RSSB looking at possible extension of 3rd rail electrification

[deltic]

The Rail Safety and Standards Board is looking for consultancy support for a project that aims to:
"

• Support the decarbonisation of traction in regions with a predominant 750V DC top contact third rail system by identifying the potential to remove diesel services by either enabling extensions to the existing electric network or appropriate alternatives
• Identify options to reduce the safety risk of 750V DC top contact third rail systems and explore how this can support the potential for approvals to appropriate extensions to the electric network
• Support decision-making on extensions to the 750V DC top contact third rail Network or other alternatives to diesel traction through a decision-making framework to consider mitigation options alongside whole transport system safety, project and economic risks

"

So maybe extensions to third rail could be on the cards again

Source is https://www.contractsfinder.service...tm_campaign=2020-06-06&utm_source=SavedSearch

 

[Ianno87]

I understand the areas where third rail is particularly risky is through complex junctions and station areas, where in some cases what is live and not live during isolations can often be far from clear. E.g. the short bits of juice rail you get around points and crosdings.

 

[Dr Hoo]

The Rail Safety and Standards Board is looking for consultancy support for a project that aims to:
• Support the decarbonisation of traction in regions with a predominant 750V DC top contact third rail system by identifying the potential to remove diesel services by either enabling extensions to the existing electric network or appropriate alternatives
• Identify options to reduce the safety risk of 750V DC top contact third rail systems and explore how this can support the potential for approvals to appropriate extensions to the electric network
• Support decision-making on extensions to the 750V DC top contact third rail Network or other alternatives to diesel traction through a decision-making framework to consider mitigation options alongside whole transport system safety, project and economic risks

Noting that much of the RSSB's website and material is only accessible to 'members' and registered users do you have a quote, link or source for this news, please?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I understand the areas where third rail is particularly risky is through complex junctions and station areas, where in some cases what is live and not live during isolations can often be far from clear. E.g. the short bits of juice rail you get around points and crosdings.

Though most of the extensions we're talking about (the likes of Skem/Wigan, Burscough Bridge, Uckfield etc) would be very simple trackwork as they're just branch lines or very minor junctions.

I don't think there's a case anywhere where it would make sense to add it to a major terminus that doesn't already have it.

Indeed, what are the cases? I can only think of Skem/Wigan, Burscough Bridge (at a push Southport that way but not really necessary), Ellesmere Port-Helsby (which needn't even have a connection to the mainline at all), Oxted-Uckfield, Ashford-Hastings and maybe Hunts X-Warrington C at a push. Are there actually any other viable cases than those ones? There are maybe more odd bits of Merseyrail which could be reinstated e.g. Aintree-Bootle via Ford or Gateacre, but those are maybe a little far-fetched as reopening them isn't even on the agenda yet.

 

[deltic]

Noting that much of the RSSB's website and material is only accessible to 'members' and registered users do you have a quote, link or source for this news, please?

Source is https://www.contractsfinder.service...tm_campaign=2020-06-06&utm_source=SavedSearch

 

[Dr Hoo]

Source is https://www.contractsfinder.service...tm_campaign=2020-06-06&utm_source=SavedSearch

Thanks.

Note that there is a further link within, which is to an 32-page procurement document. See T1214 21st Century DC electrification infill - supplier engagement day.doc. It is not feasible to summarise this but I note a statement that the risk of electrocution with third rail is ten times higher than for overhead and that extensive engagement with the ORR will be required. If awarded the consultancy contract might run to around £200,000 and take until the end of 2021 for completion of both phases.

 

[kieron]

I don't think they're in a position of looking for candidates yet. The RSSB know that overhead electrification is very expensive (not least because of their safety requirements). They don't yet know if third rail electrification would also be very expensive, if it was installed according to their requirements.

Once they have some idea of what they need from new third rail installations, and how much it would cost to install and maintain to their standards, Network Rail and the like can start to look at whether it makes sense to install it anywhere in the future.

 

[Ashley Hill]

Does this mean that "new" 3rd rail cannot be installed in the same manner as existing 3rd rail?

 

[HSTEd]

Finally.

The study might not go anywhere, but at least people are actually trying.
Rather than simply saying no.

 

[yorksrob]

It's certainly a positive development over the recent stalemate.

 

[Skie]

Sounds like a positive development. End result should be some clear guidance on how the RSSB thinks you can safely expand the 3rd rail network. That can only be a good thing, unless they come to the conclusion that it just can’t be done safely enough.

 

[Lucan]

I understand the areas where third rail is particularly risky is through complex junctions and station areas,

That makes sense, and having done a fair bit of walking around on 4th rail electrified track I can vouch for it. You really have to think hard when you step through pointwork.

