| CI 1 PB 254 788 } ' suBway ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN HANDBOOK, 7\ \VOLUME 1: PRINCIPLES AND APPLICATIONS, SECOND EDITION TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, LIMITED WASHINGTON, DC MARCH 76 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Technical. Information ServiceUMTA-DC-06 -0010-76-1 PB 254 788 SUBWAY ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN HANDBOOK Volume I Principles and Applications 2nd Edition “OE TRAN, S a, 0 wy % S RO Ss < States OF" REPRODUCED BY US. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NATIONAL TECHRNCAL FORMATION SERVICE SPRINGFIELD. Va 22 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Urban Mass Transportation Administration Office of Research and Development Washington, D.C. 20590NOTICE THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN REPRODUCED FROM THE BEST COPY FURNISHED US BY THE SPONSORING AGENCY, ALTHOUGH IT IS RECOGNIZED THAT CER- TAIN PORTIONS ARE ILLEGIBLE, IT IS BEING RE- LEASED IN THE INTEREST OF MAKING AVAILABLE AS MUCH INFORMATION AS POSSIBLE.NOTICE ‘This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government and the Transit Develop- ment Corporation, Inc. do not assume liability for its contents or use thereof. ‘The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufac: ‘turers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the objectives of this Handbook. ‘The preparation of this Handbook has been financed in part through a grant from the United States Department of Transportation, Urban Mass Transportation Administration, under the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964, as amended.Technical Report Documentation P: ants Catalog Ne pen Ne. FGavenment ecession Nor 3 Beain UMTA-DC-06-0010-76-1 2 : PB 25 d 7 8 8 TFs ond Sabie Report Dare Subway Environmental Design Handbook, Volune I: _ ere 2576. Principles and Applications, Second Edition p. Reston Oo Portrning Orgeisaion Name ond Aivo¥e TOW Unit Nos TRAIT ‘Transit Development Corporation, Inc. DC-06-0010 1730 M Street, N.W. TT Connosd or Grant Ror Washington, D.C. 20036 DoT-UT-290_ TE Type of Report ond Poriod Covered TE. Sponnering Agency Nowe ond Aarons U.S. Department of Transportation Technical Report Urban Mass Transportation Administration 2100 2nd Street, S.W. [T2Sponsoring Aveney Code Washington, D.C. 20590 L 15, Supplementory Ne Prepared by Associated Engineers, a Joint Venture of Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade @ Douglas, Inc., DeLeww, Cather & Company, and Kaiser Engineers Te Abeweet ‘This Handbook is a guide and reference for the planning, design, construction and operation of environmental control systems for underground rapid. transit. The fEnabook follows the engineering sequence from criteria through load analysis, and from systen conceptual design to selection of equipment. It covers a broad range of parameters, including temperature, humidity, air quality and rapid pressure change, and, to 2 limited extent, noise and vibration as related to environnental control equipment. ‘The content of the Handbook is divided into two.volumes, Volume I (this volume), Principles and Applications, encompasses all of the above subject matter so that mv of the environmental system design can be accomplished using the techniques, comput tions and related graphic data contained herein. Volume II comprises both the User and Programer's Manuals for the Subway Environment Similation (SES) computer progr fs a design tool, this sophisticated program cen be utilized readily by design engineers for detailed analysis of designs and for rapid evaluation of alternative environmental system concepts for extensive or complex configurations. Volume II, Part I: User's Menual and Part II: Programmer's Manual is available ‘through the National Technical Information Service. To Kay Warde TE Diswiborion rotons? Urban Transportation Available to the Public Through the ‘Subway Railways National Technical Inforration Service Environmental Engineering Springfield, Virginia 22161 Ti Secoriy Clessit Tol Wit reper Unclassified Unclassified\+Dc-06-0010-76-1 SUBWAY ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN Ic HANDBOOK ie ie Volume I Principles and Applications 2nd Edition Prepared by Associated Engineers - A Joint Venture Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade & Douglas, Inc. De Leuw, Cather & Company Kaiser Engineers Under the Direction of the TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION. INC. 1976 Prepared for UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Urban: Mass Transportation Administration Office of Research and Development Washington, D.C. 20590CONTENTS PREFACE xii INTRODUCTION xiv ACKNOWLEDGEMENT xi TERMINOLOGY xix - PART | — DIGEST 11. Past Practices and Concepts Early Public Transportation in London z 1 eT 1 New York City's First Subway 12 Early Tests on Subway Ventilation 14 In Boston: The First Subway in North America 16 Chicago's Subways ea The Toronto Transit System 18 ‘The Cleveland Transit System 1-8 Summary 19 "12. Contemporary Environmental Control Concepts 19 + The PATH System 1-10 ‘The Montreal System 1-10 The PATCO System mu The BART System 12 Newer Concepts 1.3. The Design Process Criteria Analysis 1-14 Control Concept Selection 1-20 Design Approach 11 14. Comparison of Alternatives 2 ‘The Rapid Transit Vehicle 1-2 Alignment and Profile 125 Real Estate Acquisition 1-26 Vent Shafts 1-26 Space Allocations for Environmental Control Equipment 127 Methodologies for Cost Trade-Off Evaluations 128 References 129 PART 2 — HUMAN ENVIRONMENTAL CRITERIA 2.1, Temperature and Humidity 2 Physiological Considerations of Thermal Comfort 23 Environmental Considerations of Thermal Comfort 24 icContents ‘Thermal Indices for Subway Application Comfort Range for Relative Warmth Index Application of Relative Warmth Index Criteria for Temperature, and Humidity Application of Heat Deficit Rate ‘Temperature Criteria for Cold Weather 7-22, Air Quality Odorants Particulate Contaminants Gaseous Contaminants 23. Air Velocity and Rapid Pressure Changes ‘Maximum Air Velocities Rapid Pressure Change 24. Emergency ‘Air Quality Criteria in Emergencies Emergency Air Temperature Criteria Emergency Air Velocity Criteria References PART 3 — SUBWAY ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATIONS ‘AND DESIGN STRATEGIES 3.1. Design Strategies to Achieve Air ‘Temperature Criteria Heat Gains Removal and Addition of Sensible Heat by ‘Ventilation Removal and Addition of Sensible Heat by Heat Sink ‘Underplatform and Related Exhaust Systems Isolation of Heat Sources and Sinks Reduction of Heat At Its Source Removal and Addition of Sensible Heat by Mechanical Equipment 3.2. Air Velocity Control ‘Fundamentals of Air Flow in Stations figh Air Velocity by Use of Blast Shafts ) Control of High Air Velocity by Changes in Station Geometry Changing the Air’ Velocity in the Tunnels Isolation of High Velocity Air 3.3. Air Quality Control Choice of Air Intake Types and Location Maintenance of Air Passages ‘Air Filtration 3.4, Air Pressure Control ‘Fundamentals ‘Train Speed Restriction Tunnel Venting ‘Changes in Tunnel Structure Isolation 3.5. Environmental Control for Emergencies Direction of Air Flow During Emergencies Limiting Smoke Concentration 28 29. 2 214 216 2-16 247 217 2-20 2-20 2-20 223 2-24 2-26 2-26 227 3 33 32 351 354 357 365 310 323 323 314 375 315 316 316 3 +B 3-88 3-102 3-105 3-105 3-106 3-108Contents Limiting Air Temperature 3.6. Strategies for Multiple Criteria Basic Steps Examples of Multiple Criteria References PART 4 — APPLICATION OF EQUIPMENT AND STRUCTURES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL 4.1, Environmental Control Systems Ventilation Systems Cooling Systems Heating Systems Air Distribution Systems Isolation Systems Trackway Exhaust Systems 42. Environmental Control Equipment Fans and Air-Handling Units Water Chillers Direct Expansion Equipment Condensers Condenser Water Cooling Equipment Evaporative Air Cooling Equipment Instrumentation and Controls Piping Ductwork, Air Outlets and Accessories Heating Equipment Miscellaneous Equipment 43. Vehicle Air Conditioning Loads Equipment References APPENDIX A — THE RESEARCH PROGRAM A.l. Scope of Research ‘Scale-Model Testing Full-Scale Testing A2. Basic Research Program Experimental Program The VICS-70 Facility ‘The VICS-120 Facility Theoretical Program A3. Applied Research Program The VST Facility The SAT Facility A4. Resistor Grid Tests AS. Tunnel Field Tests References APPENDIX B — SCALE MODELS AND SIMILITUDE BLL. Scaling Laws Principles of Similitude Derivation of Similarity Laws Examples of Application of Scaling Laws B2. Scale Model Experimentation 3-109 3112 316 3116 3.122 at 4 414 416 “17 419 422 422 4.25 432 435 437 441 447 449 451 456 456 4-68 478 Al Al A2 A2 Aa AB Ad AS AS AG All As BA B2 B2 BS B10Contents Experimentation Related to Subway Environmental Research Program Experimentation Related to General Subway Design B3. Design and Construction of Scale Models Level of Geometric Detail Construction Materials and Techniques B4. Testing Methodology VST Facility Highlights SAT Facility Highlights B.S. Semi-Empirical Data Output VST Highlights SAT Highlights References APPENDIX C — SURVEY RESULTS C1. Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) Tunnels Stations Trains Environmental Control System Cleanup Environmental Conditions C2. Montreal Urban Community Transit Commission (MUCTC) Tunnels Stat Trains Environmental Control System Environmental Conditions ©3. Chicago Transit Authority (CTA) Tunnels Stations Trains Environmental Control System Environmental Conditions C4. Port Authority Trans-Hudson Corporation (PATH) Tunnels Stations Trains Environmental Control System Environmental Conditions C5. Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) Tunnels Stations Trains Environmental Control System Environmental Conditions C6. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA) Tunnels Bs Bs Bld BS B23 B23 B27 B.30 B30 B34 B41 cr cr C7 cs. cs cs co co C10 C10 C10 ci cu ci cn C12 ec ce cn cw‘Contents Stations Trains Environmental Control System Environmental Conditions C7. Port Authority Transit Corporation -(PATCO) Tunnels Stations Trains Environmental Control System ‘Environmental Conditions C8. Cleveland Transit System (CTS) Tunnel Station Trains Environmental Control System Environmental Conditions C9. New York City Transit Authority (NYCTA) Tunnels Stations Trains Environmental Control System Environmental Conditions C10. Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) APPENDIX D — STATISTICAL INFORMATION ON SUBWAY SYSTEMS Tabular Data Notes APPENDIX E — BIBLIOGRAPHY INDEX C4 C4 cs cs cs C16 C16 C16 C16 ci7 C17 C17 cay cir cir C18 C9 C19 cig C19 C19 20 cu D2 D.28 ElIMPORTANT FIGURES AND TABLES Fig. 1.4 Fig. 1.5 Table 2.2 Table 2.3, Fig. 22 Fig. 2.3 Table 2.4 Fig. 2.4 Table 2.5 Fig. 2.5 Fig. 2.6 Fig. 2.7 Table 2.8 Table 2.9 Table 2.10 Table 2.11 Table 2.12 SES-Computed Rush-Hour Average Air ‘Temperature Distribution SES-Computed Instantaneous Air Flows and Train Situations Metabolic Rates for Various Activities Insulating Effect of Clothing at Various Activity Levels Comfort Clothing as a Function of t, M and V Standard Value for Ia vs. Velocity of Air ASHRAE Comfort Classification and Cor- responding Relative Warmth Index Percentage of People Who Want a Cooler Environment in Summer Numerical Values Used in Calculating Relative Warmth Index for Existing Rapid Transit Agencies Relative Warmth Indices Relative Warmth Values in Subway Systems Heat Deficit Rate and Cumulative Heat Deficit Representative Limits for Particulate Contaminants Generated in Subway Environment Contents of Some Inert Dusts Representative Threshold Limits for Gaseous Contaminants in Subway Environment Optimum Air Velocity as a Function of Metabolic Rate and Humidity at 104F Acceptable Air Velocities Directed at Workers Page 121 25 26 2 28 28 210 212 216 220 22 221Table 2.13 Table 2.14 Table 3.1 Fig. 3.1 Table 3.2 Fig. 3.3 Fig. 3.4 Table 3.3 Table 3.4 Fig. 3.6 Table 3.5 Fig. 3.7 Fig. 38 Fig. 3.9 Fig. 3.10 Table 3.7 Fig. 3.11 Table 3.8 Table 3.9 Fig. 3.12 Table 3.10 Important Figures and Tables Beaufort Scale Ear Sensations at Various Levels of Pressure Change Heat Gains and Losses in a Subway System Subway System Heat Balances With Design ‘Temperatures Below and Above Ambient Example Subway System for Analysis ‘Typical System Speed vs. Distance Data Relative Magnitude of Subway Heat Sources Relative Magnitude of Heat Sources in a Subway Station and its Adjacent Tunnels Summary — Subway Heat Loads Deceleration Resistor Temperature History Approximate Heat Release From Resistor Grids Under Nonequilibrium Conditions Transition Speeds of Cam-Controlled Rapid Transit Motors Air Conditioner Power Requirements Distribution of Braking Energy Along Track Detail of Temperature and Heat Rejection of Dynamic Braking Resistor Grids at ‘Thermal Equilibrium Spatial Distribution of Heat Released From Carbome Air Conditioner Condensers of Example Train Distribution of Vehicle Air Conditioner Reject Heat Along Track Location of Heat Sources in a Subway Station and its Adjacent Tunnels Spatial Distribution of All Heat Release in Example Subway System Relative Magnitude of Subway Heat Flows Spatial Distribution of Heat Release — Preliminary Design Values 2.22 2.23 34 3.2 t t 35 39 3-10 31 3-14 318 3.20 3.20 321 321 3 322Fig. 3.13 Fig, 3.14 Fig. 3.15 Fig. 3.16 Table 3.11 Table 3.12 Table 3.13 Fig. 3:19 Fig. 3.21 Fig. 3.27 Fig. 328 Table 3.14 Table 3.15 Fig. 3.30 Fig. 3.31 Fig. 3.32 Table 3.16 Fig. 3.38 Fig. 3.42 Fig. 3.44 Fig. 3.45 Table 3.20 Fig, 3.49 Fig. 3.50 Important Figures and Tables Effect of Ventilation Air on Heat Balance Friction Factors as a Function of Reynolds ‘Number and Relative Roughness Circular Equivalent of a Rectangular Duct Effect of Internal Ribbing on Pipe Flow Friction Factor Surface Roughness of Various Typical Materials of Construction ‘Theoretical Tunnel Friction Factor Loss Coefficients for Area Changes Head Loss for 90° Rectangular Miter Turns Head Loss Through Variable Area Miter Vent Shaft Flow Analysis - Inflow ‘Vent Shaft Flow Analysis ~ Outflow Infldw Driving Pressure Coefficient in a Tunnel-Vent System Outflow Driving Pressure Coefficient in a Tunnel-Vent System Tunnel Pressure Drop Across Vent Shaft, Flowing In Effect of Trin Characteristics on Drag Piston Action Flow Sensitivity of Ventilation Rate to Changes in Subway System Variables Vent Shaft Parameter Interaction ~ Inflow Efficiency of Underplatform Exhaust Systems Based on the Toronto Subway Tests Train Kinetic Energy vs. Speed Temperature Distribution in Air-Conditioned Station Representative Cooling Loads Subway System Air Flow Rates Air Velocities in Station vill 3.23 3.25 3.26 3.27 3428 3.28 3.29 3.30 3.31 3.37 3.38 339 339 3450 356 3.70 3470Fig. 3.51 Fig. 3.52 Table 3.21 Table 3.22 Table 3.23 Table 3.24 Table 3.25 Table 3.26 Table 3.27 Table 3.28 Table 3.29 Table 3.30 Table 3.31 Table 3.32 Fig. 3.58 Fig. 3.59 Table 3.47 Fig. 3.69 Fig. 4.1 Fig. 4.2 Fig. 4.3 Important Figures and Tables Blast Shaft Mass Flow Ratio Relationship Among Train Speed, Blast Shaft Location, and Blast Magnitude Relationship Between Blockage Ratio and Velocity Ratio for Constant Vent- Shaft Area Effect of Various Air Flow Parameters on the Air Velocity in the Station Possible Accumulation From Brake and Wheel Wear Definition of Pressure Coefficients Viscous Equivalents Inertial Equivalents Reflection and Transmission of Pressure ‘Waves Portal Entry Pressure Transients Process Equations Post Entry Pressure Transients Process Equations ‘Vent Passage Pressure Transients Process Equations Portal Exit Pressure Transients Process Equations Train Passage Pressure Transients Process Equations: BART Lead Car Interior Pressure Transients BART Wayside Pressure Transients ‘Combustion Constants Fires in Tunnel of 210 sq ft Cross Sectional Area Basic Geometry of a Vent Shaft ‘Vent Shaft With Side Inlet ‘A Complex Vent Shaft Configuration a7 32 374 314 377 378 3-80 3-80 3.81 3.84 387 34100 34101 3-110 sat 42 42 43Fig Fig. Fig. Fig Fig, Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig Fig, Fig. 44 45 47 48 49 415 4.16 417 418 420 421 422 423 424 425 4.26 427 4.28 . 4.29 4.30 4a Important Figures and Tables ‘Vent Shaft With Side Inlet, 45° Offset, Miter Turn and Storm-Water Sump ‘Types of Intersection Configurations Used for Vent Shafts and Tunnels Inlet of Vent Shaft With Emergency Fan ‘Types of Outlet Configurations Used for ‘Vent Shafts Typical Subway Station Cooling Load Cycle Capacity Ranges for Direct-Expansion Systems Capacity Ranges for Chilled Water Systems Warm-Air System for Snow Melting at Subway Entrances Schematic of Train Screen’s Control of Station Environment Underplatform Exhaust with Supply Trackway Exhaust System Capacity Ranges for Fans and Air-Handling Units ‘Simplified Model of a Typical Water Chiller Capacity Ranges of Water Chillers A Representative Equipment Room Layout at Platform Level ‘A Typical Platform Level Equipment Room A Representative Equipment Room Layout at ‘Mezzanine Level Elementary Direct-Expansion Cooling System Capacity Ranges for Direct-Expansion Equipment Capacity Ranges of Condensers Mechanical Draft Cooling Tower Configura- tions 43 43 45 47 42 413 4s 418 421 421 422 4.26 4.26 427 4-27, 28 429 432 432 435 438Fig. 4.32 Fig. 4.33 Fig. 4.34 Fig. 4.35 Table 4.3 Table 4.4 Table 4.5 Table 4.6 Table 4.7 Table 4.8 Table 4.9 Table 4.10, Fig. 4.38 Fig. 439 Fig. 4.40 Important Figures and Tables Capacity Ranges for Mechanical Draft Cooling Towers Capacity Ranges for Evaporative Air Cooling Equipment Block Diagram for Central Control Systems Recommended Equipment Vibration Criteria Guidelines for ‘Selection of Vibration Isolator Deflection Air-Conditioned Subway Car Characteristics ‘Thermal Conductivities and Conductance of ‘Materials Surface Conductances and Resistances for Air Thermal Conductances of a Plane Air Space Overall Heat Transfer Coefficients, U, for Vertical Flat Glass Conversion Table for U Coefficients for Various Wind Velocities Transmission Gains Through Various Subway Car Components ‘Component System With Overhead Air Distribution Undercar Self-Contained Unit Typical Duct Installation for Undercar ‘Self-Contained System 438 453 454 +56 4m 4m +16PREFACE This Handbook is a valuable guide and reference for the planning, design, construction and operation of underground rapid transit systems. The bulk of the material presented herein has been prepared for those Primarily responsible for environmental control. ‘Therefore, the Handbook follows the logical flow path from criteria through load analysis, and from system conceptual design to selection of equipment. It covers a broad range of parameters, including temperature, humidity, air quality, air velocity and rapid pressure change, and, to a limited extent, noise and vibration, as related to environmental control equipment. Different values and design guides have been established for different areas in a subway system, such as stations, ‘tunnels (including ventilation shafts), vehicles and various miscellaneous structures contiguous to a subway system. ‘The content of the Handbook is divided into two volumes. ‘Volume I, Principles and Applications, addresses all ofthe above identified subject matter 50. that most environmental system designs can be accomplished utilizing the techniques described in this volume, including the manual computations and related graphic data, These design methodologies will permit basic engineering decisions to be made with confidence. These decisions influence environmental design requirements for such items as station structure configurations and vent shaft sizes and locations. In most cases, selection of one esirable environmental system concept from several alternatives can be effected. Volume II contains both the User's and Programmer's Manuals for the Subway Environmental Simulation (SES) ‘computer program. This analytical design tool, developed as part of the research program leading to this book, made possible the formulation of many of the manual ‘computation techniques and data contained in Volume I. As a design tool, the computer program can be readily Utilized by environmental design engineers for “fine tuning” designs developed by the methodologies described in Volume I, and for rapid evaluation of alternative ‘environmental system concepts for extensive or complex ‘transit system configurations. Part 1, Digest, of Volume I provides the reader with an overview of the subject and enables those who may not be directly concerned with the details of environmental design to obtain sufficient information for their purposes about the subject and its interaction with other major elements of a rapid transit system, such as transit vehicles and the system civil structures. This Digest will be of value xii to those responsible for making some of the early decisions in regard to.the overall rapid transit system concepts. It will also benefit those readers who do not normally go through the entire design process, criteria-analysi control, in detail, but who require general information and data on the subject of environment. Information contained in Part I will be sufficient to identify some of the major basic environmental considerations, such as preliminary sizing and spacing of ventilation shafts, or early evaluation of climatological data for the purpose of formulating environmental criteria and control concepts. Consideration of environmental control in rapid transit systems involves the identification and understanding of three major topics: criteria, analysis, and control, which are addressed in Parts 2,3 and 4 of Volume I. These parts of the book are written primarily for environmental design engineers concerned with environmental design ‘methodologies and techniques. The environmental design engineer will derive the greater and more direct benefit from the Handbook, because it is written in the language of his profession Planners will be able to use the Handbook as a general reference. They may find Part 1, Digest, especially useful Subway and transit agencies also will find the Handbook useful. They may be particularly interested in Part 2, Human Environmental Criteria, which will enable them to establish general guidelines to be followed in the design of environmental control systems. Design engineers, who size and select environmental control equipment, will benefit from all parts of the Handbook. These engineers ‘must first compute cooling, ventilating, and heating loads, Consequently, their attention will be focused primarily on Part 3, Subway Environmental Evaluations and Design Strategies. Also, equipment manufacturers will find useful information in the Handbook, though they may be Primarily concerned with Part 4, Application of Equipment and Structures for Environmental Control. Part 4 will enable them to appraise the unique demands made on environmental control systems and equipment that are to operate and maintain a controlled environment in subway systems. In addition to Volumes I and Il, more than 40 technical reports containing detailed output from various phases of the Subway Environmental Research Project are available from the National Technical Information Service. These reports are included in the Bibliography, Appendix E of Volume I.