement of berths in Mark 5 sleeper coaches. PRM single
2x Double
2x Standard
PRM Double
Sleeper coach
4x Standard
was to spread the orders to acquire new trains as soon as possible given the urgent need to increase capacity on its overcrowded services. TPE also had to consider electrification uncertainties, particularly in respect of its Nova 3 fleet which mostly runs on non-electrified routes. The choice of loco-hauled coaches for these routes provides a relatively easy conversion to electric traction by replacing the locomotive. Furthermore, it is also likely that CAF was able to offer a competitive price for Mark 5A coaches as this extended its Caledonian Sleeper Mark 5 production run. The 13 sets of five Mark 5A coaches that make up the Nova fleet comprise 1 DT - Driving Standard Class with 64 seats; 1 T1 - First Class catering/ wheelchair coach with 36 seats and two wheelchair spaces; 2 T2 - Standard with 59 seats,
6x Business
plus an area that offers six tip-up seats or bike storage, 1 T3 - Standard with 69 seats. The coach interiors are quite different from those of the Mark 5 Caledonian Sleeper coaches, with one exception. This is that, with its 2-1 seating, the Mark 5 Seating coach is almost identical to the Mark 5A T1 coach and has the same seats.
Though the Mark 5A coaches are designed for 125mph, their maximum operating speed is 100mph. They share the same body shells (except width and window location), bogies, braking systems, batteries, internal and external doors, gangways, air conditioning, toilet system, Wi-Fi and CCTV as the Mark 5 coaches.
(Bottom) The first Class 331 at CAF's Zaragosa plant. (Below) The Class 331 driving cab is very similar to that of a Mark 5A DT coach.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
37
38
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS
(Inset) The interior of a First Class coach. (Bottom) TransPennine Express' Class 68 locomotive.
In addition, the Mark 5 and 5A coach sets have a Train Control and Monitoring System (TCMS). The controls, sensors and modules that comprise this system communicate via Ethernet serial communications buses. Both sets of coaches also have an On-board Train Data Recorder (OTDR) which records operational and maintenance data. A maintenance software tool analyses the data downloaded from the OTDR. A particular difference between the Mark 5 and Mark 5A sets is that, instead of Dellner couplers, Mark 5A coaches have inter-coach bar couplers, with buckeye couplers and buffers provided at each end of the five-coach set. Perhaps the most significant difference between the Mark 5 and Mark 5A sets is the DT coach’s driving cab which adds
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
significant complexity to a small production run. However, having supplied numerous UK multiple units, CAF is familiar with the requirements of UK driving cabs.
Stakeholders and seats In his presentation, Graham reflected on the number of stakeholders that CAF had to liaise with during the design, supply, commissioning and maintenance of the Mark 5 fleets. In addition to Network Rail and the ORR, key stakeholders for the sleeper coaches were SERCO Caledonian Sleeper as the operator, GB Railfreight as traction supplier and testing operator, Alstom who maintain the fleet at its Glasgow Polmadie depot, Lombard as the owner and Transport Scotland as grant funder. For the Mark 5A fleet, the key stakeholders were TPE as the operator, DRS as traction supplier who also sub-leased 14 of its Class 68 locomotives to TPE, Freightliner as the testing operator, Alstom who maintain the fleet at its Longsight Polmadie depot and Beacon Rail Leasing as the owner.
There were fewer stakeholders for the CAFbuilt Class 195 and 331 units for which Northern was the operator, testing operator and maintainer, and Eversholt was the owner. Graham also considered the implications on the TPE Mark 5A coaches being 0.8 metres shorter than the Mark 3 and 4 coaches, and advised that if they had been 23 metres long, there could have been an additional row of four seats in each of the set’s five coaches. He then calculated the potential lost revenue on the basis of a 35-year fleet life, 11 sets operating per day for 364 days per year, with each making five trips a day for which a typical ticket would cost £36. On this basis, the resultant lost revenue is a large nine-figure sum. Readers are invited calculate the exact sum for themselves. Graham Taylor’s presentation ‘Mark 5 Coaches: Sleepers and Transpennine’ is available in the Railway Webinar section of the IMechE webinar hub: www.imeche.org/webinar-hub
Request a free subscription at www.railsubs.com Call 01530 816 444 or visit www.railstaff.co.uk for more information
RailStaff magazine
RailStaff has been championing the rail industry’s workforce since 1997. As well as getting to the heart of ‘what you need to know’ each month, its team of writers focus on the latest developments in: • Health • Safety • Wellbeing • Careers and training We also cover stories that celebrate the great achievements of staff. Such is the freely-distributed magazine’s success that the only industry-wide people recognition scheme, the RailStaff Awards, was launched in 2007, and has been held ever since.
Download for free all issues on the Rail Media App for iOS and Android
40
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS
DAVID SHIRRES
MAKING LIGHT RAIL AFFORDABLE P re-Covid, there were almost 300 million journeys a year on Britain’s light rail systems. Their high capacity provides urban connectivity that drives economic growth. For example, the Docklands Light Railway helped regenerate London’s Docklands whilst Manchester’s Metrolink was the catalyst for Salford’s Media City. Unlike buses, trams attract motorists from their cars and so reduce congestion and emissions. Yet Britain has only nine light rail systems compared with 28 in France and 57 in Germany. In Europe, towns with populations less than 50,000 can support a tram system, whilst Leeds - with a population of 800,000 - has the distinction of being Europe’s largest city without one. Over the last 70 years, Britain has invested 40% less on transport than the rest of Europe. With increasing recognition of the need to reduce urban car use, more light rail systems are required. Yet conventional tram systems typically cost around £50 million per kilometre, with a 1.7km extension of a Birmingham tram line costing £160 million. At these prices, providing a number of medium-sized cities with a light rail network is quite simply unaffordable. However, in 2017, one such city, Coventry (population 320,000), decided that it should be able to afford a suitably specified light rail system as part of its transport strategy when the City Council approved a plan to develop a Very Light Rail (VLR) network. One reason for this decision is that the city has significant exceedances of air pollution limits and light rail does not have the non-tailpipe emissions from brake pads and tyres that buses have. Since then, the City Council has been working with the University of Warwick’s WMG (Warwick Manufacturing Group) to develop a VLR system at a target cost of £10 million per kilometre.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS
Innovative track and vehicle
Visualisations of Coventry's VLR vehicle.
To achieve this target cost, a shuttle-type vehicle has been adopted which uses lightweighting techniques developed by WMG, has no overhead catenary, requires minimal utility diversions and reduces the earthworks required. WMG has partnered with Transport Design International to design the prototype vehicle which is being built by NP Aerospace in Coventry and is now almost complete. This prototype is self-powered from a 750V 54kWh battery that gives a range of 70km. An out and back journey will consume about 9kWh. The intention is that the battery can be charged overnight from a 20kW supply and during the day receive 3.5-minute rapid charging from a 200kW supply. Packaged underfloor is the electronics and the lithium titanate battery which has a safe chemistry. The vehicle is made from steel, aluminium and composites, with a carbon/polyethylene bumper and carbon/Kevlar cab ends. Polycarbonate windows meet the requirements of the post-Croydon accident recommendations. It has a maximum speed of 70kph and can tackle a 5% gradient. All axles are driven and an innovative bogie enables the network to have 15-metre radius curves. A future vision is autonomous driving which would significantly reduce operational costs and offer a greater load factor. The production vehicles weigh 11 tonnes, are expected to cost around £750,000 each and normally carry 50 passengers or 70 in crush conditions when their weight will be 16.5 tonnes, giving them a maximum four-tonne axle weight. Vehicles carrying 50 passenger with a typical four-minute headway would transport 750 people per hour. This is about a third that of the Edinburgh tram system which carries 250 people at seven-minute headways. The VLR system can only be affordable with a new trackform that can be installed at an acceptable rate and at low cost, in particular by avoiding the need for utility diversions. It must also not be damaged by heavy
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
41
42
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS Edinburgh's tram system cost £71 million per kilometre.
road traffic and accommodate 15-metre radius curves. To develop such a track, WMG has partnered with the Paris-based engineering group INGEROP and its British consultancy, Rendel. The anticipated cost of the developed trackform is £2 million per kilometre, including excavation of the road surface and embedding the track into it. It is expected to be installed at a rate of 16 metres per day. As it is only 300mm thick, the track can be installed without disturbing utilities installed at a minimum depth of 450mm. However, installing the VLR track over services will only be acceptable to utility companies if they can treat the track as a normal road. Hence the trackform can accommodate 600 x 600mm utility access chambers and, in an emergency, can be dug out and replaced in 24 hours. The track has been designed to support high loads on a lowstiffness subgrade of 2.3% CBR (California Bearing Ratio). The CBR is typically 5-50% for sandy soils and only 2% for clay.
300mm target system height
Surface Course Binder Course Base Course Sub-base Sub-grade Buried Services
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
Bringing it all together However good the design of the vehicle and new trackform, extensive testing of both - as a system - will be required before work starts to install the Coventry VLR system. In addition to design optimisation, this will be required to obtain the required approvals. This testing is to be done at the VLR National Innovation Centre (VLRNIC) at Dudley which is currently under construction. Rail Engineer was keen to learn more so was glad of an opportunity to tour the centre with the Railway Industry Association (RIA)’s Technical and Innovation Manager, Sam Bemment. RIA is keen to promote this emerging industry and has done so at various events including a recent five-day online Unlocking Innovation event, ‘Light Weight and Low-Cost Railway’ (see Issue 188 Jan/Feb 2021). Our visit was hosted by Richard Jones, Business and Partnership Manager for BCIMO (Black Country Innovative Manufacturing Organisation) which has been set up to oversee the VLRNIC’s build, launch and operation. Richard explained the centre’s purpose is not just to test the VLR system, but to create a whole new industry. The aim is to showcase this new technology and work with Local Authorities to create jobs by developing a VLR supply chain. In addition, the centre’s facilities are now available for conventional rolling stock and infrastructure testing. For example, the DfT recently used its 867-metre tunnel to test 5G communications in railway tunnels. During our visit, Birmingham City University was using it to investigate laser surveying techniques. The Centre is being built on the site of Dudley Station which closed in 1962 and was replaced by a Freightliner terminal in 1967. This, in turn, was closed in 1987, with the line through Dudley closed to all traffic in 1993. The land for the centre has been leased from Network Rail for 40 years on condition that the freight line through it can be reinstated if necessary. An 11km extension of the West Midlands Metro from Wednesbury to Brierley Hill will run close to the centre and is expected to open in 2024. Nearby is the Black Country Living Museum whose webpage quotes Elihu Burritt, American Consul to Birmingham in 1868, as saying “The Black Country, black by day and red by night, cannot be matched for vast and varied production by any other space of equal radius on the surface of the globe.” Hence Richard wishes to see VLRNIC recreate an industry here, though without 19th Century pollution. The construction of the Black Country and Marches Institute of Technology immediately adjacent to the centre will help in this respect. Richard expects VLRNIC to be training about 900 students from the college over the next three years to show them opportunities in the rail industry at trades level. Hence various items of railway infrastructure are to be installed on spare land between the centre and college.
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS
VLRNIC The main Dudley VLRNIC facility has a footprint of approximately 250 x 50 metres. This comprises a workshop building, a storeroom, vehicle shed, car park and the northern end of its test track. On its west side, the cutting has been excavated and a large retaining wall provided to accommodate the workshop. The Brierley Hill Metro extension will run just behind the top of this retaining wall and will have a stop, Dudley Castle, next to the VLRNIC. The test track is a 2.2km standard gauge single line built to 100mph standards, with a 15-metre radius turnaround loop adjacent to the main facility. It will have platforms at main line and tram stop heights. 250 metres south of the main facility, this track enters the double-track tunnel which will be lit and with a walkway provided on the unused trackbed. There is sufficient space adjacent to this test track to install the new VLR trackform. The main workshop building will have 4,600m2 of floor space across three floors. Its roof will be fully covered by photovoltaic cells which will generate 98MWh per year. This will feed a battery farm and hydrogen electrolysis plant. The main workshop is the full height of the building and has a 10-tonne overhead crane. It has two roads - one is the length of the workshop and the other is a through
road which extends outside to a concrete pad for the delivery and removal of rail vehicles. Both roads have 15-metre-long pits and share the use of four 16-tonne lifting jacks. On the western side of the workshop, three floors of rooms will contain an electric power train dynamometer system, electronic and software laboratories, a control centre and a driver simulation suite which can also be used for route analysis. Richard advises that there will also be plenty of space for co-location with SMEs and for collaborative R&D projects. In addition, on the second floor there will be a 100-seat auditorium and exhibition centre with a balcony overlooking the test track which will provide a good opportunity to showcase VLR and other vehicles under test. This will provide an ideal venue for local companies to launch their products. The completed 36 x 10 metres vehicle shed enables vehicles to be tested prior to completion of the main building. It has one road with an 8-metre pit, a 1.4-tonne overhead crane and four 16-tonne jacks. During our visit, the centre’s Zephir Crab 1500 E shunting tractor was seen in this shed. This is a small vehicle of 2.2 x 1.8 x 1.5 metres (LxWxH) weighing four tonnes, with rubber-coated rail wheels that has a 300-tonne towing capacity. The budget for VLRNIC construction is £28 million which includes £16 million for the main building, £8 million for the trackwork and £4 million for the retaining wall. Funding has
(Above) The retaining wall built to accommodate the main building and the completed vehicle shed. (Left) A 15-metre radius turning loop.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
43
44
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS in 2010 in Granada and they are now used in Sweden, Spain and the Netherlands. The charger at Dudley has software developed by Furrer+Frey UK specifically for VLR vehicles. The charging station essentially contains an inverted retractable pantograph. Once the VLR vehicle is in place, the charge station operates autonomously as it communicates with the vehicle to confirm it is safe to lower its charging arm and then starts to charge the battery within five seconds, with no operator involvement. The arm has four contact strips specially designed for high-power transfer. Once the vehicle is charged, the arm retracts to a safe deenergised state. As previously mentioned, it is expected that charging the VLR vehicles will require a 200kW supply for 3.5 minutes. The unit has been shown to charge at 900A. Its maximum capacity is 450kW.
Looking to the future The Furrer+Frey charging station and its retracted arm.
been provided by Dudley Council, the Black Country Local Enterprise Partnership and the Government’s Getting Building Fund. In addition, Coventry Council paid for the cost of the retaining wall. The main construction work is by Clegg Construction whilst Trackwork is installing the railway infrastructure. Richard points out that the ORR has granted VLRNIC exemption from the Railways and Other Guided Transport Systems (Safety) Regulations. The centre is expected to be fully open in May 2022.
Instant charge VLRNIC was in the news in April when Furrer+Frey installed the world’s first VLR ultrarapid battery charging station. The company installed its first such charger for battery buses
Dudley Tunnel being used to investigate laser surveying.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
With the construction of the VLRNIC and its adjacent technical college, together with the planned West Midlands Metro, Dudley is about to see big changes. When the centre is operational, it is expected to employ around 40 personnel. Richard believes it will create other employment as the VLR supply chain is developed, and local SMEs and the adjacent collage are able to benefit from its facilities. Although VLRNIC will not be fully open until next year, it will soon see some significant developments: the prototype VLR vehicle by September and some of the trackform should be laid by October. Richard considers that around 40 cities could benefit from a VLR network and advises that “we are talking to many of them”. Although he is currently unable to say who he has been talking to, this will become clear on 30 September when it is planned to have a launch
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS event in Dudley at which eight or nine cities are likely to be represented, together with housing developers and potential suppliers. The intention is that a VLR user group will be formed at this event. In this way VLRNIC will be bringing together technical development, the market and the supply chain. The Holy Grail is a VLR system whose capital and operating cost is so low that it will attract private finance so that Councils will not need to call on the public purse. If this happens, the goal of significantly increasing the number of cities with light rail systems becomes feasible. Yet, for it to happen, it needs to be demonstrated that VLR’s hardware can work in practice and be provided at the anticipated cost. VLRNIC has a key role in this respect. Moreover, with a driver needed for each 50-person vehicle - compared with one for each 250-person conventional tram - autonomous operation is needed if VLR systems are to become widely affordable. With advances in artificial intelligence and autonomous systems, it is possible to envisage a remote operator who controls multiple vehicles and intervenes when alerted to problem situations. VLRNIC will no doubt be actively involved developing this concept, though it is unlikely that this technology will be approved for use before Coventry’s planned introduction of its VLR system in 2025.
Richard Jones is clearly enthused at the prospect of VLRNIC driving the development of VLR systems. He sees this to be an opportunity to work effectively at system level and get there first to set standards. As well as providing affordable urban transport on a large scale, he is aware of international interest that could lead to significant exports. All this is, as he says, a huge opportunity.
The lowered arm of a similar charging station.
High Power Charge Stations Proud Winner for ‘TECHNICAL INNOVATION OF THE YEAR’ at Global Light Rail Awards 2020
k
Furrer+Frey are delivering the charging infrastructure for Coventry Very Light Rail Project.
Vehicle design by Transport Design International
gb@furrerfrey.co.uk
@furrerfreyGB
www.furrerfrey.ch
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
45
56 66 69 46
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS
G
PLUS
B Railfreight (GBRf) was formed in 1999 by GB Rail which, in turn, had been created by entrepreneurs to seek opportunities through rail privatisation. GBRf ordered its first locomotives - seven Class 66s - in 2000. It has since grown to be a business with circa £200M turnover and a fleet of more than 130 locos of which 99 are Class 66. The company continues to grow and, to do so, it needs more locos.
EQUALS
Bob Tiller, GBRf’s Engineering Strategy Director, takes up the story. He says that Class 66s were cheap to buy because they were being mass produced, there was a beneficial exchange rate with the USA at the time and they were also far more reliable than any British-built freight loco. Sadly, he says, they are no longer being made, partly because they would not comply with National Technical Specification Notices - the post-Brexit name for TSIs. Whilst GBRf acquires second-hand examples where it can - mainly imported from Germany -it still needs more locos with the Class 66’s performance. Buying new is not an option. But there are currently no UK-gauge diesel locomotives available delivering that performance and to design one for the UK market would at best require a large order and there is a risk that a diesel engine of the right power rating that complies with current
emissions legislation would not fit the UK gauge at all. Even if a new design could be developed, with the decarbonisation strategy to remove all diesels from 2040 and carbon-zero by 2050, its lifespan would be limited. This led Bob to think about how existing locos might be repowered for the 21st century. He has form in this arena, having been deeply involved in the upgrade of the HST power cars to MTU engines, fitting GM diesels to Class 47s to form the Class 57 and the upgrade of the Class 73 electro-diesels with 1,200kW MTU engines. “I’m known as the body snatcher!”, he reveals. The only locos that could have been used as a basis for the repowering were Classes 56, 58 and 60. There were insufficient Class 58s available and although GBRf has some Class 60s in its fleet, there are no more available. This left the Class 56 - a fleet which originally numbered 135 - as Hobson’s choice.
