May 2012
i s s u e
91 Reusing the Connaught Tunnel CONNAUGHT TUNNEL TO BE REFURBISHED TO FORM AN ESSENTIAL COMPONENT FOR CROSSRAIL
Northfleet Sidings New business for rail
Working Together, Achieving More
Fuel for thought
The Northfleet reconnection project and a fascinating rail business expansion.
BS11000 is designed to improve collaborative working.
A recent report looks at a whole range of current technologies to achieve fuel economy.
written by rail engineers for rail engineers
available online at www.therailengineer.com
may 2012 | the rail engineer | 3
welcome Grahame Taylor’s
Operating notice This is another bumper issue of the magazine with fourteen articles written by our in-house engineer writers. So I’ll do my best to cram my résumé into these 630 words! I almost bought a new camera recently, so seduced was I by the spectacular advances in imaging technologies. But I resisted. After all, if I wait another year, cameras will be even more impressive. This pattern of relentless progress is replicated in the world of railway telecoms. As Les Giles reports in his debut article for the rail engineer, GSM-R has a successor on the blocks. What to do? Buy a new system or wait for something even better? Peter Stanton shows us that what looked like a simple like-for-like siding connection reinstatement at a desolate Northfleet site was much more complicated than first appeared. And yet this simple connection is vital for the completion of Crossrail and for the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds. But in pole position this week on the front cover is Chris Parker’s wade through a very wet Connaught Tunnel in East London. This cut and cover structure beneath the London docks now has very little “cover”. So little, in fact, that shipping bumping over it had reduced it down to some very thin cast steel plates. Re-use for Crossrail “as is”? Perhaps not! Clive Kessell has been to Brussels to find out about the work of the ERTMS Users’ Group which has the unenviable task of unravelling assorted historical national operating and signalling procedures. Clive also comments about the future of GSM-R, but Michel Ruesen, the Group’s MD, feels that it is best to concentrate on application rather than technology to avoid changing radio hardware. Back in the UK, Clive visited Scotland to see the work involved in solving the Paisley Corridor bottleneck – a massive project that was commissioned over Christmas 2011 under a 120 hour possession.
Nigel Wordsworth’s remit this month has taken him to Austria, into a WWII munitions dump and finishing off with a jaunt down the Hertford Loop via Network Rail HQ. The common thread? Absolutely nothing, it’s just luck of the draw. The Austrian piece is a follow up to his article last month when he visited Siemens’ works in Graz where 4,000 bogies come off the production line every year in all shapes and sizes. The encounter with potential unexploded ordnance was just one of the snags encountered when a new substation was needed at Gatwick Airport, and the Hertford Loop foray gives us an insight into what is happening next with ERTMS. His interview with James Dean, Network Rail Director of Track Asset Management, explains how they are saving £1billion in CP4. Mungo Stacy has delved into Bayesian Processing to produce Posterior Models. All clear? It will be in the context of his piece on the capabilities of a group formed from the merger of a number of familiar company names. In his interview with Professor Sam Luke of SKM, he touches not only on strategic asset management, but also on cutting edge bridge design. A quick quote from Collin Carr’s article this month. “If you are not sure what BS11000 is all about.......you would be wise to get onto Google now”. But help is at hand. Collin has given us a clear account of the role of BS11000 in bringing about Network Rail’s “behavioural change”. When it comes to railway workshops it is easy to confuse “legacy” with “baggage”. Crewe has plenty of legacy and this has not helped it compete in the 21st century. But as Terry Whitley tells us, Crewe’s baggage has been well and truly dispatched and the depot now has a secure future... in the future. And I’ve written a piece on loco and DMU fuel economy – but I’ve run out of space here....
Editor Grahame Taylor grahame.taylor@therailengineer.com
the rail engineer Ashby House, Bath Street, Ashby-de-la-Zouch Leicestershire, LE65 2FH
Production and design Adam O'Connor adam@rail-media.com
Telephone: Fax: Email: Website:
Engineering writers chris.parker@therailengineer.com clive.kessell@therailengineer.com collin.carr@therailengineer.com david.shirres@therailengineer.com graeme.bickerdike@therailengineer.com mungo.stacy@therailengineer.com peter.stanton@therailengineer.com steve.bissell@therailengineer.com stuart.marsh@therailengineer.com stuart.rackley@therailengineer.com terry.whitley@therailengineer.com Advertising Asif Ahmed asif@rail-media.com Nigel Wordsworth nigel@rail-media.com Paul Curtis pc@rail-media.com
01530 56 00 31 01530 41 21 66 hello@rail-media.com www.therailengineer.com
Editorial copy Email: news@rail-media.com Free controlled circulation Email: subscribe@rail-media.com
in this issue
Reusing the Connaught Tunnel 6 The Connaught Tunnel is to be refurbished to form an essential component of Crossrail. New Business for Northfleet The Northfleet reconnection project.
10
New circuits and old bombs 14 UK Power Networks Services upgrade the circuit breakers in an electricity substation at Gatwick.
BS11000 - Working Together, Achieving More 20 Collin Carr speaks with Network Rail’s Head of Contracting Strategy, Neill Carruthers. ‘Fuel for thought’ 22 A recent report looks at a whole range of current technologies to achieve fuel economy. Shunter Safety: The industry’s hidden concern 28 Shunter safety still remains a serious concern across the board in the rail industry.
Track Maintenance - maintaining savings 40 Nigel Wordsworth speaks with James Dean, Network Rail’s Director of Track Asset Management. ERTMS - The steer to Future Success 44 ‘Interoperability for rail traffic to cross borders seamlessly has yet to be fully proven,’ reports Clive Kessell from the ERTMS Users Group.
The small print the rail engineer is published by RailStaff Publications Limited and printed by Pensord. © All rights reserved. No part of this magazine may be reproduced in any form without the prior written permission of the copyright owners.
forthcoming
features
Sister publication of Safety Systems; Plant & Equipment Stations; Surveying
June July
4 | the rail engineer | may 2012
news
CROSSRAIL
IN BRIEF
Crossrail heads for Heathrow
With Infrarail 2012 just about to start as this issue of the rail engineer is published, dates are already available for Railtex 2013. Next year’s national rail exhibition will take place at Earls Court 2 from 30 April to 2 May. Railtex 2013 will be the 11th in a highly successful series of trade shows covering railway equipment, systems and services which have firmly established Railtex as the UK’s leading rail industry event. Plans are still being made, but the rail engineer should again be involved, presenting a series of informative seminars and keynote speeches on every aspect of railway engineering.
Recycled bricks Modifying any listed building can be problematic. However, plans to renew the canopies and remove part of the redundant spine wall at Kirkgate station have been granted Listed Building consent by Wakefield District Council planning committee. Network Rail is funding approximately £1.5m of work on the station with a contribution from the Railway Heritage Trust. Bricks which are removed from the spine wall will be cleaned and reused in the supporting wall for the new ramp.
PHOTO: JONATHAN WEBB
Railtex 2013
Work has begun on the Stockley Interchange in west London which will allow Crossrail services to operate to and from Heathrow. Network Rail, on behalf of Crossrail, will build a new single track viaduct for all trains from Heathrow towards London. Work is due to complete in 2017. Existing train services to Heathrow will continue to run throughout. The current junction at Stockley is used by Heathrow Connect in both directions and Heathrow Express in the London direction. The viaduct will start on the western side of the existing airport lines and cross over all of the
tracks in the railway corridor, turning eastwards and continuing on the northern side of the railway tracks. The viaduct will then widen and a junction for Crossrail and Heathrow Express services will be installed. This junction will allow Heathrow Express services to cross above the slow lines and descend to main line track as at present. Crossrail services will remain on the northern side, descend on a second ramp and run on a dedicated track which will then connect with the existing up slow line via a new junction constructed just before Hayes and Harlington station.
STATIONS
Stansted in 30 Phil Verster, Network Rail route managing director, said: “Our team is already on site completing preparatory works and will press ahead with the full scheme immediately.”
Three new depots Although the contract to build the new IEP trains had still not been signed, Hitachi appointed EC Harris, the global built asset consultancy, to assist with the delivery of three Inter City Express Depots. These will be constructed on the Great Western Mainline between Swansea and London Paddington at London North Pole, Bristol Stoke Gifford and Swansea Maliphant. EC Harris will provide project, commercial and risk management services to ensure the scheme is completed on time and within the agreed budget. The new depots are planned to be built over the next three years.
London Stansted Airport launched its “Stansted in 30” campaign to urge the rail industry and Government to invest to cut journey times on Stansted Express trains to and from the capital to 30 minutes. It currently takes 45 minutes to cover the 35 miles between the airport and London Liverpool Street. The airport authority claims that reducing journey times between the airport and London will boost Stansted’s ability to compete and bring significant benefits to communities up and down the line. Stansted’s Managing Director, Nick Barton, said: “I’m very proud that nearly 49% of our passengers already use public transport to get to and from the airport - the highest of any major UK airport. But we can’t maintain or build on this success without major rail investment, which has to be included in the Government’s policy
announcement this summer.” Colin Stanbridge, Chief Executive at London Chamber of Commerce and Industry commented: “Better and faster rail access to London’s airports such as Stansted creates the connectivity our international trading partners in European and
emerging markets require to do business in London. With the Government keen to see more inward investment and increased exports, slashing journey times to London’s airports is vital to boosting growth and productivity in London and the UK as a whole”.
may 2012 | the rail engineer | 5
news
INFRASTRUCTURE
HS2 design to start Despite all the rumbling from the inhabitants of southern England, HS2 continues to plan for the future. Atkins has been awarded the contract to prepare the preliminary designs for the two high-speed running lines through the Country South section - a 91km stretch covering Buckinghamshire, Oxfordshire and Northamptonshire. The contract is worth £13.3 million and includes the design work for the Colne Valley Viaduct, the twin bore tunnels under the Chilterns and a range of new ‘green’ tunnels (which are specifically designed to blend in with the surroundings). David Tonkin, Atkins’ UK chief executive officer, said: “HS2 is an
important step towards providing the UK with the world-leading infrastructure and additional rail capacity needed to deliver sustainable economic growth. “As well as designing a high-quality, cost efficient railway, we have to be very aware of how we minimise the impact the construction and operation of the line could have on the communities through which it will travel, and we will work closely with HS2 Ltd, rail systems designers, environmentalists and land referencing companies in order to achieve this.” Work will start immediately and will be completed to coincide with the introduction of the HS2 hybrid bill to Parliament by the end of 2013.
Benefit from the natural solution
DESIGN
The UK’s largest planning and design consultancy, Barton Willmore, has been appointed to advise a French government agency planning a new Paris orbital railway. The project run by Société du Grand Paris (SGP) features 58 new stations and more than 100 miles of railway track in a loop around the French capital in a bid to boost the economy by linking some of the most remote parts of the city. Barton Willmore International is leading the creation of a design code to guide the architecture of the project’s five maintenance sites, which are located in very different parts of the city. The consultancy is challenged with helping to ensure the new sites are in keeping with their local
Advice for Paris Orbital surroundings, which range from agricultural land to heavily populated urban areas, while still keeping a consistent identity. The project will run for six months and, once the design code is complete, the practice could go on to advise SGP on selecting architects to design the maintenance sites and ensuring their work complies with the code both in design and construction. Nick Sweet, Partner at Barton Willmore’s London office said: “Our focus is on taking a sensitive approach to the socio-economic context of each area, working closely with all local stakeholders.”
Together on a 7 day railway Railcare makes this possible, providing efficient Railvac vacuum excavator services within the following areas: • • • • •
Enhancements Maintenance Renewals Buildings and civils Powers, Telecom and Signalling
LLP
www.railcareexport.com
6 | the rail engineer | may 2012
feature
writer
Chris Parker
Reusing the
Connaught Tunnel contract C315 is very unusual for C rossrail a major new transport scheme such as Crossrail. It doesn’t involve major new works, like the other parts of this project, rather it is nearly all about the refurbishment of Victorian infrastructure dating back over 130 years. Connaught Tunnel is situated on the former North Woolwich branch of the North London railway and runs under the Royal Docks. It is to be refurbished to form an essential component of the Crossrail Abbey Wood branch, the re-use of existing infrastructure being rightly seen as a positive move. Given the complexity of the task as it is now understood, it would be interesting to see how the costs work out in the end compared with the likely cost of a new tunnel.
Back in time
The Royal Docks sit directly above the Connaught Tunnel.
Let’s get back to the history of the structure before delving deeper into the current project. The original North London line branch to North Woolwich arrived in East London in the middle of the nineteenth century and, amongst other uses, served the developing docks that became the Royal Docks. These docks became a challenge to the railway’s existence, because they were a huge success and needed ever more room to expand. This expansion led to the creation of three huge new docks between 1855 and 1921, the Royal Albert, Royal Victoria and King George V docks, creating what was then the world’s largest enclosed dock system. The railway crossed the line of the new docks between the Victoria and Albert basins. Originally, a swing bridge was planned to allow a navigation channel under it, to
enable ships to travel between the docks. This idea rapidly became unacceptable because the shipping traffic grew so much that the railway would have been continually interrupted by the need to open the bridge for ships. In consequence, it was decided to re-route the line through a new tunnel beneath the dock channel instead, and this became Connaught Tunnel. It was constructed by cut and cover, lined in brick and it opened in 1878. It was about one kilometre long, with a central twin bore section about 550 metres in length and single, twin track bores at either end. Approach cuttings were built at each end, with brick retaining walls and brick arch struts overhead at regular intervals along them. A brick arch invert ran throughout the cuttings as well as the tunnel sections, and the whole was drained by means of six foot drains. These drains ran to the bottom of a pump shaft
situated to the north of the docks and to the east of the tunnel. An unusual hexagonal pump house was built in brick at the head of the shaft to house the pumps and associated equipment. Continuing expansion of shipping movements at the London docks caused further problems however. By 1935, the size, and more importantly the draft, of ships had increased to the extent that the extrados of the tunnel arch was being struck by them, with damage caused to both. To stop this, it was necessary to deepen the docks, and in particular to lower the tunnel profile. To this end some 100m of each of the single bore tunnel sections was reconstructed to a smaller gauge. This was still adequate to allow clearance for the trains then in use, but left the tunnel sufficiently reduced in height to permit the required deeper draft in the docks above.
may 2012 | the rail engineer | 7
feature
Early use of steel The reconstruction of the tunnel was achieved by quite unusual means as it involved the use of cast steel linings. Cast iron is commonplace in such tunnelling applications, but not, at that time, cast steel. Furthermore, the bolted, egg shaped linings were welded to one and other, presumably to ensure that they were watertight. After this, the tunnel had a fairly uneventful life until World War II, when it was badly damaged by bombing in September 1940. This necessitated a repair roughly 10 metres long by 5 metres high in the upper tunnel haunch on the east side of the arch in the section north of the docks. This repair is still readily apparent today. In the 1960s, the advent of containerisation and the poor industrial relations in the docks led to a rapid decline in trade in the Royal Docks. The waterways are now used for water sports and exhibitions rather than shipping. The tunnel finally ceased to carry rail traffic in 2006, when that section of the North London Line was taken out of use.
Going forward Crossrail contract 315 takes over all of this history with the aim of turning it into twenty-first century rail infrastructure. The site lies between the proposed Custom House Station and the North Woolwich portal of the intended Thames tunnel. About half is in tunnel and the remainder in cutting or above ground. Led by Project Manager Linda Miller, who has over 20 years experience with Bechtel, the Crossrail contract team has a complex job to deal with. This goes beyond what will be apparent from the history already described as, in addition to all that, there is London City Airport to the south east of the site, with an apron having fuel bunkers below it over part of the tunnel. The Excel exhibition centre is close by to the west, alongside the docks, and the docks themselves play host to internationally significant water events such as the London Boat Show.
The principal contractor on the team is Vinci UK’s civil engineering division, Taylor Woodrow, whose team is led by Project Manager Richard Wall-Morris. Linda and Richard between them are managing works on the surface, in the tunnel and underwater.
Investigations Because of the WWII bombing of the area, one of the first tasks was to carry out a survey to check for unexploded ordnance (UXO). This was assisted by the existence of records from the bomb spotters who, during the war, tried to keep track of where bombs had fallen and plot them on maps of the city. These gave some clues as to where bombs were most likely to be found, but it was still necessary to survey the site thoroughly using modern techniques. An armoured truck was supplied by Fugro and operated by EOD Contracts, and it probed the site with a 35mm diameter magnetic probe to a depth of 8m. The probe has a 3m range of sensitivity and was deployed in a grid pattern to ensure full site coverage. All areas of permanent or temporary intrusive work had to be checked. Fortunately no UXOs were discovered. Another task that started early was the archaeological exploration of those areas considered to be of interest. This investigation involved the archaeological excavation of four sites on the contract as it is now known that there was significant prehistory to the site. A Roman road ran through the area of the railway route, and that is believed to have been constructed on the line of a prehistoric pathway. Three of these digs have been completed but the fourth has been interrupted by the discovery of a 60kV buried cable.
The removal of silt was critical to a second form of surveying that was employed in the water. A specially equipped boat, “The Galloper”, owned and operated by the Port of London Authority (PLA), carried out underwater sonar surveying of the
In the central twin bore section, the single bores at the end are clearly evident.