‘The Handbook treats environmental control of rapid transit subway systems as part of an integrated system. Users of this Handbook are urged to adopt this systems approach early in a rapid transit system's concept and planning stage. ‘This Handbook may differ somewhat from other engineering handbooks, which usually contain data and information derived from proven theories previously documented, various text books, and other published source references. At the outset of the research and development project which resulted in this Handbook, there were very limited published data available in the field of subway environmental control Consequently, the information contained inthis Handbook is primarily based on results from mathematical modeling, field tests, model tests, and Preface ‘operating experience and observations in existing subway systems. However, all technical aspects of the subject matter have been identified and addressed. In instances where precise data are not available, ranges of values are Provided which reflect the best judgment of the authors, ‘such as data primarily associated with the performance of various control system concepts. ‘The preceding paragraphs summarize the scope and utility of the Handbook, reflecting the best environmental, system performance data currently available, New experiences, additional data collection and knowledge acquired from further study and testing will be reflected in future editions of the Handbook to advance the state- of-the-art, PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION After publication of the first edition of this Handbook, a significant field test program was undertaken to validate ‘many of the theories presented in the Handbook and to fill critical knowledge gaps identified during the development Of the first edition. This field test program was accompa- nied by an intensive effort to solicit the comments and suggestions of Handbook users in order to produce a second edition of improved clarity and usefulness. ‘The major revisions incorporated in the second edition of Volume I include Section 3.1, Design Strategies to Achieve Air Temperature Criteria, which has been changed to reflect the findings of a field test of underplat- form exhaust system performance conducted in the To- onto subway. Section 3.4, Air Pressure Control, has been Xl revised to present a more accurate analysis of pressure waves, and Appendix C ~ Survey Results, has been ex- panded to include the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid ‘Transit District (BART). In addition, numerous editorial revisions to Volume I have been made to further define the intent and application of the myriad analytical tools. Also, Appendix E — Bibliography, has been updated to reflect recent contributions to subway environmental analysis, and control. ‘The findings of a thorough field validation program con- ducted in the Montreal Subway are detailed in Volume II of the Handbook. With regard to Volume I, these valida- tion tests confirmed the analyses of subway aerodynamics and thermodynamics presented hereinINTRODUCTION ‘The material presented in this Handbook was derived from a research project extending over a three and one- half year period. It was sponsored jointly by the Urban Mass Transportation Administration (UMTA) of the United States Department of Transportation, and by operating. transit agencies in the United States and Canada. The project has been directed by the Transit Development Corporation (TDC), the research arm of the operating transit agencies, from January 1973 to the date of publication of this Handbook. Prior to that date, it was directed by the Institute for Rapid Transit (IRT), utilizing the same management structure ‘The need for a coordinated research and development program for the purpose of furthering the state-of-the-art of subway environmental design was recognized by the ‘Technical and Operations Committe of the IRT. These ‘objectives coincided in part with the goals of the Southern California Rapid Transit District (SCRTD) in furthering their studies for a rapid transit system in the Los Angeles ‘metropolitan area. The objectives of the Committee were to provide a forum for technical dialogue in order to improve upon the limited knowledge concerning the interaction of environmental control systems with all other features of a modern rapid transit system, ‘Subway designers had struggled over the years in repeated efforts to optimize environmental control systems with Widely varying degrees of success. They were handicapped by-an incomplete knowledge of the complex interaction ‘between the various elements of the subway system which affect temperature, air velocity, pressure and humidity. For example, before the advent of this project, there was a great deal of uncertainty about the criteria for sizing and locating ventilation and blast shafts. There was, however, a wealth of operating experience in the existing rapid transit agencies and in the design and fabrication of hhardware for subway systems. This information, as evaluated by experienced environmental engineers, formed a sound foundation upon which to identify the nature of the environmental problems. On the basis of these evaluations, the scope of the required research and development activities necessary to solve these problems ‘could be formulated. Realization of the above problems and recognition of the fact that ventilation and station air-conditioning costs could comprise as much as eight to 10 percent of the total cost of subway construction encouraged the IRT to formulate a detailed program of basic and applied research, engineering development utilizing academic disciplines, scale model experimentation and analysis, and the high-speed calculation abilities of modern computers. In 1970, thirteen rail transit agencies*, through the IRT, applied to UMTA for a research grant. Processing the application was made possible by contributions from each of the transit agencies in the form of funds and services. In addition, it incorporated a unique -management structure featuring an Advisory Board comprised of transit industry management personnel and technical specialists. One of the important direct functions of this group was the establishment of management policy in conjunction with UMTA. Another important function was to provide, when necessary, the services of specialists from the transit agencies. In addition, it was perceived at the outset that the Advisory Board could provide individual assistance in certain test programs to be conducted on transit operating systems. And, finally it was perceived that Advisory Board participation, through periodic meetings with the project staff, would make possible the timely dissemination of project results to the ultimate users, namely, the transit agencies designing and building new systems. This management concept has been most successful in blending together the diverse talents found in the transit industry, with those of consultants, academicians, and those in the aerospace industry. The basic research, applied research and engineering development leading to the nublication of this Handbook ‘were undertaken concurrently, contrary to the traditional sequencing process. In spite of the inherent risks, such an approach was necessary in order to complete the research effort, including the computer program, and to produce the Handbook within the short time established by TDC. and UMTA to meet the urgent needs of the transit industry. ‘Bay Arca Rapid Transit (BART); Chicago Transit Authority, (CTA): Geveland Transit System, (CTS); Mass Transit Administration, Md., ATA); Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, (MBTA), ‘Montreal Urban Community Transit Commission, (MUCTC); New ‘York City Transit Authority, (NYCTA); Port Authority, Trans-Hudson Corporation (PATHD; Port Authority Transit Corporation, @PATOO}, Southem California Rapid ‘Transit District, (SCRTD), Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority, (SEPTA), Toronto Traasit Commission, (TTC); Washington Metropolitan Ares Transit Authority, (WMATA)‘The engineering development was performed by the Associated Engineers, a joint venture of Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade & Douglas, Inc.; DeLeuw, Cather ‘& Company; and Kaiser Engineers. The applied research, was primarily performed by Developmental Sciences, Inc., and the basic research by the Graduate Aeronautical xv Introduction Laboratories at the California Institute of Technology. ‘The project participants, the TDC staff and the TDC Advisory Board benefited greatly from the administrative and technical guidance of UMTA’s Office of Research and Development and by the Department of Transportation's Transportation Systems Center.ACKNOWLEDGMENT Many persons in the engineering profession and from governmental and operating transit agencies have contributed to advancing the state-of-the-art of subway environmental control. Significant contributions, either through authorship or through support and. ‘encouragement to the authors, have been made by all of those shown below, and especially those on the TDC Advisory Board. Deane N, Aboudara Transit Development Corporation, Inc. Washington, D.C. * Bemard Adler New York City Transit Authority New York, New York Roy H. Anderson DeLeuw, Cather & Company Chicago, Ilinois * Allen G. Behring Deleuw, Cather & Company Chicago, Mlinois + Robert C. Belfi City of Philadelphia Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Paul F. Brautigam Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade & Douglas, Inc. New York, New York » Robert Bretz Cleveland Transit Systems Cleveland, Ohio James E. Busch Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Joseph S. Busch Kaiser Engineers Oakland, California Barbara Cohrssen Kaiser Engineers Oakland, California xvi Norman H. Danziger Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade & Douglas, Inc. New York, New York William D'Ambrosio Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade & Douglas, Inc New York, New York Bain Dayman, Jr. California Institute of Technology Pasadena, California George Donato Montreal Urban Community Transit Commission Montreal, Canada Richard Gallagher Southern California Rapid Transit District Los Angeles, California Clarence Generette Cleveland Transit System Cleveland, Ohio Bernard Goldentyer City of Philadelphia Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Herbert H. Gould United States Department of Transportation Transportation Systems Center Cambridge, Massachusetts