 

[MarkyT]

That makes sense, and having done a fair bit of walking around on 4th rail electrified track I can vouch for it. You really have to think hard when you step through pointwork.

In these cases, 3rd rail could work as a kind of discontinuous electrification scheme with moderately-sized traction batteries aboard a subfleet of electric units dedicated to the lines. Lengths of live rail kept well away from any remaining level crossings and most station platforms, and able to be remotely isolated in fairly short sections quickly by the signaller for maintenance work and in the case of alleged trepass, while trains could still keep moving on battery (slowly under caution as neccessary of course). In platforms and sidings where trains layover, normally isolated sections of 3rd rail could exist to energise to charge batteries only when a train is present.

 

[AM9]

... All this only adds 1-2% to third rail line mileage. under 1% to track mileage. Hardly a significant increase over existing electrocution risk. ...

Surely, any new live 3rd rail represents a greater than normal risk than existing electrified lines at least until the locals have it fixed in their minds.

 

[O L Leigh]

EaW is not the only legislation in question, though. Besides, not everything is ever covered specifically by legislation, which is why organisations like ORR publish policy documents such as this to set out their interpretation of the legislation as they see it applying to their area of work or business.

If you’ve not already done so you should read the document. It sets the bar high but the ORR does not rule out further CRE projects.

 

[Tio Terry]

Any new electrification will be subject to the requirements of ROGS and, in particular, The Common Safety Method (CSM) for risk assessment. It is this, and this alone - because it will be site specific - that will be the deciding factor within British Law.

 

[yorkie]

Just a gentle reminder to stay on topic please; the forum has plenty of capacity for threads on any other topic

Also any ideas, suggestions etc belong in the Speculative Ideas section please.

Some posts have been moved to the following threads:

• Pros and cons of different electrification schemes (e.g. 3rd rail / OHLE / battery power)
• Which lines do you think would benefit from 3rd rail electrification

If anyone sees off topic postings, please make one report using the report button; ideally the fist off topic post should be reported, and details of any subsequent off topic posts can be included in the report.

Thank you

 

[yorksrob]

Just been reading Ian Walmsley's column in July's Modern Railways and he's quoted a reader (Mr Blakey) who submitted a Freedom of Information request for fatalities and weighted injuries (FWI) per thousand track kilometeres. He calculated that the OLE network accounted for 0.23 FWI whilst the third rail accounted for 0.47.

So whilst the third rail does appear to be more dangerous, these calculations would suggest that it's nothing like ten times more so.

Is this level of increased dangerousness sufficient to justify the ban on third rail infill ? Personally, I think not.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

Just been reading Ian Walmsley's column in July's Modern Railways and he's quoted a reader (Mr Blakey) who submitted a Freedom of Information request for fatalities and weighted injuries (FWI) per thousand track kilometeres. He calculated that the OLE network accounted for 0.23 FWI whilst the third rail accounted for 0.47.

So whilst the third rail does appear to be more dangerous, these calculations would suggest that it's nothing like ten times more so.

Is this level of increased dangerousness sufficient to justify the ban on third rail infill ? Personally, I think not.

First up, the article has some holes in it, there's some issues with calculations and the underlying data is, as Ian inadvertently suggests, rather flawed.

The long standing problem (of sorts) with the FWI calculations is it relies on injuries being reported. If you come into contact with 25kV AC, we'll know about via the coroner. If you come into contact with 750V DC, particularly if you're trampling around the six foot or cess and get an unpleasant jolt, and even if you're there with your shiny PTS card and hi-viz jacket, there's no guarantee a report will be made. That's especially the case with the trespassing fraternity and the cable stealing fairies.

However, if you're not killing people and only giving them nasty shocks, then you may ask if it's actually an issue. In one respect, that's perfectly true, we don't have MOMs finding electrocuted bodies in third rail territory on a daily basis, but on the other hand, if the reports aren't being made, it's difficult to do a proper risk assessment.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

25 kV AC OHLE is the future. An obvious place to start for me anyway is Reading -Basingstoke and then to Salisbury - I prefer no more 3rd rail DC. Remember power loss is directly proportional to current squared with the constant of proportionality being the resistance. Steel also has higher resistance than copper.

 

[yorksrob]

First up, the article has some holes in it, there's some issues with calculations and the underlying data is, as Ian inadvertently suggests, rather flawed.

The long standing problem (of sorts) with the FWI calculations is it relies on injuries being reported. If you come into contact with 25kV AC, we'll know about via the coroner. If you come into contact with 750V DC, particularly if you're trampling around the six foot or cess and get an unpleasant jolt, and even if you're there with your shiny PTS card and hi-viz jacket, there's no guarantee a report will be made. That's especially the case with the trespassing fraternity and the cable stealing fairies.

