The Rail Engineer - Issue 113 - March 2014

the rail

engineer by rail engineers for rail engineers

www.therailengineer.com

MARCH 2014 - ISSUE 113

this issue q CLASS II - FIRST CLASS q LINESIDE SIGNALLING INNOVATIONS q BOTTLE IT! q WHITEBALL TUNNEL

The pressure’s on!

REPAIRING DAWLISH SEA WALL

National Electrification Programme Six into four will go

Interference and Immunisation

Understanding electrical interference

Gales, floods and the railway

The worst weather conditions for 250 years

RIF to ROC in Scotland

The first application is commissioned TECHNOLOGY � DESIGN � M&E � S&T � STATIONS � ENERGY � DEPOTS � PLANT � TRACK � ROLLING STOCK

Level Crossing Installations

Level Crossing Installations Ltd are skilled installers of all types of crossings and experienced providers of associated construction services.

Our expertise, backed up by excellent service, has enabled us to build an ever expanding client base and reputation as a company committed to delivering work of the highest quality.

We carry out the installation, repair and maintenance of crossings for both the rail and tram networks and are able to offer a bespoke cut-to-fit installation service allowing us to overcome the problems presented by switches and bonding cables.

We also able to install crossings on curved track up to a 50 meter radius and carry out all associated interface works, including tarmac, kerbs, line marking and security fencing.

For information, please visit: www.levelcrossinginstallations.co.uk or contact our office on 01684278022

the rail engineer • March 2014

3

Contents

Six into four will go

News 6

The National Electrification Programme in six regions is awarded to four organisations, but what does that mean to them?

New trains and free ones, clearances, tunnels and ‘pudding mix’.

The pressure’s on!

12

Collin Carr looks at the start of repairs to Dawlish sea wall and the station.

24 Lessons for the future

Gales, floods and the railway

16

What happens after the water subsides and it is time to clean up?

Interference and immunisation

36

The science of understanding electrical interference.

RIF to ROC in Scotland

44

How Remote Interface technology is being applied at Edinburgh’s ROC.

Modular signalling solution

48

A successful pilot of the latest modular signalling design is completed.

Class II - 1st class

50

Class II programme is producing new technology and added benefits.

32

Signalling innovations on the lineside

56

David Bickell looks at some new developments that keep costs down.

A framework for collaboration

The human factors

How collaboration and colocation is working as part of the National Signalling Framework.

Reducing cost with GFRP

64

When you take away the earth wire, it behoves you to use insulated cabinets.

GSM-R on board

66 Bottle it!

60

Automation can often require more human management rather than less.

68

On-board kit that is making the implementation of GSM-R a success.

Signal collaboration

72

Working together to bring overseas signalling experience to the UK.

Future challenges and opportunities

74

Steve McLaren looks ahead at where the signalling industry is going.

Signal sighting made easy

78

Track inspection vehicles capture data for the Signalling Innovations Group.

Is IP the future?

80

Paul Darlington, looks at IP and how it could affect us all.

84

What have the universities ever done for us?

Rail Research UK Association working to bring in university expertise.

We’re looking to highlight the latest projects and innovations in

Rolling Stock/Depots

Infrarail Show

in the May issue of the rail engineer.

Got a fantastic innovation? Working on a great project? Call Nigel on 01530 816 445 NOW!

96

RAILLive RAIL

2014

18-19 June 2014 Long Marston Warwickshire

The Largest Outdoor Rail Event in the UK Network Rail, in association with The Rail Alliance, the rail engineer and Macrail, is proud to present Rail Live 2014: a showcase for railway infrastructure.

2014, which marks the start of Control Period 5 (CP5), will see the whole rail industry continue to embark on one of the longest sustained periods of investment the railway has seen since Victorian tim es. Network Rail will be continuing its focus on safety and delivering value for money through working more closely with suppliers.

www.raillive2014.com

In partnership with

the rail engineer • March 2014 Editor Grahame Taylor grahame.taylor@therailengineer.com

Production Editor Nigel Wordsworth nigel@rail-media.com

Production and design Adam O’Connor adam@rail-media.com

Engineering writers chris.parker@therailengineer.com clive.kessell@therailengineer.com

Awash with engineering stories this month I’ll mention floods in a moment…… But first, this month we feature articles on telecommunications and signalling – in that order as you’ve got to have telecoms before you can have any signalling. Clive Kessell takes us through the process of replacing the existing Cab Secure Radios that have seen sterling service over the past 30 years.

It’s a complicated project not helped by a complicated industry and a multitude of players.

collin.carr@therailengineer.com david.bickell@therailengineer.com david.shirres@therailengineer.com graeme.bickerdike@therailengineer.com jane.kenyon@therailengineer.com mungo.stacy@therailengineer.com peter.stanton@therailengineer.com simon.harvey@therailengineer.com steve.bissell@therailengineer.com stuart.marsh@therailengineer.com

Advertising Asif Ahmed | asif@rail-media.com Chris Davies | chris@rail-media.com Paul Curtis | pc@rail-media.com the rail engineer Rail Media House, Samson Road, Coalville Leicestershire, LE67 3FP.

Telephone: 01530 816 444 Fax: 01530 810 344 Email: hello@rail-media.com Website: www.therailengineer.com Editorial copy Email: news@rail-media.com Free controlled circulation Email: subscribe@rail-media.com 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.

Part of

5

Clive then delves into the dark art of electrical interference and immunisation – a subject so obscure that it comes with the health warning, “Not for after dinner speeches”. But it’s not that bad – quite interesting in fact - and one of those topics that can’t be ignored. It’s a subject that seems to involve everyone – signalling, traction, power, even civil engineers get involved. Ignore it at your peril!

Instead of our usual practice of looking at what’s in a box of signalling tricks, David Bickell looks at the box itself. Enclosures are an important part of any signalling installation and can get taken for granted. Durability and ergonomic considerations are almost a given, but then there are other attributes that mustn’t be forgotten such as electrical properties and fire resistance.

David has been to hear about the pitfalls of automation – the law of unexpected consequences that is ever with us. Automatic train operation has existed for a while now, but extending the concept to ever more complex layouts, whilst technically feasible, paradoxically starts to involve humans more and more when things go wrong. And you can’t trust humans!

We look again at Class II signalling equipment a year after it was introduced on Network Rail. It’s not new technology.

It’s been around for a while, but getting rid of one third of the copper in power supplies has been the catalyst for a flurry of innovation. Given the opportunities that Class II affords,

it’s not surprising that new suppliers are entering the market and new products abound.

Fancy a game of substation chess? It’s a London Underground speciality apparently as Peter Stanton found out when he covered a seminar in London entitled ‘Railway Electrification Lessons for the future’. The dark art of immunisation cropped up again, but things took a turn for the lighter with presentations on auto transformers and the possibility of taking 25kV down to the south coast.

Paul Darlington gives us a fabulous résumé of IP – what it is, where it came from and most importantly what it is capable of in a railway context.

It’s already out there in many other industries and it won’t be long before IP will be seen in the sensitive area of train control.

The extraordinary prospect of coaches running without bogies was just one of the subjects covered in David Shirres review of the Rail Research UK Association.

They will have wheels of course, and these trains will be somewhat more advanced than a class 142 (thank goodness). In fact, they’ll use the same control philosophy as the Eurofighter Typhoon with perhaps less of the firepower. Blue sky thinking is what it’s about and the UK’s universities are rather good at it.

Graeme Bickerdike has revisited Holme tunnel now that works are underway on this extraordinarily deformed structure. A hole in the ground is no match for the forces of nature once a hillside decides to move.

GRAHAME TAYLOR

With the relative luxury of a twenty week possession at their disposal, the engineers are able to shake off conventional railway tunnel techniques. They’ve turned Holme into a colliery haul road and can call on the expertise of miners who are well and truly in their element.

As we go to press, Collin Carr has just arrived back from Dawlish with his report of the latest plans to rescue the Great Western main line. We’ll let him dry out and in the meantime look at his account of the repairs to Whiteball tunnel on the main line between Taunton and Exeter.

It’s a tunnel that has been a headache for many years but has finally been taken in hand.

On the horizon, though, is the development of a tunnel factory train which will work on one line with trains able to pass on the other.

Mopping up. That’s what Chris Parker, a very experienced railway engineer, ponders on as the flood waters finally recede. It’s certainly not just a matter of patching up the track and formation, giving trains the right away and expecting everything to work. It won’t!

We’re all told that they don’t make structures like they used to. It’s probably just as well – especially when it comes to sea walls. Inevitably, railway engineering this month has been dominated by pieces of infrastructure that have failed during the recent storms.

Yes, failed is the word, not overwhelmed as some of the more lurid press reports suggest.

Constructed to a budget more than 150 years ago, many railway structures are now very tired.

Just looking at the aftermath of the Dawlish failure it’s not so hard to work out where to start.

The real challenge will be where to finish!

6

NEWS

the rail engineer • March 2014

The power of the press Last month, The Rail Engineer included a major feature on the new Aventra train which has been designed in Derby for the UK market. The article finished by stating that all the train needed now was a launch customer.

Well, within days of receiving their copies of that February issue, the procurement team at Crossrail and Transport for London (TfL) was so impressed by the description of the new

train that they ordered 65 of them.

The contract between TfL and Bombardier includes maintenance of the fleet at a new depot at Old Oak

Common. The new trains will be manufactured and assembled at Bombardier’s plant in Derby. TfL will be working with Bombardier on the final design for the trains with the first due to be delivered in May 2017. This will support 760 UK manufacturing jobs plus 80 apprenticeships. An estimated 74 per cent of contract spend will remain in the UK

economy.

The new fleet of trains will be progressively introduced to the existing rail network well in advance of services commencing through Crossrail’s central section in December 2018.

Congratulations to all concerned at Bombardier. Who now doubts the power of the press?

been overloaded with water.”

In an equally colourful description, a Network Rail spokesman says the clay had the consistency of pudding mix.

Due to the poor ground

conditions, access is a problem.

However, a temporary road has been built and most of the affected clay removed. Sheet piles are being placed on both sides of the alignment and then the

embankment will be completely rebuilt.

Osborne is the contractor landed with the unenviable task of getting the railway open again by mid-March.

Pudding mix at Botley With all the bad weather stories of failed embankments and landslips, it takes a lot to write about another one - but the single-track line between Eastleigh and Fareham in Hampshire has had a particularly bad time. Three landslips in half a mile have closed the line - the worst being an 80 metre section near Botley which has collapsed completely.

The South West Trains website has a great description of the damage. “The embankment is predominantly composed of clay. Both sides of the railway turned into a claggy mixture under the weight of water and slid outwards. It’s what engineers call a doublerotational failure and looks much like a sandcastle that has

NEWS Gauge enhancement is now being carried out on the railways for two reasons.

Freight routes are being enlarged so that the latest ‘big box’ containers don’t hit bridge arches, station platform edges and canopies - which would be noisy and upset neighbours and passengers standing on those platforms.

In addition, the electrification programme is having to clear bridge heights so that there is room to put a 25,000V conductor under them without excessive arcing which would cost money on wasted power and cause pedestrians watches to stop as they crossed the bridge.

So knowing exactly how much room there is already helps make decisions on what work needs to be done easier. For some time, Network Rail has used a software programme called ClearRoute, produced in Matlock by Balfour Beatty Rail.

the rail engineer • March 2014

Check those clearances

With all the need for more and more information, that system has been improved.

Unsurprisingly now called ClearRoute 2™, it includes new and improved functionality, as

well as faster operating speeds, to allow rail engineers to undertake gauging clearance analysis more effectively. Whether studying simple clearance checks, stepping distances or passing runs

between rolling stock and the infrastructure, the results can be provided almost instantaneously.

So hopefully - no more big score marks on the haunches of old brick arches.

519.50_mbadvert_railwayengineer_190x130_v3_Layout 1 17/01/2014 09:42 Page 1

Where innovation and heritage meet...

Supplying railway bridging solutions since 1849, from innovative plate girder solutions to conventional fully welded rail decks.

year old, ‘160 236 metre long viaduct replacement, assembled and launched in 249 hours

’

Read the case study and watch the installation in 60 seconds by visiting www.mabeybridge.com/loughor

Visit: www.mabeybridge.com

7

Email: rail@mabeybridge.com

Follow us: @mabeybridge

8

NEWS

the rail engineer • March 2014

The great goodbye!

PHOTO: ALISDAIR ANDERSON

The National Railway Museum at Shildon held a special event at the end of February as it lined up all six surviving LNER A4 class locomotives side-by-side. World speed record holder Mallard was joined by Sir Nigel Gresley, Union of South Africa and Bittern as well as two visitors from overseas, Dwight D. Eisenhower from the USA and Dominion of Canada.

4468 Mallard was built in 1938 at LNER’s Doncaster Works and, four months later, was participating in a test programme on a new

Westinghouse brake. Just nicely run in, and the first of her class to be fitted with a double chimney double Kylchap blastpipe which

gave better performance at speed, she was recorded as reaching 125.88mph on Stoke Bawnk, just south of Grantham on the East Coast main line.

Retired over a million miles later in 1963, Mallard now resides at the National Railway Museum at York. As part of the seventyfifth anniversary of the record-

breaking run, she was reunited with the other survivors of the original class of 35 locomotives which were designed by Sir Nigel Gresley.

The Great Goodbye was the last chance for enthusiasts to see all six together, three of them in steam, before they all return to their home bases.

suppliers.

Some of the largest Network Rail projects will be featured too.

Nick Elliott, managing director, national supply chain, will provide an update on the current electrification programme, Mark Somers, project director signalling & track, Thameslink, will review progress with the major upgrade of this busy cross-London link and Paul Hodson will outline plans for the Northern Hub, for which he is project director.

And the latest status of the HS2 high-speed line and the procurement strategy for it will be given by Beth West.

Commercial director at HS2 Ltd, Beth will be providing a welcome update on the presentation she made at last year’s Railtex show.

More information on the Project Updates programme can be found on the show website, which also features the latest list of exhibitors and details of the busy programme of supporting activities during

Infrarail.

Online registration to visit the Infrarail 2014 free of charge is now open. A link on the event website takes you quickly through the simple registration process. Pre-registering to visit the exhibition, which takes place at Earls Court in London from 20 to 22 May, will speed up entry and avoid a £20 charge payable by non-registered visitors.

Update yourself at Infrarail Visitors to this year’s Infrarail exhibition will have the opportunity to find out more about some of the most significant rail infrastructure schemes in the UK during a series of Project Updates running throughout the event.

Senior managers responsible for key projects will be making presentations in a programme that now also includes contributions from Transport for London - insights into the development of plans for the £1 billion Northern Line Extension of the London Underground system to Battersea Power Station will be given by the Graeme Shaw, who is heading the project. To be completed by 2019, the new deep tube line promises great opportunities for

For all the latest information on Infrarail, visit www.infrarail.com

Signals MainLine

Waiting Rooms

Freight LevelCrossing

Clocks BaggageCarts

SwitchGear Gates

Seating Software

Lighting ComputerTechnology

SafetyClothing Tools Drainage

RailMaintenance

Airconditioning Rail

Ventilation Scanners Whistle

Track Railway Station Platform

Cleaning Security Freight

WaitingRooms Scanners

Track Railway Station Platform Signage Tickets Stairs Cleaning Security Jucntions Signals

MainLine WaitingRooms Freight LevelCrossing Clocks BaggageCarts SwitchGear Gates Seating Software

SwitchGear Gates Seating Software Lighting ComputerTechnology Track Railway Station

Track Railway Station

Platform Signage Tickets

Platform Signage Tickets

Stairs Cleaning

Stairs Cleaning

Security Jucntions Signals

Security Jucntions Signals

MainLine WaitingRooms

MainLine WaitingRooms

Freight LevelCrossing Clocks

Freight LevelCrossing Clocks

BaggageCarts

BaggageCarts

SwitchGear Gates Seating

SwitchGear Gates Seating

Software Lighting ComputerTechnology

Software Lighting ComputerTechnology

SafetyClothing Tools

SafetyClothing Tools

RailMaintenance Drainage

RailMaintenance Drainage

Airconditioning

Airconditioning

Ventilation Scanners Whistle

Ventilation Scanners Whistle

20 - 22 MAY 2014 | EARLS COURT 2, LONDON, UK

Track Railway Station Platform Signage Tickets Stairs Cleaning Security Jucntions Signals MainLine WaitingRooms Freight LevelCrossing Clocks BaggageCarts SwitchGear Gates Seating Software Lighting ComputerTechnology Track Railway Station Platform Signage Tickets Stairs Cleaning Security Jucntions Signals MainLine WaitingRooms Freight LevelCrossing Track Railway Station Platform

Signage Tickets Stairs

Cleaning Security Jucntions Signals MainLine

WaitingRooms Freight LevelCrossing Clocks BaggageCarts

SwitchGear Gates Seating

Software Lighting

ComputerTechnology

SafetyClothing Tools RailMaintenance

Drainage Airconditioning Ventilation Scanners Whistle

Track Railway Station Platform

Signage Tickets Stairs Cleaning Security Jucntions Signals MainLine

WaitingRooms Freight

10th

Track Railway Station Platform

Signage Tickets Stairs

Cleaning Security Jucntions Signals MainLine

INTERNATIONAL RAILWAY INFRASTRUCTURE EXHIBITION

WaitingRooms Freight LevelCrossing Clocks BaggageCarts

SwitchGear Gates Seating

Software Lighting

ComputerTechnology SafetyClothing Tools RailMaintenance

Drainage Airconditioning Ventilation Scanners Whistle

Track Railway Station Platform

Signage Tickets Stairs

Cleaning Security Jucntions Signals MainLine

WaitingRooms Freight Tools

Railway Station Platform Signage Tickets Stairs Cleaning Security Jucntions Signals MainLine Waiting

velCrossing Clocks BaggageCarts SwitchGear Gates Seating Software Lighting SwitchGear Gates Seating Software Lighting ComputerTechnology

Track Railway Station Platform Signage Tickets Stairs Cleaning Security Jucntions Signals M

ns Signals MainLine WaitingRooms Freight LevelCrossing Clocks BaggageCarts SwitchGear Gates Seating

ng ComputerTechnology SafetyClothing Tools RailMaintenance Drainage AirCondi

othing Tools RailMaintenance Drainage Airconditioning Track Railway Station Platform Signage Tickets Stairs Cleanin

MainLine Freight L e v e l

Freight LevelCrossing

Railway Station

SwitchGear Gate Trac

ilMaintenance Drainage

Station Platform Signage

Where the industry meets… Where the industry does business • Live Product Demonstrations • The Track • Education & Training • Networking • Innovation • The Yard • The Recruitment Wall • Hundreds of exhibitors • Thousands of products Media Partners:

Supporting Organisations:

For more information: Tel:+44 (0)1727 814400

www.infrarail.com REGISTER

NOW

for free at www.infrarail.com Save £20 on the door

10

NEWS

the rail engineer • March 2014

Recordbreaking tunnel The Guinness World Book of Records database has just given the title of the ‘World’s oldest railway tunnel’ to one recently investigated in Fritchley near Crich in Derbyshire.

Located on a short horse and gravity worked mineral railway dating from 1793, the line carried limestone down from quarries at Crich to the Cromford Canal at Bull Bridge until 1933. It was blocked up in the 1980s but was reopened last year to allow an archaeological investigation to take place as part of the Heritage Lottery-funded Butterley Gangroad Project, managed by the Derbyshire Archaeological Society.

PHOTO: FORGOTTEN RELICS

Using laser scan technology, Wessex Archaeology created a virtual computer model of the tunnel. Originally about 25 metres long, 2.5 metres wide and 3.2 metres high, the southern half of the tunnel was reconstructed during the 1850s when the

railway was re-aligned. The northern half remains as-built.

Small steam locomotives replaced horses from about 1870 and it is believed that the chimney of the earliest one had to be lowered each time that the train ran through the tunnel

because of the restricted height!

Previously it had been thought that the oldest surviving railway tunnel was also in Derbyshire, at Chapel Milton, on the route of the old Peak Forest Tramway - but that one is now known to be at least two years younger.

Buy 16 - get 1 free Registered

Is your Insurance Renewal Date in the next 3-6 months?

WE INSURE • • • • •

RRV and Plant companies S&T, PWay, IRSE and Civils contractors Rolling Stock Turnkey Modifications companies Manufacturers of rail related products ROSCOs

WHY US? • • • • •

Specialist rail knowledge Risk management orientated approach Resulting in lower insurance premiums Better technical advice We are passionate about rail!

Plan early and call Keven Parker on 07816 283949 / 0121 452 8717 / 0207 983 9039 or email Keven.parker@jobson-james.co.uk

www.jobson-james.co.uk/rail Offices in London and Birmingham. Nationwide coverage.

Permanent Way Institution

German state railway operator Deutsche Bahn has started to take delivery of its new CE3 high speed trains - class 407. 15 were originally ordered for delivery commencing December 2011, and a sixteenth was added to replace an earlier-model ICE train which had been damaged.

However, due to delays in the certification process, the first train didn’t run until December 2013. As part of the package of compensation agreed between

the two parties, Siemens will build and supply a seventeenth train free.

With each train worth around €33 million, that’s not a bad offer!

Total Rail Solutions:

First port of call in an emergency

Total Rail Solutions offers full 24 hour emergency services and has equipment available for almost any task on the railway and its infrastructure. Combined with its other capabilities this enables Total Rail Solutions to offer customers a complete package for works.

The ONLY POL and Plant supplier already 100% compatible with NR/BS/LI/309

Total Rail Solutions recognise that having the correct tool for the job in hand is one of the most critical parts of undertaking work on the railway infrastructure.

The company also has the ability to fulfil all your plant and equipment needs. Plus, as an established Plant Operators’ Licence (POL) holder, it can offer a single source solution for any project. It has developed a range of road / rail vehicles and specialist small plant which are available for hire nationally.

Truly a Total Rail Solution.

Total Rail Solutions

Tel: 01962 711642 E-mail: info@totalrailsolutions.co.uk www.totalrailsolutions.co.uk

12

the rail engineer • March 2014

COLLIN CARR

PHOTO: RALPH RAYNER

PHOTO: MARK FRAZER JONES

the rail engineer • March 2014

13

The pressure’s on!

REPAIRING DAWLISH SEA WALL

COVER PHOTO: RALPH RAYNER

PHOTO: CROWN COPYRIGHT

14

the rail engineer • March 2014

T

he pressure is on. The sea wall was breached by storms on 4 February and the railway has been washed away. Business in the West Country is suffering and the government is demanding effective engineering solutions that can be quickly activated. Network Rail has set itself a target to reinstate the railway by mid-April and has appointed BAM Nuttall as principal contractor for the work to help them achieve this challenging target.

The damage to this coastal stretch of railway is extensive; more than 80 metres of the sea wall has been breached by the waves and washed out to sea. By mid February, the breach had expanded to more than 90 metres in length and the formation and track ballast behind the wall had been washed out to sea followed by the retaining wall that supported a private roadway and the roadway itself, leaving the houses beyond in a very precarious state.

Extensive damage Apart from the breach described above, there are five other locations between Dawlish and Dawlish Warren where the sea wall has been breached, but so far the damage is not as severe. Also, Dawlish station has taken a battering, the wooden down platform boarding has been ripped out and furnishings badly damaged. Further up the coast in the Teignmouth area, there are concerns about the stability of the sea wall at various locations.

The appalling weather has been relentless and the tides unsympathetic. As BAM Nuttall’s site agent Alastair Morley explained, all parties had to act immediately to protect the formation supporting the houses that were now totally exposed, and they had to do something quickly to prevent further erosion. So after cutting the rails over the breached area, the concrete-sleepered track was laid across the formation to offer added protection. Once the sacrificial track was in place, the whole area was covered in sprayed concrete, offering additional resistance to the next high tide and helping to minimise further destabilisation of the exposed row of houses.

Temporary protective barriers Whilst this work was underway, a procession of eleven ship containers was brought to site and placed on the footpath in front of the 90 metre breach. The containers were then welded together and filled with rock and rubble gathered from the site. This metal barrier has provided the much needed additional protection so that reconstruction to the damaged area could take place. However, it wasn’t plain sailing, the ferocity of the sea split two containers so running repairs to this temporary barrier has become an essential part of the daily routine. In addition, a scaffolding bridge has been constructed to span the 90 metre gap so that services and signalling equipment can be reinstated and reconnected to the existing infrastructure.

So at the time of writing this article, it appears that a little breathing space has been created and the immediate further erosion has been addressed. There is now a reasonable barrier in place to keep the hostile sea at bay for the time being. Whilst this work was underway, Network Rail was considering what needed to be done to enable all the repair work to be completed and to restore the railway to meet the deadline.

Prime Minister David Cameron with Network Rail’s Alex Evason, Patrick Hallgate and Mark Carne.

the rail engineer • March 2014

15

Skilled team Several other suppliers were needed to support BAM Nuttall as principal contractor so Amalgamated Construction (AMCO) was drafted into the process by Network Rail. One of its teams was carrying out other railway work in the area at a significant site near Tiverton, where they are carrying out repairs to Whiteball Tunnel (as reported in this issue on page 92). AMCO was given the responsibility for repairing the 90 metre breach.

Also, SISK group was brought in to rebuild the down platform which had to be demolished at Dawlish station and carry out other repairs to the station buildings and Up platform.

At a separate site, Dyer & Butler has been drafted in as principal contractor for the repairs to the sea wall between Kennaway Tunnel and Teignmouth station. As the local maintainers, Dyer & Butler will add vital local knowledge and expertise to the team and will also undertake extensive geotechnical works to the cliff face.

In addition to all the work that is taking place on site, Network Rail has procured the services of Tony Gee & Partners to develop a design for repairing the main breach. Although, at the time when this article was written, the design was still in its developmental stage, thoughts were turning towards the construction of a barrier made up from concrete vehicle barriers. These are precast concrete units about 2.5 metres in length, tapered from a base of 700mm down to 300mm and weighing approx.2.5 tonnes.

These units will be fixed to the formation using 36mm diameter dowel pins and tied together using horizontal reinforcement ties. Once this barrier is in place, the void behind will be filled with pumped concrete before reinstating the ballast formation and track. The concrete will also make up the levels for the private road surface to be laid and the retaining wall between the road and rail formation will probably be constructed using precast L-shaped concrete units.

PHOTO: MARK FRAZER JONES

24-hour commitment This is a team effort that is calling on total commitment from everyone involved. To ensure that their efforts are coordinated and effective, there is a site meeting every morning with all interested parties attending including Network Rail’s local track and signalling maintenance teams.

This is followed up with another meeting late afternoon to assess progress, consider new developments and address any emerging problems. Meanwhile, there are more than 100 people working a 12-hour shift with a similar number ready to replace them for the next shift.

Between the two shifts, a handover meeting ensures that everyone knows exactly what is going on and what is being planned for the future.