Fred S. Greene Port Authority of New York and New Jersey New York, New York Seymour S. Greenfield Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade & Douglas, Inc. New York, New York Marshall E. Greenspon Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Washington, D.C. Gordon Harris California Institute of Technology Pasadena, CaliforniaAcknowledgment Woodrow W. Hitchcock Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade & Douglas, Inc. New York, New York John F. Hoban Port Authority of New York and New Jersey New York, New York Frank Hoppe ‘Mass Transit Administration Baltimore, Maryland Charles E. Keiser Chicago Transit Authority Chicago, Ulinois James J. Kirk Port Authority of New York and New Jersey New York, New York William A. Kumpf Kaiser Engineers Oakland, California Norman I. Lesser Port Authority of New York and New Jersey New York, New York Graeme J. MacKeown Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade & Douglas, Inc. New York, New York Franklin T. Matthias Kaiser Engineers Oakland, California Wilmot R. McCutchen San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District San Francisco, California Frederick S. Merritt Consulting Editor Syosset, New York Werner W. Metsch Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade & Douglas, Inc. New York, New York Jeffrey G. Mora United States Department of Transportation Urban Mass Transportation Administration ‘Washington, D.C. Edward J. Murphy City of Philadelphia Philadelphia, Pennsylvania James A. Murray Kaiser Engineers Oakland, California Robert J. Murray Toronto Transit Commission Toronto, Canada Paul O'Connell ‘Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority Boston, Massachusetts Evan E. Olmstead Chicago Transit Authority Chicago, Ilinois John T. O'Neill New York City Transit Authority New York, New York W. Howard Paterson Toronto Transit Commission Toronto, Canada William J. Reinhardt Transit Development Corporation, Inc. Washington, D.C. Neil Richards Southern California Rapid Transit District Los Angeles, California Farrel L. Schell Kaiser Engineers Oakland, California Gerald R. Seemann Developmental Sciences, Inc. City of Industry, California Joseph M. Sockle Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Morris Solomon Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority Atlanta, GeorgiaAcknowledgment + Francis E. Therrien Montreal Urban Community Transit Commission Montreal, Canada Herbert A. Thomas, Jr. Kaiser Engineers Oakland, California “Alfred F. Tyrrill Kaiser Engineers Oakland, California Kenneth S. Voigt ‘Transit Development Corporation, Inc. Washington, D.C. Harry P. Watson DeLeuw, Cather & Company Chicago, Ilinois, xviii Edmond J. Whitaker Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority Boston, Massachusetts John I. Williams Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority Boston, Massachusetts Donald R. Wolfe Port Authority Transit Corporation Camden, New Jersey ‘TDC Advisory Board Member Co-suthorTERMINOLOGY* ‘Air Resistance: resistance inhibiting train motion as a result of the drag of air flow past the moving train. This resistance increases in proportion to the square of the train, speed. (See also Davis Equation.) BART (also SFBARTD): San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District Bernoulli Effect: static regain. The conversion of velocity pressure to static pressure when an air stream enters an enlarged cross-sectional area with an attendant reduction of average air velocity. Blast: sudden atmospheric pressure changes caused by air rushing into a subway station, tunnel or shaft as a result of piston action generated by an approaching train. Blast Shaft: a shaft located in the approach tunnel of, and immediately adjacent to, a subway station specifically for the purpose of relieving blast effects. Blockage Ratio: ratio of the cross-sectional area of the train to the cross-sectional area of the tunnel, Braking Resistors: see Resistor Grids Branched Junction: location in a subway tunnel or station at which air flow divides into two or more streams. Chimney Effect: the tendency of heated air to rise due to its lower density (buoyancy). Also called stack effect. clo: unit of clothing insulation. (See also Physiological Principals, Comfort and Health in ASHRAE Handbook of Fundamentals.) CTA: Chicago Transit Authority. CTS: Cleveland Transit System. Davis Equation: empirically quantifies the resistance offered by a train to motion along a track in terms of pounds of resistance per ton of train weight. A brief discussion of this equation may be found in Mark's Mechanical Engineers Handbook under the subject headings of Railway Engineering and Train Resistance. Dwell Time: the time, in seconds, a train is stopped in a station, Dynamic Braking: see Resistor Grids. Fume: disperse suspension of particles in the air. Headway: the scheduled time interval between the arrival in a station of two successive trains travelling in the same direction. Line Section: the length of trainway between two adjacent branched junctions ar between a branched junction and a portal, MARTA: Authority, Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit MBTA: Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority ‘Mechanical Resistance: resistance inhibiting train m as a result of journal-bearing and flange friction and other mechanical factors. (See also Davis Equation.) MTA: Mass Transit Administration — Maryland Department of Transportation, MucTe: Commission, Montreal Urban Community Transit NYCTA: New York City Transit Authority. PATCO: Port Authority Transit Corporation (Phila.). PATH: Port Authority Trans-Hudson — The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. mn Action: the effect of a moving train on the air in a tunnel; analogous to a piston pushing air ahead of it as it moves through a cylinder. Also called piston effect Porosity: the ratio of the total free area of the wall ‘openings to the gross area of a dividing wall between two adjacent subway tunnels, Portal: the interface between a subway tunnel and the atmosphere. Resistor Grids: during braking, the traction motors are electrically reversed, causing them to behave as generators. The electrical energy thus generated is dissipated through resistors inserted into the motor circuit and is released as heat to the surrounding air. This process is called dynamic braking. The resistors are generally located beneath the train and are arranged in one or more braking or decelerating resistor grid(s). With cam-type propulsion control, the current throughTERMINOLOGY* the traction motors during train acceleration is controlled by inserting resistors into the motor circuit. This second, array of resistors is also located beneath the train and is arranged in starting or accelerating resistor grid(s). With chopper-type control, no accelerating resistor grids are used. SCRTD: Southern California Rapid Transit District. SEPTA: Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority Shaft: any structure provided for the purpose of exchanging air between a subway system, or any part thereof, and the atmosphere Slippage: a bypassing of air that is not pushed ahead of a train moving in a tunnel, but instead is deflected by the. front of the train and “slips” to the rear of the train, Stack Effect: see Chimney Effect Sta ig Resistors: see Resistor Grids, Subway: a rapid transit system, or part thereof, which operates in a covered structure below grade, ‘Trainway: as used in the context of this Handbook, trainway describes the track on which revenue (rains operate, TTC: Toronto Transit Commission. Underground: see Subway WMATA: Authority Washington Metropolitan Area Transit * Additional terms used in this Handbook and not listed herein are defined in ASHRAF Handbook of Fundamentals, Chapter 27 — ‘Terminology.PART 1 — DIGEST This part of the Handbook provides the reader with an overview of the history and development of environmental, design for subways and identifies the interaction of environmental control with the other major subsystems in a rapid transit system past and present. Section 1.1 contains a condensed history of subway development and of the early consideration toward ‘environmental control. It identifies a compendium of subway environmental design experience that was available prior to the preparation of this book. It documents the approaches, methodologies and techniques, or lack thereof, for solution of subway environmental problems. Thus the Handbook user might bbe better prepared to appreciate the complexities relating to the extension or modification of existing systems, in light of these experiences. Section 1.2, entitled Contemporary Environmental Control Concepts, identifies and highlights the methodologies currently ‘employed in the planning, design and construction of new systems. It relates the principles of mechanical control systems concepts that are utilized today. A description of the Design Process, Section 1.3, furthers an understanding of the fundamentals of the design process performed by the environmental design engineer based on the material printed in this Handbook. It is essential that those who are involved in preliminary planning of the major subsystem concepts (station, line section and vehicle design, and train operations, etc.) have an awareness of the total design process’ so that the impact of the environmental control systems on the other major subsystems can be evaluated appropriately. ‘Toillustrate the need for trade-off evaluations, Section 1.4 provides guidance on alternative system concepts, This section includes a consideration of alternative mechanical cevironmental control system concepts and economic tradeoff benefits associated with different types of vehicles, operating concepts, and construction ‘configurations as influenced by the environmental control systems. It also includes information to aid the reader in defining and quantifying the overall energy requirements for a rapid transit system. 