Battery Cl. 802 trial (tri-mode)

[hwl]

Finally after previous signing of battery supply contracts in the summer by Hitachi an announcement on an actual train test (replacing 1 of the 3 engines on 5 car GWR, Eversholt owned 802)

As with all press releases promising big potential gains if rolled out but the trial only being a single unit:

Hitachi and Eversholt Rail to develop GWR intercity battery hybrid train – offering fuel savings of more than 20%

Batteries replacing an engine to cut fuel usage and reduce carbon emissions First time a modern UK intercity train, in passenger service, will use...

www.mynewsdesk.com

Hitachi and Eversholt Rail to develop GWR intercity battery hybrid train – offering fuel savings of more than 20%​

http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?...rain – offering fuel savings of more than 20%

• Batteries replacing an engine to cut fuel usage and reduce carbon emissions
• First time a modern UK intercity train, in passenger service, will use alternative fuel
• Tri-mode train can improve air quality and reduce noise across South West route’s non-electrified stations

In a UK-first, Hitachi Rail and Eversholt Rail have signed an exclusive agreement aimed at bringing battery power – and fuel savings of more than 20% – to the modern Great Western Railway Intercity Express Trains that carry passengers between Penzance and London.
The 36 longer, faster trains – with their iconic sleek design – have already transformed journeys for passengers in south west England, since their introduction by GWR in August 2018. Now the partnership between Hitachi, the train builder and maintainer, and Eversholt Rail, the trains’ owner, will develop a plan to install batteries on a modern Intercity Express Train. The trial will demonstrate that the innovation meets passenger service and safety standards.
The line between the South West and London is only partially electrified, with the majority of the 300 mile journey requiring diesel power. The partnership is looking at batteries replacing a diesel engine as a power source on an existing Hitachi-built five-carriage train – currently known as a bi-mode for its ability to switch seamlessly between electric and diesel power.
Adding a battery creates an electric-diesel-battery hybrid train (tri-mode). On non-electrified sections of the route, the batteries will supplement the power of the engines to reduce fuel usage and carbon emissions by more than 20%. Whereas when travelling in and out of stations and surrounding urban areas, the train would rely on battery power only. This has the benefit of improving air quality and dramatically reduce noise levels, creating a more pleasant environment for passengers and people living nearby.
GWR’s Intercity Express Train fleet currently calls at 15 non-electrified stations on its journey between Penzance and London, all of which could benefit from trains running on battery-only power.
Hitachi Rail will draw upon market-leading expertise in Japan, and the support of its battery partner – Hyperdrive Innovation. The two North East-based companies reached an agreement in July 2020 to create and develop battery packs for mass production at Hyperdrive’s HYVE facility in Sunderland, the UK’s first independent battery pack manufacturing facility.
The projected improvements in battery technology – particularly in power output and charge – create opportunities to replace incrementally more diesel engines on long distance trains. With the ambition to create a fully electric-battery intercity train – that can travel the full journey between London and Penzance – by the late 2040s, in line with the UK’s 2050 net zero emissions target.
Installing battery technology on trains can complement electrification and helps to improve the business case for upgrades that can level-up the South West and provide a low emission alternative to domestic air travel.
Rail Minister, Chris Heaton Harris, said:
“This is an exciting partnership to develop technology that can make rail travel more sustainable across the UK’s network. Battery powered trains will support us in our battle against climate change and poor air quality, and improve the overall passenger experience. As we continue to build back better, developments like this are major stepping stones towards achieving the UK’s 2050 net-zero emissions target.”

Jim Brewin, UK & Ireland Country Lead, Hitachi Rail said:
“This partnership is an exciting opportunity to unlock new greener trains for passengers, reduce running costs for operators and cut carbon. At Hitachi Rail we share the UK’s ambition for a net zero emission future. Britain is in a unique position to become a global leader in battery trains, we want support the UK’s green economic recovery and levelling-up.”

Mary Kenny, Eversholt Rail Chief Executive Officer said:
“We are delighted to continue working in partnership with Hitachi to investigate the conversion of our Class 802 fleet to tri-mode by introducing battery technology. Eversholt Rail is committed to ensuring our fleets meet the UK Railway’s decarbonisation commitments.”

