Abstract

Public Service Escalators are characterised by carrying large numbers of

passengers and as acting as part of the main route within railways and
terminal stations. High safety factors are used in sizing their braking system to
prevent the risk of runaway situations. This presents the hazard of passenger
falls or even avalanche passenger falls when spurious stops take place. It is
estimated that 2.5% of all escalator stops lead to passenger falls.
Closed loop feedback braking systems can control the value of acceleration
and jerk as well as the stopping distance. This paper discusses the design,
implementation and testing of an intelligent braking system on a Public
Service Escalator. It outlines the aspects of the hardware and software FMEA
(failure modes and effects analysis), the use of appropriate feedback devices,
control algorithms and braking system hardware. Results are discussed that
illustrate the success of the system in reducing stopping variations caused by
changes in load.
The paper concludes by showing test results that correlate the stopping
characteristics of an escalator with the probability of passenger falls. Based on
those results it proposes the optimum stopping curve characteristics to
minimise passenger falls and meet requirements laid down by standards.

1. Introduction
Public services escalators are used in railway and metro stations and
transport terminals in general. They carry large numbers of passengers and
form a critical part of the main route within the transport terminal that they
serve [1]. For these reasons, public service escalators demand exceptionally
high levels of reliability, availability and safety. The braking system of these
escalators is the last and most important line of defense.
The majority of public service escalators have two brakes: An operational
brake that acts on the high speed shaft, and an auxiliary brake that acts on the
low speed shaft.
These two brakes would apply during any stoppage of the escalator, although
in some cases an intentional delay is applied to the auxiliary brake.
A braking system has to achieve two conflicting requirements: Stopping the
escalator within an acceptable distance to prevent injury (e.g., passenger
entrapment) and not stopping too harshly to cause passenger falls. This is the
dilemma facing the designer of the braking system.
This paper describes the development and testing of an intelligent braking
system that ensures a gentle stop which also meets the stopping distance
requirements.

2. Intelligent Braking Versus

Conventional Braking
The main problem with conventional braking systems is that they have to cope
with a number of varying factors. These include direction (up and down), load
(no load to full load); wear in the brake pads/shoes, changes in temperature
and contamination of the brake pads/shoes. The brakes are usually
designed/adjusted to deal with full load in the down direction such that the
stopping distance at full load in the down direction for a fully loaded escalator
does not exceed 1500 mm (for a 0.75 m/s escalator) [3]. However, this setup
results in a sharp stop when the escalator is not loaded, as well as a very
short stopping distance when the escalator is loaded in the up direction.
In effect, a conventional braking system is a form of open loop (or feed-
forward) control system, as shown in Figure 1. Although it is set to a certain
value, any variation in the ‘noise’ parameters would lead to large variations in
output. The output in this case is both the value of deceleration and the value
of stopping distance.

Figure 1: Block diagram of conventional braking system (feed-forward).

An intelligent braking system would monitor the value of the variable it is trying
to control (speed in this case) during the braking sequence. It then would
continuously adjust the braking effort to keep to the set speed curve. Even if
‘noise’ is introduced into the system, the feedback loop feeds this information
to the system, and the braking effort is also changed to suit. This is an
example of a closed loop system (Figure 2).
Figure 2: Block diagram of an intelligent braking system (feedback).

3. Principle of Operation
Brakes in lift and escalator applications have to be fail-safe. For this reason,
they are invariably spring applied and power lifted (either hydraulically or
electromagnetically).
The most widely used brake types on escalators are either hydraulic or
electromagnetic (i.e., solenoid). An intelligent braking system would require a
brake than can be proportionally controlled.
Hydraulic brakes are more amenable to proportional control than
electromagnetic brakes. The problem with electromagnetic brakes is that they
can either be set in the on or off positions, and it is not possible to keep them
in intermediate positions in order to vary the pressure. Hydraulic brakes on the
other hand can be controlled by varying the oil pressure that acts against the
springs. So the decision was made to use hydraulic brakes for the intelligent
braking system.
Thus all the discussions that will follow in this report will assume that the
controlled braking applies to a hydraulic brake.
The pressure applied by the hydraulic brake is the result of the interaction
between the spring force (trying to apply the brake pads on the disk) and
hydraulic pressure (trying to keep the brake pads off the disk). The spring
 pressure is constant and cannot be varied, as it is a characteristic of the
spring. By controlling the hydraulic pressure, the exact braking effort can be
applied. The hydraulic pressure is varied by controlling the valves that control
the flow of the oil. Such a control can be done via two methods:
1. Proportional valves.
2. Pulse width modulation (PWM) control of on/off valves.
The second method of PWM is the one used in this system. Although the
switching is not proportional (i.e., only on and off), the duty cycle of the on/off
proportions is varied such that a 50% duty cycle leads to no change in
pressure, while a duty cycle in excess of 50% (i.e., with the valve feeding the
oil staying open longer than 50%) leads to an increase in pressure and
reduction in braking (and vice versa). This requirement to increase or
decrease the braking depends on the comparison between the reference ideal
speed profile and the actual measured speed profile.