Production of next-generation Acela Express fleet underway
Stadler unveils TEX Rail Flirt DMU
Siemens invests in remote monitoring specialist Wi-Tronix
DB consortium selected for California high speed rail
Judge puts the skids on state’s proposed rail trail
Amtrak's CEO shares his vision for rail's future
Flight Rail: a new type of train?
America’s short lines play the long game
New York rail operator bolsters security after London bombing
It might look like a normal articulated truck, the same as the millions that carry freight on North America’s highway network. But a silver Freightliner Cascadia tractor-trailer currently driving on Virginia’s roads is doing so entirely under the command of autonomous driving software. A licensed safety driver is in the cab, and there is an engineer to monitor the system. However, Freightliner, owned by Daimler Trucks, hopes these supervisors won’t have to take the wheel.
The tests began in September in the south of the state, and the plan is to expand the deployment of the technology, which delivers Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) Level 4 autonomy, to more trucks over the coming months. This strategy reflects the goal of Daimler’s Autonomous Technology Group, founded in May 2019 with a $570 million investment budget, to deliver SAE Level 4, where drivers remain in a supervisory capacity, to all its vehicles within the next decade.
Daimler isn’t alone in developing automated trucks. U.S. autonomous pioneer Peloton is working with the U.S. Postal Service on a two-truck platooning pilot that does not require a driver in the second truck. UPS is similarly conducting autonomous tests in Arizona, having purchased a stake in TuSimple, another automated driving start-up. Even Tesla is active in this area. The Semi, the company’s electric articulated truck, is set to feature the second generation of Tesla’s semiautonomous technology, offering automatic braking, lane keeping and lane departure warnings.
For railroads, the economics of automated trucking are a major concern. Convoying trucks offer significant cost savings and efficiency gains for rubber-tired vehicles. Electric trucks are also cleaner than diesel locomotives.
The U.S. Class I response is to improve the efficiency and economics of what they have by introducing their own form of automation. With the rollout of Positive Train Control (PTC) now in the final stretch, the railroads are shifting their focus to projects with this infrastructure. The goal is to improve the efficiency of operations in the short-term, with an eye on delivering various stages of autonomous operation in the medium- to long-term.
Among them is Union Pacific. By the end of the year, and more than 11 years after PTC was mandated by the federal government, UP will have invested $2.9 billion to install PTC equipment on nearly 17,000 route-miles and 5,515 locomotives, and on more than 10,000 wayside antennas. According to Assistant Vice President Transportation Systems Development Michael R. Newcomb, the railroad is currently running 9 million service-miles every month using PTC.
Newcomb was speaking at the AREMA conference at Railway Interchange in Minneapolis. He says that with UP’s PTC network virtually complete, some of the current work in the final stage of systems data operations for PTC is focusing on improving interoperability with other railroads.
Newcomb reported that 12 of UP’s 31 tenant railroads are now interoperable, equivalent to 85% of total operational miles. However, with in-field expertise reducing due to retirements, UP is looking to support its tenants by assisting them with the testing and upgrade process. By issuing release and change management documents, he says the goal is to reduce the replication labor and local expertise required from release-to-release for PTC.
The railroad is also looking to improve diagnostics capability for smaller railroads. While the Class I’s have advanced diagnostics for themselves, this is often not the case for their tenants. Currently, if a small railroad has an emergency braking event, UP will request the logs from the locomotive. Initially, this was done via email, but increasingly, engineers will use an onboard touchscreen module as a standard way to ask for and log exchanges. The Class I’s are set to have the capability to download this information electronically by the end of the year. In addition, through work with Association of American Railroads subsidiary Railinc, UP is aggregating data from this diagnostics information. “Our ability to exchange diagnostics information in support of operations is maturing pretty rapidly,” Newcomb says.
Another area relates to Reliability, Availability, Maintainability and Safety (RAMS) of the PTC network.