MALCOLM DOBELL
PHOTOGRAPHY: BOB TILLER Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS
(Above) The tired-looking Class 56 before work on its rebirth.
Bob adds, “There were a lot of Class 56 locomotives operating or stored around the network and we felt that these would be a good base to start from if they could be comprehensively overhauled and their weaknesses eliminated. So why not take the best of a Class 66 and build it into a Class 56?” Bob christened it Class 69.
(Left) Refurbishment of the bodywork in progress.
Moving forward The Class 56 locomotives were built between 1976 and 1984. They are Co-Co six-axle locos with Ruston-Paxman engines rated at 2,460kW with Brush alternators and DC traction motors. They had sufficient power to haul heavy freight trains (often coal) - exactly the type of motive power needed for today’s heavy haul trains. Bob says the bodies, wheelsets, bogie frames and suspension, traction motors and fuel tanks are usually in good condition or easily repairable, so the notion was born of a loco that looks like a thoroughly overhauled and refurbished Class 56 from outside but is a Class 66 in all other respects. Bob was careful, however, to choose only locos that were warranted in good enough condition to be moved by rail. He was not concerned about the diesel engine and most of the controls, but it was vital that the bogies, suspension, wheelsets and brake equipment were all present and functioning. Fleet size
Class
Type
8
56
Diesel (3 working, 5 stored)
1
59
Diesel
10
60
Diesel
99
66
Diesel
10
69
Diesel
12
92
Electric (12 working, 4 stored)
4
08/09
Diesel shunter
10
73/1
Electro-diesel (400HP diesel)
11
73/9
Electro-diesel (1,600HP diesel)
10
Di8
Diesel industrial loco
GBRf operate a mixed fleet comprising the above locomotives and about 1,500 wagons.
There are a number of features of a repowered loco that have to remain the same to be accepted for operation in the UK without triggering all the technical and certification requirements of a new build. These include maintaining the gauge, braking characteristics and dynamics of the vehicle which, in practice, means retaining the bogies, suspension and body whilst also maintaining the vehicle dynamic weight. Bob worked with the EMD (Electro-Motive Diesel) Progress Rail team in Chicago, planning how an EMD 12N-710G3B-T2 12-cylinder two-stroke diesel engine - as used in a Class 66 - would fit into a Class 56 body and then how all the other equipment - cooler groups, brake and electronic racks etc - would fit around the engine. He then worked with the Office of Rail and Road to gain its support that this was a repowering project, not a new build. Even so, some certification is still required and these services are being provided by TÜV Rheinland.
GBRf operate a mixed fleet comprising the above locomotives and about 1,500 wagons.
Make an effort The EMD 12N-710G3B-T2 diesel engine produces just under 2,400kW (3,200 HP) at 900rpm and conforms with the EU Stage 3A emission obligations. The requirement for repowering is that the emissions of a new engine should be “better than the engine it replaced”.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
47
48
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS Bob says that the old engines predated any emission regulations and were famous for high fuel consumption, smoke and leaks, so the new engines are a very considerable improvement. The new cooler groups, electrical cubicles, computer cubicles and internals were similar to other GP40/50 American designs for metregauge applications and fitted the 69 bodyshell, so these were manufactured in Chicago along with the engines, alternators and auxiliaries, and shipped to the UK for installation at EMD Progress Rail’s Longport facility.
(Above) The cab interior has been fully modernised. (Inset) The OTDR/ auxiliaries control cubicle, with the engine alternator in the distance.
Class 66s are notable for a very high low-speed tractive effort, some 50% higher than the quoted figure for Class 56. Bob says the existing motors - which are being retained after overhaul - are capable of delivering more performance than the original engine and he expects a maximum tractive effort somewhere between that of the Class 56 and Class 66. Being able to produce the required torque is one thing, but reliably turning that into tractive effort at the wheel needs good bogie and suspension design, as well as a good motor control system. The Class 56 was limited by both its bogie and motor control system.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
The bogie design allowed the fourth axle - the leading axle of the second bogie - to become unloaded during acceleration and the very early electronic control system was comparatively crude, resulting either in wheel spin or reduced tractive effort for all three axles on that bogie. The bogie limitation remains, but on the Class 69, the motors are driven by the latest EMD CP5 and controlled by the EMD EM2000 systems. Each axle is independently monitored for its speed and load so that it will make the best use
of the available adhesion. This form of control manages - but does not totally eliminate - the fourth axle unloading issue and hence the peak tractive effort is not quite as good as a Class 66 but, under test, there was significant improvement beyond expectations. The only equipment retained inside the loco is the brake rack for fitting the overhauled Davies & Metcalfe brake equipment. An electric compressor is fitted instead of the shaft-driven device used on the Class 66 due to space constraints.
Home comforts The driver’s cabs are completely modernised with an EMD power control pedestal fitted to the right of the driver’s seat and the various brake controls to the left. Bob explains that significant work is also undertaken to protect the cab from noise and vibration.
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS One feature of the Class 66 - which is also necessary on the Class 69 - is that the engine is bolted directly to the frame without any antivibration mounts; this is to accommodate the engine within the gauge. The engine is then tuned/balanced following installation to ensure there are no resonant vibrations. The cab has been insulated and additional heaters and fans are fitted to provide a comfortable environment. Safety equipment includes the latest Mark IV version of TWPS/ AWS and driver’s safety device/vigilance system. There is also an EMD EM2000 system fault annunciator and control panel fitted below the control desk. Space is available for future provision of ETCS and the locos are expected to be included in the national freight ETCS programme, but there is no design as yet.
Programme timeline Having decided to go ahead, GBRf obtained 18 Class 56 locos from UK Rail Leasing and arranged delivery to EMD Progress Rail at Longport. The company is a long-term partner of GBRf with responsibility for maintaining its Class 66s. The contract is for ten locos with an option for another six, the other two are being used for spares. The work starts by stripping the loco of all removable parts and getting those that will be retained and overhauled to as-new
condition. Everything is inspected to identify the work required. Bob says this was a voyage of discovery as every loco they have looked at so far has been different “with the wiring and piping a complete mess”! This will not be a surprise to anyone involved in refurbishing existing trains.
(Top) Testing took place on the Severn Valley Railway. (Inset) The bulkhead electronics control cubicle.
HOW DO YOU WEIGH YOUR TRAINS?
■ Established in 1988. ■ Inventor of the patented Portable Train Weigher (PTW). ■ Weighing systems in over 40 countries worldwide. ■ Ideal for overhaul and repair of rolling stock.
+44 (0)114 26 999 55 sales@weighwell.com www.weighwell.com Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
49
50
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS All air pipes are replaced and the locos completely rewired to suit the new controls, engine and 21st century computer systems. In addition to the necessary body repairs - corrosion, for example - various alterations are made to accommodate the needs of the air intakes, exhaust (both for the engine and the cooler group) and the current standards for head and tail lights. This gives the Class 69 a distinctive new look which will be emphasised in a new livery for some of the class, particularly 69001. The first and second locomotives are now complete and are either in paint or awaiting moving to paint after 69001 was successfully tested on the Severn Valley Railway.
In the pipeline
Locomotive 69002, named Bob Tiller.
Rail Engineer asked Bob what has gone well, what challenges have had to be overcome and what had been unexpected. Inevitably, Covid was raised. But it was the variation in weight distribution between locos and
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
the state of the pipework that were the biggest surprises. Bob says he was glad that complete replacement of the pipework was already planned. However, he was most pleased to find that the new designs all fitted perfectly and that the improvement in performance was better than expected. Following receipt of authorisation from the Office of Rail and Road on 26 May 2021, Bob was confident that the first locomotive would go into service in late July. To sum up, this is a project that makes the best use of engineering knowledge, supplier skill and good relationships to make an old locomotive fit for many years more service. Bob fully expects
the Class 69 still to be capable of operating in 2050, although he and your writer agreed that neither of us would probably be around to see it. News came in June that a deal had been struck between GB Railfreight and Bachmann Europe PLC to produce model versions of the Class 69. And finally, we note that loco 69001 has been named ‘Mayflower’ and, on 10 July, John Smith, the CEO of GB Railfreight, unveiled the name of loco 69002 in a small ceremony at Waterloo Station. It was named Bob Tiller CM&EE - a fitting tribute to the “father of the Class 69”. Many thanks to Bob Tiller and Dan Cicero for their help with this article.
This is what efficiency looks like
Since 2018, we’ve been run by stakeholders, not shareholders. RISQS has been designed with industry involvement and built for rail from the ground up. That’s why the industry’s biggest buyers choose us. Plus, you can benefit from a recent price reduction and service improvements. Find out what RISQS could do for you at risqs.org
Railway Industry Supplier Qualification Scheme
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS
GET A GRIP... again
52
I
n our last edition, we reported some of the highlights of ADHERE 21, work sponsored by RSSB and the industry’s Adhesion Research Group (ARG). There was too much to cover in one article so here is the remainder, focussing on rail head cleaning and dependable speed measurement.
Three presentations were made on progress with developing alternative methods of cleaning rails compared with the current Rail Head Treatment Trains (RHTT) which apply water jets at 1,000-1,500 bar pressure.
Dry ice Roger Lewis, University of Sheffield, reported on the dry ice project. Briefly, this system fires dry ice pellets at the rail head to clean off leaf contaminant and iron oxide. In autumn 2020, the equipment was installed on the Nexus (Tyne and Wear Metro) RHTT and ran for four days over sections of line notorious for poor rail head conditions. A successful test was also carried out on a Northern Trains Class 155 unit at 40mph in March 2021. Roger described options for obtaining the dry ice, including delivery, manufacture in the depot and manufacture on the train. The latter needs more development. The RHTT test involved continuous application, but Roger said
that future work would explore other options including using a form of machine vision to trigger cleaning based on estimated rail head contamination. He also plans tests at the University of Huddersfield’s Institute of Railway Research (IRR), using its HAROLD test rig at the equivalent of 60mph, and a service trial on a Class 155 unit in autumn 2021.
Plasma Track Roger Gray of Plasma Track outlined progress with a large Road Rail Vehicle developed by his company which uses a 100kW twin treatment system and was tested in the laboratory to confirm the power-to-speed relationship, demonstrating that an instantaneous surface temperature of >300C can be delivered for leaf removal and >900C for still more aggressive removal. On-track trials were successfully carried out in autumn 2020. Plasma Track is confident that the system is scalable and proposed two variants for autumn 2021: a 15kW system on a road-to-rail
Kinetic energy from compressed airstream and pellets Sudden expansion of gas aids removal of coating
No
Thermal shock causes cracking/ weakening of coating
zzl
e
Coating
Surface to be cleaned The principle of dry-ice cleaning.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS
truck for possession use, running at 10kph and delivering a 45mm-wide clean band to replace manual cleaning crews, and a larger 300kW system on a Multi-Purpose Vehicle or RHTT, with most of the equipment in a 20 feet long container. This would be capable of running at 80-100kph and deliver a 45mm-wide clean band. Both systems would be self-contained and use atmospheric-generated nitrogen gas, avoiding the need for compressed nitrogen bottles. For the future, Plasma Track is planning a passenger train system. This would be miniaturised and optimised to allow predictable braking. For this application, the system might clean a 10mm-wide band aligned with the wheel/rail contact patch. Several of these might be installed along the train. Passenger and freight train-mounted systems would be active during braking/acceleration, replace sand applicators, require no consumable materials, clean the track for following trains and provide a cumulative effect for the entire network. The system could also be used for wheel tread cleaning.
Water-Trak John Cooke and Simon Barnard from WaterTrak Limited described progress with their innovation of adding water to help adhesion, something that still feels counter intuitive despite evidence that it works! They explained that wet rails give good adhesion, but damp rails - especially if contaminated - provide very low
The cryo rail-cleaning train and nozzle.
adhesion. The system has been demonstrated at Long Marson on the Hydroflex train and was fitted to a Northern Trains Class 319, running for over 16,000 miles during autumn 2020, even though the system was only operated over four nights in a Signal Protection Zone between Prescot and Bryn. The system was triggered by Wheel Slide Protection (WSP) operation. There were three nights of severe contamination and one of moderate contamination. Results for runs between Garswood and Bryn showed significant improvements in both acceleration and braking performance when water was added, noting that the Class 319 with only 25% axles motored has a reputation for struggling to accelerate in poor adhesion conditions. Noticeable improvements to the achieved brake rate for Step 3 demand were observed when using water and the effect was cumulative. Water-Trak plans to target operators of two and three-car trains for retrofitting with the system. Their trains are not prioritised for the
MALCOLM DOBELL
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
53
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS
Plasma rail cleaning in action.
fitment of Double Variable Rate Sanders. John Cooke noted that wetting the rails does seem to improve the performance of the sander systems as more sand sticks to the rail. They aim for an installed price of £30,000 for two systems, one at each end. Each system would have a capacity of 200 litres of chlorinated water from the same source as that used to replenish on-train toilet systems. Water-Trak estimate a payback period of approximately 4-5 years.
Dependable speed measurement Julian Stow of IRR described the benefits of a dependable speed measurement system. WSP systems typically derive their speed signal from axleend tachogenerators that measure wheel rotational speed. In the event of wheel slip or slide, the wheel rotation speed remains accurate, but the link to train speed is broken. WSP systems generally take the speed signals from all four axles on a vehicle and use these to
estimate train speed, but that speed is probably different for each vehicle in the train. The ability to control wheel slide depends on the accuracy of and the time taken to establish the estimation. Julian said that simulations carried out using the IRR’s low adhesion braking model, LABRADOR, showed that a reliable, accurate speed signal provided to all WSP systems could reduce a train’s stopping distance by up to 100m when braking from a speed of 20m/s (72kph).
70
Result of WaterTrak test showing significant improvement in both acceleration and braking on Laps 2 & 3.
Accel ms2 0-20mph Lap1
60
0.23
Lap2 0.35
with water
Decel %g
Lap3 0.38
Lap1 Lap2 Lap3 -8% with water -9.20% -11/3%
Lap3
50
SPEED (MPH)
54
40
Lap1 30
Lap2 20
10
0 0
20
40
60
80
100
TIME (SEC) Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
120
140
160
180
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS There are other ways of measuring speed including Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) radar and accelerometers, though each of these has disadvantages in a railway application. Ideally, speed would be measured in several different ways, but only use the most reliable speed signal for the prevailing conditions. The automotive industry increasingly uses inertial measurement devices for accurate speed and for stability control/ABS etc, using just such a ‘real time sensor fusion’ approach to speed measurement. The decision on which speed measurement is ‘most trustworthy’ is made using an algorithm known as an ‘extended Kalman filter’ within the sensor itself. To provide the best performance in different applications, a range of motion profiles are available that optimise the Kalman filter.
Speed tracking IRR undertook tests on an Inertial Navigation System from SBG systems that included a three-axis gyroscope, three-axis accelerometer and three-axis magnetometers, with external inputs for dual GNSS and an external tachometer. Over 45 runs, tests were carried out on a four-mile section of the Great Central Railway at speeds up to 110kph using a Class 45 locomotive. Although the sensor doesn’t currently have a rail-specific motion profile, it was found that good results could be obtained. Julian presented the interim results, showing a very close fit between the tachometerderived speed and the estimated speed. The testers induced simulated sudden reductions in wheel speed the tachometer signal - during braking and monitored how well the estimated speed tracked the true train speed. Even with the sensor using a
The Huddersfield IRR team and Class 45 loco on the Great Central Railway.
non-rail motion profile, it was able to accurately estimate the speed for some 25 seconds and, when tachometer variations corresponding to the typical reductions caused by poor adhesion/WSP activity were induced, the estimated speed tracked the actual speed very accurately over the full braking distance from 110kph. Julian concluded that commercial off-the-shelf inertial sensors show considerable promise in this application. Accurate speed estimation could be obtained on-train during simulated WSP operation, even without using a rail-vehicle-specific motion profile. Application-specific tuning of Kalman filters would further improve accuracy and this would also reduce time taken to initiate/align the inertial sensor. Decisions on which speed signal to trust could also be enhanced considerably with some simple logic. Applications include improving performance of current/legacy WSP systems, providing a speed signal to sanders etc without an interface to train systems and/ or providing a reliable speed signal for ETCS.
is still important to clean contaminant from the rails everywhere. Damp, contaminated rails cause poor adhesion, but dry contaminated rails can result in wrong-side track circuit failures and these can cause dangerous occurrences, as illustrated by the RAIB report into the level crossing near miss at Norwich Road in 2019. Thanks to RSSB and the speakers for their assistance in the preparation of this article.
Structural Precast for Railways
And finally Neil Ovenden, chair of the ARG, congratulated everyone on their work and presentations. He also issued a reminder that although these presentations were about improving braking performance, it
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
55
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS
PETER STANTON
W
ith rail franchising effectively abandoned and management contracts established, alongside the introduction of new fleets into existing depots, there is increased focus on improving depots on relatively slim budgets. As many new vehicles are of similar technological standards, much knowledge will be transferrable. But some of these vehicles are arriving at depots built for slam-door stock and there is also the need to improve maintenance arrangements for existing fleets. There are many challenges.
Since 2007, much of Eurostar's maintenance work has been carried out at Temple Mills Depot, Stratford.
Against this background, the Railway Division of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers arranged a seminar in June 2021 entitled ‘Evolution and Revolution: Railway Depots Today’, showing how they were being adapted. Rail Engineer was pleased to attend.
