Regenerative braking

A regenerative brake is an energy recovery mechanism which slows down a vehicle

or object by converting its kinetic energy into another form, which can be either
used immediately or stored until needed. This contrasts with conventional braking
systems, where the excess kinetic energy is converted to heat by friction in
the brake linings and therefore wasted.
Limitations
Traditional friction-based braking must be used in conjunction with mechanical
regenerative braking for the following reasons:
The regenerative braking effect drops off at lower speeds; therefore the friction
brake is still required in order to bring the vehicle to a complete halt. Physical
locking of the rotor is also required to prevent vehicles from rolling down hills.
The friction brake is a necessary back-up in the event of failure of the regenerative
brake.
Most road vehicles with regenerative braking only have power on some wheels (as
in a two-wheel drive car) and regenerative braking power only applies to such
wheels because they are the only wheels linked to the drive motor, so in order to
provide controlled braking under difficult conditions (such as in wet roads) friction
based braking is necessary on the other wheels.
The amount of electrical energy capable of dissipation is limited by either the
capacity of the supply system to absorb this energy or on the state of charge of the
battery or capacitors. Effective regenerative braking can only occur if the battery or
capacitors are not fully charged. For this reason, it is normal to also incorporate
dynamic braking to absorb the excess energy.
Under emergency braking it is desirable that the braking force exerted be the
maximum allowed by the friction between the wheels and the surface without
slipping, over the entire speed range from the vehicle's maximum speed down to
zero. The maximum force available for acceleration is typically much less than this
except in the case of extreme high-performance vehicles. Therefore, the power
required to be dissipated by the braking system under emergency braking
conditions may be many times the maximum power which is delivered under
acceleration. Traction motors sized to handle the drive power may not be able to
cope with the extra load and the battery may not be able to accept charge at a
sufficiently high rate. Friction braking is required to dissipate the surplus energy in
order to allow an acceptable emergency braking performance.
For these reasons there is typically the need to control the regenerative braking and
match the friction and regenerative braking to produce the desired total braking
effect. The GM EV-1 was the first commercial car to do this. Engineers Abraham
Farag and Loren Majersik were issued two patents for this brake-by-wire technology.
[1][2]
Additionally, early applications commonly suffered from a serious safety hazard. In
many early electric vehicles with regenerative braking, the same controller positions
were used to apply power and to apply the regenerative brake, with the functions
being swapped by a separate switch. This led to a number of serious accidents
when drivers accidentally accelerated when intending to brake, such as therunaway
train accident in Wdenswil, Switzerland in 1948, which killed twenty-one people.
Regenerative braking in DC systems

evaluated

Electric stock may recuperate energy during braking by using traction motors as
generators. In DC supply systems (1,5 and 3 kV) high recovery rates are only
achievable under favourable conditions.
Technology field: Regenerative braking and energy management

General information
Description
Principle:
The energy put into accelerating a train and into moving it uphill is stored
in the train as kinetic and potential energy. In vehicles with electric traction
motors (this includes electric, diesel-electric and hybrid stock) a great part
of this energy can be reconverted into electric energy by using the motors
as generators when braking. The electric energy is transmitted backwards
along the conversion chain and fed back into the catenary. This is known as
regenerative braking and widely used in railways.
Braking and safety
Braking safety requires installation of additional brakes besides regenerative
brakes, for two reasons:
Braking power of 3-phase AC motors is of the same order as power installed
for traction. Additional braking power is therefore indispensable and
provided by mechanical (e.g. disk brakes) or other dissipative brakes.
Typically brakes are blended, i.e. when the driver brakes, first the
regenerative brakes are applied, if more power is needed (especially in
unforeseen situations) additional brakes are applied.
If the contact between pantograph and catenary is interrupted, regenerative
braking is impossible.
Use of recovered energy
The energy recovered by dynamic braking is used for different purposes:
on-board purposes (auxiliaries or comfort functions). On-board demand is
usually far too low to consume all the energy supplied.
energy is fed back into catenary to be used by other trains motoring close
enough (in a section of track supplied by the same substation).
If DC substations are equipped with thyristor inverter units, they can feed
back energy into the national grid.
Influence of supply system
The electric supply system has a considerable influence on the feasibility of
energy recovery. In DC systems, the catenary can be interconnected over
great distances (since in contrast to AC systems, no phase shifts can occur).
This would in principle allow for a long-distance transmission of recovered
energy. However, given the low voltage of these systems (1,5 or 3 kV),
transmission losses strongly limit the feasible feeding distances. Therefore
the probability of having trains braking and trains accelerating close enough
to each other to allow for an effective transmission is rather small.
General criteria