STRUCTURAL PRECAST FOR RAILWAYS
• Bridge Deck Construction • Station Platforms • Bespoke Units
Heavy silt Divers supplied by Abwood removed silt from the dock floor and carried out engineering surveys of the underwater area of the site. Given the location, it is perhaps not surprising to hear that the “silt” that was removed included a number of submerged cars!
MOORE CONCRETE PRODUCTS LTD Caherty House, 41 Woodside Rd, Ballymena BT42 4QH N.I. T. 028 2565 2566 F. 028 2565 8480 E. info@moore-concrete.com
www.moore-concrete.com
8 | the rail engineer | may 2012
The brick inverts in the tunnel and the cutting will be removed.
channel above the tunnel. The “Multi-beam” system fitted to the boat deploys an array of 512 ultrasonic beams, giving coverage of the entire underwater zone from horizontally to port through vertically below to horizontally to starboard of the boat. Scanning in this way, as the boat travels along, gives the data to build up a complete picture of the underwater zone surveyed. This method revealed that the cover to the tunnel was substantially less than previously thought, in some cases being as little as 250mm. In addition, the dock floor was shown to be far more badly damaged than expected.
Revised plans
‘The drainage is going to be quite a job in itself’.
These survey findings led to the conclusion that the risk of catastrophic inundation of the tunnel was high, and the method of reconstructing and enlarging the tunnel needed to be reconsidered. Crossrail had intended to strengthen the central tunnel section by removing the steel linings and backfilling the tunnel bores with foamed concrete. They would then have bored through the infilled section to create new tunnels of the required larger cross section to accommodate the Crossrail trains. That method was considered to be excessively risky given the conditions found by the survey. After consultation and discussion, a new methodology was agreed, whereby the tunnel will be exposed from above for the first time since its original construction in
feature
the 1870s. This will be achieved by construction of two cofferdams, one each side of the tunnel, across the 30 metres wide by 9 metres deep dock channel above. These will seal out the water of the docks each side, enabling the space between to be de-watered and kept dry. The old tunnels below will be removed by excavation within the space between the cofferdams, and the required larger tunnels will be built in their place. Thus, in the end, the tunnels will be renewed by the same cut and cover method as was used in their original construction. Since there are two swing bridges over the dock channel today, one for pedestrians, the other the A112, conditions for the work will be quite challenging. That stage of the works will not be starting for some time, however. Obviously the cofferdams will preclude any boat movements between the Victoria and Royal Albert docks. This has important implications for a number of stakeholders in the docks area, in that it would interfere with events involving boats and water sports, for example. Crossrail has consulted about this with the Royal Docks Management Authority and other stakeholders, and has agreed not to start these works until after the 2013 London Boat Show and to complete the work and remove the cofferdams within 6 months of commencing.
As well as improving the gauge of the constricted centre section of the tunnel in this way, it is equally necessary to improve the remainder of the tunnel and the cuttings on either approach. A proper repair to the bomb damaged section of tunnel is part of this work, as is the provision of the extra clearance required by the new trains. At one time it was thought that the clearance work would include removing the brick arch struts from the cutting retaining walls. However, it was decided that it would be preferable to keep these, gaining the extra headroom needed by lowering the inverts in both the tunnel and cutting instead. The drainage needed improving for a modern, intensively used railway in any case, so it was always the intention to replace the old six foot drain with a modern alternative. Invert lowering was thus not going to add to the drainage task.
Too much water However, improving the drainage is going to be quite a job in itself. There are two aquifers separated by a clay layer in the strata above the tunnel, and the upper one is heavily charged with water. The ground is very wet around the structure, and the head of water is quite high. Specialist subcontractor WJ Groundwater is in the process of lowering the
may 2012 | the rail engineer | 9
feature
groundwater levels under and around the site by pumping, but, despite that, things are still quite wet in the tunnel in places. The final solution involves Bachy-Soletanche grouting the ground around the tunnel using the “tube a manchette” technique to reduce the head and cut off as much as possible of the inflow. Any remaining water ingress will be dealt with by a new drainage system. The drainage pump shaft is to be deepened by some seven metres to a final depth of 25 metres by installing a segmental concrete extension beneath the existing structure. The brick shaft will be cleaned and repaired, and modern pumping equipment will be installed. Water will drain to the base of the shaft through a new tunnel and cutting drainage system, connected to the shaft by micro-tunnelling. Ground improvement is required in many areas of the site as much of the area is a swamp, according to Linda. Improvement is being achieved by installing “controlled modulus columns”, a displacement technique that is an alternative to piling and which is cheaper, quicker and produces less spoil than methods. This work is • traditional • • •
being undertaken by Ménard, who will be installing some 3,000 columns. The technique is particularly attractive to neighbours of the site due to its low levels of noise and vibration, and the vibration reduction makes it friendlier to nearby utility infrastructure.
Safeguarding structures All of the brick structures that will be retained are to be cleaned to remove the soot and dirt of years, and will be repaired where necessary to bring them up to prime condition for their new lease of life. The potential for disturbing the tunnel and approach cuttings is high, given the groundwater lowering and invert removal, for example. Consequently, the project team is monitoring the structures constantly by means of automated systems that will trigger alarms if significant movements are detected. Included are automatic total stations at regular intervals through the site, each monitoring a series of targets placed around the structures at appropriate points. The pretty little Victorian Head House is to be removed from the top of the shaft, since ••it is too small to •• accommodate •• • the
equipment required for the new system. It will not be lost to posterity though. It is to be removed carefully in a way that will allow its re-erection elsewhere, and is to be donated to Newham Borough. Linda Miller understands that they intend to pass it on to the SS Robin Trust, an organisation seeking to preserve the ship “SS Robin” in a berth in the Royal Docks. The ship is one of the oldest surviving steamships in the world, and was built in East London. The pump house may form a ticket office at the quayside beside the restored ship if the Trust succeeds with its aims. Other works include demolitions, particularly the removal of the old Silvertown Station which has been redundant since the old rail line closed in 2006. Cast in-situ concrete parapet walls along the tops of the retaining walls to the approach cuttings have to be removed and replaced with new equivalents, as they are not considered adequate for modern needs in structural or aesthetic terms. In all, this is a fascinating and complex project, and it is easy to understand why Linda Miller particularly asked to be appointed to run this job.
New Brochure now available
Keyline has all the right connections to offer solutions for your rail project through a rail compliant delivery service Contact the Keyline National Rail Office on 0844 892 2677 or email rail@keyline.co.uk
www.keyline.co.uk TRACKSIDE
TUNNELLING
Registered
PLATFORMS
STATIONS
TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT
TRANSPORT LINKS
SITE SAFETY JB65086 01/12
10 | the rail engineer | may 2012
feature
New Business for Northfleet writer
Peter Stanton tall chimneys that marked the T hepresence of the huge cement works at
The cement works prior to demolition.
Northfleet were a major feature of the North Kent skyline for many years. As the largest cement producing plant in the UK, the works was historically also a major rail customer until its original connection and merry-go-round system fell out of use in the early 1990s. Fuel (in the form of coal) and gypsum came in by the trainload, and cement ran out around the country. This was a major industrial site providing employment for many people. Following closure of the works in 2008, and demolition of the iconic chimneys on 28 March 2010, the site became a flat and empty landscape surrounded by chalk faces and the river Thames. One or two buildings remained, forming a cement import terminal. There was a dock area, some limited activity, and a strangely isolated office block in the middle of all the emptiness. That office block, however, was to become the hub of a project organisation that would produce new railway infrastructure and new business for rail, marking a major regeneration of the site. There would also be great environmental benefits and a gain for British wildlife.
New use The site is owned by Lafarge Cement UK, which has recognised the potential for alternative future uses for their former manufacturing site. Crossrail is ready to start its tunnel boring machines to commence the core work of that huge infrastructure project, but some time ago realised that there would need to be an effective way of disposing of the waste material. Coupled to this, the Royal Society for the Protection of
Birds (RSPB) realised that there was a fantastic opportunity to work with a major construction project to provide enhanced habitats for the feathered population of the Thames and the South-East. Together we have the Northfleet Reconnection Project, and a fascinating rail business expansion. Crossrail has, of course, a high political profile. Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, officially started the first tunnel boring machine in March 2012 and the Northfleet facility had to be, and was, available to receive trains by then. Lafarge has leased part of their site to Crossrail Limited, which has enabled them to fund the design and construction work associated with the reconnection of the Northfleet cement sidings to the national network. The private sidings will initially be used as the destination for trains carrying material excavated from the Crossrail tunnel bores. This will be temporarily stockpiled before being transferred to barges for onward shipment along the Thames for use in the RSPB Wallasea Island Wild Coast project. Five train paths in each direction per day from April 2012 have been timetabled to transport the excavated material from the tunnel portal at Westbourne Park for the duration of the tunnelling works. Crossrail is
also considering other uses for the Northfleet sidings in support of the tunnel construction operation. Following completion of Crossrail tunnel construction, the sidings will revert back to Lafarge which has a long term plan for the ship-based importation and rail distribution of aggregates to London and the South East, in support of their existing cement import terminal.
Preparation and planning A Third Party / Asset Protection agreement was put in place between Lafarge and Network Rail, and the project was given investment authority to cover Network Rail costs. Lafarge elected to project manage the works itself, and appointed Balfour Beatty Rail as their main contractor for the delivery of all stages of the proposed works. Main sub-contractors were Parsons Brinckerhoff, Birse Rail and Signalling Solutions Ltd. The Network Rail project teams came from the Core Crossrail Project Management unit and the South Eastern Asset Protection Team. Other contractors involved were Railway Electrical Services of Ilkeston, K T Price and Chunnel Group. Rail consultancy services were provided to the Lafarge in-house project manager by Robert Skene
may 2012 | the rail engineer | 11
feature Consulting, which developed the Lafarge outline brief to establish the initial outline design for the project. The total cost of the connection and sidings was approximately £13 million and the target completion date of 1 February 2012 for completion of physical works and commissioning was achieved. The scope of the project affecting Network Rail infrastructure was the installation of a new crossover and turnout on the North Kent lines to the west of Northfleet station and all associated points heating, third rail, signalling and telecommunications. The installation was complicated by the need to undertake a Solid State Interlocking boundary change in order to create enough capacity on the Northfleet interlocking to accommodate the reinstated connection. Engineering access to infrastructure in this area is limited due to the intensity of the North Kent commuter services, the proximity of Springhead Junction (used by HS1 services between St Pancras and Faversham) and the need to preserve access into Hoo Junction sidings for engineering trains. Any possession over-runs would have a significant impact in terms of minutes delay.
In detail The detailed works included the installation of the crossover and turnout to give access to the new railway being built within the site. These main line works included the erection of one new signal and the addition of a feather on an existing mainline signal. There was considerable
work required on signalling and signalling control systems as functionality had to be transferred from one interlocking to another to allow it to be installed within one adjacent interlocking. Coupled to this were the need for telecommunications work, civil engineering for structure works and considerable electrification and plant tasks on power supplies, traction contact system arrangements and switch heating. This was all undertaken on a very busy railway with quite limited access and a high risk of massive disruption to peak hour London commuting services. Senior Project Manager for Network Rail, Richard Anderson, reviewed the project and pointed out that much of its success grew from effective project management control, maintained through the project, aided by close co-operation between the units and companies undertaking the work. Effective application of the T-minus process, the
continuous update of the project action/issues list and weekly telephone conferences between the project team, contractor and subcontractors to align communication and update progress all contributed to the delivery. The works themselves involved considerable co-operation between the various railway engineering and operating functions and showed that, while to an outsider it might have seemed a simple addition of a siding connection, it was in fact a very complex process!
Installing the new access.
12 | the rail engineer | may 2012
feature The multi-functional challenge was met with the participation of several contractors and consultants while Network Rail took a project management role assisted by both Southern Asset Protection and Crossrail project management. Lafarge appointed Balfour Beatty Rail as main contractor. In turn, the signal engineering work was subcontracted to Signalling Solutions Ltd and Invensys. Telecommunications work was undertaken by both Parsons Brinckerhoff and the Network Rail direct labour delivery unit. Electric traction engineering was dealt with by Sonic Rail Services.
Work continues
‘ ... a model of partnership project delivery.’
Completed - on time.
Reconnection The connection is on the site of the old rail access to the cement works. However, one of the first challenges was that standards have changed considerably since the original connection was designed and installed in the late 1960s and therefore, despite the connection being almost like for like, several standards compliance issues had to be tackled. In adition, the connection was being made after the line had been re-signalled and no passive provision for the new siding was available. The site effectively fell on the edge of two interlocking boundaries, and neither of these had the capacity to take the new infrastructure on board. The interlocking inventories therefore had to be re-arranged to allow the new connection to be incorporated onto one interlocking. Thus the project was faced with considerable design work in both the signalling and telecommunication fields, together with the human factor protocols at the Ashford control centre.
Form B designs were developed over the summer of 2011 and phase one of the construction took place during two full weekend possessions in September 2011. Track works for the junction and the crossover were installed, together with the electric traction equipment and the signalling structural aspects. Novel to the area was the installation of in-bearer clamp locks on the main line pointwork. Signalling and telecommunications design then continued, whilst Balfour Beatty Rail moved on with the provision of the infrastructure to allow access to the old cement works site where the train offloading facilities would be provided. Arrival and departure loops were installed, with bollard lighting to define safe walking routes. These loops feed the private line down to the two sidings and runround facilities at the quayside. The second and final construction phase of the project was scheduled to take place in the next available possession in January 2012 and so, in preparation, the newly installed trackwork was clipped up and detected. On the 21 January this final phase commenced with the major signalling work getting underway, including the provision of
new signalling power supplies to feed the junction equipment. A continuous possession from Saturday night to the Monday morning was successfully completed, with the railway being reopened to traffic on time and the access to the new terminal ready for use. Nigel Rees, who project managed the works on behalf of Lafarge, believes the excellent working relationships established between the client, designers, contractors, Network Rail and Crossrail created a model of partnership project delivery which was key to its safe and successful completion on time and within budget. He also pointed out that the reinstatement of the rail link marks a major stage in the regeneration of the site and welcomed Crossrail as its first user following the end of cement manufacture. The infrastructure now sits completed, ready for the official opening and the arrival of the first train of excavated material. The birds at Wallasea are waiting for that as well.
14 | the rail engineer | may 2012
feature writer
Nigel
Wordsworth
and old bombs Unpleasant surprises found during trial excavations.
projects seem to have a habit of R ailchanging over time. A seemingly simple project can alter almost beyond recognition before it is completed, often adding both time and cost in the process. This is often caused by the problem of dealing with aging Victorian infrastructure which yields unpleasant secrets as work progresses. However, at Gatwick Airport recently, the cause was quite different. UK Power Networks Services (UKPN Services) had a contract to upgrade the circuit breakers in the electricity substation. This formed part of the preparations for the new 12-car Thameslink trains that were due to commence running in December 2011. An uncomplicated job, and quite routine. Then, Network Rail decided to add a new platform at Gatwick Airport to ease congestion and improve passenger flow. Again, no real problem, except the new track alignment would go slap-bang through the electricity substation.
New substation There was nothing for it but to build a new one. UKPN Services, as the contractor on site, were asked to design and build a complete new substation to replace the existing one which would then be demolished to make room for the revised track layout. Again, this was, on the face of it, an unremarkable project. None of the old equipment would be reused as it was obsolete. So a completely new installation was planned a few hundred yards away. It could be built and fitted out without interrupting railway operations, and when complete the supply would be switched over. “Simples” - to quote a well-known television character. Work commenced in April 2011. As the location for the new substation compound was a prime site, it was decided at the outset
to strip the entire compound area, grade, install a geotechnical membrane to prevent vegetation growth, and then add a hardcore layer to establish a good working level.
Unexpected delay However (that’s the second “However” in this project), in August 2011, when hand digging some trial holes at the northern extremity of the site, the team came across what looked like an unexploded hand grenade. Shortly after that, a land mine and a further grenade were discovered, all approximately 1 metre below the surface. Naturally, work stopped on site and the bomb disposal squad was called in. The Gatwick Airport Authority was contacted and a 15 minute suspension of plane operations was planned to enable the items found to be detonated in a controlled manner. Further research revealed that some of the work area was used as a munitions dump after World War Two and that a lot of items had been disposed of as part of the decommissioning process. Apparently, it is not unusual when undertaking such controlled detonations that some of the munitions can be driven below the surface without exploding.
A decision was made to engage an ordinance expert on site full time. Zetica Limited was appointed, trial slots were dug by hand in all areas of the civil works, and ground-penetrating radar scans made at various levels to ensure it was safe to continue. In total a further six items were discovered and were disposed of but no further controlled explosions were necessary and the ordinance expert took control of the removal and disposal of the various objects as they were found. As the ground was littered with buried metal of all sorts, both detritus from the old railway sidings as well the remains of the ordinance depot, it was impractical to clear the site entirely. Instead, care was taken and
may 2012 | the rail engineer | 15
feature
the munitions expert monitored the whole process continuously. All this delayed construction by a week, but there was still plenty of work for the team to do on site so the overall effect was negligible. UKPN Services Project Manager David Blakeley commented that civils partner BP Howard “did a really good job” in getting the programme back on schedule.