Matthew Golton, Interim Managing Director, GWR said:
“We are committed to reviewing emerging technologies such as battery power and assessing feasibility for services and rolling stock on the GWR network. This is a really exciting development and we look forward to working closely with both Hitachi Rail and Eversholt Rail on this trial.”
Mike Gallop, Network Rail’s interim Wales & Western regional managing director, said:
“We welcome this agreement particularly as it supports our recently published Traction Decarbonisation Strategy and our commitment to supporting the UK’s 2050 net zero emissions target. It also builds on the positive impact of electrification and our ambition to deliver greener and more sustainable travel.”
ENDS

Images and video available for journalists here:
GWR intercity train image here.
Infographic explaining the new tri-mode battery hybrid train and gif of where the batteries will be install please see our media library here.
A video of how battery trains work – see here or for download here

The First TPE and Hull trains units are Angel owned.

 

[Domh245]

Sounds promising, it'll be interesting to see how it works out. Based on what they've said about the way these'll operate the limiting factor will become range - removing an engine (and fuel tank) and replacing it with a battery will effectively reduce the range by a third although I suppose if it was going to be an issue they wouldn't be proceeding with it. It'll also be interesting to see what the net effect of the batteries on CO2 across the journey is - weight wise I expect they'll be heavier, and I wonder if the other engines will be worked harder - where the train might normally coast with the engines idle the battery may still require charging (less an allowance for regenerative braking) and result in engines working harder between stops.

If it works though, there's definitely an argument to be made for swapping out the engines on the 801s at LNER with these - those engines are there for last mile limping, something that one of these batteries should be capable of handling.

 

[rebmcr]

One of the few correct uses of the phrase 'tri-mode' I've seen.

We usually see it incorrectly attached to dual-voltage bi-modes like the Class 769 — even by the lessor!

 

[Energy]

Interesting, removing one of the engines doesn't seem to be a great idea when there are only 3 of them...

 

[swt_passenger]

One of the few correct uses of the phrase 'tri-mode' I've seen.

We usually see it incorrectly attached to dual-voltage bi-modes like the Class 769 — even by the lessor!

I don’t really agree, if the battery is only working in conjunction with the remaining Diesel engines it’s not a third independent power source.

 

[Nick Ashwell]

I don’t really agree, if the battery is only working in conjunction with the remaining Diesel engines it’s not a third independent power source.

It'll charge off the wires and underbreaking. It will supply power to the bus as the diesels do. It's more than definitely a separate source that is just supplied from the other two.

 

[rebmcr]

I don’t really agree, if the battery is only working in conjunction with the remaining Diesel engines it’s not a third independent power source.

Sure, but this is just the pilot trial.

 

[hwl]

Sure, but this is just the pilot trial.

The battery alone will power the unit into, in and out of stations with no diesel in non electrified area. Hence it is an independent power source but batteries also used with diesel as well.

 

[patstonuk]

Precisely.

 

[JamesRowden]

The battery alone will power the unit into, in and out of stations with no diesel in non electrified area. Hence it is an independent power source but batteries also used with diesel as well.

The battery is a power storage rather than a power source. All the energy in the battery will have ultimately come via the diesel or the pantagraph. The system will have three types of energy storage:

• Battery
• Kinetic Energy
• Gravitational Potential Energy

The number of modes could be argued to be nine since it will be able to:

• Run on diesel only
• Run on diesel while recharging the batteries
• Run on diesel while discharging the batteries
• Run off electrification only
• Run off electrification while recharging the batteries
• Run off electrification while discharging the batteries (where electrification has limited power)
• Coast
• Discharge batteries only
• Charge batteries only

 

[Domh245]

The battery is a power storage rather than a power source. All the energy in the battery will have ultimately come via the diesel or the pantagraph. The system will have three types of energy storage:

• Battery
• Kinetic Energy
• Gravitational Potential Energy

The number of modes could be argued to be nine since it will be able to:

• Run on diesel only
• Run on diesel while recharging the batteries
• Run on diesel while discharging the batteries
• Run off electrification only
• Run off electrification while recharging the batteries
• Run off electrification while discharging the batteries (where electrification has limited power)
• Coast
• Discharge batteries only
• Charge batteries only

By your logic, any EMU suddenly becomes at least bimodal (running off electric and coasting) which is clearly utter nonsense, similarly "charge only" and "discharge only" aren't independent modes unless you're also going to break running on electrification into drawing power and returning power as well.

I think these definitely qualify as 'tri-modes' as there's 3 ways of uniquely providing power to the traction equipment - external (OLE), diesel engines, and battery - where the battery gets it's energy from is irrelevant so long as it can be used to power the train by itself. My main gripe with the other "tri-mode" is that they weren't "bi-modal" before having the diesel engines added to turn them into tri-modes. They were (and remain) dual voltage with two different means of receiving external electric power, but with the addition of the second mode in the form of the diesel engine.