Status of development: in use

Regenerative braking is used in many DC systems world-wide.
Time horizon for broad application: now
(no details available)
Expected technological development: dynamic
Regenerative braking itself is a mature technology. In order to effectively
exploit the potential of brake energy recovery in DC systems, additional
technologies can be implemented on-board or in substations. In this field,
there is potential for further technological developments.
Motivation:
Energy saving
Reduced wear of mechanical brakes.
Benefits (other than environmental): big
Wear of mechanical brakes
The use of regenerative brakes reduces wear and maintenance of
mechanical brakes. It may also be possible to reduce the complexity, weight
and cost of mechanical brakes.
Since regenerative braking works without friction, no wearing parts are
present.
Barriers: medium
Low voltage
Due to the low catenary voltage in DC systems (1,5 or 3 kV) transmission
losses are high. This reduces the probability of having trains braking and
trains accelerating close enough to each other to allow for an effective
transmission considerably. Without additional technology to improve the
situation, substantial recovery rates can only be achieved in dense suburban
networks.
Voltage limits
It may happen that during braking the catenary voltage increases beyond
the limits foreseen by the standards. In this case voltage is automatically cut
off and no recovery is possible.
Feedback into supply grid
A feedback of recovered energy into the public grid is usually not an option
in DC systems. However, if substations are equipped with thyristor inverter
units , they become reversible and can feed energy into the supply grid.
Insufficient braking power
The power of regenerative brakes is roughly the same as the one installed
for traction. For many situations (trains running late, bad track conditions,
unexpected stop signals) this is not sufficient. In this case regenerative
brakes are blended with dissipative brakes or completely replaced by them.
Generally, EMUs have a better regenerative braking performance than locohauled trains, since more axles are powered. The higher the motor power
and the more axles are powered, the more energy may be recovered.
Acceptance
Acceptance is generally high. However some drivers are reported to be

reluctant to use regenerative brakes because of safety or timetable

concerns.
Success factors:
Inverter units for substations
By installing thyristor inverters in substations of DC systems, a feeding back
of recovered braking energy into the public mains becomes a possibility.
This can considerably increase recuperation rates in suburban or regional
DC systems.
Energy storage
On-board or stationary energy storage are another way of enhancing
recuperation rates in DC systems.
Automatic train control
Automatic driver-less systems offer the possibility of introducing a timetable
which is optimised for regenerative braking by synchronising the
acceleration and braking phases of subsequent trains.
Applicability for railway segments: high
Type of traction: electric - DC
Type of transportation: passenger - main lines, passenger - high speed,
passenger - regional lines, passenger - suburban lines, freight
(no details available)
Grade of diffusion into railway markets:
Diffusion into relevant segment of fleet: > 20%
Share of newly purchased stock: > 50%
The share of stock equipped with regenerative brakes may vary
considerably between European countries but is generally high. In new stock
regenerative braking capacity is standard technology.
Market potential (railways): high
(no details available)
Example:
(no details available)
Environmental criteria
Impacts on energy efficiency:
Energy efficiency potential for single vehicle: 5 - 10%
Energy efficiency potential throughout fleet: > 5%
Share of recoverable energy:
Share of recoverable energy heavily depends on speed and stopping
pattern.
The following values are typical (referring to total energy demand) for
different operation types
Main lines: 15%
Regional lines: 35 %
Suburban lines: 45%
Freight lines: 20%

