Train GraphicClick on the map to explore geographics
 
End of through trains
Bristol to Waterloo?

 
Please sign our petition
(more information)
 
Campaign links here
Travel & transport from BBC stories as at 12:15 01 Dec 2021
* Pre-departure Covid tests would be valuable, say Sage scientists
- Covid: 'We could miss our son's wedding over travel rules'
- Cycling saved my life - now I need to finish round-the-world challenge
* Omicron: Do travel bans work against new Covid variants?
Read about the forum [here].
Register [here] - it's free.
What do I gain from registering? [here]
 03/12/21 - TWSW AGM - online
09/12/21 - Award Event - CRN
19/01/22 - MTUG - regular meeting
08/03/22 - WWRUG AGM - B-o-A
Random Image
Train RunningShort Run
09:40 Yeovil Pen Mill to Gloucester
10:41 Gloucester to Yeovil Pen Mill
12:02 Yeovil Pen Mill to Gloucester
12:04 Didcot Parkway to Banbury
12:42 Gloucester to Yeovil Pen Mill
13:07 Banbury to Didcot Parkway
14:00 Yeovil Pen Mill to Gloucester
15:50 Yeovil Pen Mill to Gloucester
Abbreviation pageAcronymns and abbreviations
Stn ComparatorStation Comparator
Rail newsNews Now - live rail news feed
Site Style 1 2 3 4
Next departures • Bristol Temple MeadsBath SpaChippenhamSwindonDidcot ParkwayReadingLondon PaddingtonMelksham
Exeter St DavidsTauntonWestburyTrowbridgeBristol ParkwayCardiff CentralOxfordCheltenham SpaBirmingham New Street
December 01, 2021, 12:26:48 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most recently liked subjects
[117] I am having problems with train line
[65] Access to Ashley Down Rail Station Engagement Survey
[53] Are the railways fit for their (future) purpose?
[44] Tisbury, loop
[41] Coffee Shop Advent Quiz, December 2021. Introduction and day 1
[39] Masks To Become Compulsory On Public Transport Again
News: A forum for passengers ... with input from rail professionals welcomed too
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2] 3
  Print  
Author Topic: Independently Powered EMU to be tested  (Read 27762 times)
TonyK
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5856


The artist formerly known as Four Track, Now!


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: January 15, 2015, 06:52:05 pm »

Is the reason for using Lithium Iron Magnesium Phosphate batteries so that it can LIMP home?

I don't like that word...
Logged

Now, please!
Chris125
Full Member
***
Posts: 48


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: January 18, 2015, 12:43:32 pm »

On a serious note, though, these would be ideally suited to routes such as Waterloo to Exeter if they could take power from any or all of third rail, overhead and battery (although not at the same time of course).

Alas they don't have anywhere near enough battery power for Waterloo-Exeter services, this RTM ((and RTFM) Read The Manual!) article has the key targets for this trial:

- a range of 50km (regional service)
- an acceleration and speed similar to a DMU (Diesel Multiple Unit)
- operational cycles of 30km battery and 50km overhead
- a lifetime of five to seven years
- a ^high level of intrinsic safety^

At best it could manage a branch service that involves a decent amount of running under wires but they are hardly ten-a-penny and should have a decent business case for conventional wiring, so may only be viable as an interim measure if the cost of new rolling stock can be justified.

Chris
Logged
TonyK
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5856


The artist formerly known as Four Track, Now!


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: January 18, 2015, 01:52:41 pm »


Alas they don't have anywhere near enough battery power for Waterloo-Exeter services,

Correct. There is over 90 miles of unelectrified track on that route. To be honest, with a 30km battery range, it would struggle on the Severn Beach line once the line is electrified as far as Stapleton Road. It looks like having run the 30km on battery, a ride powered externally of at least 50km is needed to recharge the batteries. The alternative is a long dwell at a station. As Chris125 says, these are likely to be most useful on a very limited number of routes.

Which is not to say "Don't do it". Battery technology has come on in leaps and bounds in the last couple of decades, and probably will continue to do so.
Logged

Now, please!
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 5939


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: January 18, 2015, 02:17:35 pm »

[Which is not to say "Don't do it". Battery technology has come on in leaps and bounds in the last couple of decades, and probably will continue to do so.

And current lithium batteries are a big advance on the old lead acid ones, aren't they? Apparently not.

The Deeside train went over 60 km sideways and 200 m up, to get to Ballater, dragging its lead-acid batteries with it. It then had an easy ride back home to recharge, and as I recall it was 2 cars not 4, but even so that makes the new train's capability underwhelming. Maybe more of a wimp than limp, though.