Low lift When those civils works were complete, the new equipment could be delivered. This was delivered to site by lorry, and arrangements were made to have it lifted off by crane. However (that’s “However” number three!), the site is directly under the Gatwick Airport flight path. The height of the crane jibs was restricted, and even then permission had to be obtained from the Gatwick Airport Authority for the lifts to take place. Once the AC and DC modules, both 4MW transformers and the allied smaller transformers and busbars were installed, then connection to the railway could begin. The substation has a 33kV AC supply, and the cables for this also had to be moved away from the new railway alignment. The 750DC output is split into nine separate circuits, each with two positive output cables and two negative returns. These 36
aluminium feeder cables, each 58mm in diameter, totalled ten kilometres of new cable installation. They were run out during night-time possessions and left near the tracks. Connection was made over two weekend possessions in November, with five circuits being connected on the first weekend and the remaining four on the second. As each circuit was connected up, the corresponding feed from the old substation was removed and everything tested for performance and safety. UKPN Services staff worked closely with cable installation contractors SRS to make sure everything went smoothly.
Clean-up Once everything was up and running, the old substation was decommissioned, the equipment taken away for scrap, and the site levelled. It was then handed over to Network Rail for them to build the new platform and track. Zetica’s ordinance expert went with it he is still working on the site. So, despite the delay caused by the bomb scare and the complication of the three “Howevers”, the whole installation was handed over on time. Network Rail’s project manager Jim Buchanan was very satisfied with the way it had all gone and commented that the project was a “showroom that all contractors should aspire to achieve in terms of quality, layout and
future maintainability”. Barry Dilks, UKPN Services projects director, was equally complimentary. “This project perfectly demonstrates our ability to work in a collaborative manner, not only with our client but numerous interface parties. Network Rail’s project management worked well with our people under Howard Blakeley (site manager) and Carl Smith (electrical site supervisor) as a combined team to deliver a high quality result, within an agreed budget and to the timescales laid down at the outset. This ‘Can Do Will Do’ attitude shows what collaborative working can achieve and they make me very proud.” The only loser was Network Rail’s project accountant, who had to foot the bill for the unexploded ordinance investigation. Maybe he can claim off the Ministry of Defence?
Work continues apace.
‘Showroom finish’.
16 | the rail engineer | may 2012
feature
SKM - Profile:
much should it cost to maintain the H ow railway? This question is exercising the
Sam Luke.
(Below) Calder Viaduct.
industry and government in the current Periodic Review which will determine the level of public funding for the railways over the next five years. SKM have been assisting Network Rail with their work on strategic asset management. the rail engineer talked to Sam Luke, SKM’s technical director for rail and bridges, to find out about the scientific basis behind the headline numbers.
This section of SKM’s business was formed by the acquisition of Mouchel’s rail engineering assets in October 2011. We report on the group’s capabilities in advanced composites, research and development and multi-disciplinary design, and how this fits with SKM’s global operations.
Global business Sinclair Knight Merz has its origins in Australia where it retains a strong base. Since being formed in 1964, it has grown steadily and now operates worldwide. With over 6,500 staff at 40 offices, SKM’s total revenues increased by 10% in 2010/11 to 1.2 billion Australian dollars or around £780 million. Over 65 mergers and acquisitions in the last 15 years have given SKM its current position as a leading projects firm with global capability in strategic consulting, engineering and project delivery. The Mouchel rail engineering business was one such takeover. Another familiar name in the UK is Colin Buchanan and Partners, which merged with SKM in June 2011. Professor Sam Luke is SKM’s technical director for rail and bridges. Luke was one of the four senior team directors responsible for integrating the Mouchel team into SKM. He says, “The transfer went smoothly. We have co-located all our staff, so now former Mouchel, Colin Buchanan and SKM staff sit together as one team in our office at London Bridge. We did the same with a co-located team at Salford Quays in the North West”. Luke is now interested in capitalising on the benefits of the acquisition. “SKM wanted to increase their rail capability in the UK and also leverage into international operations. The former Mouchel rail business brought strength and depth of project delivery in the UK with over 140 experienced staff. Colin Buchanan and Partners brought front-end skills including
writer
Mungo Stacy
economic appraisal and transport modelling. Together, SKM can now offer a one-stop delivery service in the rail sector.” The UK rail and bridges team sits within SKM’s Buildings and Infrastructure group. This is one of four groups targeted at market sectors, which also include mining and metals, power and energy, water and environment. Luke has just returned from a three-week trip to Australia. “I met senior people from rail and road authorities and presented our capabilities to 16 clients. There are a lot of opportunities out there in addition to our UK work. We’re also expecting to develop business servicing the mining sector and dedicated mineral lines.” “There is a lot of cross-fertilisation between teams, a lot of virtual teaming. To complement the strengths of the existing teams, my rail and bridges team has particular expertise in strategic asset management, advanced composites, large bridge and multidisciplinary design.”
Strategic Asset Management Asset management was one of the eight key areas investigated by Sir Roy McNulty’s Rail Value for Money Study. Recommendations included developing a high level framework for asset management. The study’s methodology included a ”should-cost” exercise. SKM have an ongoing £1 million civil engineering strategic cost modelling project with Network Rail looking at just these issues. The work started in October 2010 and is due to complete by the end of this year. It involves developing life cycle and deterioration models to predict the investment needed to maintain Network Rail’s civil engineering assets. Luke says, “A key achievement has been to apply a Bayesian process to develop a predictive asset model”. This allows the vast
may 2012 | the rail engineer | 17
feature volume of data within Network Rail’s asset database, including some 60,000 bridge spans and 100,000 earthworks, to be interpreted sensibly. In statistical terms, a prior model is formed using available data including the global asset inventory, condition data, deterioration rates and average historic intervention costs. A subset of assets is chosen and studied in detail by hand, considering examination reports, detailed cost estimates, intervention profiles and alternative policy definitions. The heart of the model is a Bayesian processor, a statistical method for probability forecasting, which takes the results of the detailed studies and applies their findings to the prior output, producing a “posterior model”. This posterior model effectively applies the learning from the subset of detailed studies to the whole database. A web-based decision-support tool allows users to interrogate the results of the modelling exercise in detail as well as applying the effects of different policies. Different policies can be applied to different groups of assets such as primary routes or freight-only lines. The relative effect of these policies can then be evaluated; for example, the difference between maintaining assets against an ultra-reliable high performance level, compared with maintaining to achieve lowest whole life cost, compared with intervening only when required to maintain an acceptable level for continued safe railway operation. Luke adds, “We have been involved in this and similar work for over 15 years”. Whilst the acronyms change, the intent is the same. “It is CECOST for the current Control Period 5 study. We worked on CECASE for CP4 and SACP for CP3.” The value of the modelling depends on the quality of data. “Compared with 15 years ago, the input data is much better and the effectiveness of the modelling is much more apparent”.
“Reliable asset management models help to inform cost planning, and our work, not just with Network Rail but also London Underground, is developing the essential decision support tools to support this process.” Luke’s Australia visit was enlightening. “They are behind the curve compared with the UK, but I expect they will come under similar pressures to develop this type of framework”.
Advanced Composites Through the acquisition of the Mouchel rail business, SKM is now one of the leaders in the application of plastic composites. The firm boasts a portfolio of over 150 schemes using composites, including 20 for Network Rail. Luke sat on the steering committees for two key publications, the Concrete Society and CIRIA (Concrete Industry Research and Information Association) guides to the use of composites on concrete and metal structures respectively. Recent rail projects include Rhuba Glas bridge and Calder Viaduct. Both of these replaced life-expired timber decks with Fibre-Reinforced Polymer (FRP) units. These lightweight modules enabled the replacements to be carried out using light cranes in a short duration, giving a cheap, cost-effective method. The team were also the designers for the first FRP bridge over the UK motorway network. Erected at Mount Pleasant in Lancashire over the M6, this bridge used FRP units rather than concrete for the deck section. It won a national award for innovation from the Institution for Highways and Transportation. On the other side of the world, SKM designed the carbon-fibre strengthening scheme for 1500 metres of approach viaducts on the West Gate bridge in Melbourne. This is one of the longest and busiest bridges in Australia; originally built to carry 40,000 vehicles a day it now carries four times that number.
“The technology is mature. It is cheap, durable and shown to be effective”, says Luke. “Construction costs for the M6 bridge and the railway decks were comparable to conventional concrete, and much lower if you consider whole life costs”. But there are barriers to wider adoption. “There is conservatism to be overcome. There is still a view that the material is in its infancy. We need continuing focus, the education of designers, clients, teaching on its use at universities.” Luke points to the Airbus A380 double-deck plane, where composites account for a quarter of the structure. “In aerospace and Formula 1, composites are already the order of the day.”
(Top) The new footbridge at Loughborough and Wrexham (below).
18 | the rail engineer | may 2012
feature
disciplinary capabilities are showcased by their work on London Underground depots. SKM are lead designer for Taylor Woodrow’s £44 million project to extend and remodel Ealing
Green Park underground station to install air handling units. The detailed design for the cooling scheme has been carried out by SKM for Morgan Sindall’s £9 million project. The challenge for cooling the tube has always been about how to extract heat from the trains and stations. The Green Park scheme uses boreholes and heat exchangers to pump unwanted heat into the aquifer below the park, the first time this type of installation has been used on London Underground. SKM carried out the complex three-dimensional analysis of heat transfer at the platforms and throughout the cooling system.
Key values
The new bridge at Mount Pleasant. (Below) Heat transfer model for Green Park.
Multidisciplinary design Luke’s background is bridge engineering. “SKM have a global bridge capability with over 100 bridge engineers”. Highlights in the UK include concept design of the centrepiece 400m-long viaduct for the £117 million Croxley Rail Link project. This scheme, awarded government funding in December 2011, will extend the Metropolitan Line to Watford Junction station. Further north, Luke’s team undertook the detailed design for a three-span bridge over 15 railway tracks including the East Coast Main Line. This bridge was installed in January 2012 and forms a critical part of the £30 million White Rose Way Doncaster Southern Gateway improvement scheme. SKM’s multi-
and Upminster depots to accommodate the new Bombardier S7 train fleet. The scope includes modifications to permanent way, traction power, signalling, structures, buildings, M&E and civil engineering. On top of that, SKM are also responsible for human factors considerations, systems engineering and design assurance. The station design portfolio includes prestigious refurbishments of Liverpool Lime Street and Salford Central. SKM have completed 26 Approval in Principal designs for the step-free access-for-all station improvement programme. Work has commenced at
SKM place a real emphasis on sustainability. Going beyond the typical corporate ‘core value’, sustainability is firmly embedded within the company. For example, an ambitious plan to reduce SKM’s own carbon emissions by 30% over three years was achieved last year. With exciting projects, continued growth, ongoing recruitment and environmental credentials, you could be wondering how the share price is performing and whether this would be a sound investment. Indeed, one of SKM’s stated key values is “controlled risk-taking and steady wealth creation”. However, SKM remains an independent company and is employeeowned. So it seems that the only way to join in is to join up.
We are committed to helping our clients achieve. Providing innovation in strategic asset management, advanced composites and multi-disciplinary engineering design are just some of the areas in which we add value to our clients’ businesses.
20 | the rail engineer | may 2012
feature
writer
Collin Carr
BS11000
WORKING TOGETHER, ACHIEVING MORE! McNulty report One of the incentives for Network Rail to embrace BS11000 is Sir Roy McNulty’s “Rail Value for Money” study published in May 2011. This study identified greater collaboration between organisations within the rail industry as one of the means of delivering greater value for passengers and taxpayers. BS11000 will be one of the tools Network Rail is going to use to improve the way it works with its supply base and to deliver better value for money. That is why it is good news to hear that Network Rail has become the first company in the rail industry and the thirteenth nationwide, to gain BS11000 certification. This is a significant achievement in the midst of a programme of wide-ranging changes within Network Rail.
Beginning to deliver
Seeing in the New Year at Finsbury Park Station, with wiring alterations.
recent months, Network Rail has O ver been sending out a clear and consistent message about the “behavioural change” needed to take place within the company in order for it to deliver its objectives. Behavioural change is an interesting concept that is often quite difficult to grasp in the pragmatic world in which we live. However, on 2nd April this year, Network Rail gained the recently established BS11000 certification for “Collaborative Business Relationship Management”. BS11000 is designed to improve collaborative working between client and supplier and it is a major stepping stone in the pursuit of behavioural change within Network Rail and, if adopted correctly, it will have a profound effect on the rail industry’s ability to work more effectively and efficiently.
Formal accreditation was presented to Network Rail on 2nd April, at an event attended by Lord Berkeley and partner organisations from across the rail industry. At this event, Simon Kirby, managing director, infrastructure projects, said: “Network Rail is making big changes that will bring us closer to our customers, make us more efficient and get better value for money to both passengers and taxpayers. Achieving BS11000 shows that these changes are already beginning to deliver in the right way. The BS11000 standard gives us the strategic framework to develop, with our key suppliers, the policies and processes, the culture and behaviours required to establish successful collaborative relations and to drive continual improvement. Maintaining collaborative business relations can only lead to benefits for Network Rail and its suppliers, for the rail industry and for Britain.”
The person responsible for leading the accreditation process for Network Rail is Neill Carruthers, Head of Contracting Strategy, Infrastructure Projects. He explained that, following approval from the Network Rail Board in June 2011, it has been nonstop to achieve accreditation. He emphasised that from the start they received excellent help from Partnership Sourcing Limited (PSL) which is a not-for-profit company set up by the CBI and BIS to help UK companies understand and implement the process of collaborative working.
Supplier partners As part of Network Rail’s partnering strategy for the new projects business, different contracting models of varying degrees of complexity have been developed. The models range from simple outsourcing to full design, build, operate and maintain. The main focus of Network Rail’s supply chain arrangements is currently focussed on the use of the alliance, delivery partner and engaging models, which are each represented across the following four pilot projects: • Crossrail south east section project partner Balfour Beatty Rail Ltd; • Finsbury Park to Alexandra Palace capacity improvement - partner Balfour Beatty Rail Ltd; • Hitchin grade separation - partner HOCHTIEF (UK) Construction Ltd; • Reading station civil engineering works partner BAM Nuttall Ltd.
Gap analysis In order to identify the corporate changes required to enable the principles of BS11000 to be put into practice, Network Rail arranged 2 day workshops for client and supplier. The process used in the workshops was a gap analysis to compare the
may 2012 | the rail engineer | 21
feature requirements of the standard with existing processes in place. This exposed the corporate changes that need to be addressed which in turn generated the Relationship Management Plan (RMP). Neill described it as a very positive experience. Different individual plans were developed for the different projects because the projects were at varying stages of development. Suppliers within a project have different needs and aspirations, so plans had to be developed for each supplier and, in turn, the suppliers had to develop their own RMPs. One of the fundamental principles behind the initiative is for client and suppliers to understand each other’s aspirations at corporate level.
Next steps A fifth project, the Edinburgh to Glasgow Improvement Programme (EGIP) has now been added to the pilot schemes. This project embraces BS11000 principles from the outset in that the RMP is included within the tender documents. The documents set out how the collaboration will work based on experience gained to date, and the bidders will be required to respond with their own views on making the collaborative process effective. So far, Neill is very pleased with the progress that has been made but he is aware of the challenges he and his team have faced and continue to face. As he says, “Delivering a culture change programme within a large organisation like Network Rail is a significant undertaking. Extending this to our dealings with the supply chain and customers is greater still. Our success is testament to the hard work of everyone involved, both at Network Rail and our supply partners.”
Managing change As has been highlighted in previous articles in the rail engineer, Network Rail is currently undergoing significant change. These changes involve a series of reforms which will see fundamental change to the way the company does business. Already, day-to-day maintenance and responsibility for the operation of the railway has been devolved to ten route managing directors. It is their job to work closely with their customers in the train and freight operating companies, ensuring that they are providing an efficient and reliable railway infrastructure for their customers to use. Over the next few months, Network Rail’s new national centre in Milton Keynes will become the home station for more than 3,000 people. Network Rail claims that this new national centre will provide a slimmer but stronger support structure for the routes. Alongside these changes, wide-ranging reforms are being made to the way Network Rail delivers infrastructure projects, including a separate projects business working in collaboration with the supply chain. So, starting this April, Network Rail Infrastructure Projects has begun to align itself with the ten devolved routes as a regionally-based delivery business. By the middle of 2013, the aim is to develop Infrastructure Projects into a subsidiary company which will be part of the Network Rail group. The long-term goal is for Network
Rail Infrastructure Projects to be the leader in providing rail infrastructure solutions in the UK and its success will be built on the strong collaborative relationships developed with suppliers, clients and customers for which BS11000 will provide the strategic framework.
Further training & development Network Rail’s BS11000 programme is already being expanded for the next financial year which will see other major projects added to the initial pilot portfolio of projects. The capital expenditure value of these additional projects will increase the overall value of projects working under BS11000 to almost £3bn. The next phase of the process will also see further training and development within Network Rail as the company investigates the scope for the adoption of BS11000 within other areas of the business. Network Rail has worked with the Railway Industry Association (RIA) as well as Partnership Sourcing Ltd to provide briefings to the company’s supply chain about BS11000 and the benefits of this approach. A number of Network Rail’s strategic partners are currently in the implementation and assessment phases for the standard, offering the opportunity for best practice being shared throughout the industry. Jeremy Candfield, director-general of the Railway Industry Association (RIA) representing the railway supply industry, said: “Getting supply chain relationships right is fundamental to achieving a more efficient railway. RIA has long been supportive of greater collaboration and transformed supply chain behaviours and there is a natural fit between BS11000 and our own Value Improvement Programme initiative in reaching those goals. This announcement is therefore an important step: we welcome it, and we look forward to working with Network Rail in the new framework being put in place today.”