I think getting hung up on what is really just a marketing phrase is a bit silly tbh

 

[Roast Veg]

Not all of those options will be exercised, and I doubt drivers will be able to set half of them up. I suspect the battery and the engines will seamlessly blend from a standing start with the pantograph down, and therefore the unit will continue to be a bi-mode: EMU and Toyota Prius.

 

[JamesRowden]

By your logic, any EMU suddenly becomes at least bimodal (running off electric and coasting) which is clearly utter nonsense, similarly "charge only" and "discharge only" aren't independent modes unless you're also going to break running on electrification into drawing power and returning power as well.

I think these definitely qualify as 'tri-modes' as there's 3 ways of uniquely providing power to the traction equipment - external (OLE), diesel engines, and battery - where the battery gets it's energy from is irrelevant so long as it can be used to power the train by itself. My main gripe with the other "tri-mode" is that they weren't "bi-modal" before having the diesel engines added to turn them into tri-modes. They were (and remain) dual voltage with two different means of receiving external electric power, but with the addition of the second mode in the form of the diesel engine.

I think getting hung up on what is really just a marketing phrase is a bit silly tbh

Which is why you should look at the funny side like me.

Although there are definetly at least five modes:

• Diesel Generator on, Pantograph down, bidirectional battery converter off
• Diesel Generator on, Pantograph down, bidirectional battery converter on
• Diesel Generator off, Pantograph up, bidirectional battery converter off
• Diesel Generator off, Pantograph up, bidirectional battery converter on
• Diesel Generator off, Pantograph down, bidirectional battery converter on

 

[MarkyT]

By your logic, any EMU suddenly becomes at least bimodal (running off electric and coasting) which is clearly utter nonsense, similarly "charge only" and "discharge only" aren't independent modes unless you're also going to break running on electrification into drawing power and returning power as well.

I think these definitely qualify as 'tri-modes' as there's 3 ways of uniquely providing power to the traction equipment - external (OLE), diesel engines, and battery - where the battery gets it's energy from is irrelevant so long as it can be used to power the train by itself. My main gripe with the other "tri-mode" is that they weren't "bi-modal" before having the diesel engines added to turn them into tri-modes. They were (and remain) dual voltage with two different means of receiving external electric power, but with the addition of the second mode in the form of the diesel engine.

I think getting hung up on what is really just a marketing phrase is a bit silly tbh

I'd say what they're planning is analogous to the 'plug-in hybrid' concept, where the (roving or stationary) 'plug' is the pantograph, where OHLE is provided. The third potential charging source for the battery is from regenerative braking, whose energy would otherwise be burned off wastefully in resistor arrays.

This project is reinforcing my long-held belief that (where cost-effective) ALL trains with electric traction motors ought to have at least some onboard traction energy storage capability.

Hydrogen-powered trains are really battery units under the hood, with the fuel cell really performing the function of a 'range extender' in automotive terms. The moderately-sized fuel cell can run at a constant high output even at times of low demand when coasting and stationary to keep the battery as close to a full charge as possible, in order that the much higher current demand for short bursts of acceleration can be delivered reliably. Braking energy can also be captured and diverted to the battery to be reused later, although resistor arrays are still required to allow regen braking to be used even when the battery is already full.

 

[Domh245]

I'd say what they're planning is analogous to the 'plug-in hybrid' concept, where the (roving or stationary) 'plug' is the pantograph, where OHLE is provided. The third potential charging source for the battery is from regenerative braking, whose energy would otherwise be burned off in resistor arrays.

Agreed - PHEV definitely seems the most appropriate automotive comparison, the only difference really (at least at a very high level) is that you can't drive the plug in whilst it's still plugged in! Other than that, the way in which the batteries can be charged and used to drive the vehicle alone are similar.

Although there are definetly at least five modes:

You've missed out Pantograph up and engines on (preheating) + the two battery converter variations

It all depends on how you define a mode and by my having the battery 'live' in addition to either the engine or OLE isn't a unique mode of operation because that's not (solely) powering the train. There's 3 power sources, the combinations in which they operate isn't the defining feature

 

[hwl]

Braking energy can also be captured and diverted to the battery to be reused later, although resistor arrays are still required to allow regen braking to be used even when the battery is already full.

That is actually a big part of the overall picture when operating @ less than 100mph and having a moderate number of stops.

This is obviously the simplest possible trial possible and will make the (5 car) unit unusable on some services.