1.1 Past Practices and Concepts ‘The tracks of primitive man wound across the continent of Africa and zigzagged their way through Europe leaving po traces that told of man’s innate desire for mobility. Soon, primitive man learned to drag loads upon sledges; then, in 4000 B.C. in Mesopotamia, man invented the wheel; and the two-wheel cart quickly followed. Although man’s early wheels were broad (o carry heavy loads, man soon noticed the need for harder and smoother surfaces upon which to roll. As the loads became heavier, man turned, to four wheels, and the tracks he now made upon the earth became straighter and harder and covered longer distances. These tracks eventually evolved into rail transit a first inaugurated in London, England. The following Paragraphs trace the history of this evolution with Primary emphasis on the ventilation aspects of subway rail transit systems. Early Public Transportation in London Hackney carriages were introduced in London in 1625; four-wheeled “growlers” were introduced in 1805. The Shillibeer horse omnibus came in 1829 and the horse train in 1861. Although many persons consider traffic problems exclusive to the twentieth century, it was during the 1850's that over 750,000 commuters entered and left London daily, cither by mainline railways or by road. The streets ‘of London were literally blocked for miles by the great variety of iron-tired vehicles of the day, all taking their toll on the frayed nerves and tempers of the frustrated London commuter. The London press ofthe day featured front page articles telling of the “scandalous state of London's transportation facilites,” at the same time affording space for comment on grandiose schemes for relieving the streets of much of their traffic by going underground with railway transportation (Ref. 1). Tt was during the 1850's that the cities of the world proved ‘that mass transportation and individual transportation could not mix successfully in urban areas. Yet, when railways offered separate mass transportation systems, the cities’ commuters were reluctant to use them. Many municipalities insisted on railway stations being kept beyond their city boundaries. The first urban penetration by a railway, and also the world’s first underground line, the Metropolitan, opened ‘on January 10, 1863, in London. Although trains ran underground, they were pulled by steam locomotives, In spite of the unpleasant conditions created by the smoky engines traveling the subsurface route, the Metropolitan ‘was an instant success. It was so successful that London began building an extensive network of subsurface lines12 Digest extending to the rapidly expanding suburbs. Londoners can also claim priority in both tunneling under a river and in constructing the first tube railway. A. vehicular tunnel was opened between Rotherhithe and Wapping on March 25, 1843, In 1869, when the London, Brighton and South Coast Railway used the tunnel for train service from their mainline at New Cross, it became the first under-river train crossing. A year later in 1870, the English opened the world’s first tube railway solely for passenger transportation when they constructed the tubes under the Thames from Tower Hill to Vine Street, a distance of one-quarter mile. At first it was suggested that the trains for this new tube ‘be run on the pneumatic principle. The cars would be “blown” through the tunnels by compressed air generated jn compressors at each end of the line; in fact, a narrow ‘gauge railway of this type materialized in London in 1863, for conveying parcels underground from the North Western Post Office on Seymour Street to London’s Chief Post Office in the City. The trains carrying the mail were literally “sucked” or “blown” backward or forward by compressed air, but success was shortlived because the air leaked continuously through the tunnel joints. The project, ‘was soon abandoned. Initially, ventilation of the London Metropolitan was provided by grating-covered “blow-holes” to give some comfort to the passengers. Years later, the Central London Tube Company installed so-called ozonizers (air purifiers). These devices sucked fresh air into the stations, but they charged the incoming air so highly with ozone that an odor of ozone clung to the passengers. The installation of these devices was shortly abandoned. More recent practice in London is to exhaust air from the tunnels by powerful fans discharging into specially designed ducts. Fresh air is admitted through station ‘entrances, staircases and vent shafts. In addition, air movement produced by trains within the tunnels is used {a5 prime ventilation. To augment this “piston-action” Ventilation, fresh air is blown through shafts enclosed in staircase wells and special air shafts before being distributed to station platforms. The Metropolitan, which later became known as the London Underground rapid transit, encountered a new set, of environmental problems when electric motors came into use. As electric motors on the trains were made more powerful, they gave off more heat. Fresh air had to be injected forcibly by fans into the tunnels as well as onto station platforms to prevent a progressive rise of temperature caused by this higher energy output. The greater heat load, together with increased passenger haulage, created an intolerably stifling condition within. the London subway. In 1915, the British had an opportunity to devise new solutions to the ventilation problems when they constructed new tunnels between Finsbury Park and Bounds Green on the Cockfosters extension. Three 12-ft diameter construction shafts were retained to serve as exhaust air ducts. They were connected by short, 12-ft diameter extensions to the train tunnels, which, at these points, were enlarged sections. To assist the flow of air, the shafts were designed with generous radii and deflectors at their tops and bottoms to guide air flow. Centrifugal fans generally were used to move air through the shafts. These fans were placed in fan houses.above ground, However, axial flow fans were installed in an underground plant near Finsbury Park Station. At station sites, construction shafts were retained to serve as air intake shafts. Undesirable rapid air movement down escalators and shafts was avoided with air distribution through multiple channels. Outside air entered the stations through intake shafts. At the bottoms of these shafts were ducts which conveyed the air beneath side-platforms to smaller, vertical duct branches that terminated at grilles set high in the station walls. From these grilles, air was discharged across the platform. Although the early London subways did not hhave such elaborate provisions for ventilation, they nevertheless attracted the interest of railroaders from other countries. New York City’s First Subway Many years before construction began on New York City's first subway in 1901, Broadway and other major thoroughfares had become unsafe for pedestrians and something had to be done. Rivalry between omnibus drivers was so keen that they frequently injured pedestrians in their haste to pick up fares. At that time ‘there were two potential solutions to the problem; one was the use of elevated steam railways, and the other, the subway transit system. Both concepts were in competition in New York City in the mid-1800's. One of the early New York proponents of the subway approach was Alfred Ely Beach. Beach, the 44-year old publisher of Scientific American magazine and avid part-time inventor, submitted aPast Practices and Concepts 13 petition in 1868 for a postal dispatch charter in the City of New York. The charter which Beach had been granted was for the purpose of developing a pneumatic dispatch tube for transport of mail and possibly passengers. As it tumed out, Beach proceeded to build the tunnel so that it could later be subdivided into two smaller tubes for mail and parcel delivery. He also used the tunnel in 1870 to demonstrate the feasibility of passenger transport in subways. Its site was 21 ft beneath Broadway, between Warren and Murray streets. The tunnel itself was nine ft in diameter, 312 ft long, and held one cylindrical car capable of going about 10 mph. A giant, 100-hp blower propelled the vehicle along a track until it reached the far ‘end, where the fan, reversed by a trip wire, slowed the car to a stop and then pulled it back the other way. Beach's greatest contribution to the technology of tunnel construction was his shield, hydraulically driven, which was propelled by pistons that drove it through the earth. Dirt removal and bricklaying went on inside the shield, affording the workers complete protection against cave- ins. The elevated railway concept gained favor and that, combined with the financial crisis of the late 1870's, resulted in Beach's terminating his pioneering efforts. In 1912, workmen digging a new BMT system tunnel ‘unexpectedly broke into Beach's subway and found the little car sitting on its éracks, the whole tunnel still remarkably intact. Today the Beach tunnel is part of the BMT's City Hall station, where a plaque commemorates Beach's pioneering achievement. Another railroader, Hugh B. Willson, from Michigan, who had been in London during the construction of the London Metropolitan and who was present at its opening in 1863, was so impressed with its merits that he conceived the idea of building the same kind of steam underground transportation system for the City of New York. Unfortunately, Willson’s project was not received with enthusiasm by the New York State legislature. The bill was shelved in the Railroad Committee where it subsequently expired. Railroad Committee opposition stopped rapid transit for the time, but the fight for rapid transit for New York City began and was tobe waged with ‘ever-increasing fierceness. The concept proposed by Willson is of historical interest because it contains the first record of environmental consideration given in the design of an early subway system. It includes a ventilation concept developed by A.P. Robinson, an American engineer, who in 1864 drew the orginal plans for the New York City steam underground railroad. Robinson planned to obtain Ventilation through pipes running up from the tunnels to hollow gas lampposts erected on the street surface at the edge of the sidewalks. The lampposts were to be placed 100 ft apart on each side of the street under which the subway was to run (see Fig. 1.1), However, many years passed before Willson's proposal for New York City became reality. It was not until 1901 that, General William Barclay Parsons, a consulting engineer, completed the plans for the first New York City rapid transit subway using electric-powered trains. General Parsons, as well as many other prominent persons at the time, believed that the objection to steam propulsion in an underground system had killed earlier subway plans and that the development of the electric traction motor ow opened the way for construction of the first subway in New York. (History shows, however, that it was the fight for franchise rights which caused postponement of the construction of the New York City subways, not the trains’ power source.) When subway construction began in New York in 1901, xno special consideration had been given to mechanical ventilation of the tunnels and stations, Grating-covered sidewalk openings were provided for ventilation in ‘conjunction with the piston-type action of trains on tunnel air. The designers believed that sidewalk openings would provide sufficient supply offesh air tothe subway system. In October 1904, operation of New York's first subway began. It ran from south of City Hall to 145th Street and Broadway in Manhattan. The trip covered 10.5 miles and took 26 minutes. During the summer of 1905, less than a year after the subway opened, the system developed a high temperature problem within its tunnels because the ‘number of ventilation openings to the surface proved inadequate. To increase tunnel ventilation, more grating- covered openings were provided in the roofs of the subway stations, and fan chambers and flues were built between stations. Central exhaust fans for moving tunnel air, when necessary, were installed in the fan chambers. Fan capacity for this additional ventilation varied from 21,000 to 110,000 cfm. The fan motors ranged from 15 to 50 hp. Automatic louvers were fitted in the flue openings. The louvers were automatic in the sense that they were counterbalanced, or weighted, to open when exhaust tunnel air-was forced through the tunnel by the piston action of trains. After a train passed, the louvers closed by gravity action, thus