However, within this ordered and well managed process, the totally chaotic weather continues to pound the coastline. Alastair emphasised that everyone in the team is determined that nothing will stop them achieving their task of ensuring that trains will be able to run between Newton Abbot and Exeter as soon as humanly possible.

Everyone is doing everything within their powers to deliver what is required and when it is all over, all those involved will deserve a well earned holiday - but definitely not by the seaside.

Dyer & Butler has earned an enviable reputation for carrying out, often complex construction work, to the highest standards. Dyer & Butler’s success has been achieved by focusing on meeting our clients’ needs and expectations. Our sustained growth has been achieved by consistently, and safely, delivering projects on time and to budget.

“Our People Make the Difference”

“80% Turnover from Repeat Business”

Operating throughout England and Wales, Dyer & Butler has worked on the rail network for over 20 years

Mead House, Station Road, Nursling, Southampton, Hampshire, SO16 0AH Tel: 023 8074 2222 Fax: 023 8074 2200

16

the rail engineer • March 2014

Cowley Bridge Junction, Devon.

Gales, floods and the railway

CHRIS PARKER

H

aving spent many years looking after railway infrastructure, I feel for industry colleagues who have been confronted with the effects of the extreme weather we’ve experienced in the last few months. My own experience of this has been relatively mild this time, being confined to the frustration of having my narrowboat stuck on the Nottingham canal since before Christmas because the River Trent has been too high for safe navigation. Not a great hardship compared with the sufferings of thousands of people in the areas of the country where the worst weather effects have been seen!

I can only imagine what it has been like for colleagues in the rail industry this time. Robin Gisby has been doing a great job fronting Network Rail’s reports on Radio 4, and the internet and news reports in other formats have kept us all informed more generally about the effects of what is being said to be the worst weather for 250 years.

So what happens to the railways in the sort of conditions we have recently seen, what can be done to put right the damage, and perhaps more important, what might be done to mitigate the effects of similar events in the future? It seems accepted by most informed people that this kind of thing is likely to become much more common than in the past.

Clearing up I don’t think I need to go into great details about the kinds of problems this sort of weather causes the railways. We’ve seen and heard plenty recently about trees on the line, speed restrictions, flooding and worse. So I will consider instead what happens in the aftermath.

Some things are not complicated; a tree across the line has to be cut up and loaded away. If overhead lines have been brought down or other infrastructure has been damaged by its fall, repairs are affected and the service can be restored.

This process may not be easy to carry out, for example,

because of the remoteness of the location or the shortage of staff and other resources, but the basics are otherwise pretty straightforward.

Shallow flooding of the line may seem even easier to deal with. The water goes away, whether naturally or with human assistance through pumping or other means. Unless the signalling or power supplies have been damaged, that’s it isn’t it? Restart the normal train service and away we go!

Well, it may not be that simple. In track circuited areas there may be a problem with the circuits failing to resume normal operation due to contamination of the track and ballast by Haddiscoe, Norfolk.

the rail engineer • March 2014

17

Gr o

igation est nv

echniques ete T r c n Co d Blasting g an n i ill ineering a Dr Eng nd d I un

Geotec

ica hn

lS

olu tio

USE FUTURE TECHNOLOGY

ns

TODAY.

Axle Counting & Wheel Detection Reliable all over the world!

Gr ou n

01236 467 000 bamritchies.co.uk

d

g and Investiga erin tio e n i n g En

STRUCTURAL PRECAST FOR RAILWAYS

Frauscher Sensortechnik GmbH St. Marienkirchen | AT | office@frauscher.com

Bridge Deck Construction Station Platforms Viaduct Slabs Bespoke Units

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

Frauscher Polska Sp. z o. o.

Katowice | PL | office@pl.frauscher.com Frauscher UK Ltd. Camberley | UK | office@uk.frauscher.com Frauscher Sensor Technology (Beijing) Co. Ltd. Beijing | CN | office@cn.frauscher.com Frauscher Sensor Technology India Private Limited Bangalore | IN | office@in.frauscher.com

www.frauscher.com

18

the rail engineer • March 2014

Datchet, Berkshire. material left behind by the water. It’s fairly rare, in my experience, but it can happen and results in unpredictable track circuit failures that may require remedial actions. These may run from changing the rail pads and insulators to complete re-ballasting in the odd extreme case. Insulated joints might also need to be changed in some instances.

Re-ballasting may also be required if the water leaves behind a significant load of silt or clay deposits in the ballast. It would be unusual for it to be necessary immediately after flooding, but it is more likely that the life of the ballast will be shortened by the contamination.

When ballast ceases to drain freely due to the blockage of the voids between the individual ballast particles, the resultant build up of water in the ballast and formation leads to “wet beds” and deteriorating track geometry which cannot be made good long term without renewal or cleaning of the ballast. These operations are disruptive and expensive, even when modern technology is used to good effect in their execution.

Longer-term problems Deeper flooding of the line, even if relatively static, causes far greater problems. The issues will be much the same for the track engineer in all probability, but the signal, telecomms and power systems begin to be seriously involved too. Returning the line to traffic obviously takes longer and requires more money and resources once that happens.

When moving water is involved, then things can get really serious.

Water movement affecting the track may take the form of swollen watercourses that become high enough to enter the railway and run along or across it, as at Cowley Bridge in 2011/12. It may take other forms too, such as the inflow of surface water from adjoining higher ground, or even the flow of flood-water trapped behind an embankment until it over-tops it and flows across the line. Finally, there is the sort of damage that we have recently seen from the sea, where tide and waves combine to invade and wreck the railway. The Cambrian Coast Line was severely damaged in this way recently and even more recently the Great Western main line around Dawlish.

The problems caused by moving water range from the washing out of ballast from a length of the line to the destruction of the underlying formation and even the complete removal of structures such as parts of embankments or retaining walls. Clearly the track and its supporting structures are not the only things affected in such instances - if there are other infrastructure assets present, they too are likely to be damaged or destroyed. Dawlish Station is a recent example.

The restoration of this sort of damage is a major operation requiring a full scale project whose particulars will vary from site to site. Even the replacement of a few scores of metres of ballast on a relatively undamaged formation needs proper care and planning. Major damage such as that on the Cambrian or at Dawlish is serious heavy engineering

needing proper surveying, design and construction skills and resources.

It is not just a case of getting the railway back into use anyhow, proper diligence is required to consider how to do this in a manner that, if possible, eliminates or at least greatly reduces, the risk of re-occurrence.

Structural damage Other infrastructure is at risk, of course. Overhead lines may blow down. Station canopies are vulnerable to heavy winds, and other buildings may be damaged - the collapse of part of a building in Holborn with fatal consequences recently is clear enough evidence of that, though not a railway structure this time.

Bridges and viaducts may be at risk from swollen rivers and water courses even when the water is not sufficiently high to directly affect the railway above. British Rail experienced this at Glan Rhyd on the Carlisle, Cumbria.

20

the rail engineer • March 2014

Heart of Wales line in 1987. Four people died in a swollen river when an apparently sound bridge collapsed under a DMU because the foundations of one of its piers had been scoured away by flood-waters overnight. The weakened structure couldn’t bear the weight of the train, collapsing into the river and taking the train down with it.

A major project had to be set into being to investigate how this could have occurred without anyone becoming aware of such a risk, and to determine how to avoid further similar failures. This in turn led to the investigation of hundreds of BR bridges and structures over or near to watercourses to determine whether they were safe, safe if subjected to special precautions or in need of immediate strengthening or reconstruction.

Signalling and power supply assets may require attention, to move them out of harms way for example. This was done at Cowley Bridge, where signalling apparatus cases were raised above the level of likely future flooding. Doing this kind of thing won’t stop the flooding of the line itself, but it does reduce the time, money and resources necessary to restore it to traffic after the waters recede. At Cowley Bridge the second time around, it was definitely quicker and easier to get the line reopened because of the relocation of the vulnerable equipment after the first inundation.

Changing assets that cannot be moved to a type that is less vulnerable to water is another strategy, using axle-counters in place of track circuits being one example.

Planning ahead The foregoing is a quick view of some of the tactical issues. What about future strategies that might shift the railway totally out of the flood risk situation? A simple example would be the kind of works carried out to some bridges post-Glan Rhyd. There were many bridges (and some other structures) that could not be shown to be founded on sub-structures that were scour proof to a safe extent. Where reasonable investigatory techniques could not confirm the adequacy of the foundations, the foundations of such structures were typically strengthened by deepening them to take them below the level to which scouring might occur. This was done by various means, such as the installation of needle piles.

An alternative was the installation of a structural apron on the river bed under the bridge and for some distance up and down stream. This apron had the job of preventing the scouring away of the river bed in the vicinity of

Near Reading, Berkshire.

Pandy, Monmouthshire.

the bridge. It was not a usual choice though, as there are potential serious problems with that approach. The collapse of the Inverness railway viaduct demonstrated this, as that viaduct had an apron beneath it that failed, it is believed, due to works carried out by others downstream of the railway. The failure of the apron left the viaduct vulnerable to scour, and this was not detected in time to avoid its collapse.

Discrete problems such as scour prone bridges are relatively simple to deal with, what about long lengths of line that are at risk? The Brunel main line around Dawlish is one important example, but there are others all over the network. Long, deep cuttings like those at Merstham in Surrey are potentially seriously at risk, as has been shown by the landslip in the recent storms.

Tunnels and cuttings may be subject to flash flooding by surface water (or even burst water mains!), and as mentioned before, the adjoining topography means that the railway is liable to inundation by watercourses or flooded land. Embankments too may be at risk if deep flood-water builds up against them. This could cause problems due to the difference in the head of water between one side of the bank and the other, through wave action on the embankment slopes or by over-topping scouring away the track and structure.

The infrastructure owner must be forward thinking in planning for the likely increase in these flood related risks to their assets. In this country, that principally concerns Network Rail. As well as reacting to the damage recently done by repairing it in a suitable robust form, it needs to be examining its network in detail in the light of the increased potential for storm and flood damage to be expected if climate change continues as scientists are predicting.

Rapid Ballast Replacement on Plain Lines and through Switches & Crossings Our brand new & purpose built fleet of Ballast Replacement machines and teams are now available to deliver Ballast Replacement Programmes and Track Lowering Schemes nationwide.

Whilst the machine is removing the ballast a team of road rail excavators and a permanent way team are working alongside to replace the ballast and to check the track geometry and tamp the ballast.

Old ballast is replaced with new without the need to remove track or sleepers.

If your ballast / track has been recently damaged by floods / water call us now to discuss hiring the machines and team.

Andrew Sumner Rail Contracts Manager t. 01228 882 300 e. andrew.sumner@stobartrail.com Gary Newton Estimating Manager t. 01228 882 300 e. gary.newton@stobartrail.com Dave Richardson Plant Manager t. 01228 882 300 e. david.richardson@stobartrail.com

stobartrail.com

22

the rail engineer • March 2014

National strategy A network-wide strategy is needed which covers the full range of issues. At its most basic, this would mean things like eliminating lineside trees that could fall onto the line or the OLE. That’s not as simple as it may appear, given that many such trees are not on the railway’s land nor in its ownership. However, let’s start with the easy stuff and get rid of those that Network Rail does have control of. It won’t be popular and may involve managing tree preservation orders and so on, but it needs doing so that we no longer need speed restrictions every time there is a gale forecast.

The Dawlish-type scenario is much more difficult. I am sure that my fellow engineers can design and construct better structures than the existing (or recently existing!) ones to support and protect the line along the Cornish and Devon coastline. I am sure that they could take into account the expected further increases in the height of the tides and surges to be faced in the future. Whether this would be cost effective for the whole of the length of ‘at risk’ railway is doubtful. I also imagine that, however good these structures may be, they will not provide an impregnable defence against the sea, and at some future time there would be further service disruption.

Dawlish cannot be the only place where such intractable problems may be foreseen, and strategies must be developed to manage each of them. There is already talk in the media of the possibility of reopening old alternative rail routes to the West Country, such as the line via Okehampton. That is one possible approach that would offer more benefits than just another way round when the sea gets rough.

In normal times, it would additionally increase network capacity and provide a rail service to communities that lost it many years ago.

The restoration of former rail routes has been successful already, particularly in Scotland, so why not in a serious way in England and Wales too?

Priorities Finally, I have been concerned to see the current weather effects being used by some in the media to open up yet another front of attack on HS2. Why, they argue, spend all that money on a new railway when we can’t even keep the existing ones open when there is a bit of bad weather? Let’s have some of the cash to put right the existing network.

I have no time for such ideas. The existing network hasn’t the capacity to cope with demand when the weather is good and all is working perfectly. Perfecting its weather resistance will not alter the shortfall in capacity, just make that capacity more reliably available.

Our country needs to face up to the need to spend strategically on its infrastructure. To spend both to make existing long-lived infrastructure robust against climate change and to meet future demand changes and increases by providing new infrastructure. Those two are not alternatives, they are equal essentials that must both happen.

I was privileged to sit on a panel that assisted the Institution of Civil Engineers to draw up its responses to the public consultations on the Phase 1 and Phase 2 proposals for HS2. One of the Institution’s most important comments in both its response documents was the insistence that the country needs a proper transport strategy. One of the greatest difficulties in arguing coherently in favour of HS2 is the inability to show that it fits the country’s future transport needs because we do not have a transport strategy properly developed in response to a valid assessment of what those needs will be.

I go further, supporting far greater engineers than myself, people like Sir John Armitt. I say that there is a vital requirement in this country for a strategic plan for our infrastructure, not just our transport infrastructure.

Which of our politicians has the guts to take up that requirement and do something positive and effective about it?

The editor comments…

Getting back to some basic issues - a flood has two main components. More water (usually) than normal and water that can’t get away. The railways have a chance to affect both parts. More water can be caused by water coming from sources that are new, from fields with changed farming practices, from large areas of hard surfacing. The changes can be very slow - probably over a generation or so. They may not be detected until the ‘great rains’ come.

Getting rid of water is generally the area where the railways can score the more spectacular of own goals.

Forgotten culverts, drains and siphons will eventually silt up and become useless. Again, all this is a very slow process. Local knowledge dies out and is one of the first casualties of reorganisations. But it’s not only the railway that has to maintain its infrastructure.

Landowners downstream have an obligation to keep waterways clear, but the railway should remember this and keep an eye on what is happening over the fence.

Whatever the frequency of future events, one thing is for sure. The assets are getting older and, with Victorian structures, what you see is not necessarily what you get!

Grahame Taylor Dalton, North Yorkshire - circa 1988.

Delivering whole life, end-to-end asset lifecycle solutions As one of the UK’s leading

engineering solutions providers, we specialise in

technical delivery, innovative expertise and sustainable solutions.

We are engineering tomorrow today, through more innovative products and services that will shorten lead times, enhance the quality of project delivery and, above all, provide cost-effective solutions.

We bring our extensive knowledge and experience to deliver value to our customers’ assets across all phases of the project lifecycle: Advisory and design Complex programme management Operations and maintenance

Speak to our Rail team today

01628 842444 www.costain.com Scan here to discover why you should choose Costain

24

the rail engineer • March 2014

National Electrification Programme

six into four will go T

o see the extent to which the electrification programme is ramping up in this country, one only has to look at the budgets. In the five-year control period that is just ending (CP4), there was a total spend of £260 million. That in itself is a significant amount of money.

But in CP5, which stretches from April 2014 to March 2019, the budget has grown to £4 billion. That immense figure can be split roughly into £2 billion for electrification work and another £2 billion for allied civil engineering work such as gauge clearances.

In addition, there are several more large pieces of work that are not included in those figures.

The operation of Network Rail’s new high-output electrification train that has been awarded to Amey, the electrification component of the Edinburgh to Glasgow Improvement Programme (EGIP), Phase 1 and 2 of the North West electrification (being delivered by Balfour Beatty Rail) and TransPennine electrification which is currently waiting to be awarded.

Inabensa working in Spain.

Forming a new community Network Rail has announced that the £2 billion will be delivered against six regional framework agreements which have been split between four organisations. Nick Elliott, currently Regional Director – Southern but soon to take up a new role as managing director of the national supply chain, was in charge of the Network Rail team which made the recent announcement.

“Awarding these contracts was all about ensuring that scarce resources can be used most efficiently,” he told The Rail Engineer.

“We talked with the industry, the contractors who were bidding for this work and who wanted to be part of what we are doing, and this is what they wanted.”

NIGEL WORDSWORTH

With a fixed workbank, and several years of visibility, the contractors can now plan what people, skills and equipment they will need to deliver the various schemes.

Regional frameworks awarded »» Southern region: AmeyInabensa »» Central (London North Western, South) region: ABC »» Central (East Midlands) region: Carillion-Powerlines »» Central (London North Western, North) region: Balfour Beatty »» Scotland & North East region: Carillion-Powerlines »» Western & Wales region: ABC The framework agreements are for seven years, with the potential for three one-year extensions.

Working together to power progress

We’re delighted to help deliver the National Electrification Programme for the Southern Region, AmeyInabensa offers over 50 years’ experience in the rail sector.

Combining Inabensa’s international experience of electrification, overhead line and traction projects with Amey’s rail asset management expertise, local industry knowledge and history of successful client relationships. www.amey.co.uk www.inabensa.com

26

the rail engineer • March 2014

North West Electrification.

Now that the contracts are in place, and the contractors are no longer competing for business, Nick wants them to all work together so that best practice and discovered efficiency improvements can be shared to keep the cost of all the programmes down. REDP – the rail electrification delivery programme – is moving to REDG – the delivery group – comprising these four companies plus some other key players such as designers and power transmission and distribution companies, to take this process forward.

“I’m very excited,” Nick continued. “We have the opportunity to form a new community, investing in common, industry-wide resources.

We are planning to create a National Academy for electrification training – not an actual centralised training school but a federated academy across the country, bringing the training facilities our contractors already have together with Network Rail’s and adopting common standards and qualifications.”

This all sounds very impressive. However, if the industry is going to gear up in this way, what is the long term future? Will it all come to an end in March 2019 with the completion of CP5?

“Not at all,” Nick explained. “These frameworks are for seven years, with a possible three years of extensions, so that will take us to the end of CP6. And we (Network Rail) are already planning with the Department for Transport what work will be needed in CP6 and beyond.”

First out of the blocks So that’s the view from Network Rail, but what do the contractors actually think about the new plans?

One of the first schemes to get underway will be the electrification of the Midland main line. Preparatory works are due to start this summer, and it is one of two regions won by the joint venture Carillion-Powerlines, a combination of the British civil and railway engineers Carillion and SPL Powerlines – an electrification specialist based in Vienna which has group companies in most European countries. The Rail Engineer recently reported on one of its contracts in Sweden, during which they were training linesmen from other countries including the UK (issue 104, June 2013).

Martin Smith is Carillion’s project director - electrification. “We were very pleased to get these two regions,” he said. “We are already carrying out gauge enhancements in the Midlands for the Doncaster to Water Orton (D2WO) scheme, and we are involved in electrification schemes in Rutherglen and Cumbernauld in Scotland, so they are a good fit.”

Early engagement in the process is very

important to Carillion-Powerlines as they can then influence how things will be built, and in what order.

“This first thrust will be to electrify from Bedford to Corby,” Martin Smith continued.

“But we shall also be working alongside other contracts, such as the rebuilding of Leicester and Derby stations, to take advantage of any blockades and access that give us the opportunity to get things done early.”

His colleague in the joint venture is another Martin – Martin Hawley of Powerlines. As the electrification specialist, he is concerned about resources. “One of the reasons we came together is to combine our strengths in terms of training and our investment in people,” he commented. “We have already taken on 40 new recruits with another 10 joining us now.

We needed to get them recruited early so that, by the time we start work later this year, they are fully up to speed.”

“We have 350 linesmen in Powerlines, and we deployed 30 of them with Carillion

the rail engineer • March 2014

27

high risk? we’ve got you covered Arc:Gear multi layer workwear system to protect against electric flash explosion.

Manufactured from unique lightweight fabrics offering unrivalled levels of breathability and movement which will not melt, drip or fuse on contact with an electric flash. Combined with our unique Premier Arc laundering service, PHS Besafe is the UK’s only outerwear rental service to the rail industry.

a complete workwear solution 0121 5211400

www.besafe.co.uk

Source code: RA100

We line up your power Our international offices 1 Powerlines Group Holding SPL Powerlines Austria SPL Powerlines Telecommunication 1 SPL Powerlines VLB Leitungsbau 2 SPL Powerlines Benelux 3 SPL Powerlines Czech Republik

6

4 SPL Powerlines Germany

10

5 SPL Powerlines Hungary 6 SPL Powerlines Norway 7 SPL Powerlines Poland

11

8 SPL Powerlines Switzerland 2

7

9 SPL Powerlines Slovakia 10 SPL Powerlines Sweden

4 8

3

9 1 5

11 SPL Powerlines United Kingdom Glasgow Office: Unit 3A, Hagmill Crescent, East Shawhead Enterprise Park, Coatbridge ML5 4NS T: 01236 424666 E: office.uk@powerlinesgroup.com

Doncaster Office: Unit 4, Potteric Carr Industrial Estate, Potteric Carr Road, Doncaster DN4 5NP T: 01302 424666 E: office.uk@powerlinesgroup.com

28

the rail engineer • March 2014

Balfour Beatty Rail’s new electrification train.

over Christmas. We can use our European workforce to fill the peaks and troughs, although the UK company will have its own workforce for most of the work.”

This philosophy is a common theme across the industry. All of the successful contractors see that employing their own qualified linesmen is the way to go rather than relying on contingent labour. The feeling is that having fully-employed staff is the way to ensure stability.

The other resource that all of the framework contractors will need is the actual equipment to carry out the work. Carillion-Powerlines is still finalising its requirements, but has a fair idea of what it wants.

“We could go for a conventional train, a locomotive and a set of wagons – or for a series of specialist road-rail vehicles which work together in a ‘production line’,” Martin Smith mused. “We have already spent over £3 million on plant – SRS lorries, baskets and so on – for our MAFA (multi-asset framework agreement) work, so we are likely to buy more of the same.”

Real Scale The other company to win two geographical areas is ABC Electrification, named after its three owners – Alstom, Babcock and Costain.

Jonathan Willcock is both an Alstom UK

main board director and one of two Alstom nominees on the ABC board.

“This contract is just right for us,” he enthused. “When we set up ABC, we scaled it to have a turnover of £150-£200 million per year. We could see the need for a wellorganised and experienced electrification contractor. We had already set up ATC, our joint venture with TSO and Costain which won the £350 million fit-out contract for Crossrail, and wanted to do the same thing for the national railways so we invited Babcock to join us.

“We had a number of false starts, we bid on a few contracts but were unsuccessful, and then we won the £70 million West Coast power supply upgrade project. We learned an awful lot from that. Now we have won these

two regions of the national electrification programme (NEP) we have real scale.”

The three constituent companies seem well matched. Alstom is the equipment supplier and engineering manager, Babcock has real experience in working with Network Rail at both regional level and on national frameworks, and Costain are highly professional project managers. But that doesn’t mean they will do everything themselves.

“We have an arrangement with Keltbray to be our tier two supplier for both machinery and manpower,” Jonathan continued. “We also have arrangements with Atkins, our designers in the North West, and Arup for the Welsh valley lines. Systra is working with us on EGIP but that is outside of this framework.”

TOGETHER WE MAKE IT HAPPEN

ABC Electrification Ltd is a joint venture between Alstom, Babcock and Costain, bringing together global electrification experience, large scale UK rail capability and major programme management expertise. Currently delivering Network Rail’s West Coast Power Supply Upgrade contract, ABC Electrification is delighted to have been awarded two of Network Rail’s largest National Electrification Programme framework contracts in Central (London North Western, South) region and the Wales and West region.

www.abc-electrification.co.uk

30

the rail engineer • March 2014

In terms of hardware, ABC already has access to two specialist work trains. Babcock has a piling train and Alstom has a wiring train operating in Europe. Plans are already underway to bring that over to the UK. Some modifications will be needed so that it meets the British loading gauge but, as Jonathan stated, “nothing major”.

Really chuffed Balfour Beatty Rail also has a wiring train, which will be going into service this month in the North West. It has already undergone successful trials. Managing director Mark Bullock is very proud of it. “It’s an actual train,” he enthused. “We had a couple of motive power units we weren’t fully utilising, so our plant engineers looked into what was available on the market, and what we could do ourselves.

By doing it in-house, buying in what we needed and reutilising what we already had, we value engineered an 80% saving on what it would have cost if we had gone to a manufacturer with our specification.”

It is well worth Balfour Beatty investing in this type of kit. Although it only won one geographical area of the NEP, the northern end of London North Western, that only represents about one third of the electrification work that the company carries out. It is also heavily involved in the above-ground sections of Crossrail and also in several multi-disciplinary projects (London Bridge for example) which have an electrification element. Still, Mark said that he was “really chuffed” that the company had won this important framework which he estimates will be worth around £200 million in the five years of CP5.

Having sufficient experienced linesmen is something that Balfour Beatty Rail also recognises is something it needs. Another 40 are to be recruited, but Balfour Beatty Rail has its own accredited training facility in Liverpool, convenient for the new project area, so Mark doesn’t see that as a real problem.

Balfour Beatty is also working on upgrading DC electrified track as part of the Track Partnership with London Underground. Although a different environment, Mark explained that lessons learned in one area do carry over to the other.

Taking the critical underground network away from London is painful hence all works must be completed to time every time - overruns are not an option. “Track Partnership is proud of its record in delivering to this requirement. We are working with industry partners to cross transfer knowledge and expertise we have developed in readiness and preparation processes.”

More than happy The southern region of the NEP was won by a new joint venture: AmeyInabensa. Although

based in Oxford, Amey is owned by the Spanish Ferrovial group, and that company has worked closely with electrification compatriots Inabensa on the Spanish high speed lines.

“We have worked well together in Spain,” explained Javier Sanchez, Inabensa’s railway electrification director. “We currently have a lot of work around the world, in Saudi Arabia,

own destiny, so we shall recruit our own core workforce and have the possibility to fill-in from Spain when we need to.”

So, all four organisations seem happy with their share of the £2 billion NEP. They are all intending to recruit and train their own fully-employed workforce (although ABC is also working with Keltbray), with three of them

Chile, France and India, so when Amey wanted a partner for the UK it seemed natural.”

Simon Rhoden, Amey’s business director for rail, agrees. “We already have a close relationship with Network Rail, and have made a big commitment to them on Great Western where we will operate the high output train. To give them the confidence that we could deliver another complete electrification scheme we needed a partner and, as Inabensa has already worked successfully with Ferrovial in Spain, they were the obvious choice.”

The joint venture’s region in the south is with two projects close to where Amey is already working on Great Western and the Barking to Gospel Oak project in Central London, and Simon is “more than happy” to be involved in the early development of these challenging projects.