The recovery rate actually reached in operation only exploits a part of this
potential. This is due to several reasons:
Efficiency of backwards power train: The recoverable energy can never be
fully regenerated due to losses in backwards power train. Backwards
efficiency is comparable to traction efficiency (~ 90%).
Receptivity of catenary: The supply system may be non-receptive because
no other train is close enough to use it. In DC systems, this is frequently the
case (cf. General criteria barriers).
Braking power: Many times the electric braking power is not sufficient and
blended braking (cf. Description) is applied. Especially in freight operation,
the electric brakes are usually insufficient for braking the entire train.
There is little (if any) quantitative data on these effects. The following table
gives some estimates (!) for DC systems. Since the main obstacle is limited
receptivity of catenary, the table gives the potential to be exploited with
additional technologies (cf. General criteria success factors) and the
potential to be exploited without additional technologies:
Correction
Theoretic
due to
al
traction
potential
efficiency

Correction
Correction Potential if
due to
due to
additional
nonblended technologies
receptive
braking
are used
catenary

Potential
without
additional
technology

15%

0,9

0,8

11%

0,2

2%

Region
35%
al lines

0,9

0,8

25%

0,4

10%

Local
lines

0,9

0,8

32%

0,5

16%

Main
lines

45%

Freight
20%
0,9
0,5
14%
0,2
3%
lines
Source: IZT
A part of the potential given in the last column is already exploited at
present. So the remaining potential without additional technology will be
around 1 - 5%. If innovative technology (cf. General criteria success
factors) is implemented, there is a saving potential of 5 20 % depending
on the specific situation.
Other environmental impacts: neutral
(no details available)
Economic criteria
Vehicle - fix costs: low
Recuperation is a common feature in modern stock with no additional costs.
If on-board storage technologies are implemented to raise recuperation
rates, vehicle fix costs are very high.
Vehicle - running costs: significant reduction
Reduced energy costs and maintenance costs through reduced wear in

mechanical brakes.
Infrastructure - fix costs: none
No additional infrastructure needed. The situation is different if additional
infrastructure is implemented (cf. thyristor inverters in
substations or stationary energy storage.
Infrastructure - running costs: unchanged
(no details available)
Scale effects: none
(no details available)
Amortisation: < 1 year
The situation is obviously different if additional technology is implemented.
Application outside railway sector (this technology is railway specific)
Overall rating
Overall potential: very promising
Time horizon: mid-term
Due to low catenary voltage and the fact that most substations do not allow
for a feedback into the public grid, DC systems pose serious obstacles to
recovery of brake energy. In very dense suburban networks, high recovery
rates can be achieved without additional technologies. In all other cases,
recovery rates are low but may be enhanced by innovative technological
upgrades of vehicles and/or substations. However, this implies relatively
high investment costs. In short term, DC operators should assess the
optimisation potential on the basis of present technologies and in mid and
long term consider the introduction of additional technologies.

Anti Collision Device

The ACD Network is a Train Collision prevention system invented by Rajaram Bojji
and patented by Konkan Railway Corporation Limited (a public-sector undertaking of
the Ministry of Railways, Government of India). ACDs have knowledge embedded
intelligence. They take inputs from GPS satellite system for position updates and
network among themselves for exchanging information using their data radio
modems to take decisions for timely auto-application of brakes to prevent
dangerous 'collisions', thus forming a 'Raksha Kavach' (meaning a '(Train) Safety
shield').
ACDs fitted (both in locomotive and guard's van of a train) act as a watchdog in the
dark as they constantly remain in lookout for other train bound ACDs, within the
braking distance required for their relative speeds. They communicate through their
radios and identify each other. If they happen to find themselves on the same track
and coming closer to each other, they automatically restrain and stop each other,
thereby preventing dangerous head-on and rear-end collisions.
Loco ACD of a train also applies brakes to reduce the train speed either to 15 km/h if
on approach it receives a message from other train bound ACD that has stopped in
a block section on adjacent track (and driver of that train has yet not communicated
that things are 'Normal') or to bring the train to a stop if train bound ACDs of other

train are radiating 'train parted' message thereby preventing dangerous side
collision that may occur due to infringement of adjacent track by a stopped or a
'parted' train, respectively.
ACD trials have recently been concluded successfully in Southern Railway. Further
implementation on Indian Railway is awaited.