"DW downunder" noname wrote

Perhaps a little more depth would help me understand - as I understand
you, with supercapacitors, emerging lithium technologies and our old
faithful lead-acid gel we haven't yet got a package of technologies that
can be tuned to the precise characteristics of suburban/interurban rail

It would be daft to develop Crossrail in the hope that adequate battery
technology would be available by the time the trains have to be ordered.
However, battery trains have been used for suburban rail - Dublin to Bray
between 1932 and 1950. In .uk a battery MU operated between Aberdeen and
Ballater in the early 1960s, while battery locos have been used to haul
engineering trains on LU in the dead of night when the power's een switched
off.

Peter

In message , Peter Masson
writes

It would be daft to develop Crossrail in the hope that adequate battery
technology would be available by the time the trains have to be
ordered. However, battery trains have been used for suburban rail -
Dublin to Bray between 1932 and 1950. In .uk a battery MU operated
between Aberdeen and Ballater in the early 1960s, while battery locos
have been used to haul engineering trains on LU in the dead of night
when the power's een switched off.

Although I agree with the basic premise, battery technology is becoming
increasingly impressive - parts of the new Rome trolleybus system
currently run on battery power for some miles, and Alstom's trams for
Nice also run on batteries in the city centre. These are vehicles
capable of carrying a large number of passengers in heavy traffic,
although probably not on the scale required for the far reaches of
Crossrail.
--
Paul Terry

On Thu, 7 May 2009 19:19:48 +0100
Paul Terry wrote:
It would be daft to develop Crossrail in the hope that adequate battery
technology would be available by the time the trains have to be
ordered. However, battery trains have been used for suburban rail -
Dublin to Bray between 1932 and 1950. In .uk a battery MU operated
between Aberdeen and Ballater in the early 1960s, while battery locos

Probably lines with very light traffic and low top speeds.

have been used to haul engineering trains on LU in the dead of night
when the power's een switched off.

They still are AFAIK.

Although I agree with the basic premise, battery technology is becoming
increasingly impressive - parts of the new Rome trolleybus system
currently run on battery power for some miles, and Alstom's trams for
Nice also run on batteries in the city centre. These are vehicles
capable of carrying a large number of passengers in heavy traffic,
although probably not on the scale required for the far reaches of
Crossrail.

Theres a big difference between accelerating a 20 ton tram to 20mph and
a 200 ton train to 60mph quickly enough so it keeps to the timetable.
Moreover when the batteries are not being used you're hauling around
god knows how many tons of dead weight - hardly enviromentally friendly.
Plus most EMUs these days seem to be pretty lardy anyway. I suspect if
batteries were thrown into the mix axle loads could become a serious issue.

B2003

wrote in message
On Thu, 7 May 2009 19:19:48 +0100
Paul Terry wrote:
It would be daft to develop Crossrail in the hope that adequate
battery technology would be available by the time the trains have
to be ordered. However, battery trains have been used for suburban
rail - Dublin to Bray between 1932 and 1950. In .uk a battery MU
operated between Aberdeen and Ballater in the early 1960s, while
battery locos

Probably lines with very light traffic and low top speeds.

have been used to haul engineering trains on LU in the dead of night
when the power's een switched off.

They still are AFAIK.

Yes, they still are. Occasionally they can be seen during the day as
well, and more often, late in the evening while service trains are still
running. They always top and tail the materials trains, and both locos
are manned, regardless of direction of travel.

On 8 May, 10:07, wrote:
On Thu, 7 May 2009 19:19:48 +0100

Paul Terry wrote:
It would be daft to develop Crossrail in the hope that adequate battery
technology would be available by the time the trains have to be
ordered. However, battery trains have been used for suburban rail -
Dublin to Bray between 1932 and 1950. In .uk a battery MU operated
between Aberdeen and Ballater in the early 1960s, while battery locos

Probably lines with very light traffic and low top speeds.

have been used to haul engineering trains on LU in the dead of night
when the power's een switched off.

They still are AFAIK.

Although I agree with the basic premise, battery technology is becoming
increasingly impressive - parts of the new Rome trolleybus system
currently run on battery power for some miles, and Alstom's trams for
Nice also run on batteries in the city centre. These are vehicles
capable of carrying a large number of passengers in heavy traffic,
although probably not on the scale required for the far reaches of
Crossrail.

Theres a big difference between accelerating a 20 ton tram to 20mph and
a 200 ton train to 60mph quickly enough so it keeps to the timetable.
Moreover when the batteries are not being used you're hauling around
god knows how many tons of dead weight - hardly enviromentally friendly.
Plus most EMUs these days seem to be pretty lardy anyway. I suspect if
batteries were thrown into the mix axle loads could become a serious issue.

hmm - some numbers.