The Class I’s requested and ultimately paid for suppliers to redesign the initial PTC model in 2012. The result is that engineers are now able to write software into the system, allowing the railroad to model changes and assess their possible impact before they are introduced. This could have significant implications for improved traffic management in high-density areas.
“The purpose of this is to get evergreen capability at the industry level for our RAMS management exploits,” Newcomb says. “All of our models produce a train delay calculation; that’s the value we added. If there is a train delay, you can calculate the business benefits and consequences of a change. Our goal is to have the infrastructure in place so as we make changes to the system—maybe we are required at some point to have some new public communications capability—we want to model it, put it in the system and see what the net return will be. We want that evergreen capability as part of the maturation of the system. Clearly, with the way the system works with the overlaying of the train, the higher the density of traffic on the line, the greater the impact of PTC.”
The railroad is also working on improving geo-location of its assets. PTC relies on GPS, which is accurate to around 25 feet, but makes identifying track occupancy difficult. Trials with the Positive Train Location (PTL) system developed by Leidos have taken place during the past four years across the U.S. The system combines information from multiple sensors and a track database (when available) in the Leidos Embedded Data-fusion Geospatial Engine (EDGE) sensor fusion algorithms to create optimal-state estimates for position, velocity and altitude. BNSF has already installed the first-generation product, and UP is set to follow suit to assess the product’s performance in real-life operating conditions.
Beyond optimizing current systems, work is under way to identify, develop and install new technologies that would form the backbone of a future autonomous train control network. Among the early steps in this process is a higher-level study looking at current signaling system design, the approach, and the rules have been introduced following various accidents in the past.
Newcomb also reports that UP is developing the technology and protocols necessary to introduce Quasi Moving-Block (QMB) operation. “We have industry consensus on the concept,” he says. “We have this idea where it might be able to eliminate the intermediate signals as we go toward moving-block, but we are not proposing to eliminate track circuits. Roll-on-roll-off protection, presence detection and broken rail detection will be maintained, and the information will be transmitted to a back office from where we will issue authorities and establish train separation. During normal operation, no trains will occupy the same block, as they do with Centralized Traffic Control (CTC), but we will split the block into smaller authorities.
“We are heading toward restricted speed protection and train occupancy protection. BNSF is doing a test on this first, and we see this as a 36- to 48-month deal to get through all of the safety analysis and to get all of the standards to work. BNSF has its product, and we will match the standards. You are going to start seeing it shortly.”
Among the key enablers for UP highlighted by Newcomb is the update to the end-of-train device (EOT).
Developed during the 1980s to replace the traditional caboose, as well as providing a visible indication of the rear of the train, the devices can monitor brake pipe pressure, relaying information via telemetry to the locomotive. Developing the EOT is necessary to expand PTL capability, which is available for the front of the train, to the rear. Newcomb says this will offer the integrity necessary to close up the block distance and enable trains to travel at higher speeds. He says that UP will also add a back-up camera to the next-generation EOT, which is optional, but it will be in the specification as it is considered a major enabler for single-person train operation in the future.
QMB could offer vast improvements in train reliability. Rather than relying on wayside infrastructure, trains will begin to communicate with one another and respond accordingly, significantly improving operating conditions in challenging areas like Chicago.
While QMB removes this restriction within the confines of the existing track circuit model, full moving-block will require a replacement for track circuits, with research in this area under way. However, Newcomb concedes that to get there, additional communications capacity is required beyond the 220MHz band currently used by the railroads, with his preference the use of 60MHz. “That is part of the thinking and planning moving forward,” he says. “I see communications becoming a large part of the investment cycle over time.”
An enhanced train Energy Management System (EMS) is also set to play a major role in managing train performance and forces. While EMS was included in the initial specification for PTC, Newcomb says it slipped down the running order as the railroads suffered from “interoperability fatigue.”