But that (like previous comments) is based on assuming that a production unit would be designed to match this experimental test-bed. There's no reason why it needs to be, though I have seen nothing on the subject. As described, the modification had to be reversible, and that may have limited what they have done. Losing a motor bogie in the process does rather suggest it is underpowered for use away from its flatter-than-Norfolk test track.
Logged
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 34965



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #19 on: January 19, 2015, 06:12:41 am »

To be honest, with a 30km battery range, it would struggle on the Severn Beach line once the line is electrified as far as Stapleton Road.


http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/urban/single-view/view/battery-trams-running-in-nanjing.html

I note

Quote
These are recharged through the pantograph at stops, as only 10% of the route is equipped with catenary.

and wonder is the Severn Beach line would be plausible for the IPEMU (Independely Powered Electic Multiple Unit (train running on batteries)) fleet, with overhead equipment from (say) Sea Mills to Avonmouth where perhaps it would be easier to install that through Clifton Down tunnel?
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Vice Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, and on the board of TravelWatch SouthWest.
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 5939


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: January 19, 2015, 09:26:49 am »

 A whole branch line (cf. the Deeside BEMU) isn't the only potential application for on-board battery power. Being able to leave shorter gaps in electric supply also has advantages. One is the "Dover Marine" one of stretches with no third rail for safety reasons. Another is the "heritage area", similar to the pressures concerning overhead wires for trams in city centres.

In the past, tunnels and other places where 25 kV OHLE was "difficult" were also looked as a justifying some on-board storage. However, ways have been found of putting 25 kV into narrower spaces, reducing the need for that.

The general topic is covered, under the headings "coasting, discontinuous or discrete electrification" and "Innovative low cost forms of electrification", in section 6 "Options" of the "Network RUS (Route Utilisation Strategy): Alternative Solutions", July 2013.* This is also looking, inter alia, at light rail and trams, but does analyse where a heavy rail BEMU might be used. This analysis and the current experimental programme, which is purely a "lets build one and play with it" exercise, complement each other.

They considered a 75 mile range, so Waterloo-Exeter isn't on their list. Their conclusion is:
Quote
The RUS has considered distances which we understand from
manufacturers that the technology is not currently capable of
achieving within the required time to recharge. However, given the
considerable investment of other sectors, notably the automotive
sector, there is reason to believe that the technology is likely to
improve over the 30 years of this strategy.

It is recommended that the rail industry works closely with
manufacturers as the technology develops. The Network RUS:
Electrification ^Refresh^ will take forward the recommendations of
this strategy for this technology in considering those areas of the
network which may not have a case for conventional electrification.
However, the topic does not appear in the remit for the Network RUS: Electrification ^Refresh^.

50 years ago a battery-powered  train was able to work in service, if only in a very limited way. Since then batteries have improved enormously. So I find it odd, and unconvincing, that a few niches at least are not now quite feasible and economically viable.

*You need to read this with care, as the word "gap" is used in a technology/solutions sense in the sections about literal gaps in electric supply.


« Last Edit: February 24, 2015, 04:30:02 pm by stuving » Logged
TonyK
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5856


The artist formerly known as Four Track, Now!


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: February 24, 2015, 03:39:35 pm »

The initial experiment will probably do no more than look at whether or not the concept is feasible. A converted train isn't going to perform brilliantly, but will at least provide test data for the engineers to crunch.

The question then will be whether it is worth developing an entirely new vehicle, using the best of the battery tests. Not only that, but lightweight composite body parts, regenerative braking, capacitor storage as well as battery, maybe even flywheel for overcoming the inertia when starting.

Or whether it would be cheaper to electrify the line, or continue with diesels.
Logged

Now, please!
NickF
Global Moderator
Full Member
*****
Posts: 61


View Profile
« Reply #22 on: May 11, 2015, 01:37:16 pm »

Here is an article about an Diesel / Electric / Battery system train being tested by Rolls Royce in Germany:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/industry/engineering/11595842/Greener-quieter-and-more-efficient-has-Rolls-Royce-created-the-train-of-the-future.html
Logged
paul7575
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4961


View Profile
« Reply #23 on: May 11, 2015, 01:57:31 pm »


Oh dear:  "The system also utilises regenerative braking systems first seen in Formula 1 cars".   A well researched article here...

Paul
Logged
Western Pathfinder
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1386



View Profile
« Reply #24 on: May 11, 2015, 06:04:16 pm »

Might be worse could of been Poo powered !.
Logged
Cynthia
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 298


View Profile Email
« Reply #25 on: May 12, 2015, 06:55:54 am »

Then why isn't it poo powered?  No shortage of that stuff as fuel!  Surely still more green than using batteries, as I'm not sure how they're disposed of when they're eventually unrechargeable.
Logged

Trying to break ones addiction to car travel is much harder than giving up ciggies!
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 34965



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #26 on: May 12, 2015, 02:28:03 pm »

Then why isn't it poo powered?  No shortage of that stuff as fuel!  Surely still more green than using batteries, as I'm not sure how they're disposed of when they're eventually unrechargeable.

Isn't there a difference between poo power and batteries in that batteries are a store for energy generated elsewhere, whereas the poo generates it?

