• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Battery Powered Electrostars for Southern

Status
Not open for further replies.

D365

Veteran Member
Joined
29 Jun 2012
Messages
11,396
The problem with inductive charging is efficiency or the lack of it (very difficult to find any figures, which tells you something in itself).

This is exactly my problem with the concept behind removing all ports from future smartphones. But that's another discussion in itself.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Chrisgr31

Established Member
Joined
2 Aug 2011
Messages
1,675
Not in the current TimeTable.

I wouldn't be surprised if they came along with Tesla Style Super Chargers at Termini, such as; Eastbourne, Hastings and Ashford.

A pantograph could be used as access to the Super Charger. I'm sure ReGen braking can top up the battery level, if 750DC can't, when its being used for the 3rd Rail Operation.

In a similar vain to those seen on some EV Buses. A bit like this.

Surely they will have to charge off the 3rd rail? Otherwise you will have to install charging kit on all terminating platforms at London Bridge, and in the bay at Oxted, and potentially at Crowborough, Selhurst and East Croydon. Not only that but the Uckfield line units could be 12 cars long so the kit installation would be huge unless done through the third rail. You’ll still need to introduce some form of charging facility at both a Crowborough and Uckfield, or alternatively base a thunderbird and driver at Crowborough to rescue ones stuck with flat batteries.

Battery capacity on the Uckfield line appears to be more crucial than the Marshlink as on the Marsh you already have electricity both ends, you don’t on the Uckfield line.
 

Mikey C

Established Member
Joined
11 Feb 2013
Messages
6,830
The problem with inductive charging is efficiency or the lack of it (very difficult to find any figures, which tells you something in itself). In a high-power application like a train it would lose a significant fraction of the energy, which affects charging time as well as efficiency. And there's no real need for inductive charging in an environment where contact charging is workable and the trains even carry the relevant equipment already.

And environmentally it's questionable too...
 

Greybeard33

Established Member
Joined
18 Feb 2012
Messages
4,229
Location
Greater Manchester
Surely they will have to charge off the 3rd rail? Otherwise you will have to install charging kit on all terminating platforms at London Bridge, and in the bay at Oxted, and potentially at Crowborough, Selhurst and East Croydon. Not only that but the Uckfield line units could be 12 cars long so the kit installation would be huge unless done through the third rail. You’ll still need to introduce some form of charging facility at both a Crowborough and Uckfield, or alternatively base a thunderbird and driver at Crowborough to rescue ones stuck with flat batteries.

Battery capacity on the Uckfield line appears to be more crucial than the Marshlink as on the Marsh you already have electricity both ends, you don’t on the Uckfield line.
I think the issue with charging from the third rail mainly applies to charging while on the move. Additional, more closely spaced, substations would probably be needed to cope with the increase in peak current demand.

But for charging in a station, an additional, local substation could be provided just to supply the platform lines. And the train would not be drawing traction current while stationary.

At a station off the electrified network, the charging third rail need only be energised when a train is in the platform, so mitigating the ORR safety concerns about new third rail.
 

D365

Veteran Member
Joined
29 Jun 2012
Messages
11,396
But for charging in a station, an additional, local substation could be provided just to supply the platform lines. And the train would not be drawing traction current while stationary.

At a station off the electrified network, the charging third rail need only be energised when a train is in the platform, so mitigating the ORR safety concerns about new third rail.

That's pretty much the concept behind the Vivarail system, with a lineside battery being used to enable fast charging of the train battery.
 

Chrisgr31

Established Member
Joined
2 Aug 2011
Messages
1,675
Well if they cant charge on the move then charging infrastructure will be needed for London Bridge and Oxted at the very least.

I get the fact that you can energise the 3rd rail if installed just to charge the train although I guess on the Uckfield line you will need several sections of it to cater for different train lengths.
 

Fincra5

Established Member
Joined
6 Jun 2009
Messages
2,486
Well if they cant charge on the move then charging infrastructure will be needed for London Bridge and Oxted at the very least.

I get the fact that you can energise the 3rd rail if installed just to charge the train although I guess on the Uckfield line you will need several sections of it to cater for different train lengths.

This is one of the many problems Porterbrook will have to solve . Issues wouldn't exist if they had perhaps just electrified the 2 Diesel Islands but thats not going to happen... :rolleyes:

The ReGen braking would likely be diverted to recharge the batteries. Which would aid Battery Level.

Having a look at thse ABB "Pantograph Down" systems, they appear to have a 4-Pole Connection. Is that the same ballpark as Inductive Charging? Seem to work similarly to a railway pantograph. I must profess I'm no expert on Electricity! :p

It might be possible to charge the batteries on the move but given the demand for the Motors (etc), would be able to handle it?
Having said that, once you get moving 377s don't use nearly as much power, looking at Mitrac.
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,070
Well if they cant charge on the move then charging infrastructure will be needed for London Bridge and Oxted at the very least.