Despite the skills of the two companies, it was felt that a UK-based design capability was also needed, so a second joint venture was formed, this time a four-way amalgamation of Amey, Inabensa, Mott MacDonald (for its expertise with power distribution networks) and URS which has a good reputation for overhead line design.

“The Southern area is potentially more than just overhead wiring,” Javier continued. “In some areas there will be both AC and DC systems on the same line, and later we may have to decommission the third-rail installation.”

“It’s a 7+3 year contract,” Simon continued.

“That takes us into CP6 and we still have to understand the CP6 workbank. However, we shall be training people up to do the work. We estimate that we will need 150-200 people, of which around 80% at any one time will be UK personnel with the balance being trainers and specific skills from Inabensa. The model is for us to be self-sufficient, in charge of our

filling in where necessary from their overseas joint venture partners. While not able to do that, Balfour Beatty Rail has a larger domestic operation so it can mix and match from its other projects.

Intellectual appeal Reaction to Network Rail’s idea that all of the contractors will sit around the table exchanging experiences was a little more mixed. All felt that it was, in theory, a good idea. Jonathan Willcock (Alstom) said that “we should all work holistically, but we need to discuss how to do that. We all need to come up with a method for all of us to work collectively.”

Mark Bullock (Balfour Beatty Rail) said that he felt “people will initially hold back, as we are all competitors in the room. Network Rail wants us to engage to share ideas. It’s a nice concept, and intellectually it appeals to me. We have a track record of working in multi-party alliances with Network Rail and other contractors.”

Simon Rhoden of Amey was more positive: “Competition is negated as we are already in the framework. Old rivalries should be put aside. Sharing best practice is a good idea and is healthy for the industry.”

Interestingly, only one of the companies, Carillion-Powerlines, spoke at length about engaging with local small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) along the route. It intends to use local fabricators for bracketry and simple components, and also local labour where it can.

Martin Smith was quite clear that he felt it was good to get local business on board as it solves many problems with lineside neighbours before they get started.

Maybe that’s the first thing that the new panel should discuss across its table?

Driving efficiencies in electrification Scan to find out more

Saving time, reducing costs and introducing safer ways of working. We develop innovative solutions that have a positive, tangible impact every day on the UK rail network.

Our new high output OLE wiring train has been designed to do just that. Capable of installing a full tension length of 2,000 metres of catenary and contact wire simultaneously in under five hours, it provides a safer, more efficient method for installing overhead lines.

Currently being deployed on the North West Electrification programme, this new approach will help Network Rail to meet delivery targets on the most ambitious programme of national electrification in a generation.

020 7216 6800 www.bbrail.co.uk

• POWER & ELECTRIFICATION • TRACK • SIGNALLING • ASSET MANAGEMENT • MULTI-DISCIPLINARY PROJECTS •

32

the rail engineer • March 2014

PETER STANTON

Lessons for the future

A

s the tempo of railway electrification in the United Kingdom increases, there is a need to remember that we must acknowledge and gain from earlier experiences. It is crucial to benefit from past lessons and apply that knowledge to current and future projects. As most of these are still generally in the design phase, this is the point at which lessons learned can be applied rather than later, when boots are on the ground and rework could be necessary.

With this positive thought in mind, the Institution of Engineering and Technology recently held a seminar in London entitled ‘Railway Electrification - Lessons for the future’ which was attended by a good cross-section of industry players. The day was led by Roger White of Atkins who looked for good ideas, views on costs and a harvesting of experience to identify key factors in taking electrification forward.

Two comes before one There has been a long history of development of overhead line design, moving from the original works on the West Coast main line in the early 1960s to the more recent West Coast Route Modernisation upgrade and the construction of the Channel Tunnel Rail Link / HS1. There has also been considerable development in mainland Europe and these advances have been reviewed to produce

a solid design range for current and future works.

The new ranges for the UK are series two and series one - quoted that way round as two precedes one in development. Series two is in the process of being installed in the North West as part of the project to electrify the route between Manchester and Liverpool along with other associated lines. Series two is suitable for speeds up to 110mph and is not TSI (technical specification for interoperability) compliant.

Series one is being developed by Furrer and Frey with a view to enabling 140 mph running; it will be TSI compliant. The final goal, of course, is to achieve one system suitable for the UK while acknowledging international developments.

In the background also lurks the consideration of what do to with the ageing 650V DC railway.

Noel Dolphin of Furrer and Frey looked forward to the production of a design range which would have its own manuals, convenient sourcing and completed system verification. Naturally this would be a system with enhanced performance, reduced maintainability (vital in a more crowded railway with less maintenance access) and optimum constructability utilising high-output plant where possible. The philosophy of ‘Safe by Design’ will be greatly enhanced by less on-site assembly.

the rail engineer • March 2014

33

Furrer+Frey AG Overhead contact line engineering Design, manufacturing, installation Thunstrasse 35, P.O. Box 182 CH-3000 Berne 6, Switzerland Telephone + 41 31 357 61 11 Fax + 41 31 357 61 00

www.furrerfrey.ch

Furrer Frey

®

Overhead contact lines

experience would allow contingencies to be built in. A useful tip was also to make the electrical control room operator your best friend!

As before, Ellen referred to “Safe by Design” and usefully reminded the audience of an incident which had occurred around a piece of switchgear that had never been used - optimise the design and reduce risk by ensuring only essential elements are designed into the system.

The process was neatly summed up in four bullet points: »» Open communication »» Continuous improvement »» Challenge and engage with others »» Share your experiences.

Reviewing auto transformers To follow that comprehensive review of where electrification is going, the conference was then treated to an excellent paper by Ellen Wintle, senior route asset manager with Network Rail. The subject was the installation of the auto transformer system which was first piloted on the ‘Hilton’ section (Hillmorton to Milton Keynes.), installed on Trent Valley four-tracking and is now proceeding in its phase-three guise on the West Coast main line near Oxenholme. Ellen was determined to ensure that lessons that had been learned

from the earlier phases would be adopted and developed within current designs and construction.

Her first reminder was to identify the output and let the design develop in line with that. The original scheme had developed the design in parallel with verification but now there should be an electrification safety case available to all future schemes. An interface management plan would be needed and construction would be managed in line with the ability to access the infrastructure. Commissioning should be considered during design and previous

Finally, a very useful reference point for system development is the Rail Electrification Development Programme (REDP). This crossindustry group has been formed to identify and implement initiatives that will enable the industry to meet the challenges of delivering the forward programme of new electrification.

To close, Ellen put the following words up for digestion: »» Understanding performance, operating and maintenance requirements from the outset. »» How do you capture and share lessons learned along the way? »» It’s all about behaviours!

34

the rail engineer • March 2014

Challenging history Matters then moved to the London Underground as Phil Carmichael gave the audience a case study on power supply upgrades and lessons learned. The talk was delivered in the context of the plan that all lines would be upgraded in the next 10-20 years, with the sub-surface lines receiving the most extensive upgrade. The system would gain new rolling stock, new track, new signalling systems and enhanced train services, but there would be a corresponding increase in electricity demand of up to 80%.

Technological advances would include raising the traction rail voltage from 650V to 750V, installing composite conductor rails and upgrading rectifier capacity in substations. All of this in a world where the private finance initiative had gone away.

Phil outlined several lessons that had been learned from history. First off was to challenge standards. Requirements may have been in place and accepted by default but, as time moves on, there could be many new options whilst still retaining compliance with safe and effective working.

Secondly, those present were treated to a description of what is known in the underground as ‘Substation Chess’. Previous experience had shown that, with careful planning and staging, the best installation results could be achieved when installing switchgear and rectifiers by continuously creating space in a building and installing in series.

The likelihood is that AC and DC traction systems will continue to run together and what has been described as an ‘inconvenient coexistence’ would therefore still be the case.

There has been considerable experience of

this inconvenience in recent years and it is painfully apparent that the interface must be considered at the design phase. The transition from AC to DC running is well-understood, but inter-running is not so. Nevertheless, the designer has to remember that, on a DC railway, the running rails are insulated with traction currents of around 2-8 kA whilst on the AC railway the running rails are effectively earthed with traction currents typically around 300-550 amps.

In connection with the thoughts around extending the ‘Electric Spine’ of 25kV electrification to the south coast, these issues have been put together and built into a model which not only has technical value but also identifies risks to the programme, communications and operations.

Analysis leads to change Once again, the need for a good consciousness of system integration was introduced by Andy Power and Rowan Joachim in regard to the central section of Crossrail.

The scale of this development is huge and, for successful implementation, needs to call upon experience from around the country. A particular highlight was the interface between electrical systems and the combined impacts on bonding and earthing. Initial thoughts were to separate the systems electrically, but analysis quickly dictated that this was just not practicable. There is obviously a requirement to model further and, in particular, confirm that modelling by extensive testing.

Auto transformer feeder systems continue to spread and the programme returned to the subject with Martin Sigrist and Chris Wilson who looked at the Thameslink project.

It quickly became apparent that here was a

project from which many positive lessons could be learned. As ever, these lessons should be applied during the design phase.

The initial designs and assumptions needed early rework which actually led to a concept rethink and the decision to adopt a completely new strategic approach to switchgear replacement and different approaches to electrical distribution. All of these would have been hugely expensive had procurement and construction phases been under way. Of particular interest was the description of the staging strategy adopted.

The day was rounded off by a panel session led by Peter Dearman of Systra, John Morris of Parsons Brinckerhoff and David Hartland of Brecknell Willis. A lively discussion ensued and the assembled audience finally went home with a robust selection of lessons learned and a consciousness to search for new historical data when preparing their projects!

S A F E

•

R E L I A B L E

•

V E R S A T I L E

•

F L E X I B L E

ERECTING CATENARY AND CONTACT WIRES - THE SRS WAY

THE BASE VEHICLE SRS wiring ‘trains’ are based on a single 26 tonne SRS road rail wiring unit. It carries two hydraulically operated cable drum carriers and is fitted with wire manipulating rollers both fore and aft. The drum carriers are designed to dispense wire at up to 75% full tension. They can push wire out and reel it in. The manipulating rollers move both laterally and vertically, and horizontal rollers within the roller assembly allow two wires to be dispensed simultaneously, one above the other.

This versatile vehicle may be used for many different wiring tasks. Typical is its incorporation in an SRS ‘train’ for putting up catenary and contact wires together.

Using four vehicles, the SRS wiring train eliminates the need for temporary rollers and slings. The vehicles are: One 26 tonne SRS wiring unit Two 17 ton SRS mobile elevated platforms (MEWPs) One 17 ton SRS scissors platform They proceed, at half span intervals, as follows: 1. The base vehicle carrying two cable drums, one with catenary and one with contact wire. This moves along the track dispensing both catenary and contact wires simultaneously, the catenary above the contact wire.

2. The first MEWP with the catenary wire running in a purpose made grooved roller which is fixed to the MEWP basket. It can be positioned precisely by moving the basket so that the linesman can clip it directly into the catenary clamp on the contact registration arm.

3. The second MEWP follows. This time the contact wire is running through a purpose made grooved pulley fixed to the MEWP basket.

Again it is positioned by moving the basket and, if the span is long, fixed to the catenary by a temporary wire.

4. Finally, the scissors platform follows closely, carrying droppers to be clipped to both catenary and contact wires

Using this SRS procedure: Kinks and wire deformation are virtually eliminated because wires are run at 75% full tension. Also wire run at 75% full tension is unlikely to roll over. Thus the task of chasing and flushing out twists is removed.

A single run through to check the groove is usually sufficient.

Sag between rollers and temporary tie wires is minimised by running near to full tension reducing the risk of kinks and protecting the wire from the damage or contamination which may occur if it touches the ground.

Flaking is made easy by the variable resistance of the hydraulic drum, particularly at the start of a new run.

Correct positioning is ensured by hydraulically controlled guide rollers which may be manipulated both vertically and horizontally so that wire may be run out as close to the required route as possible Pulling or towing wire out is eliminated because the drum can ‘pump’ wire out.

Safety is ensured by guide rollers which completely encompass the wire so that it cannot jump free, important for the safety of following linesmen.

It is possible to dispense wire at 5 kph. Speed is usually limited by the rate at which linesmen can work.

This is just one of many wiring tasks which SRS vehicles can perform with their highly trained and motivated operators.

Tell us the task. We will provide the tools and the people.

INTERNATIONAL

HIRE & SALES

To hire or buy road rail at its best call: +44 (0) 870 050 9242, email info@srsrailuk.co.uk, or visit our website www.srsrailuk.com

36

the rail engineer • March 2014

Interference and Immunisation

CLIVE KESSELL

E

PHOTO: SHUTTERSTOCK.COM

ver since electric traction was invented, measures have been needed to stop unwanted electric currents from interfering with signalling, telecoms, lineside power supplies and outside organisation interests. The resultant protection is collectively known as immunisation, sometimes confused with medical activities using the same name. Ask the switchboard for the immunisation department and you will as likely get the doctor’s surgery!

The science of understanding electrical interference has been ongoing for many years, engaging the top brains in universities and research establishments. As new forms of rail electrification and traction emerge, so new technologies for S&T and power supply protection need to be devised. The interference is likely to have an adverse impact on many systems, often leading to disputes as to the method and cost of remedial action.

To better understand the latest situation, the IRSE ran a seminar recently entitled ‘Track, Traction and S&T - The Final Frontier’. It was chaired by David Bradley, a signal engineer with many years of experience in the subject, and it was an interesting day proving, if nothing else, that the word ‘final’ remains a pipedream.

creation of frequencies that can interfere with other systems, particularly for unsafe signalling conditions; »» Minimise coupling - eliminating or minimising the conductive, inductive or radiation linkage between the traction current and affected systems; »» EMC (Electro Magnetic Compatibility) design - ensuring that engineers responsible for minimising interference understand the established techniques and standards.

Safety and standards Someone once said ‘the wonderful thing about standards is that there are so many to choose from!’ This was never more true than for electrical interference and immunisation, where a plethora of standards and instructions exist within Europe, the UK and Network Rail. Getting the responsible engineer to search all these out, realise how they relate to each other and then devise a practical compliance is a challenge in itself. The base standards were said to be: »» IEC 61508 - setting out the functional safety of electrical and electronic equipment for safety related systems; »» IEC/TS 61000-2:2008 - describing the methodology for achieving the above; »» IET Guide on EMC functional safety.

The Dark Art Ken Webb from Mott Macdonald used this title to describe the subject, noting that other names - ‘Arcane Discipline’, ‘Black Magic’ and ‘Not for After Dinner Speeches’ - had also been attributed. The main criteria are: »» Current management - getting amperes to and from the train; »» Frequency management - avoiding the

PHOTO: SHUTTERSTOCK.COM

the rail engineer • March 2014

These relate to the general control of electrical interference and are not railway specific. UK railway standards derive from the European EN 50121 series and RSSB Group Standards GE/RT8015 and GE/RT8270.

However these will not guarantee immunisation safety. Three basic types of interference occur that can cause connection to other systems; conduction as a direct connection, induction as an electromagnetic coupling and radiation relating to high frequency radio waves.

All of these may occur on an electrified railway, be it 25kV AC overhead or both overhead and third-rail DC systems. Down the years, a portfolio of protective measures have been designed to limit induced voltages and currents to within prescribed limits. These can add considerable cost to an electrification scheme and thus the different engineering disciplines may argue as to their necessity.

In the UK, infrastructure owner Network Rail has responsibility for ensuring that railway systems are protected from electrical interference and that staff are not exposed to dangerously high voltages. To obtain optimum solutions, the company liaises with other European rail bodies to produce a suite of standards and instructions that give guidance on what can be expected and the remedial measures needed.

Maya Petkova, a principal engineer in the Asset Management Group, works with colleagues in Europe to both produce and update standards and to relate these to UK conditions. The resultant Railway Group and Network Rail standards set out the conditions and practices that must be met. This is not a static situation and the documents regularly need review and update to reflect emerging circumstances. Recent examples are: »» The growing impact of radio systems for rail control and communication including track mounted balises and train aerials; »» New types of track circuits (TCs) and axle counters; »» Transient effects of neutral sections on electrified lines; »» The impact of interoperability on both infrastructure and rolling stock; »» Pressure to use more COTS (Common off the Shelf) equipment which may have a lower EMC performance.

Dominant in all of this is understanding how frequency management will be possible over the range from 0-1MHz to prevent unsafe operation of track circuits.

The electrification engineer So how do the different disciplines cope with the competing pressures of obtaining the most cost effective electrification configuration whilst keeping the railway safe?

For nearly 60 years, electrification on main lines has used the 25kV 50Hz AC overhead line system. The advantages are well known, since adopting the domestic mains frequency means avoiding expensive rectification and distribution networks. The current in the catenary

37

wire does, however, produce an inducing electric field that affects lineside copper cables. It can be loosely regarded as a long single turn transformer and ways of preventing large induced voltages had to be found.

The most common solution is the use of booster transformers and return conductors. These transformers are mounted on the stanchions at roughly two kilometre intervals and inserted in series with both the catenary and the return conductor, the latter also being strung on the stanchions. Half way between transformers, the conductor is connected to the traction return rail. The effect is to ‘suck’ return current out of the rail into the return conductor that creates an opposing electric field to that of the catenary so as to balance each other out. The induced voltage limits into cables are 60V steady state and 430V under short circuit conditions, the latter only being present for a few milliseconds until the breakers shut off the traction supply.

The electrification engineer traditionally regards booster transformers as a necessary nuisance since they increase the impedance of the system thus losing potential power.

Even the 25kV system, however, is not capable of delivering sufficient power for high speed or very heavy load trains and so has been developed the 50kV auto transformer (A/T) system described at the seminar by David Hewings, the Network Rail electrification engineer. In this case, a transformer at the electrification feeder station which takes power from the grid delivers 50kV to an auto transformer with a centre tap connected to the return rail, one 25kV feeding the catenary and the other to a separate 25kV conductor mounted on the stanchions. The two feeds are in anti phase so help to cancel out the resultant electric fields.

The ‘presentation’ to traction units remains 25kV and is thus unchanged.

Because the system can deliver more power, the currents in the two feeds are higher, thus increasing the inductive effect.

In the same period, the means of controlling the system has been updated and the control of individual feeder stations by separately switched circuits has been replaced by a network known as a station bus system using IEDs (Intelligent Electronic Device). With more power comes a potentially higher fault current - up from 600A to 1200A - and thus much faster circuit breaker switches are needed to keep induced voltages within the prescribed limit. The package has led to GOOSE (General Operating Optical Sensing Equipment) that is based around a fibre optic LAN network, suitable for transmission of safety critical messages.

38

the rail engineer • March 2014

PHOTO: SHUTTERSTOCK.COM

The telecommunications engineer For many years, interference into telecom circuits represented a major problem. With long distance copper cable-based circuits, the longitudinal induced voltages could be very large, posing a risk to circuit performance, equipment damage and staff safety. The protection methods of booster transformers and additional cable screening were virtually mandatory, not only to prevent interference to railway circuits but also to British Telecom and other telecom providers’ systems which were routed close to an electrified railway.

This method is not perfect and such circuits

may need to be further protected by either an aluminium screen on the cable(s) or the provision of a separate mutual screening conductor located in the cable route, these being earthed down to copper rods at 1km intervals so as to also carry an opposite phase current.

As well as high voltages, because the wires of a pair in a telecom cable were not always identical as to resistance and capacitance characteristics, the inducing field could introduce noise on to the circuit by what is called a transverse voltage. Under internationally agreed limits, this had to be

restricted to 1mV, and required cable balancing techniques for this to be achieved.

Fortunately, the advent of fibre optic cables has been the solution to most problems and, for over twenty years, railways and public telecom operators have invested in this technology for long distance telecom links. It is not a complete solution since there remain a lot of trunk telecom copper cables in existence and copper tail cables are needed to connect from fibre ‘hubs’ to the end device. Keeping the length of the latter to broadly a 2km limit is good practice.

Telecom equipment at the lineside must be bonded to earth in a similar manner to signalling. Because some equipment is susceptible to high voltage transients caused either by electrification short circuits or lightning, the provision of fast transient earths at individual equipment cabinets protect against any high voltage ‘strike’.

The signalling engineer Since signalling copper circuits are of relatively short length, induced longitudinal voltages are not the main problem. Of more concern is the potential interference to track circuits by conduction direct from the rails.

This can be influenced by the type of track circuit deployed and whether it is based on single or double rail design. Success is measured by how well the TC operating frequency can be different from the 50Hz overhead line frequency and the harmonics that derive from this.

PHOTO: SHUTTERSTOCK.COM

40

the rail engineer • March 2014

PHOTO: JONATHAN WEBB

Unwanted frequencies can also be generated by the sophisticated types of traction units now in service and the objective is to prevent traction return currents from causing unsafe operation of track circuit equipment. The TI 21 track circuit used for many years is designed around frequency shift keying (fsk) with the frequencies chosen outside of the normal 50Hz harmonic range but recent tests with Class 90 locomotives have shown that the fsk principle is not good enough and that in certain circumstances, wrong side TC failures can occur. Thus digital encoding of track circuits, making each one unique, is the ongoing design preference.

Earthing and bonding remain a challenge and Peter Brown, the E&P design manager in Network Rail, described how a return screening conductor (RSC) connected periodically to the traction return rail can negate the need for individual earth rods at signalling lineside locations. Such an arrangement is ideal in areas using single rail track circuits or axle counters but impedance bonds will be needed if double rail TCs are in use. This arrangement has been chosen for the forthcoming Great Western main line electrification, subject to it passing a generic safety case approval.

Firstly, there is 1.5 tonnes per power car of filter equipment, intended to protect TCs from conducted electro-magnetic interference.

Also introduced when the trains were built was a Line Interference Monitor (LIM) based on Railtrack standards but experience in practice showed this to be so onerous that traction power was removed too often when the third rail experienced ice conditions and trains became stranded. The replacement is an Interference Current Monitoring Unit (ICMU) but even here when ice is present, drivers are trained to keep power on when coasting to ensure an arc keeps flowing to the third rail.

On older fleets where an ICMU does not exist, cruder monitoring systems were provided but proved less reliable than the on-board systems being protected. The latest thinking

is that the next generation of trains is unlikely to be fitted with monitoring equipment since the desired limits are known to be exceeded many times daily but are of short duration.

Protection systems to prevent over voltage, over current and device failure in the traction power electrics will be sufficient.

The power supply engineer Providing a reliable power supply for S&T equipment at the trackside is vital; without power, nothing can function. Traditionally this has been via a 650V single-phase cable with a transformer provided at every lineside cabinet from which the local 110V AC and 50V DC power sources are derived. Later designs have adopted a 400V three-phase arrangement but both used a cable with a separate earth core.

The traction engineer Every rolling stock designer is aware of the risk posed to signalling and other equipment by return currents and inappropriate frequencies generated by the train. Colin Place from Bombardier described the devices that are installed on Class 377 DC units in service on Southern and South East Trains.

PHOTO: JONATHAN WEBB

the rail engineer • March 2014

Telecoms Power Signalling Birmingham | Glasgow | London | Manchester | Sheffield | Swindon | York

Complete

DRAIN Clearance

41

We deliver market leading, turnkey network engineering telecomms, power and signalling solutions to the world’s leading businesses including Network Rail, TfGM (Manchester Metrolink) and Nexus. We have an enviable reputation spanning over 30 years, gained working on some of the world’s most technologically advanced communication networks.

Our services include development and design, installation testing and commissioning supported by asset maintenance and management services. Our services are deployed both nationally and globally, 24/7. Our expertise is deployed across fixed networks and wireless applications in all industry sectors including, rail, utilities, oil and gas, highways, MoD and local government authorities.

0844 800 0983

www.linbrooke.co.uk

THE NO.1 COMPANY SOLELY DEDICATED TO DRAINAGE ON THE RAIL INFRASTRUCTURE

Maximise your possession...

...with:

SITE INSPECTION

CALL US TODAY TO DISCUSS YOUR REQUIREMENTS OR VISIT OUR WEBSITE

- Before job commences to identify hazards, etc.

PURPOSE BUILT RRV JET VACTORS - Quick on/off tracking - 3,500 CuM/min. airmover for rapid catchpit emptying - 1,500 psi high pressure water pump provides continuous flow for flushing drains etc.

- 8500 gallon water tank means fewer top-ups (if any) during the shift - 4 tonne capacity detritus tank

MACHINES LOW-LOADED TO SITE - On one vehicle saving transport costs

FULLY TRAINED 3 MAN TEAM - Complete with maintenance fitter ensuring no breakdowns or loss of time

ASSET CONDITION REPORTS - Including site drawings and photographs

Complete Drain Clearance Limited 49 Weeping Cross, Stafford, ST17 0DQ Tel: 01785 665 909 Fax: 01785 664944

E-mail: completedrainclearance@yahoo.co.uk

www.completedrainclearance.co.uk

42

the rail engineer • March 2014

In electrified areas, this earth was connected to the collective earthing system of the line and this could lead to high touch voltages if double earth fault conditions occurred.

A design to simplify and reduce the cost of lineside power supplies has recently emerged from Network Rail; known as a Class II supply this is based around an earth free system using only a two-core cable and its features were described at the seminar by Tahir Ayub from Network Rail’s Signalling Innovations Group. A full explanation of this power supply is contained within a separate article in this magazine.

Mixed Electrification Areas The protective measures needed to protect vulnerable equipment in AC and DC electrification are quite different: in AC, earthing plays a vital role whereas DC systems should be kept earth free (or at least only a local equipment earth) so as to prevent high traction return currents using S&T cables as a return path. However, it is known that DC stray currents can exist well beyond the immediate rail area and there are many locations where the two systems are in close proximity, bringing with it the risk of equipment misoperation.

The ongoing NW electrification project brings AC systems near to the Manchester Metro (tram) network. Recent tests carried out at three sites, Ordsall Lane, Castlefields and Eccles, were described by David Bradley to see if a problem would result. Four basic measurements were made at each site - two of voltage and two current - to determine any flows between the two rail operations.

Both short circuit and steady state conditions were tested. Happily, stray currents did not penetrate as much as expected and thus it is concluded that track circuits will continue to function correctly.

Crossrail and Thameslink Any new piece of electrified railway will raise fears as to whether interference will cause problems to existing co-located railways.

One such consideration is Crossrail - on its east-west route across London it will have two 400kV supply points at Pudding Mill Lane and Kensal Green and will use the 50kV A/T system delivering 67MVA from Stratford to Shenfield and Paddington to Maidenhead and 30MVA in the central section.

James Greatbanks from Bechtel described how an interference model has been produced looking at 16 engineering elements that might be affected. These included earth potentials, stray currents, electrolytic corrosion, resonance, rail voltage, screening factors and equipment loading. Modelling is based around short circuit conditions with and without a supplementary earth wire on the surface sections. The conclusion is that there will be negligible 50Hz flow between Crossrail and other railways.