PHOTOS: EUROSTAR
56
International difficulties There were eight key topics on the agenda, including the changes needed to processes to adapt to the Entity in Charge of Maintenance (ECM) legislation, influencing depot upgrades and automation, all closely allied to smart rolling stock maintenance. The reality of the challenges was shown in locational studies, in many cases illustrating the extra challenge of building a new depot on an old site. One presentation tackled the task of decommissioning and the transfer of rolling stock maintenance to other organisations.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS
Depots: E VOLUTION
Persons or organisations responsible for the maintenance of vehicles used on the main line railway are known as Entities in Charge of Maintenance and their vehicles are required to have an ECM assigned to them in the National Vehicle Register (NVR). In the case of Eurostar, with its international duties, the requirements are broader. Dan Barrett, Head of Engineering at Eurostar, introduced the requirement to adapt processes for the maintenance of the company’s fleet to meet the legislation. The stock had been maintained since 1994 and the work transferred to a new site at Stratford in 2007, with some also being undertaken in Brussels and Paris. The conference heard of the arrangements for both the older stock and later E320 vehicles, with the multi-country use of the Eurostar trains meaning the legislation became a challenge to meet. Delegates were told how the company had tackled the need to adjust processes to meet the
&
RE VOLUTION
One of the West Coast Main Line's Pendolinos undergoing work at Oxley, Wolverhampton. regulations, keeping the units out of the depots and earning income. The intention was to rationalise maintenance on the newer units and bring remote condition monitoring into force, relying significantly in receiving data direct from the trains themselves.
Good practice In contrast, the agenda then moved on to a national view from Mark Molyneux, the workstream lead for main line depot-related aspects of the Rail Delivery Group-sponsored Industry Network Reliability
Action Plan. The strategy focuses on examining depot safety and performance. The establishment of a depot working group - on which all Train Operating Companies (TOC) had been represented - led to a good practice guide for depots. For some time, it had been apparent that depots could tend to be an afterthought following a decision to procure new trains. This potential shortcoming required attention as a priority. The operational function of a depot is important, both for safety and performance; a full
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
57
58
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS
Every day, the depot at Ardwick delivers 16 or 17 Class 185s for TransPennine Express.
depot was of little help if trains could not be moved around. Performance was viewed as sufficiently important to formally establish the ‘701A Owners Group’. From this came the ‘Fleet Management Good Practice Guide’. This 20-point plan is the current industry view of the activities required to maximise the reliability of the national rolling stock fleet. Its aim is to allow TOC engineering teams, engineering directors, fleet managers and other rail partners to identify issues to concentrate on and where to view best practice.
The pit-stop approach The conference moved on to a presentation by Sam TravisLunt, Systems Improvement Engineer for Alstom. In 1999, Virgin Trains awarded Alstom
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
a contract to design, build and maintain the new fleet of high-speed tilting Pendolinos for the West Coast Main Line until at least 2026. Within the full maintenance contract of the 56 Class 390 trains, Alstom strives to optimise costs while improving fleet performance. In 2006, the company implemented ‘Train Tracer’ to remotely monitor the fleet’s condition in real-time and to anticipate the needs for corrective maintenance - the pit-stop approach. Eight years later it commissioned the first TrainScanner as a data capture solution, enabling predictive maintenance for wheels, brake pads and pantograph carbon strips. This diagnostics portal automatically measures the wear of these key consumables when the trains arrive at the depot. It also checks the integrity of the underframe and side skirts. Additionally, in 2016, a new Health Hub release was commissioned utilising Alstom’s rule engine. This is a web-based supervision tool providing a deeper insight into fleet usage and its availability. It triggers alerts and maintenance recommendations automatically, based on pre-defined rules set by the user. Alstom also launched a second TrainScanner device that was installed at Oxley Depot near Wolverhampton, following successful testing of the predictive maintenance prototype.
Adapting Ardwick The conference then took a dip into history with Lyndon Platt, Fleet Technical Manager for Siemens Mobility UK. The theme was Ardwick Train Maintenance Depot continuing to evolve to meet changing demands. There has been significant rail infrastructure on the site for many years but, in 2006, the current facility came into use. The depot is on land leased from Network Rail until 2035, built, owned and maintained by Siemens. The location is a primary depot for 51 threecar Class 185 DMUs, with a secondary depot in York and a facility at Cleethorpes. The contractual target with TransPennine Express is to deliver 46 Class 185s MondayFriday and 44 at weekends. Ardwick delivers 16 or 17 of these units, providing light and heavy maintenance, repairs, modifications and cleaning to the fleet. The depot also delivers five Class 323 units per day for Northern. Lyndon presented a fascinating description of how the depot was overlaid on the old freight depot sidings and showed how such a development could be staged. The site was adapted to deal with longer trains than originally envisaged whilst maintaining an effective flow of units through the depot. The changes carried on with electrification in 2013/14 and the addition of extra stabling sidings. The
scope of the installation is reinforced with the provision of a bogie drop and wheel lathe; overall a highly optimised maintenance site. Lyndon summarised by telling the audience that, from experience at Ardwick, one of their key challenges had been the discovery of unexpected ground conditions due to the site’s historic use, where new sidings or structures need to be erected. Developing the business case under the current franchise and contractual climate presented extra challenges, such as changes to the depot for maintenance or technology improvements. When the facility was electrified in 2014, many adaptations had to be made - each presenting varying degrees of technical difficulty - such as changes to walkway gantries given the different kinematic envelope of the Class 350/4.
Managing transition The conference then took another direction with a presentation from David Pearce, the Class 345 Delivery Manager for the MTR Elizabeth Line. His task was the managed closure of the existing Old Oak Common Depot to make way for major future rail developments.
PHOTOS: TFL
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS
David’s role encompasses depots, being one of the key facilities used to provide a safe, reliable, clean fleet. However, in terms of the initial work, the task involved the depot’s closure, disposal of Class 332 and 360/2 fleets, and the seamless transition of the Class 387 fleet into service, all with no impact to the customer. David was immediately met with a list of significant challenges. The work was fraught with changing and tightening timescales, the threat
The depot at Old Oak Common has been transformed for the MTR Elizabeth Line.
RAIL DEPOT & WORKSHOP EQUIPMENT • • • • •
RAILCAR LIFTING JACKS BOGIE/EQUIPMENT DROPS TRAVERSERS TURNTABLES BOGIE WORKSHOP MACHINES • UNDER CAR EQUIPMENT HANDLING
• • • • •
LASER MEASURING SANDBOX FILLING SHUNTERS EXHAUST EXTRACTION UNDER FLOOR WHEEL LATHES
mechan.co.uk info@mechan.co.uk +44 (0)114 257 0563
Davy Industrial Park Prince of Wales Road Sheffield S9 4EX
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
59
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS Improving performance
PHOTOS: JONNY WALTON
60
Sarah Rolando, senior consultant from Amey, demonstrated train movement data analysis undertaken at Leeds’ Neville Hill Depot. This large facility deals with both InterCity and local rolling stock, yet sits on the crowded LeedsMicklefield corridor with all its capacity restrictions. It is also constrained by having one way in and one way out. The remit had been to investigate poor performance through the use of granular train movement data and collaborate in a cross-functional working group to enact performance initiatives.
At Neville Hill Depot, a cross-functional working group delivered performance initiatives.
of skills loss, long material lead times and obsolescence. He was also faced with political pressure, defects and the risks associated with new fleet introduction. It was no mean challenge and a pragmatic approach was needed. The greatest tests were probably to maintain an open and transparent relationship between parties, communication with the ‘doers’ and, overall, ‘expect the unexpected’. As well as the pressures involved in running the depot down while providing a service, there was disposal of the existing fleets of rolling stock. David’s important conclusion was to remember your end customer, align your strategies and communicate.
Dealing with constraints Mark Wild, Chief Executive Officer at Crossrail Ltd, reviewed the depot works at Old Oak Common from the closure of the original facility in 2009 to the present. The history of the site development proved a fascinating insight into the new railway, with the depot site starting off as a tunnel ring store and morphing into the largescale establishment seen now.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
The background to the design gave a particularly intriguing insight into the process of depot planning, not always being able to achieve the optimum. A significant point was that the depot was single-ended due to constraints, rather than the double-ended layout which system analysis would suggest was the ideal solution. However, with nine maintenance roads and 33 storage roads, the resources are available. The depot is signalled to achieve maximum efficiency and safety around depot movements. Additionally, the Automatic Vehicle Inspection System allows assessment of such issues as wheel profiles, brake disc and pad wear and, as a result, it is claimed that Class 345 EMUs have the lowest maintenance interval of any unit in the UK.
Sarah commented that her team had encountered two key challenges in the past year. Firstly, there seemed to be a disconnect between on-network and off-network performance, making it difficult to implement and share best practices. Secondly, the data that follows units inside depots was compromised by GPS not being centrally available, thus creating a real challenge when investigating operational requirements here. Departure performance was seen to be poor and the need for improvement was overwhelming. Sarah described the root cause analysis undertaken using Trust and general movement analysis involving a whole system approach. Valuable insight into the depot performance was gained and allowed
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS all concerned with stock movements to take ownership of performance, with significant potential gains.
Synchronised lifts
As a final module, ‘Smart Rolling Stock Maintenance Depots of the Future’, Gareth Tucker and Adam Bevan from the University of Huddersfield looked at proposals on how robotics and automation can be applied to rolling stock maintenance. Further work on optimising depot workflows and scheduling is vital. The approach would be supported and strengthened by extracting useful information from reliability-centred maintenance to the advances that were proposed. A view across the industry suggested that maintenance accounted for 40% of lifecycle costs and that 96 depots were responsible for 14,000 vehicles in the UK. Within this domain, the use of smart technologies may be a key enabler in improving the efficiency of train maintenance. The Huddersfield research provided a useful roundup of many points that had been presented during the conference, including the introduction and development of enhanced automated nondestructive testing techniques, including depot-based systems which automatically inspect key components as the vehicle is moving - wheel profile wear, brake wear, image profiling and pattern recognition, scanning
of wheel damage to replace visual inspection and the use of robotics to inspect critical or obscure components/parts. A fitting conclusion to the wide-ranging conference was illustrated by the scope of the Huddersfield facilities. These comprised a £1.8 million project to establish a ‘smart rolling stock maintenance research facility’, due for completion in June 2023. The aim of this facility is clear and vital: to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of rolling stock maintenance to meet the challenges of the near future of rail, enabled by a virtual depot/digital twin arrangement, RCM data processing and development, and an augmented reality suite. There was much to be gained from the seminar and Rail Engineer has only been able to summarise the mass of useful data and information. A seminar can act as a real catalyst for improvement and there is no doubt the industry will benefit greatly from the exchange of ideas and design. The IMechE is to be congratulated on this move to deal with that 40% of the rolling stock cost allied to maintenance and will surely encourage further progress.
PHOTOS: FOUR BY THREE
Underground/metro systems were the order of the day in a presentation led by Anne Potter, Programme Delivery Manager 4LM Depots, Transport for London, assisted by Chris Antram and Robert Parry. The team was undertaking preparations for the Piccadilly Line upgrade, depots and stabling facilities, and faced the challenge of enhancing these establishments while the running and maintenance of the existing service continued, keeping the wheels of the 1973 stock turning. The new fleet would consist of longer trains whilst the existing depots were relatively primitive, with outdated layouts and surrounded by urban sprawl which prevented any expansion of the depot footprint. A major change to processes arises from the articulation of the new stock and the need to undertake synchronised lifts, a step change from the current arrangements. The only option was to phase depot construction, but the best available process analysis and modelling techniques were being applied to allow optimum design.
Getting smarter
The Institute of Railway Research (at the University of Huddersfield) will comprise a smart rolling stock maintenance research facility.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
61
62
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS
T
o those outside the rail industry, ‘shore supply’ may seem a strange phrase which ought to be referring to cables from the dockside to a ship in a cruise port! In the railways’ early days, carriages were heated by steam from the locomotive; when no engine was present, the vehicles were warmed by a static steam boiler. Electrical systems were low power and supplied by batteries. If the trains were not on the move, those batteries would become discharged and cables to the train were needed to charge the cells.
PETER STANTON
Nowadays, as well as the traction supply from a contact system or generated by the locomotive/ power car, a rake of vehicles needs power to run auxiliaries such as lighting, heating and air conditioning. When the traction supply is disconnected or shut down, the rake needs power to precondition the accommodation or be live for maintenance and testing. Therefore, just as a ship tied up in dock needs power, rolling stock needs its ‘shore supply’.
Early electric train heating used a single-phase supply, made available from the locomotive via plugs and sockets. Even a fixed formation unit such as a High Speed Train will not require the power unit to be running all the time and an Electric Multiple Unit may not be connected to the contact system. In the original HST protocol, the train auxiliary load was supplied by the rear power car engine running, but this was quickly deemed unacceptable in terminals and around maintenance and stabling points. Thus, there has always been a need to supply power to trains when not in motion and various generations of arrangements have been developed. Many systems have standardised around a 400V three-phase three-wire system, with a variety of solutions adopted.
Shaw Automation Rail Engineer was invited to look at a significant entrant to the shore supply market - Shaw Automation of Ballymena, Northern Ireland. The company also has a base in Motherwell. Adrian Shaw and David Kerr explained their approach to the industry requirements and how they had developed their product line to engage in the supply and installation of equipment. Shaw Automation Ltd has been in the market for switchboards and process control for some time and felt that its experience could be applied to the rail market, the first approach being the design and production of shore supply equipment. The idea was to update the traditional design utilising modern technology to enhance functionality, operator safety and equipment protection, adding the benefit of the Shaw Automation product being more economical and quicker to deliver than existing offerings.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS The equipment can be adapted to any rolling stock interface. Robust construction using sturdy 2 and 3mm-thick steel forms the enclosure for the main control panel and the trackside pillars, all backed up by high-quality Schneider switchgear. Shaw Automation’s aim in its design philosophy is to provide simple operation - a clear status indication, easily-used operator inputs and automated sequences. Design input was received from installers, end-users and railway specialist design engineers SVM Glasgow Ltd, in regard to the development of the new demand for the three phase and neutral shore supply which came with its own peculiarities that hadn’t been used on British depots as yet.
Allerton Depot The Company now has several installations under its belt one of which being Allerton Depot, close to Liverpool South Parkway Station. The facility is ideally located for maintaining, servicing and stabling trains operating between Liverpool, Manchester and Blackpool. Originally a rail freight depot, it currently houses Northern’s new Class 331 electric trains as well as the refurbished Class 332s and Class 319s. In the very near future, Allerton will also provide a base for the innovative Class 769s which are able to operate using either diesel or electricity. Northern has constructed and installed several hi-tech pieces of equipment and infrastructure, designed to modernise the maintenance of trains and turn Allerton into a 21st Century hub of engineering excellence. The multi-million-pound improvements include features such as highlevel access, a bogie drop with a trolley to safely remove underframe components without having to lift the trains, and in particular the newlydesigned eight-way 400V three-phase, neutral and earth 125A Shore Supply System from Shaw Automation for the CAF-built Class 331 units This installation removes the need for a restrictive earth supply and the development of the automated human machine interface (HMI) has improved the safety, simplicity of operation and supply reliability as there are fewer unnecessary protective device operations. The Allerton system was successfully installed by the expert hands of Quartzelec Ltd.
Control system and technology The core of the installation consists of the main shore supply switchboard featuring plug-in circuit breaker technology, power monitoring and load management, with facilities for remote monitoring and a novel arrangement for customer billing. The control interface for the system is the smart control pillar which features many enhanced safety features such as earth fault and
emergency stop protection. Of particular note are the full offline interlocked testing features including automatic insulation resistance testing, pass/fail indication and train interlock testing. Valuable facilities also include data logging, and a time-limited test validity. Adrian pointed out that, in comparison with legacy facilities, these protocols ensure that an operator would run through test functions automatically before the system takes load. All operational indicators and push-buttons are located on the trackside pillar. Connection of the supply to the train is taken care of through a Marechal DS9 plug with bespoke safe stowage and a Marechal decontactor socket. This ‘business end’ of the equipment sits with a full stainless steel pedestal with a protective cover. The system architecture ensures that the Marechal DS9 plug pins cannot become live when not plugged into the train or the test socket. Considerable emphasis has been placed on ease of operator use and, to that end, the indicator display is arranged to be logical, with just the correct amount of information provided. A series of green indicator lamps will illuminate from top to bottom on start-up sequence and will all be lit while the shore supply is switched on. This information is also displayed on the HMI the display on which faults and helpful hints/instructions are clearly shown.
The stowage connector.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
63
64
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS
Power to the pins cannot be energised if the plug is not confirmed as plugged in at either the stowage socket or on the vehicle itself. Other basic provisions include emergency stop and earth fault protection. All these features ensure an operator can work in complete safety.
Testing protocols
The system is designed for safety and ease-of-use.
The HMI is set out to be an assistant for the operator. Under normal circumstances, the operator can be guided by the LED indicator arrangement which is duplicated on the HMI indicating Shore Supply status. When faults occur, they will be indicated on the HMI and, depending on the condition, instructions or advice will be displayed. To make operation simple, the operator button is mounted in a logical position adjacent to respective indicators. The HMI offers the operator a step-by-step guide from which the testing procedure cannot be bypassed and thus offers the ease of power introduction to the carriages and efficient use of the operator involvement between shunting movements.
The important feature of the system is the automated insulation resistance test. Again, it is worth emphasising that the system will walk the operator through the sequence before the power is actually applied. An operator has only one operation to start the process. The on-board controller will then automatically sequence and control the test procedure, encompassing all the necessary elements: 1. Interlock to Earth 2. Interlock to Interlock 3. Interlock to Mains 4. Mains to Neutral 5. Mains to Earth. The train interlock allows full cable and plug testing when placed in the stowage position and inhibits testing if the parts are not confirmed in the stowage position.
Safety
Developments and enhancements
As with any equipment for use in a rail depot environment, the matter of safety has been at the forefront throughout the equipment design process. As noted earlier, testing has been built-in as part of the equipment’s protocols and, to that end, tests can only be carried out while the plug is safely connected to the stowage socket; if the plug is disconnected, the plug and cable cannot be tested. The power will not switch on unless successful testing has been completed.
Adrian was keen to point out that, due to the engineering of the system, the other features can be made available as useful options. With each project fully designed and installed, operator feedback has been used to provide input into a continually developing solution that meets the needs of the depot operators from ease of operation, billing accuracy and reliability; all systems are backed by an optional Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) approved maintenance programme.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS
Adaptable future Dave Kerr summarised the system. “The idea was to update the traditional design of shore supply installations by utilising modern technology to enhance functionality, operator safety and equipment protection, adding the benefit of the product being less expensive and quicker to deliver than existing offerings. The product can be adapted to any rolling stock and the company has seven installations completed and commissioned, with another four currently in production - all in the last 18 months. There’s a lot of interest. “The new rolling stock construction and electrical distribution within the CAF-built Class 331 units removes the need for the restrictive earth supply due to enhanced means of carriage chassis to track earthing, whilst the development of the automated HMI has improved the safety, simplicity of operation and, of course, supply reliability, as there are fewer unnecessary protective device operations. “We are starting to have great success with this product all over the UK - modern technology being typically more cost effective and with enhanced safety features.”