E = 1/2 200,000kg x 30^2 = 100MJ = 30KWhrs.

That's about 200kg of Li-ion battery, for the energy load. But the
power requirement is much tougher - you would need some of these fast
charge batteries, which actually have less energy storage. Without
looking up the W/kg figures, I'd guess a few tons.

Hybrid technology is certainly useful for trains, but you'd probably
want to use ultra caps to capture the braking energy.

"disgoftunwells" wrote in message
...
On 8 May, 10:07, wrote:
On Thu, 7 May 2009 19:19:48 +0100

Paul Terry wrote:
It would be daft to develop Crossrail in the hope that adequate battery
technology would be available by the time the trains have to be
ordered. However, battery trains have been used for suburban rail -
Dublin to Bray between 1932 and 1950. In .uk a battery MU operated
between Aberdeen and Ballater in the early 1960s, while battery locos

Probably lines with very light traffic and low top speeds.

have been used to haul engineering trains on LU in the dead of night
when the power's een switched off.

They still are AFAIK.

Although I agree with the basic premise, battery technology is becoming
increasingly impressive - parts of the new Rome trolleybus system
currently run on battery power for some miles, and Alstom's trams for
Nice also run on batteries in the city centre. These are vehicles
capable of carrying a large number of passengers in heavy traffic,
although probably not on the scale required for the far reaches of
Crossrail.

Theres a big difference between accelerating a 20 ton tram to 20mph and
a 200 ton train to 60mph quickly enough so it keeps to the timetable.
Moreover when the batteries are not being used you're hauling around
god knows how many tons of dead weight - hardly enviromentally friendly.
Plus most EMUs these days seem to be pretty lardy anyway. I suspect if
batteries were thrown into the mix axle loads could become a serious
issue.

hmm - some numbers.

E = 1/2 200,000kg x 30^2 = 100MJ = 30KWhrs.

That's about 200kg of Li-ion battery, for the energy load. But the
power requirement is much tougher - you would need some of these fast
charge batteries, which actually have less energy storage. Without
looking up the W/kg figures, I'd guess a few tons.

Hybrid technology is certainly useful for trains, but you'd probably
want to use ultra caps to capture the braking energy.



You got it, and the super caps can then be used to release the regenerated
charge to the lithium and lead based units at their life-optimising charge
rates, if it's not drawn down promptly (such as would occur at a terminal)
for acceleration. For runs beyond the range of battery-only, I envisage
using a lightweight gas-turbine genset running at its optimum efficiency -
with the batteries buffering the peaks and troughs of current consumption.
But that raises a question about fuel tanks in tunnels which have stations
..... I'm not sure where that is at today, but suspect the bureacracy would
regard it as a major no-no.

David down under

On 11 May, 17:17, "DW downunder" noname wrote:
"disgoftunwells" wrote in message

...



On 8 May, 10:07, wrote:
On Thu, 7 May 2009 19:19:48 +0100

Paul Terry wrote:
It would be daft to develop Crossrail in the hope that adequate battery
technology would be available by the time the trains have to be
ordered. However, battery trains have been used for suburban rail -
Dublin to Bray between 1932 and 1950. In .uk a battery MU operated
between Aberdeen and Ballater in the early 1960s, while battery locos

Probably lines with very light traffic and low top speeds.

have been used to haul engineering trains on LU in the dead of night
when the power's een switched off.

They still are AFAIK.

Although I agree with the basic premise, battery technology is becoming
increasingly impressive - parts of the new Rome trolleybus system
currently run on battery power for some miles, and Alstom's trams for
Nice also run on batteries in the city centre. These are vehicles
capable of carrying a large number of passengers in heavy traffic,
although probably not on the scale required for the far reaches of
Crossrail.

Theres a big difference between accelerating a 20 ton tram to 20mph and
a 200 ton train to 60mph quickly enough so it keeps to the timetable.
Moreover when the batteries are not being used you're hauling around
god knows how many tons of dead weight - hardly enviromentally friendly.
Plus most EMUs these days seem to be pretty lardy anyway. I suspect if
batteries were thrown into the mix axle loads could become a serious
issue.

hmm - some numbers.

E = 1/2 200,000kg x 30^2 = 100MJ = 30KWhrs.

That's about 200kg of Li-ion battery, for the energy load. But the
power requirement is much tougher - you would need some of these fast
charge batteries, which actually have less energy storage. Without
looking up the W/kg figures, I'd guess a few tons.