Collaborative working Neill suggested to me that if you were to ask each one of the 3,500 people who work in Infrastructure projects within Network Rail, “What is the meaning of collaborative working?” you would receive many different answers. BS11000 now provides a framework and a focus that everyone can understand. It also offers a platform that will start to change the concept of cultural change from an abstract form into something that can be managed. It’s good news for Network Rail, its supply chain and for the rail industry. However, if you are not sure what BS11000 is all about, hopefully this article helps a little, but you would be wise to get onto Google now since you will need to be quick to catch up with those well placed suppliers who have already participated in the pilot scheme!
New crossover nearing completion, looking south towards Finsbury Park Station. (Below) Platform alterations at Finsbury Park Station.
22 | the rail engineer | may 2012
rolling stock/depots
Fuelfor thought writer
Grahame Taylor use is ever topical. Fuel economy is F uel perhaps less so. Our Leaders’ advice, in the face of the hint of industrial action by tanker drivers, was to exhort us to top up our tanks - in effect to use even more. Nobody suggested that doing fewer miles might help or that the more efficient use of engines could be a good idea. The railway industry has always had an eye on fuel efficiency - not that it was always obvious. Locos idling for hours (allegedly because they wouldn’t re-start), plumes of exhaust smoke out of the old Deltics and fuel tanks filled to overflowing, spraying diesel out on heavily canted track. Despite all of this, there were drives to be more efficient. Take for example the reengining of the HST fleet with the MTU power unit as reported in the rail engineer back in 2008. This was a particularly elegant solution because the rest of the control gear had no idea that it was talking to a new engine! Look too at the Selective Engine Technology of the class 185 DMUs run by First TransPennine Express using technology originating from Siemens.
Technology transfer The railway’s room for manoeuvre is limited. When the Department for Transport commissioned the TRL in partnership with consultants Ricardo to look for fuel saving measures it was the complexity of the present industry, coupled with all the historic baggage, that made life very complicated.
The thrust of the research which has been published recently was to look for technologies from outside of the railway industry and investigate whether there is anything that could be transferred to good effect. The railways use large power units, but these are not just limited to railway applications - far from it. Marine applications come to mind along with mining, generating and off-road heavy haulage. They’ve all developed in their own way and, to some extent, with more freedom to exploit innovations. The report did not limit itself to just the power units but looked also at a whole range of current technologies.
Complications - always complications The reasons to look at fuel efficiency are compelling, if for no other reason because of cost. GB rail used 681 million litres of diesel (that’s 150 million gallons or over half a million tonnes!) in 2009/10 with passenger services using 482 million litres and freight 199 million litres. The proportion of the national network that is serviced by diesel powered trains is high (69%) in comparison with mainland Europe.
But straightaway there are complications. There are over 20 classes of passenger DMU used on the network. This daunting variety can be rationalised, however, by separating out the more recent DMUs which have newer versions of MTU and Cummins engines. These have been designed to be fuel efficient and to comply with more recent emission regulations. The scope for improvement is therefore limited. On the other hand there is a sizeable set of DMUs that have older Cummins and Perkins power units from classes 142 to 166. They differ slightly but there are similarities in engine technology and characteristics that lend them to accept fuel efficiency modifications. The stock of freight locomotives can be similarly rationalised. Although there are still some locomotives that date back to the 1950s, there are not many of them and they cover very few miles. On the other hand, 48% of the freight fleet are class 66 locomotives that cover 87% of all freight miles. So, being the most heavily used unit and consuming significant quantities of fuel, any modifications to the class 66 fleet would have a significant impact on diesel consumption.
may 2012 | the rail engineer | 23
rolling stock/depots
Idling away Having boiled down the fleets to manageable numbers, the next complication was to determine what the units actually do on a daily basis - the typical duty cycle. Whether a unit is coasting, powering acceleration or idling will have a fundamental impact on how much fuel they use. Passenger and freight trains have significantly differing duty cycles. And within the passenger sector, there are variations depending on whether the train is serving a local or intercity route. The former spends more time accelerating than the latter. Unsurprisingly, freight locomotive engines really do spend a large proportion of their time idling and it is here that major fuel savings can be achieved.
The study looked at engines on the market that could be adapted to railway freight use. Counter-intuitively, the marine power units are not a favoured choice. In most cases they have developed from existing land-based units and have specific modifications to deal with seawater cooling - something the railway industry does not need apart from winter journeys through Dawlish Warren perhaps! Of all the comparable engines considered, none performed any better at high loads compared with the baseline class 66 engine - the GM EMD 710 - although NOx and PM emissions would be greatly reduced. However, up to a 20% improvement in fuel efficiency at idle could be obtained.
Shopping list In addition to examining engine substitution, the report looked at a wide range of technologies that could improve rail sector powertrain efficiency. At the risk of producing yet another set of bullet points these were: • Engine enhancements - Gas exchange systems, Combustion systems, Engine friction reduction and lubricants and fuel additives; • Engine parasitic loss reduction through oil pumps, water pumps, compressors and auxiliary alternators, fans, heat exchange arrangements and cooling air flow rate; • Waste heat recovery; • Transmissions and driveline systems -
The GM EMD 710 engine in a Class 66 performs well at high loads.
24 | the rail engineer | may 2012
rolling stock/depots Stringent emissions standards
(Above) A smokey start for an HST power car. (Right) Replacing the original Paxman Valenta with an MTU unit at Brush’s Loughborough factory.
mechanical, hydraulic, infinitely variable; • Hybrid powertrain systems and energy storage; • Additional Efficiency improvements multiple engine stop/start systems, Auxiliary power units, integrated powertrain optimisation systems.
Breathing losses From all the topics raised, the report went on to suggest a range of technology packages that could be considered for the passenger and freight fleet. After rigorous evaluation, two packages were favoured - one for passenger and one for freight. The passenger solution was for a gas exchange system upgrade. This is one of the simplest to apply with the majority of benefits coming from the upgrade in turbo charging technology. Improvements to the engine gas exchange systems will improve efficiency by minimising engine breathing losses with a 3% improvement in fuel efficiency estimated over both the intercity and local duty cycle. The enhancements are relatively simple, but the bespoke nature of the DMU fleet means that there is no ‘one-size-fits-all’ solution. But it is possible to apply the upgrade to all the engines in the group.
VOITH DIWA Rail For 70 years Voith has produced drives for railway vehicles with some 40,000 transmissions sold worldwide. Stemming from a continuing programme of technical development, the DIWA Rail transmission builds on that pedigree. Now, under the Voith philosophy of “Engineered Reliability”, it offers operators: • Improved fuel consumption • Rail-proven and fully-integrated reversing mechanism • Reinforced design to meet the demands of rail applications • Lower weight • Auto-neutral position • Long life and cost-effective overhaul periods • Low maintenance costs • Auto-coasting mode • Fully optimised electronic (VTDC) control. The Voith DIWA Rail transmission is offered both as a new build or retrofit, either as a single unit or as part of a complete DIWA Pack which includes engine, cooler group, cardan shafts and final drives.
Close on the heels of the gas upgrade option is a transmission upgrade. This is already under consideration by the industry. Ever since 1969, the Voith T211 turbotransmission has been used in the majority of DMUs. In fact there are over 10,000 T211 transmissions, or variations of it, in service on trains worldwide. They are efficient above a speed threshold at which the hydrodynamic coupling is locked up, but below this speed there are significant losses. Vehicles that operate at slow speeds or have a local duty cycle rarely achieve the optimum speed. The alternative transmission that is showing significant savings is a mechanical version as offered by the manufacturer Voith and also now by ZF. Exchanging transmissions is a relatively simple modification compared with repowering or engine modifications.
Stop/start For the class 66 freight locomotives, the favoured technology package mainly manages the issue of prolonged idling. It involves the engine being shut down and restarted using a lead acid battery system. The ‘hotel’ loads - that is the heating/airconditioning of the driving cab - would be supplied by a 30kw lightweight diesel generator set. The gas exchange system would also be upgraded by modifying the compressor wheel in the turbo charger and upgrading the charge air cooler and cooling systems. This package is all that is proposed for retrofitting to freight locomotives as there are limited options for improvements to the existing 2-stroke engine of the class 66. But addressing the idling could be highly beneficial as up to 41% of fuel is burnt at idle in the freight duty cycle.
As always, although the engineering is reasonably straightforward, it’s the “other factors” which make life very complicated in the current railway industry doubly so. Many technologies are not viable from an economic standpoint as the payback period makes a return on investment impossible within a franchise period or over the residual life of the asset. Fragmented diesel fleet and vehicle procurement models result in low volume orders with little incentive for investment in R&D from suppliers. Adoption of EU emissions standards (stage IIIB) has made the procurement of new engines, either as part of new rolling stock or for repowering of existing vehicles, unattractive. More stringent emissions standards also, in general, result in reduced efficiency due to the increased parasitic loads placed on the engine predominantly for extra cooling. The standards take no account of what an engine unit achieves within an overall railway system. They just look at emissions per engine. So, a rail engine can haul 2000 tonnes of freight far further and far more efficiently than multiple road engines and yet it gets no ‘credit’. A significant problem in evaluating fuel saving technologies is obtaining an accurate measurement of the fuel consumption before and after the application of the technology. Efforts are being made to develop direct measurements for precise monitoring of rail engines’ fuel consumption but, due to the nature of the fuelling systems in use, there are technical difficulties in achieving this.
Shared conclusions and recommendations The report is positive overall. The key recommendation is that, by working together, the GB rail industry can improve the commercial viability of more fuel efficient technologies and implement better long-term solutions. Owing to the complex nature and age profile of the diesel rail vehicle fleet, the study showed that smaller and more incremental changes applied to a large proportion of the fleet would deliver significantly greater fuel saving benefits than more radical innovations applied to a smaller number of vehicles. This is a light-weight summary of a hefty piece of rail research. The very readable 162 page report (GB Rail Powertrain Efficiency Improvements) can be obtained through the Ricardo web site. The report and its conclusions and recommendations are now in the process of being shared with a range of industry stakeholders including rolling stock leasing companies, train operating companies, fleet maintenance and overhaul firms and rail freight operators.
26 | the rail engineer | may 2012
rolling stock/depots
A rich heritage writer
Terry Whitley Crewe Works to an old railway M ention anorak and it takes them back to the
Wheel’s final assembly.
A bogie from a Croydon tram under the wheel press.
days of steam. To the locomotives that were built when William Stanier was Chief Mechanical Engineer of the London, Midland and Scottish Railway, and the later BR standard classes, the Britannia and Clan passenger engines and the Class 9 2-10-0 freight locomotives. From 1957 onwards, the works built a succession of diesel locomotives concluding with the Class 43 HST power cars. Class 87, 90 and Class 91 electric locos were also built at Crewe. After privatisation, and a succession of new owners, Crewe was taken over by the Canadian engineering company Bombardier in 2001.
A quantum change Notwithstanding its strong and impressive engineering heritage, over the years the Crewe site had begun to lack the efficiency required to meet modern rail standards of quality and cost-effectiveness, not to mention a highly performance-driven privatised UK rail network. Overcapacity and outmoded working practices meant that productivity was low, with on-time delivery averaging just 33%. Equally, both quality and health and safety standards were below par. It was evident that to continue to service railway equipment and maintain the workforce there needed to be a significant change of direction so, in 2009, a new management team was appointed to turn things around. Recognising the latent potential of the site given the right tools and techniques, the new team set about addressing the improvement of processes, productivity and customer service levels. Whenever new ideas which differ from “the norm” are introduced, they have a tendency to be met with resistance. This is
especially true within the rail industry and Bombardier’s Crewe site was no exception. Therefore, the new management worked especially hard on building trust with the employees. They were keen to introduce lean manufacturing processes, but recognised they would have no success if the workforce was not motivated. Therefore, their first task was to ensure the workforce bought into the concept of forward planning and a team ethic of working together. A relationship of mutual trust evolved so that when new tools such as Value Stream Management, 5S Visual Management, problem solving and standardisation were introduced, the workforce quickly adapted to their use.
Heavy overhaul There is no longer any new vehicle construction at Crewe. Instead, Bombardier’s Crewe site underpins the broader Services business in the UK as a market-leading maintenance and overhaul operation providing heavy overhaul services encompassing bogies, wheelsets, engine rafts, traction motors and many other components. The site supports both the internal Bombardier businesses and other customers through an increasing number of external contracts, a reflection of the current level of performance and customer confidence. One of the significant changes introduced under the new management was an annualised hours system of working. A feature of heavy maintenance is that work occurs in
may 2012 | the rail engineer | 27
rolling stock/depots
natural cycles which inevitably bring large fluctuations in workload - the notorious “feast and famine” syndrome. To address the difficulties this brings and to give security to the workforce at Crewe, an annualised hours system provides the facility to flex the labour to efficiently match the fluctuations in demand throughout the year. The flexibility and competence of the workforce is continuously improved through various training programmes. A staff competency board, displayed for ease of reference in the facility, monitors the tasks in which each employee has been trained. The objective is to train the workshop staff in two new areas of work per year. This ensures that all staff become multiskilled so they can perform other work tasks when new work business is won, and is a real change from the past when staff had no flexibility within their skill area even though all had gone through an apprenticeship and become timeserved fitters and electricians.
Employee engagement The reasons behind the efficiency of the Works are immediately apparent on visiting the site. The pride in work shines through at every level of the organisation and at every workstation. The introduction of processes commonly applied in the automotive industry but new to the rail sector, such as the Andon system of problem notification, ensures any production hitches are quickly flagged and dealt with, in an environment that believes that a problem identified and shared is one that is quickly solved. There are around 270 employees on site with an average of 20-25 years service. What is fresh about the site is the degree to which employees are involved in this drive for quality and production improvement. This has been achieved through a process of change and mutual commitment, evidenced by absentee levels which are below industry standards.
and allowing them to build on their skills to create an environment of continual improvement in quality and reliability of their product, has been key in delivering these changes at Crewe Works. Moreover, success has been achieved by challenging and addressing service and quality issues to maintain a sustainable business. As Tony Webb, Bombardier’s Crewe facility general manager, said: “Crewe Works has improved its performance markedly over the last two years. It continues to demonstrate the capability and commitment of our people in consistently delivering high quality products and services, on time and at competitive rates.” Crewe is now a sustainable business with world class quality and delivery performance and a workforce that is prepared to exceed the expectations of a modern railway. And there’s not a steam engine in sight…
(Left to right) Moving a DC motor carcass. Overhauling a pantograph. Repairing a gearbox.
Three in one Quality and efficiency The basic process of rail vehicle overhaul has been the same for years. A vehicle arrives at its home depot, is stripped to the framework and its components are sent to various workshops such as Crewe, which have the expertise solely relating to that component, whether it is an engine, bogie or electrical machine. The component is then assessed for repair, refurbished or replaced with new equipment. At the end of the process it is returned to the depot, ready to do another stint of work back out on the running railway. Whilst the overhaul requirements remain broadly similar, processes and the working culture at Crewe Works have changed dramatically with tangible results. As a result, the business has become more efficient and cost effective while reliability and the quality of finish have improved markedly. Crewe now consistently provides 100% on-time delivery. This in turn means that vehicles can return to passenger service punctually, thereby improving the public performance measure. This 100% delivery record is matched by a high level of quality. The site has attained RISAS and IRIS accreditation as well as ISO Quality, Health & Safety and Environmental standards, and this year the site has been nominated for its fifth consecutive ROSPA gold award.
The works are split into three businesses, housed in three different workshops. These are: • Power/Control - pantograph, vacuum circuit breakers, diesel engines; • Wheels - tyres, axles, gearboxes; • Bogies - brakegear, traction motors, welding, NDT testing. In all the three businesses, production of each working cell is monitored by the use of large ”child” boards. These are displayed prominently to enable staff to be aware of the progress within their individual production zone. Updated regularly by each team leader, they display progress against the following key performance indicators of safety, quality, delivery and cost. From these child boards, information is relayed to the workshop “motherboard” at manager/team leader daily meetings. This enables the management team to be aware of any production difficulties and the tracking of components throughout their journey through the facility ensures planned customer delivery dates are achieved. Over the last two to three years, the facility has delivered more than 2,000 consecutive bogies on time and in excess of 7,500 wheelsets, and is now one of the most efficient service facilities in the country. It also has an excellent safety record, and has won significant new business over the last year. Giving responsibility to staff,
THE NEW MCE ‘LIMPET’ NOT TO BE MOVED LOCKABLE FIXING SYSTEM...
“No drilling required”
rail Infra Stand J01 ...allows staff to take responsibility for, and guarantee their own personal safety whilst working on any type of Rolling Stock. WHICH HAS NOT BEEN POSSIBLE - UNTIL NOW! See our full range of Railway Safety Products for Depot & Trackside use on our website www.mcelectronics.co.uk Or call us for a catalogue on 020 8428 2027
MC Electronics Ltd 61 Grimsdyke Road Hatch End Middx HA5 4PP
T: 020 8428 2027 F: 020 8428 2027 E: mcelectron@aol.com www.mcelectronics.co.uk
28 | the rail engineer | may 2012
rolling stock/depots
writer
Christian Fletcher Technical Director, Zonegreen
Shunter Safety: The industry’s hidden concern
Zonegreen’s Points Convertor on site.
