Norfolk Southern and BNSF Railway to Test New Train Brake Technology

Trains Magazine General Discussion
1

Norfolk Southern and BNSF Railway to Test New Train Brake Technology

NORFOLK, VA AND FORT WORTH, TEXAS, March 29, 2007 - Norfolk Southern Railway (NS) and BNSF Railway Company (BNSF) will begin testing a new braking system that may reduce the amount of time it takes to stop a train.

The project, authorized by the Federal Railroad Administration, calls for NS and BNSF to equip and test certain locomotives and freight cars with electronically controlled pneumatic (ECP) brakes.

ECP brakes have the potential to reduce train stopping distances by as much as 50 to 70 percent over conventional air brake systems. ECP brakes utilize electronic signals to simultaneously apply and release throughout the length of a freight train. This differs from conventional brake systems in which each car brakes individually as air pressure moves in a series from car to car.

Testing ECP will allow the railroads to review its potential for improved braking and shorter stopping distances that may improve railroad and public safety, network capacity and efficiency, asset utilization, fuel savings and equipment maintenance.

NS and BNSF plan to conduct separate ECP brake tests. NS plans to equip 30 locomotives and 400 rapid-discharge coal cars with ECP brakes during 2007 and use the equipment in dedicated coal train service.
BNSF plans to test this technology within its intermodal fleet, focusing on international business to/from the San Pedro Bay ports. In addition, BNSF is pursing a partnership with a major coal customer to integrate this technology into one of the longest distance coal routes in the country.

“ECP brakes represent a major breakthrough in rail technology,” said Gerhard Thelen, Norfolk Southern’s vice president operations planning and support. "Our tests will help determine how the technology performs in a real-world environment and will indicate wh

2

[quote user=“dsktc”]

Norfolk Southern and BNSF Railway to Test New Train Brake Technology

NORFOLK, VA AND FORT WORTH, TEXAS, March 29, 2007 - Norfolk Southern Railway (NS) and BNSF Railway Company (BNSF) will begin testing a new braking system that may reduce the amount of time it takes to stop a train.

The project, authorized by the Federal Railroad Administration, calls for NS and BNSF to equip and test certain locomotives and freight cars with electronically controlled pneumatic (ECP) brakes.

ECP brakes have the potential to reduce train stopping distances by as much as 50 to 70 percent over conventional air brake systems. ECP brakes utilize electronic signals to simultaneously apply and release throughout the length of a freight train. This differs from conventional brake systems in which each car brakes individually as air pressure moves in a series from car to car.

Testing ECP will allow the railroads to review its potential for improved braking and shorter stopping distances that may improve railroad and public safety, network capacity and efficiency, asset utilization, fuel savings and equipment maintenance.

NS and BNSF plan to conduct separate ECP brake tests. NS plans to equip 30 locomotives and 400 rapid-discharge coal cars with ECP brakes during 2007 and use the equipment in dedicated coal train service.
BNSF plans to test this technology within its intermodal fleet, focusing on international business to/from the San Pedro Bay ports. In addition, BNSF is pursing a partnership with a major coal customer to integrate this technology into one of the longest distance coal routes in the country.

“ECP brakes represent a major breakthrough in rail technology,” said Gerhard Thelen, Norfolk Southern’s vice president operations planning and support. "Our tests will help determine how the technology performs in a real-world environment

3

I understand the fundamental difference between this system and conventional air brakes, but I would like to hear more about the practical advantages. Reducing the stopping distance of road vehicles always seems like a worthwhile goal, but trains have such a long stopping distance, I wonder how much benefit there is in cutting it in half. Certainly it would pay off in some emergency situations, but if the goal is complete national changeover, while maintaining interchageability, it seems like an enormous undertaking. What happens to the track when you stop a train in half the distance of conventional practice???

4

This sounds pretty much like a pilot project conducted by NS and BNSF at the behest of the FRA. The system is being tested in two different types of service, probably to get a wide variety of operating data. Any bugs in the system will be found in these tests and it will also provide information as to how much additional training will be needed for train crews.

5

I seem to remember reading almost 10 years ago(in Trains IIRC) that BNSF (and/or UP) had a number of trainsets using electronic braking in revenue service? I’m sure that some were coal gons but I think there may also have been well cars (doublestacks). Was that only an experiment?

6

IMHO this poses a question: are there non-ECP pneumatic brakes for a backup system or not? If the ECP system (control only) fails would that be analogous to losing all air pressure or would something else kick in brakes? Wouldn’t shorter stopping distances mean that engineers could keep more positive control of their trains and be able to run on tighter schedules?

7

The key advantage to the system comes with train handling. With the standard system, an engineer can increase the brakeing in stages, but it is not possible to release the brakes in stages. Further, while brakes are applied, the system cannot recharge, thus it is possible to “run out of air”.

The bottom line for ECP is much better control of train speeds, but I believe that it is expected that brakeshoe wear can also be reduced. As far as the faster stops? Don’t expect a big reduction in grade crossing incidents.