As the company settles into the rail market, a view is being taken about where else it may offer its expertise. There are many requirements for power supplies in both safety-critical and non-safety-critical areas, with a variety of applications outside the depot environment. The company has wide experience in building supply cabinets and switchgear locations for Distribution Network Operators. Additionally, there are reference sites where the company has engaged with the provision of Principal Supply Points and Functional Supply Points - basically any switchgear in the rail industry can be provided for. Adrian is optimistic about his company’s future in rail and insists that it will be pleased to react to any approaches, developing products and installations in line with client requirements.
CONTACT
An aid to record keeping is train identification with the logging of parameters such as: » train on/off » earth fault » IR fault » IR test results - pass/fail for each parameter etc » time and date stamping. Where a depot might be serving more than one operating company, logging of energy consumption (kWh) for each connected period is available and could be used for billing against each unit. Remote control and viewing of each line status could be made available and would allow the logging and monitoring of functions such as whether plugs are properly stowed and not connected to the train, and monitoring of load current per phase is also available. This would allow connection to an existing building management system.
A control pillar for shore supply control.
www.shawautomation.com support@shawautomation.com 028 2565 8100 For more information about Shaw Automation's Intelligent Shore Supply, please scan the QR code. Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
65
66
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS
No time to stop T
rains are designed, manufactured and procured to operate; they are not intended to be stabled in a siding and not working. Great effort and advances have been made in the industry over the years to ensure that lifecycle costs of rolling stock are reduced and availability of the assets are maximised. To support this, it is also essential that the facilities developed to stable and maintain the rolling stock are also accessible and reliable.
Lowery understands the need for this and has built up a wealth of experience in the maintenance of depots, with contracts delivered in both the Ashford Train Maintenance Centre and at the hugely complex Clapham facility for South Western Railway (SWR). The experiences gained were the start of an exciting journey and Lowery hopes to build on and develop this knowledge through future opportunities.
Ashford TMC experiences Hitachi Rail Europe (HRE) Ashford TMC is located in Kent and was the first rail vehicle maintenance centre built in Europe by the Japanese rail vehicle manufacturer, with trains such as the Class 395 maintained in the depot. The company is responsible for cleaning, inspecting and repairing the trains to ensure safe travel for the Class 395 Javelin stock on both high-speed and classic tracks, connecting London and the Channel Tunnel. Lowery was contracted by HRE to undertake the permanent way and electrical maintenance and inspections at Ashford TMC, as well as developing and delivering a number of reports regarding the condition of the assets. These reports focused on maintenance records, asset availability, defects and trends, and recommendations. Through planned daily, weekly and monthly track inspections - undertaken in line with the HRE technical work scope - the team was able to assess the condition of the assets, ensuring the permanent way remained suitable for the linespeed throughout. A review of the existing maintenance regime and records was carried out to generate a base line of both the asset condition and any planned works that were already in place. In addition to developing the asset maintenance plan, coordinating and carrying out maintenance over the course of the contract and on-call cover for any fault rectifications, Lowery also put in place the necessary measures for hot weather monitoring of the track during relevant periods.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
Finding trends Lowery uses a number of problem-solving methods to analyse equipment and process failures. Part of the depot team’s role was to separate problems and failures that required relief from those where recurrence must be prevented in the future. To do so, the team asked several questions: » What is the current actual impact of the problem? » What is the potential impact if the problem is not solved? » What level of risk can be tolerated from a moral, legal and contractual viewpoint? » What is an acceptable outcome that balances risk, cost and benefits? When we focus on a response that provides relief and, as necessary, the discovery of root causes, we use a Root Cause Analysis (RCA) approach defined by the five steps outlined below: » Safety - accident analysis, occupational safety and health » Production - quality control in industrial manufacturing » Process - the scope of production is expanded to include business practices » Equipment failure - inspired by the military, then customised by industry and used in engineering and maintenance » Systems - incorporates all the above and adds change. By focusing on the trends, Lowery was able to develop and put in place a preventive maintenance approach. Experience has shown that this reduces the overall lifecycle cost of the assets and, more importantly for HRE, improves their availability. Preventive maintenance is planned in advance to minimise disruption and reduce late notice access requests. Key opportunities were identified over the course of the contract and will be included as recommendations for future proposals.
ROLLING STOCK & DEPOTS
A learning experience Often, the track used in UK rail depots is older and of a lower specification than the permanent way on main lines. This is understandable; there is no desire to over-specify the tracks in depots. However, track upgrades can be considered without requiring large levels of capex. A simple easy-win solution could be to weld up jointed tracks into suitable lengths. This reduces the need for joint inspection, risk of dipped joints and broken fishplates. As long as the lengths of continuous rail are such that adjacent track does not require expansion joints and S&C does not need to be strengthened, this is a relatively simple exercise to improve track quality. Another option Lowery is keen to explore on future contracts is the reuse of materials, such as switches and crossings removed from main lines that still have a serviceable life in an application such as a low-speed track in a depot. In the same way that we are encouraged to up-cycle in our everyday lives, a slightly more open approach to reusing materials could see great benefits in improving depot track quality, reducing failures and ultimately improving the availability of the assets. Also, a different approach to preventive and cyclical maintenance could change trends. From working closely with depot operatives and in developing the asset management plans, it became clear that some areas of the depots were known hotspots and cyclical maintenance was undertaken on a regular basis to ensure the correct geometry and accessibility of the tracks. Whilst manual tamping is common place in depots - especially around turnouts - Lowery believes mechanised tamping could be used more widely to reduce continuous cyclical maintenance and benefit trends.
South Western Railway. The track maintenance and enhancements works were developed as part of Operation Spark - an ongoing programme of works covering the permanent way and associated equipment for Wimbledon, Clapham and Strawberry Hill depots. These are all operated by South Western Railway for the stabling, maintenance and washing of trains. At the project close-out, Lowery provided final updates to the CDM/CSM hazard log where all remaining risks after site completion were handed over to the maintainer. Many initial risks which had been identified at the beginning of the project - mainly access/egress and asset condition - had been closed.
Delivering enhancements With a different operator and a different location come different challenges. Whilst the approach was specific, the fundamental principles adopted at Ashford were readily transferrable to the works carried out in Clapham Depot on the Wessex Zone. A key facility for SWR with a number of stabling sidings and train cleaning crews, the depot is located alongside Clapham Junction, one of the busiest in Europe. Ensuring the availability of access and egress to the depot is critical. Lowery delivered the track asset enhancement works at Clapham as part of a long-standing collaborative relationship with
A key element of the successful delivery of these projects which included development, installation and commissioning - was Lowery’s highly skilled engineering staff, constantly liaising with the client’s permanent way and construction teams, as well as other stakeholders. Numerous technical meetings, often led by Lowery engineering staff, contributed to quick close-out of the most challenging issues and problems. Liaison with clients, manufacturers and end-users ensured all parties understood project requirements and worked towards mutual success.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
67
68
FEATURE
Beyond HS2 R
ail Engineer has reported often on the HS2 project, with the government having given the green light to commence Phase 1 from London to Birmingham. That work is continuing apace and agreement has since been given to proceed with Phase 2a from Birmingham to Crewe. Design work on that section is well advanced.
It is not just the engineering of the project that has to be considered and the Westminster Energy, Environment and Transport Forum staged a second conference recently to look at the wider implications of HS2 on other projects, the resourcing required for delivery and some impacts on the areas through which the line will pass. The initial session was chaired by Lord Faulkner of Worcester, the Deputy Speaker in the House of Lords and sitting on the Railway Group in Parliament, who made the comment that the project is in the same league as Brunel and Stephenson’s efforts in the 19th century. High speed rail will change the way Britain does business, matching the impact similar lines have had in other countries.
The way forward Tim Smart, Managing Director for Phase 2, catalogued the progress to date and the ongoing predictions for HS2: » Phase 1 is well underway, with 300 construction sites established » The supply chain is mobilised, with integrated project teams for all civil works
CLIVE KESSELL
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
» Phase 1 has a £43.3 billion budget, with £11 billion already spent and £12.6 billion contracted » Phase 2a (Birmingham-Crewe) contracts are signed for the first work, mainly environment surveys » Phase 2b western leg (Crewe-Manchester) has the Hybrid Bill in preparation and is expected to be passed in Q3 2022 » Phase 2b eastern leg (Birmingham-Leeds) will be dependent on the National Rail Plan. The Euston approach capacity could be either a two or threetrack approach, but the precise number of platforms is not seen as critical. For the government, Andrew Jones MP, Chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Infrastructure, indicated his support for HS2 - including the eastern leg - acknowledging that the project is about capacity rather than speed. However, there has to be recognition that HS2 is not a standalone line and investment in the classic network is also needed. He stated that no significant investment in road, air or rail has occurred since the 1970s, but that view will be disputed by many.
FEATURE
Legal and planning processes Many people despair at the time taken and the steps needed to get planning consent for major projects. HS2 has been no exception. Robbie Owen, Head of Infrastructure Planning at Pinsent Masons, attempted to explain the final stages before actually getting the goahead for work to start. The key step is the passing of a Hybrid Bill in Parliament. For this to happen more swiftly, a review of procedures has happened, with a first stage completed in 2016/7 and a second due for finalisation in July 2021, all in an effort to streamline the process. Stage 1 removed some of the rights to object, but retained MPs right to petition where their constituencies are affected. Stage 2 allows for remote participation at hearings, a general education and awareness programme to help the understanding of the process, additional provisions for adding to the project scope and the promotion of negotiations with the petitioners. The overall impact will be to combine elements of public and private bills, restricted initially to projects in England. ‘Schedule 17’ approvals are additionally needed by ‘qualifying authorities’ and relate to consents, licences and permissions for such as roads and waterways. The end result will enable easier compulsory acquisition of land for both permanent and temporary works. Hybrid bills are already passed for HS2 Phases 1 and 2a, with a deemed consent for Phase 2b western leg (Crewe-Manchester) expected to be agreed.
Euston platforms/Phase 2b
The supply chain The UK has traditionally underestimated the benefits of rail investment, so says David Clarke, Technical Director at the Railway Industry Association. Whilst a few projects have gained bad headlines by being late and way over budget, most projects are delivered successfully. Avoidance of the stop/start situation is vital to give a greater confidence to invest for the longer term. Decarbonisation will be part of the modal shift and whilst the Covid-19 pandemic has seen passenger rail traffic plummet, it is now building back. RIA and others are busy developing the domestic supply chain, recognising that highspeed and conventional rail technology is not very different, thus bringing benefits for the whole industry. Some companies are already seeing business expansion in rail and 83% expect growth in connection with the highspeed market. That said, many companies are encountering barriers for entry into HS2 contracts which needs to be rectified. Having a successful and diverse supply chain is the route to UK exports of high-speed capability around the world.
Phase 1 is well underway, with 300 construction sites established.
HS2’s Euston Station was planned to accommodate an illustrative service pattern of 18 trains per hour for the whole Y-shaped network, for which ten platforms would be required with an eleventh to provide operational resilience for late-running trains. In January, the DfT specified that HS2’s Euston Station should only have ten platforms. Whilst a high level of reliability can be expected on the HS2 network, about half of the services originate on the conventional network. On the basis of current performance levels, it is possible that lack of contingency provided by the eleventh platform could result in significant disruption. This would only become an issue when and if the full HS2 network becomes operational. However, the future of HS2 Phase 2b, its eastern leg to Leeds, is in doubt. Comments made at a recent House of Commons Transport Committee hearing suggested that it was not needed whilst HS2’s Chief Executive, Mark Thurston, advised that no work was being done on planning Phase 2b which would “play out in the fullness of time.” If built, Phase 2b would relieve capacity on both the Midland and East Coast main lines from which it would respectively attract an estimated 33% and 50% of passengers.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
69
70
FEATURE PHOTOS: JOHN ZAMMIT
Property values and regional development
On a similar theme, Rachel Anderson, Policy Director from the Darlington-based North East England Chamber of Commerce - of which both George and Robert Stephenson were once members - raised concerns about Phase 2b eastern leg and when it will happen. The government’s levelling-up agenda needs to proceed, but it must encourage greater involvement of UK companies. There is a tendency for main contractors to rely on their traditional supply chain and new SMEs are finding it difficult to engage. Some contract packages are too big for SMEs and the performance bonds are very onerous. Many contracts require apprenticeship generation which has to be good, but what about internships for the likes of surveyors and planners where local companies can add valuable localised knowledge? There is a need to stage big events to promote engagement and explain the standards and safety requirements. Hitachi did this when constructing their new premises and very successful it proved to be.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
It is common knowledge that railway lines have always attracted new property developments. In more recent times, electrification has generated the so-called ‘sparks effect’, with an associated increase in house prices. Is all this still true today? Nick Vaughan, Director for Greater London Residential Developments, gave an insight on what is happening. Regeneration of a whole area needs a holistic approach, where transport links are hugely important. The pandemic is leading to evolving trends: » Working from home is on the increase, with only a partial return to the office » Priorities within the home are changing to facilitate home working » The desire to locate within an urban or city area remains strong » Sustainability is increasingly important in home construction. In all of this, transport infrastructure in the form of large rail projects such as Crossrail, Crossrail 2, HS2 and others will all impact on property development. The Old Oak Common hub will see a major uplift in values for the surrounding area including Southall Waterside, Ealing Filmworks, the Horlicks Quarter in Slough and the Vendean in Acton. Similar benefits will be seen at other HS2 hub locations.
71
FEATURE The wider implications for regional development were discussed by Jonathan Bretherton from the Urban Growth Company, using the town of Solihull as an example. This area is close to Birmingham Airport, the existing West Coast Main Line (WCML), the National Exhibition Centre, Birmingham Business Park, Jaguar’s Land Rover factory and the Resorts World leisure centre. In the middle of all this will be the HS2 Birmingham Interchange Station and thought is being given to its impact. Planning authorities are expecting the need for 5,000 new homes and the creation of up to 70,000 new and supported jobs in a hub area known as the Arden Cross Triangle.
PHASE 2B
PHASE 2B
PHASE 2A ECML
50% Construction and collaboration Tackling both real and perceived barriers is a major challenge for infrastructure projects, so says Colin Wood, Chief Executive (Europe) for AECOM. Some were cited: » The investment needed to produce the capability to deliver the capacity of the contract » Many competing priorities exist within the construction sector » A general situation of non-simple project governance. The planning and environmental issues are complex and not always consistent. UK legislation needs to change to give a clear planning and consenting strategy within a collaborative culture. Where there are public and private stakeholders, trust needs to be institutionalised to create a firm shared vision. Delivery behaviours and cultures must be incentivised. Above all, it is important to assess and reassess the project as it is being delivered. One might perhaps add caution to this as constant project change of scope is often the cause of significant cost increase.
WCML
67%
PHASE
MML
33%
1
Practical examples on how to maximise and release the value of major infrastructure investment were given by Andrew Went from Arup. The now-authorised TransPennine route upgrade design and delivery phase should yield progressive benefits as the project rolls out, a prime example being around Manchester. The WCML upgrade of ten years ago caused huge disruption whilst work was carried out and lessons have been learned. That said, a need to see the ultimate benefits is important.
The percentage of passengers attracted onto HS2, releasing capacity elsewhere on the network.
Old Oak Common - the site of major station works in west London.
PHOTO: JOHN ZAMMIT
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
FEATURE
Capacity for freight
PHOTO: DAVID MARTIN
HS2 will have wide implications for regional development, such as in Solihull close to Birmingham's Interchange Station.
The Forth Road Bridge (Queensferry Crossing) predicted huge cost increases, but intense collaboration between all involved parties brought the cost projections down to manageable levels. Rail needs to learn from other sectors. Connectivity of operations, systems engineering, environment impact and design/delivery is needed right from the start.
Planning and environmental issues have proven to be complex and not always consistent.
PHOTO: JOHN ZAMMIT
72
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
Part of the rationale for building HS2 was to release capacity on other lines, principally the WCML. Alex Veitch from Logistics UK expressed concern that this capacity increase might not favour the freight operators. The West Coast Partnership is developing the WCML timetable for after HS2’s opening, which the ORR will need to approve. It seems that the formation of GBR following the Williams/Shapps report will require a rules-based access system to be put in place and it is vital that this permits the freight sector to get the capacity it wants.
The Northern dimension The levelling up of the country’s economy has become a cause célèbre for some prominent voices in the north of England. The assumption that all streets are paved with gold in the south is untrue as there are many deprived areas, especially in coastal areas. However, there is much truth in the perception that areas in and around the northern cities have not enjoyed the same level of prosperity as that seen in London and the south-east. Nowhere is this more demonstrable than in transport links and Tim Wood from Northern Powerhouse Rail is campaigning vigorously for investment in rail links that need to go alongside the HS2 project. The vision is considerable: » New Liverpool-Manchester and ManchesterLeeds lines, often known as HS3 and including much better connectivity to Bradford » Upgraded Manchester-Sheffield line » Reopening of the Leamside route in County Durham » Station upgrades in Rotherham and Barnsley » Electrification of major links and suburban routes.
FEATURE
Ebbsfleet and Ashford, and similar opportunities should be developed for the Midland and Northern cities. In noting the vast station being built at Old Oak Common and the rail connectivity that it will yield, Lord Berkeley gave thought as to whether the extension to Euston should be abandoned to save both disruption and cost. It is doubtful that many will agree with this idea, but if ever increasing costs are to be contained, it would be
The intention is to create much-improved journey times and frequency of services for passengers, as well as connecting all the northern economic centres primarily to Manchester Airport but other regional airports as well. Electrification will go hand in hand with government targets for decarbonisation. It is recognised that this is a huge undertaking that will take many years, but there is a need for certainty for these rail schemes with work being planned to begin in the mid-2020s. A more localised vision of this was given by Liz Hunter, Head of Transport Policy for West Yorkshire, a region that has 2.3 million people, 90,000 businesses and a workforce of 1.1 million. Transport embraces rail, bus, cycling and walking, and a plan exists for all of these with rail being a major part. Already Leeds Station has a £39.5 million investment to improve the main entrance and its surroundings, and which will incorporate plans for HS2 and HS3 lines when they materialise. Connectivity to Bradford, Huddersfield and Hull - and HS2 linkage into Sheffield - are key elements. For Bradford - always the poor relation but with a £10.5 billion economy - will have a new central station at St James.
Concerns still remain about under investment in the North's transport infrastructure.