Hence the following trial routes make sense (lower off wire speed):
Didcot - Oxford and beyond
Cardiff - Swansea
Bristol Parkway - Temple Meads
Swindon - Stroud and beyond
possibly Chippenham - Temple Meads

A next step would be to fit battery to 4th and 6th (trailer) cars on a 9car as that wouldn't impact of wires performance much if at all. (More weight but more power to accelerate quickly).

Even the 802s and uprated 800s don't use the max engine power, there is potentially more rpm and power available but this would increase maintenance costs per engine but then there might be fewer engines on the 5 car.... so the total engine maintenance cost should reduce.

A big part of this will be software development and testing how well modelling and reality align before doing any more.

 

[sprinterguy]

Nice to see some work going Sunderland's way, given the Brexit-related uncertainty around the Nissan plant at present.

 

[rebmcr]

All the energy in the battery will have ultimately come via the diesel or the pantagraph.

All the energy in the diesel and pantograph will have ultimately come from the Sun or some Uranium, so if we are to be unwisely reductionist, every vehicle in existence is Nuclear.

 

[JamesRowden]

All the energy in the diesel and pantograph will have ultimately come from the Sun or some Uranium, so if we are to be unwisely reductionist, every vehicle in existence is either Solar, or Solar/Nuclear hybrid.

We're limiting our analysis to the train itself since we are analysing the train rather than the universe

Agreed - PHEV definitely seems the most appropriate automotive comparison, the only difference really (at least at a very high level) is that you can't drive the plug in whilst it's still plugged in! Other than that, the way in which the batteries can be charged and used to drive the vehicle alone are similar.



You've missed out Pantograph up and engines on (preheating) + the two battery converter variations

It all depends on how you define a mode and by my having the battery 'live' in addition to either the engine or OLE isn't a unique mode of operation because that's not (solely) powering the train. There's 3 power sources, the combinations in which they operate isn't the defining feature

The pantograph, diesel generator and battery power converter all have two dicrete modes of operation each, on and off. The train modes are combinations of these modes.

The battery can act as both a source and load to its power converter on the short term. But, when looking at the overall train system and its use during its life, the purpose of the battery is to store energy. You won't get more energy out than you put in. Unlike energy entering the train system via the pantograph and the fuel pump.

 

[Bald Rick]

This project is reinforcing my long-held belief that (where cost-effective) ALL trains with electric traction motors ought to have at least some onboard traction energy storage capability.

Agree entirely. Leaving aside ‘off juice’ operation, it would really help with performance, particularly in third rail areas. Ice on the con rail would cease to be a problem, for example.

Re this proposal, does anyone know the capacity of the battery pack proposed, and its maximum rated power when discharging? A standard MTU power pack (engine, cooling system, alternator, exhaust, fuel tank) is about 8 tonnes IIRC. 8 tonnes of battery pack is at least 1MWh.

 

[gallafent]

and Toyota Prius.

(although the Prius is a (very interesting) series-parallel hybrid (drive from petrol engine to wheels can be mechanical, electrical (also buffered by the traction battery), or a combination) where as an IET (etc.) is a DEMU, which is simpler, being a series hybrid — more of a Vauxhall Ampera maybe?

 

[7 Ingleborough]

Heard somebody loudly berating this project today. They are out there in force rubbishing the plans for electrifying road transport. There is a proliferation of articles, papers and pamphlets appearing across all forms of media, and some it is being picked up by mainstream papers. Always pays to look at who is behind such articles. Had a very lively online discussion with one such 'author' who claimed electric cars cause far more particulate pollution because their tyres shed PM2.5 particles at a rate that is worse than diesel exhausts. (the claim was 1000 times worse). it was published by a very respectable sounding organisation, by a chap with a host of letters after his name. Who financed his research? Well it takes a bit of hunting, but one of the sponsors serves on the board of Saudi-Aramco, the World's largest oil company.

 

[reddragon]

The oil industry know they are loosing so are spending heavily of distorted reports from seemingly trustworthy organisations!

You should see how much lies & twisting it takes to make diesels look better than electric cars!

Put simply, the battery recovers energy from braking / idling engines / OLE and uses it to power the train away at either 100% or to relieve the stresses & more polluting loads on the diesel engines. How that is balanced, is down to software settings

 

[rebmcr]

The oil industry know they are loosing so are spending heavily of distorted reports from seemingly trustworthy organisations!

You should see how much lies & twisting it takes to make diesels look better than electric cars!