8

Most of the benefit in shorter stopping distances comes from quicker application of braking and the net benefit is greater at lower speeds. Theoretically, it could speed up operations at restricting speed. In order to stop even shorter, you’d have to employ some sort of empty/load sensing and/or wheel slide/adhesion control system. These are a lot easier to accomdate once you have some “smarts” on the car.

I’d guess that braking forces on the track aren’t going to be a big deal even if you did stop a 10,000 ton train at 1/4 G. I’d think that the track structure is a lot stronger longitudinally than it is vertically thermal forces longitudinally would swamp braking forces.

9

BNSF has been using ECP braking in service on a trainset of Taconite Pellet hoppers. The trainset cycles between the dock in Superior, WI and the pellet plant Hibbing Taconite near Hibbing, MN. Problems have been occuring more frequently as the equipment ages. Another problem is the need to lock in a technology. In other words you will need forward and backward compatability for general service cars. It is easy to implement ECP Braking technology in dedicated trainsets, but how are they going to do it when say the first car in the train is brand new and the second car is 45 years old? Will the ECP components talk to each other? Is the FRA going to order retrofitting of older cars, or will it be 50 years before all cars are equipped?

10

your statement makes no sense, I will agree that the brakes can be applied in stages and can be applied with both types and true you can not release in stages so you haft to release all at once. Now where do you get this run out of air stuff at? Once i draw 10 pouinds of air off the brake pipe thats it thats all that comes off then when i release the brakes the system airs back up. pretty simple. with this new system all it does is give the cars control valve a signal to reduce quicker locally than the old system that did this at 900 feet per second. I only see longer delays at initial terminal on brake test. as far as reduce wear on brakes and stuff not going to happen nothing will change. and as far as grade crossing incidents i totally agree, no changes there either.

11

Very good news.

12

This seems like a good program on the surface, but many utility companies don’t use over the air control mechanisms due to terrorist activites and sabotage, had this been a worry/concern for the railroads? I shutter to think what might happen if somebody flipped the stop switch.

13

From an article in Railway Age December, 1966.

"Burlington Northern Santa Fe has been the leader of the industry in the operation of ECP trains. It is operating three doublestacks, two unit coal trains, one unit grain train, and a 165-car taconite train. BNSF has also equipped 200 locomotives with ECP brake equipment. The taconite train, which is being used as a test bed for prototype connector designs, operates between Superior, Wisc., and E. St. Louis. The results of stop distance tests with this train and one of the unit coal trains are as follows:

–A taconite train (20,000 tons, 6,000 feet, 165 cars, 38 mph) stopped in 4,800 feet with conventional braking, 1,800 feet with ECP braking.

–A unit coal train (15,428 tons, 6,181 ft, 113 cars, 50 mph) stopped in 5,429 feet with conventional braking, 3,524 feet with ECP braking.

Two of the doublestack trains have been operating between Chicago and Los Angeles since last December. These trains are made up of 70 three-unit drawbar-connected Gunderson cars constructed late in 1995. To date, with over 150,000 miles of service, only three car control devices (CCDs) have failed. All of these failures were vibration related, and TSM has changed the design to eliminate the problem. The ECP cars have been compared with a like number of conventionally braked cars from the same production run. The results from the BNSF test and preliminary results from the Conrail test are shown as follows:

BNSF after 150,000 miles of service:   

                                              Conventional /ECP

Wheels replaced for slid
  flats (hand braked axles)                     7         0
Wheels replaced for slid
  flats (non-hand braked)                       1&nb
14

By “running out of air”, I was refering to situations where more braking is needed but the reservoir pressure equals the cylinder pressure.

I believe the ECP system allows the reservoir to be recharged while the brakes are applied.

See previous posts for maintenance issues.

I recall a Trains article on the previous tests. Completing a run in LA, the hogger asked who made the equipment because he wanted to buy some stock in the company.

15

Right, with the ECP system the trainline and reservoirs can be rech

16

Several shippers I work with have looked at ECP brakes for new shipper-owned unit trainsets. Everyone can see technical benefits of ECP but the economic benefits mostly accrue to the carrier and not the shipper, and no one can figure out to quantify the benefits to the carrier and reflect this in a rate reduction to the shipper in order to pay for the equipment, especially because the benefits are highly variable and the industry is moving away from contract rates to tariff rates.

In closed systems ECP has a clear economic case, such as the Spoornet Sishen-Saldanha Bay iron ore circuit where the Wabtec ECP system has generated a significant increase in gross ton-miles.

S. Hadid

17

Guess we’ll have to wait and see how the technology developes. It is certainly not ready for general application. I’m in no hurry , all I need is another high tech piece of junk that doesn’t work .

18

No not so. It works just fine. Seriously. It just doesn’t yet seem to have made a good economic case in the U.S. in open-interchange service.

S. Hadid

19

For those who want to pursue the details:

http://www.fra.dot.gov/downloads/safety/ecp_report_20060811.pdf

The report does define the problem with the economics of equiping private car fleets and getting the loose car fleet equiped.