• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both 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!

Class 230 traction question

Status
Not open for further replies.

thenorthern

Established Member
Joined
27 May 2013
Messages
4,714
Looking at the specifications for the Class 230 I notice that its keeping the LT118 Brush Traction motors from the D Stock. Is this correct?

If it is correct it just surprised me as those are DC motors and it just surprised me that they would retain a DC motor for mainline use as most trains today of course use three phase AC motors.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Townsend Hook

Member
Joined
3 Aug 2011
Messages
932
Location
GB
Looking at the specifications for the Class 230 I notice that its keeping the LT118 Brush Traction motors from the D Stock. Is this correct?

If it is correct it just surprised me as those are DC motors and it just surprised me that they would retain a DC motor for mainline use as most trains today of course use three phase AC motors.

Motors are being retained, albeit coupled to new control gear. Still plenty of things running around with DC motors.
 

Domh245

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2013
Messages
8,426
Location
nowhere
The main reason behind retaining the DC motors was cost. It meant that they could just put the bogie straight back under the train with a minimal amount of work done to it.
 

Nym

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2007
Messages
9,807
Location
Somewhere, not in London
There's also nothing wrong with them, and there is going to be the skills base retained to maintain and heavy overhaul them for the life of the Piccadilly Line 1973TS, so likely some decent life left in them yet.
 

thenorthern

Established Member
Joined
27 May 2013
Messages
4,714
Fair enough, using the 3.2 Ford Duratorq engine from the Transit seems a good idea as its generally been quite a good engine and the Ford Transit has been a very very successful in its market.

Regarding the stop-start is it going to operate like a car does with stop start? Only wondering as my car has stop start fitted and its essentially like any one else when moving off from traffic lights of push clutch down, into first gear check mirror take handbrake off and then move off.

With most diesel trains however its not like that as it takes around 1-2 min for the engine to be ready to move off when starting it but I take it that its going to be different with the Class 230.
 

Townsend Hook

Member
Joined
3 Aug 2011
Messages
932
Location
GB
Should be fairly quick for the train to be ready to move off, mainly because the engine will already be warm and there should be enough air to release the brakes.
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
33,792
Location
Scotland
I wonder if they missed a trick by not fitting a smallish battery pack to provide extra oomph when moving off and allow the stop-start to be a bit more judicious in when to start. Just a random thought.
 

D365

Veteran Member
Joined
29 Jun 2012
Messages
13,210
I wonder if they missed a trick by not fitting a smallish battery pack to provide extra oomph when moving off and allow the stop-start to be a bit more judicious in when to start. Just a random thought.

Probably not enough space below the solebar, and would make it more expensive.
 

thenorthern

Established Member
Joined
27 May 2013
Messages
4,714
With the battery they will need quite a big one as if my car when the engine is turned off the current in the battery needs to be enough to power the starter motor, air conditioning, dashboard lights, headlights, radio, engine management and other auxiliary power.

On a train however its the same just much more of it plus interior lighting.
 

Nym

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2007
Messages
9,807
Location
Somewhere, not in London
I wonder if they missed a trick by not fitting a smallish battery pack to provide extra oomph when moving off and allow the stop-start to be a bit more judicious in when to start. Just a random thought.

You really, really, don't need it. I don't get this obsession with hybrid drives...
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
33,792
Location
Scotland
You really, really, don't need it. I don't get this obsession with hybrid drives...
Performance. Some of the fastest and cleanest road vehicles are hybrids.

In the case of the 320s, they already have IC engines driving electric motors - the only components missing are the batteries and charge controller.

Wouldn't even need to be batteries, thinking about it, super-capacitors would do the trick.
 
Last edited:

D365

Veteran Member
Joined
29 Jun 2012
Messages
13,210
Like I said before; where are you going to find the space under the solebar?
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
33,792
Location
Scotland
Like I said before; where are you going to find the space under the solebar?
Oh, sorry. I meant to say thanks for your answer - that may very well kill the idea. I was explaining the 'obsession' with hybrid drive.
 

Nym

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2007
Messages
9,807
Location
Somewhere, not in London
Performance. Some of the fastest and cleanest road vehicles are hybrids.

In the case of the 320s, they already have IC engines driving electric motors - the only components missing are the batteries and charge controller.

Wouldn't even need to be batteries, thinking about it, super-capacitors would do the trick.

OK, lets look at this sensibly...

1 - Mass;

Hybrid drive systems will typically add around 20% - 50% additional mass to the vehicle, although they usually do offset the additional starting mass with the power that is provided, so if one has a rail vehicle, that spends a significant amount of it's time at constant speed rather than starting and stopping, that is most of the mainline, even on services that are very much 'stopping' in nature.