preventing the exhausted air from returning to the tunnel, Later, when the Interborough Rapid Transit (IRT) line was extended, six rapid-transit tunnels were built under14 Digest Fig. 1.1. Section of Subway Tunnel Showing Subsurface Structures and Ventilation {as conceived by A. P. Robinson in 1864) the East River. Ventilation plants for each pair of these tunnels were provided on both sides of the river. They had the capacity to renew the tunnel air once every 15 minutes, independent of train movement. The plants were equipped with centrifugal fans that discharged fresh air into a plenum where the air was diverted into the tubes by means of lectro-pneumatically operated dampers. Fans had capacities of 45,000 to 70,000 cfm and were driven by 75 to 82-hp motors. Early Tests on Subway Ventilation In the early days of subway design, little research had been done on tunnel ventilation. The first significant test from which engineering data were gathered on subway trains was conducted by J. V. Davies and was reported in a paper, “Air Resistance to Trains in Tube Tunnels” (Ref. 2) presented to the American Society of Civil Engineers ‘on May 15, 1912. The tests reported therein were performed in October 1911 and gave special consideration to tunnel air, its resistance to train motion and its use as 2 ventilating force. The tests took place on the tracks of the Hudson and Manhattan (H&M) Railroad connecting Manhattan Transfer and the Church Street Terminal, 3 distance of 40,454 ft. For a distance of 13,400 ft, the H&M railroad ran through both iron-tubular and conerete-tined construction tunnels under the Hudson River. The remainder was surface track. ‘The experiments were conducted from 1:20 a.m. to 5:00 ‘a.m. to ensure that virtually no other traffic would be using the tunnels. Six tests were performed, four to evaluate air inertia characteristics within a tunnel as a train entered, and two to evaluate air velocity characteristics as a train traversed a tunnel. These velocity tests were made to measure air slippage within tunnels. (Slippage refers to air that is not pushed forward by a train but instead remains at rest or is deflected by the front of, the train and passes to the rear of the moving mass.)Past Practices and Concepts Most noticeable from the tests was a significant and sudden increase in air pressure when the train entered the tunnel. The column of moving air in front of the train was approximately 6,000 ft long. It was determined that the column of air in front of the train, 90 sq ft in eross- section or 540,000 cu ft in volume, would weigh approximately 41,000 Ibs and would require a force of 19,200 Ibs to be accelerated to 15 ft per sec (10 mph). From these tests, Davies concluded that during the day, when tunnel traffic is heavy, the impact pressure would not be as high as found during these tests, for the tunnel, air would already be in motion from the passage of the other trains, and the force necessary to overcome air would therefore depend on the traffic density. (As enters a tunnel, itis resisted by two aerodynamic forces: impact upon the slower moving or stationary air, and air friction in the annulus. Impact is a function of train speed and is independent of tunnel length. Total frictional resistance varies with the length of the moving air column. Therefore, in long tunnels, the total resistance due to the train motion does not depend on train speed alone.) The velocity tests determined that the volume of slip increased very rapidly with train speed. This observation, was confirmed by the pressure difference between the front and rear of a train; as train speed increased, the pressure at the front of the train increased and the pressure at the rear of the train decreased. For an average train speed of 24 mph through tunnels with iron liners, a steady slippage of 254,000 efm developed. ‘The 1911 tests suggested five methods for decreasing air resistance in long unvented tunnels: provision of fans, ‘multiple moving trains within a tunnel, wind shields on trains, smooth tunnel linings and larger tunnel cross- sectional areas. It was concluded that supply fans could be provided at one end of a tunnel and exhaust fans at the other end, to move the air within a single-track tunnel in the same direction in which the trains are moving. However, costs were considered prohibitive at that time. It was reasoned that multiple trains moving in the same direction within a tunnel would produce a resultant total Pressure which would not, however, increase in Proportion to the number of trains. Though the impact ‘on entry into the tunnel would be the same on each train, the total resistance on each train would decrease with an increase in number of moving trains Wind shields on trains would reduce both impact and air resistance, but the volume of air dispelled by train piston action, and therefore the ventilation rate, would be reduced. Smooth-lined tunnels would tend to reduce the 15 resistance to the flow of air, since the pressure necessary to force air through a tube depends to a great extent on the relative smoothness of its interior. But the cost of a smooth lining to reduce total resistance was considered unwarranted Increase in tunnel cross-sectional area was deemed the controlling factor in the air resistance offered to a train. With an increase in cross-sectional area the tunnel resistance would decrease and would approach that found in open air. In multi-track tunnels, air resistance would be materially reduced, but the piston-action ventilation would be adversely affected, because the rate at which air is expelled would be reduced and air would instead be buffeted from track to track. This recirculation of air would retain large amounts of train heat in the tunnel and would cause an increase in tunnel temperature. Based on the 1911 tests, Davies determined that piston- action ventilation of two- or four-track tunnels, in which trains operate. in opposite directions, is virtually ineffective. He explained that ventilation of such tunnels, must depend on independently operated fans to remove air at specified rates. Davies concluded that in single-track tunnels the enormous volume of air displaced by piston action of a train would ensure adequate ventilation if the tunnel were properly vented at certain points (Ref. 2). Similar tests were conducted by George Gibbs in 1912 in the Pennsylvania Railroad Tunnels to investigate Ventilating conditions caused by train’ movement. The Purpose of these tests was to determine whether trains operating at high speed would produce sufficient piston action to give satisfactory ventilation. The conditions in the tunnels of the two railroads, tested by Davies and Gibbs respectively, were quite similar, except that portions of the Hudson and Manhattan Tunnels were not ‘concrete lined. The presence of exposed cast-iron segment flanges caused considerable air friction. In the tests by Gibbs, air columns moved by trains at various speeds attained velocities of from three-fourths to two-thirds that Of the trains, depending on train speed, The average speed Of the air column for the entire time the train was in the tunnel was about one-half the train speed, Gibbs’ tests indicated that after a train left a tunnel, the column of air in the tunnel remained in motion for about five minutes but at a constantly decreasing velocity. Gibbs estimated that a train of six to eight cars replaced half the volume of air in a tunnel with fresh air drawn from portal and vent shafts. During rush-hour traffic, a complete renewal of tunnel air ‘was required every 20 minutes. If the movement of one1-6 Digest train renewed one-half the air in the tunnels, the passage of a train every 10 minutes would produce satisfactory ventilation. However, rush-hour service required a train frequency of 2.5 minutes; therefore, it was reasoned at the time, four times the required ventilation would be produced by train movement without the aid of ventilating fans during this period of heaviest traffic. In summary, Gibby’ test showed that satisfactory ventilation in the Pennsylvania Railroad Tunnels would be provided by piston-action ventilation alone. In Boston: The First Subway in North America ‘A subway had already been operational for over a decade {in Boston when tests were made by Gibbs and Davies. A Rapid Transit Commissioner had been appointed in June 1891 to provide proposed solutions to the problem of rapid transit in the City of Boston. In August 1894, the Boston ‘Transit Commission was organized and subsequently the Green, Blue, Orange and Red Lines were constructed. On September 1, 1897, the first half-mile section of the subway from the Boston Public Garden portal to Park Street Station (the first subway built in North America) ‘was opened for operation. Even in those early days of subway planning an awareness of the need for providing patrons with a suitable environment was evident. In fact, the first report of the Boston Transit Commission, dated August 15, 1895, acknowledged, if only as an economit factor, “.. the cost of pumping, ventilating and lighting and the expense of ‘maintaining stations.” This report describes a ventilation concept which provides that “... fresh air will be drawn in at the stations, and will flow in each direction to the ventilating fans, where it will be exhausted through special openings at the side.” The report concluded, from a comparison with the old tunnels in London, that “it will be easy to secure pure air by artificial ventilation in a subway operated and lighted by electricity.” It was correctly surmised even then that “The question of temperature is connected with that of ventilation, and if the air in the subway is frequently changed, the difference in temperature between it and the outside air will be small.” Evidently the fans referred to in the first report were not installed initially as planned. A letter by the Boston ‘Transit Commission, dated January 18, 1898, “begs to call, to the attention” of the Boston Elevated Railway Company that “in the hot summer days fans may be imperative for a proper equalization of the temperature” even though after “the short experience of four and a half months it does not appear that fans are essential for keeping the air pure and wholesome during the autumn, and winter seasons.. in the fourth annual Boston Transit Commission report by carefully maintained dry bulb and wet bulb temperature and humidity charts in which subway and outside air conditions for the first full year of operation were compared. For example, these charts indicate that ‘on an abnormally warm day in October, when the outside air was 83F db and 71F wb, the air in the subway was 67F db and 65F wb. In the following summer, the subway dry- bulb and wet-bulb temperatures were within approximately three degrees of the outside air temperatures. Subsequently, fans in a capacity range of 30,000 to 40,000 cfm were installed and, in addition to temperature, the purity of the air in the Boston subway ‘was closely monitored. The fifth annual report by the ‘Commission concluded from samples taken in January and February 1899 that “the air taken at the busiest hour in the most crowded station in the subways is superior to that usually provided in halls, theatres, churches, schools, In May 1900, construction