Diesel Improvements

Status
Not open for further replies.

WatcherZero

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2010
Messages
9,476
Study highlights potential diesel savings

22 March 2012






UK: A study commissioned from Ricardo and TRL by the Department for Transport has proposed a variety of upgrades to improve the fuel efficiency of diesel multiple-units and EMD Class 66 locomotives.

While containing little that is new in technology terms, the report strengthens the business case for including efficiency upgrades within potential life-extension programmes for the 1 590 ex-British Rail DMU vehicles still in use.

The report lists 'technology packages' which could give individual fuel savings of between £5m and £15m a year. These range from modern turbocharger designs to the replacement of hydrodynamic transmissions with multi-speed gearboxes, already being trialled by South West Trains.

The report also proposes a technology package for the 450 EMD Class 66 freight locomotives operating in the UK. At an estimated cost of £100 000 per locomotive, Ricardo claims this could save £53m a year in fuel.

Central to the saving is a reduction in idling which is responsible for up to 41% of fuel burned in the freight duty cycle. Ricardo's proposal is based on a stop/start system using lead-acid batteries. Stop/start is a feature of modern road vehicles, with engines stopping when the car is at rest, and restarting automatically when the accelerator is depressed. Freight locomotives can spend long periods stationary, making stop/start particularly effective. vA small 30 kW generator would be fitted to provide power for cab heating and air-conditioning when the engine was shut down.

While Ricardo found 'limited' scope for improving the EMD 710 power plant, the recommended Class 66 technology package would also include an upgraded compressor stage in the turbocharger, an upgraded charge air cooler and cooling system, plus remapping the controller positions to the most efficient engine operating points.

Ricardo puts the development cost for the Class 66 upgrade at £3m. It could be implemented in two years, and at current fuel prices would pay for itself in 10 months.
Ricardo is to collaborate with LH Group on a research and development programme to identify efficiency improvements for DMU engines. Initial work will focus on the Cummins NT855 which powers the majority of ex-British Rail DMUs.
http://www.railwaygazette.com/nc/ne...tudy-highlights-potential-diesel-savings.html
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

142094

Established Member
Joined
7 Nov 2009
Messages
8,789
Location
Newcastle
Railway Gazette said:
potential life-extension programmes for the 1 590 ex-British Rail DMU vehicles still in use.

So instead of new stock, just make do and mend the old stuff? Anyone know which classes make up the 1590 figure?
 

Schnellzug

Established Member
Joined
22 Aug 2011
Messages
2,926
Location
Evercreech Junction
So instead of new stock, just make do and mend the old stuff? Anyone know which classes make up the 1590 figure?

At a guess, 142, 143, 144, 150, 153, 155, 156, 158. 159, 165, 166 ... Replacing all those in one go would be, um, a little costly, I expect ...
 

aformeruser

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
30,637
Class 121: 3 vehicles
Class 142: 188 vehicles
Class 143: 46 vehicles
Class 144: 56 vehicles
Class 150: 282 vehicles
Class 153: 70 vehicles
Class 155: 14 vehicles
Class 156: 228 vehicles
Class 158: 353 vehicles
Class 159: 90 vehicles
Class 165: 210 vehicles
Class 166: 63 vehicles

I make that 1603.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
The full report is available here for those who have the desire to read all 160 pages. http://www.ricardo.com/en-GB/News--...ortunities-to-improve-rail-diesel-efficiency/

An observation I've made is around half of journeys made by diesel powered trains are Pacer or Sprinter operated, the other half being 16xs, 17xs, 18xs and 22xs.
 

WelshZ

Member
Joined
8 Sep 2011
Messages
42
Location
Porth
Looks like I might have an apt signature after all, with the pacers coming in under that figure
 

BR Blue

Member
Joined
6 Jul 2009
Messages
47
You can bet, the last pound in your pocket, the Pacer fleet won`t be getting any kind of upgrades. I`ve scanned this article with my non-expert eyes and it seems to be geared towards finding fuel efficiency savings with the `NT885` engined class 15X fleet.
 

whhistle

On Moderation
Joined
30 Dec 2010
Messages
2,636
Tut.

This is typical of the railways and in many cases Britain itself. The new slogan we should use is:

British Railways - It'll do.
 

WelshZ

Member
Joined
8 Sep 2011
Messages
42
Location
Porth
You can bet, the last pound in your pocket, the Pacer fleet won't be getting any kind of upgrades. I've scanned this article with my non-expert eyes and it seems to be geared towards finding fuel efficiency savings with the 'NT885' engined class 15X fleet.