The biggest risk is at joint stations and also at Heathrow’s baggage and airside terminals with their many electronic systems. London Underground continues to have reservations with the Hammersmith & City line being the most likely to be affected. Whilst modelling is much cheaper than live tests, no doubt confirmatory tests will be necessary once the line is built and equipped.

The north-south Thameslink project is an upgrade scheme to hugely increase the number of trains using the route. Martin Sigrist from Network Rail explained that it means converting the Midland main line electrification to the 50kV A/T system but retaining 25kV and booster transformers from St Pancras to Blackfriars and with the complication of having to change from overhead to third-rail electrification between Farringdon and Blackfriars, which will be dual

voltage. The expected high DC currents raise the risk of these straying well into AC areas with risk to track circuit operation because of insulated rail joint (IRJ) arcing.

Early tests suggest 180 amps of stray current in the quiescent state (no trains) and 300+ amps with trains running, but measurements on the East Coast main line have shown only 0.5 amps detected there.

The earthing and bonding plan for the central section is thus a complex issue with the multiplicity of cables, equipment cabinets and a fire main between Kings Cross and Farringdon all making possible parallel return paths for single rail track circuits and traction return. Contactors have been installed at Blackfriars to minimise the DC flow from southwards of this point, but many more tests and adjustments to the design will be needed as the project progresses.

At the end of the day, this seminar demonstrated that interference and immunisation is anything but a precise science. Whilst broad order protective measures have been established for 25kV lines over a number of years, the emergence of new types of rolling stock, computerised based signalling systems and more power from the overhead catenaries have needed improved methods of testing and monitoring.

In the past, engineers may have taken an over cautious approach and perhaps the adverse effects are not as bad as some would have us believe. Some technology advances - for example fibre optic cables and Class II power supplies - have made immunisation easier. The situation with DC electrification and particularly third rail is less well documented and adverse weather can vary traction current conditions thus impacting on interference levels.

The work to understand and protect against electrical interference will need to continue for many years yet.

Now in service between Manchester and Newton-le-Willows

44

the rail engineer • March 2014

IAN MITCHELL

N

etwork Rail’s strategy to control the whole UK network from 12 Rail Operating Centres (ROCs) will require existing signalling centres using SSI (solid state interlocking) technology to be ‘re-controlled’. The interlockings will remain in place and become remotely controlled from the new ROC. DeltaRail has led the way in developing the remote interface (RIF) technology to achieve this and the first application has now been commissioned in Scotland.

From PSB to ROC Edinburgh is unique amongst the 12 ROCs in that the building was originally a power signal box (PSB) opened in 1977 with a large entrance exit control panel controlling relay interlockings along the East Coast main line from the England-Scotland border through the City of Edinburgh and over the Forth Bridge into Fife. Its second life began in 2006 as part of a major capacity improvement project for Edinburgh Waverley station - the interlockings in the station area were replaced with SSI and a new operating floor with VDU workstations replaced the panel.

The signalling control system technology chosen for this critical project was an Integrated Electronic Control Centre (IECC) supplied by DeltaRail - a decision driven by the requirement to provide automatic

route-setting (ARS) to maximise performance over the new layout, and to be capable of interfacing to the existing relay interlockings which were retained outside the central Edinburgh area.

The seven IECC workstations installed at Edinburgh were designed with spare capacity which is being taken up by a number of extensions of the area of control: »» Airdrie to Bathgate re-opening (2010); »» Polmont signalbox re-control (2012); »» Millerhill signalbox re-control (2012); »» Borders railway re-opening (planned for 2015).

Network Rail’s new operating strategy has resulted in Edinburgh being designated as the ROC for the East and North of Scotland - the key internal links between Scotland’s seven cities - Edinburgh, Glasgow, Aberdeen, Dundee, Inverness, Perth and Stirling. The other Scottish ROC is the West of Scotland Signalling Centre which will cover the Glasgow suburban services and trains to Ayrshire and the West Coast main line to England.

The first step towards realising the operating strategy is for Edinburgh ROC to take over the signalling on the Edinburgh-Glasgow route via Falkirk. This is taking place as part of the Edinburgh Glasgow Improvement Project (EGIP) - a £650m investment to electrify and upgrade the route. The Glasgow end of the route has been controlled from the Cowlairs signalling centre, an SSI installation with a panel, since 1998. At 15 years old, this was clearly an installation with a lot of life remaining, so re-control rather than resignalling was the preferred option although this wasn’t a straightforward task.

The challenge of controlling SSI SSI, as conceived by British Rail in the 1980s, was based on a distributed system architecture with electronic interlockings in the control centre, and interfaced with lineside signalling equipment via trackside functional modules (TFMs) distributed along the trackside.

The communications protocols allowed the interlockings to be remote from the TFMs but assumed they would be in the same building as the control system - a panel or IECC. In hardware terms, it would be possible to plug the serial data link from the interlocking into a modem and send the information over

Scotland RIF to

ROC in

the rail engineer • March 2014

Network Rail’s fixed telecommunications network to a remote control centre. However, this would not be compliant with CENELEC (le Comité européen de normalisation électrotechnique - the European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardisation) standards for safety related communications. There is a risk that data transmitted in this way could be changed through accidental or deliberate misrouting or interference without being detected, resulting in false indications to the signaller or incorrect controls to the interlocking.

One solution would be to stick with the SSI architecture and relocate the interlockings to the ROC. This was done when Leeds PSB was re-controlled to York IECC in 2002. The five Leeds North West SSIs controlling the lines to Bradford, Ilkley and Skipton were ‘moved’ - in fact new interlocking cubicles were provided at York, and only the SSI processor modules were moved on the commissioning weekend.

However, this approach incurs significant installation, test and commissioning costs and, as ever-larger areas are controlled from the ROCs, there is a limit to the number of interlockings that can be easily accommodated, and a certain nervousness in concentrating so much critical equipment in one location.

The alternative approach is to develop a remote interface (RIF) to be installed alongside the SSIs at the old signalling

centre, which then communicates with the ROC using a modern protocol that is fully compliant with the CENELEC standards for safety related communications. DeltaRail has developed this capability for the new generation IECC Scalable signalling control system, and the Cowlairs re-control project provided an ideal opportunity to offer this solution and get it through the product acceptance process.

IECC Scalable The original IECC system architecture remained in production (with numerous hardware and software upgrades over the years) until 2011. In 2012 DeltaRail introduced IECC Scalable, with a highly successful pilot installation. This replaced the original IECC at Swindon B signalling centre on the Western route (issue 92, June 2012) prior to the relocking and recontrol of this area to Thames Valley Signalling Centre (TVSC). IECC Scalable delivers proven functionality on industry standard blade hardware achieving a very compact, cost effective and future proof solution that is being applied in a wide variety of projects.

The installation at TVSC has been extended and now controls the Paddington-Heathrow end of the Great Western main line and, at the other end of the scale of application complexity, IECC Scalable workstations can now be seen in a mechanical signalbox

45

at Harrogate and controlling the modular signalling between Ely and Norwich.

The key architectural innovation in IECC Scalable is the use of IBM’s MQTT messaging technology as the information path between the subsystems that implement various functions within the system. The benefit from this is that MQTT messaging is a widely used IT industry standard that enables exchange of information with a wide range of systems and supports extensions to functionality, for example future interfacing to ERTMS and Traffic Management systems. It also allows any component of the system to be deployed remotely from the others, with the messaging enabling communication over any IP-based transmission media.

For re-control of an SSI, the interlocking interface component can be deployed in an IECC Scalable RIF alongside the interlockings.

The RIF then communicates locally with the SSI interlockings using the legacy NR/SP/ SIG/17503 protocol, and to the main IECC Scalable system at the ROC via the messaging over a suitable communications link.

The Safety Case for IECC Scalable has to demonstrate that safety related functions of the signalling control system (up to SIL2 in CENELEC terms) can be depended upon, taking into account the use of the MQTT messaging software (which is commercial off the shelf without a railway safety case) and to allow the possibility of communications over an open communications network.

46

the rail engineer • March 2014

The solution was to treat the messaging as part of the communications network, and to provide a software safety adaptor between the message broker and each module that implements SIL-rated functionality. The software within the adaptor implements a set of defences that allow messages to be checked against the various threats to communications - all in accordance with the requirements of CENELEC BS EN 50159:2010 ‘Safety Related Communications in Transmission Systems’.

Signaller workstations While the use of the IECC Scalable RIF was the main innovation for the Cowlairs recontrol, there were a number of other interesting features of the project. Whilst it is technically possible to control the whole of the Cowlairs area from a single IECC Scalable workstation, the ergonomics study for the project suggested that the workload at peak periods would be excessive for one signaller. Provision of a second workstation would also provide sufficient capacity for the future re-control or re-signalling of the remaining signalbox areas between Edinburgh and Glasgow (Greenhill Junction, Carmuirs East and Grangemouth Junction).

The chosen solution was to provide two workstations on the IECC Scalable system - a primary workstation, capable of controlling all of the former Cowlairs PSB area and a secondary workstation to control the main EdinburghGlasgow line only.

During day shifts, both workstations are manned with the secondary workstation controlling the Edinburgh-Glasgow line and the primary workstation the rest of the controlled area (the Springburn to Cumbernauld line).

At night time, the secondary workstation is unmanned, and the primary workstation controls the whole area. The two workstations are located side by side on linked desks with hard wired controls, such as the ‘emergency signals on’ facility, located between the two where they can be easily reached from either position.

To allow the supervision of such a large area, each workstation has two rows of screens. The upper row displays non-controllable overviews that provide a permanent display of the entire area for monitoring purposes. The lower row shows detailed views which the signaller selects as required for manual route setting or other controls. Of course, ARS is provided as a standard feature of IECC, so only a few trains require manual route setting.

Project delivery As well as the IECC Scalable supply, DeltaRail’s scope of work for the project included updating the SSI data to work with a VDU-based control system and ARS. The Cowlairs area includes

an early implementation of axle counters using co-operative reset which was retained after the re-control, and this required some further changes to SSI data to make it compatible with the standard IECC axle counter controls and indications.

Inevitably, the project was a little more complicated than a straight re-control. The first stage of EGIP electrification is the Cumbernauld line, with an enhanced service to be provided in time for the 2014 Commonwealth Games by extension of the existing Glasgow Queen Street Low Level service that terminates at Springburn.

This requires some track remodelling in an area where the existing SSI was full to capacity, and so the project required the number of SSIs to be increased from 5 to 6. DeltaRail undertook the initial split of interlocking data and then handed over to Atkins which was the signalling contractor for the remodelling work.

Provision of a robust IP networking solution between Cowlairs and Edinburgh was an essential element to delivering the IECC Scalable RIF, and fortunately Network Rail in Scotland has been somewhat of a pioneer in this regard (issue 72, October 2010), building a wide area IP network using gigabit Ethernet optical links over spare fibres in the cables installed for the main fixed telecommunications voice network. A ring topology for the network provides alternative paths allowing data to be rerouted if any links are damaged or fail.

The initial use of this approach was for remote condition monitoring and long line public address systems, but it was equally suitable for the IECC Scalable RIF application, with access points available at Cowlairs and Edinburgh.

As part of the product acceptance testing for the IECC Scalable RIF, testing was undertaken to ensure the capacity and propagation times delivered by the network was adequate to achieve reliable operation - as expected the relatively modest data rate required was easily achieved.

Cowlairs workstation.

PHOTO: IMALOOLS

Commissioning The re-control of Cowlairs to Edinburgh was successfully commissioned on 7 October 2013, and the IECC Scalable RIF performed faultlessly throughout the three month trial period required to achieve full product acceptance. DeltaRail has provided post-commissioning support with regular reviews which focused largely on optimising the ARS performance in the area.

Further minor updates are programmed for 2014 as electrification and remodelling continue, and DeltaRail is looking forward to further work in Scotland to fill in the gap between Cowlairs and Edinburgh as the EGIP project progresses.

The approved IECC Scalable RIF now means that any SSI signalling centre can be recontrolled to a ROC with minimum change to the existing equipment - and this includes sites that use the next generation SSI-compatible interlockings Westlock and Smartlock. The IECC Scalable RIF will be equally applicable to projects requiring re-control of relay-based signalling systems, and DeltaRail is looking forward to winning a contract where this version can be demonstrated and approved.

The ease with which re-control can be delivered will allow a step-up in the pace of migration to the ROCs, enabling Network Rail to realise the benefits of reduced operational expenditure and improved performance earlier than anticipated.

48

the rail engineer • March 2014

Modular Signalling Solution W

ith much of the UK rail network featuring low density lines - characterised by an asset base which dates back to the 1940s and which is increasingly expensive to support and maintain - Network Rail recognised the need for a new approach to the re-signalling of rural lines with the objective of reducing both installation and ownership costs.

Responding to this, in the last five years the concept of modular signalling has been developed

by Siemens Rail Automation (formerly Invensys Rail), working in close partnership with Network Rail. The development programme recognised two key factors: firstly, that there were at best only marginal business case benefits to be made from upgrading secondary lines to computer-based interlocking technology and secondly, that the resources and skills required to operate legacy systems were no longer providing value for money.

Rural upgrades The modular signalling concept offers Network Rail the opportunity to upgrade these rural lines cost-effectively, using proven technologies and provides a positive economic case for investment in secondary

lines. This solution also delivers forward compatibility with future technology, including the European Train Control System (ETCS).

Siemens’ modular signalling solution includes products and technologies from across the company’s Rail Automation group, with the system being based primarily on simplicity of design and ease and repeatability of the installation process. Essentially the company’s development team examined every part of a signalling scheme to identify where different products and new processes could be introduced to provide operational and cost benefits.

At the heart of its modular signalling solution is Siemens’ Trackguard WESTRACE computer-based interlocking, enabling signalling schemes to be delivered from just a small

range of core components. From this range, the company has developed a limited number of configurations to suit the precise requirements of low density rural lines, the products providing a number of standard signalling systems and a set of standard data templates.

Using standard templates means that the number of engineering hours required for any given scheme is significantly reduced and importantly, that the validation and verification process is much faster and more straightforward, such that systems can now be tested off-site at Siemens’ purposedesigned hangar facility in Chippenham.

Modular signalling has also been developed to operate via Network Rail’s Fixed Telecommunications Network (FTN). By using internet protocols (IPs) over the ethernet, the system can connect to Network Rail’s control architecture, meaning that fewer signallers are able to control greater areas (so reducing operator costs).

The result is a future-proof system, developed specifically for low-density rural lines which delivers reduced material costs, rapid and low-cost installation and much reduced cost of maintenance.

Representative pilot The Crewe - Shrewsbury Modular Signalling Pilot Programme was successfully commissioned by Siemens over the weekend of 12 - 14 October, with control of the line now being undertaken from the Network Rail Regional Operating Control Centre in Cardiff.

The pilot programme contained many of the application scenarios required to prove the generic solution - and nearly all the configurable scenarios with which most rural or secondary routes can be re-signalled - and covered 30 miles of bi-directional signalling; seven level crossings - five of which have now been converted to manually controlled barriers with obstacle detection (MCB-ODs) - and two complex fringes.

Siemens installation work

the rail engineer • March 2014

began on site in March 2011, with a Siemens Trackguard WESTRACE Mk2 interlocking at the heart of the scheme - which also features object controllers, plug coupled cables, axle counters and lightweight signals. The trial of the train detection equipment began in July 2011, with extensive testing of the programme continuing through 2012 and 2013 and the pilot scheme proving the case for the design work, validation and verification, installation and operational effectiveness of the system.

By its very nature, modular signalling uses less trackside infrastructure than a conventional application of computer-based interlocking technology, the small core range of components making the optimisation of equipment positioning to overcome input/ output limitations all the more critical.

Significant development Commenting on the programme, Siemens regional delivery director, Rob Cairns said: “With the rising cost of signalling renewals and the recent Office of Rail Regulation efficiency determination, experienced during Network Rail’s Control Period 4, the business case becomes ever more attractive for technologies which reduce both capital and operating costs.

As a consequence, an increasing amount of future project investment is being proposed for modular solutions and we are seeing schemes which make use of hybrid technologies (a combination of modular and conventional systems) in specific areas on more complex primary routes.

“The price of signalling has been steadily increasing over a number of years, as suppliers have seen their cost bases continually rising to reflect not only the specification of conventional signalling, but also the infrastructure associated with it. Our own data shows that around 50% of our cost base has been associated with the additional steelwork and copper

located trackside associated with the signalling, or the large scale plant and concrete to get it there and keep it there.

“Signalling pricing also reflects the lengthy design processes associated with conventional technology, as often there are a number of bespoke or nonrepeatable signalled scenarios which have to be individually designed and tested. The cost base of the design itself is not an influencing factor, it does however drive the overall lead-in duration for signalling investment - and time becomes cost on the balance sheet.

“Modular Signalling is arguably the most significant development in the signalling market since the introduction of solid state interlockings in the 1980s and this technology shift becomes increasingly important as more and more schemes rely upon the modular approach in Network Rail’s Control Period 5.

“Our technology is now established, and proven - we also know how to effectively apply it. Modular by its very nature is targeted at a fixed number of operational signalled scenarios, flexing modular around complex layouts will never pay dividends, because whilst the technology is very

adaptable, we would not be using the technology in a way where its value could be realised.

“By working with Network Rail and its customers, I am confident we can improve

49

the modular proposition even further by optimising operational configuration, and establishing rules which allow the investment to be weighted against the available benefits in a way where the customer decides!”

Active PFC

Automatic battery capacity tests

Extreme Short MTTR

Permanent battery capacity tests

19” module pluggable rack

Integrated DC distribution and fusing

Microcontroller for battery charging and monitoring

Alarm signals on from all cards

2 independent battery strings +44 (0) 1264 337800 warren.venn@powerboxcraftec.com

www.powerboxcraftec.com

50

the rail engineer • March 2014

Class II “

Class II? It’s really taken off much faster than we ever dreamt it would!” Tahir Ayub, Network Rail’s senior E&P (electrification and power) engineer working within the National Signalling Innovations Group (SIG) in Infrastructure Projects, reflects on the past year – and it really is just one year. Class II has come a long way and it’s now the default specification for signalling power supplies on Network Rail.

But we need to take a brief rest from all this frenetic activity to reflect on the background. For instance, what is Class II and why is it so important? More specifically, why was there so much trepidation about bringing it into operation? And what has changed in just one year?

What is it?

For the non-electrical engineers out there here’s a quick introduction to Class II. And where better to look for an explanation than in the December 2012 edition of The Rail Engineer?

“Class II? This has all to do with electrical protection and it’s necessary to look a little at the history of railway power supplies. Ever since someone dreamt up that an electric lamp could replace a paraffin lamp, the signal engineers have looked after the wiring. It seemed eminently logical at the time and this was how the whole system of signalling wiring evolved.

The power served signals and

so it seemed right that signal engineers were the best folks to look after it.

“By the turn of the millennium, with the railways privatised and Railtrack in charge, there were some who were decidedly edgy about all this in-house cosiness. Electrical Safety – with a capital S – is the province of electrical engineers who abide by ‘proper’ electrical standards – not standards dreamt up by signal engineers.

“As a result, power supplies – including signal power supplies – had to conform to BS 7671, otherwise known as the IET wiring regulations. The upshot of this was that the two core wiring previously used did not meet current standards and three core armoured cable which included an earth conductor was adopted for all new installations.

“All well and good, but it did mean that the amount of copper used (and stolen) was at least a third more than before.”

GRAHAME TAYLOR

No separate earth Class I is a system that has an earth return – that third conductor - so that any fault in a particular location is sent directly to an earth point so protecting someone from electrical shock.

Class II is a system where the individual location is encased and double insulated so that, if a fault develops, that fault is contained within the casing and nobody is exposed to electric shock. There is no separate earth conductor.

Ponder long on that last sentence. There’s no separate earth conductor. Even nonelectrical engineers might sense that this could be a tricky business.

Back in December 2012 Tahir talked about an inertia to overcome, of strongly held counter views. Forget all that now, Class II has been embraced by the industry and is being specified for all new projects and many maintenance items. Overcoming industry reluctance is one thing,

the rail engineer • March 2014

but getting the industry seized with what, in power supply engineering terms, can only be described as enthusiasm is quite another. It required a bold and fairly cold-blooded strategy.

First on the list was to be sure of the engineering. Could it be done? Then there were financial imperatives to cover.

Solid engineering base By 2009, with the assistance of ERA (formerly the Electrical Research Association) Tahir had prepared a suite of railway standards for Class II power supplies. With these signed off and endorsed, it became much easier to involve the wider industry.

Network Rail was now seen to have committed to Class II and suppliers were keen to invest.

Sharing the development of the engineering strategy and the draft standards during the early stages enabled the supply chain to be engaged and this encouraged investment in new Class II products. But it needed good system design

and clear requirements to foster collaborative relations with the supply chain and then to encourage investment.

The technology introduction and product approval process, contrary to most assertions, was timely, efficient and added great value. Over 30 certificates and 200 new products were approved in just one year across the five product categories of power cable, signalling transformers, switchgear, auto-reconfiguration equipment, and point machine transformer rectifiers.

Bringing the industry on board The Signalling Innovations Group organised three learning days at Westwood which were attended by over 200 people from 50 organisations. At these events, the suppliers and contractors were introduced to the key stakeholders within Network Rail. With the products on show, it was obvious that the technology had arrived. It was no longer a pipedream.

On their return to their home bases, delegates were able to

51

52

the rail engineer • March 2014

spread the word and so the whole project gained a momentum of its own. This was all combined with the excellent coverage in The Rail Engineer of course!

The tactic worked. Tahir poses the question: “How do you bring about change in an industry that’s global? You might be able to do it on an individual project or in an area but to do it nationally you need engagement and that’s what the SIG set about.”

A minimum of three suppliers were introduced into most product categories, so ensuring a competitive supply chain which allowed further reductions in unit costs. Importantly, all the supply chain needed to be engaged in the process. Many had invested heavily in the technology and to ignore them would have risked their withdrawal from the market.

The industry as a whole has invested over £2.6 million in the development of Class II equipment.

Network Rail’s investment was over £500,000. The suppliers within the industry have invested a further £2.2 million.

Network Rail’s production of new business standards has given the industry increased confidence and allowed for the development of new products, novel designs and patents.

Excited new suppliers The initiative introduced new suppliers into the industry, created jobs, fostered research and development and in some cases patents. “They’re tendering right now on live projects and that makes them very excited. Many have learnt the process of innovating a railway product, taking it through the approvals process and getting it to market – something that many, as traditional railway suppliers, have not done for decades.”

“They’ve developed equipment, sent it to test houses, verified and validated it. The SIG has helped them through the product approval process and, because it has been much faster than some anticipated, companies have been able to enjoy a return on their investments.

A typical quote from a supplier has been: “I’ve got £15 million of business opportunities out there now, that I didn’t have last year!”

The fibre reinforced polymer enclosure specialist iLECSYS, from Tring in Hertfordshire, has increased its turnover by £2 million, taken on extra people and bought extra machines - all on the back of this initiative.

With the likes of Thameslink, Crossrail and Birmingham New Street on board, it’s time to look further ahead. The product range is being extended to cover configurations that are bespoke to certain projects, such as for

tunnels, and there’s a move to integrate Class II into Class I installations to reduce the risk of electric shock. And while this is happening, initiatives from manufacturers themselves are extending the product range.

The transformation from Class I to Class II-based signalling power supplies has given the supply chain the opportunity to add enhanced functionality over and above the Class II system requirements to differentiate their products from other suppliers. This can be seen through examples of transformers and transformer rectifiers, cable, and switchgear.

The introduction of ultralow-inrush transformers has benefits for legacy power supplies where cumulative inrush can cause fuses to rupture on start-up. High energy efficiency transformers reduce losses and energy consumption and drive sustainability benefits. Multi-

TRANSFORMERS BLACK BOX TOP OF CLASS II TRANSFORMERS formerly forrest transformers

CERTIFICATE PA05/05765 formerly forrest transformers

THE ONLY COMPLETE RANGE OF TRANSFORMERS TO COMPLY TO EXTREME ENDS IN SAFETY AND PERFORMANCE

• • • • • • • • •

CLASS II

CLASS II HYBRID ZERO INRUSH • 250 VA INSULATED TO 20,000 V • 500 VA FULL CERTIFICATION CLASS II • 1000 VA HYBRID TRANSFORMERS • 1400 VA • 2000 VA REDUCES MATERIAL SPEND • 3000 VA VANDAL PROOF CASE CLASS II / CLASS II INDEPENDENTLY TESTED • 100 VA VERY COMPETITIVE PRICES MANUFACTURED TO FIT ALL OLD & NEW SITES

Proud manufacturers of transformers used on the Olympic line services

TRANSFORMERS TRANSFORMERSLTD formerly forrest transformers

Tel: 0121 451 3204 • Fax: 0121 433 4577

Email: sales@ft-transformers.co.uk • www.ft-transformers.co.uk

54

the rail engineer • March 2014

winding transformers with AC and DC outputs allow transformers and transformer rectifiers to be rationalised. The testing of transformers with IEC fuse technologies allows switchgear foot prints to be reduced. The size and cable interfaces with existing transformers allow Class II transformers to replace Class I types, which could ultimately lead to the complete withdrawal of Class I transformers.

The new enhanced un-armoured cable is also offered in 2-core and 4-core variants, with some suppliers providing coloured threads through the conductor to allow identification of the cable back to Network Rail if stolen and then recovered. This is in addition to the tape and external markings which are part of the minimum requirement.

A range of switchgear arrangements have been developed. These are differentiated by the materials used to satisfy the Class II requirements of double or reinforced insulation. Special paint coatings with insulation

properties have also been used with a number of suppliers currently protecting their designs by applying for patents. These coatings will find other railway and industrial applications.

The adoption of smaller IEC fuse technologies has allowed for some assemblies to be reduced.

Additional features to aid the installation and termination of the cable have been introduced by all the supply chain. Features to allow quick recovery after flooding have also been added.

Many benefits What’s the pay back? On the face of it, this seems pretty simple. By removing one copper core within cabling, going from three cores to two, Network Rail has saved to date a total of over 2.3 million kilogrammes of copper, with a further reduction of five million kilogrammes anticipated over CP5. With copper at £4,500 per tonne and rising, this accounts to a significant industry saving.

Through use of over three million meters of Class II cable (either installed or to be installed this

eco - rail

year), Network Rail has generated significant savings which, over CP5, will equate to tens of millions of pounds.

Based on current figures this saving could total £40 – 60 million in the next five years depending on volumes.

But there are also what are termed ‘tier II benefits’ – the gains in train running performance because of fewer periods of disrupted running. Route supplies can be restored very quickly through the introduction of remote switching which is now possible

®

with Class II technology.