However, if you're not killing people and only giving them nasty shocks, then you may ask if it's actually an issue. In one respect, that's perfectly true, we don't have MOMs finding electrocuted bodies in third rail territory on a daily basis, but on the other hand, if the reports aren't being made, it's difficult to do a proper risk assessment.

I'm inclined to think that you've absolutely hit the nail on the head. If you get a bit of a whack with a "cricket bat" and you're in a position to choose not to report, then such instances shouldn't be considered in the same light as fatalities. I don't know the detail of how "weighted injuries" are come by, but I'm going on the assumption that they weigh injuries by severity.

 

[HSTEd]

Steel also has higher resistance than copper.

Which is why modern high performance third rails are mostly made of aluminium?

 

[Bald Rick]

I'm inclined to think that you've absolutely hit the nail on the head. If you get a bit of a whack with a "cricket bat" and you're in a position to choose not to report, then such instances shouldn't be considered in the same light as fatalities. I don't know the detail of how "weighted injuries" are come by, but I'm going on the assumption that they weigh injuries by severity.

Very roughly, a major injury is weighted as a tenth of a fatality, and a minor injury is weighted as 1/200th of a fatality. I’m fairly sure that an electric shock will be counted as a major.

 

[Ashley Hill]

I know several have suggested why,but I still fail to understand why OHLE Basing-Sarum? It would only benefit freight as far as Laverstock which would then need bi-mode as far as Southampton. Whereas out of Waterloo is 3rd rail to Basing. It can only make sense (to me) to extend 3rd rail to Salisbury to be able run modern trains WLO to Sarum. WoE can remain diesel powered until the 159s are replaced by perhaps bi-modes.

 

[yorksrob]

Very roughly, a major injury is weighted as a tenth of a fatality, and a minor injury is weighted as 1/200th of a fatality. I’m fairly sure that an electric shock will be counted as a major.

Thanks Bald Rick for the further explanation of the metric. It illustrates to me that electric shocks are accounted for and lesser ones aren't discounted unecessarily.

It contributes to my opinion that third rail infil schemes are not inherantly dangerous in the scheme of things and that they should not be banned.

 

[Taunton]

Very roughly, a major injury is weighted as a tenth of a fatality, and a minor injury is weighted as 1/200th of a fatality. I’m fairly sure that an electric shock will be counted as a major.

I'm sure there are a number of us here whose children have worked through 200 minor injuries over time (as in need to get the bandage box out), and in no way consider that to equal a child fatality.

 

[Taunton]

I know several have suggested why,but I still fail to understand why OHLE Basing-Sarum? It would only benefit freight as far as Laverstock which would then need bi-mode as far as Southampton. Whereas out of Waterloo is 3rd rail to Basing. It can only make sense (to me) to extend 3rd rail to Salisbury to be able run modern trains WLO to Sarum. WoE can remain diesel powered until the 159s are replaced by perhaps bi-modes.

It's a shame that the mid-1980s Network South East original plan to extend 3rd rail to Weymouth, substituting 4-CIG stock, and transferring the REP+TC arrangement to an electrified service through to Salisbury (or 4-CIG for what terminated there), with the 33s taking one set on to Exeter, was never seen through. Apparently it was a quite close decision.

 

[Bletchleyite]

25 kV AC OHLE is the future. An obvious place to start for me anyway is Reading -Basingstoke and then to Salisbury - I prefer no more 3rd rail DC. Remember power loss is directly proportional to current squared with the constant of proportionality being the resistance. Steel also has higher resistance than copper.

There would be no sense in putting 25kV up on Merseyrail, and it might not even be possible due to clearances in the tunnels. If they went overhead it'd likely have to be DC tram OHLE, but that's a huge cost to convert.

Switching to a shielded form of third rail would be more viable if they had to change it. It might even be possible to shield the existing third rail using fibreglass troughing, you're unlikely to catch the top of it unless you do it deliberately.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Which is why modern high performance third rails are mostly made of aluminium?

Good to know - I honestly did not know that - thanks

 

[GRALISTAIR]

There would be no sense in putting 25kV up on Merseyrail, and it might not even be possible due to clearances in the tunnels. If they went overhead it'd likely have to be DC tram OHLE, but that's a huge cost to convert.

Switching to a shielded form of third rail would be more viable if they had to change it. It might even be possible to shield the existing third rail using fibreglass troughing, you're unlikely to catch the top of it unless you do it deliberately.

I don’t disagree in that instance. Horses for courses