If the pacer's are withdrawn and places like the valley lines do not get electrified somehow then there would not be a sufficent number of 150's to cover a commuter role.....and the 158's ARE NOT suitible to fill because of their restricted RA in some areas and the poor acceleration for commuter service. And there is nothing to stop the transport secretary then to provide a exemption to the equality act for the pacers.
.
 

Failed Unit

Established Member
Joined
26 Jan 2009
Messages
7,516
Location
Central Belt
Class 121: 3 vehicles
Class 142: 188 vehicles
Class 143: 46 vehicles
Class 144: 56 vehicles
Class 150: 282 vehicles
Class 153: 70 vehicles
Class 155: 14 vehicles
Class 156: 228 vehicles
Class 158: 353 vehicles
Class 159: 90 vehicles
Class 165: 210 vehicles
Class 166: 63 vehicles

I make that 1603.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


An observation I've made is around half of journeys made by diesel powered trains are Pacer or Sprinter operated, the other half being 16xs, 17xs, 18xs and 22xs.

For interest how do you get your 150 total?

6 - 150/0
100 - 150/1
168 - 150/2

274 so one of us is wrong. Don't think the 121s will get any more work.
 

anthony263

Established Member
Joined
19 Aug 2008
Messages
5,694
Location
South Wales
If the pacer's are withdrawn and places like the valley lines do not get electrified somehow then there would not be a sufficent number of 150's to cover a commuter role.....and the 158's ARE NOT suitible to fill because of their restricted RA in some areas and the poor acceleration for commuter service. And there is nothing to stop the transport secretary then to provide a exemption to the equality act for the pacers.
.



I would guess that it is likely that the valley lines will be getting wired as something will have to replace the pacers unless they will order a fleet of class 172's.

Even then the class 150's will need some refurbishment to make them DDA compliant as well.

How about the WG pay for a return to loco haulage on the Rhymney valley line on a temporary basis to allow some class 150's to go for refurbishment they will have the MK2 rakes from wag1 if they are replace by MK3 carriages
 

Schnellzug

Established Member
Joined
22 Aug 2011
Messages
2,926
Location
Evercreech Junction
Tut.

This is typical of the railways and in many cases Britain itself. The new slogan we should use is:

British Railways - It'll do.

British Railways certainly knew what they were doing on the mechanical side, without a doubt; the Sprinters (and the 70s and 80s generation EMUs) must surely be the most reliable stock (certain Siemens products excepted, perhaps) ever built for UK railways. And certainly nothing built since privatisation has come anywhere near it for ride quality. Why rush for something new when what you've got now still works very well indeed?

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

* Incidentally, i make Class 150

150/0 2 x 3 car = 6 (150001/002)
150/1 48 x 2 car + 2 x 3 car = 102 (150101-150)*
150/2 82 x 2 car = 164 (150201/203-208/210/211/213-285)
-----
272

(*150121/127 3 car with cars 57212/57209)
 
Last edited:

OuterDistant

Member
Joined
25 Oct 2010
Messages
456
Location
South Cheshire
Here's a mad idea: how about they turn the 66s off when they're not in service, as opposed to seemingly leaving them idling for hours on end?
 

aformeruser

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
30,637
the Sprinters (and the 70s and 80s generation EMUs) must surely be the most reliable stock (certain Siemens products excepted, perhaps) ever built for UK railways. And certainly nothing built since privatisation has come anywhere near it for ride quality.

Apart from the 158s, the Sprinters are very noisy trains. However, maybe if the 156s have air conditioning fitted with some of the opening windows removed and have engine improvements, they'll not be too far behind the 158s.
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
12,206
What does saving 41% of the fuel cost of freight rail transportation do to its carbon emissions and other economics compared to road freight?
 

Smudger105e

Member
Joined
5 Jan 2010
Messages
1,012
Location
N 52° 53.492 W 001° 15.493
Last edited:

cj_1985

Member
Joined
6 Mar 2010
Messages
645
As far as i can see it.. with regards to the class 66s... the problem for the FOCs probably isnt to do with the cost of such work.. its probably much more likely to be be to do with the additional weight any additional equitment would add to the locos.... and the effect the additional weight would have on the locos RA... and the effect that in turn could have on track access fees
 

ash39

Established Member
Joined
8 Feb 2012
Messages
1,387
regarding the no idling thing, I can imagine that's fine for a Class 66 type of machine, but would you fancy shutting down an old 37 or similar in the middle of winter knowing you have to fire it back up again in half an hour?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top