The influence of the project is spreading. Bob Wright of FT Transformers Ltd has been talking to the Birmingham Chamber of Commerce to see how awareness can be spread across the world. This would be good for Birmingham and indeed the UK generally.

Last words from Tahir? “It would be great if UK businesses could benefit from an initiative that we started.”

But they won’t actually be his last words, I can promise you!

56

the rail engineer • March 2014

Signalling innovations on the lineside

T

DAVID BICKELL

he post-war modernisation of British Railways saw the introduction of ‘panel’ signal boxes covering many route miles on busy main lines.

These new boxes involved the total equipment replacement of older lever frames or power installations. The schemes were generally delivered by a small number of signalling equipment manufacturers, with much of the work being carried out in-house.

With a nominal life of 25 years, many panel boxes are still in service today 50 years later, although some of the installed kit has been refurbished or replaced in that time. Watford Junction (1963) is due to be decommissioned this year whilst Plymouth (1960) is still going strong.

During the Railtrack era, the use of the Signalling Condition Assessment Tool (SICA) showed that these robust and generally

reliable installations could continue in service and there was no point in spending money unnecessarily. Nevertheless, innovation in the control centres took a leap forward from 1985 with the introduction of Solid State Interlocking which replicated the function of relay interlocking.

This was followed in 1989 by a visual display unit equivalent of the signaller’s panel.

the rail engineer • March 2014

57

Investment and cost saving Engineers were aware that there was going to be an investment bulge of signalling renewals come the twenty-first century. Add in the roll-out of the ERTMS/ETCS overlay and various signalling alterations to increase capacity, not to mention Network Rail’s strategy to centralise control at a dozen or so Rail Operating Centres (ROCs), and it becomes apparent that there are new opportunities for suppliers both large and small.

Future signalling requirements are being met by a combination of re-signalling (all new signalling), re-lock (typically replacement of a relay interlocking with a computer-based version), and re-control (usually replacement of a panel with a workstation in a different location).

Current signalling costs are considered to be too high and a real reduction of 16% by 2019 is the target. Unfortunately, overall costs are going to increase substantially in the short term since the ERTMS/ ETCS kit planned for intercity routes is additional to the existing signaller interface systems and interlockings which will continue to be needed.

Savings may be realised only when all trains on the route have been ERTMS fitted and lineside signals removed. Further cost reductions may be achieved when track fitted train detection systems are replaced with wireless train positioning techniques. The latter is the ETCS Level 3 package, provision of which is likely to be highly complex from both engineering and operations perspectives, and isn’t going to happen any time soon.

In the meantime, there is much scope for cost saving innovations out along the lineside. Until recently, signalling technology has changed little, with old fashioned power supplies and multicore cables that are labour intensive to install and test. Evidently there is a niche market here for innovative smaller suppliers that are willing to work in collaboration with Network Rail.

Small yet successful One such company is iLECSYS (intelligent electrical control systems), a small company employing 65 people at four locations in the UK. It has enjoyed impressive growth, more than doubling turnover in six years to £9.5 million in 2013 and The Rail Engineer recently visited the company at Tring in Hertfordshire.

Peter Dickson, engineering manager of the rail division, explained that iLECSYS acquired his own company in 2002. This had specialised in the machining and assembly of well engineered, affordable, insulated electrical enclosures, and the manufacture of components for the oil and gas industries. Peter has an interest in railways and astutely believed that there might be parallels with the highly disciplined and safety critical oil and gas industries.

Given the diverse nature of Network Rail’s signalling investment programme, the iLECSYS approach to the railway industry could not have come at a better time. It is quite a challenge for a small company to become a supplier to Network Rail but the company ensured that it was off to a good start by setting itself certain goals - supporting customer initiatives; providing a fast, practical vehicle for innovation; delivering cost reduction through reduced maintenance and supporting zero harm.

Peter acknowledges the help of the Rail Alliance, a networking organisation facilitating collaboration and innovation, in putting iLECSYS on the map. Much hard work followed, leading to iLECSYS becoming a registered supplier under the Link-up qualification scheme. Needless to say, the company has quality management systems in place and has been successfully audited by Network Rail.

Today, iLECSYS collaborates with Network Rail’s infrastructure project teams and signalling technical specialists at Milton Keynes, working to achieve product acceptance for its products. It has been supplying around a dozen schemes since 2010 including Reading Area Signalling Renewals, Thameslink and Stirling.

58

the rail engineer • March 2014

Fibreglass products The company specialises in the configuration and supply of products based upon fibre reinforced plastic (FRP). The commonly used fibres are carbon, glass and aramid while the most popular resins include polyester, vinyl ester and epoxy. FRP is named after the fibre used, so glass fibre reinforced polymer is GFRP. First developed in the mid 1930s, the use of GFRP has grown from a few components to complete structures. It is very light, has a high strength to weight ratio, is water-proof and chemical-resistant, and can be moulded into almost any shape.

GFRP’s electrical insulation properties make it ideally suited to the production of ‘composite electrical enclosures’. In railway speak, this translates to fibreglass disconnection-boxes, fuse boxes and signalling location cases.

Recently, the introduction of Class II power into railway signalling has promoted even more use of GFRP.

Power supplies Traditionally, signalling power supplies have consisted of a Class I, 650VAC feeder cable.

Class I refers to a system that has an earth return so that any fault in a particular location will divert stray current to an earth point, thus protecting someone from electric shock. This is a costly system requiring robust earthing arrangements at all locations and a three-core power cable with earth return conductor.

Because of the way that cable design takes into account earth return currents, it is possible for the size of the earth return conductor to be larger than the individual phase conductors. As cables are only manufactured with equal sized conductors, this can mean that the cable is sized to the larger earth conductor, thereby using a third more copper than is necessary to carry the supply.

Safety is a further concern, given the many cable thefts in recent years. With theft and vandalism, there is a risk that the earth return system could become compromised leading to death or serious injury.

Enter Class II power supplies. Class II is a system where the individual location is encased and double insulated so that if a fault develops, that fault is contained within the casing and nobody is exposed to electric shock (see issue 98, December 2012).

Boxes GFRP switchgear boxes for Class II signalling power supplies are supplied by iLECSYS and these were installed at Reading during the recent Christmas blockade. A further innovation is the provision of a micro switch box, used to create a disconnection facility

where a lineside power supply splits between a legacy Class I system and everything downstream of that point which is Class II. Enclosure boxes can be supplied in a variety of sizes suiting many signalling applications.

The latest development by iLECSYS is the GFRP location case which is shortly to be installed at Stafford, London Bridge and Watford Junction. The current signalling location case (‘loc’ for short) is usually made of steel which has a tendency to cook sensitive electronic units in hot weather, necessitating a partial application of a suitable heat reflecting paint. GFRP comes with the advantage of a low heat transfer coefficient.

Aside from signalling applications, GFRP boxes have many potential railway applications including traction third-rail heating panels.

Plug & Play The concepts and practicalities of signalling ‘Plug & Play’ were expounded in issue 107 (September 2013) of The Rail Engineer. The term has come from the computer industry and whilst ‘Plug’ is correct, ‘Play’ is not apt for a signalling environment since the cable terminations are specific to a particular application and would need to be part of the functional testing routine.

Generally, lineside multicore cables carry controls and indications to/from the signalling centre and the individual cores of the cables are hand terminated onto disconnection links at each end. This is labour intensive and is followed up by wire counts requiring skilled testing staff to spend time on site.

The introduction of plug couplers to signalling cables is not new. The Crewe resignalling

of 1985 was undertaken in a tight 6-week summer blockade of the station where all the existing track and signalling was removed and replaced with new. The use of military grade plug couplers enabled clamp lock tail cables to be prepared and tested in advance, and installed rapidly when access became available to the newly installed point work. However, further use of plug couplers at that time was ruled out on the grounds of the high cost of the plug coupler components and concerns about water ingress and failure potential.

Nevertheless, the potential labour and time saving advantages were established.

Today, the use of plug-coupled cables is firmly back on the agenda. iLECSYS has a range of plug-coupled disconnection boxes available for clamplock points, point machines, signals, axle counters, level crossing lights, obstacle detectors and much more.

Lightweight structures There are many other uses of FRP, both temporary and permanent. Signalling location cases need to be installed onto solid ground with a support platform often needed. With the recent floods causing damage to railway infrastructure, FRP platforms could provide a great solution to raising signalling location cases above flood levels.

Dawlish has been much in the news recently, with the collapse of the sea wall and railway following heavy pounding from storm-driven waves. Just a few hundred metres away, the new station footbridge has remained impervious to the weather throughout - and it is made of FRP. In the future, rail engineers are likely to increasingly turn to FRP for innovative solutions to a variety of applications.

RailwayPeople.com Fast track your career

Helping you find the right people for your projects since 2001

www.RailwayPeople.com

60

the rail engineer • March 2014

Automation in Railway Control The

Human Factors DAVID BICKELL

A

t 35,000 ft above the Atlantic Ocean, the pitot tubes (air speed sensors) iced up and failed (a known phenomenon) causing the auto-pilot to disengage. The inexperienced co-pilot did not know how to correctly react to the situation. The pilot returned to the cockpit after taking a rest but could not assimilate the scenario presented by the instruments in time to save the state of the art A330 Airbus plunging into the ocean with the loss of all 228 persons on board. The fate of Air France Flight AF447 in 2009 is a horrific example of the failure of Human/System interaction in transportation systems.

Is there a parallel in the automation of train control? The introduction of computer technology and automation hasn’t always produced the expected outputs in day-to-day service of the railway.

Two recent examples from the RAIB archive demonstrate the need to fully understand the human factors associated with the design and operation of modern systems.

Inherent flaws In 2008, following resignalling work at Milton Keynes, a driver waiting to depart the station observed his signal change momentarily to green with a train visible in the section ahead. This wrong-side failure was traced to a design error that resulted in the omission of some computer data in a complex matrix of adjoining signal interlockings. The designer, design checker and signalling principles tester all failed to spot the error. Under different circumstances the error could have caused another ‘Clapham’.

In 2013, a cyclist was fatally injured by a train whilst using a bridleway level crossing equipped with Miniature Stop Lights near Witham station in Essex. Whilst the MSLs were correctly displaying a red aspect, some users had become intolerant of the long red aspect closure periods on this busy main line and were using their own judgement to cross safely.

The RAIB investigation revealed that, in response to drivers complaining about delayed clearance of signals approaching the nearby station, the closure time was extended by the use of the ’non-stopping’ setting for trains which were due to stop at Witham. Signallers were unaware of the implications on crossing warning time. Also, the designer of the Automatic Route Setting system applied a programming rule that was intended to delay the operation of the level crossing, without realising that the controls within the interlocking itself already provided for such a delay.

Automation of train control Automatic route setting has been in place on the London Underground since 1958 when the first Programme Machine was introduced at Kennington. The machine contained a roll of plastic in which holes, that encode timetable information, had been punched and which were read by electrical contacts - old fashioned and crude, but also robust and effective. The British Rail network introduced ARS as a computer controlled add-on to the Integrated Electronic Control Centres from 1989.

Automation train operation (ATO) was introduced with the opening of the Victoria Line in 1968. The Docklands Light Railway opened in 1987 fitted with ATO, without a ‘driver’ riding up front. Subsequently, the Central, Jubilee and Northern lines have been equipped with ATO, whilst the Victoria Line and DLR have received new ATO equipment.

ATO is generally considered best suited to self-contained metro systems. However, Network Rail has an ambitious scheme to introduce ATO to the core part of the Thameslink route which, in its entirety, contains all the elements of a main line, suburban and metro railway (issue 109, November 2013).

From December 2017, the Thameslink project team are planning to introduce Automatic

the rail engineer • March 2014

Train Operation (ATO) through the core from St Pancras International to London Bridge. ATO is required to ensure optimum throughput of trains. However, to safeguard the passenger service in the event of a partial control system failure, train drivers are being provided with four modes of movement authority. The selected mode will depend upon the health of various components of the system, and a driver must be prepared to change over to another mode at any moment should the need arise.

The modes are: fully automatic driving; manual driving using movement authority information displayed in the cab; traditional driving in accordance with the lineside colour light signalling, and finally the ‘Proceed on Sight’ scenario using the special lineside POSA signals. The signallers’ workstations will be more complex than hitherto with the need to show the current mode of each train and facilitate the use of the POSA signals.

There are challenges to ensure that drivers and signallers correctly interpret failure symptoms and react appropriately. However, unlike flight AF447, the risk here is most likely to be commercial. At worst, wrong decisions by driver/signaller will bring the service to a standstill.

Human Factors in Railway Control With computers and automation taking over ever more functions of railway control, the management of human factors associated with system design and operation of the railway need to be at the forefront of railway projects around the world. This topical subject has been addressed by Lloyd’s Register Rail and was the subject of a recent paper to a global audience, describing the research undertaken.

Dr Daniel Woodland (professional head of signalling with Lloyd’s Register Rail) and his colleagues Ajai Menon (principal consultant, signalling) and Harry Blanchard (principal consultant, human factors) have conducted a review of ‘Human Factors in Railway Control’ and presented their findings at a recent Middle East Rail conference in Dubai.

A summary of their work follows:

Benefits and risks of automation Automation, generally understood as ‘the use of control systems and information technologies to reduce the need for human intervention’, offers many attractions for a railway operation, whether in the control centre, on a station or on trains. It provides the promise of an increased quality of output (including greater consistency and impartial, emotion free decision making) with a reduction in operator workload, improved levels of safety and potential cost savings.

61

a de-skilling of the workforce and communication errors can all lead to problems.

While humans are good at adapting to the circumstances through rapid thinking and action, they are not good at handling the stress and work overload when emergencies arise and intervention is required. In fact, they are particularly poor at the passive monitoring of systems - their attention can only be maintained for about half an hour.

Their role needs to be seen

Automation, generally understood as ‘the use of control systems and information technologies to reduce the need for human intervention’, offers many attractions for a railway operation, whether in the control centre, on a station or on trains.

However, along with these advantages come some potentially significant drawbacks. Getting the ‘level’ of automation wrong, programming the automation with parameters that turn out not to meet the real need, or should the automation itself go wrong, then there will be an incorrect system response to the conditions. This can lead to a loss of situational awareness, competence and understanding by the nowoverloaded supervising staff, leading to security risks and vulnerability.

The potential for human error to contribute to train accidents is significantly reduced by automation systems, but issues still exist. Errors in preparation and maintenance,

as more of an active part of the system’s activities if they are to contribute to their full potential and be ready to intervene effectively when needed. So, if they are to have an active role, they must understand what the system is doing and where they fit.

It is important that the operator knows how to interpret and respond to information from the system. Advanced forms of training using simulations can assist with developing experience of lowprobability events.

In order to ensure that these issues are addressed, it is essential that all aspects of the Human Machine Interface are considered during the early stages of design,

62

the rail engineer • March 2014

and that sufficient analysis is undertaken early on to understand their impact on system function and performance. Ideally, early engagement with the rail operators will help to obtain clarification as to what is expected, especially if it is not clear how the railway should be run and operated.

Limitations of technology An over-reliance on automation systems can lead to disruption of the smooth operation of the railway service and, in the worst cases, to unsafe conditions and accidents.

There are two significant limitations within current technology and application know-how.

Firstly, the dynamics of railways in general - let alone specific applications in a particular railway’s environment (particularly if that is a new application) - are not yet fully understood. This means that automation solutions which will deal optimally with all possible situations cannot be completely specified.

Secondly, the integration of automation and humans within a system, and how to implement solutions that enable knowledge sharing and mutual support, is still in its early days. This is a limitation within current technology itself that restricts the ability to provide effective automation.

So automation should only be implemented where the technological capability, the understanding of the system and the ability to address related human factors are robust. Automation is not a desirable end in itself - it is a tool that, if appropriately applied, can assist in achieving improvements in both operational efficiency and safety. That is the real objective.

There is a need to carefully consider the ‘art of the possible’ and also carry out a cost / benefit analysis to determine the extent of automation that is appropriate.

This depends on the client and a wide variety of associated factors, in addition to how the specific railway will need to be run.

If automation is implemented too early (and the automation is not accurate or effective), operators will ignore, bypass and / or turn off the support and automation systems - discrediting the concept of automation and putting off the potential benefits until at least the next upgrade cycle.

Given the current state of technology, there would seem to be distinct, supportive roles for human operators and automation

systems. Humans make good information managers and can make complex decisions. Automation can filter information and present concise analyses, and can then process the decision and set off ‘alarms’ if anything goes outside set parameters.

Implementing automation The Lloyd’s Register team concluded by suggesting that a railway considering the introduction of control-centre automation should start with a baseline of a manuallycontrollable system, augmented by ‘easy to implement’ and well understood (routine / repetitive task) automation and simple ‘process reminder’ decision support.

This should include the ‘filtering’ and presentation of information to the human operator.

More comprehensive decision support features can then be developed as the system becomes established and the characteristics in service become better understood, building up models for ‘prediction’ and using these to enable preemptive advice. Over time, if decision support proves to be highly reliable in certain areas, full automation can be introduced in those areas.

In the future, it may be possible to build in additional automation, but operators need to take one step at a time and not let their enthusiasm and eagerness to see the final objectives achieved lead them to jump too far ahead of their ability to deliver.

We get to the bottom of things Our name is synonymous with independent assurance: we inspected our first locomotive in 1929 and have been assuring products, processes and entire railways ever since.

In the past year alone we have been appointed to provide Notified and Designated Body services for major projects such as Crossrail and the Great Western Integrated Programme, and safety assessments for overseas clients such as Etihad Rail and the Taiwan High Speed Railway.

In an industry where safety and performance are paramount, there are few names you could trust more.

For more information visit www.lr.org/rail

Working together for a safer world

Lloyd’s Register and variants of it are trading names of Lloyd’s Register Group Limited, its subsidiaries and affiliates.

Copyright © Lloyd’s Register Group Limited. 2014. A member of the Lloyd’s Register group.

64

the rail engineer • March 2014

cost Reducing

with GFRP

T

he benefits of Class II signalling power supplies have been featured in The Rail Engineer on several occasions, including in this issue. Switching from three-core to two-core cabling reduces the weight of copper used on the railways, while the next step, a move away from copper to aluminium, will bring further cost savings.

However, while two-core cabling has the potential to save a great deal in replacement costs, many current trackside products may be unsuitable for this solution as the metal enclosures used to house the electronics are often unable to provide the insulation required. This has led many OEMs to move away from traditional enclosure products in favour of Glass-Fibre Reinforced Polyester (GFRP) alternatives. Sourced from the correct supplier, these enclosures not only provide better insulation, but they are cheaper and easier to install as well, all of which helps Network Rail in achieving their target savings.

New development MGB Engineering Ltd., a leading manufacturer of safety critical rail products, has recently launched a new FSP switch gear enclosure, a component of the Functional Supply Point (FSP), which takes advantage of GFRP enclosures to provide Class II insulation. Mike James, engineering director, explained how the company worked with its supplier, Spelsberg UK, to design an efficient and reliable solution: “We had previously worked with Spelsberg on another project so we were aware of the company’s technical knowledge and design capabilities,” he commented. “When we began to think about the new FSP switch gear we approached Spelsberg to see what ideas it could bring to the table. It turned out that it had a product on the shelf which could be developed to produce a Class II power feed, and so we set out a new project to deliver a solution which would be competitive in terms of procurement and installation costs while having the additional benefit of reduced replacement costs in the event of cable theft.”

The purpose of the enclosure is to be connected to a radial circuit and provide protection and isolation points for a number of functional circuits as well as surge suppression, if required. The enclosure had to be IP4X rated and contain terminals for the radial supply, in and out, capable of accepting 120mm² conductors.

The key design criteria for the new FSP switch gear was that it had to fit the legacy size of 400mm x 400mm in order to allow an easy swap with the incumbent product and keep installation costs to a minimum. In addition, the entire solution had to be designed specifically to work with the Network Rail designed Class II cable.

From this point Spelsberg worked closely with MGB Engineering on specifying the correct enclosure and developing the design; which had to account for Class II cable termination and glanding while also conforming to IEC (International Electrotechnical Commission) and rail industry standards. Over the course of a year, prototypes were developed and innovative solutions incorporated into the final design which was granted the Network Rail Certificate of Acceptance in May 2013.

Inflexible problem One of the major challenges in the project was the installation of large cables into the enclosure. Even with the introduction of removable gland plates this is no easy task, having to work in a confined area with large, inflexible cables. MGB Engineering and Spelsberg worked together to develop the innovative MAGplate™. The high quality polycarbonate MAGplate allows the power cables to be made off at a convenient point in front of the FSP enclosure and then the gland plate assembly simply pushes into position. No additional fixing is required.

the rail engineer • March 2014

65

This design makes site installation much quicker, saving time and money. The unique design of the MAGplate means maintenance is considerably simplified and an individual power cable can be changed without disturbing any others. Extensive testing has resulted in an extremely strong assembly and a practical solution to an age old problem of installing power cables of up to 120mm² in either copper or aluminium.

The finished design also had to incorporate test points for the supply cables to enable maintenance engineers to test for a live circuit before opening the enclosure as well as individual isolators for each circuit with the facility to be locked off. The fuse protection can be accessed by only removing a clear cover and so does not require the enclosure to be opened, thereby reducing the danger to engineers.

Challenges overcome Mike James continued: “We have had to overcome a number of challenges during this project and were fortunate that Spelsberg was able to able to offer its expertise and aid us in critical parts of the design phase. The entire Spelsberg team has been very proactive and provided a number of excellent solutions including the innovative cable entry system using a sliding gland plate design. They have produced prototypes in very short time scales and generally provided an excellent level of support to the project.”

Darren Field, area sales manager at Spelsberg, added: “This project has proved to be a great success. Working with MGB Engineering, we have been able to develop a truly unique product that will help the rail industry reduce maintenance costs and improve the efficiency of the electrical installation teams. This product has passed through some very rigorous testing procedures in order to achieve final acceptance and finally the hard work has paid off.”

Following on from the certificate of Acceptance from Network Rail, MGB Engineering has also designed an FSP03 (Auto Recognition System) which is based on similar, modular principles. It incorporates facilities

uk Spelsberg UK is the largest supplier of non-metallic enclosures, ex stock in the UK; it has over 4,000 standard products available with extensive CNC customisation abilities.

The company has almost 100 years experience in the industry and its team of sales engineers is on hand to develop bespoke solutions for almost any application.

Tel: 01952 200716 Email: sales@spelsberg.co.uk

for installing equipment capable of detecting faults and automatically reconfiguring the supply cable to isolate the faulty section and restore power to the complete signalling system. The design offers simple installation with reliable operation and has recently been granted approval from Network Rail with the formal certificate expected to arrive within weeks.

www.spelsberg.co.uk uk Customisation

GRP Range

66

the rail engineer • March 2014

a

collaboration

for

the rail engineer • March 2014

67

E

stablished to modernise and improve signalling infrastructure across the UK network, the National Signalling Framework is now in full swing.

Announced in January 2012 (issue 89, March 2012), three framework agreements were awarded to Invensys (now Siemens Rail Automation), Signalling Solutions and Atkins.

Primary and secondary contractors were appointed, covering eight geographical areas.

These agreements formed the backbone of Network Rail’s programme to modernise and maintain safety-critical railway signalling systems and were designed to deliver the efficiency savings required across the company’s signalling work bank over the next seven years through further reductions in unit costs.

At least one of the contractors, Atkins, has found that delivering this major programme of work, while achieving challenging industry efficiency targets, has required a different approach. The solution has been to work collaboratively with Network Rail.

The framework was set up to deliver design and build contracts (GRIP 5-8). However, at the time that Atkins was appointed primary contractor for the Area 4A (Anglia and Kent) and Area 4B (Sussex and Wessex) frameworks, the initial development stages - GRIP 1 to GRIP 4 - also needed to be completed. The company was therefore awarded an additional commission by Network Rail to progress seven key projects to the design and build phase so that they could then be delivered under the framework. For the past two years Atkins has significantly advanced these schemes, with the first project, East Kent Phase 2, recently moving into design and build.

Progressing the schemes Speaking to Steve Hall, frameworks programme manager for Atkins, it is clear that working in collaboration with Network Rail has streamlined the GRIP 1-4 process.

“When we were named primary contractor in January 2012, we decided from the beginning that working in partnership would be the best way to get all seven projects ready for design and build. As we were putting the project team together for East Kent Phase 2, we established principles to help us save time and money.

For example, rather than having a number of project managers, we only have one, by implementing the policy of best person for the job where appropriate.

“Balfour Beatty Rail and Spencer Rail are also working with Atkins and Network Rail to deliver East Kent. While this is not a formal alliance, all companies put into practice the

main values of working in partnership. Our trial of the shared project controls office in East Kent is a good example of collaboration at its best. By working as one team, co-located in one office, we are driving efficiency and delivering shared project performance data for all four businesses via cloud based systems which are accessible to all.”

As the first project to reach the design and build phase, East Kent Phase 2 is the example which the other schemes (Victoria 2, NorwichYarmouth-Lowestoft, Feltham, Cambridge, Colchester and West of England) are following.

Moving in together...

In April 2013, the joint East Kent Phase 2 team initially moved into an office in Croydon and is now permanently based in the project site office at Rochester. This has made communication and problem solving much easier as the engineers from Atkins, Network Rail, Balfour Beatty and C Spencer sit with each other and can deal with issues as they arise.

The project is also one of the first framework schemes making full use of the standard for collaborative business relationships, BS 11000.

East Kent Phase 2 achieved certification to that standard last year, which Steve Hall notes as an important milestone. “By following the guidelines set out in BS 11000, roles and responsibilities are clearly defined to avoid duplication of effort, which is also helping us keep the projects ahead of schedule,” he said.

Three further projects will be moved into the Network Rail offices at East Anglia House later this year. The projects, Norwich-Yarmouth-

Lowestoft, Cambridge and Colchester, are all at various stages within the GRIP 1-4 process and it is expected that the benefits of co-location seen on East Kent Phase 2 will be experienced on these schemes as well.

Meanwhile, the Feltham project team will also move into a joint office at Waterloo. This major resignalling scheme has now moved into the GRIP 3 (option selection) stage. With Atkins, Network Rail and the South West Trains Alliance working at Waterloo, it is anticipated that integration requirements with other major infrastructure projects working in the same area will be easier to co-ordinate.

Another testament to the success of co-location is Victoria 2, which is based in Croydon. Covering the Streatham, Wimbledon and Sutton areas, the GRIP 1-4 stage has taken less than two years to complete - an impressive timescale by industry standards.

Steve Reynolds, signalling project director for Network Rail, said: “I’m really passionate about collaboration, and I feel it’s the only way forward in the frameworks. The results that our joint team has achieved on the development stage of these framework projects are fantastic, and testament to their hard work and dedication. While we’ve achieved a lot over the past two years, we’ve still got a busy time ahead of us. Feltham is one of the biggest signalling projects in the UK, so working efficiently together is extremely important.”