Shunters have a high-risk job.
here is no doubt that the rail industry is a potentially dangerous place to work. After all, there are not many industries that expect employees to deal with high voltage electricity, speeding vehicles, powerful machinery and thousands of members of the public on a daily basis. Because of the obvious dangers, the industry as a whole is very aware of the need for the implementation of highly-tuned systems in order to guarantee the safety of both the public and those employed to keep the UK’s rail infrastructure on track. However, despite this, there are still areas of the industry that remain a dangerous place to work. According to a recent study carried out by the Rail Safety and Standards Board (RSSB) shunter safety still remains a serious concern across the board in the UK rail industry. Shunters, working in both the commercial and freight areas of the industry, are key to ensuring that trains are able to proceed safely from depots or sidings, and are critical to the maintenance and safekeeping of the UK’s rolling stock.
T
Risk and effect Shunters are very much “on the ground” and working in the thick of the action. The RSSB’s report reflected that, and showed that the rates of shunter fatalities and RIDDOR-reportable injuries suggest a significantly higher level of risk than other workforce groups.
According to the study, the average shunter working for a freight operator (FOC) loses 0.7 working days a year as a result of injuries sustained whilst at work, whilst on average a train operator’s shunter was reported to lose around 0.2 days. The occupational health risks that such a job entails are great. Operating heavy manual points, sometimes when standing on an uneven surface or working in poor conditions, could lead to lasting damage to the back, neck or shoulders, which not only causes the employee suffering and lost working days, but could also lead to a more serious accident. Thankfully, these are less common, but the rate of RIDDOR-reportable injuries reported by shunters in 2008 is still nearly twice that of the next highest category, the track worker. RIDDOR-reportable injuries are not something to be taken lightly, and include traumas such as fractures; amputation; dislocation of the shoulder, hip, knee or spine; temporary or permanent loss of sight; penetrating injury or burn to the eye; electrical shock or burn resulting in unconsciousness; resuscitation or the need for 24 hour hospital admittance; heat or cold induced illness resulting in unconsciousness,
resuscitation or the need for 24 hour hospital admittance; unconsciousness caused by asphyxia or any injury that results in workforce lost-time of over three days. Shunters reported a RIDDOR-reportable injury rate of over 20 per 1000 workers per year, compared to only around 7 per 1000 train drivers, and 10 per 1000 track workers. Considering the safety requirements that are put into place across the rail network, that’s significantly higher.
Accidents Research has shown that 25% of the accidents that caused shunters to lose working days were attributed to slips, trips and falls sustained whilst moving between work areas. Of course, part of the shunter’s job can require them to move about in the depot in order to operate hand points and switches. Negotiating rails, ballast, cabling and potential hazards that may be in their way, is an occupational hazard, and whilst shunters still have to move around in the depot, these dangers will remain. Fatalities are also a huge concern. Between 1998 - 2008 there were four reported shunter fatalities, all involving FOC shunters who lost their lives whilst working on the ground.
may 2012 | the rail engineer | 29
rolling stock/depots Although, when related to the injury rate, the fatality rate is comparably low, the fatality risk for a shunter compared to other railway occupations is still startlingly high. According to data taken from an RSSB survey carried out for the 5½ year period between January 2002 and June 2007, the average fatality risk per worker was 1 in 5,200 for a shunter, compared with 1 in 7,500 for a track worker and only 1 in 28,000 for a train driver. Whilst the comparison with the train driver is somewhat more understandable, the disparity in risk between the shunter and the track worker shows the stark reality facing the industry. Something needs to be done in order to improve safety for shunters.
Solving the problem One of the simplest ways to improve safety is to remove individuals from situations that have proved to be the most dangerous. Recent advances in technology now offer the opportunity to reduce the dangers faced by shunters, with the implementation of systems such as Zonegreen’s Points Convertor. The system has been designed to increase safety and efficiency in railway depots and sidings, and allows the automation and remote operation of manually-operated switches and crossings. It can be controlled by an operator from a remote location using a portable or cab-mounted device, removing the need for an individual to have to negotiate difficult terrain, rails or other potential hazards, thus minimising the risk of
-
slips, trips and falls. Such a system allows the shunter to operate the points from a safe distance, thus reducing risk and lowering the accident rate. As well as assisting in the prevention of such accidents, a system such as the Zonegreen Points Convertor also greatly reduces the significant physical strains that shunters face with regards to operating points manually and the lasting damage this can have on the body, particularly the back and neck. In order to change the industry, one of the key considerations is changing the way the people within it think. Understanding the human factor behind accidents can help the industry as a whole go some way to understanding incidents and implementing new products and guidelines to ensure that the same situation needn’t happen again. Technology such as the Points Convertor
from Zonegreen has been developed with the needs of a fast-paced, developing industry in mind and it is clear that, in order to maintain the safety standards that the UK rail industry is proud to uphold, improvements are needed.
Another Points Convertor - newly installed.
Yesterday’s news.
convertor powering your manual points
The Zonegreen Points Convertor is a safe, efficient and reliable solution designed for modern train care facilities. The Convertor allows the automation and remote operation of traditional manual points/switches and rail road crossings. • • •
Enhanced safety by reducing the potential for slips, trips and falls. Increased depot efficiency and speeding up of operations by eliminating stops and starts. Train detection prevents damage to vehicles and infrastructure through operator error.
• • • •
Expandable. Routes can be pre-set, re-configured and upgraded at any time. Traceability. Includes an event logging system to keep a record of the points operation. Low cost. LUL approved.
Find out more at www.zonegreen.co.uk Tel: +44 (0)114 230 0822 Fax: +44 (0)871 872 0349 Email: info@zonegreen.co.uk
30 | the rail engineer | may 2012
rolling stock/depots
Transforming Trojans the Corus steelworks at Port Talbot W hen needed new, more powerful industrial locomotives for its internal rail system, it turned to Corus Northern Engineering Services at Scunthorpe to design and build them. Four locomotives were built, with many delays and redesigns, between 2008 and 2011. The first “Trojan” locomotive, No. 920, was supplied in October 2009, followed by No. 921 in February and No. 922 in May 2010. The fourth locomotive No. 923 remained at Scunthorpe under construction.
Inherent problems From new, it was reported that these locomotives were found to have numerous inherent design issues which made them unsuitable for the original planned duties due to unreliability, poor accessibility, maintainability and poor cab ergonomics. Following a number of discussions between Tata Steel and renowned industrial locomotive manufacturer Hunslet, No. 923 was delivered to Hunslet’s manufacturing works in April 2011 with instructions to carry out a fault evaluation of the locomotive and to propose recommendations for improvement. Following a number of visits by the operators and senior management of Tata Steel, recommendations were finalised and agreed and work started on a number of areas.
Cab and controls In the cab, the existing ceiling mounted control desks, driver’s seat and control cubicle were removed. A new, ergonomically designed cab/driving arrangement was installed with a fore-and-aft driving position that improves the driver’s visibility, comfort and accessibility. New heating and insulation
was installed, and the whole cab refinished to a higher standard. The electrical control system was completely replaced with a Hunslet-proven IQAN-based electronic system to provide a locomotive that is safe, reliable and easy to operate. The IQAN controls all functions allowing programming to suit site conditions. It also monitors, logs and acts upon information sent to it from the five separate electronic units on the locomotive. To improve operator safety, the spring parking brake emergency release system was modified so that, in the event of a failure, it allows for the release of the spring applied parking brake. This eliminates the need for an operator to have to access the release mechanism from the underside of the bogies. The relationship between the buffer face and coupler hook was incorrect making it extremely difficult to couple vehicles on a curve. To correct the relationship, a 50mm spacer was fitted along with a new coupling chain.
Poor drainage There were problems with most of the drains fitted to the locomotive. The existing main air reservoir drain did not expel moisture that accumulated in the reservoirs. An automatic drain valve was fitted, which expels the moisture and prevents build up of water, thus providing a better quality of air supply on the locomotive. As designed it was virtually impossible to remove the oil drain plug in the lower portion of the Voith transmission, as the fuel tank blocks all access. The fuel tank was removed and an access tube was welded into the fuel tank structure, allowing ease of access to the drain plug.
It was also found that the radiator compartment filled with water when it rained and there were no means of draining. A series of 25mm diameter holes were drilled into the compartment floor.
Finishing touches Even the handrails were unpopular with drivers, who did not like the existing design, finding it a bulky and cumbersome structure. A welded design using a smaller diameter round bar was manufactured and fitted along with grab rails. The whole locomotive was then repainted in Tata Steel livery, giving it a much smarter appearance. When complete, the locomotive was static tested in Hunslet’s works at Barton under Needwood, near Burton on Trent, prior to undergoing dynamic testing at Chasewater Railway. It then began commissioning and field trials on 16 April 2012 at its designated site of Port Talbot. Hunslet are now hard at work on two more Trojan locomotives, Nos 921 and 922, which should be completed in June and July 2012. The fourth locomotive is expected to arrive at Barton under Needwood in July and should be turned around by September. All four of Tata Steel’s smart new Trojan locos will then be fit to do what was originally intended, namely, the backbone of the locomotive fleet at Tata Steel Port Talbot.
32 | the rail engineer | may 2012
rolling stock/depots
writer
Nigel
Wordsworth month, the rail engineer visited L ast Graz, the historic capital of Styria and
Welding up bogie frames.
Austria’s second city, for the launch of the new SF7000 bogie which Siemens intends to use on the new Desiro City trains that it will shortly be building for the Thameslink programme. During that visit, Siemens’ engineers were keen to show how modern bogies are manufactured in a factory which can turn out 4,000 a year. Dating from the 1850’s, when it commenced making railway wagons and then, more recently, carriages, Siemens converted its earlier 26% holding in the factory to 100% in 2001. Since then, the Graz plant has concentrated purely on bogie design and manufacture and is now Siemens’ Centre of Excellence for bogies, where they make bogies for everything from trams to high speed trains. Design is carried out in the same way as for any other mechanical assembly these days. A team of experienced engineers, working on CAD screens and using finite element and other techniques, come up with new ideas and modifications to earlier designs. These designs are then tested, in computer simulations so that changes can be made before an actual prototype is even manufactured.
Building Bogies Design Development Diemo Wojik, Head of Bogie Projects, explained how the design process has progressed in the last ten years. When Siemens established the Graz centre in 2001, they were already using computer simulation techniques as part of the design process. Completed designs were subjected to a multitude of simulated running conditions to see how they would react in operation - under load, under braking and on good and bad track. It was important to make sure that bogies were stable, and didn’t pass unwelcome movement onto the passenger carriage to which they were mounted. In 2002, strength analysis was added to the computer models, and in 2005 a routine was introduced to help optimise the acoustic characteristics of the bogie. Most of the noise emitted by a running train comes from
the wheels and bogies, and increasing public sensitivity to this made the ability to design a quiet bogie essential. By 2007, Siemens was developing routines to design with maintenance in mind. What were the operating life expectancies of the various components, and could this be increased? Whole life costs were becoming important
benchmarks for customers, and a few extra Euros spent on a design or a component that reduced maintenance in the long term were now a good investment for operators. A programme to design for weight commenced in 2007. Weight had always been an important element as heavy bogies give high axle loads and thereby damage track more easily. However, now lightness was increasingly important as it also has a bearing on fuel economy. So light bogies, underneath aluminium-bodied trains, were becoming the norm in metro applications. The new programme examined the weight of everything, from frames to axles and even brackets, in a drive to get as much weight reliably out of the product as possible. 2012’s programme takes the concept of designing for maintenance a step further. “Bogie Monitoring” fits the bogie with a number of sensors measuring movements, resistance to movement, and other variables to establish the condition of the bogie and its components. This means the bogie can self-diagnose any faults, and report back through the train’s control system, so maintenance engineers are notified when essential work is needed, or can postpone routine maintenance when it is not, so saving cost.
All this design and development work is undertaken by the 210 engineers at Graz before a new bogie is even released for
may 2012 | the rail engineer | 33
rolling stock/depots
manufacture. Then a pilot run is made, tested in the laboratories at Graz, and then shipped off to Siemens’ own test track at Wildenrath on the German / Dutch border. There, fitted under a test train, the performance of the new design can be evaluated in actual working conditions. After all the static and dynamic testing is complete, and any design modifications have been made, then the new bogie is passed over to the factory for tooling up and series production.
Frame manufacture The bogie itself starts life as a collection of shaped steel plates. These are procured from a range of approved suppliers, and arrive at the factory cut and bent to shape, with holes drilled as required, and with big chamfered weld-preparations already on the edges. When butted up against the next component, these chamfers form a deep v-channel which will be filled up in the welding process ensuring that the weld is the full depth of the plates. The component parts are then assembled onto large jigs. These are unique to each design of bogie and represent a major part of the cost of tooling up each new design. The various plates and other parts are clamped into the jigs until the whole subassembly is complete, and they are then tacked together manually by an experienced welder so that the structure becomes rigid. To allow access to all the joints, the whole jig moves in three dimensions, rotating and swivelling so the welder can ensure that everything has been correctly attached. And with a bogie frame measuring three metres across and weighing a couple of tonnes, this assistance is very necessary. Once the assembly is complete and stable, it comes out of the jig and goes off to the main welding robots. It is attached to another jig, which also moves in three dimensions, but this one is mounted directly under a big robot welding arm. Behind protective screens, the bogie frame and the
welding head move and swivel while a multi-pass weld is built up in all those v-shaped channels. To maintain capacity, there are four of these units and they weld all the volume bogie frames and large subassemblies. Smaller components are welded by hand. After welding, the frame is placed on an automated line which checks that all the critical dimensions have been achieved. Welds are checked for integrity, and then the whole thing is cleaned up, shot blasted, and sent for painting. Dangling from chains on a moving track, the frames are first sprayed with primer (an interesting salmon-pink colour) and then finished in a colour to the customer’s specification. This usually seems to be a form of battleship grey. After drying in an oven, the next stage is assembly.
Assembly One major item that is fastened into every bogie is, of course, the wheel set (or more strictly - two wheel sets). This is the axle complete with wheels and, possibly, brake discs. Until recently, Siemens also bought these from outside suppliers. However, a new workshop now allows them to be assembled in house, although some are still procured. The wheelsets, springs, shock absorbers, brakes, brakelines, gearboxes, electric motors, sensors, cables and other items that will together become a complete bogie are hand-assembled on large tables in cells rather than on a production line. One or two fitters complete each bogie, and at full capacity the factory is turning out about five each shift. Currently working 10 shifts a
week, the production line can be geared up to 19 shifts a week if necessary. To make sure that each bogie has been assembled properly, it is placed on a large test machine which hydraulically applies a load to the mountings for the carriage. The weight on each wheel is measured, and adjustments made until everything is square and all four wheel loads are in specification. The only thing left to do is to ship the complete bogies off to the various Siemens factories. At one end of the range, Graz makes small, lightweight bogies for trams that go off to Vienna, and at the other extreme, large high-speed bogies for the 1,520 mm gauge Velaro RUS EVS (Sapsan) that is built at Krefeld and Erlangen in Germany. So next time you catch a train, peer over the platform edge at the bogies hidden underneath, and remember all the technology and engineering that goes into those oft-forgotten essential components.
Wheelset and Frame come together.
34 | the rail engineer | may 2012
rolling stock/depots introduction of Virgin’s new 11-car Pendolino trains into T heservice on Thursday 5 April has given some much-needed extra
Pendolinos Jacking up
capacity on the West Coast Main Line. However, it also presented a few problems to the maintenance team at the Alstom Transport Traincare Centre in Longsight near Manchester. They needed to be able to lift a complete 11-car train up into the air to work underneath. After considering systems from around the world, Virgin invited Mechan, the Sheffield-based rail maintenance equipment specialist, to install the largest single system of lifting jacks in the UK. A completely new version of Mechan’s Microlink jack control system was developed to operate the 44 jacks. Richard Carr, Mechan’s managing director, said: “It has taken seven months to develop the Microlink software that will lift such a large network without losing the flexibility and synchronicity for which the system is renowned and we are very pleased with the results.” The patented Microlink jack control system enables a network of jacks to be operated from anywhere in the chain via a single cable. This latest phase of development has increased the system’s capacity and seen the addition of a touch screen panel that provides the user with constant feedback during the maintenance process. Dave Walton, Alstom’s senior site services manager, said: “The brief for this project was very specific and a number of factors had to be taken into account, not least the size of the system required and the depot layout. Mechan provided us with a very competitive solution that offered the right balance of engineering expertise and progressive technology. This, combined with the firm’s reputation for excellent after sales care, sealed the deal. Installation of the jacks was completed on time and within budget and we are looking forward to fully utilising the system in the months to come as the 11 -car project progresses.” Three new 11-car Pendolino trains are currently in service. The fourth and last new train will be delivered from Alstom’s Italian factory in May. Meanwhile, 62 new carriages are being delivered to convert existing 9-car sets to 11-car. Those new jacks will come in useful!