I suspect that poo power may be inefficient, require heavy maintenance of the clever stuff that converts poo to movement, and I'm not sure how reliable the poo supply is.  "The 17:20 from Paddington has been delayed at Hungerford due to fuel shortage.   We have plenty on passenger on board, and expect they'll start throwing the sh*t in the next hour and we'll get going again.  In the mean time, long distance expresses will be diverted between Reading and Westbury, with Newbury and Pewsey calls replaced by a call at Swindon"
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Vice Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, and on the board of TravelWatch SouthWest.
Bmblbzzz
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 3669


View Profile
« Reply #27 on: May 13, 2015, 03:26:52 pm »

Then why isn't it poo powered?  No shortage of that stuff as fuel!  Surely still more green than using batteries, as I'm not sure how they're disposed of when they're eventually unrechargeable.

Isn't there a difference between poo power and batteries in that batteries are a store for energy generated elsewhere, whereas the poo generates it?

I suspect that poo power may be inefficient, require heavy maintenance of the clever stuff that converts poo to movement, and I'm not sure how reliable the poo supply is.  "The 17:20 from Paddington has been delayed at Hungerford due to fuel shortage.   We have plenty on passenger on board, and expect they'll start throwing the sh*t in the next hour and we'll get going again.  In the mean time, long distance expresses will be diverted between Reading and Westbury, with Newbury and Pewsey calls replaced by a call at Swindon"
It's usually a movement that produces a poo.  Cheesy
Logged

Waiting at Pilning for the midnight sleeper to Prague.
TonyK
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5856


The artist formerly known as Four Track, Now!


View Profile
« Reply #28 on: May 13, 2015, 10:03:39 pm »

Then why isn't it poo powered?  No shortage of that stuff as fuel!  Surely still more green than using batteries, as I'm not sure how they're disposed of when they're eventually unrechargeable.

Depends on the type of battery. Lead acid are very recyclable. When the surface of the lead plates gets too covered in crystalline lead sulphate to accept a charge, or mechanical stresses start to crumble the plates, or one of a number of things happens, it is kaput. The acid can be drained off - don't try this at home, as the process is regulated - and the plates simply smelted to recover the elemental lead. Lithium ion cells contain very pure copper and aluminium electrodes which are very much recoverable on an industrial scale. Rare earths such as Neodymium can also be recovered, but the rest of the contents are very dangerous, so this is a job for the experts. Silver oxide batteries, like watch batteries, contain a small amount of mercury, which it is both worth recovering and desirable to do so because of the poisonous nature of the liquid metal. Any manufacturer of batteries sold in the EU» (European Union - about) has to pay for collection, recycling, and processing of used batteries. Although this has not been ratified into UK (United Kingdom) law AFAIK (as far as I know), most big places selling domestic batteries provide a facility to collect them for recycling. Commercial batteries have a significant unit value which encourages recycling.

The "poo-powered" bus is powered by methane, like the LNG bus (not a success because of filling problems) before it, making the description hyperbole. If the same gas were burnt in a power station then supplied to the grid, as is perfectly feasible, one could argue that IEP (Intercity Express Program / Project.) will be poo-powered.

Disposal of human waste is a delicate matter, and as the supply isn't going down, it begs the question why all sewage isn't processed to recover methane. That otherwise ends up in the atmosphere, where it is a more potent greenhouse gas than the great enemy, Carbon Dioxide.

We need to take action instead of just going through the motions.
Logged

Now, please!
Chris from Nailsea
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 17816


I am not railway staff


View Profile Email
« Reply #29 on: May 13, 2015, 10:10:07 pm »

Or we could just be posting sh!t.

 Shocked Roll Eyes Tongue Grin
Logged

William Huskisson MP (Member of Parliament) was the first person to be killed by a train while crossing the tracks, in 1830.  Many more have died in the same way since then.  Don't take a chance: stop, look, listen.

"Level crossings are safe, unless they are used in an unsafe manner."  Discuss.
Do you have something you would like to add to this thread, or would you like to raise a new question at the Coffee Shop? Please [register] (it is free) if you have not done so before, or login (at the top of this page) if you already have an account - we would love to read what you have to say!

You can find out more about how this forum works [here] - that will link you to a copy of the forum agreement that you can read before you join, and tell you very much more about how we operate. We are an independent forum, provided and run by customers of Great Western Railway, for customers of Great Western Railway and we welcome railway professionals as members too, in either a personal or official capacity. Views expressed in posts are not necessarily the views of the operators of the forum.

As well as posting messages onto existing threads, and starting new subjects, members can communicate with each other through personal messages if they wish. And once members have made a certain number of posts, they will automatically be admitted to the "frequent posters club", where subjects not-for-public-domain are discussed; anything from the occasional rant to meetups we may be having ...

 
Pages: 1 [2] 3
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
This forum is provided by a customer of Great Western Railway (formerly First Great Western), and the views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that the content provided by one of our posters contravenes our posting rules (email link). Forum hosted by Well House Consultants

Jump to top of pageJump to Forum Home Page