Summing up the National Signalling Framework so far, Steve Hall commented: “It has been a very eventful time and we look forward to delivering more projects under these frameworks. Collaboration has already played an important role in reducing delivery times which will mean that the travelling public can enjoy more reliable journeys on the network sooner. With more work on the horizon we are always looking for talented engineers to join our team and help us resignal the South of England.”

For information on joining Atkins’ rail business, turn to page 101.

68

the rail engineer • March 2014

GSM-R

on board CLIVE KESSELL

I

n the 20-odd years that the GSM-R European standard for track to train radio has been in existence, much has been written on the infrastructure design with its control centres, base stations, aerial towers, frequency assignments, transmission links, power supplies and other ancillary equipment. Very little has been written on the train-borne radio kit, which is surprising considering the complications that can arise with this.

In the UK, virtually all of the train radios have been supplied by Siemens which has a long history of designing and building electronic systems at Poole for train borne use and which is therefore experienced in understanding the risks and pitfalls that can occur.

Radio design When the Cab Secure Radio (CSR) system was being implemented on British Rail in the London & South East, Merseyside and Strathclyde areas during the 1980s, one serous constraint was the small size of many British train cabs, particularly those with a through corridor connection alongside. The space to fit any additional equipment was severely limited. The adaptation of a road vehicle radio, as fitted into the dashboard of cars and lorries, was seen as the best solution as these too had to fit a small space envelope.

The then Plessey company rose to the challenge by not only building the complete CSR infrastructure package but also a train radio that would fit most cabs. The latter unit consisted of a separate radio transceiver and power supply that could be mounted in any convenient location adjacent to the cab - often under a seat in the passenger compartment - and a driver display unit small enough to be positioned in the driver’s console without too much difficulty.

The CSR system has served Britain’s railways well for nigh on 30 years but the time has come to replace it with GSM-R. The contract for the radio infrastructure was let to Nortel (taken over by Kapsch after they ceased to trade) and is now being rolled out across the country.

The associated train borne equipment had, however, some logistical problems as, whilst there were a number of potential suppliers, most of these had designed their radios to fit the more generous cab capacity that exists in mainland Europe. Adapting these for the typical British cab would be quite a challenge.

Discussions with the Poole company, now part of the Siemens group, gave promise to a GSM-R radio that would fit the CSR space envelope and, with the orders seen as likely, work commenced to design and build such a set.

Down the years, drivers have got used to the formatting and procedures for operating a track to train radio system and having a near identical process for GSM-R was seen as a big advantage. Thus the operation of the new radio, and its Man Machine Interface (MMI), has much in common with CSR. The radio must nonetheless meet with all the GSM-R EIRENE (European Integrated Railway Radio Enhanced Network) functional specs for performance and interoperability and be suitable for selling to overseas rail administrations in addition to the UK. An integral power supply is included, the lessons of train supply spikes and surges having been learned down the years.

The radio incorporates the standard GSM-R features of a voice group call giving the facility for the signaller to talk to a group of drivers with their ability to acknowledge, both priority and pre-emption group allocations for the over-riding of routine calls by ones of more importance, and a voice broadcast service allowing an urgent one-way message to be sent to all trains from the signalling centre operator.

the rail engineer • March 2014

Deviations from the standard

Contracts, supply and fitting

As is the way with all railway operators, some bespoke features are called for by individual railways to meet local rules and functionality. Some of these are due to a genuine need while others, perhaps, are specified because no-one is prepared to amend operational rules.

For the British market, two modifications were requested. One was to adapt the fully-digital identification system to an alphanumeric one. With a train radio being called by its running number identification, this requires a set up procedure at journey start to co-relate the train description to the actual radio number which is aligned to the train unit stock number. Whilst the European standard for train descriptions is a 6 digit numeric code, that in the UK is a 4 digit alpha numeric number, e.g.

1A56. To change would have massive operating and cost implications, hence the need for adapting the GSM-R radio.

In addition, part of the GSM-R spec is a red emergency button which, when pressed by a train driver, will cause an alert message to all trains in that area to stop. This is quite draconian and can have a significant impact on rail operations. A lesser warning alert was thus seen as necessary and has resulted in a yellow button being incorporated into the driver’s display panel. When pressed, it makes a high priority point-to-point call to the signaller who can then assess and manage the situation by talking to the train with the problem and, if need be, making a general call broadcast to all trains explaining the situation.

Whilst such changes are seen as necessary by those who write the rules, they do add cost and should therefore be carefully thought through as to real necessity. The overall radio type is known as the SVR-400 series with the special features needed in Britain making it the SVR-401 model.

The supply chain route for train radios in the UK is complicated as, whilst the ultimate customers are the train operating companies (TOCs), to set up individual contracts with each one of these would be bureaucratic, complicated and open to the temptation of local engineers to alter the specification. Thus, a pragmatic decision has been made to supply all radios to Network Rail (which will act as the systems engineer) and for TOCs to call these off as required. However, even this was seen as over-complex for new-build rolling stock and agreements are in place for Siemens to supply radios direct to the train manufacturing plant. The fitting of existing rolling stock is a sizeable contract with 8,000 radios expected to be delivered over a period of time.

Building the basic radio is, however, only one element in the supply progression. There are many different types of rolling stock in Britain and each will have a different cab design. Most passenger trains are multiple units and the only practical way of fitting these with radios is to put one in each cab. This may seem uneconomic as, for example, a 12-car train made up of three 4-car units will have six radios in total. However past attempts to have a single radio set in each unit wired out to an MMI in each cab have led to significant technical complications, loss of reliability and an increase in cost. For locomotives, it is feasible to have a single radio mounted in an appropriate electronic cubicle connected to a MMI in both cabs and the Siemens product range caters for this arrangement.

There are, however, many more variations than just the type of train. Fitting the radio into the many variations of cab involves a design having to be done for every one of these. Siemens is responsible for the first-of-class installation designs for all the various train fleets. Not only will this determine where the radio unit and the MMI are

69

70

the rail engineer • March 2014

positioned, it will also determine the type of low profile aerial to be used and its mounting position on the cab roof.

Once the train installation designs have been approved, installation kits for each of the train classes will be manufactured by Multipulse, a specialist contractor based in Woking.

Network Rail is responsible for the cab radio installation, although the actual fitting is usually carried out by the Train Operating Company’s own maintenance staff or a specialist contractor such as Vossloh Kiepe.

Transportables Whilst most trains will be fitted with permanent cab radios, there will always be occasions when other items of rolling stock are required to operate but do not have a cab radio. Steam specials are an example and for these a transportable unit has been designed. Additionally, some operators require spare radios that can be stored at strategic points along the route for quick and easy installation in the cab should the fixed radio develop a fault.

Essentially, the transportable unit is the same radio packaged into a robust integral case with a battery unit at the bottom and an antenna connection on top. The latter can be either a direct screwed-in aerial or a connection to a magnetic-base aerial that is positioned on the cab roof or elsewhere. The whole assembly is robust and will withstand being dropped from a fair height. The battery has a nominal eight hour life, so a fully charged spare is always advisable.

Future Use Potential Siemens is mindful that, since designed primarily as a track to train voice facility, the cab radio units are rarely in use unless some train service disruption has occurred.

Even in the days of CSR, the specification called for the connection of the radio to the train PA system and, although this was provided, for various personnel reasons it was rarely used. The facility continues in the current design and it is to be hoped that it can be used for direct messaging from control room to travelling public on any matters regarding train service operation. Other possible uses of the available airtime are being considered, these being:

»» On board train monitoring - with modern trains being fitted with remote condition monitoring systems, the train management system can report directly to the depot using the GSM-R radio. »» Asset anomaly reporting - whilst Network Rail has track measurement trains in service, these are only able to survey routes on a periodic basis. Why not use the track-to-train radio to report any unusual occurrences en route such as rough sections of track, bogie abnormality, etc? Such events would need sensors building into the train but the opportunity is there. »» Remote management of the radio activity. Occasionally software updates are required for the train radios.

These are normally done at a depot but can be performed much faster by downloading direct, negating the requirement for maintenance staff to visit every train. »» Driver Advisory System (DAS) integration. The growing deployment of these non-safety systems to give drivers advice on optimal speeds (issue 104, June 2013) is logically going to impact on train radios once DAS technology is expanded to include networking of multi train position information. Indeed, Siemens already have a DAS application running on the cab radio that uses the existing MMI. Should any of these applications materialise, then it is likely some will make use of the ‘back cab’ radio unit, i.e. the radio not being used by the driver. These radios are live whenever the train is in operation but are not normally in use as the MMI unit is only energised via the insertion of the driver’s key. The ‘back cab’ radios should not be confused with the train data radio (the SDR200) that will be used when ERTMS signalling systems are deployed. Although this will also use the GSM-R system, it will be entirely devoted to transmit and receive information for the on board ETCS equipment and is designed for both circuit and packet switching (GPRS).

One potential problem affecting GSM-R is that of interference from public networks. There are a number of ways of overcoming this including the provision of a band pass filter installed between the cab radio and the aerial.

With all this capability, it is not surprising that the Siemens Poole facility is supplying GSM-R radios outside of the UK. Australia, Denmark, Ireland (for the DART Upgrade project), Spain, Greece, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and The Netherlands are all making use of this basic design.

Variations on the MMI were inevitable, with several different versions of the text display including a graphical option.

Although GSM-R remains a 2G technology, it will be a cornerstone of rail communication for many years to come and to give a co-ordinated steer on future usage and development, a GSM-R Industry Group is in being.

As well as Siemens, this includes Kapsch, Nokia Siemens Networks (NSN) and a number of others.

Assurances are in place for continuation of the GSM-R service until the late 2020s and it may last longer than that. Thus the investment being made into train fitment will see a good return on the outlay as well as providing a much improved voice communication facility between driver and signaller.

siemens.com/MobileComms

What next for GSM-R? Our new Driver Advisory System (DAS) offers real time guidance for train drivers

The rail industry demands outstanding reliability and high performance from GSM-R, while at the same time seeking to reduce energy, fuel costs and COâ‚‚ emissions and to better serve the travelling public.

To help realise these objectives, we have developed a low cost DAS – the first of a series of new applications developed for our range of on-train cab radios.

DAS provides real time guidance to train drivers about optimum route speed and driving approach during each journey.

Designed to run from the existing cab radio and driver control panel, our DAS application maximises the benefit of the original on-train cab radio investment.

Experience integrated mobility.

Answers for infrastructure and cities.

72

the rail engineer • March 2014

Signal

collaboration

C

ollaboration is the name of the game these days. Joint ventures and deep alliances are becoming essential as companies strive to deliver turn-key projects which involve a variety of skills and disciplines.

Carillion is at the forefront of this minirevolution. The infrastructure specialist has recently been awarded a share in a £2 billion electrification framework by network Rail, a contract it won in partnership with the Austrian firm SPL Powerlines.

The company has also received a framework contract for the development and design of the European Train Control System (ETCS) for use in the UK. This time, Carillion is in partnership with Bombardier in a joint venture named Infrasig.

The new organisation is well placed to fulfil this contract as Bombardier has a great deal of experience on the continent with both ETCS and ERTMS (European Rail Traffic Management System - basically ETCS controlled using a GSM/R radio network) in a variety of differing applications.

A world first One good example of this is the Västerdalsbanan in Sweden - the first European railway to employ an ERTMS level 3 regional traffic control system. This replaced the previous token block system and is a variant of ERTMS for low density, regional lines.

The Västerdalsbanan is in central Sweden, approximately 350 km north of both Gothenburg and Stockholm. The 134 km line runs from Repbäcken to Malung with six stations (currently closed as the line is freight-only) and 33 level crossings. Today, the line is controlled by one dispatcher situated in Gävle, 200km away. Eight freight trains per day traverse the line, running at a maximum speed of 90km/h.

Previously, nine dispatchers controlled this non-electrified line without support from a centralised traffic centre or Automatic Train Protection (ATP), using only GSM/R for voice communication. Bombardier was awarded a contract to implement its Interflo 550 solution as part of a frame work agreement covering 13 regional lines in Sweden. The Västerdalsbanan is the first pilot line project being implemented for the customer, Trafikverket.

Designed for regional lines, Interflo 550 is a flexible, modularised wayside train control system which provides the capacity, adaptability and cost-effectiveness needed for secondary lines. It offers the option for future growth while ensuring safe and efficient train operation.

Simple technology Regional lines are commonly characterised as operating mixed-mode and lowdensity traffic, with extended headways, often in remote areas and/or very harsh environments. For this reason it can be difficult to justify the investment in traditional train control systems.

These criteria demand that cost, performance and reliability are of the highest standard.

Interflo 550 allows vehicles equipped with ETCS to operate seamlessly between regional and adjacent lines without any additional onboard systems or configuration except for the possible need of a Specific Transmission Module.

The new system adds a new, highly costeffective dimension to Automatic Train Protection (ATP) applications by using modules and practices derived from Bombardier’s ERTMS development programme. It addresses component cost and availability by employing commercial off-the-shelf products that are readily available, keenly priced and will support migration in the future without the threat of obsolescence.

Designed as an integrated system for manual or automatic control of traffic, the modular construction of Interflo 550 simplifies maintenance and modification. All the software modules can be integrated on one

the rail engineer • March 2014

platform, a benefit which assists delivery and supports the robust nature of its operation.

The necessary wayside control systems, primarily for operating point motors, can be factory-assembled and brought on site factory-tested and ready for operation.

Train dispatchers control and monitor traffic flow via workstations. The complete operational situation can be displayed on large panels to combine with the main operational network.

Better control, lower cost

73

systems and overall cost reductions approaching 60% providing fully automated operation and increased traffic capacity around the clock. Under a framework agreement, additional regional lines will be equipped with Interflo 550 until 2016 and beyond.

Using Bombardier’s experience of installing ERTMS on secondary lines to save cost, and Carillion’s knowledge of the British railway infrastructure, the new Infrasig company is set to bring the advantages of these new signalling systems to routes around the UK.

The equipment was initially installed as an overlay, allowing the possibility to test and prove the system whilst the legacy manual token system was in control of the line during hours of operation. Now that it is complete, the ERTMS Regional system consists of a traffic control centre (Radio Block Centre and interlocking) in Borlänge and a central traffic control centre in Gävle. The installation has the flexibility to allow for future growth in system size or levels of automation. Sharing data with other systems is also a simple task and can contribute to better traffic management.

The need to have ERTMS functionality for operation from the regional lines to the main lines was a critical part of the customer’s decision. Further key aims were to achieve cost reductions of up to 50% in the signalling

YOUR STAY ON THE RIGHT TRACK

Dedicated Account Managers Our rail specialists have an exceptional knowledge of how your industry operates along with an in-depth understanding of rail projects.

Don’t delay, call us today on:

02476 587581

Over 100,000 satisfied rail employees have stayed in our hotels Experts in providing hotel accommodation for all your rail projects. We have the know how to help your project run smoothly.

• Highly competitive Rail Project Hotel Accommodation Rates • Your food, your way, when you want it – from packed lunches to dinner at 2am, we can provide it all • Free on site parking able to accommodate long wheel based vehicles* • Express Check-In and Out – ensuring your team arrives on time • Secure storage for tools and equipment – keeping your valuables safe • Fully equipped meeting rooms, ideal for project control and briefing centres • Quiet zones – allocated quiet bedrooms perfect for night shift workers

Book today at www.tophoteloffers.co.uk/therailengineer *Subject to location.

74

the rail engineer • March 2014

Looking Ahead

Future challenges and opportunities STEVE MCLAREN

F

ew could argue that the next five years will be an exciting and busy period for the UK rail industry. The way the sector tackles the future impact from political, economic, environmental, workforce, safety and technological factors will be critical if it is to remain competitive and achieve its full potential. There are challenges and opportunities in equal measure but, overall, the outlook for the UK industry remains positive.

We are currently seeing the biggest, most sustained investment in rail in decades. Projects ranging from Crossrail to the Northern Hub, Great Western Electrification and the ambitious High Speed 2 (HS2) programme are illustrative of this and showcase British engineering excellence. From my involvement in European and International rail projects, I believe much can be learnt from the British experience and knowledge.

Our country has one of the fastest growing railways in Europe but, as our railways get busier, the challenges to provide additional capacity to support passenger growth become more complex. With this come all the implications for wear and tear and congestion, so a key challenge over the next few years will be maintaining sustained investment in both renewing and modernising the railway while increasing its capacity.

Rail transportation represents opportunities to develop and deliver leading technology. In my view, developing new products that use emerging technology in an agile and flexible way is vital to move forward within the industry and is a challenging but achievable opportunity for suppliers and contractors to secure business in a highly competitive and cost sensitive world.

Technology advances Harold Wilson made his famous ‘White Heat of Technology’ speech at the 1963 Labour Party Conference, passionately reminding the country of the need to develop and deliver new technologies. Fifty years on, the legacy of Wilson’s call for innovation chimes with the emerging technologies and engineering developments in rail infrastructure and operations as new signalling and control technologies revolutionise train control and traffic management. ERTMS (European Rail Traffic Management System) is at the forefront of this innovation and, based on past experience when I led R&D for ERTMS at Alstom, I believe a challenging factor for the industry will be improving the return on investment from ERTMS with innovative financing.

re-signalling the rural/low density lines. A key factor is that they are entirely infrastructure based, so there is no complication with having to fit equipment onto rolling stock.

SSL has gained valuable experience in deploying a modular system for the Ely to Norwich pilot project.

Traffic Management (TM) and Rail Operating Centres (ROCs) are both ‘hot topics’ in terms of rail innovation. TM systems will provide decision making tools to identify the optimum operational solution - increasing capacity and efficiency - while the plan is to concentrate command and control at ROCs with the entire railway eventually controlled by these centres.

Many cutting edge technologies will be factored into the HS2 project, making use of technology successfully developed in countries such as France and Germany. All eyes will be fixed on the progress of HS2 this year, with calls for the timescale to be brought forward and the costs reduced. HS2 will report around Easter on these factors and Sir David Higgins has

Our country has one of the fastest growing railways in Europe but, as our railways get busier, the challenges to provide additional capacity to support passenger growth become more complex.

Certainly, over the next five years, the drive to reduce the cost of signalling will continue to be important. One initiative to achieve this is Modular Signalling for secondary routes, aimed at significantly reducing the cost of

said he will promote early contractor involvement. I believe that HS2 will be a tremendous boost to the UK economy and the rail industry - bringing suppliers closer to manufacturers and manufacturers closer to markets.

the rail engineer • March 2014

Workforce and skills shortage The critical shortage of skilled engineers and technicians in rail engineering generally, and signal engineering specifically, is a growing problem that we can’t ignore. And with high levels of investment and volumes of project work during 2014 and beyond, a core focus for the industry will be to fundamentally address the issues regarding its future workforce.

Estimates suggest that 11% of the workforce in Track, Signalling & Telecommunications, Electrification & Plant and Traction & Rolling Stock could retire as early as 2018.

Compound this with a decrease in the number of students in engineering subjects and you can see why the industry is bracing itself for a dire skills shortage. The reality we now face is that skilled rail engineers will be hard to find!

As an industry, we must consistently promote the diverse range of exciting career opportunities rail has to offer young people by showing them that, regardless of their background or career aspirations, they will find something that suits them. We need to communicate this to a younger generation of engineers and inspire them to join the industry.

So, I firmly believe the industry challenge during 2014 will be twofold: understand the skills shortage issues more clearly and then lobby for government support and funding to help us address the problem.

As a company, SSL takes this challenge very seriously. Our in-house team of recruitment specialists is working hard to recruit skilled signal engineers and promote the rail industry as an attractive career path for graduates and trainees. Recently, we have developed successful initiatives to attract ex-armed forces personnel into a fast track training programme.

While it’s a fact that, in the UK, we produce fewer graduates in engineering than our international competitors, in my experience the quality of our graduates remains high and our culture of innovation runs very deep indeed. It’s an edge we need to keep fighting to maintain.

After nearly three decades working in this industry, I still believe it is an exciting and rewarding profession which offers tangible prospects for people who work hard. As an active non-executive board member of The National Skills Academy for Railway Engineering, I am very supportive of

their analysis of the skills required to attract new entrants into the profession. We estimate the rail industry needs 3,000 additional engineers in the next five years.

SSL experience to deliver We have worked successfully on various key Network Rail projects since we started operating in 2007.

Looking to the future we intend to draw from this experience and on the wealth of expertise our parent companies have in the UK and globally.

As a joint venture operation we benefit considerably from the strong industry reputations of our two parent companies, Alstom and Balfour Beatty - both highly regarded for their operational excellence. Their support has meant that, from SSL’s inception, we were able to operate from a complete turnkey capability. It has also allowed us to leverage leading technology and ‘know-how’.

The project management and operation of new signalling technology requires best business practices - and our strategic approach has always been that robust project management reduces costs and delays. Reliability in terms of delivery and performance on both projects and

75

76

the rail engineer • March 2014

most prestigious projects - Crossrail and Great Western main line upgrade for interlocking renewal and ETCS overlay - puts us at the very heart of the challenges ahead.

Collaborative approach

product integrity is core, but we have very cohesive checks and procedures across the business - and lessons learned and obstacles overcome is part of our company ethos.

Our company has grown four-fold since we started in October 2007, helped significantly by the Network Rail award of long-term geographical frameworks which has enabled us to make strategic and longterm investments in our signalling technology and our workforce. We value our strong working relationship with the team at Network Rail; we know the market well and our aim always is to provide the best possible service, based on our flexibility, to adapt our capabilities to meet the exact client and project requirements.

We were delighted to be chosen to develop a traffic management capability for Network Rail. SSL is also one of the four suppliers for the ETCS National Integration Facility on the Hertford Loop deployment trial, where our train-borne equipment is being tested for interoperability with products from three other companies.

Work started on this project in September 2013 to provide both train-side and train-borne equipment.

Work also continues apace with our prototype SSL Traffic Management system.

Signalling in CP5 is going to be an exciting and innovative experience and there is a tangible sense of enthusiasm and commitment around the company. Our work on two of the

SSL values collaborative, constructive working relationships with a wide range of stakeholders across the profession. We like to play our role in helping and supporting key industry bodies. Safety is a paramount issue for us all, which is why I am both professionally and personally proud to Chair the Project Safety Leadership Group (PSLG) on behalf of Network Rail and the industry. My philosophy has always been that safety is everyone’s responsibility, every day!

Collaboration is often the key to success for many projects and learning from past experiences leads to better ways of future working. For example, valuable lessons learned from the Cambrian Line ETCS (European Train Control System) deployment have been taken on board by SSL and the other companies involved in the Hertford Loop integration trial. Our SSL teams adopt this approach of innovative collaboration and are working closely with Network Rail and the other stakeholders in the task of demonstrating that interoperability between the different supplier offerings can be achieved.

Each project has its unique set of challenges and opportunities, but I believe it is vital to adopt a collaborative style to better understand past issues, find solutions and necessary improvements for the future and recognise financial and project opportunities. As Signalling Solutions has discovered, closer collaboration can certainly achieve these things - and more.

We are all committed to the long-term development of a strong rail and infrastructure industry - so this year I hope we will all recognise and embrace collaborative working to drive innovation, maximise opportunities, help reduce costs and minimise the challenges that lie ahead.

Steve McLaren is managing director of Signalling Solutions Ltd

THE COMPLETE SIGNALLING SOLUTION

Delivering expertise and experience Signalling Solutions is a leader in the provision of train control solutions in the UK, offering a complete range of services from design to full project delivery. Our solutions are ERTMS ready, in successful operation and providing significant benefits to operators across Europe.

Our expertise and experience in supporting the UK’s rail network and in delivering cutting edge technology

- such as the introduction of the European Rail Traffic Management System - has placed us at the heart of innovation and technological development within the sector.

In an ever increasing and competitive market place Signalling Solutions is building a strong reputation for meeting the control requirements for the railway of the future.

excellence in train control a Balfour Beatty and Alstom company

+44 (0) 1923 635 000

info@signallingsolutions.com

www.signallingsolutions.com

Signalling Solutions Limited, Bridgefoot House, Watling Street, Radlett, WD7 7HT

78

the rail engineer • March 2014

Signal sighting made easy

K

nowing exactly where every structure, sign, pole and platform edge is on a railway is very important. The position of any item can affect everything from gauge clearances to signal sighting.

The traditional method of capturing this information involved track walking with a trundle wheel and GPS receiver.

However, this exposes staff to the potential safety risks of being on or about the line.

Gathering data by train Therefore, Network Rail Signalling Innovations Group (SIG) changed the way in which asset inventory data was captured by utilising Network Rail’s track inspection vehicles to undertake

train-based surveys. These are carried out on behalf of Signalling Design Group (SDG) projects.

The system used, OmniSurveyor3D®, accurately identifies the geographical and linear position and dimensions of an item, which is automatically assigned a unique ID. This information can be incorporated into a comprehensive geospatial database of assets with the ability to include condition/ inspection information. Details can be exported to assist with

engineering reports and data gathering exercises.

At its most basic level, the software can be used to identify and understand the assets of a route and the surrounding environment. Height profile data can be interrogated for the creation of gradient information.

Site reports and images relating to any asset can be added to the database. When the time comes for site visits, inbuilt aerial imagery combined with access points within the database allows for access route planning.

Experienced operators can use a further array of tools to make life easier. Measurements can

be taken between two points in three dimensions, giving both direct distance and track distance to an accuracy of several centimetres. This information can be used to display lineside measurements, signal distances, level crossing widths, bridge height/length and the like. The signal sighting tool can be used to check driver’s line of sight to a signal. Also, with a bank of virtual asset and object models, OmniSurveyor3D enables users to overlay and manipulate objects for signal planning/sighting, new track layouts and station builds.

The software can also be used for office-based driver route learning.

the rail engineer • March 2014

79

Accurate plans Recent projects delivered were East Coast main line and Durham Coast to the York SDG office and Cambridge to the Swindon office. Over the last 12 months alone, nearly 2,000 miles of the rail network have been surveyed for specific projects but, historically, the entire network was surveyed on a rotational basis so data is available for over 90% of the main line network.

This data is available to all contractors from either SIG or Omnicom.

Richard Cooper of the Swindon SDG, involved in the pilot projects using ISP, said of the method: “As well as the saving in time and cost, we avoid exposure to the safety risks of being on or about the line. This new method of producing signalling plans is accurate, with digital images and position data readily available at the touch of a button and easily shared with other disciplines. Different disciplines can request additional survey assets such as telecoms, electrification, plant and civils which could prove to be very cost effective as only one set of data is required.”

Darren Leech, Project Manager of the Cambridge Resignalling Project, added: “The video has also proven to be beneficial for use with risk-based signal sighting, constructability assessments, driver route learning and training.”