Lord Tony Berkeley, well known for his rail knowledge and a member of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Infrastructure, is broadly supportive of HS2, but believes the project as currently planned to be over specified, with costs continually rising and resultant bad press. The need for more regional involvement is crucial, particularly as nobody can accurately predict what passenger numbers will be in the post-Covid era. Reduced commuter demand is almost certain so the opportunity should be taken for more train paths to be made available for local services around Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds, with through running across these cities instead of into terminus stations, much as is happening in continental Europe and London. It is a fact that HS1 has revolutionised commuter routes into Kent by linking these into the line at
PHOTO: FOUR BY THREE
Some HS2 concerns
one means of cutting back. More openness by both government and HS2 promoters is seriously needed, with perhaps the new GBR taking control of the project in order to achieve better integration with the existing rail network. The conference certainly provided food for thought.
All about people
people working in public transport...people like you! less than
20p a day
Health, welfare and financial help in times of need, hardship and distress. £1.25 a week covers you, your live-in partner and dependent children.
0300 333 2000 | help@tbf.org.uk | www.tbf.org.uk Transport Benevolent Fund CIO, known as TBF, is a registered charity in England and Wales, 1160901, and Scotland, SC047016.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
73
74
FEATURE
Classic delivery FOR HS2 WORKS
E An overview of the site.
MARK PHILLIPS
KFB (Eiffage, Kier, Ferrovial and Bam Nuttall) is building a section of HS2 through the Buckinghamshire countryside and making good use of a semi-mothballed line to deliver fill material by rail, minimising heavy lorry traffic in the area. Rail Engineer was invited recently, along with other press representatives, to see for ourselves this juxtaposition of old and new rail infrastructure in full use.
EKFB has established a large complex of site offices and accommodation near Calvert. Currently, there are around 150 EKFB and supply chain personnel working on the site. Ultimately, the accommodation will cater for 170 white collar and 250 blue collar staff. Very rigorous health and safety arrangements, with additional policy focus on all the requirements of COVID-19 regulations, were much in evidence.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
Part of the visit involved walking within the overall site, but vehicular transport was needed to get efficiently to another area. This required quite a fleet of vehicles and drivers, with only one press representative allowed per vehicle - seated in the back diagonally from the driver!
Scope of works EKFB’s contract is for the construction of an 80km section of the HS2 route. Its overall contract is worth around £2.3 billion for undertaking the civil engineering works over a fiveyear period. It does not include track, signalling and other rail systems nor the early activity involving site clearance, utility diversions and archaeological works. The Calvert sub-section of this contract consists of a 10km length of the HS2 trace itself, but also a 3.5km portion of the Network Rail OXD line, where it intersects the HS2 route, and which will become part of the East-West route between Oxford and Cambridge. The Calvert section includes the construction of 14 overbridges - five of which are ‘green’ bridges - and a 900-metre bat mitigation structure. Earthworks involve 1.7 million cubic metres of excavation, but 4 million cubic metres of fill. It is this massive excess of fill over excavation that has inspired the opportunity to utilise rail delivery, explained David Newcombe, EKFB’s Construction Director.
FEATURE All the earthworks and structures have been designed by a joint venture of Arcadis, SETEC and COWI (ASC). Apart from the structures and earthworks on the HS2 route, EKFB’s contract includes for doing the same over the OXD intersection section. The main structure for this is a 30-metre single span steel bridge which will carry the OXD line over HS2. The bored concrete piles for the bridge have already been completed and are now ready for abutment construction. The piling rig had stood idle on site for several weeks since completion of the piles and could not yet be off-hired. The reason for this provides a small example of HS2’s ecological credentials. A pair of jackdaws - perhaps inspired by the site activities - chose to build a nest in one of the spaces in the steel rig shaft. They will remain undisturbed until the fledglings have flown the nest. In fact, during our visit,
an HS2 ecologist was on site with binoculars observing their current status. The longitudinal profile of the OXD route has to be altered significantly to rise over the HS2 line. This requires significant earthworks, the demolition and reconstruction of an arch overbridge very close to the new intersection bridge and some highway rerouting.
Each week, 17 trains of 22 wagons feed the Calvert North Railhead.
01457 869999 PELIPRODUCTS.CO.UK Rail Engineer half page july aug 2021 190 x 130mm.indd 1
06/08/2021 2021 06:46:47 Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug
75
76
FEATURE
The site accommodation will eventually cater for 170 white collar and 250 blue collar staff.
The piling rig was stood idle due to nesting jackdaws.
Rail delivery of aggregate Calvert North Railhead has been established just south of the intersection location on a chord line linking the Great Central’s former AylesburyCalvert line and the East-West railway. This chord will be dismantled soon, but, before it is, opportunity is being taken to stockpile material at this location. So far, 277 trains at a rate of up to three per day - 17 per week in total - are feeding the site. Each train has a consist of 22 wagons, each with a payload of 77 tonnes. At the time of our site visit, 448,000 tonnes of aggregate had been delivered by 277 trains, saving 45,000 lorry journeys and an estimated 15,236 tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions. In early August, the Calvert North Railhead will close and, following discussions with
Buckinghamshire County Council and FCC landfill, the Calvert South Railhead will commence operations to create another large material storage area. The DB locomotives hauling these aggregate trains are using HVO (Hydrotreated Vegetable Oil) fuel which is something the contractor is proud to support. HVO is marketed as one of the world’s purest and greenest fuels. It is made synthetically from vegetable oils and animal fats through the hydro-treatment process. Its use significantly reduces carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide emissions when used in diesel engines. HVO is supplied by Crown Oil. No virgin products are used in its manufacture as it is derived fully from responsibly sourced waste products.
Time of the essence The wagons are unloaded using RFS clamshell grab machines and the material is then taken to the deposition locations by large Volvo dumpers leased by EKFB, but operated by Buckingham Group Contracting. It normally takes between two and 2½ hours to unload each trainload. Paul Clews, rail adviser to EKFB, emphasised however that should an incoming train arrive at site late for any reason, he nevertheless despatches the train at its scheduled departure time, even if that means sending back a few wagons
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
still unloaded. He explained that, responsible for rail operations as he is, he wants to ensure that the site will not cause any disruption to other train services by missing the scheduled path. The fill material comes from Hanson’s Tytherington Quarry in Gloucestershire, runs to Acton where the train is run round, then via Hanwell Curve and on to Calvert. Daytime trains run usually via the Berks and Hants line. By night, they run according to which route is available depending upon Network Rail possessions, but generally via Bath and Wootton Bassett, with a run round at Bristol. There has been great cooperation from Great Western Trains and Chiltern Railways in setting up the routing and paths for the material trains, and it is important to avoid any disruption. The strategic position of Calvert at the intersection of the HS2 trace and Network Rail’s East-West route is one of the factors in the selection of the site for the future HS2 maintenance depot. This facility only needs 60% of the footprint of a comparable depot on the classic network because HS2’s use of slab track means it doesn’t have to accommodate conventional track machines (see Issue 185 July/August 2020). It will occupy the area of land in the north-east quadrant of the two lines’ intersection.
No matter the project you’re working on, we can get you up to speed with industry best practice. We’re an independent body that makes collective industry knowledge freely available to our members. Our tools, resources and engineering services allow the railway to be safer and more sustainable. We also offer consulting, training, research and events. So there’s no need to duplicate work that’s already been done. Here are three of the hundreds of resources we offer:
Shrink your carbon footprint
Optimise performance
Reduce risk on the network
Our Rail Carbon Tool helps you reduce carbon emissions through design and construction, for capital and operational cost and carbon savings.
Our Human Factors Hub provides a range of guidance, tools, products and services to help you support railway staff performance through systems thinking.
Our RED Programmes are safety briefing videos that will help you raise awareness of operational safety issues to your workforce.
Learn more at rssb.co.uk/up-to-speed
78
STATIONS & PASSENGER TECHNOLOGIES
O
ver the last few years, we have heard a lot about the Digital Railway programme and how it will transform the network by deploying modern signalling and train control technology. Rail Engineer first reported the launch of the programme in 2015 and, while progress has been slow, the East Coast Digital Programme will at last deliver the first main line digital rail link in Great Britain. However, digital telecoms technology has been used in rail for many years and now - in the form of Internet Protocol (IP) devices - digital technology is transforming the way stations are managed for information and surveillance purposes. Station Information and Surveillance Systems (SISS) once consisted of standalone CCTV, Public Address (PA) and Customer Information Systems (CIS), but is now delivering far more. By using Internet of Things (IoT) and IP datadriven devices, engineers are discovering they can enhance the station customer experience, strengthen operational capabilities and help prepare for new ways of working. Many station systems are now very much connected, both to each other and to external systems, and sometimes a control point can manage several stations. SISS allows a station to be managed safely and securely, for the railway police to investigate incidents, to inform passengers of train departures, and much more. With IP technology and the security industry offering opportunities from the latest commercial off-the-shelf technology, SISS has changed over the last ten years with systems far more powerful, better connected and with richer functionality. The change has not stopped and Artificial Intelligence (AI) is just one enhancement with powerful potential.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
STATIONS & PASSENGER TECHNOLOGIES
CONNECTING OUR STATIONS Wi-Fi Free Wi-Fi has been identified by passengers as one of the key factors that could improve railway stations and is now an expectation. Any new Wi-Fi service will need to offer seamless connectivity with simple, single, automatic signon. Most passengers now have smartphones and tablets which means, with good digital connectivity, they can access their own train information and journeys are no longer ‘dead time’ as they can work or access leisure media while on the move. Passengers expect seamless connectivity in their homes, places of work, on the train and at stations, and Wi-Fi is a digital technology that will attract people to rail. Good, secure, fast Wi-Fi is also needed to connect station staff. Sir Peter Hendy, chair of Network Rail, wants staff out of the booking offices and on platforms to help passengers. To do this they need access to digital information via connected devices. The latest standard WiFi 6 (not to be confused with 6G) will offer even greater performance. Wi-Fi 6 can also support the low-latency levels required for virtual and augmented reality (VR/AR) applications. In trials, speeds of 2Gbps and consistent twomillisecond low-latency have been achieved. It is envisaged the technology will be especially suitable for locations such as subsurface stations. Several regulators have plans to release 6GHz spectrum bands for unlicensed Wi-Fi 6 use, including FCC in the US, Ofcom in the UK and regulators in the EU. SISS has progressively become more integrated with the use of IP-enabled Station Data Networks (SDN) and controlled using Station Management Systems (SMS). The primary role of a PA system is to broadcast voice messages to people on the station, announcing a message either live from a control room or a message library. The PA,
when triggered by a fire alarm system, can also provide a coded voice alarm to alert staff to investigate a potential incident and advise people to leave the station. Audio-over-IP is a protocol now being used for PA systems and another example of IP now dominating telecoms. Audio-over-IP is not to be confused with internet streaming. Such services can send music to users over a network connection, but broadband IP streaming sends low-bandwidth, compressed media to devices with no attempt at synchronisation or low latency. This is not an issue when each receiver is separate from one another, but is no good for PA systems. So, audio-over-IP is used to distribute real-time, tightly-synchronised uncompressed audio to devices. The primary role of a station CCTV system is to allow the operator to view and monitor both public areas for the purposes of safety and security, and operational areas used by retailers, railway workers and others. Live camera views enable areas to be monitored, for example to watch for overcrowding. Recording of the camera data allows the station control room to view and download CCTV images for evidential purposes to confirm, for example, a slip and trip claim, or to assist the investigation of a crime or security incident. For example, following the Novichok nerve agent poisoning in Salisbury, security authorities identified two Russian nationals suspected of being involved. They were tracked using highresolution CCTV passing through several London stations and Salisbury station. Inquiries into events such as the Manchester Arena bombing in 2017 have highlighted the need to ensure there are no CCTV blind spots. Customer information systems present news about train departures and arrivals at a station, and communicate messages about safety or
PAUL DARLINGTON
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
79
80
STATIONS & PASSENGER TECHNOLOGIES service changes during periods of disruption. The presentation of train-based information has been in many forms according to the available technology at the time, from the classic ‘flap’ boards to digital screens using coloured LED displays. Keith Williams has said that during research for the Williams-Shapps Plan for Rail, many people expressed a desire for ‘one network’ whilst Sir Peter Hendy insists he wants stations to be consistently attractive. So consistent CIS displays will be required more than ever. The context of SISS and its importance for station management has evolved. Many stations have grown into railway hubs with other transport infrastructure - such as underground and bus stations - and have become community hubs for retail and entertainment, which are also used by non-passengers for buying ‘on the go’ items. Stations have to manage many operational scenarios, such as regulating passenger flows to deal with overcrowding due to service disruptions and adapting to train service changes. SISS control points must therefore be comprehensive and easy to use, and must be reliable to maintain public communications, and support police and security services to minimise risk and deal with threats to public safety. Cameras with 360-degree viewing and multisensor cameras are now being offered by manufacturers, providing the designer with the option of reducing the number of cameras to cover areas. High definition (HD) cameras offer a greater
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
depth of view and resolution in comparison to previous analogue equipment. This opens up opportunities to monitor areas of interest in high resolution, such as ticket gates, cash machines and entry/exit doors. In comparison to the SISS renewals of 10-15 years ago, the developments in Commercial Off-The-Shelf (COTS) products now offer systems with much reduced physical footprint requirements. Racks of equipment that required a dedicated room can now be replaced with equipment located in an enclosure in an office or waiting room.
Challenges with SISS The use of IP as a ‘plug and play’ connectivity solution for SISS brings challenges in preventing security breaches and cyber attacks that attempt to access critical data or disrupt railway operations. This could result in misleading station or service management decisions, or ransomware attacks. The latter is malicious software that locks the victim out of their systems or blocks access to data, and is one of the most common forms of cyber crime. It has infected millions of networks around the world, costing businesses and financial institutions billions in lost revenue. Railway projects must now undertake security assurance as part of the design process to identify measures and mitigations to reduce the likelihood of security breaches. And just as important, the measures must be constantly updated once the system goes into service. By their COTS nature, SISS products may be more vulnerable to cyber attacks than other railway systems. While IP systems are powerful and reliable, they are also complicated. The maintainer is no longer just a technician with a tool bag and ladder. Competent system managers must be in place and supported appropriately. IP SISS technology changes rapidly and can quickly become obsolete, so robust asset management upgrade and renewal plans must be in place, and subject to constant review. Any renewal strategy for SISS must use the latest technology and challenge conventional asset management and project engineering practices. The availability of COTS devices and systems ‘out of the box’ has changed, bringing minimal devices that are full of technology and removing the need for product development from first principles. It is still important when specifying COTS devices to assess their actual performance in the operational environment and confirm that new products can integrate correctly with other systems.
STATIONS & PASSENGER TECHNOLOGIES Projects must accurately specify their requirements and aim to minimise the risk of COTS products and systems failing midway through the expected service life of the asset. Whole-life asset management must avoid the product life being exceeded, spares not being available, licenses expiring, and unnecessarily complex and expensive maintenance regimes. Using IP provides a foundation for SISS by creating a ‘plug and play’ approach that will bring benefits for future integrators by exploiting the simplicity of the infrastructure, while extending the functionality of SISS or other station-based systems to bring a richer experience to passengers and staff. These features include things such as enabling dynamic journey information, and utilising analytics and AI to assist station management teams, through to exploiting integrated control of multiple operators and sites across a wider architecture. IP technology and connectivity using Wi-Fi and Bluetooth will extend into other station applications other than traditional SISS. In his vision for Great British Railways, Sir Peter Hendy also wants the end of paper ticketing, so smart ticketing is likely to be the future. By combining biometric ticket barriers, Bluetooth, Wi-Fi and other technologies to remove physical barriers, customers could walk in and out of stations freely. This will help reduce congestion, make it easier to deter fare evasion and, most importantly, manage passenger volumes and, if required, social distancing. Similar technology is already being used by Amazon for walk-in, walk-out shopping; in Australia, New South Wales is planning to make biometrics a central part of its future transport plans, with passengers being scanned by facial recognition systems for automatic payments.
Smart security Commuters need to feel safe as they travel and, when deployed with care and with full regard to privacy and data security, smart CCTV cameras are a potential solution. Biometric data - such as face or voice recognition - and AI can identify risks and proactively organise responses. Staff can then be stationed in areas of potential risk - for example, in response to cameras detecting suspicious movements or behaviours - to further improve passenger safety and optimise incident response times. Smart, connected cameras and security systems could also be used to identify and secure lost items, assist lost travellers such as a child separated from its parents and coordinate emergency services - for example, directing ambulance staff to the right location to help a passenger with a health issue. Biometric security cameras have already been successfully trialled in Berlin and the potential for rail is huge. Deploying IoT sensors could create a steady data flow to solve practical problems. For example, staff can be provided with IoT tags to monitor their safety. Maintainers with IoT-connected cameras and sensors could enable them to remotely connect with experts and technical information. Physical assets, such as lifts and escalators, can be monitored and scheduled for preventative maintenance before service interruptions and repairs are required. Their service operation could be tracked in realtime, to keep customers informed how best to move around stations. At Singapore’s Changi Airport, ‘big belly’ smart bins send alerts as they fill up, ensuring they never overflow. Using data from sensors to feed analytics and AI, operations can become predictive and proactive in an IP-connected station.
Endpiece
PHOTO: BIM
It is an exciting time for SISS. There is a lot of innovation and creativity in the engineering solutions available, but at the same time the technology is reliable and proven, and benefits from other industry sectors’ R&D driving the availability of more cost-effective COTS devices. Modern digital SISS devices are powerful and able to be networked via IP to provide a ‘connected’ solution to transform the way stations are managed for information and surveillance purposes, and to contribute to the more user-friendly and safe, efficient railway we all aspire to.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
81
82
STATIONS & PASSENGER TECHNOLOGIES PHOTO: BIM
Towards the inclusive railway
T
ravelling by train can pose challenges for all of us: finding our way around complex stations, making decisions about routes to take, getting seats on a crowded service and reacting to changes when they occur. This can be difficult enough for anyone, but for those who have limited mobility or sensory impairment, the thought of dealing with these issues can be a strong reason to choose an alternative way of travelling. If we are to support the modal shift to sustainable transport and significantly reduce carbon emissions, we need to make the railway as accessible as possible for all passengers.