I get the fact that you can energise the 3rd rail if installed just to charge the train although I guess on the Uckfield line you will need several sections of it to cater for different train lengths.

Everything I’ve seen suggests they can recharge on the move. In principle a battery doesn’t care - or even know - where the electrons come from. In the case of the Uckfield line the power supply system on the existing D.C. (north of S Croydon at least) will easily be able to cope with an additional train or two an hour charging as it goes through. I’m not so sure of arrangements between Ore and Eastbourne or Brighton, but I’d be surprised if it was a major issue.

I’ve been saying for sometime now that this technology has been coming, and here it is.
 

Chrisgr31

Established Member
Joined
2 Aug 2011
Messages
1,675
Everything I’ve seen suggests they can recharge on the move. In principle a battery doesn’t care - or even know - where the electrons come from.

It makes more sense that they can charge from the 3rd rail on the move.
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,070
It makes more sense that they can charge from the 3rd rail on the move.

Bear in mind that a single 377/3 can draw around 0.8MW through the 3rd rail; one assumes this would be the limit of both power draw and charging rate to avoid damage to all the traction electronics on the train. Therefore if accelerating at less than full power, it could be charging (a little), when coasting or stationary it would be charging at the full rate less the small amount needed for ‘hotel’ services, and when regenerating it would simply draw less from the 3rd rail. But, given how little time trains actually spend on full power, and how much time they spend coasting, braking or stationary, it’s reasonable to assume that they will be charging most of the time when on the 3rd rail.
 

Sunset route

Member
Joined
27 Oct 2015
Messages
1,176
This refers to losing 12 171s. There are 18. Which ones are staying?

Is that 12 units or 12 coaches as 12 coaches in the form of 2X2 coaches and 2X4 coaches (the ex scotrail units) are confirmed as going.
 
Last edited:

Chrisgr31

Established Member
Joined
2 Aug 2011
Messages
1,675
Wikipedia suggests that 4 2 car units, and 4 4 car units will not be going to East Midlands. So 24 carriages are not going
 

Greybeard33

Established Member
Joined
18 Feb 2012
Messages
4,229
Location
Greater Manchester
Everything I’ve seen suggests they can recharge on the move. In principle a battery doesn’t care - or even know - where the electrons come from. In the case of the Uckfield line the power supply system on the existing D.C. (north of S Croydon at least) will easily be able to cope with an additional train or two an hour charging as it goes through. I’m not so sure of arrangements between Ore and Eastbourne or Brighton, but I’d be surprised if it was a major issue.

I’ve been saying for sometime now that this technology has been coming, and here it is.
Maybe it would be ok in those locations, but on intensively worked lines where the power supply system is near capacity, a diversity factor can normally be assumed. All the trains along the line do not draw full power simultaneously, so the power supply system only has to be designed to meet the average demand, with a margin to allow for occasional peaks.

But a battery train charging will draw the maximum 0.8MW continuously, not just during acceleration, increasing the net peak demand on the power supply system. Therefore costly reinforcement might be necessary if charging is permitted.
 

paul1609

Established Member
Joined
28 Jan 2006
Messages
7,187
Location
Wittersham Kent
Bear in mind that a single 377/3 can draw around 0.8MW through the 3rd rail; one assumes this would be the limit of both power draw and charging rate to avoid damage to all the traction electronics on the train. Therefore if accelerating at less than full power, it could be charging (a little), when coasting or stationary it would be charging at the full rate less the small amount needed for ‘hotel’ services, and when regenerating it would simply draw less from the 3rd rail. But, given how little time trains actually spend on full power, and how much time they spend coasting, braking or stationary, it’s reasonable to assume that they will be charging most of the time when on the 3rd rail.
My understanding is thats the real problem
Maybe it would be ok in those locations, but on intensively worked lines where the power supply system is near capacity, a diversity factor can normally be assumed. All the trains along the line do not draw full power simultaneously, so the power supply system only has to be designed to meet the average demand, with a margin to allow for occasional peaks.

But a battery train charging will draw the maximum 0.8MW continuously, not just during acceleration, increasing the net peak demand on the power supply system. Therefore costly reinforcement might be necessary if charging is permitted.

Apparently its a dummy whammy because to ensure long life of the batteries the charging has to be in a sophisticated cycle and you cant fast charge much above 80% because of the thermal limit. Getting this to work when your power source is dc third rail with gaps in the conductor rail and limitations when you are accelerating away from the many station stops means that the charging cycles have to be conservative in order to meet the worst case scenario.

Im afraid another dismal rail industry failure is on the horizon.
 