Extra features The system developer, Omnicom, is currently working to extend the functionality offered within the software by including links and features already offered in existing products OmniVision® and OmniInspector®HD. Adding these features, such as automatic image recognition, laser integration and support for SDEF (Signal Data Exchange Format), will greatly enhance the user experience. A new suite of models including signs, signals, speed boards, plant and machinery are also being developed to give users a 3D interactive environment to help improve efficiency, effectiveness and safety when working in the railway environment.

OmniSurveyor3D is widely used by Network Rail’s Signalling Design Group and it is an integral part of the production of base signalling plans and scheme plans. Importing data into the Intelligent Scheme Plan (ISP) software produces a geographic file. This displays the signalling and track data according to geographical position with overlaid Ordnance Survey topography and aerial imagery.

The geographic file is the centre-pin of ISP as this is the file into which all surveyed data is imported and from which all layout plans are generated.

The imported files contain data for track centre lines, track connection, datum points, point nodes and the assets. ISP then converts the geographic data into a more familiar schematic or ‘as-is’ layout that depicts the track and signalling layout with sections scaled according to the user requirements and is linked to the static imagery associated with the assets.

80

the rail engineer • March 2014

Is IP the

PAUL DARLINGTON

I

future?

P (Internet Protocol) is the basic protocol used on the internet. However, it is also now the heart of all new telecoms networks and data communications systems, and is starting to be used in signalling control systems.

IP and the internet originally started as a US defence department project. The Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) developed ARPANET in the 1960s - the world’s first operational packet switching network and the predecessor of the global Internet. The addition of TCP (Transmission Control Protocol) in 1983 and HTTP (Hyper Text Transfer Protocol) allowed information in many forms to be easily shared, and together with the introduction of the now famous WWW (World Wide Web), led to the Internet becoming the phenomenon that it is today. However it is the basic protocols of TCP/IP that have now become the de facto standard for nearly all new data and voice communication systems, including railway telecoms networks.

Packet Switching Traditional telecoms and data transmission systems are circuit switched networks. With this configuration, there is a permanent

connection between two applications which locks up the communication resource but simplifies the data exchange. A path is established even when no data is being transmitted, and there is no resilience unless a standby path is provided.

IP is a packet switched network within which multiple paths are available between the end nodes. The data message is split into small “packets” to share capacity and the paths are only used when data needs to be sent. This requires routing to be established for each data exchange.

Each packet contains a ‘header’ and a ‘payload’ - the variable amount of data to be transmitted. The IP header contains a 32bit origin and destination address as well as an indication of the length of the overall packet and other information. The “time to live” field is used to set the maximum number of hops between router nodes to prevent unsuccessful delivered packets circulating

and clogging up the network. After the packet has transferred its specified number of hops it is simply discarded.

An IP network, as described in its raw state, is simply a best effort network, and there is no guarantee of the packets arriving at the destination, or indeed in which order they arrive. There is no association between the transmitter and the receiver, and the network is ‘connectionless’. Some additional functionality is required in what is known as the ‘transport layer’ to manage the flow of IP packets.

TCP sits within the IP payload and envelopes the source data by a header, the composite is then carried by the IP packet as the payload. TCP acts as a connectionordinated protocol within the connectionless network. It assumes the IP network is unreliable by undertaking the following functions for the datagram packets: »» Numbering the IP packets or “datagrams” at the sending or transmitting end of the link; »» Examining the numbers at the receiving end, and requests the retransmission of any packets not arriving within a specified period; »» Using the numbering sequence to arrange the packets into the correct order; »» Monitoring the flow of packets getting through the network and adjusts the launch rate accordingly.

User Datagram Protocol (UDP) is used for applications that are very time sensitive, for example voice communications. UDP assembles the data packets in the correct order similarly to TCP, but it does not arrange for the retransmission of corrupt or missing packets - they are simply discarded.

When transmitting voice or video images it is time critical that the data is delivered; however gaps in the image or voice can be tolerated and may not even be noticed. For such applications a high quality of service (QoS) will be required on the network.

the rail engineer • March 2014

Routing Packets An IP network typically consists of an arrangement of routers. These only examine the IP packet header, and simply pass the datagram packet on to the next router in the network according to a table held within the router. Multiple paths for the packets are available, and it is possible for two consecutive packets to be routed over different paths between router nodes.

A useful analogy of a TCP/IP network is the postal system. Imagine a flat pack item of furniture being sent through the postal system as a number of parcels (packets). Within each parcel there will be a set of instructions which will state the total number of parcels required to make the furniture, together with the order in which they need to be assembled (think of this as TCP). Each parcel will contain the destination and source address of the parcel. At each mail sorting office, the mail sorter will simply look at the destination address and pass (route) the parcel onto the next sorting office in the chain. If a sorting office or path is not available the mail sorter could send the parcel to a different sorting office. The mail sorters (routers) do not know or care what is within each parcel, they just use the destination address. If a parcel becomes lost in the mail system, or is broken (errored), the destination requests a replacement parcel to be sent through the network.

Various versions IP is known as version 4. This would of course imply that there were earlier versions of the protocol used for IP and the internet, but this was not the case. IP was created when its functions were split out from an early version of TCP in the 1970s that originally combined both TCP and IP functions. TCP evolved through three earlier versions, and was split into TCP and IP for version 4 when it became the Internet.

IPv4 uses a 32bit address, so although there are 232 or 4.3 billon different combinations, this is not enough and it has run out of addresses. The good news is that the problem has been known about for a number of years and the solution is IPv6. IPv6 uses 128-bit addresses (2128 = 64 billion times the capacity of IPv4) and, while IPv4 does not provide an IP address for every person alive, IPv6 allows for around 4.8Ă—1028 addresses per person! IPv6 offers other enhancements such as better security, increased encryption authentication, more efficient

81

routing / packet processing, and better support for service such as Voice over IP and QoS. So what happed to IPv5? IPv5 was used for an experimental protocol known as Internet Stream Protocol. However, it was never formally released or implemented so, when IPv6 was released, the number was skipped to avoid confusion.

Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) MPLS is a method of providing a guaranteed Quality of service (QoS) and Virtual Private Network (VPN) capability within an IP network, and a method of making the connectionless IP network connection ordinated.

MPLS uses labels to establish a virtual path for the IP packets to follow.

A 20-bit label is attached to the front of each packet at the edge routers of a network, providing faster routing and traffic engineering, and is similar to that available in circuit switched networks. MPLS is essential for voice applications, and also provides VPN network capability for security. This is of much interest to the signal engineer and provides the reliability of an IP packet network with the security of a circuit switched network.

Open Systems Interconnection (OSI) model One way of making sense of all the various protocols and layers is to map TCP/IP and its supporting protocols against the Open Systems Interconnection (OSI) model. At physical Layer 0 and 1 there are the various transmission systems and cables in the access and core network. Layer 2 includes the various data link systems that may be used in the telecoms IP network - Ethernet and possibly the Public Switched Network for dial up connections. IP resides at Layer 3, the Network layer. The Transport Layer, layer 4, is split between TCP for latency tolerant or UDP for the latency intolerant applications.

There is a vast array of protocols covering many possible applications that may run over an IP network, whether it be the internet, an intranet or even an IP-based secure signalling system, and it is at this level where full end to end data security needs to be addressed. The design and standards for IP and the internet are administered by a consortium of users, academics, and manufacturers known as the Internet Engineering

82

the rail engineer • March 2014

Central file storage, internet connection, and GSM-R / VoIP Servers would be centrally located and connected to at least two core nodes. Traffic Management Centres would also be connected to at least two core nodes.

IP Network and railway signalling

Task Force (IETF). Ethernet is the dominant technology used for layer 2 and within Local Area Networks (LANS). Ethernet is a standard known as 802.3 and is controlled by the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) of America.

Voice is simply data Voice over IP (VoIP) systems offer many advantages as voice communication simply becomes another application running on an IP network. This offers many advantages over traditional telephone networks. Internet telephones, or computers running Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) use addresses similar to email addresses rather than telephone numbers to represent the users.

Savings can be made with a single structured cabling installation for voice and data, and making voice a data application allows further convergence and integration of computer applications such as Outlook address book, for phone directory, instant messaging, and video conferencing. There is also the ability to connect to other VoIP systems using a corporate intranet wide area IP network connection, allowing ’free’ phone calls.

Designing a railway network There are already many private IP networks - Network Rail has IP networks in Scotland and the North West for LLPA (long line public address) installations. One of the most interesting IP networks, and relevant to railways, is the Highways Agency which uses a private IP network to connect and manage several thousand motorway CCTV cameras, help points and road signs.

In a railway IP network, the access layers may be split into one for mission critical services and another for normal services.

The mission critical access layer would have industrial grade switches and routers, with enhanced duplication of components and power supplies, all suitable for harsh EMC and environmental conditions. The access rings would be connected to at least two nodes on the core router layer via MPLS edge routers. MPLS VPNs would be created within the core of the IP network for the various services and additional capacity in the core rings could be provided by using Dense or Course Wavelength Divisional Multiplexing (DWDM or CWDM) over a fibre network.

There are many advantages for using an IP network for railway signalling. By using standard off-the-shelf data communications products costs can be reduced. But that’s not all; IP networks are very resilient and can reduce the risk of the loss of data communications paths by providing availability in the order of 99.99%. This will become increasing important with the introduction of larger signalling control areas.

Security is always a concern, but there are solutions. Encryption and firewall software is commercially available in many designs, types and formats to suit applications.

The signalling communication application layers need to provide the required defence against transmission and access threats, in accordance with EN 50159:2010 “Railway applications - Communication, signalling and processing systems - Safety-related communication in transmission systems”.

An MPLS VPN can provide control and security through the IP network and networks managed by rail professionals, with competence and procedural control measures for maintenance and operations, to reduce the risk.

Quantum cryptography and the use of private IP networks to isolate sections of signalling network, together with the use of router and network devices with integral functional firewalls, are further mitigations available to future signalling and telecoms engineers. There is a whole world of industry with an even greater need for security than railways.

To answer the title of this article - no, IP is not the future. It’s the present. Don’t miss out.

Now Mainstream: IP - The New Standard for Operational Telecommunications Cisco IP Networking Technologies Support a Growing Number of Operational Services for Railways in the UK and Abroad.

Internet Protocol (IP) networks have been widely deployed for back-office and retail telecommunications by infrastructure operators for the past decade. Now IP networks are becoming the new standard for operational communications, too, replacing older technologies like ATM/TDM over SDH. One of the leaders in the adoption of new telecoms standards for railway operations is Banedanmark. Last year, as part of their programme to deploy ERTMS Level 2 across Denmark, they rolled out a GSM-R system that connects all of their base transmission stations to a Cisco railway-compliant IP network.

By standardising railway telecoms on IP technologies, Banedanmark are able to reduce the risk and costs associated with the provisioning of spares from a dwindling supply base, and also reduce the complexity intrinsic to operating multiple, redundant networks.

Network Rail Telecom (NRT), the telecoms asset management and service provisioning unit of Network Rail, leaped into the innovation lead last year, and have begun deploying two operational services delivered via IP technologies: substation automation as per the IEC 61850 standard on electrified lines, and lineside voice over IP. The first 25 secondary substations in the West Coast Mainline and Liverpool Manchester lines have been equipped with Cisco’s rugged IP switches designed to handle SCADA communications. Lineside voice along the first 40 route miles deployed relies on Cisco gateways to which analogue signal post telephones are connected,

and Cisco’s industry leading IP call-control system, Unified Communications Manager. Signalling staff now receive calls on IP telephone turrets from IPTrade, while voice recording is handled by a solution from RedBox Recorders.

NRT will deliver these and other operational and retail services over their new Cisco core IP transmission network.

Like their industry peers, NRT are upgrading all telecoms to IP, because the gains in efficiency, cost reduction, and reduction of risk will help them deliver better value for money.

Only two years ago, the idea of connecting a solid-state interlocking (SSI) to an IP telecoms network would have been seen as science fiction. In July 2013, DB Netz, Germany’s railway infrastructure operator, connected several element controllers of their newest Siemens SSI to a Cisco IP network in Annaberg-Buchholz. This milestone is the result of a close cooperation between Siemens and Cisco in response to DB Netz’s demands that intra-SSI communications be standardised on IP. DB Netz are clearly betting on IP as the new standard, in order to make signalling and train control operations more economical and less resource-hungry.

These are exciting times for railway infrastructure operators, as many prepare to upgrade their operational telecoms networks. Many will certainly look to innovation leaders such as Network Rail, Banedanmark and DB Netz to benchmark their own goals.

For further information about Cisco’s IP Networking Technologies, please contact Felix Gerdes at fgerdes@cisco.com, or your Cisco account Representative.

Alternatively you can visit www.cisco.com/go/rail

84

the rail engineer • March 2014

Bottle it!

W

e do things very differently nowadays. Mechanical and technological evolution - not to mention health and safety - has completely rewritten the railway engineering text books since the Victorians first filled them with pioneering insight. It was a primitive business back then, relying upon man’s courage and ferocity assisted by horses, explosives, hand tools and the musings of Archimedes. Machinery didn’t really make its presence felt until the 1870s, by which time the core railway network had already been forged. And when it subsequently came to maintenance, the extent to which safety played second fiddle to performance would today make even the most audacious engineer’s toes curl.

PHOTO: GRACE’S GUIDE/THE ENGINEER

Labourers progress the partial reconstruction of Cwmcerwyn Tunnel in 1908, protected by a mobile canopy.

Witness the early life of Cwmcerwyn Tunnel, 1,012 yards in length and host to summit level on the Port Talbot Railway which meandered through the Llynvi, Garw and Dyffryn valleys in search of coal to export. Opened in 1897 after 18 months exertion, its contractors encountered mixed strata as they cut through the hill, so construction methodology varied also. In some places sidewalls were dispensed with but elsewhere inverts had to be installed. Ground

GRAEME BICKERDIKE

movement was apparent from the outset, distorting the lining by as much as 20 inches. Strengthening work was programmed in 1898 and 1902, adding concrete inverts and heavy timber struts at the toe of the sidewalls. But the gradual crushing of the arch continued, prompting the decision to reconstruct 60 yards of tunnel in 1908.

Cwmcerwyn was not generously proportioned, built only for a single track. And yet one overriding priority came down from on high: traffic must not be disrupted.

So the successful tenderers, Messrs Perry & Co, developed a mobile canopy to separate the trains from the workforce as they hacked away brickwork and fitted cast iron segments in 20-inch wide rings. The canopy, 12 feet in length, provided a 4-inch clearance around maximum loading gauge whilst the poor souls outside it laboured in a space less than three feet wide.

Loaded mineral trains stopped in the tunnel whilst a crew member pinned the brakes down in preparation for the long 1:40 descent from the west portal. This resulted in the tunnel being filled with choking smoke for as long as 20 minutes, rendering work impossible until it cleared. Yet despite this impediment, progress was made at a rate of five rings - or 8 feet 4 inches - per week. The job was substantively finished in six months, without hardhats or injury.

Hit the ground running A century and 160 miles away in Lancashire, Network Rail faces a similar challenge on the Copy Pit route between Hall Royd Junction - east of Todmorden on the Caldervale line - and Gannow Junction where the Colne branch converges. Since 9 November last year, replacement buses have been ferrying passengers over the hill between Burnley Manchester Road and Hebden Bridge/Todmorden stations while engineers complete a programme of remedial works at Holme Tunnel which will see the structure partly repaired, partly rebuilt.

the rail engineer • March 2014

85

PHOTO: FOUR BY THREE

PHOTO: AMCO

(Above) A scene of industry, looking south through the tunnel.

(Left) Setting one of the new steel arches.

180mm

320mm

TRACK SLEWED

GE G HINMIN R FO

The project’s whys and wherefores were examined in Issue 109 of The Rail Engineer (November 2013), but it’s worth reminding ourselves briefly of the background.

Opened in 1849, the 265-yard tunnel penetrates a spur of land below Thieveley Scout, part of the ridge that forms the south-west side of the Cliviger Valley. Several rotational landslips have occurred here resulting in unstable ground.

Since the 1970s, an increasing number of defects have been recorded in the tunnel, with the situation at the south (Todmorden) end becoming sufficiently serious to warrant the installation of 152 steel ribs between 1986 and 1991. However the degradation continued to a point where the Up-side haunch was displaced by as much as 320mm, forcing the crown upwards by 180mm. Loss of gauge clearance led to the introduction of a 20mph PSR. In terms of long-term performance, it’s not difficult to understand Network Rail’s motivation in restoring the tunnel’s structural integrity through the current intervention.

Eighteen months in the planning, the physical works got underway over the summer of 2013 with a series of possessions taken to inject grout behind the lining, improving the strength and cohesion of the ground.

This proved a significant task - consuming around 450,000 litres of grout - but it contributed to the safe breaking out of the existing brickwork. Alongside this, 87 new steel arches were being fabricated by Barnshaws in Wolverhampton whilst Hanson, from Derby, manufactured the accompanying concrete inverts.

These elements form part of the design, developed by Donaldson Associates, for the reconstruction of the lining at the south end.

A cross section through the tunnel showing the distortion.

86

the rail engineer • March 2014

The project team moved onto site in May after Network Rail acquired a parcel of agricultural land alongside the railway to serve as a compound and access point. These will be retained for maintenance purposes once the work here is done; the existing facilities 150 yards down the line are limited for space.

Amco Rail is fulfilling the role of design and build contractor. Critically they bring with them years of experience in the mining industry.

For the 20 weeks of the blockade, the tunnel is effectively an oversized colliery roadway; forget the fact that trains will soon be running through it. The solution being applied here is known in the trade as a back-rip, a technique that’s been used below ground for hundreds of years.

Every picture What strikes you most when venturing through the south portal is the intrusive and brutal nature of the work. That, and the determination. The section being rebuilt extends 87 metres in from the Todmorden end. Immediately apparent is the change in profile between the old displaced

PHOTO: FOUR BY THREE

The new arches in the background contrast with the existing distorted steelwork nearer the camera.

steelwork in the foreground and the 52 new arches that had previously been installed beyond. It’s an image that tells you much about the forces exerted on the lining over its lifetime.

The operation is cyclical, ongoing around the clock to meet a tight programme. The methodology has evolved a little through experience, with previously sequential activities now taking place concurrently. In overview it involves the withdrawal of four existing arches together with the associated cess casings and invert. A 1.5 metre section of lining - which was pre-cut at the start of the blockade - is removed, the ground trimmed and rockfall protection mesh fitted. Precast concrete invert units are then laid and angled steelwork bolted to it to support the arches which come in three sections, connected by flexible temporary joints. An excavator fitted with a bespoke attachment lifts them into place. The sequence is repeated until 12 metres has been completed, after which the invert and cesses are poured and a 420mm lining sprayed using fibrereinforced concrete.

the rail engineer • March 2014

While the theory sounds neat and tidy when condensed into five sentences, reality brings variables with it - and therein lies the challenge. That’s why this project is not being driven by railwaymen or civil engineers; the Network Rail team has stepped back a little and placed its faith in Amco, an approach that pays dividends for both. They regard theirs as probably the best client/ contractor relationship either has

ever encountered. That’s some assertion. Peter Shrader, Network Rail’s senior construction manager, tells me that “Your headline will be ‘Collaborative working delivers success!’” It’s better in the body text, Pete, but the truth behind that sentiment is apparent to even the casual visitor. When an ORR inspector appeared before Christmas, his feedback read “If we could bottle what’s happening here, I’d be out of a job.”

Big bang theory

87

The Todmorden portal is being rebuilt in concrete, faced with the original masonry, and drainage installed behind it.

The ground here changes yard by yard. “When we first set off back in November we had perfect conditions,” recalls Amco’s project manager Dave Thomas. “We thought we’d won the lottery.” The compressive forces of the ground movement had been such that, even when the brickwork was removed, the formerly-broken material behind it held in a perfect arch.

PHOTO: AMCO

Looking up into the void left by a preChristmas roof fall.

88

the rail engineer • March 2014

PHOTO: FOUR BY THREE

PHOTO: MULHOLLAND MEDIA

With some of the old steel arches removed, a section of masonry lining is broken out.

Dealing with roof falls follows a set procedure: clear away the debris, spray in concrete to cork the ground, set the arch ring, shutter off the void and pump expanding foam into it. A resin is then injected to compress the foam, effectively preventing the ground from breathing. All this eats into the schedule by about two days on each occasion. To strengthen the

But it was always expected that things would deteriorate as they retreated towards the portal. A number of roof falls have occurred including one just before Christmas of more than 100 cubic metres. To ensure complacency never creeps in, the release of stored energy in the ground can suddenly launch large pieces of stone across the tunnel. You can see then why Amco’s Keith John, in the weeks before the blockade, spent time on the road looking for the right men: familiar, trusted faces in established gangs who travel the country from job to job.

There’s something unique about miners as anyone who grew up amongst them - as I did in West Yorkshire - will testify. The nature of their shared experiences strongly binds them together and this works to everyone’s advantage. There are two teams of six here, mostly with roots in South Wales. They change shifts at 07:00 and 19:00 but their commitment extends beyond those booked times. Supporting them are 20 skilled operatives per shift, bringing materials in and taking debris out.

Their role is to ensure that the back-rip never stops.

To ensure complacency never creeps in, the release of stored energy in the ground can suddenly launch large pieces of stone across the tunnel.

ground adjacent to the Up sidewall and thus provide more support to the shoulder, a recent addition to the operation has involved the localised injection of Wilkit resin - a silicate-based system that sets to form a compact grout. It’s expensive but promises long-term benefits. This activity has been taking place on weekend nights so as not to interfere with the main works.

Moving on Muck gives way to water as you move beyond the heavy industry of the rebuild. That familiar tunnel dripdrip-drip provides the day shift with an assortment of maintenance and remedial tasks. Amongst these is the installation of cess drainage, tied into the new six-foot drain, to collect water as it runs down the lining. Through this section, the issue is fracturing of the brickwork rather than lateral movement so extensive recasing is apparent - rather more than was initially anticipated.

The north (Burnley) portal has been repointed and de-veged ahead of drainage being installed above the headwall. The more intrusive works are at the other end where the Todmorden portal has been completely dismantled to allow its reconstruction in concrete. This will be refaced with the original masonry. Behind it, the hill has been raked back slightly and trees removed to allow a new drainage system to be put in. There is then a 650 metre track relay to be delivered by Stobart Rail before trains start to run again on 24 March and the PSR finally disappears.

Sooner or later, whether it takes months or decades, nature will attempt to reclaim what the railway has taken from her by driving its tunnels. Cwmcerwyn was under pressure from the outset; Holme proved more resilient but eventually succumbed. However, Network Rail and Amco are ensuring that the Copy Pit route will not suffer the same fate as the Port Talbot Railway

Donaldson_quark:Layout 1

27/9/12

11:01

89

PHOTO: MULHOLLAND MEDIA

the rail engineer • March 2014

which saw its last traffic in 1964. Key to their success in difficult circumstances has been a partnership approach. As they prepare to move onto their next projects, Dave reflects “It’s a shame it’s got to end!”

Hopefully they’ll take the same spirit with them.

Breaking-out the existing lining prior to recasing work.

Page 1

More Than 25 Years of World Class Solutions Delivering value into the future DONALDSON ASSOCIATES LTD

London, Derby, Glasgow, York, Uttoxeter, Hong Kong For more information contact: Damian McGirr: Chief Tunnel Engineer Tel: 00 44 (0)207 407 0973 d.mcgirr@donaldsonassociates.com www.donaldsonassociates.com

90

the rail engineer • March 2014

GRAHAME TAYLOR

W

atford junction - the troublesome child of the WCML! It was ever thus. Many years ago, aspiring engineers were bused out to Watford Junction after a few days at the BR Watford training school to gasp at the multitude of track faults. What terrible behaviour! It needed a really good thump. But no matter whether it was coaxed or threatened, Watford Junction continued to sulk and caused a succession of engineers a great deal of heartache.

Its time nearly came when there was a promise of new treats courtesy of the WCML (West Coast main line) route improvements. But the behaviour just went from bad to worse, to such an extent that the treats were taken away when the troublesome child was de-scoped - a euphemism for ‘left to get on with it’.

Eventually, pity was taken on the errant junction with another selection of indulgencies to be dispensed lavishly over a series of extended blockades, due to start in August this year as the Watford area resignalling scheme.

True to form, Watford Junction knew a few strings to pull. It had its grudging admirers and these began to howl with protest at the thought of losing their favourite child for such long periods.

Discontent in Watford But now it’s time to abandon this metaphor before it all gets too tired, silly and complicated, and introduce Dominic Baldwin whose name last appeared in this magazine in our write-up of the Stafford Area Improvements scheme (the WCML’s other wayward child!). Tasked with delivering the project, Dominic rightly detected that there was discontent in the Watford area and that a review of the whole scheme might well be necessary.

Watford

the rail engineer • March 2014

paths, but this is a lot more than no paths at all. This meant that single line working had to be planned throughout the blockades - a really risky business.

Passengers had to take pot luck with a variety of diversionary options. From Glasgow, the route was via Edinburgh and the East Coast along with the Sleeper traffic. From Manchester it was a trip across the Pennines and down to London via Doncaster. Liverpool involved an excursion via Crewe and Derby and Birmingham passengers would enjoy a gentle trundle through the Chilterns.

Short haul commuters would take their chances on buses - and it was these commuters that were the most vocal!

The ticking clock

We’ll take a few steps back at this point and look at how a scheme could have been proposed to shut down this part of the WCML for periods of 16 and 9 days - one in August and the other in February 2015.

Once upon a time, major possession work was done over a series of long weekends.

The ‘new railway’ world considered this to be inefficient and disruptive - which it was. Far better to blitz a project in an extended block a blockade - became the accepted thinking. It’s something that survives to this day for plenty of valid reasons.

What diversionary routes?

It was the reasoning behind the Watford proposal. Watford had always defeated the planners. For a blockade to work well, there need to be diversionary routes for the traffic that gets trapped on either side. This is where Watford struggles, especially as the major consideration these days is the huge amount of freight traffic. In fact there are in excess of 100 freight paths a day coming from, and going to, all parts of the UK through the bottom end of the WCML. Detailed and difficult discussions with freight companies and Network Rail’s operating side had boiled the requirement down to an absolute minimum of 42

Behind all the noise associated with the scheme, the clock was still ticking. This is an asset condition driven scheme with life expired switches and crossings, plain line and power supplies. Deferring everything for another good think was not an option. The possessions and blockades were booked and so, if a rethink was needed, it all had to fit into the same tight time schedule.

Dominic offered to conduct a review and began talking to all the players and stakeholders, questioning and challenging assumptions.

Did all the work have to be done in 2014 or could some go back just one year? The reason for the question was that in 2015 a major bridge deck renewal at Orphanage Road just south of the station would shut the WCML for 102 hours. And the answer was pretty simple.