Confidence in station management and control With the RailCom Manager suite - RailSecurity, RailAsset, RailControl and RailInfo siemens.co.uk/rail
RailCom Manager is a suite of modules which offers improved operational efficiency. RailSecurity allows station operators to respond rapidly to incidents through integrated control of all safety systems including CCTV, public address, help points and fire alarms. RailAsset monitors the condition of assets to plan preventative maintenance and prevent costly
failures. RailControl provides safe control of electrical traction power networks including electrical isolations and alternative feeding arrangements. RailInfo is a flexible open system delivering real-time passenger information to ensure accurate and efficient journey planning, a real benefit when passenger numbers increase during major events.
Answers for mobility.
36 | the rail engineer | may 2012
SilentTrack market development.
track
Steel has recently announced an T ata £800 million investment in its plant at Port Talbot, South Wales. While this is not a rail plant, it produces strip for the automotive and white goods industries, it does demonstrate Tata Steel’s commitment to the UK, and prompted the rail engineer to look at some of the work going on in track technology. When Tata Steel develops new products, a structured stage-gate approach is used to ensure that developments are led by the customer’s needs whilst at the same time taking into account the manufacturing route. New products first go through a validation and trial phase, followed by the tracking of a commercialised product for a period of five years to continually build on the understanding of new products in service making the innovation process an iterative cycle.
HPrail®
SilentTrack rail dampers fitted to a length of track.
HPrail was developed in response to customer demand for rail better able to withstand the increased traffic and heavier axle loads of today’s railway systems. Based on ten years of research on rail degradation mechanisms combined with world leading metallurgical expertise HPrail provides a high performing solution, which reduces the frequency of rail grinding. HPrail is a metallurgically engineered rail steel developed to address the three main degradation mechanisms seen on European mixed traffic railways i.e. wear, plastic flow and rolling contact fatigue. The development was underpinned by research work to understand customer needs with respect to reducing the cost of track maintenance. Additionally, the manufacturing route for HPrail allows flexibility in terms of supplied lengths, profiles and volume as it can be manufactured either in the UK or in Hayange, France. In the early development of HPrail, the focus was on track monitoring and forensic laboratory examination of the rail microstructure under wheel loading. Rail steel has a pearlitic structure which has two distinct phases, both of which would need to be addressed to make a longer lasting rail. The result was the creation of a steel using the traditional techniques of refining the harder constituents of the pearlite structure whilst at the same time
engineering the softer ferrite phase to contribute to the in-track performance of the rail. Early trial work included laboratory investigations, which indicated a step change in the resistance to wear and rolling contact fatigue compared to traditional or current pearlitic rail steels found in the European specification EN13674-1. This counters the traditional approach to tackling the degradation mechanisms by increasing the bulk hardness of the rail steel. This led to the casting and rolling of the first trial HPrail. These were installed in the works track at Scunthorpe under heavy-duty conditions on the torpedo line (used to transport molten steel across the works) to provide the first live trial and give quick results. Regular monitoring by the Rail Technologies team and the generation of inservice performance data gave the confidence to progress this development into live mainline track trials.
Practical applications
Trial programme Early customer involvement with Network Rail resulted in a two-year programme of trials. HPrail was installed and monitored at seven very challenging sites in the network to confirm the performance compared to standard grade rail. One such site was at Hett Mill, Durham, where HPrail was installed in January 2011. The site was chosen as it is a mixed passenger and freight line, with an existing re-rail frequency of around five years. Its curve radius of 1000m and history of developing extensive rolling contact fatigue (RCF) within a short period made this an ideal location for track testing. Within fifteen months, Network Rail is already making cost savings through reduced track maintenance activities, such as extending the grinding interval due to the rail maintaining profile and increasing the period to initiation of rolling contact fatigue. Network Rail’s projections on life
of track technologies
may 2012 | the rail engineer | 37
track cycle costing indicate that significant savings will be made as a result of HPrail installation. The early results have led to the installation of 3,000 tonnes of HPrail around the network in 2011 under trial approval certification, in anticipation of full product acceptance by Network Rail in the summer of 2012. Based on the performance of HPrail in plain line, work is underway on extending its use to switches and crossings for Network Rail, demonstrating how developing new products is often an iterative and evolutionary process.
SilentTrack® The introduction of noise legislation via the European Noise Directive has compelled railway authorities to consider how best to limit the exposure of the general pubic to excessive railway noise. Additionally, the growing public and political awareness of noise as a health and environmental issue has resulted in the search for effective noise control measures that can be applied to the railway infrastructure. Traditional solutions to noise have been the installation of antinoise screens which are expensive, difficult to install onto an operational railway, and unsightly for the railway’s neighbours. European funding facilitated a collaborative programme of work to investigate the sources of noise generation and potential solutions to mitigate the problem. Tata Steel participated in partnership with the University of
Southampton to develop an understanding of the generation of noise through the wheel-rail interaction. This led to the development of a rail-mounted damper to tackle the rail-wheel interface noise at source. SilentTrack consists of rail dampers, attached either side of a rail, which are tuned to absorb the vibrations in the rail. The dampers themselves function as a classic mass/spring damping system, with steel masses encased in an elastomeric polymer with a high damping factor. For each project, site-specific data is used to assess the track characteristics. The damper is then designed to provide the most effective noise reduction and develop a bespoke solution to the specific noise issues encountered on the track.
As a commercial product, SilentTrack has been installed in over 100 kilometres of track in Holland and Germany, providing reductions in noise between three and six decibels. Approvals are in place for use in the UK and the first installation was at Blackfriars in April 2012.
EXPERIENCE THE DIFFERENCE
Tailor-making tomorrow’s rail At Tata Steel Rail, we recognise there is only one perfect rail solution for you. And it will be born only from dedicating our team to work as one with yours.
15612_Tata Steel Rail Engineer Ad 190x130.indd 1
Drawing on a century of industry-leading metallurgy experience, our people touch every aspect of rail infrastructure with dedication and expertise. We listen, consider, advise, create and deliver much more than just rail – sustainable rail solutions that work better, last longer, cost less and provide real value. Experience the difference and let’s build tomorrow’s rail.
For more information contact: Tata Steel Rail PO Box 1 Brigg Road Scunthorpe DN16 1BP UK T: +44 (0) 1724 403398 F: +44 (0) 1724 403442 E: rail@tatasteel.com www.tatasteelrail.com
'On-track' sponsor at Infrarail
20/04/2012 09:37
Lengthy r e c y c l i n g
38 | the rail engineer | may 2012
track
is not only good R ecycling for the environment, it is also a good way to save money. Network Rail has been getting very involved in recycling over the past few years, probably for both reasons, with new recycling centres at Whitemoor Yard and Westbury having been covered in previous issues of the rail engineer. Now, as part of that process, the Eastleigh Long Welded Rail Depot is getting in on the act. Opened in 2011, Eastleigh LWRD has been supplying the rail network with 216 metre long rails which it welds up from 108 metre lengths of new rail supplied by companies such as Tata Steel. With a current output of 50,000 tonnes a year (that’s around 275 miles of new track), it has been giving a good service to Network Rail’s track renewals teams.
Rail recovery Eastleigh LWRD is operated by Network Rail’s National Delivery Service (NDS), and part of their strategy is to recover used rail wherever possible and to reuse it on the network. So plans were drawn up for Eastleigh to weld up lengths of recycled rail and to reuse it on the secondary network. To do this, the LWRD needed some new equipment, and some more room. The depot sidings would have to be extended, the stocking and processing areas enlarged, and a new building erected. This would house a new hydraulic four-way press and a new automatic rail saw. There would also have to be a new link road connecting all three facilities. And all without interrupting the existing depot’s production. A team of contractors was brought in to do the work. Osborne were appointed principal contractor, but several separate design and build packages were let to undertake various parts of the work.
Challenging work At the civils end, 6,562m3 of contaminated soil had to be removed. The new areas were constructed and the new building erected. A great deal of coordination was needed between all the contractors so they didn’t interfere with the day-to-day running of the plant. Pre-planned maintenance shut down periods were fully utilised, and programme reviews every two weeks kept the whole project on course. Indeed, the whole programme was accelerated by six months a challenge that the team was able to meet through extensive co-operation, communication and collaborative working. The new building housing the press and saw needed to be integrated directly with the existing Depot production process beneath the gantry crane. Major modifications and enhancements had to be carried out to the conveyor control system. The electrical supply for the new plant was problematic. This was the first time that such equipment had been installed on the positive side of the welder. This
meant that there was a risk that, if the rail between the press and saw building and the welder formed a continuous link, the 100,000 amps produced when the welder is used would destroy the new press and saw. Considerable additional earthing work and the installation of safety cut-out switches added and linked into the depot production control system were required to alleviate this risk. Physical works, including testing and commissioning and operative training, were completed on 29 February and LWRD was opened by Richard O’Brien, Route Managing Director (Wessex), on 21 March, six months early as planned. With the re-use of recycled rail estimated to save Network Rail £4 million a year, that six months time improvement represented an additional £2 million of savings.
The process Lengths of recycled rail are shipped to Eastleigh from various locations around the country. It has already been fully visually inspected and ultrasonically tested, and any scrap rail cut out and discarded. On arrival at the LWRD it is sorted by profile. Any old welds, done before 1976, are cut out. To make up a 216 metre length, selected rails of the same profile, and a minimum length of 8-9 metres long, are selected to meet Network Rail standards for Serviceable Rail. These profiles have to match not only for their original section but also as regards to wear, otherwise there will be steps in the top surface. The selected lengths are straightened and welded together to make up the finished 216 metres. While these recycled rails are made up from track removed from main line duty, they are quite good enough for use for an extended period on secondary routes. They are 70% cheaper than new rail, and Eastleigh can produce 10,000 tonnes a year of them, or 8-10% of the rail that Network Rail uses in a year. A saving well worth making.
We’ll keep you on the right track.
One sure fire way to keep your business on the right track is to partner with the best. WVCO Railroad Division is the industry leader in innovative products and application systems for wood and concrete sleeper remediation. Our products are the trusted solution for major railways all over North America (Burlington Northern Sante Fe, Canadian National, Canadian Pacific, CSXT and Norfolk Southern), the United Kingdom, with distribution by Hallrail (Tube Lines and Metronet on The London Underground Network and The Tyne & Wear Metro), and in Europe (Infrabel, Belgium).
We’ll keep your railway on the right track. Call Hallrail today: +44 (0) 191 526 2114 • hallrail.co.uk For more information about WVCO WV CO R CO Railroad, aaiilr lroa oad, oa d, vvisit: isit is it: wv it: wvcorailroad.com vccoora raililrooaadd.ccom
HALLRAIL E S T A B L I S H E D
1 9 4 8
40 | the rail engineer | may 2012
track
Maintaining Savings
writer
Nigel
Wordsworth
Large investment
one talks about the cost of W henever British railways, the same comments come up - “efficiency”, “savings”, McNulty”, “uncompetitive”, “expensive”. Network Rail is no stranger to these financial pressures. The company’s finances and budget is divided up into five-year control periods and it is given targets by the Office of Rail Regulation (ORR) as to both its activities and budget. In CP3 (2004 / 2009), the first full control period after Network Rail took over management of the railway’s infrastructure from Railtrack in October 2002, the ORR believed that the Operating, Maintenance and Renewals budget could be reduced by 31%. CP4, the current control period running from 2009 to 2014, required a further 21% reduction, and no doubt CP5 (2014-2019), still in the planning stage, will set even tighter targets. However, these goals are reductions in expenditure, not in maintenance. The railway’s infrastructure still has to be maintained and improved - just for less cost.
The country’s 20,000 miles of track represents a large part of the total infrastructure for which Network Rail is responsible, and therefore also takes up a large part of the maintenance budget. So if any large-scale savings are to be made, track maintenance and renewals must be one of the main target areas. Any reduction in expenditure cannot come from just doing less work. Network Rail has to demonstrate that their budget is used to deliver a railway that is safe, cost-effective, sustainable (ie the money spent will add value/life) and which performs to the agreed levels and outputs. Specifically with respect to track, the ORR sets targets for: • Level of performance (PPM) • Reliability • Track Geometry Targets (by primary, secondary and freight/tertiary routes) • Number of rail breaks/significant rail defects.
In the case of track, there are nine Route Asset Managers each responsible for a specific geographical area and within their teams are Senior Renewals and Enhancement Engineers, Senior Maintenance Support Engineers (responsible for rail, welding and track), Lineside Engineers (drainage, fencing, vegetation etc) and Data Analysts. The Route Asset Managers are responsible for acting as sponsors for all track programmes in their areas, and ensuring that the track asset is managed appropriately and meets the needs of the business, both at present and in the future. So there is no longer any split between renewals and maintenance, it is all about managing the whole track asset. James Dean, Director of Track Asset Management, explained how the new system worked, and how it could deliver the required savings.
Replace or refurbish? The 21% budget reduction for CP4 represented a £1.1 billion cut in the track asset management budget - an enormous amount if the same or better performance is needed at the same time. So how is it being done?
Reorganisation The first decision was to look at each asset, in this case track, as one entity. Previously there had been a Maintenance team, and a separate Renewals team. The danger with this arrangement is that once a project has been designated either renewals or maintenance, that is what happened whether there were better solutions or not. The existing organisation structure was reorganised in December 2009 resulting in a Director of Asset Management for each discipline (in this case Track), Heads of Asset Management and Route Asset Managers.
In the past, on nearly all routes, there had been a philosophy of completely replacing time-expired track. Not only is this costly, it is also wasteful as some of the elements could still be in good condition. the rail engineer has reported on condition monitoring of such items as rolling stock and signalling in the past. Scheduled routine maintenance has, through analysis of performance, wear and failures, been replaced by focussed maintenance of individual components only when they need it. This saves money while possibly even improving performance. This method is now being applied to track. Improved asset information, often derived from train-borne inspection systems, allow for better, more informed decisions to be taken regarding maintenance periods and possible renewal.
may 2012 | the rail engineer | 41
track
One example that James quoted was an exercise being proposed at Waterloo station on point movements. This will allow teams to maintain the most highly used assets more often, and the others less. This study is being replicated throughout the country. Lightly utilised assets don’t have to be maintained so often, reducing cost. There are, of course, complications. Sometimes it is difficult to renew one item of S&C without also working through adjacent points and crossings that form part of a linked system. However, when the work is done, very often the various components are no longer linked, making maintenance simpler in the future. In the past, track designers looked for neat engineering solutions to problems, rather
than considering maintenance. Double-slip points certainly have a small footprint, but are expensive to look after. A simpler solution may take up more track space, but solves a lot of those difficulties. Admittedly, this may affect signalling and OLE, which will add to the immediate cost, but long-term the savings are obvious. And a simplified track layout can also lead to a simplified OLE layout, saving cost for the electrification team as well.
Is it needed? A survey carried out recently in the Netherlands revealed that 25% of their S&C could be removed without affecting functionality, and studies in the UK have indicated that this could be the case here as
42 | the rail engineer | may 2012
track
well. There is no point maintaining an asset that isn’t being used and, as James Dean commented, there is a certain satisfaction with being able to remove five crossovers and only put three back. James also recalls one particular instance. They were looking to do some routine maintenance on a particular crossover, when the team discovered it had only been used twice in six months. Some more research revealed that both of those occasions were when Network Rail’s own tamper went over it! So there didn’t seem much point in keeping it. Network Rail’s track asset team is now working with their colleagues in operations and with train operators to look at track layouts and see where unused or underutilised S&C can be deleted. This will not only reduce longterm maintenance costs but also improve reliability. Some 90% of track failures that result in train delays are caused by S&C. As James rather ruefully commented, “The most reliable piece of S&C is plain line!” Relocating crossovers can have an operational benefit as well. Careful placement can allow trains crossing a main line to clear more quickly, for example. A lot of points and crossings are where they have always been, rather than where they need to be, so looking at every situation with fresh eyes can reveal some unexpected opportunities.
Clever maintenance Of course, reducing the number of individual assets reduces maintenance costs, but the remaining
track still has to be maintained. Modern high-output machinery helps - it is now possible to remove and replace ballast, or re-rail a section, without replacing the whole track. James Dean commented that they no longer “just rip it all out”- it is now very much a considered decision on whether lowercost activity will give the desired result and extend that asset’s life sufficiently. Maintaining points and turnouts is easier now as well. Ballast can be removed using giant vacuum cleaners such as the Railvac and then replaced. There is also a development exercise underway looking at large undercutters that can remove ballast from underneath points. Three manufacturers are working with Network Rail, and the first new machines should be in service within 18 months. Plain track hasn’t been neglected. In the last financial year there were 124 rail breaks - the lowest number ever recorded. James is pleased with that figure, although he wants still more improvement. And even when track, and S&C, is “ripped out” - these days it all goes off for recycling - making even more savings long term. All these new initiatives have certainly reduced the cost of track treatments. Some additional costs have been incurred in sorting out junctions and other areas to make savings in the future, but overall the track asset management team has saved £1 billion in CP4. And they are on target to save another 16% in CP5. All this by actually doing more work!
may 2012 | the rail engineer | 43
feature
writer
Les Giles
Report on RailTel Europe 2012
RailTel Europe conference was T hewiderecent ranging in its scope, and covered amongst other things GSM-R and its potential replacement, the provision of enhanced telecommunications services for passengers and other railway customers, issues with the implementation of ETCS on Thalys, cross-border communications network links, and the implementation of railway telecommunications on a new line in Saudi Arabia. Great progress has been made in implementing GSM-R across Europe and beyond, but much thought is being given to its eventual replacement. It has also become clear that, even when a system has been designed to be used on a pan-European basis, there can be problems if it is implemented in each country in an independent manner and users, be they train drivers or ERTMS control systems, extend its use across borders.
