Train control in the heavy haul environment

What capacity improvements can be achieved on heavy haul and mixed traffic networks?

Introduction

About the presenter: Neal Mumford Rail Leader for Arup in Australasia

• Personal experience and views – UK and

Australia

• Setting the scene – how important is this

topic?

• What are the main components – is innovation

in Train Control the answer ?

• Re-inventing the wheel – and getting it right !

Case 1 The Pilbara: Closed systems Australian Financial Review 18 July 2013

“ … allowing the ACCC to require a company to invest in an

expansion for the benefit of third parties would require the

ACCC to usurp the Board’s proper functions, and interpose the

ACCC into the management of the infrastructure owner’s

business.”

Marcus Randolph (BHP Board - November 2009) warned that

“Third party access was the highest value item on BHP Billiton’s

internal risk register” and that “the risk had been valued at $7.9

billion.” Randolph then noted that BHP Billiton could “rebuild a

completely independent railroad” for less than that amount.

What’s more he insisted that BHP had seriously contemplated

spending $2 billion to build a railway for Fortescue and any other

of the Pilbara’s free-riders rather than incur the cost associated

with regular access.”

BHPB response to the Productivity Commissions Draft Report on

third party access, AFR

Case 1 The Pilbara ‘Concept design of high efficiency heavy haul railroads’

Andrew Neal, August 2012 (ARA Heavy Haul Conference – Newcastle)

Capacity utilisation

85% ? Could be tweaked

Case 2 Open systems For example, the Hunter Valley or Queensland Coal and Passenger Networks Capacity utilisation

65% ! Would be great

Infrastructure

The ARTC Hunter and Gunnedah Network “It is important to note that the whole Hunter Valley coal

supply chain is interlinked. The stockpiling and loading

capability of the mines affects the trains required, the train

numbers affect the rail infrastructure and so on. The

capacity and performance of the system is entirely

interlinked and the capacity of the rail network needs to be

considered in that context.”

ARTC Hunter Valley Corridor Capacity Strategy

June 2013

Infrastructure

Building robust capacity

ARTC Hunter Valley Corridor Capacity Strategy

June 2013

Infrastructure

Tracks and overtaking or passing loops Provisioning facilities Gradients and speeds (Liverpool Range and Nundah Bank)

Main title (24pt TNR)

Date: Day Month Year (14pt TNR) Location: City/Country (14pt TNR)

Hunter Valley network

model

Optimising infrastructure “…developed a number of options to upgrade the Nundah Bank, and

assessed coal train performance, headways and route capacity through

the bank area for each option. The shortest loop dimension for the third

road proposed was identified and developed to give 10 minutes headway

over the bank and overtaking or passing loops.”

Nundah Bank Modelling Report

Train control technology

Today’s lineside signalling technology CBI

Train control technology

Poles and lights – with CBI and Phoenix control

Image: ARTC and © Henry Owen

“During 2008 ARTC completed the implementation of new train control systems and automated signalling systems during the Train Control Consolidation Project (TCC). Under the project all 28 of the 19th century manually operated signal boxes within NSW were fully automated to

Phoenix train control system technology…

This project realised significant operational gains, both in improved train transit times through the use of technology in addition to reduced budget expenditure.

More recently ARTC is nearing finalisation of

the Advanced Train Management System (ATMS) safety

case and is in the process of evaluating the potential for its

implementation within the Hunter Valley.”

ARTC Hunter Valley Corridor Capacity Strategy

June 2013

Train control technology Middle Hunter CBI solutions Optimised to match the performance of the current coal train fleet

On-board

ATP

ATO

LDS

Radio

Communications

Interface

Level

Crossing

Points

Machine &

Indicator

Dragging Equipment

Detector

(Any Asset Protection

Device)

Hot Wheels/

Bearings

Detector

Track

Circuit

Points

Machine

GPSCab

Signalling

Display

Wayside

Interface

Unit (OC)

Wireless

LAN Cell

Voice

Radio

Train Interfaces-Brakes (ECP)

-Traction

Data

Logger

Wayside

Interface

Unit (OC)

Alternative

OCC

Primary OCC

Equipment

Rooms

Train

Integrity

CCTV

Wi-Fi

RND

Screen

Redundant Fibre Network

Tra

ck

Gan

gs

Hi

Rail

Tag Marker

Board/RFID

BTS

BTS

Hand Held

Terminal

Radio

Controller

Carrier Provided

Circuits

Maintainer

Screen

Maintainer

Screen

CCTV

ScreenLVCS

LAN/WAN

Router

TETRA Data

Communications

Automation

and Vital

Systems HMIs

Automation

and Vital

Systems HMIs

Servers

LCDS

HWDS

STAGE DATO

F

W

New Technology

An Example

Ansaldo-STS Communication Based

SBS solution – Roy Hill

Automatic Train Operation

ETCS Train Control UK ETCS Level 2 – Newer technology, Showing capacity increases

Example Site B (PB Non-Stopping)

(Sandy to Stoke Junction)

Line Down Fast Down Slow

Train Class Class 1 Class 4 Class 6

Timing Load 12591410 75C66S12 75C66S14 60H66S12 60H66S20 60H66S22

Existing

Signalling (mm:ss) 02:14 04:39 05:36 05:08 06:32 06:58

ETCS

Level 2 (mm:ss) 01:41 03:40 03:45 03:40 03:59 04:09

Headway

Improvement

(mm:ss)

00:33 00:59 01:51 01:28 02:33 02:49

ETCS Train Control UK ETCS Level 2 – Newer technology, showing cost savings

Artefact Existing Proposed

Train detection 352 Track circuits 214 Axle counters

Route indicators 91 7

Shunt

signals

99 13

Main

signals

123 0

Train planning and operational modelling + Human factors, Software and Risk Management factors

Train planning and operational modelling Critical points and interfaces between sub-systems (rail and port operations)

Reference: ARA Indonesia Paper

Tony Vidago, May 2013

Arup Hunter Valley Operational Modelling project experience

13

13

9494

10

5

SandgateWarabrook

Kooragang

Junction

North ForkSouth Fork

11

107

18

18

107

10

5

1169.4%

63

.3%

70

3535

NCIG

KCT

70

65

6571

71

65.6%

Operational modelling Infrastructure, Control and Train Performance

Train planning / Optimisation

Train Control & Increasing Capacity So – We have covered : • Hard Infrastructure • Train Control Systems & Technology • Modelling, Planning & Timetabling

Have we forgotten anything ? • Maybe …… • Customer Requirements and Business

Drivers (Does the System actually work ?)

Does this ring true?

Competing interface risks, commercial and contractual drivers …

Get the users operational and capacity requirements up front Plan and model how they will be delivered Optimise - then design, deliver and validate.

A systems engineering approach

Lessons learned ……….

• Route capacity identified and impact analysed

as part of the entire network • Realistic capacity utilisation factors taken into

account for the timetable planning • Infrastructure expansion is not the single

answer to increased capacity • Be careful not to be the ‘trial’ for innovative

technology

Iterations | Re-invent the wheel ! Time spent in planning is rarely wasted ?

Q: What capacity improvements can be achieved on heavy haul and mixed traffic networks? A: Plenty – through a combination of : - a systems engineering approach - implement reliable technology - application of expertise, and - collaborative working

Thank you