was begun on the East Boston tunnel, which was to be ventilated by a duet in the erown of the tunnel (see Fig. 1.2), extending from Webster Street in East Boston under the harbor to the Atlantic Avenue station. The duct had a cross-section of about 48 sq ft, and was formed by means of a diaphragm one in. thick, made of expanded metal enclosed in cement mortar. A partition midway between the two ends divided the duct in two portions. On each side of the partition, 14 openings, each four ft long and 17 in. wide, were provided to serve as exhaust air intakes. Fig. 1.2. East Boston TunnelPast Practices and Concepts 17 In addition to the far-sighted planning and provisions for ventilation, the rather satisfactory: quality of Boston's subway environment was attributed to larger entrances and exits in closely spaced stations. Also, the trains’ average speed was higher than that of subway trains in other cities at the time, resulting in purging greater volumes of air. For example, Boston subway trains averaged 17 to 25 mph whereas New York subway trains averaged 20 mph for express trains with II cars and 16 to 18 mph for local trains with eight cars. Vent-shaft spacing in Boston varies from 300 to 1,400 ft. Vent-shaft gratings are located in sidewalks, roadways, parks and cemeteries. Grating areas vary from 60 sq ft to 210 sq ft. A tunnel temperature range from 38F to 96F with a relative humidity range of 58 to 86 percent is generally maintained. The system currently operated by the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority relies almost entirely on piston-action ventilation during normal operation. Fans are used mainly in an emergency when piston action ceases and contaminated air has to be purged. Chicago's Subways In Chicago's subways, environmental _ control considerations were employed from the start. In 1943, its first subway system was completed. Ventilation of the system was based on concepts developed by Edison Brock in a paper he prepared for the Journal of the Western Society of Engineers, entitled “Development of Formulae for Calculating Ventilation for The Chicago Subway” (Ref. 3). In the paper, Brock stated that the heat generated by .the train motors and electric lighting, together with body heat from passengers, was so great that excessive temperatures would prevail in summer unless a volume of air in excess of that required for breathing were supplied. Therefore, it was necessary to set up heat balances and to develop methods and formulas for calculating piston effects of the trains. ‘The Chicago subways, except in the downtown Loop area, have separate tubes for each track. It was evident that venting had to be provided for each tube if air velocities generated by piston action were to be kept within acceptable limits. Since single-track tubes were then a departure from existing practice, it was necessary to pick ut and isolate comparable construction in other cities for preliminary mathematical formulation. The author had Previously conducted numerous tests, but he believed that the air-resistance formulas he developed from this previous work were not applicable to single-track tunnel operation. A survey of existing data did not disclose any ‘mathematical analyses of piston action of trains within tunnels. Therefore, Brock found it necessary to develop formulas applicable to the Chicago subway in advance of its construction and without the benefit of preliminary tests Chicago subways were designed for an anticipated ultimate peak of 40 trains per hour per track. A subsequent mathematical formulation of piston-action air ‘movement of trains in a single tube of the Chicago subway suggested that, with air vents at sufficiently close intervals, the tubes would have ample ventilation. The formulation also made it clear that such vents were Fequired to avoid excessive air velocities on passenger platforms and in escalators and stairwells Brock demonstrated that vents placed at 450-ft intervals were essential if the air velocities through stair and escalator wells, sidewalk gratings and on station platforms. were to be kept within limits so as not to be felt objectionable. Fans installed in the tunnels were generally designed for emergency use only. In the Loop area, piston action was not as effective as elsewhere, because of slow train speeds, double-track tunnel configuration and large platform areas. In setting up a heat balance for a subway, Brock considered the cumulative effect of the heat generated, the daily and annual tunnel wall temperatures and the soil temperature, as well as the air changes necessary to ‘maintain an acceptable environmental condition within a subway tunnel. Brock’s analysis showed that the heat produced from the rolling stock in summer would exceed the tunnel wall absorption capacity during the peak hour of subway operation. As a result, he predicted the average temperature within a tunnel would rise above the Prevailing outdoor temperatures. Brock came to this conclusion by formulating accumulative heat-effect equations for the subway walls and surrounding soils for both annual temperature cycles and average daily temperature cycles based on corresponding atmospheric temperature cycles for Chicago. He plotted curves that showed the variation in conerete and soil temperatures at various distances from the tunnel wall surface. He then determined the accumulative effect for each cyclic temperature condition Application of the findings to the design of the Chicago subways resulted in a system with adequate ventilation and acceptable temperatures practically year-round. Chicago’s average temperature is SOF with a relative humidity of 20 to 98 percent. Its annual temperature range is -16F to +98F. In spite of the possibilities of high1-8 Digest temperatures and high hui ‘Chicago's subway stations are not air conditioned and rely, con piston action for all of the ventilation. Using this, method, the stations maintain an average temperature range of 40F to 75F with a relative humidity of 40 to 80 percent. Vent shafts are spaced 450 ft apart for intake and exhaust of air. Vent-shaft gratings are located in sidewalks and within parking areas. Grating areas average 100 sq ft net area each, There are four tunnel air changes per hour. The earth temperature around the tunnels averages SOF. Under these conditions, tunnel temperatures range from 40F to 87F with a relative humidity of 20 to 80 percent. The Toronto Transit System The environmental progress of Chicago's subways led other cities, such as Toronto, which were planning rapid transit systems, to seek environmental control solutions in the early design stages. The Toronto system, which ‘began operation in 1954, was based on the Chicago design. However, it had a major environmental problem in the form of high air yelocities, with corresponding pressure and shock waves to the system’s stairwells, platforms and patrons. In the Chicago subway design, vent shafts were placed 450 ft on centers. The cost of such construction proved prohibitive for Toronto, and the problem of finding vent outlet locations was @ major one. Because of these facts, Toronto engineers decided to increase vent-shaft spacing to an average of 1,500 fi. This large spacing, coupled with the fact that the train's blockage ratio was a massive 67 Percent (compared with 50 percent for Chicago's trains), Produced high pressures and velocities ‘These adverse effects were corrected to acceptable levels bby two methods. One method was to terminate the dividing wall between the box-tunnel sections 100 ft from the station portal. The resultant widening provided a pressure relief as well as a means for the air to exhaust into ventilation shafts at the tunnel entrance. The second ‘method was to taper the roof of the tunnel in the station approaches to provide a diffusion effect and thus a smoother airflow into the vent shafts. In the Toronto system, prolonged high ambient temperatures necessitate occasional running of fans during the four hours at night when the subway is not in operation. Fans are operated to cool the tunnel walls and surrounding earth and to restore their value as heat sinks. ‘The heat sink effect helps to maintain acceptable temperatures during the late afternoon peak traffic hours. Toronto's average temperature is 47.7F with a relative humidity of 60 to 78 percent. Its annual temperature range is -14F to +107F. In spite of the possibilities of high temperature coincident with high humidity, Toronto's subway stations are not air conditioned. Stations and tunnels rely entirely on piston action for ventilation, Vent- shaft gratings are located in roadways, sidewalks and public plaza areas. Gratings vary from 100 to 200 sq ft. ‘As a result, subway temperatures range from 28F to 87F with a relative humidity of 13 to 68 percent. The Cleveland Transit System ‘The Cleveland Transit System was completed in 1955. It consisted primarily of a surface operation until 1968. At that time, it was extended westward to the Cleveland Hopkins Airport, where the final 1,670 ft extends underground into a two-track tunnel ending near the airport lobby, thereby becoming the first transit operation in the United States offering rail service to a major airport. Piston-action ventilation, similar to that in Boston, Chicago and Toronto, could not be used for the subway in Cleveland. Because the tunnel entrance speed is limited to 15 mph and because the tunnel dead-ends at the airport, there exists virtually no piston-action ventilation. TI due primarily to two factors: first, as the train enters the ‘tunnel itis in a constant state of deceleration from 15 mph to zero; and secondly, because of the very low blockage- ratio (0.22), an insignificant air column is pushed ahead of the train, There is no noticeable air movement on any portion of the platforin. ‘Ventilation for this tunnel was provided by 1 20,000 cfm, axiallow supply fan located 680 ft from the far end of the platform and approximately 990 ft from the tunnel’s portal. This fan affords one and one-half air changes per hour, is. single-speed, nonreversible and manually controlled. During winter months, the airport station and pedestrian tunnels are heated by a 50-kw-capacity, 2,000 cfm, forced-air system. In addition, two infrared heaters, of 1,000-watt capacity each, are located above doors to offset heat loss by infiltration. There is also a similar installation over the doors leading from the pedestrian tunnel to the platform proper for the same purpose. In spite of its high annual temperature variation (-2F to +101F), Cleveland’s one underground station is not air conditioned and relies for its ventilation on the 20,000 efinContemporary Environmental Control Concepts 1-9 exhaust fan. The annual average temperature range in the station is about 42F. (Relative humidity has never been measured.) Summary Past practices of subway environmental control were limited to natural (piston-action) ventilation, augmented with forced mechanical ventilation often as a last resort after painful trial-and-error periods. In many existing subways, the benefits that can be derived from retrofitting the ventilation systems have already been exhausted. New subways should embody provisions for adequate environmental control from their inception, or else they will be outdated before operations begin. The rate of population growth and increasing traffic congestion in the major cities of the world have brought about a demand for improved mass transit facilities and operations resulting in higher train speeds, shorter headways and heavier passenger loads. In a number of new and existing systems, subway car air conditioning has become a necessity. These factors have contributed to a sizeable increase in subway heat generation, so that not only the subway air but even the heat sinks have experienced a rapid increase in temperature. Therefore, ‘a systems approach embodying the latest available technology for controlling subway environment should be undertaken in the planning and design of new subway systems. 