Put simply, the battery recovers energy from braking / idling engines / OLE and uses it to power the train away at either 100% or to relieve the stresses & more polluting loads on the diesel engines. How that is balanced, is down to software settings

Not to mention regenerative braking further reduces brake pad particulates!

 

[reddragon]

Not to mention regenerative braking further reduces brake pad particulates!

Yeah, brake pads on EVs can last well over 100,000 miles due to regen!

 

[Taunton]

If it works though, there's definitely an argument to be made for swapping out the engines on the 801s at LNER with these - those engines are there for last mile limping, something that one of these batteries should be capable of handling.

Unfortunately OHLE failures tend to last longer than a mile. Any issue between Peterborough and Doncaster and its round by Lincoln you go. Regarding how well batteries last compared to specification, ask those in the Kentish Town stranding.

 

[Domh245]

Unfortunately OHLE failures tend to last longer than a mile. Any issue between Peterborough and Doncaster and its round by Lincoln you go. Regarding how well batteries last compared to specification, ask those in the Kentish Town stranding.

'last mile limping' is a figure of speech...

Are the 801s actually sent via Lincoln during dewirements? In the most recent dewirement apart from a few trains (only proven train sent that way was a 'full-fat' 800 anyway), they weren't, and once the offending wires had been cleared out of the way they just coasted through the area - batteries would allow them to transit the area under power. Based on @Bald Rick's estimation of >1MWh of battery of battery going into the train, the battery would be capable of delivering full traction power for 20 minutes - they should quite easily achieve longer than that. As a more useful comparison, a 1MWh battery would provide the same power as the current back up engine running for 105 minutes which would admittedly fall short of the required 3 hours required by the IEP TTS for a complete stranding (but within the 1h if the train is also going to move under it's own power) but it calls for "at least Basic Services" - which I would think to be achievable with some load shedding

I'm not entirely sold on the relevance of Kentish Town. The batteries there were specified to last up to 90 minutes running the radios, emergency lights, CCTV and PA system and managed about half of the required time after the actual stranding, have been running for some time previously. I'm pretty sure that the batteries on an electrostar will be not much different to what you might find in an ICE car. Needless to say that battery technology has come a fair way since then, and a battery pack designed to power the whole train should quite easily be able to provide basic services for a short period of time

 

[Bald Rick]

Unfortunately OHLE failures tend to last longer than a mile. Any issue between Peterborough and Doncaster and its round by Lincoln you go.

Not so on both counts. There are many, many failure modes where the OLE isn’t even isolated, but the line is blocked to electric traction, or coasting is deployed. I have lost count of how many times coasting has been put in between Doncaster and Peterborough. Of course, it’s not a headline grabber as it doesn’t often cause major delays.

In these circumstances, the ‘last mile’ facility - which in reality is rather more than a mile - is rather useful, and turns medium level delays into negligible delays.

For major dewrirements clearly the line is shut to all traction and a diversion via Lincoln is necessary. Even then, I’m not sure it’s out of the realms of possibility for the one engine on the 801s - they still chuck out over 900hp, so whilst acceleration will be sluggish, once they get up to the 60 or 75 ruling linespeed they will sit there quite happily. There’s not many hills to worry about!

Edit - seen @Domh245’s post. I think a Peterborough to Doncaster diversion would be at the very limit of a fully charged 1MWh battery, but it would certainly be doable with 1.5-2MWh. A Newark to Doncaster via Lincoln would definitely be in range of a 1MWh battery. Do LNER ever do this diversion? I know their predecessors did Grantham -Doncaster via Sleaford and Lincoln.

 

[Richard Scott]

The oil industry know they are loosing so are spending heavily of distorted reports from seemingly trustworthy organisations!

You should see how much lies & twisting it takes to make diesels look better than electric cars!

In the cold light of day just taking Carbon Dioxide emissions into account it actually isn't that hard. A lot of Carbon dioxide emitted in the manufacture and recycling of batteries not to mention the devastation caused by mining lithium. These so called green alternatives certainly aren't as green as some people would have you believe so twisted arguments on both sides, I'm afraid.

 

[Bald Rick]

In the cold light of day just taking Carbon Dioxide emissions into account it actually isn't that hard. A lot of Carbon dioxide emitted in the manufacture and recycling of batteries not to mention the devastation caused by mining lithium. These so called green alternatives certainly aren't as green as some people would have you believe so twisted arguments on both sides, I'm afraid.

What is often carefully not mentioned in these arguments is the CO2 emitted in the manufacture of petroleum products, not to mention the devastation caused by ‘mining’ crude oil, then subsequently refining and transporting it.