PHOTO: JUSTHAVEALOOK
To help achieve this, Siemens Mobility Limited has worked with the University of Cambridge, Astutim and KeolisAmey Docklands, as part of a research project funded by the Rail Safety and Standards Board (RSSB). Its purpose is to investigate how well the industry caters for people who are disabled or impaired, and how we can develop new technology and adapt existing approaches to improve their experience of using the railway. Out of a population of some 64 million people, around 10% have impaired vision, 5% hearing, 15% mobility, 15% memory or concentration, and
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
17% impairments to their hands or arms. And more than 60% of those over 75 have less than full ability. The proportion of the population in that older age group is increasing, but with people wanting to remain mobile for as long as possible, public transport has an important role to play in supporting independent living. The current methods used to assess people’s ability to access our transport networks tend to be subjective and lack rigour. They often focus on wheelchair users (who account for only 1.7% of the population) and blind people (representing 0.6%). The project team recognised that the transport sector badly needed a more objective approach to auditing, one which would take proper account of impairments and include the larger number of people who have multiple impairments. It should also be able to allow an assessment to be made of how accessible the digital interfaces are that deliver passenger information - whether that is through a station display, a mobile app on a smartphone or some other means. The four project partners launched the ‘Towards the Inclusive Railway’ programme, its aim being to identify ways of significantly improving the customer experience for all passengers, particularly elderly people and those who suffer from multiple minor impairments to vision, hearing, thinking, reach, dexterity and mobility.
83
STATIONS & PASSENGER TECHNOLOGIES Sign of the times
positioned out of direct sunlight to allow passengers to read and react to the information in good time. The screens were less cluttered, stripped down to just the key information, including times and departure locations for the next trains. Following the installation of the trial signs, a second audit was undertaken to evaluate their impact. This found that they resulted in both a reduced mobility demand and a reduced concentration requirement, with the signs negating the need to stand and pore over different maps and display boards.
Getting smart The team also audited a European travel app which was found to be well designed for those who are familiar with digital interfaces and smartphone technology. However, it was not helpful to inexperienced users of mobile communications devices, estimating that at least 34% of the population was excluded from using the app, either due to a lack of access to the necessary technology or resulting from passengers’ attitudes and capabilities with digital interfaces. This audit has helped Siemens Mobility to develop new and adapted mobility services based on the company’s portfolio of digital solutions, including its app-based Traveller Relationship Manager (TRM) solutions. The TRM system uses Bluetooth low-energy beacons at strategic locations which enable passengers to get information on their smartphones when they are close by. It is planned that this technology will be used for detailed navigation within stations - or other locations where GPS signals are weak or non-existent - to help passengers find their way quickly and easily to their platforms or other station facilities, such as lifts, toilets and shops. A new application called SiMobility Flow has also been developed to help passengers
navigate their way within and around stations. A prototype was developed using Canning Town Station, with a 3D model generated to allow passengers to follow a virtual walkthrough display which guides them to be in the right place at the right time. Passengers are provided with information in real time about their next available travel options and directions are given to the right platform, or to a reserved seat on the train, as well as providing information about their onward journey by taxi, bike or other methods. A trial was also developed whereby messages could be displayed via the TRM system, with information received from the digital station manager PHOTO: SOLSTOCK2
The project based its work on the Docklands Light Railway (DLR), which is the busiest light rail operation in the UK. In 2019/20, the DLR carried 117 million passengers and, before the Coronavirus pandemic hit the UK, around 370,000 passengers used it each weekday. DLR is a step-free network, with escalators or lifts available for passengers to use at its elevated stations, served by an automated train system. The railway is largely unstaffed, with only four of its 45 stations being permanently staffed. Any faults with the station facilities, equipment or services are therefore potentially problematic for passengers. A feature of the DLR is that is has numerous interchanges with both London Underground and main line operators. Some of these interchanges are quite complex - for instance, at Canary Wharf and Canning Town and therefore good quality, accurate information is vital for passengers to be able to move easily around stations. To assess the quality of information available to passengers, the project team developed a new digital assessment tool - to work with the University of Cambridge’s existing Exclusion Calculator model - and applied this to understand any barriers which exist to passenger information that may hinder or deter passengers from using the railway. The audit found that many aspects of the DLR support a good travel experience, but some of the line’s complexities make it challenging. It was felt that both visual and neural demands could be eased by the addition of some new fixed and electronic signage. As a result, a number of prototype information signs were developed and piloted, with a series of trials run by KeolisAmey Docklands. The signs featured a larger font and were carefully
software. The example chosen was a ‘lift out of service’ message which would be detected by the system and relayed to the TRM, immediately alerting passengers via mobile screen messaging and fixed wayfinding display information. Testing has been undertaken at a series of events, with more incorporating travelling customer feedback - planned to take place following the lifting of COVID-19 restrictions. All these, combined with future studies and pilots, will help improve accessibility, uptake of public transport and drive railway decarbonisation.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
84
FEATURE
a challenging Challenge T MALCOLM DOBELL
he Institution of Mechanical Engineers (IMechE) 10th Railway Challenge took place at the Stapleford Miniature Railway between 25-27 June 2021, with sponsorship from SNC-Lavalin Atkins, Angel Trains, Beacon Rail Leasing, Network Rail and RSSB.
The event provides a great opportunity for aspiring teams of young engineers to compete in a demanding industry-specific competition, showcasing their skills, expertise, knowledge and business acumen. Participants are required to design, manufacture and run a miniature (10¼” gauge) railway locomotive in accordance with strict rules and a detailed technical specification.
The team from FH Aachen University of Applied Sciences/ Reuschling took part remotely. Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
The locomotives are then tested over a single weekend at the Stapleford Miniature Railway in Leicestershire, where several category winners and an overall Railway Challenge champion are announced. There are six track challenges: maintainability, auto-stop, ride, energy recovery, acceleration and noise, together with a derived reliability challenge. There are also three paper-based challenges: design, innovation and poster, as well as a business case challenge where teams have to pitch their design to a ‘Dragons’ Den’ of judges. In normal times, the business case challenge is held on the Saturday of the competition, but this year it was held virtually on 4 June. Unlike 2020’s competition, which was held virtually, the easing of Covid restrictions allowed the track-based challenges to go ahead. It was a closed event and this report is based on the IMechE’s own news piece, together with input from colleagues.
FEATURE Energy recovery A total of 11 teams entered, but, because of restrictions imposed by the various lockdowns, only five had completed their locomotives and only four were allowed to travel to Stapleford. Ten teams participated in the non-track challenges which were virtual. Teams from Alstom/University of Derby, the University of Huddersfield, Network Rail and the University of Sheffield arrived at Stapleford on 25 June and, during torrential rain showers, there was a great deal of ingenuity in simply providing reasonably waterproof joints between gazebos; pliers and cable ties were involved! These teams had also suffered disruption in constructing their locomotives. Only the Huddersfield team was equipped to be able to attempt all the track challenges. Its locomotive was powered by a petrol generator feeding electric motors, with an energy recovery system built from clock springs and clutches mounted on one of the axles. Sadly, it failed to operate during the tests. All the other teams used or, in the case of the teams not participating in the track
challenges, proposed lead acid batteries feeding electric motors. Several different controllers and motor types were employed, providing teams with a variety of ‘interesting’ control system challenges. All but one of the locomotives were twin two-axle bogie vehicles, whilst Sheffield’s locomotive comprised two, two-axle vehicles. Apart
from Huddersfield’s spring system, other teams used supercapacitors for energy recovery or simply fed the energy back into the main batteries. Teams have always struggled with the energy recovery challenge. The rules state that the locomotive and its load must be braked to a halt and demonstrate to the judges that only the energy recovered in that brake application can be used to propel the train. This is not straightforward. How do you measure that energy? The energy recovered in a single stop is not large and some teams simply measure the change in voltage of the supercapacitor. This can work providing an appropriately sized supercapacitor is used, something that was generally not an issue in the early days of the competition as the only affordable supercapacitors were quite small. Bigger devices have since become available, but teams have discovered that bigger is not necessarily better. Putting a small charge into a large supercapacitor results in a very small change of voltage - too small to convince a judge!
The team from Network Rail check data.
Adjustments are made by the University of Huddersfield team.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
85
86
FEATURE
The Alstom/University of Derby and University of Sheffield teams put their locomotives through their paces.
The same is true if the energy is fed back into the battery. Some teams have started to measure the energy in and out. This is better, but some account still needs to be taken of the losses in the charge/discharge cycle. The Aachen locomotive was one that used an energy meter approach. On the competition day, none of the locomotives successfully completed the energy recovery challenge and this award was not made.
Come to a stand The other ‘challenging challenge’ is auto-stop. The train has to be moving at over 10kph and, on passing a set point, automatically apply its brakes to stop exactly 25m beyond the set point. Teams used or proposed a variety of trigger methods - optical sensor, infrared, magnet/reed switch, radar speed probe and Hall effect sensor. But none of the teams at Stapleford was able to deliver a successful auto-stop.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
The team from FH Aachen University of Applied Sciences/Reuschling, 2019’s winners, was one of the five teams that had completed their locomotive, but they were unable to travel to the UK. As they had a small oval test track on a campus car park, the competition organisers arranged for a judge to witness a demonstration of their loco carrying out the majority of the track challenges on that test track and the maintainability challenge in their workshop. The arrangement was that the loco would not be eligible for scoring on the track challenges as the geometry was so different from the Stapleford track. In addition, the ride and noise tests were not attempted. The judges were minded to make a special award for the German team’s ingenuity in setting up the remote demonstration, but, in the absence of any successful auto-stop challenge results at Stapleford, the judges decided to award them the auto-stop challenge certificate despite the limitations of their test track.
Together again Two locomotives deserve special mention. Sheffield’s was clad in transparent panels so that its components were easy to see. The team uses its locomotive as part of its STEM outreach programme and one of the features is a series of coloured LED strips which provided almost disco-like illumination in the Stapleford tunnel. Network Rail’s loco arrived at Stapleford as a non-runner and it is a great tribute to its team that members were able to get it running and participate in the maintainability challenge. After prize giving on the Sunday, the team made a trip around the railway and there was a big cheer on departure.
FEATURE It was obvious how much everyone valued the opportunity to do real things with other people, rather than participate in Teams or Zoom meetings. IMechE Education Programme Operations Manager, Jelena Gacesa, said that “The 2021 Railway Challenge honoured the work of students, apprentices and young professionals in the most challenging of circumstances. Together we celebrated their resilience, problem solving acumen and innovative solutions, reinforcing the importance of practical engineering skills in an increasingly virtual world.” At the presentation ceremony, head judge Bill Reeve observed that “we are increasingly seeing past participants in quite senior roles within the railway industry. Time and time again, past competitors tell us that they look back on their Railway Challenge experience as the highlight of their training. For many, it allows them to gain competence towards their CEng that would otherwise be hard to get so early in their careers.” For me, your writer, as a member of the Challenge’s Organising Committee and now a judge as well as a past team sponsor, this is one of the most rewarding things I’ve done in my 50+ year career. The University of Huddersfield team were overall winners of the 2021 Railway Challenge, with the University of Sheffield taking the runners-up spot and the Alstom/University of Derby team third. The winners of the individual challenges were: » Auto-stop (automatically stop from >10kph in precisely 25m): FH Aachen/Reuschling » Ride comfort (measured using a triaxial accelerometer over most of the railway’s loop section): University of Huddersfield » Traction (accelerate in the shortest time over a 1:80 uphill section): University of Sheffield » Noise (measured whilst accelerating in the traction challenge and corrected for speed): Alstom/University of Derby » Maintainability (safely remove and replace a wheelset in the quickest time): Alstom/ University of Derby » Business case (pitch the design to a ‘Dragon’s Den’ style panel): Newcastle University » Technical poster (describe/illustrate the loco design for visitors to the competition): University of Birmingham » Innovation (draft a technical paper about an innovation fitted to the locomotive): FH Aachen/Reuschling » Design (draft a design review submission): Alstom/University of Derby Rail Engineer adds its congratulations to all the teams who took part in the 2021 Railway Challenge. We are looking forward to covering the 2022 competition.
The team from the University of Huddersfield was the overall winner of the 2021 Railway Challenge.
Despite the tension, faces are always dressed with smiles.
The team from the University of Huddersfield was the overall winner of the 2021 Railway Challenge. Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
87
88
PLANT & EQUIPMENT
Plant force QTS' weed control unit can spray 44 miles of trackside in 8 hours.
Q
TS is synonymous with originality when it comes to machinery on the UK rail network and innovation remains a driving force behind the development of its plant fleet. With bespoke equipment such as the Mega Chipper V1 and V2 already in operation, it leads from the front. The Mega Chipper was the first of its kind and the company has continued to introduce world firsts onto the rail network, including the QTS Vegetation Compactor. It is the only one of its kind currently operating on the UK network and is secured to a trailer using ISO twist locks; it can hold up to ten times the traditional trailer load thanks to its moveable sides which compact to crush the brash and allow more vegetation to be removed from site, increasing efficiency.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
Using the Liebherr Road Rail Excavator, a TMK tree shear can be attached in just under a minute, allowing all sizes of material to be handled with no loss in output. A rail trailer is also hitched to the Liebherr which can carry 20 tonnes of timber. This process can be carried out using only two operatives - a machine controller to look after the side of the vegetation compactor, and an RRV driver to operate the Liehber and the tree shear. This provides increased productivity and safety as there is no risk of entry into the exclusion zone and no manual cutting of trees, such as blackthorn and hawthorn. By using the compactor, there is no impact on the lineside ground or drainage systems. Disturbance to wildlife is greatly
PLANT & EQUIPMENT
QTS' Vegetation Compactor can hold up to ten times the traditional trailer load.
reduced, as are noise levels compared to conventional chainsaws and wood chippers, reducing impacts on lineside neighbours. All brash and timber can then be removed off site and easily unloaded, either into a chipper or processed into biofuel.
Spray that again Another new addition to the QTS fleet is the Weed Control Unit, a specially designed vehicle which aids the removal of trackside weeds which can travel safely on both road and rail. It is one of a handful of weed control machines in the UK and it currently has the largest water capacity at 3,000 litres. This means that it can carry out 44 miles worth of spraying over a 8 hour period. A separate tank is used to hold the chemicals, from which they are injected into the spray nozzles. The machine has five different settings: » spraying down embankments, up to 6m from the running edge of the rail » spraying 6m up an embankment or a cutting » spraying directly into the four-foot, if required
» direction can be controlled so that the spray can be both sides at once, or either side » two hand lances, installed at the rear of the truck, allow spot spraying. All spray settings are controllable from the cab and can be switched off when near or passing waterways. One of the main benefits of this impressive machine is its ability to work under live overhead lines, except use of the spot spray setting.
Jetting power QTS has also developed a ground-breaking piece of machinery which will join the company’s current fleet of six drainage vehicles, making it the largest and most diverse fleet of its kind in the UK. The Rail Mega Vac has 7 tonnes of
water capacity and an efficient waste system which can hold 3m³ of waste, meaning it can work for longer before having to be refilled. The multi-purpose machine can jet water at speeds up to 300 litres per minute using the main jetting hose, located at the rear of the machine. A secondary hose reel is fitted to the front which can extend up to 50m. It also has an auxiliary hose reel that is suitable for pressure washing. This allows track drainage to be unblocked in record time and is ideal for jetting large culverts and undertrack crossings, using specialist jetting heads. The hose - which has a diameter of 8 inches compared to the 6 inches specified on current machines - provides increased suction.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
89
90
PLANT & EQUIPMENT
A before and after Unimog by QTS' Special Projects team.
Outside the box
The Rail MegaVac can jet water at speeds up to 300 litres per minute.
Alan McLeish, Managing Director of the QTS Group said: “We are committed to an innovative future in rail maintenance across the UK network. Our focus is on steady investment in innovation throughout our plant fleet, including everything from excavators and cranes to chippers and compactors. “We’ve been working on more than 48 design projects this year. So, whether that’s upgrades to our existing Unimogs or new attachments for our road-rail excavators, we are committed to continuing to be at the forefront of innovation on the railway.”
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
In 2019, QTS introduced a Special Projects team which has revamped and restored 12 machines within its workshop. The first of these projects was on RRU06, a Mercedes-Benz U1650 Unimog. The machine was fully stripped down to a bare chassis and all of the main components that could be reused were blasted and painted. The machine was completely rewired, and all air and brake components replaced. The engine and gearbox were fully stripped-down, and the worn parts replaced and rebuilt. The rail axles have been fully overhauled and rail wheels reprofiled. The chipper was originally mounted on the rear but, as part of the upgrade, an engineering change was carried out and the chipper was relocated at the front of the machine. This project took
approximately six months to complete, including the PAB certification process. John Simpson is the Special Projects Manager, based at the QTS HQ at Rench Farm, Drumclog. He said: “Our team is dedicated to the improvement and the refurbishment of old machinery and it’s such a great feeling to take an old Unimog that comes to you in pieces and then restore it so you can drive it out of the workshop. “One of the best things about QTS is the vision of the leadership team - especially from Alan - when it comes to the plant. There is always the drive to do better and create more efficiencies through our machines, which is something we’re really proud of and look forward to doing more of in the future.”
PLANT & EQUIPMENT
H
YTORC is the world’s largest and leading manufacturer of industrial bolting systems, boasting a superior line of hydraulic, pneumatic and electric torque and tension tooling. The firm recognises that industrial bolting has inherent risks, but many - such as HandArm Vibration Syndrome (HAVS) - can be mitigated with the use of newer and safer technologies.
Risk and responsibility It is well established that exposure to high-magnitude vibration power tools such as impact wrenches will increase the risk of HAVS which can cause permanent damage to nerves, blood vessels, muscles and joints in the hands and arms. HAVS is the disease with most recorded cases by RIDDOR within the rail industry in the past ten years. High-vibration tools quickly become a moderate or high risk of HAVS injury. Most impact wrenches exceed the industry standard Exposure Action Value (EAV) limit of 2.5m/s2 and the Exposure Limit Value (ELV) of 5m/s2, meaning a high risk of developing HAVS. Employers have a responsibility to be aware of this hazard and protect the workforce from the risk of injury, either by monitoring and limiting exposure time or selecting equipment with a lower magnitude of vibration.
HAVS-free tooling HYTORC’s electric and pneumatic torque tools have been independently verified and tested by HAVi Technologies Ltd - the UK’s leading specialist in solutions helping businesses comply with HSE guidelines for managing HAVS. The results confirmed that HYTORC’s range of handheld power torque tools are ultra-low vibration in actual operational use. The vibration levels of a typical impact wrench are measured at approximately 19.0m/s2, allowing a maximum of 30 minutes trigger time per day. HYTORC’s handheld tools have been measured at <1.0m/s2; allowing for unlimited daily use, with negligible HAVS risk to the operator.
hand safety T H E
P R E M I U M
Hand safety commitment The HYTORC washer system eliminates bolting pinch points due to there no longer being any need for a reaction arm or fixture on a torque wrench. This technology ensures a much safer working environment. HYTORC is ready to help. The firm’s specialists guarantee to deliver safe, controlled and precise bolting solutions to solve issues experienced throughout the sector, with significant improvements in operator safety, speed, accuracy and ease of use.