Only the essential elements Did all the work have to be done at all? A decision was taken to forego the trailing, slowspeed crossovers in the station area. That’s six point ends and three crossovers.

The drive was to concentrate only on the essential elements of the scheme while, at the same time, building assets that could be maintained more efficiently. Take, for example, the fast/slow crossovers. At present these ladders are fairly short and so it is impossible to tamp one element without there being a need to block adjacent tracks. Four S&C tampers have to be amassed to complete the task in a large disruptive

91

possession. The aim now is to stretch the ladders so that each element of the crossover can be tamped using just two machines.

Blockades? What blockades?

The end result? The 16 day and 9 day blockades have gone. And instead there will be two 54 hour possessions of all lines this year.

Two of these possessions will have a further 12 hours of two lines blocked tagged on at the end. A third major possession will be the 76 hour block over the August bank holiday.

Having opted not to replace the slow speed crossovers, there was still the issue of taking them out and making good with plain line.

Fortunately, there were possessions booked in weeks 10 and 11 to install and recover temporary facilities that would have been used during the original planned single line working.

These weekends have now been allocated to the plain lining operation.

The Christmas 2014 block will remain as planned and in February 2015 the long blockade has been replaced by two 54 hour blocks with the 12 hour add-ons. As mentioned before, the Easter 102 hour block for the bridge deck renewal will be used for plain line renewals.

So, that’s the new pattern of possessions at Watford. It has taken Dominic and his team a great deal of hard bargaining to achieve but, despite all the late alterations to the scheme, they found that they were pushing on an open door.

Looking good For once at Watford, it all starts to ‘look right’. No longer will there be the prospect of shoehorning freight traffic through single line working. And, in amongst it all, there will be an experiment to offer bespoke temporary speed restrictions depending on the type of rolling stock. This exploits the differing braking and accelerating characteristics to reduce the time lost in negotiating the speed reductions.

It’s been a collaborative effort, emphasises Dominic. He gives credit to contractor AmeyColas for the track and OLE works, with designs by Atkins. The signalling design, installation testing and commissioning are by Siemens Rail.

At last, the problem child that was Watford may yet come out of the naughty corner.

out of the naughty c orner

92

the rail engineer • March 2014

COLLIN CARR

Whiteball Tunnel

Significant progress and more innovation to come!

M

ore than two years ago, Network Rail decided to adopt a different approach for repairing and maintaining the ageing brick lining within Whiteball tunnel on the main line between Taunton and Exeter. The plan was to carry out the repairs in two stages.

Stage 1 was completed in 2011 without any significant disruption to the train service.

Stage 2, however, would be more demanding and complete closure of the tunnel would be necessary for some considerable time. The benefit would be a lining repair with a design life of 125 years, an attractive benefit both for Network Rail and the train operators who use the route.

Therefore, following negotiations with First Great Western, it was agreed that, in order to minimise disruption to passengers whilst completing Stage 2, one long three-week possession would be taken between Tiverton and Taunton. The possession would extend from 18 January until 10 February 2014. This approach would also enable Network Rail to address other significant infrastructure issues in the area including 4km of track renewal, renewal of 14 switch and crossing (S&C) units and more than 1920 metres of track drainage. Total value of the work was approximately £20 million, forming part of an overall improvement plan for the Exeter to Taunton main line route.

Degrading tunnel lining Whiteball tunnel was named after the nearby village White Ball. It was built by Brunel and opened in 1844. It is a 1000 metre long Victorian brick arch structure that straddles the Somerset/Devon border and it provides a path for trains to travel under the ‘easy to dig’ white sandstone of the Blackdown Hills.

The clay used for the millions of bricks required for the tunnel lining came from local pits. The engineering bricks produced were of a good quality but over the years weathering, chemical reaction from the sulphurous steam trains, voiding behind the brick lining and the degradation of the mortar joints, has meant that there has been a rolling programme of repairs to the lining throughout most of the twentieth century, right up to the present day.

Fortunately, thanks to Brunel’s broad track gauge of 2140mm, the structure gauge within the tunnel is very generous. This has allowed engineers to carry out repairs usually involving turning new brick arch rings within the existing lining. Over the years, special shields constructed out of old bullhead rail have been designed to match the profile of the tunnel. These shields can be clamped together to accommodate the varying lengths of the tunnel due for repair. The structures also include a staging platform at a level that allows trains to run underneath, so over time, they became a permanent feature within the tunnel.

The shields were placed over newly formed concrete strip foundations to match the length of arch required to be turned and then skilled bricklaying teams constructed a two brick arch inside the existing lining. The process was effective but very time consuming, expensive and it required the skilled workforce to work in difficult circumstances, at height and often in a very uncomfortable environment. Also, the rate of deterioration of the lining has accelerated recently.

Stage one - Ram Arch system As stated earlier, in 2011 Network Rail decided to change its strategy and adopt a technique used in London Underground tunnels called the Ram Arch System created

by Amco Rail, principal contractor for the tunnel work, working in conjunction with designers Donaldson Associates.

The Ram Arch System consists of easy to handle, two metre long lengths of galvanised steel mesh. These are bolted together on site to form arch rings one metre wide which are then interlocked and supported on slotted angle brackets fixed into the brick lining about two metres from the cess level. Each ring is secured to the brick lining using two 200mm long temporary dowels, fixed with a five second ‘resin hit’.

Once everything is in place and secure, a more permanent fixing is introduced. The temporary dowels are replaced with five permanent rock anchors that are fixed with a 10 second ‘resin hit’ for each individual arch ring. Finally, spine wires are threaded along the profile of the arch to link the individual arch rings together, providing additional stiffness, and are fixed to the now continuous arch structure using a pneumatic Hog Ring Gun. Once the rock anchors are in place and the spine wires fixed, the nuts on the rock anchors are loosened to create a 2 to 3mm gap between the new galvanised arches and the existing brick lining. This is the work known as Stage 1 which Network Rail completed over a 355 metre length of the tunnel in 2011.

Stage two - now completed The second stage completed in the three week possession consisted of spraying

the rail engineer • March 2014

93

New drainage works installed by Total Rail Solutions, including 250 metres of precast concrete flume.

concrete over the crown and haunches of the tunnel. This is quite a specialist skill and Gunform Concrete, based in Yorkshire, provided the expertise required. They used a system of 16 robotic arms that could be remotely controlled whilst spraying a total of 1500 tonnes of concrete onto and behind the arch rings. Amco Rail worked round the clock, completing two shifts using more than 100 skilled workers.

The work went extremely well and was completed within the planned time allocated. There were no reportable accidents recorded and Amco Rail was awarded a STAR Award by Network Rail for the quality of their health and Safety management and execution. This is an achievement of which Amco is very proud, given the challenging site conditions and the associated, dreadful weather conditions that had plagued the whole area throughout this stage of the project.

Talking of weather conditions leads nicely on to the £3.4 million of drainage and embankment work also taking place throughout the blockade. At the Northern end of the tunnel new cess drains designed

by Tony Gee and Partners were being installed to capture water from the cutting and from the six-foot drain that runs through the tunnel. In conjunction with this work, the cutting slopes were being re-graded and new counterfort drains installed.

At the same time, work was carried out at the Tiverton end of the tunnel to expand the drainage system and to improve the embankment around the area. The tracks had been frequently flooded because the surrounding area was saturated and the culverts blocked with debris throughout the area. This work formed part of a much wider programme, all carried out by Total Rail Solutions, designed to alleviate flood risks posed by extreme weather patterns.

Guess who?

Inevitably, our good friend and protected species, the Great Crested Newt, reared its head. The newts also enjoy the habitat at this end of the tunnel and particularly in a local pond close by. So, to minimise the impact of the drainage and embankment work on the environment, Network Rail installed environmental fencing to protect the newts. This exclusion fence was built along the boundary of the worksite and came with a license from Natural England, thus allowing the work to take place.

To maximise the benefit of the three-week possession, a carefully planned logistical programme was created to enable 4km of plain line track renewal to be completed on time and also 14 S&C units to be renewed at separate locations between Taunton and Tiverton. The units were brought to site as built units and off loaded by a Kirow crane. They were then stored and finally lifted into place, thus keeping the crane fully

Hitchin Flyover

© Marcus Dawson

Blackfriars Station

Creating value through innovation

Dawlish Station Footbridge

© Network Rail

Tony Gee and Partners LLP For further information on our specialist rail design services, please contact David Barnes

Tel: +44 (0)1372 461600 email: rail@tonygee.com

www.tonygee.com

Consulting Civil, Structural and Geotechnical Engineers

94

the rail engineer • March 2014

employed. It is a strong argument for more tilting wagons, and one which has not been lost on Network Rail’s senior management team as more tilting wagons are on order. It is a shame that they could not be built in this country.

The key S&C units were opened to traffic at 80mph, helping to support the argument that time to consolidate the bottom ballast and do the job properly will pay dividends in the long run. Also, the S&C units were fitted with ‘Plug & Play’ signalling equipment which enabled the majority of the signalling testing to be completed before reaching site. This is another innovation that will certainly reap dividends in the future.

Exciting prospect - Stage 2B So all the work went well, but let’s go back into the tunnel because Amco and Donaldsons are developing an interesting next stage currently known as stage 2B! No doubt a more colourful title will soon emerge.

Stage2B involves the design of a Tunnel Factory Train that will have the ability to erect a sealed safety screen parallel with the adjacent line. This would allow work to take place on one line whilst the adjacent line is open to traffic. The design will take account of the negative and positive air impulses that are generated by the draft from a passing train and it will include louvre panels and pneumatic sealing features helping to reduce forces and create a stable working environment. Such a system would enable drilling, doweling, grouting, fixing of precast concrete panels to the side walls

of the tunnel, and then spray concreting the sides up to the completed crown - thus completing the lining process.

The intention is for this factory train to enter the tunnel before the last train has passed and then complete the work after the first train next morning. This will enable work to be carried out without interruption over an eight hour period which is the time required to carry out this cycle of work efficiently.

An uninterrupted eight hour work period would justify the effort and it is hoped that a prototype will be ready by the end of the year, so watch this space!

Closing a main line route for three weeks anywhere on the network is a major undertaking and it creates huge pressure.

Without doubt, the weather conditions throughout the period of work didn’t help. It created many significant problems especially getting key people and plant to site. Not only did they manage to get all the planned work done, they were able to hand back S&C at 80mph, a tunnel lining in better condition and 4km of plain line is now in good order.

As mentioned, Amco Rail was given a Star Award for safety and, in conjunction with design partners Donaldson Associates, is developing an innovative piece of kit - The Tunnel Factory Train. Maybe, they could also turn their hand to resolve the flooding problem on the nearby Somerset Flats - but not until the work in the tunnel is completed during Stage2B!

MAKING SENSE

of Safety

SESSION 1 SETTING THE SCENE Ÿ Problems What are the issues? Ÿ Case studies Looking back at recent incidents and a look at the ORR Health and Safety Report SESSION 2 Ÿ Behaviour Ÿ Interfaces Ÿ Systems

Over the past few years there has been a significant push to improve the safety record within the rail industry. This has often meant significant change both in design and process.

Ÿ Design

SESSION 3: All areas of the industry felt that this often caused confusion due to the amount of change that happened at one time:

Ÿ Staff welfare Ÿ Fatigue

CONTROLLING SAFETY RISKS Keeping passengers and staff safe The many tiers of contractor safety Benefits and burdens of the LUCAS / Sentinel Integration Building safety into a new railway OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Scheme implementation and monitoring Designing better shift rosters and including travel to work time

• Which policy to implement?

SESSION 4:

LEARNING LESSONS Learning lessons from the top Ÿ Root causes Finding root causes: looking at Tripod Beta Ÿ Models The Rail Management Maturity Model, Real world usage Ÿ Lessons

• Have I missed anything?

• Which part applies to my organisation?

Over the coming year, we will see more change as the industry streamlines processes through collaboration in a bid to cut through red tape and ultimately make sense of safety.

OUTCOMES FROM THE DAY, Q&A WITH THE ADVISORY BOARD

Making sense of safety is a key challenge in 2014 for the industry, whether that be through learning from other industries, through product and process design or through industry collaboration.

SAFETY SUMMIT ADVISORY BOARD Anson Jack

Deputy Chief Executive

RSSB

Bill Free

Head of Business Development, Rail

Carillion Rail

Darren Selman

H&S Manager Assurance

Crossrail

David Shirres

Engineering Writer

Rail Media

Dr Ian Gaskin

Head of Management Systems, Health, Safety and Environment,

TfL

Ian Prosser

HM Chief Inspector of Railways and Director of Railway Safety

ORR

Paul Clyndes

Health & Safety Officer

RMT

Peter Sheppard

Senior Safety Engineer and Validator

Bombardier Transportation

Pino de Rosa

Managing Director

Bridgeway Consulting

Roan Willmore

Safety & Sustainability Development Director Network Rail

Seamus Scallon

Safety Director UK Rail

FirstGroup

28th April 2014 Royal College of Physicians Regent’s Park, London

REGISTER ONLINE

www.railsafetysummit.com

96

the rail engineer • March 2014

What have the universities ever done for us?

DAVID SHIRRES

B

ritain spends 4% of the world’s expenditure on research and development. It has 6% of the world’s researchers who write 8% of all research papers and attract 11% of all citations. With the nation’s population being just 0.9% of the world’s total, and a GDP that is 3.9% of the global economy, Britain’s universities are clearly punching above their weight.

However, British research is not doing so well in terms of knowledge transfer. UK researchers have a low share of both patents and articles co-authored by academia and corporate sectors. Not surprisingly poor crosssector co-operation has been identified as a barrier to UK innovation.

Enter RRUKA

Transport Secretary Patrick McLoughlin enjoys his demonstration of rail wheel conicity at Huddersfield University.

The Technology Strategy Board (TSB), formed in 2007 (issue 95, September 2012), is part of the Government’s strategy to promote innovation along with the Catapults, including the Transport Systems Catapult (issue 111, January 2014). One way these new organisations promote innovation is to facilitate collaboration between universities and different industry sectors. In this way, rail innovation can benefit from emerging technologies in other transport sectors.

The benefit of the universities’ input is shown by a recent TSB study which found that innovation projects involving academia gave a return of £9.67 per £1 invested compared with a £4.22 return for other projects. The universities contribution is thus essential if rail innovation is to meet its cost and capacity challenges.

Formed in 2010, the Rail Research UK Association (RRUKA) is a partnership between the UK rail industry and universities. Its pedigree dates back to 2003 when a group of seven universities formed Rail Research UK (RRUK) to deliver twelve projects funded by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council.

When this funding expired, the approach was to seek industry partners for rail innovation projects. This led to the formation of RRUKA to encourage university involvement in rail innovation by facilitating such partnerships. RRUKA also aims to identify research needs and disseminate research findings. It is jointly funded by Network Rail and RSSB. RRUKA currently has 39 members. The two industry members are RSSB and Network Rail. All other members are universities with the exception of the Transport Research Laboratory. RRUKA’s co-chairs are, for academia, Professor Simon Iwnicki of the University of Huddersfield and, for industry, Colin Dennis of RSSB.

the rail engineer • March 2014

97

Analysis of research required for Rail Technical Strategy’s Control, Command and Communication theme Research subject

Type*

TRL

Contribution to the RTS

1

Capacity definitions and metrics.

C

4

Fundamental requirement

2

Whole system modelling, simulation and emulation

S

3

Fundamental requirement

3

Optimisation

S

3-4

Reliable and resilient CCC systems

4

Methods for train location

C

3-5

Reliable and resilient CCC systems; widespread use of ATO

5

Levels of autonomy

B

1

Beyond the current RTS horison

6

Platooning trains

B

2

Consistent with long-term RTS vision

7

Vision for next generation train control

B

1

Reliable and resilient CCC systems; widespread use of ATO

8

Human aspects of the transition from DAS to ATO

S

4-5

Reliable and resilient CCC systems; widespread use of ATO

9

Vehicle-infrastructure communications technology

S

3-4

Reliable and resilient CCC systems; high-speed, high-bandwith communications networks

10

Video sensing of environment

S

3

Various Contributions to system reliability

*Concept type: »» Collaborative: Partnership with industry to meet medium-term RTS requirement »» Strategic: New academic input required to enable industry’s longer-term plans »» Blue Sky: New idea that needs formative academic research Problem solving or blue skies Many of the rail projects involving RRUKA members seek solutions to known railway problems. This is applied research to develop tools and improved methods over a typical timescale of five years. It is specified and funded by industry.

In contrast, pure research might have a timescale of 25 years or longer and needs fresh thinking to develop technology for the next generation. It is generally led by academia, supported by industry and paid for by research funders. Whilst some might be wary of such blue sky thinking, as will be seen, future rail technical requirements will not be met without it.

The 2012 Rail Technical Strategy (RTS) is a consensus industry view of required future rail technologies. It has six themes (control, command and communications, energy, rolling stock, information and customer experience). RRUKA’s response to this, the Academic Response to the RTS (ARRTS), provides an academic perspective. It builds on current capabilities and proposes key areas where research is needed to develop the required technologies.

To do this, ARRTS shows the current knowledge and capabilities for each RTS theme. It also identifies developments in other sectors that potentially could be transferred to rail and sets out the theme’s research priorities. Each research area is categorised by Technology Readiness Level and the type of research required as Collaborative, Strategic or Blue Sky.

In this way ARRTS both demonstrates the UK’s railway research capabilities and identifies the research required to deliver the RTS. This encourages further industry engagement and increases the likelihood of funding opportunities for specific blue sky research by demonstrating a definitive goal. It does however also identify areas where Universities need to further develop research capabilities to meet rail industry requirements.

Challenging events and workshops RRUKA has a business objective to hold a minimum of five events that bring communities, people, problems and solutions together against identified industry challenges.

These both identify further research topics and provide opportunities to network, form partnerships and bid for funding. Recent events have included workshops on the ‘Adhesion Riddle’ and ‘The Half Cost Train’.

The lack of reliable and predictive braking, especially from autumn leaf fall, presents a significant safety risk and which costs at least £65 million a year. Adhesion is a railway system issue that crosses contractual boundaries. However, events such as the Adhesion Riddle workshop show that this is not a barrier to the development of solutions of mutual benefit to Network Rail and train operators.

Presentations considered adhesion mitigation measures tried in the past and future potential solutions. In 1978, BR Research had found that a

98

the rail engineer • March 2014

combination of simulated rainfall and the passage of trains helped to clean the rail head.

Interestingly, trackside water spraying was considered as one of the future solutions, as was the development of a ‘smart’ material to replace sand and electromagnetic braking.

Following this event RRUKA and the Enabling Innovation Team (EIT) are to announce competitions to make over £200,000 available for long term projects to deliver reliable and predictable braking. EIT funding will also be available for prototypes and the demonstration of short term solutions.

Trains of the future Currently, annual UK rolling stock costs are £1.9 billion. Capital, operating and maintenance costs are respectively 31%, 25% and 44% of that total, which shows the need for the whole life perspective taken by The Half Cost Train workshop. This led to funded feasibility studies on a comparative study on rail and aviation industry innovation (Universities of Leeds and Loughborough and Imperial College); process standardisation (Newcastle University, Imperial College); lightweight rail bogies (University of Huddersfield) and design for control of railway vehicles (Loughborough and Salford Universities).

The ‘design for control’ concept aims for the rail sector to follow the example of the aviation and automotive sectors by taking full advantage of control engineering. For example, whilst rail vehicles lack active suspension, the Eurofighter Typhoon’s high manoeuvrability is only possible though computer control as the aircraft has unstable flight characteristics.

For rail vehicles, active suspensions could eliminate the need for bogies. Coaches could then have four wheels on stub axles enabling low floor double decker trains to be built within the UK loading gauge, a capacity benefit worthy of some blue sky thinking.

An ever increasing contribution

The focus RRUKA provides identifies research areas and breaks down barriers to innovation by facilitating partnerships between industry and academia. These will no doubt ensure that this is an ever increasing contribution that will not only provide future rail technology solutions but enable the UK rail industry to compete in a global market.

So what have the universities done for us?

In 2003, with only seven universities in RRUK, the answer would have been not much.

Today, RRUKA’s membership is almost 40 and Britain’s universities play a significant and essential part in developing new rail technologies.

This article is based on a presentation by Professor Simon Iwnicki to the Scottish Centre of the IMechE Railway Division. Further details, including the RRUKA member’s booklet and ARRTS, are available on http://rruka.org.uk/

Subscribe to our free publications at www.railsubs.com

www.rail-media.com

100

the rail engineer • March 2014

RECRUITMENT

Engineering Tomorrow COSTAIN is one of the UK's leading

Recent awards for these long term contracts

Costain specialises in technical delivery

engineering solutions providers operating

means we are seeking permanent employees

with an innovative approach. We are

across the full spectrum of railway work from

to work on a number of contracts providing

seeking individuals with a desire to commit

major project delivery and the North East

the safety critical duties of:

to the highest standards and form part of a

Spur from Stratford to Shenfield, to the new

safety critical team that will be recognised

five year multi-function framework for Kent,

COSS

plus work through ABC Electrification from

Nominated Person

by our competitors for its professionalism.

Scotland down the West Coast Main Line

Appointed Person

These posts are seen as staff positions and

and in South Wales.

Engineering Supervisor

demand a dynamic approach, competence

Protection Controller

and commitment to the highest safety and

Possession Planners

procedural standards. Excellent communication skills and the ability to use

Additional competencies such as Machine

computers or tablets to a basic level is a

Controller or Crane Controller would be an

minimum requirement and will be tested.

advantage.

NO AGENCIES

To find out more please go to www.costaincareers.com

RailwayPeople.com Fast track your career

OVER 3,000 LIVE JOBS from all the rail companies that matter

SEARCH & APPLY

ONLINE www.RailwayPeople.com

This is my story Working collaboratively to deliver projects in record time.

“We’ve worked as one team with Network Rail from the outset, sharing offices and new ways of working to create a new, better model for delivering the National Signalling Framework.”

Steve Signalling framework opportunities £competitive + benefits | Croydon/London based At Atkins, we achieve brilliant things by thinking differently and leading the way with collaborative working. As primary contractor for the Anglia & Kent and Sussex & Wessex signalling frameworks, we’re proud to have integrated our teams with Network Rail like never before. It’s improved communications and problem solving with feasibility and development projects delivered at an incredible pace. So, passengers will be able to experience the benefits much sooner.

As our projects enter the next phase and we embark on a growing number of exciting new challenges such as Victoria II, East Kent II, and resignalling of the Windsor lines (Feltham), we’re looking for more talented people to join us in the signalling frameworks: • Commercial managers • Engineering managers • Planners • QSE managers • Signalling designers • Project managers • Design, test & construction engineers

Not afraid to think innovatively and embrace new technologies and ways of working to exceed client expectations, you’ll join a united team of brilliant Atkins people who work together to make full use of BS 11000 certification and increase punctuality, reliability and capacity on the UK’s railways.

Amazing projects. Collaborative working.

Delivering faster than ever before. Your journey starts here. There’s more to us than meets the eye, so discover more about Atkins and our careers at

www.atkinsglobal.com/railcareers/se

Great opportunities with a fast moving company Signalling Solutions is a company formed by combining the complementary signalling resources and products of Alstom Transport Information Solutions UK and Balfour Beatty Rail Projects.

If you are looking for a new challenge and want to make a real contribution to the success of our business, we have opportunities across all our locations in the following disciplines: • Design • Testing • Planning • Project Management • Quantity Surveying • Installation Management • Project Engineering • Health, Safety and Environmental • Systems Engineering

If you want to work with a forward thinking company and the latest cutting edge technology, apply today.

In return for your commitment and contribution, you can expect an excellent package and the opportunity to shape your career the way that you want, with training, development and career planning.

All the advertised positions have the following benefits: We offer a competitive salary plus a range of benefits including a contributory pension and 25 days holiday.

For more information please visit www.signallingsolutions.com or apply by sending your CV to recruitment@signallingsolutions.com

For further information, or to make an application: Tel: +44 (0)1923 635 089 email: recruitment@signallingsolutions.com

a Balfour Beatty and Alstom company

Opportunities with Frazer-Nash

Our client, Frazer-Nash has over two decades of successful project delivery in the rail industry.

Frazer-Nash’s consultants have been applying their expertise and know-how to develop, enhance and protect their clients’ critical systems and processes. They’re adding value to projects spearheaded by some of the biggest names in rail.

With over 500 employees, Frazer-Nash is continuing to grow – and we’ve been engaged to look for the right people to join its UK- and Australia-based rail business. If you’d like the opportunity to flourish within a collaborative environment, where creative thinking and entrepreneurial talent is recognised and rewarded, we want to hear from you.

At Frazer-Nash, you’ll work on a range of rail projects, and you’ll have the opportunity to apply your skills and expertise to other parts of its business too. The company is renowned for its work across the aerospace, transport, defence and nuclear sectors, and encourages the sharing of best practice and ideas.

With exemplary communication skills and the ability to influence at all levels, your technical knowledge will be second to none. Ideally, you’ll be degree qualified and have Chartered Status or possess membership of your relevant professional body.

Our client has an immediate need for the following specialists: Rolling Stock Engineers With significant experience, your knowledge may include safety system assessment methodology and application, maintenance systems, propulsion or Railway Group Standards.

Principal Rail Electrification Engineer You’ll be an established design and implementation practitioner of high-voltage rail electrification infrastructure.

With Chartered status, you’ll have experience in AC and DC railway electrification systems.

Rail Systems Modelling Engineer With a good degree or PhD in a relevant subject, you’ll possess a strong understanding of fundamental engineering principles, coupled with significant experience in rail systems modelling.

Frazer-Nash is also looking for Principal Electrical Distribution Engineers and Rail Safety Engineers.

To get to know Frazer-Nash and to find out more about a career with the company, call Rod Shaw at RGS Executive on 0115 959 9687, email enquiries@rgsexecutive.co.uk or visit our website.

Due to the nature of Frazer-Nash’s work, successful candidates will be required to gain UK security clearance.

FRAZER-NASH OFFICES UNITED KINGDOM: Bristol, Burton-on-Trent, Dorchester, Dorking, Glasgow, Gloucester, Plymouth, Warrington AUSTRALIA : Adelaide, Melbourne

t: 0115 959 9687 e: enquiries@rgsexecutive.co.uk rgsexecutive.co.uk

Influencing your energy strategies with integrated solutions UK Power Networks Services is a leading provider of electrical infrastructure with significant experience of working on high profile transport projects such as High Speed 1, High Speed 2 and Crossrail.

UK Power Networks Services: • Consistently delivers results on the most challenging projects • Can undertake the total requirements of any strategic infrastructure project • Has access to a wealth of international experience in providing finance solutions

Contact us by visiting: www.ukpowernetworksservices.co.uk

Consulting

|

Technologies

|

Engineering

|

Construction

|

Operation & Maintenance

|

Finance