EMS is now returning as a priority capability that can manage key functions in the train, from stop-start to air and dynamic brakes. Newcomb says PTC provides the situational awareness for EMS, meaning that it does not have to be turned off when the signal is not there, thus unlocking huge potential capability to improve the efficiency of operation. “It used to be a signal product; now it is a railroad product,” he says.
A key milestone for UP’s use of EMS took place at the beginning of September when the railroad operated a PTC-enabled train with New York Air Brake’s LEADER EMS technology “Zero-to-Zero.” Instead of the EMS activating when the EMD SD70AC locomotive was stationary and up to 10 mph, it remained in use for the entire 43-mile trip. Newcomb says integration with PTC has taken a 65% opportunity to apply EMS on a trip, given the non-clear signals and other things that occur, to 90%-plus and ultimately a 98%-99% application.
In the short term, this offers fuel savings: Newcomb projects that UP will double fuel efficiency using EMS and other associated efficiency initiatives in the next 10 years. In the long term, the benefits include management of the entire consist and the movement away from the DP (Distributed Power) model to autonomous control of individual elements.
As a railroad subscribing to the Precision Scheduled Railroading (PSR) operating model, where trains are increasingly made up of varying consists, managing in-trains forces has become a concern. Trains are braking more, increasing the risk of derailment with the weaker elements of the train. “What we are doing with EMS is potentially managing those in-train forces and reducing the risk,” Newcomb says, adding that one EMS product that has been deployed has exceeded expectations in terms of managing train consists. “We have been running in our most critical territory for the past three months and we have had zero breakages.”
Inevitably the ultimate objective for UP is Autonomous Train Operation (ATO), particularly if the railroad is to counter what Newcomb describes as the “clear and present danger” from autonomous trucking.
There are significant obstacles to get to this point, among them the future of human resources and the inevitable pushback from labor unions—a situation shared by the trucking industry—as well as the technical and regulatory challenges to prove that unmanned vehicles are safe.
Newcomb did not put a timeframe on the ATO project. However, he says that UP has a high-level architecture for ATO that is subject to change. The writing of ATO specifications, which is taking place in committee and is led by the company’s Technology Advisory Group, also got under way earlier this year.
Newcomb says the most technically challenging issue is to solve encroachment on the right-of-way—whether this is from road vehicles at grade crossings, livestock, trees or boulders. While the human brain can see into the distance and make decisions based on this, it is also restricted by poor visibility, so there is an opportunity to deliver a more sophisticated system that enables trains to run at higher speeds than they otherwise would by reducing this risk. There is also the opportunity to solve restrictive operations in areas with limited coverage.
“We have been talking to Waymo, Apple and trucking companies interested in rubber-tired automation,” Newcomb says. “The challenge we see is that they do not have to see as far. It ends up being part of the military-industrial complex, not only in the U.S., but some from outside are starting to solve some of these problems. However, it is still years in the making, and it will be a long capital cycle before we get there.”
UP and the Class I’s are of course not the only railroads looking at ATO. Rio Tinto’s Pilbara Autohaul project, now in full operation, is the flag bearer for such applications.
Newcomb reports that he has been closely engaged with the project, meeting with Rio Tinto on several occasions. He also says the Zero-to-Zero test was based on technology in use by BHP Billiton, another Australian heavy-haul railroad pursuing ATO.
However, the scale of what the Class I’s are trying to achieve in the U.S. compared with the Pilbara emphasizes the challenges they will face. Rio Tinto has a single locomotive fleet running the same 240-car consist on a closed 930-mile network. UP’s 31,600-mile network is a whole different ballgame. “We have shown with Zero-to-Zero that we can do these things, but it is about doing it safely,” Newcomb says. “Rio Tinto has 44 grade crossings. We have 31,000. That gives you a sense of the challenges ahead.”
The post Journey To ATO appeared first on Railway Age.
This article first appeared on www.railwayage.com
About this website
Railpage version 3.10.0.0037
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest is © 2003-2020 Interactive Omnimedia Pty Ltd.
You can syndicate our news using one of the RSS feeds.