Improve Speed, Safety, and Accuracy for Plant and Equipment Bolting Applications
LITHIUM SERIES® II Electric Torque Tool
VIBRATION VALUES <1.5 m/s2
Approved solutions HYTORC battery-powered bolting systems are approved for use by Network Rail. They are the ultimate solution for bolting jobs across the rail sector, whether it is for maintenance on trains or the tracks. The Lithium Series II electric torque tool is the next revolution in bolting technology, redesigned from the ground up with expanded functionality, greater durability and intuitive usability. This lightweight 36V battery-powered tool - with capacity up to 6,779Nm - is the ultimate solution for strength and portability. It is now available with data recording and Bluetooth functionalities as standard.
HYTORC Washer Uncompromised Bolting Efficiency 01670 363 800 • INFO@HYTORC.CO.UK • HYTORC.CO.UK S A L E S • R E N TA L • S E R V I C E • T R A I N I N G
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
91
92
PLANT & EQUIPMENT
I
t is a common misconception that the Victorians built their railways on engineering principles that were way in excess of what was actually needed. This may have been true for the grandest of bridges or tunnels, but it was certainly not always the case for cuttings and embankments. Many of these earthworks exhibit weaknesses, and instances of bank slips and landslides occur from time to time. The tragedy at Carmont last year only emphasised how fragile some of the UK’s rail infrastructure is. Climate change and weather extremes have not helped and millions of pounds are having to be spent on stabilising the worst locations. Knowing that something is going to fail before it actually does is very much part of modern-day engineering. To achieve that, sensors are needed where vulnerabilities exist to detect movement or abnormal conditions. A range of equipment is available for different kinds of foreseen problems. But that is almost the easy bit; retrieving and acting upon the information provided on a near-continuous real-time basis is essential, otherwise the insight will be valueless. Real-time means switching from traditional data loggers - with the need to sift through gigabytes of historic data - to smart sensors communicating ‘live’ using hybridised edge computing to know what is right and wrong, and when to cry for help. One company that believes it has a system that provides a consistent means of overcoming this challenge is Iridium, in conjunction with rail partner Radio Data Networks (RDN). Rail Engineer recently spoke with them to learn all about it.
Company backgrounds
THE
challenges monitoring OF
CLIVE KESSELL
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
Most people will remember Motorola - an American company that was at the forefront of mobile radio development. Iridium, the satellite communications company, was born of Motorola, but, due to a number of flawed assumptions and impatient Motorola investment, the company went under, only to be bought out of bankruptcy by a group of investors and has since risen from the ashes. Whilst still offering a satellite-based mobile radio product, it has ventured into the world of infrastructure monitoring. With an HQ near Washington DC, it now has operational centres around the world, with the UK base being close to Stansted Airport. Infrastructure monitoring is big business and the company has connected up one million devices worldwide. The directors of RDN have been behind several highly-acclaimed innovations in the rail industry, from the development of real-time rail temperature monitoring system back in 2000 through to hot box detection. UK based, operating from their own innovation centre a few miles from Iridium’s European HQ, RDN’s past experience was instrumental in their successful rapid design and deployment of the apparatus used in 2018 for Iridium’s trials with Network Rail’s North West Region as part of an innovation project.
PLANT & EQUIPMENT
System architecture The measurement and interconnection chain is relatively simple. Firstly, you need a sensor. This will vary according to what is to be monitored, ranging from earth movements, temperature, flooding, bridge scour and track position to even more routine things such as the detection of copper theft. Many of these sensors will be in remote locations where landline provision or even mobile radio coverage may be nonexistent. With the latter being subject to a constant state of flux as cellular operators advance their system to a higher G number, it makes justifying long-term investment in cellularbased equipment questionable due to the everpresent problem of obsolescence. From the sensor, a local radio link connects the data to a collection point, noting that there may be more than one sensor in the area. The ‘collection point’ is deliberately nothing more than an inconspicuous grey GRP box. Tucked within it is the Iridium modem - formerly known as the Iridium Remote Telemetry Unit (RTU) - a cigarette packet size unit which is the gateway element that connects to a satellite link. This unit has been engineered to be lightweight and easy
to carry, with a universal bracket to enable pole, post, rockface or OLE stanchion mounting. Being an ultra-low power device, the RTU’s internal controller provides sensor communications control and a smart adaptive Artificial Intelligence, enabling the elimination of the need for mains power or a solar panel, but still giving months, years or even decades of service. Data is transmitted and then downloaded from the satellite into Iridium’s control centre in Arizona, from where it is delivered typically over a virtual private network (VPN) link to the customer’s operational centre.
(Above) Earthworks require increasing attention and investment. (Inset) A flooding sensor being attached to the rail foot.
Component parts There are many manufacturers of sensors, depending on the type of monitoring that is required. RDN have spent the last decade pioneering smart ultra-low power devices; many of them are highly applicable to the challenges faced by the rail industry and range from flooding to geostructural movement. Iridium is, however, agnostic to these and has a working relationship with many sensor companies in case something different is required. In one of RDN’s applications, the link from the sensor to the ‘grey box’ is provided through RDN’s national private Ofcom-licensed data channels. This is already proven in the utility sector and used by the likes of the Environment Agency for flooding and other critical risks. RDN can create private networks ranging from a few metres to several kilometres and are legally protected. This then enables the Iridium uplink to be shared amongst a number of distributed sensors.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
93
94
PLANT & EQUIPMENT The Iridium solution is to have 66 satellites in a Low Earth Orbit (LEO) approximately 800km above ground level. These are meshed together with full resilience and redundancy, meaning that if one satellite fails, there will be others that can intercept the signal. These satellites are constantly moving so don’t suffer from low-angle measurements. Since, at some point, the angle will be low, it has been found that even a sensor in a tunnel will give a signal once there is a direct line of sight between the tunnel entrance and the satellite. Iridium’s L-band spectrum based devices are proven to be weather independent. Iridium is the only LEO network provider of this type and has a unique satellite network.
(Right) A traction return current monitor. (Below) Inside Iridium's 'gateway' box.
Having established the connectivity, the data flow needs to be considered. Most sensors are looking for change, rather than an absolute measurement. Thus, when considering earthworks, it may only be necessary to transmit a reading every 24 hours. Similarly, if measuring a river flow, the sensor would be set within a range of flow rates considered to be normal and only if the flow increases beyond these limits would more frequent readings be transmitted. A river in full flood might receive sensor signals every few minutes.
Understanding satellite communication
A schematic overview of the system.
Most people have heard of satellites with geostationary orbits approximately 36,000km above the earth’s surface, in a fixed location above the equator from where communication takes place. It might be thought that this would be the ideal scenario for sensor monitoring, but there are disadvantages. If the user device does not have a direct line of sight to the satellite or the path is a low angle, changes in topography can cause the signal to be lost. Also, if the sensor is moved to another location even close by, the signal can be affected.
The cost question Whilst all this sounds good, it comes down to cost if organisations are going to use the system. In broad terms, a typical price of £5K per site can be used for budgeting purposes. This includes the acquisition of the sensor(s), the facilitation with Radio Data Networks of the local VHF link (including the ‘grey box’), the provision of the satellite modem plus one year’s satellite air time and the setting up of the VPN link back to the customer’s control centre. Around the world there are in excess of 1.5M subscribers. Several thousand are in use within the UK, mainly with the utility companies. There are several railways with devices, but mention is made of Canada where Iridium Certus communications terminals are being used to support connectivity for the PTC (Positive Train Control) project. Network Rail is also continuing to show interest. Thanks to Alan Briggs in Scotland and Jordan Hassin in the USA for the interview and for providing the visuals accompanying this article.
Satellites
Sensor
Gateway
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
Ground Station
Data Centre
Iridium Connected® Intelligent Railway Solutions Only the Iridium® satellite network offers truly global, weather resilient connectivity that keeps you connected and on track
Remote Track Sensors Positive Train Control
Preventative Maintenance
Proactive Incident Management
www.iridium.com/rail
96
PHOTO: COLD SNOW STORM
FEATURE
net-zero T THE DRIVE FOR
he UK has committed to reduce carbon emissions to net-zero by 2050 and rail travel will play a significant role on that journey. Decarbonisation is high on the industry’s agenda and although 2050 is a generation away, any decisions made today will have a direct impact on the UK’s ability to meet its target in the most cost-effective way. The abandonment of the rail franchising system, technological progress and the declining costs of renewables mean that green power can now be coupled with innovation and investment. In some respects, franchising acted as a barrier to innovation, with Train Operating Companies (TOCs) reluctant to make longterm investments because of relatively short-term contracts.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
Bridging the gap Electrification will play an important role in decarbonisation, but progress is slow and the government continues to have concerns around cost. So what other solutions can be implemented? Driver Advisory Systems (DAS) are recognised as a means of optimising the performance of trains to reduce energy
consumption. There are many systems on the market, but their varying degrees of sophistication affect the level of optimisation. DAS has evolved significantly over the years, with a distinction between connected (C-DAS) systems and standalone (S-DAS). The latter is less sophisticated, working only on the pre-planned timetable; the advice it gives might therefore not be useful if, for some reason, the train’s planned path is unavailable. Drivers’ situational awareness is limited to the process of driving their own train. They are able to perceive the state of their train and the track ahead within their vision. They know how this information affects the train so they can decide how to apply engine power and brakes in order to reach a certain speed and deliver a smooth, comfortable ride. However, train drivers lack situational awareness about the traffic situation. This is true even with a stand-alone DAS fitted, due to the fact that S-DAS runs off static information, meaning train drivers’ only sources of input are predefined timetables and signal states. Based on this,
FEATURE they can only assume that everything is running according to plan. As soon as the situation deviates - which is a regular occurrence on a complex and dynamic network - drivers make decisions based on out-of-date information and their driving becomes suboptimal.
A complete picture
PHOTO: MARIO GUTI
Connected Driver Advisory Systems (C-DAS) allow train drivers to gain a complete picture of current conditions, understanding changes in the traffic situation and operational plans due to the system’s real-time data feeds and constant recalculation of the driving profile, taking into consideration the external elements affecting the train’s route. Thus, drivers’ situational awareness is more comprehensive and they can therefore adapt to an optimal driving profile. KeTech has designed an award-winning C-DAS, developed through dialogue with both drivers and operators to identify the real requirements needed to deliver success. Digitising the whole
From product benefits to the installation of C-DAS, this versatile system helps us towards reduced carbon emissions in more ways than one. It can be especially environmentally beneficial for trains relying on friction brakes - such as freight - due to the energy-saving speed profiles that seek to minimise energy loss through braking; in turn, maintenance savings will be made as a result of reduced brake wear and tear. More money spent on retrofitting means less money spent on energy: investment rather than consumption. KeTech’s C-DAS is scalable and modular; it has been designed for flexible deployment. It can be delivered as an integrated system; it can be displayed on an iPad, smartphone or existing hardware in the cab. It is not off-the-shelf; the software offers a myriad of personalisation possibilities. KeTech created the system with retrofitting in mind, to repurpose perfectly good hardware, minimise installation time and save money.
network so that the system will know the track layouts, gradients, linespeeds, speed restrictions, curvature, electrified lines, junction details, platform numbers and lengths, and level crossings is not an easy job. Infrastructure sources for the UK’s railway are disjointed; this meant KeTech had a challenge on its hands. The company pulled together disparate information to create a secret database of the network. Its software architects and train simulation expert joined forces to understand train characteristics and craft the algorithms to integrate the real-time data. This is all essential to create a truly situationallyaware system that is as dynamic as the railway. KeTech’s C-DAS provides specific driving advice, indicating recommended speed and advice about braking or coasting. Ensuring the right balance of detail in the advice is crucial to avoid additional mental workload for drivers.
Overcoming obstacles When KeTech presents C-DAS, it is often met with the question “doesn’t it need to sit under a Traffic Management System?” Not if you design it right and make it future-proof. The ultimate goal is for C-DAS to sit under a TMS so that the replanning of train movements can be immediately interpreted for advisory system displays. But the rollout of TMS is some way off and will not be fully deployed in the UK for many years; however, when it is available, KeTech’s C-DAS will seamlessly switch from non-TMS to TMS routes. KeTech has created a system that allows collaboration between human and algorithm, giving drivers important guidance towards a more effective way of driving and ultimately a greener railway, driven by data. Implementing C-DAS will further help us reach the goal of zero carbon by 2050 whilst improving passenger confidence.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
97
98
IN MEMORIAM
David Bickell All the team here at Rail Media were saddened to learn of the passing of Rail Engineer writer David Bickell on 8 June. Living in Kings Langley when he was growing up, David was a railway enthusiast from an early age and, after taking his A-levels in 1968, he joined British Rail as a student engineer. He undertook a work-based training programme covering all aspects of signalling and telecoms. He held various roles after training, working in the design office at Nottingham and supervisor at Derby and Euston. He became an instructor at the Derby training centre before moving to be the chief instructor at the Crewe training centre. David obtained funding to improve the facility, and both he and his instructors took part in the major 1985 Crewe resignalling scheme. Other roles held by David included being the signal area maintenance engineer in Kent and regional signal maintenance engineer at Liverpool Street and York. During this time, his responsibilities involved the management of general safety regimes - including SPAD mitigation - and chair of signal sighting committees. Following railway privatisation, he was part of the Railtrack signalling network development team in Anglia and, in 1996, he became the standards engineer control systems at Railtrack headquarters. Prior to his retirement in 2005, David was signal standards and assurance engineer for Network Rail, managing the company’s portfolio of signal engineering standards and sitting on the RSSB Group Standards signalling sub-committee. He then became a visiting lecturer on railway signalling at Sheffield Hallam University and, since 2013, David had written for Rail Engineer on many signalling projects and activities. He had an excellent knowledge of railway signalling principles and was always generous in providing help and feedback to his colleagues. Those who worked alongside him from the early part of his career remember being impressed with the speed David quickly disconnected part of the signalling system when a freight train ‘came off the road’ at Derby North. What he didn’t know about geographical interlocking signalling technology was not worth knowing. He married Sheila in 2006 and had one stepdaughter. Beyond railways, David’s interests included tramways, canals and rambling old railway lines. He had a substantial and fully-signalled model railway.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
1949 - 2021
THE UK’S LEADING MEDIA GROUP DEDICATED TO THE RAIL INDUSTRY
Connecting the UK rail industry for 24 years.
www.rail-media.com
100
RAILTEX / INFRARAIL
THE RETURN OF
Railtex and Infrarail
F
ollowing a challenging period brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic, the rail industry is now targeting a determined recovery. Successful rail events will play a major role in kick-starting business activity and reconnecting the key
decision makers with their peers.
Railtex and Infrarail, which have both served the rail market for over 20 years, are back in what is being billed as the ‘ultimate show for the UK rail industry’. The exhibition will offer a brand-new programme of activity, held in partnership with supporting organisations old and new. A new feature from RIA is the Unlocking Innovation (UI) Zone, which will be a daily programme focusing on new ideas and thinking that could benefit the railway, its passengers and the economy. There will also be a new UI Showcase stand, where discussions can be held with presenters from important organisations such as Network Rail, RIDC, Tier 1, HS2, regional authorities, UKRRIN and Innovate UK. Also organised by RIA will be the returning Future Focus Conference - three-day, free-to-attend, high level, strategic conference covering topics for the whole industry supply chain, with political and industry leaders presenting on UK rail’s strategic direction.
More products, services and live demonstrations By combining Railtex - the premier exhibition of railway equipment, systems and services - and Infrarail - the leading showcase for every aspect of railway infrastructure technology and expertise - the event will be the perfect platform for companies, covering every aspect of the railway industry and its associated disciplines.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
Never before has there been an opportunity to see so many different products, services and innovations under one roof at a UK rail exhibition as there will be at Railtex/Infrarail 2021. From track, rolling stock, and infrastructure to plant, machinery and civil engineering, there will be something for everyone involved in rail in any capacity. Exhibitors will be able to grab the attention of attendees by hosting their own live demonstration of products, either at their stand or at the dedicated track display area. For more information, including the latest list of exhibitors please visit www.uk-railhub.com.
15th International Exhibition of Railway Equipment, Systems & Services
13th International Railway Infrastructure Exhibition
7 - 9 SEPTEMBER 2021 NEC, Birmingham
Let’s get back on track Joining forces to shape the future of UK rail Companies serving all aspects of the infrastructure and rolling stock sectors will be showcasing their technologies and innovations, covering over 180 categories of products and services from the following:
• Passenger and freight rolling stock
• Track and infrastructure
• Fare collection technology and products
• On-board comfort • Passenger information • Signalling and train control
More than just an exhibition! Strong conference programme with 40+ speakers across two conference streams (CPD accredited)
On–Track display & Plant and Machinery exhibits
Matchmaking
Recruitment wall
NEW
First Time Exhibitor Zone
systems and equipment
REGISTER NOW!
www.uk-railhub.com
Organiser:
NEW
102
RAILTEX / INFRARAIL
We are experts in rail recruitment and are celebrating 25 years of helping people get jobs HALL 12
Advanced Resource Managers (ARM)
range of skillsets for this very niche sector. Buzzing with activity, there are many job opportunities in rail right now. ARM is proud to work with a wide range of businesses across a number of sub-sectors within rail and infrastructure. It supplies talented professionals to customers who work in multiple disciplines and have delivered complex assignments for some of the industry’s leading specialist companies, including client organisations, design consultancies, cost engineers and contractors, based both in the UK and around the world. With a strong reputation in these markets, based around delivery of some highly successful packages of work, ARM often sources candidates with extremely hard-to-find skills. This isn’t confined only to the UK either; the international division is fast picking up speed.