GSM-R Operational Experience Firstly, some good news. As the rollout of GSM-R continues, the potential for its exploitation becomes more apparent. Whilst those involved in writing the EIRENE (European Integrated Railway Radio Enhanced Network) specifications identified those requirements which would be mandatory for international trains, the potential for other uses was left to the individual railways to develop. A number of the conference speakers showed how the introduction of GPRS (the packet switching development within GSM-R) and associated IP based data calls enables the support of passenger information and train position reporting, plus the monitoring of train and trackside equipment including level crossings. All of these are possible over public GSM, but why
pay for using someone else’s network when you can use your own? There are concerns about future network capacity, but until ERTMS Level 2 becomes widely implemented this is not a significant issue. Jean Cellmer of RFF (the French Railways infrastructure organisation), in explaining the basis of their public private partnership approach to GSM-R implementation, was able to confirm that the high availability figures of around 99.99% (52 minutes outage/year in total across the network) were currently being achieved and Torbjørn Berger of JBV Nett stated similar figures were being obtained in Norway. The two major failures suffered by RFF were due to transmission outages from a thunderstorm and a flood, whilst JBV Nett had experienced local power and battery ageing failures. From this evidence, it appears that concerns about the change to radio communication from fixed communication systems, expressed by many railway S & T engineers, are not being borne out in practice. Several speakers highlighted the issue with interference from public communications networks in the 900MHz band, particularly as 3G (UMTS) becomes more widely implemented, despite all the lobbying work in CEPT by UIC representatives to ensure that the GSM-R frequency band would be protected. The result is particularly apparent in station areas where the effect is seen as a reduction in GSM-coverage. The only solution at present is to negotiate with the local public operators to achieve a change in the channel planning and a lowering in their output power on base stations close to the railway. GSM-R emergency calls still have issues to be resolved. Structured as group calls, these alert the train drivers and train controllers in a particular area covered by a designated group of radio cells defined by the originating point of the call, to an emergency of some kind. However, where intersecting or parallel rail routes are covered by one or more cells within the call area, this can result in train drivers and controllers receiving the call unnecessarily. Whilst this is not a safety issue, it can cause
delay on a route not actually affected by the emergency situation. A number of possible solutions have been put forward but none have apparently yet been implemented. An emerging concern is the limited cooperation between GSM-R network operators, each treating its own network in isolation, so that, for example, emergency calls at borders are not linked between networks. Thus when two trains are approaching each other across a border one might not receive an emergency call as it is on the other GSM-R network. This is not a technical issue, but a management one which was further demonstrated by Thomas Joindot, the ERTMS Director for SNCF. He explained the crossborder implementation issues experienced on Thalys and identified the difficulty in managing the number of partners and contractors involved in operations.
GSM-R as an ETCS Bearer Lines L3/L4 in Belgium and HSL Zuid in the Netherlands are all equipped with ETCS Level 2. Thalys operations with ETCS began in December 2009 after retrofitting the rolling stock, with SNCF being responsible for all rolling stock engineering, but with each of the Thalys partners remaining responsible for the safety case in its own country. The first cross-border problem encountered was that the French (RFF) SIM cards were not recognised and thus the ERTMS train equipment was unable to call the Dutch HSL Zuid RBC (Radio Block Centre), so preventing the initialisation code for communications. This was first discovered in 2007, with the subsequent investigation taking more than two years to fully determine the cause. The temporary solution was the use of ProRail (Dutch) SIM cards and the final solution was to make changes to the RBC. This was implemented just a few weeks before revenue service began. Another technical difficulty was with emergency brake applications occurring when entering Belgium from the Netherlands. This was identified as GSM-R handover failure between the GSM-R networks. Trains remained connected to the last Dutch base station (BTS) with no attempt to connect to the Belgian BTS due to a failure in the mechanism used to maintain a GSM-R connection from one network to another (inter-PLMN). The solution was to implement balises to force the connection to the Belgian network. A similar problem was experienced when Thalys trains failed to log onto the Belgium
The mainly single track freight railway in Saudi Arabia carries six 120-wagon trains a week, each with a capacity of 12,000 tonnes of bauxite or phosphates at 60km/h.
44 | the rail engineer | may 2012
feature When it comes to the appropriate protocol, UDP (User Datagram Protocol) has less protection but, in theory, offers better time transfer than TCP/IP. UDP datagrams may arrive out of order, appear duplicated, or go missing. UDP assumes that error checking and correction is performed in the application, avoiding the overhead of such processing at the network interface level. Three elements require further study: cell reselection performance, behaviour in a busy environment which requires a refined model of ETCS traffic and the management of ETCS and non ETCS GPRS users to ensure ETCS gets priority. The following actions have been programmed: • an ETCS simulator application test within the RFF/SNCF network in 2012 to evaluate the results on a High Speed Line; • development of ETCS GPRS prototype equipment as an add-on to the RBC; • use of a modified on-board Euroradio interface initial field tests in the UK in 2013 and then validate GPRS in high capacity cross-border regions in Denmark in 2014. The last of these, requiring agreement from suppliers, network operators and users, is likely to be the most difficult to achieve in the timescale. Once these tests are completed, the release of specifications related to GPRS usage in the railways environment will follow.
Replacing GSM-R
(middle) Mobile sand removal vehicles. (bottom) Equipment rooms are buried to save on air conditioning load and many sites are powered by solar cells.
network on both L3 and L4, this being traced to shortcomings in the GSM-R modem software, which required modification. The key lessons learned is that the interdependence of trackside and onboard equipment has to be recognised, with access to monitoring tools and results from the GSM-R network being made more widely available. SNCF is fitting a number of trains with monitoring recorders to assist in faster identification of the causes in the future.
Improving GSM-R efficiency by GPRS Manfred Taferner of Kapsch CarrierCom explained the progress being made in improving the spectral efficiency of ERTMS usage of GSM-R by changing from circuit switched data transmission (CSD) to GPRS. To achieve the aim of having ETCS over GPRS available by 2014, the EU launched a Working Group in 2011 under the TEN-T programme to develop and demonstrate the concept. There have been several test scenarios using simulators in Italy, Sweden and Austria. These have shown that GPRS functionality is comparable to CSD and increases capacity by a factor of seven. Data transmission delay tests show performance meeting the QoS requirement defined in the ERTMS specification Subset 093. However, cell reselection has a significant effect on time delay, typically adding 2-3 seconds but occasionally up to 10 seconds.
Papers from Kapsch CarrierCom, Huawei, Nokia Siemens Networks (NSN) and Alcatel Lucent explored how the implementation of LTE technology (4G) could be the replacement for GSM-R, thus missing 3G altogether. LTE (Long Term Evolution) is being standardised by ETSI (European Telecommunications Standards Institute) and will be entirely packet based with faster call set up and greater capacity than either 3GPP or GSM. It has a simpler architecture and significantly lower cost per megabyte of capacity. John Stafford from RSSB stated that their study into strategy options and the business case for rail mobile communications in the UK (due to be published shortly) would support the view that LTE was the future. The anticipated increase in capacity would benefit passenger on-train use as well as railway applications. John suggested that only 11% of demand was for operational use with 89% being driven by passenger demand, so a joint implementation with public operators could enhance the business case. Huawei recommended a parallel implementation of LTE to initially carry nonvital communications with greatly improved capacity, very much in the way public operators have implemented 3GPP and are now trialling LTE. It was unclear where the frequencies would come from to support this approach. Both NSN and Alcatel Lucent suggested that the changeover to LTE could start from around 2015, but railway representatives pleaded that this be delayed to 2025 so as to get useful life out of GSM-R. The issue facing the railways however is whether another generation of mobile technology will arrive before the changeover starts?
Papers from Norwegian Railways, National Rail Enquiries (UK), LEO Express (a private train operator in the Czech Republic), Siemens CMT and Alcatel-Lucent highlighted the need to support services to passengers on trains. These were mainly based on providing support for network services such as Twitter and Internet surfing via on-board WiFi to passengers’ own devices. Updates on train running would be provided by in-train displays. Whilst some high-value services might be chargeable, the consensus was that most of the support should be provided on the basis of improving the train experience and thus tempting passengers from other modes of transport. Once provided, these links could also support CCTV for security and train location for passenger information.
ETCS and GSM-R in harsh environments The railway telecommunications systems on the new North-South line in Saudi Arabia, where extremes of temperature and sand storms bring their own challenges, were described by Abdullah-Al-Yousef. The main freight railway is 1486km in length, mainly single track, and carries six 120-wagon trains a week, each with a capacity of 12,000 tonnes of bauxite or phosphates at 60km/h. These will soon be increased to 150 wagons and 80 km/h. There are also passenger and general freight services linking Riyadh and Al-Haditha sharing about half the freight route and bringing the total length to 2400km. The entire route uses ETCS level 2 signalling carried over a GSM-R network linked by a resilient SDH transmission network on fibre optic cable. To overcome the extreme conditions, equipment rooms supplied to IP54 rating are buried so as to reduce the air conditioning loads, as is the fibre cable. Due to poor accessibility to many of the sites, refuelling the diesel-powered generators, which have storage for 60 days, is challenging. 88 of the 189 sites are powered by solar cells and have a three-day battery back-up. Track possessions are taken by work gangs using mobile possession terminals to maximise working time. Rolling stock is monitored using track-based detectors which check for hot axleboxes, hot wheels, dragging equipment and dynamic loads alongside a vehicle identification reader. The control centre can then arrange with the train crew for removal of a vehicle, if appropriate, at the next available siding. Most of us are familiar with snow ploughs and snow blowers, but in desert conditions mobile sand removal vehicles perform similar tasks.
Beyond doubt This conference demonstrated the real thought being given to resolving the problems, particularly in the cross-border situation, of GSM-R and its potential as a transmission medium for ERTMS as well as a system for voice and data communication. What is beyond doubt is that radio is the only logical technology for future train control applications and that an international approach is needed to ensure future spectrum availability and commonality of technical specifications.
46 | the rail engineer | may 2012
Countries planned to be operating ERTMS by 2020.
feature
writer
Clive Kessell ERTMS (European Rail Traffic T heManagement System) concept has been around since 1989, some 23 years ago. The idea conceived a pan-European network where trains and infrastructure would be to a common standard and rail traffic could cross borders seamlessly. So the word interoperability was invented. By now, its use should have been commonplace on all high speed lines and any other main trunk routes that have required re-signalling. Reality is somewhat different. It is true that, in the intervening period, many lines have been equipped with either Level 1 (track to train signalling information via balises) or Level 2 (track to train signalling information via radio) but these have tended to be on discrete routes with little connection to each other. Thus the interoperability goal has yet to be fully proven and, in those areas where it has been tried, many interface problems have emerged. So why is this, and what can be done? To answer the question, one must perhaps go back in time.
Signalling and Railway Operations Ever since railways began, different countries have invented and adopted different operating rules and signalling systems to go with them. Once embedded, these rules become part of the railway culture for a particular country and are instilled in operators and engineers alike. So strong is this that trying to instigate change is an uphill struggle. The temptation when new technology arrives is to adapt the technology to fit the rules rather than
change the rules to fit the technology. Since, in real terms, no railway (at least within Europe) can claim that its rules have led to a dramatic improvement in operational efficiency and safety over any other railway, the need for the differences is questionable. Thus operating and signalling have become prisoners of history and the ERTMS concept has battled since its inception to overcome these long established traditions. To try and get greater uniformity of thought and action, the ERTMS Users Group was established in 1995. It has a published mission statement: “To help the railways in applying ERTMS/ETCS in a harmonised and interoperable way to enable the free flow of trains and a competitive railway”. Located in Brussels, I met with Michel Ruesen, its Managing Director, and Hugh Rochford, one of its senior engineers who is also the secretary to the IRSE International Technical Committee, to find out what the current position is and their predictions for the future.
Forcing the Standard The European Union holds the aces for ongoing ERTMS development and extension since it is one of the prime sources of finance. Six pilot projects were originally set up to prove the ERTMS safety and interoperability concept, but with the condition that collective joint responsibility would be taken by the participating railway organisations. The first three were in Germany (DB), France (SNCF, succeeded by RFF) and Italy (FS, succeeded by RFI), followed on by two in the Netherlands (NS Railinfrabeheer and succeeded by ProRail) and Spain (RENFE, succeeded by ADIF). Thus the Users Group was created as a European Economic Interest Group (EEIG ERTMS Users Group).
Membership is now extended with the UK (Network Rail), Switzerland (SBB), Sweden (Trafikverket) and Denmark (Banedanmark) having joined, and comprises almost all European countries operating substantial ERTMS systems. Not to be involved means having no influence on the progressing of standards. Further, the knowledge base in individual countries is somewhat sparse so a collective approach is accepted as the optimum means of maximising expertise. The ERTMS Users Group goals are to ensure a free flow of information on the technology whilst recognising that competitive tendering must take place for the supply of both infrastructure and train borne equipment. The focus is on two of the three elements of the ERTMS package - ETCS, the signalling system, and GSM-R, using radio for data transmission. The third element is ETML, the traffic management layer, but this has made little progress to date. Influencing the specifications is a prime responsibility but going hand in hand with this is monitoring project implementation and testing. The task of controlling additional functionality is important but also vital is the need to ensure backwards compatibility by making sure that new generation ERTMS fitted trains can run on existing ERTMS tracks, thereby protecting the investment already made in the infrastructure. The ERTMS Users Group is recognised as the Knowledge Centre for ERTMS and this includes the expertise in the handling of ERTMS studies funded by TEN-T (the TransEuropean Transport Network).
How the ERTMS Users Group works The Group combines the knowledge of around 60 experts, of which 10 are located at the central office in Brussels. The other 50 are dotted around the railways, including engineers from Network Rail. Several management and technical meetings are held every month between the member organisations, using English as the universal language, covering topics such as change requests, driver-machine interface, keymanagement, engineering rules and testing/validation.
48 | the rail engineer | may 2012
The Group has close liaison with other European sector organisations, these being: • The European Commission (DG-Mobility) and the European ERTMS Co-ordinator • ERA, the European Railway Agency • The TEN-T Executive Agency, co-ordinating all TEN-T financed projects • CER, the Community of European Railways • EIM representing the independent European Infrastructure Managers • ERFA, the European Rail Freight Association • UNISIG and UNIFE representing the equipment suppliers • GSM-R Industry Group, representing the GSM-R suppliers • Rail Freight Corridors 1/A (Rotterdam/Antwerp) –- Genoa, 2/C (Antwerp/Rotterdam) –- Lyon) and 6/D (Valencia - Budapest) • UIC, the international organisation of railways. The ERTMS Users Group is essentially an advisory body and has no enforcement powers. This latter has to come from legislation passed by the EU using the ERA as its agent. More than €200 million of subsidy has been allocated to the Group since its inception.
Technical Standards of Interoperability EU legislation has been in place for some time to mandate ERTMS for high speed lines. Under the project to create European Rail Corridors, the TEN-T concept, it was logical to make these ERTMS equipped throughout, thus aiming for a seamless control system. This is now extended to the international freight traffic, recognised by six so called ERTMS Corridors as part of the European Rail Freight Corridors. More recently, the same mandate applies to other trunk rail routes when the time comes for these to be re-equipped with a new control system. Existing ATP technology may only be used in the short term providing this does not constitute any enhancement to the national ATP system. It is expected that regional lines will be included in the legislation before too long although some adaptation of the standards has to be finalised before this can happen.
Ongoing Challenges and the Future The Users Group has the task of facilitating the provision of a universal train control and communication system in place across Europe. This must concentrate initially on getting all present ERTMS systems operating to the same specification such that regardless of who supplies the equipment, it
feature
will work across all networks. The challenge is considerable as there are many variables that make for a successful ERTMS operation and which must be made to harmonise with each other. Examples are: • Harmonised operating rules • Harmonised signalling rules • Common specification for infrastructure equipment and deployment • Common specification for train borne equipment • Common radio-on-air interface • A software level that allows all operating and signalling requirements • Commonality of approach from infrastructure providers • Commonality of approach from train borne equipment suppliers. As has been seen, many of these are rooted in history and it will take a lot of persuasion to get change. Others relate to technology. Getting a robust and recognised software level was always going to be difficult as ERTMS had to be developed with many upgrades to software along the way. Version 2.3.0d is currently the standard, but this was reached with high speed rail operation in mind and all the safety requirements that go with that. As the UK has witnessed on the Cambrian, it is over restrictive for operations on regional lines and thus baseline 3 will shortly be introduced as the standard that will be acceptable for all operations across Europe. However, it will have to be backward compatible with 2.3.0d as the logistics of upgrading all existing trackside equipment to baseline 3 over even a short period of time are impossible. An issue in the short term is the situation in Germany where existing ATP systems are still fairly new and a large replacement programme is not yet needed. Since Germany is a big country in the middle of Europe, not having ERTMS will impact on several corridors, the main ones being Prague / Vienna to Warsaw, and Rotterdam to Switzerland and Genoa. A solution for these international freight corridors, where Germany committed itself in the past to enable foreign freight ERTMS-equipped trains to run on them, is being sought. GSM-R is another longer term problem. With the GSM standard (2G) for public mobile radio now largely replaced by 3G, and with 4G not far off being launched, the future for GSM-R has to be considered since its data handling capacity is limited and the availability of products will not be safeguarded. Michel Ruesen is of the view that the future radio element of the specification will concentrate on application rather than technology. This should allow normal technological advancements to be made without having to universally change the radio hardware The enthusiasm and expertise of the team is impressive, and so it needs to be as the challenges for the future are significant. The technical elements are hard enough, but getting a mind-set change amongst the individual railways will be equally difficult. We must all wish them well.