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
7,354
Bear in mind that a single 377/3 can draw around 0.8MW through the 3rd rail; one assumes this would be the limit of both power draw and charging rate to avoid damage to all the traction electronics on the train. Therefore if accelerating at less than full power, it could be charging (a little), when coasting or stationary it would be charging at the full rate less the small amount needed for ‘hotel’ services, and when regenerating it would simply draw less from the 3rd rail. But, given how little time trains actually spend on full power, and how much time they spend coasting, braking or stationary, it’s reasonable to assume that they will be charging most of the time when on the 3rd rail.
Modern (3rd rail) EMUs aren't wired up isn't like that though, the current limiting is done on the load side* (computer controlled) with just significant over current protection (fuse/MCB) on the supply side.
*e.g. by the 3 phase drive for each motor and auxiliary converter for the non traction supplies.
The addition of batteries effectively add a third category of load to the DC-Link which could mean greater current draw than currently overall, hence MITRAC software needing to be altered to ensure charging is sensibly managed e.g. not too much 3rd rail voltage drop etc. and monitoring 3 phase drive current flow. Hence in areas of good power supply the opportunity is there to do significantly better.
Unless the batteries are very large, regen on harder braking will easily supply more power than can be used for recharging, but luckily the performance needed on the diesel only area is leisurely...
 

paul1609

Established Member
Joined
28 Jan 2006
Messages
7,187
Location
Wittersham Kent
Modern (3rd rail) EMUs aren't wired up isn't like that though, the current limiting is done on the load side* (computer controlled) with just significant over current protection (fuse/MCB) on the supply side.
*e.g. by the 3 phase drive for each motor and auxiliary converter for the non traction supplies.
The addition of batteries effectively add a third category of load to the DC-Link which could mean greater current draw than currently overall, hence MITRAC software needing to be altered to ensure charging is sensibly managed e.g. not too much 3rd rail voltage drop etc. and monitoring 3 phase drive current flow. Hence in areas of good power supply the opportunity is there to do significantly better.
Unless the batteries are very large, regen on harder braking will easily supply more power than can be used for recharging, but luckily the performance needed on the diesel only area is leisurely...

The really exciting aspect of the project is what are going to be used as the Thunderbird Locos to rescue units which have run out of charge on a single line in the middle of nowhere and of course what livery they are going to be in? Class 37s fitted with tight lock couplers. Maybe Southern could pay for a mainline connection at Eridge and one could be used for diesel galas at the Spa valley in between their frequent duties dragging dead units back to the third rail...
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,793
Location
Nottingham
My understanding is thats the real problem


Apparently its a dummy whammy because to ensure long life of the batteries the charging has to be in a sophisticated cycle and you cant fast charge much above 80% because of the thermal limit. Getting this to work when your power source is dc third rail with gaps in the conductor rail and limitations when you are accelerating away from the many station stops means that the charging cycles have to be conservative in order to meet the worst case scenario.

Im afraid another dismal rail industry failure is on the horizon.
The maximum power consumed in a particular area is sort of limited by the number of trains that can be in that area simultaneously. The worst case is probably when a blockage ahead has just cleared, so several trains stacked one behind the other are all accelerating as their signals clear in quick succession.

However another limitation on the supply is thermal loading, which is a function of total energy transmitted over a longer period of time (an hour or so I think) rather than maximum power at any instant. A proportion of the energy turns into heat in the equipment, which will cause problems if it gets too hot. This is the mechanism where battery charging will probably have the greatest impact.
 

Meerkat

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2018
Messages
7,416
Just wire the Uckfield up! Plenty of dual voltage units about.
How difficult can 25 miles of largely single track be?
 

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
7,354
Just wire the Uckfield up! Plenty of dual voltage units about.
How difficult can 25 miles of largely single track be?
Very when there isn't the power. The power available in the wider Uckfield-Tonbridge area to the south of the M25 is quite limited. No Grid and DNO is pretty maxed out because they only every planned on light green belt usage.
The cost of wiring is one thing the cost of sorting the power supply is quite another!
 

Meerkat

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2018
Messages
7,416
Very when there isn't the power. The power available in the wider Uckfield-Tonbridge area to the south of the M25 is quite limited. No Grid and DNO is pretty maxed out because they only every planned on light green belt usage.
The cost of wiring is one thing the cost of sorting the power supply is quite another!

Better wire both lines back to Purley then, must be some big sockets about there!
Bloody experts and their practicalities......;)
 

Chrisgr31

Established Member
Joined
2 Aug 2011
Messages
1,675
Better wire both lines back to Purley then, must be some big sockets about there!
Bloody experts and their practicalities......;)

If you are going to do that you might as well have a long lead on the train. Plug it in at Hurst Green, roll it out behind the train, roll it back up on the return journey, unplug it at Hurst Green and continue up to London Bridge
 

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
28,013
Location
UK
The really exciting aspect of the project is what are going to be used as the Thunderbird Locos to rescue units which have run out of charge on a single line in the middle of nowhere and of course what livery they are going to be in?

I picture a giant portable power bank with wheels, and a USB port at each end.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top