Advanced Resource Managers (ARM) works with some of the biggest consultancies, best-known contractors and busiest local authorities in the UK. Considered true experts within the industry, ARM’s rail consultants possess a combined 25 years’ experience and specialise in permanent, contract and fixed term placements across a broad
H60
Sectors in which ARM operates include: » Highways, Traffic & Transportation » Electrification » Civils » Signalling & Telecoms » Systems » Rolling Stock » Commercial & Supply Chain » Utilities » Cyber
Walling, roofing, rail and Erosion control, infrastructure containment and shelter Anderton Concrete
Anderton Concrete has its roots deeply set in traditions, manufacturing excellence and dedication to customer service that have existed for many
HALL 11
N37
years. The company has been manufacturing precast concrete products for over 60 years and, as such, the name Anderton Concrete Products has become synonymous with product quality and deliverability within the rail industry. Anderton Concrete is part of Ibstock plc, a group of companies which manufactures and distributes a wide range of products servicing a breadth of construction needs. The group's product offering ranges from walling, roofing, rail and infrastructure to garden and landscaping, flooring and groundwork, bespoke services and much more.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
Concrete Canvas
Concrete Canvas® (CC) is a flexible, concrete-filled geosynthetic that hardens on hydration to form a thin, durable and waterproof concrete layer. Essentially, it’s Concrete on a Roll™. CC allows concrete construction without the need for plant or mixing equipment: just add water. The speed and ease of installing CC means it is well suited to time-critical
HALL 12
D30
trackside work, reducing line possessions and improving safety. Eliminating issues associated with rebound from shotcrete and the large plant and equipment required for traditional concreting methods means rail works can continue without line closures. CC is BBA certified with a durability in excess of 120 years when used in erosion control applications.
RAILTEX / INFRARAIL
2107 RailEng CPD HS2 advert.pdf 1 03/08/2021 16:35:17
Subscribe to our free publications at www.railsubs.com C
M
Y
CM
MY
CY
CMY
K
www.rail-media.com
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
103
104
RAILTEX / INFRARAIL
The comfort factor HALL 12
Ballyclare
Ballyclare has been keeping railway workers safe and comfortable for over 100 years, with a solid reputation as a designer, manufacturer and supplier of highquality rail workwear and highly technical protective clothing. The company’s comprehensive range of products provides solutions for on-track and lineside workers in a wide variety of roles. The arc protection multi-hazard collection combines modern styling and outstanding levels of flame resistance, as well as arc, weld and anti-static protection. Included in the range are polo shirts,
Responsive design enGauged Ltd
enGauged Limited is a bespoke, fast-moving civil and structural engineering design and consultancy business which provides support for organisations working across a range of rail projects all across the UK. Our emphasis is on providing design with build in mind, delivering comprehensive and fully developed designs. We help UK rail organisations meet demanding civil and structural engineering objectives – designing everything from lineside civil
HALL 12
It reflects the company’s commitment to sustainability, as the garments are largely manufactured from recycled polyester materials recovered from plastic bottles. They also offer a high degree of recyclability at the end of their working life, ensuring their environmental footprint is minimal whilst offering the quality and ruggedness which are Ballyclare hallmarks. Supplying Network Rail with its only approved range of PPE clothing, Ballyclare is committed to innovation through ongoing efforts to provide increased comfort and ever-greater protection to ensure wearers can trust in their protective clothing.
Analysis and Operation of Rail Traction Systems K51
projects to station platforms, footbridges and depots. From feasibility through to construction, striving to provide the best environmental options that are sustainable, with consideration to health and safety by design. As an agile business we are flexible and responsive, with our MD involved at all stages. We are well-positioned to react swiftly to support our clients with the unexpected, such as shifting delivery dates, or changes to a project’s specification.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
sweatshirts, trousers and coveralls. The waterproof garments in the range made from the technically advanced Gore-Tex Pyrad® fabric - offer a far more lightweight and comfortable solution than bulky, traditional waterproof, arc flash clothing. With the added benefit of reliable and breathable waterproofing, plus some of the highest arc flash ratings available in modern PPE, the range meets the changing demands of today’s rail industry. A new PPE ECO range has been designed by Ballyclare, in partnership with Network Rail and end-users.
E11
ETAP Automation Ltd
HALL 11
R11
ETAP® is a global market and technology leader in modelling, design, analysis, optimisation, monitoring, control and automation software for electrical power systems. The company has been powering success for over 35 years by providing the most comprehensive and widelyused enterprise solution for generation, transmission, distribution, industrial, transportation and low-voltage power systems. Its mission is to provide state-of-the-art products and superior engineering services by combining advanced technologies with the highest standard in quality to achieve overall customer satisfaction.
106
RAILTEX / INFRARAIL
From Witches Hats to trough and cess walkways Hird Rail Development/ Trough-Tec Systems
HALL 12
G11
Hird Rail Development are suppliers of insulated rail joint repair kits, cold bolt expansion tooling and coated insulated rail joints. We will be showcasing our increased height anti-trespass panels (Witches Hats) and alarm system.
Trough-Tec Systems supply Green Trough, an innovative cable management system available in six different sizes and manufactured from recycled polymer. The latest addition to the range is TTS Walkway, the ideal product of choice where a combined cable trough and cess walkway is required.
Safer access Kwik-Step Ltd
The Kwik-Step Modular Stairway System is designed for permanent or temporary installation, achieving radical savings in time and cost compared with conventional
Communication, information and rail technologies KeTech
KeTech is building a reputation as the UK’s leading provider of truly real-time information across both stations and trains to raise the standard of customer experience and enhance operational efficiency and decarbonisation. Our mission is simple - to redefine the standard of excellent customer experience whilst simultaneously filling the gaps with innovative futureproof systems on the journey towards a greener, digital railway. KeTech specialises in converting data into intelligence; our systems capture millions of data points and present information to the user in real-time and in a format
HALL 11
N41
that’s meaningful, helping them to make better informed decisions. The outcome is award-winning Connected Driver Advisory Systems and intelligent journey information through managed cloud-based systems.
Our Vision, Your Visibility HALL 12
E56
methods of construction. The sections of galvanised steel treadplate are pinned directly into the slope, minimising groundwork and avoiding the need for foundations. The Kwik-Step galvanised steel platform can be installed using adjustable frame supports or screw piles. Supplied flat-packed, every component can be manually handled safely and assembled on site with hand tools. Fibre-reinforced polymer platforms provide a light and non-conductive alternative to the galvanised steel platforms, and include refuges and lookout posts for use at hazardous locations on the rail network.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
Leo Workwear Ltd
HALL 12
D47
Leo Workwear are the high visibility clothing partners you need to keep your workforce safe, seen and protected on the railway. Fulfil your sustainability goals with our 22 (and growing) EcoViz® range of products. All garments made from recycled or sustainable fabrics, significantly reducing the energy and CO2 produced in the manufacturing process. By buying quality products that last longer, with more durable components that can withstand more washes, they can be replaced less frequently. Enable your workforce to do their job safely with over 80 garments meeting the RIS-3279-TOM standard, meaning you can protect anyone in your workforce with Leo Workwear. We have the largest and most innovative women’s high visibility range, including the first stocked maternity range and the only stocked conforming modesty tunic. So, if you’re looking for a progressive, environmentally conscious partner with 40 years of expertise in everything high visibility, speak to Leo Workwear today.
+44(0)3300 578450 +44(0)3300 578450
Better Informed Decisions
KeTech Group
ketech
KetechSystems
+44(0)3300 578450
info@KeTech.com
info@KeTech.com KeTech.com
info@K
KeTech.co
108
RAILTEX / INFRARAIL
Worldwide presence HALL 12
Mechan
Mechan are world industry leaders in the design and manufacture of lifting and handling equipment for rail depots and workshops,
offering a wide range of products to clients worldwide including lifting jacks, equipment drops and bespoke traversers.
MPI has been supplying the rail industry with competent and experienced personnel since 1989. We have a successful track record of working with signalling, civils, telecommunications and construction companies, as
the likes of Siemens, Hitachi, Network Rail, Bombardier and Alstom. An open and friendly work environment promotes ideas generation and a sense of responsibility among staff which is reflected in the high level of customer service enjoyed by clients large and small. In March 2017, Mechan started a new chapter, joining French infrastructure group CIM - which operates in 120 countries - adding its expertise to a portfolio of services that includes railway infrastructure supply and construction projects. This has accelerated international development and exports now play a much larger role in the firm’s order book.
Innovative power system testing solutions
Find a new way in recruitment MPI Ltd
The Sheffield-based manufacturer combines traditional engineering skills with innovative design and the latest technology to drive the development of equipment that epitomises its commitment to quality, safety and reliability. With half a century’s engineering experience, Mechan enjoys an unrivalled reputation at home and overseas, and has supplied high profile UK projects such as the Intercity Express Programme, Thameslink and Crossrail. Thanks to its attention to detail and aftersales care, Mechan enjoys excellent links with depot operators and train builders, working regularly with
D31
HALL 12
D61
well as train operators, rolling stock manufacturers and maintenance depots to support them to supplement their workforce across the UK. Our infrastructure experience includes civils teams, S&T (all grades), construction support and many other grades. Our rolling stock experience includes new build, commissioning, warranty, modification, exams, overhaul, refurbishment, livery, HVAC, door systems and bogies. Our impressive client base includes the biggest providers in the rail sector. We win contracts on the strength of our delivery and client service, investing time and money in people.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
Omicron Electronics UK Ltd
OMICRON is an international company serving the electrical power industry with innovative testing and diagnostic solutions. The application of OMICRON products allows users to assess the condition of the primary and secondary equipment on their systems with complete confidence. Services offered in the areas of consulting, commissioning, testing, diagnosis and training make the product range complete. Customers in more than 160 countries rely on the company’s ability to supply leading-edge technology of excellent quality. Service centres on all continents provide a broad base of
HALL 12
G48
knowledge and extraordinary customer support. All of this, together with our strong network of sales partners, is what has made our company a market leader in the electrical power industry.
All products manufactured in the UK
£
Full range of cost effective solutions available
Anderton has an unrivalled reputation for manufacturing market-leading rail and structural precast concrete products. From troughing to signal bases, cable theft deterrents to ballast and king boards, Anderton has the solution. Along with our bespoke concrete offering, we’re the go-to provider of quality concrete products for the rail industry. Call 0333 234 3434 or visit www.andertonconcrete.co.uk
110
RAILTEX / INFRARAIL
Driver Risk Management By the industry, for the industry
RED TRAINING
HALL 11
P04
RISQS
RISQS is the Railway Industry Supplier Qualification Scheme, giving the industry’s circa 90 buyer members the assurance to do business with confidence with circa 4,000 supplier members. The scheme provides suppliers with an open, fair and transparent way for them
HALL 12
G10
to be formally recognised as capable providers of products and services to the GB rail market. Suppliers can be audited once via RISQS for their capabilities, avoiding the need for them to be subjected to multiple, duplicate auditing from different buyers.
Integrated safety, control and automation systems We have more than 35 years’ experience in driver risk management and are passionate about creating cost-effective, no-nonsense training solutions for our clients whether they are SMEs, not-forprofit or large multi-national organisations. We are a fully accredited DVSA (Driver and Vehicles Standards Agency) fleet training provider. We train our own trainers for corporate and
fleet training work, ensuring that our high standards of quality are applied consistently throughout the UK.
Our approach works All practical and classroom training can be delivered at the client’s location but our specialist training centre at Donington Park is equipped to deliver highly engaging driver workshops, specialist training, off-road training and licence acquisition. We also offer a number of JAUPT and DVSA approved CPC training courses – many of which can be delivered online. Managing your drivers and vehicles though our comprehensive Driver Risk Management e-platform will result in demonstrable savings as well as ensuring legal compliance.
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
SELLA CONTROLS Ltd
We are supplier of safety critical and control solutions to the global rail industry. As a specialist integrator, we have 45+ years’ experience in the provision of mobile and infrastructure solutions using a suite of in-house-developed and industry-approved products. Using our Tracklink product suite in tandem with industryrecognised product partners, we provide innovative and cost-effective, reliable control and safety systems. We provide complete design, engineering, commissioning and support of safety, control and information solutions, certified to the latest international standards.
HALL 12
F39
Our solutions include » automatic selective door opening » overspeed protection » traction power SCADA » SIL4 level crossing controllers » SIL4 depot control » tunnel ventilation SCADA/ BMS » integrated communication management » train rontrol management » emergency power shutdown » on-board train control/data recorders Our global client base includes Network Rail, Transport for London, Metro Trains Melbourne, Great Western Railways and many others.
Let’s get your people to the job SAFELY Driver Risk Management – helping you navigate the risks We are experts in providing specialist risk assessment and training to those who drive in the rail industry. Safer driving to the job brings a range of benefits:
Reduces accidents
Reduces downtime
Reduces vehicle maintenance
Protects your people and your company’s reputation
Reduces insurance costs
See us at RAILTEX/INFRARAIL (Hall 11 Stand P04) Or call us now 01332 810007 Email info@REDtraining.com or visit www.REDtraining.com
112
RAILTEX / INFRARAIL
Cables, cables, cables Tratos UK Ltd
Continued investment in the latest technology, materials and human resources enables Tratos UK Ltd to supply a wide spectrum of specialised railway cables. Fixed trackside power cables include high and medium voltage cables supplying power to substations and switchgear, as well as track feeder and OLE cables. The company supplies fixed trackside communication and
HALL 11
P11
signalling cables including data and telecommunications (copper and fibre optic) together with signalling, power and control cables. Tratos is also a major supplier of rolling stock cables, including inter-car jumpers and pantograph cables. Network Rail has awarded the independent Merseysidebased cable manufacturer a five-year cable supply framework contract.
Emission-free battery traction and charging Vivarail Ltd
HALL 11
P72
Vivarail is a world-leader in emission-free battery traction and charging systems for rail applications. Its products include: » DMU conversions » EMU range extensions » Fast charge » Power storage Today's batteries can achieve ranges of up to 80km and recharge in only ten minutes. Battery technology is mature and Vivarail already has battery and battery hybrid trains fully approved in the UK. Batteries are the easy and cost-effective way to extend the electric network without the need for expensive overhead lines.
Vivarail will showcase its next-generation battery train at COP26, with daily runs out of Glasgow Central. Visit our stand to find out more about our plans for COP26 and our work in decarbonising and achieving Net Zero on the rail network using modern high performance batteries.
The safety premium Zonegreen
Even though the UK boasts one of the safest railways in the world, accidents are an inevitable fact of life. With a combination of high-speed vehicles, high-voltage electricity and powerful machinery, maintenance depots can be hazardous places to work. Help is at hand to mitigate workforce risk in the shape of Zonegreen’s Depot Personnel Protection System (DPPS) - an innovative, automated means of
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
HALL 11
allowing the safe and efficient movement of vehicles in and around maintenance depots. Workers are able to create safe zones in which to operate. Staff log onto DPPS using contactless RFID tags that identify where they are working. The system then prevents any vehicle movements being authorised onto that road until it is clear. In the event that a signal is passed at danger, the vehicle is physically prevented from entering the maintenance shed by a Network Rail-approved derailer. When a train needs to be repositioned, a Designated Person can give permission for the movement using the system’s user-friendly road-end control panels which are placed strategically within the depot - normally next to the doors - giving a clear line of sight to incoming and outgoing activity. Only after the derailer has been lowered will the proceed signal be given. Audible
N02
and visual warnings are simultaneously activated on the road when the derailer is lowered to indicate a train is on the move.
WHAT’S THE COST OF LIVING?
zonegreen safe working solutions
Renowned as global market leaders in depot protection systems, the SMART DPPSTM delivers physical protection from vehicle movements to rail depot staff whilst providing visual and audible warnings. 7 - 9 September 2021 NEC, Birmingham Visit us at Stand N02, Hall 11 www.zonegreen.co.uk Tel: +44 (0)114 230 0822 info@zonegreen.co.uk
114
CAREERS
ALSTOM AND ADVANCE TRS RECRUITING IN THE RAIL INFRASTRUCTURE SECTOR ACROSS THE UK Advance TRS are currently recruiting on behalf of Alstom for projects across the UK with key areas of focus in York, Derby, Birmingham, London and Bristol. If you are looking for your next opportunity and are interested in working on major rail infrastructure upgrades for Alstom with the latest technologies contact our team today.
DESIGN VERIFIERS
LEAD POWER ENGINEERS
LEAD PROJECT MANAGERS
DERBY - BRISTOL - BIRMINGHAM - YORK - HATFIELD
ADVANCE-TRS.COM
01483 361 061 | info@advance-trs.com
way People.com At the heart of UK rail… RailwayPeople.com is the largest dedicated rail job site in the UK. With thousands of job opportunities updated daily, your next career is a fingertip away. Visit RailwayPeople.com to find your next role today.
Tel: +44 (0)1530 816 450
Rail Engineer | Issue 191 | Jul-Aug 2021
@railwaypeople
Values you can trust, a team you can rely on Rail Careers XEIAD As the largest UK provider of Network Rail Structures examinations, we pride ourselves on supporting the end to end management of a range of Civil engineering assets across the rail network with our dedicated team of Engineers, Examiners, Planners and Project Managers. The knowledge that you contribute is critical to the success of the project and the satisfaction to be gained in playing an important role in it should be a key motivator. We have clients that include Network Rail, Transport for London, and many rail industry suppliers. We have ambitious growth plans with a formidable order book, so there has never been a better time to join us on this exciting journey. We support flexible working but may also require travel on occasion within the contract areas.
Nationwide Career Opportunities Competitive Salary Dependant on Qualifications and Experience Due to the successful wins on various contracts throughout the UK, we are currently recruiting for various roles within our Rail division. • Assistant Structures Engineers Nationwide • Bridge Assessment Engineers Derbyshire or London • Senior Structures Engineers Nationwide • Structures Engineers Nationwide • Trainee Examiners South of England • Examiners South of England • Resource Managers Nationwide • Planner / Assistant Planner South West • H&S Manager Rail North
If you would like to work for a national company with a local feel and offer significant development opportunities as well as a huge variety of work, please get in touch.
What we offer… We place great value on our people and the contribution they make to our business, that’s why we aim to offer a competitive benefits package to all of our employees including competitive salary packages, contributory pension scheme, Life Assurance, Private medical insurance and a generous holiday entitlement. In addition we also offer excellent training and development for all our employees making us a great place to work. Fundamental to living our core values is having great people in our business. That’s why we believe that XEIAD is only as great as the people we employ.
Diving I Rope Access I Confined Spaces I UAV/ROV We would also like to hear from: Graduates / Apprentices / HR Assistant / Project Managers / H&S Manager / Civils Contract Manager / Project Engineer (Bridge Assessments) for future opportunities please visit our website for more information or email your application.
xeiad.com
careers@xeiad.com
Specialist Engineers for the management of difficult to access structures
Siemens Mobility is shaping the future of UK rail Helen is committed to increasing the efficiency of our rail network through innovative signalling solutions and driving industry-wide education on sustainable technologies. siemens.co.uk/sustainablemobility