INNOVATION IN MODERN SIGNALLING CONTROL
Built on over 20 years of experience our flagship IECC
DeltaRail is a Software and Technology Company that
product, with Automatic Route Setting, controls many
is Dedicated to the Needs of the Rail Industry,
of the most densely used areas of the UK rail network
On Operations, On Track and On Train.
- with over 50 workstations at 12 locations. On operations signalling control systems, operational Our recent IECC installation projects include the
planning & management
Reading Station Area Redevelopment Works and the
On track infrastructure support
North London Railway Infrastructure Project.
On train rolling stock maintenance
DeltaRail Group Limited: Hudson House, 2 Hudson Way, Pride Park, Derby DE24 8HS w: www.deltarail.com
e: customerservices@deltarail.com
t: +44 (0) 1332 869800
50 | the rail engineer | may 2012
feature
ETCS coming to the UK A train heads towards Harlech past a block section marker (yellow arrow on blue background). PHOTO: FOUR BY THREE
Network Rail is a member of A lthough the ERTMS Users Group, as described in Clive Kessell’s article, the Cambrian Line is the only ERTMS equipped line in the UK. The 134 miles between Sutton Bridge Junction, Shrewsbury and Machynlleth compare poorly with the size of installations in other countries. That is about to change, though, as Network Rail has announced the next stage of the development programme. A framework contract has been awarded to four concerns; Invensys Rail, Signalling Solutions (Balfour Beatty / Alstom joint venture), Infrasig (Carillion / Bombardier joint venture) and Ansaldo STS. All have experience in ERTMS installations elsewhere, and Ansaldo STS was responsible for converting the Cambrian Line. Network Rail’s medium-term goal is to install ERTMS on three major routes, the Great Western, the East Coast Main Line and the Midland Mainline. However, this new framework contract is for a one year period to help define the specification of the ETCS (European Train Control System) component of the system.
Phase 1, 2, 3…. Guy Stratford, Head of Contracts and Commercial at Network Rail, explained the company’s thinking. “I don’t like labelling projects as ‘Phase1’, ‘Phase 2’ etc,” he commented, “but it is probably appropriate in this case. In Phase 1, the four companies will work collaboratively with Network Rail, and with each other where we are discussing non-commercial aspects, to come up with a technological solution and a commercial proposal for going forward. Network Rail has a clear idea of what it wants to achieve. The discussions will revolve around how each company
proposes to achieve that.” This is a framework contract, not part of the tendering process, so Network Rail will contribute towards the costs of the four organisations involved. At the end of Phase 1, likely to be in around 9-12 months time, Network Rail will assess the technical and commercial proposals that each company has put forward and ask a number of them, probably three, to demonstrate their proposals using a test installation on the Hertford Loop. This is a double-track, 24 mile loop off the East Coast Main Line between Stevenage and Alexandra Palace. Commuter trains will be restricted to a single line over a 5.5 mile stretch, freeing up the other line for use as an ERTMS test track. Starting in 2013, the chosen firms will be asked to demonstrate their ETCS solutions, one after the other, over a twelve month period.
trains and operation control systems, said on announcing the contract awards, “ETCS is now a crucial part of our plans for resignalling the railway - our focus now is on building confidence and experience in the technology so that future schemes can be delivered seamlessly. These new frameworks are the building blocks to developing this capability and will allow us to work closely with our chosen suppliers to develop longterm plans for work to be carried out more quickly and efficiently.” So, at future ERTMS Users Group meetings, Network Rail will have a bit more to discuss!
Timetable 2012/2013 Phase 1 Collaborative ETCS development
2013/2014 Main line implementation Following these trials, the most robust technical and most cost-effective solutions will be chosen to be installed on the Great Western and East Coast Main Line. Guy Stratford explains, “We will have as much flexibility as possible at this stage. It is possible that one company will be headand-shoulders above the others, but we will have to bear in mind the logistical difficulties of one organisation working on two major projects at once.” Work is likely to start in 2014, with the Great Western coming on stream first (commencing 2016) followed by the East Coast Main Line (2018) and the Midland Mainline (2020). So it all starts with discussions between Network Rail and the four companies involved over the rest of this year. As Andrew Simmons, Network Rail’s director of future
Phase 2 Development and Testing on Hertford Loop
2014 onwards Phase 3 Implementation Great Western commencing 2016 East Coast Main Line commencing 2018 Midland Mainline commencing 2020
With Invensys Rail it all comes together perfectly Invensys Rail’s control centre solutions provide efficient and total railway control. We seamlessly integrate and optimise advanced traffic management, SCADA, traction and station management (e.g. CCTV and Passenger Information). Our solutions have been successfully deployed all around the world, including London, Madrid, Vancouver, Hong Kong and Oslo, ensuring compliance with each country’s unique rules and regulations. We support a wide range of operating concepts including ERTMS, CBTC and now our unique ROAME (Railway Operations Administration & Maintenance Environment). This makes us a true one stop shop, providing the safety, efficiency and capacity you need. Invensys Rail brings together Westinghouse, Dimetronic and Safetran, the world’s most trusted and experienced names in signalling and train control.
Find out how we can help you succeed, visit www.invensysrail.com or call +44 (0) 1249 441441
Proud to be Network Rail’s Supplier of the Year 2011
52 | the rail engineer | may 2012
feature
Putting the Paisley Corridor into the writer
Clive Kessell
The Paisley Corridor and the extension of existing signalling control on the Ayr and Inverclyde lines were commissioned over the Christmas 2011 period under a 120 hour possession.
new generation of Network Rail T heControl Centres are growing by number every year, but one of the first to be commissioned has recently had a major expansion to its operational area. The West of Scotland Signalling Centre (WSCC), sited at Cowlairs on the outskirts of Glasgow, first opened in December 2008 when the old Glasgow Central Power Box signalling area transferred to it. Constructed in the architectural style that all subsequent centres have followed, the building combines functional needs with high security. The track layout changes at that stage were minimal. This establishment of the control centre, and the subsequent provision of two additional platforms at Glasgow Central Station followed by a complex interlocking renewal at Shields Junction, paved the way for a complete upgrading of the line onwards to Paisley.
The Paisley Corridor Plans were well developed in 2006 for a rail link to serve Glasgow Airport by building a 2km spur running northwards from the Paisley - Gourock line. Known as GARL, the envisaged train service necessitated an increase in line capacity on the route into Glasgow. The line from Shields to Paisley had originally been four track but this had been rationalised down to two as part of the electrification in the late 1960s. Whilst the GARL project was eventually abandoned owing to the high cost of overcoming significant obstacles along the proposed route (fuel tanks, the bridge over the M8, a 2km viaduct over playing fields), it was agreed that the line capacity improvements should continue as rising passenger numbers required an enhanced train service to the commuter belts in Ayrshire and Inverclyde as well as the regular
WSSC
freight services along the route. The most significant freight is the carriage of coal from the port at Hunterston to a number of power stations including Longannet via the recently opened Stirling - Alloa - Kincardine line. As the second busiest line in Scotland, the existing layout was seriously inadequate with a particular bottleneck just eastwards of Paisley Gilmour Street station. This ‘Paisley Corridor’ improvement thus got the go ahead and work started in 2009. The main thrust has been to lay an additional track westwards from Shields and to increase this to four tracks in the immediate Paisley area so as to separate the junction for the Inverclyde and Ayr lines away from the station throat. All lines will be made reversible but only the middle track will use the facility on a regular basis so as to achieve an increase in directional capacity for the morning and evening peaks. A complete new signalling system was required for all of this, so as to add the area onto the WSSC. This plan, however, also included the complete closure of Paisley Power Box and the transfer of the existing 10 remote relay interlockings between Paisley and Ayr to the control of WSSC. As part of this, signalling alterations were needed to control an extended loop at Elderslie and provide a new cross-over at Brown Street, just west of Paisley. The intensity of the train service, being both daily commuter traffic to Glasgow, leisure journeys to the Ayrshire coast and the strategic importance of the freight traffic, meant that any long term blockade would not be allowed, with the work having to be done during 29 hour Sunday possessions and the occasional 54 hour weekend shut down. This added to the cost but was in keeping with Network Rail’s declaration to restore a seven day railway.
Balfour Beatty Rail were given the contract for the permanent way, civils and OLE work, Invensys provided the new signalling and GE Transportation provided the control system and two new signaller workstations for the Paisley and Ayr control areas. The work involved was massive and included 15 kilometres of new track, 40 new point ends, 17 new signalling gantries and 423 new overhead line foundations to rebuild the overhead line electrification system, all of which had to be installed in a tight clearance envelope and limited hours of work. Meticulous planning was essential.
West of Scotland Signalling Centre The heart of the new signalling is the Invensys Westlock computer based interlockings. These are second generation technology taking over from the original SSIs pioneered by BR, Westinghouse and GEC in the 1970s. Having much greater processing capacity, relatively few modules are required for even a complex area like Glasgow. Using the time honoured 2 out of 3 principle, the interlockings are rated SIL4 in the safety table and have performed reliably since their introduction some 4 years ago at Leamington Spa. Separate Westlocks are provided for the Glasgow Central, Shields and Paisley areas. An internal transmission system connects the interlockings to the GE MCS control system and onward to the operating floor, where the layout comprises a number of VDU based signallers’ desks and supervisor positions. There is no hard wired signalling panel since these are difficult to alter as further expansion and alterations take place. As one signaller said, ”the overview is not as good but you eventually get used to it”. Distributing the interlocking commands to the external signals, points, level crossings, etc uses 64kbps circuits within the telecoms
may 2012 | the rail engineer | 53
feature
The layout comprises a number of VDU based signaller’s desks and supervisor positions.
FTN network, these being both available and resilient. The comment is made however that this arrangement is becoming obsolete, the use of IP addressing being likely to succeed it in the near future. The FTN is also used for connecting to the relay interlockings on the Ayr and Inverclyde lines. LED signals predominantly mounted on gantries have been used on the Paisley Corridor section with four lightweight VMS signals being used to overcome construction limitations and excessive cost on the St James viaduct. Unaltered points use the reliable Alstom HW2000 machine whilst the new layout introduced Hy-Drive points. Trackside power is by means of a double end fed, single phase 650v feeder cable serving REBs and lineside locations.
Track to train radio networks Also commissioned during the time of WSSC has been the GSM-R track to train radio network, the first use of this system in the UK which will eventually be adopted nationwide. The quality of the speech is reckoned to be markedly better than the Cab Secure Radio that had been in use. Siemens HiPath concentrator equipment is used to terminate the SPTs which continue to be provided at every signal, although with the introduction of GSM-R radio, decreasing use is made of these. The WSSC does not yet use Automatic Route Setting (ARS) but the facility will become available later in 2012. A separate training room has screens that mirror the main operational displays and can be programmed to reflect any disruption that the signaller is likely to encounter. Without ARS, the signallers have to set routes for the main junctions and this keeps them familiar with the skills needed. Once ARS is introduced, the routes will be set automatically from the timetable data and thus the need for refresher training becomes necessary to ensure signallers can manage disruptive occurrences that need manual intervention. The training period needed to become a signaller from scratch is around 16 weeks with a further element of ‘over the shoulder’ familiarisation before being allowed to work independently on a control desk. Part of the training includes psychometric testing to make sure signallers have the right relationship, planning and communication skills.
The Paisley Corridor and the extension of existing signalling control on the Ayr and Inverclyde lines were commissioned over the Christmas 2011 period under a 120 hour possession. All signal commands and train movements are recorded so that if any untoward incident occurs, a full analysis of what took place can be made. This can show up equipment failures as well as human errors. Recordings are kept for 28 days.
Future plans and new networking opportunities The size of both the WSSC equipment room and operating floor demonstrates that many more sections are to be added to the control area under a strategic plan. The next stage will see the Glasgow South Suburban lines transferred covering the area controlled from Cathcart signal box. This is planned to take place in April 2013 and will involve track layout changes to reinstate a double junction to replace the existing single leads. After that will be the transfer of the existing Motherwell Power Box area, extending the WSSC control almost to Carlisle. The Westlock equipment is designed to interface to any future ERTMS aspirations on the WCML, which is designated as an EU TENS route. Thereafter, further extensions will include transferring the control of the Yoker box area. Another challenge will be the provision of telecommunications links to lines not equipped with power signalling, such as the Glasgow - Barrhead - Kilmarnock and the Stranraer lines. Again, Scottish ingenuity is coming up with a solution. The FTN, being primarily designed to support the GSM-R
network, does not necessarily have its terminating points (Points of Presence - PoP) near to signal boxes, and thus the ability to get high quality data connections is that much harder. the rail engineer reported on plans for a Scottish IP network in October 2010 (issue 72), and Network Rail engineers are experimenting with using legacy infrastructure to get IP facilities to the remoter places at a reasonable cost. Extending out from the PoP with an MPLS connection over whatever cable plant is available seems to be practical and this can be done for about £10,000 per site as against £70,000 for an FTN node. Potentially this will allow old signalboxes to have modern datacom facilities, not necessarily meaning they can be abolished, but allowing them to be part of the sophisticated decision making processes that modern control centres utilise in the goal for operational efficiency. The Scottish IP network is expected to be rolled out to all but the remotest of lines covering 285 stations by 2015. With the new Network Rail Telecom (NRT) organisation in place, it is likely that this Scottish initiative will become a standard for adoption elsewhere. Those of us who were young engineers in the 1960/70s, and who thought the power boxes of that era were the ultimate in technology, now realise that nothing stands still. These latest control centres will be equally antiquated in 40 years time, when lineside signals become a thing of the past. Maybe even ERTMS will also be past its sell by date by then. Thanks are expressed to Colin Findlay, Ian Findlay, Matthew Spence, Alan Taylor from Network Rail and to Peter Allan from Invensys for facilitating the visit and for willingly explaining all the technicalities
The heart of the new signalling is the Invensys Westlock computer based interlockings.
Senior Plant Services Engineer Kewdale, Perth, Australia.
Join Western Australia's leader in Rail At John Holland we understand that our greatest resource is our people. We are looking for people to join our company and to become part of a team focussed culture within a rewarding and beneficial work environment. At John Holland we provide long term career options where we recognise the importance of flexibility and a healthy work / life balance. We have an excellent opportunity for a Senior Plant Services Engineer to join our Rail Plant team in Kewdale to assist management with the development and implementation of Plant Services systems and procedures. The provision of technical input on modifications to the major rebuild of existing equipment and the development of new specialist Rail plant and equipment is a major responsibility of this role. This role will also include the operational manuals, specifications and procedures on a day to day basis.
In addition to this other responsibilities include: · · ·
Engineering validation of maintenance activities outside of any OEM coverage Design validation of in-house modifications using change management tools Documentation control of modified plant and systems in operator, service and spare parts and document control of all drawings
As one of Australia's largest and most diverse building, engineering and services providers, with over $6 billion of work-inhand, employment with John Holland offers a world of opportunity. · · · ·
Management of the rolling stock change process Risk assessment – Engineering input on rail safety aspects Ensure maintenance of rail accreditation and the maintenance of the technical library Provide support & assistance as required to the Manager of Plant Services.
To be considered for this role you will possess: · ·
· · ·
Tertiary qualification in Mechanical Engineering or similar 7-10 years experience in a relevant / related role with the flexibility to tackle mechanical engineering issues on a wide range of rail plant and equipment Strong relationship building, influencing and negotiation skills Excellent communication skills – both verbal and written Computer literate specifically MS Word, Excel and PowerPoint.
We are also seeking to recruit for current and upcoming new build Rail and Maintenance contracts across the State of Western Australia the following suitably qualified personnel: Rail Plant Superintendents // Mechanical Fitters // Track Machine Operators
Rail Plant Supervisors Autoelectricians
Please forward your resume for the attention of cliona.ryan@jhg.com.au or visit the John Holland website at www.johnholland.com.au
• Building • Civil • Communications • Aviation Services • Water • Tunnelling • Rail • Power • Mining • Energy & Resources •
Delivering your energy infrastructure
UK Power Networks Services is a leading provider of electrical infrastructure to the rail industry. Whether it is the groundbreaking electrification of High Speed 1, or the technically complex programme of upgrade works at Blackfriars, we are consistently providing electrification excellence on the most challenging projects.
Our long-term commitment to delivering best in class electrical infrastructure is at the heart of everything we do. As part of the Cheung Kong Group, we have access to a wealth of international experience in managing power distribution and infrastructure assets.
www.ukpowernetworks.co.uk/services