So for example, on the Class 230, assume we have infinite space beneath the solebar, and that we will need to be using some form of electrical regenerative braking recovery system. Lets also assume we're going to be exceedingly clever with how we can regenerate this power, making use of series/parallel techniques and field injection.

Braking at a constant rate down from 60mph, or 27m/s. We have a, lets say, 50,000kg mass to bring to a stop. Next, lets consider that rehostatic braking on the LT118 motors is only effective down to the point at which a D78 Surface stock cuts out this function and moves to pneumatic only braking, that being 22mph, or 9.83m/s.

The total potential energy recovery for this is a relatively simple calculation and yeilds an ideal number of 15.8MJ.

Now one should consider that the efficiency of using this system is around 80% - 85% on a good day, if you're using field variance to get the ideal charging current, with minor boost conversion at the low end. If this isn't possible because the driver is needing to moderate braking, then you're looking more like 60% efficiency because of the boost converter needed at the low end and the various other losses associated with changing current through the armature. Lets assume balanced driving and around 75% efficiency.

Now, we need to be able to store 12MJ. This equates to around 3.3MWh.

Next up, lets consider the volume required. Assuming one is using EDLCs, probably the ideal for this use, optimistically 8Wh/l. So now we need to find around 420ltr of space under the train. Doesn't sound too hard.

Next up, mass... That's around 550kg.

2 - Environment;

Most hybrid drives will use Lithium Ion or Lithium Polymer batteries, these are exceedingly difficult to recycle and have a very limited lifespan, unlike their older, lead acid cousins, where one can remove and recycle the lead, or repair the battery and continue using it.

3 - Complexity;

Take what is a very simple, and familiar diesel-electric drive, that you can pretty much buy off the shelf, it's likely this will use some form of either SCR (Silicon Controlled Rectifier) or Uncontrolled Rectifier and Chopper circuit, both available off the shelf and using a rather limited amount of this precious semiconductor that everyone is under delusion that we have an unlimited supply of. To put regenerative systems on this, you will at least double if not quadruple the number of these switching devices.

Not to mention the increased maintenance cost associated with this complexity, and the additional, significant hazards presented to the maintainers when servicing these energy storage devices. A number of significant injuries have occurred with maintainers servicing input filters without sufficient bleed off time being allowed, imagine how bad this could be with a true charged device? The additional training, time and complexity of maintenance will far outweigh any savings.

4 - Lifespan;

As has been demonstrated by 1992TS, the lifespan of a DC motor that is continuously driven in either motoring or braking is significantly shortened, and the service intervals shortened. These motors where not designed for intensive regenerative braking, with anything other than a basic field injection system.

Not to mention the additional performance one wants to see when setting off will further stress these components.

And it's getting late in the evening, so I'll stop for now.
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
33,792
Location
Scotland
OK, lets look at this sensibly...
Thanks for the post. Most of it I agree with, but as I said in my post edit, it makes more sense to use ultra/super capacitors which reduces the cost, material requirements, mass (I think) and risk to maintenance staff.
 

Nym

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2007
Messages
9,807
Location
Somewhere, not in London
Thanks for the post. Most of it I agree with, but as I said in my post edit, it makes more sense to use ultra/super capacitors which reduces the cost, material requirements, mass (I think) and risk to maintenance staff.

EDLCs and other capacitors are always a hazard to maintainers, they can self charge in the presence of an electric field to a lethal level, especially when integrated with semiconductors, and in terms of mass per kWh, they're if anything worse performing than batteries.
 
Last edited:

thenorthern

Established Member
Joined
27 May 2013
Messages
4,714
How much is the energy consumption of a auxiliary electrical power on a train?

Only asking as with start stop it would need quite a large capacity battery for it to work properly.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
28,785
Location
Nottingham
Will all the engines start-stop or is it something like the system on the 185s where at least one of them is running all the time to power the auxiliaries?
 

rebmcr

Established Member
Joined
15 Nov 2011
Messages
4,005
Location
St Neots
Obviously any sort of battery system for traction will be too expensive for what the 230 is trying to achieve.

However, I would like to point out that a hybrid drive does not have to include any sort of energy recovery, it can be as simple as just providing some extra amps for acceleration, and trickle charging back up when the engine is at low rpm or idle.
 

Nym

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2007
Messages
9,807
Location
Somewhere, not in London
Obviously any sort of battery system for traction will be too expensive for what the 230 is trying to achieve.

However, I would like to point out that a hybrid drive does not have to include any sort of energy recovery, it can be as simple as just providing some extra amps for acceleration, and trickle charging back up when the engine is at low rpm or idle.

And when you're auxiliaries run at either, 24, 48/52 or 110V DC and you have 330V DC motors?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top