Hybrid technology is certainly useful for trains, but you'd probably
want to use ultra caps to capture the braking energy.

You got it, and the super caps can then be used to release the regenerated
charge to the lithium and lead based units at their life-optimising charge
rates, if it's not drawn down promptly (such as would occur at a terminal)
for acceleration. For runs beyond the range of battery-only, I envisage
using a lightweight gas-turbine genset running at its optimum efficiency -
with the batteries buffering the peaks and troughs of current consumption.
But that raises a question about fuel tanks in tunnels which have stations
.... I'm not sure where that is at today, but suspect the bureacracy would
regard it as a major no-no.

When Connex introduced the new trains on the South Eastern line to
Hastings, they didn't realise that the new trains, accelerating at
twice the rate of the old ones, needed twice the power. This led to
delays, whilst the grid was strengthened.

I wonder if today's solution would be to use super capacitors to
reduce peak current draw down.

A quick google gives 300W/kg for super capacitors, so 1 ton gives a
peak of 300KW.

How does that compare to a train motor?

I'm not convinced about batteries just yet. When every bus is
electrically driven, then it'll be time to consider trains.

In uk.transport.london message 189d5170-b0b5-4170-a082-fcad1d0f3a3e@s21
g2000vbb.googlegroups.com, Mon, 11 May 2009 13:40:35, disgoftunwells
posted:

A quick google gives 300W/kg for super capacitors, so 1 ton gives a
peak of 300KW.

Wiki supercapacitors gives 30 Wh/kg as the highest in production, and a
link to their use in starting Diesel engines - note, engines not
vehicles.

Wiki Electric locomotive indicates that ordinary engine powers are in
the 5 MW range. Therefore, significantly more than a ton of SCs would
be needed to approach ordinary performance levels And a ton of SCs
would give 0.03 MWh, corresponding to less than half a minute of 5MW.

Ordinary commercial products will be improving, of course; but against
that one must consider that products for use in railway engines need to
be guaranteed for many years of actual use in a moderately unfavourable
environment, or capable of economical replacement.

--
(c) John Stockton, near London.
Web URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/ - FAQish topics, acronyms, & links.
Correct = 4-line sig. separator as above, a line precisely "-- " (SoRFC1036)
Do not Mail News to me. Before a reply, quote with "" or " " (SoRFC1036)

On 9 May, 21:47, disgoftunwells wrote:
On 8 May, 10:07, wrote:

On Thu, 7 May 2009 19:19:48 +0100

Paul Terry wrote:
It would be daft to develop Crossrail in the hope that adequate battery
technology would be available by the time the trains have to be
ordered. However, battery trains have been used for suburban rail -
Dublin to Bray between 1932 and 1950. In .uk a battery MU operated
between Aberdeen and Ballater in the early 1960s, while battery locos

Probably lines with very light traffic and low top speeds.

have been used to haul engineering trains on LU in the dead of night
when the power's een switched off.

They still are AFAIK.

Although I agree with the basic premise, battery technology is becoming
increasingly impressive - parts of the new Rome trolleybus system
currently run on battery power for some miles, and Alstom's trams for
Nice also run on batteries in the city centre. These are vehicles
capable of carrying a large number of passengers in heavy traffic,
although probably not on the scale required for the far reaches of
Crossrail.

Theres a big difference between accelerating a 20 ton tram to 20mph and
a 200 ton train to 60mph quickly enough so it keeps to the timetable.
Moreover when the batteries are not being used you're hauling around
god knows how many tons of dead weight - hardly enviromentally friendly.
Plus most EMUs these days seem to be pretty lardy anyway. I suspect if
batteries were thrown into the mix axle loads could become a serious issue.

hmm - some numbers.

E = 1/2 200,000kg x 30^2 = 100MJ = 30KWhrs.

That's about 200kg of Li-ion battery, for the energy load. But the
power requirement is much tougher - you would need some of these fast
charge batteries, which actually have less energy storage. Without
looking up the W/kg figures, I'd guess a few tons.

Hybrid technology is certainly useful for trains, but you'd probably
want to use ultra caps to capture the braking energy.

and here it is, in the Bombardier magazine (I think a freebie with the
DT - I saw it on the train).

MITRAC Energy Saver - some stuff here
http://www.bombardier.com/en/transpo...01260d80048697

The article says applied to DMUs, it allows energy savings or
performance boosting. For light rail it helps reduce energy
consumption and "enables catenary free operation for short distances."