1.2, Contemporary Environmental Control Concepts ‘The growing need for rapid and comfortable urban mass transit is widely regarded as one of the outstanding technological challenges of the last half of the twentieth century. Today, more rapid transit systems involving subway facilities are being thought about, planned, designed or built than ever before. It has been estimated that in cities in the United States alone expenditures on new, expanded, or improved rapid transit facilities will amount to $25 to $35 billion over the next 10 to 15 years, and that at least 150 miles ofthese lines will bein subways. Cities expanding existing systems or planning new systems include Atlanta, Baltimore, Boston, Buffalo, Chicago, Cleveland, Honolulu, Los Angeles, Miami, Minneapolis- St. Paul, New York, Pittsburgh, St. Louis and Washington. In other countries, subway work in planning or construction stages is under way in Toronto, Montreal, Mexico City, Vienna, Munich, Frankfurt, Budapest, Caracas, Hong Kong, and Sao Paulo; transit studies are being performed in Singapore; Japan is planning 10 practically double its existing 132 km of rapid transit in Tokyo, Osaka, and Kobe; and Brussels, Helsinki, Turin, and Amsterdam are among the European cities that are planning entirely new rapid transit systems. The Population growth in urban areas demands a greater frequency of rapid transit service at higher speeds, Since the increase in power to provide faster and more frequent train service (which is ultimately all converted to heat unless energy regeneration is employed) varies as the square of the increase in speed, requirements for environmental control in vehicles, subway stations and tunnels are expected to increase at an equal rate Paramount among the problems of subway environment is that of heat buildup and disposal. In fact, it has been estimated that (in the United States, at least) the cost of heat control in the subway may be as much as eight to 10 percent of the total construction cost, and that the power consumption of environmental control systems ‘may be as much as 50 percent of that required for traction, For example, in the WMATA (Washington Metropolitan, Area Transportation Authority) subway, about $85 millions being expended on tunne! ventilation and station air conditioning, and it has been estimated that the proposed Los Angeles system would have to allocate some 556 million for environmental control. Even in the San Francisco Bay area, the so-called “naturally air- conditioned city”, the environmental controls for the subway system, at the time it commenced revenue ‘operations, exceeded that of any system in the United States and in the world with the exception of some recently air-conditioned lines in Tokyo and Osaka Removal of excess heat often may be as important 10 subway patrons as the speed of their ride, and subway ‘operating agencies are discovering that the environmental conditions of subway waiting areas and transit vehicles significantly affect the level of utilization of a facility. The relative importance of providing an attractive ‘environment for passengers may be expected to grow over the decades ahead as the riding public, increasingly accustomed to environmental control in offices and homes, desires appropriate environmental conditions in their transit systems. This desire increases the requirements for a high degree of heat removal and overall. environmental control ‘The expression “subway environment” generally is taken to encompass all the phenomena which affect the comfort1-10 Digest and well-being of patrons and operating personnel. The subway temperature, humidity, and air movement are particularly important to comfort, but the environment also includes subway noise, dust, odors, and bothersome pressure fluctuations. Air temperatures and velocities are regulated in subways primarily by control of the design of major construction features, such as station, vent shaft and line geometrical configuration and layout, and by installations of environmental control equipment, such as ‘mechanical ventilation and refrigeration. ‘Subway spaces, with respect to environment, may be con- sidered to comprise four distinct but related areas: the public and non-public spaces within stations, the vehicles, and the normally unoccupied trainway space. The ‘objectives to be realized in controlling the environment in all such spaces are: first, to provide a suitable environment for patrons, as well as for operating and ‘maintenance personnel; and second, to provide for the ‘removal of a sufficient amount of the heat generated from the normal system operation so that the life expectancy of the equipment will not be diminished. In addition, positive control of haze and odors should be provided. In the event ofa fire or similar emergency, an effective means of purging smoke and supplying fresh air to patrons and fire-fighting personnel is mandatory. Allof these objectives, therefore, relate to the environment of a system, eg. the control of temperature rise and the replenishment of air. Subway construction ‘initiated during recent years has brought new experiences as well as some new approaches in the consideration of environmental control. Brief descriptions of experiences in subway systems include the The PATH System In 1962, Port Authority Trans-Hudson (PATH), 2 subsidiary of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, assumed operation and maintenance of the rail rapid transit system previously known as the Hudson and Manhattan Railroad between New Jersey and New York Outdoor temperature in the area varies from OF to 95F and averages 54. Summer outdoor relative humidity ranges from 40 to 80 percent. Initially, station entrances and exits were relied on to admit fresh air, except at three locations where supply fans were provided to supplement these flow rates. PATH, however, no longer employs mechanical ventilation under normal operating conditions. Tests showed that fan operation made little difference in tunnel air flows Ventilation is now completely by piston action. Fans and dampers for emergency conditions, however, are installed in all shafts. All PATH subway cars are air-conditioned. A capacity of ten tons of refrigeration is provided for each car. The vehicle air-conditioning system consists of one under-floor compressor-condenser unit per car and iwo evaporator units located in the ceiling, one at each end of the car. During the summer, conditions of 78F and S0 percent relative humidity are maintained within the cars. The World Trade Center terminal is the first air- conditioned subway station on the North American continent. Air conditioning was installed in 1971, when the Hudson Terminal station was extensively remodeled to become the World Trade Center station. The station i-conditioning system consists of a built-up air-handling. unit containing chilled water and steam heating coils. The ir supply unit delivers 95,000 cfm of conditioned outside ir at SSF db, 53.1F wb. The total cooling load is $90 tons per hour during the peak evening rush hour in the summer, of which about half constitutes outside air load. The Montreal System In Montreal, Canada, a new subway system commenced ‘operations in 1966. The system was the first to be installed in North America with pneumatic rubber-tired wheels, as used on the Paris Metro trains and now also on the Mexico City subway (see also discussion on The Rapid Transit Vehicle in Sec. 1.4). In addition to noise reduction, proponents of the rubber-tied concept believe that it can also offer other advantages: (1) excellent gripping properties allow fairly steep grades up to seven percent. Therefore, a “humped” track profile (with tunnel-track elevation below station-track elevation) can be utilized to greater degree, which reduces energy input requirements during acceleration and reduces excess energy discharge during deceleration; (2) improved riding comfort; (3) improved braking since no wheel slippage is encountered; and (4) less maintenance required on the negative (return current) rail. But there are also disadvantages: (I) a pneumatic tire’s load-carrying capacity is smaller, (2) Pneumatic tires require a guiding mechanism, (3) Pneumatic deflation possibilities complicate the truck design, and (4) pneumatic tires on precast concrete rails require more power and generate more heat in the system. Outdoor temperature in the Montreal area varies from =ITF to +97F. The estimated maximum capacity of a nine-car train is 1,500 seated and standing passengers. The projected ultimate peak traffic density is 40 trains per hourContemporary Environmental Control Concepts 1 in each direction, resulting in a peak carrying capacity of {60,000 passengers per hour in each direction. A total of 369 cars was ordered initially Upgrades at station approaches are utilized for reducing train deceleration braking energy requirements and acceleration energy demands, and therefore overall traction power requirements. The Méntreal Metro is a deep tunnel system for the majority of its construction. (Self-supporting rock tunneling in Montreal is less expensive than the conventional “cut-and-cover” or “decked roadway” method of construction used in the United States.) Ventilation is principally by mechanical means rather than by piston action alone. Originally fan shafts were placed about midway between stations for ventilation of the subway. No other shafts were provided. Each shaft had a two-speed, reversible fan of 45,000 cfm capacity. Fans were controlled from adjacent passenger stations. In the summer of 1967, shortly after operations started, however, stations and vehicle interiors were uncomfortably hot. Also, high air velocities and disturbing pressure fluctuations were experienced in the station passageways and entrances. ‘These problems were attributable to the fact that doors hhad to be installed at all entrances due to the severe winter climate. The design of the Metro system was based on the design of the Paris subway where trains average about 15 mph. The Montreal Metro trains, on the other hand, average between 22 and 32 mph. Furthermore, the blockage ratio of the Montreal trains is higher than in most double-track systems. Yet, design was based on the assumption that virtually no piston effect would occur in a doublestrack tunnel, and that therefore, any air velocities produced by the piston effect would not be objectionable because the air would bypass the moving trains. For these reasons, piston air movement was ignored in the design of the Montreal system. However, the air pushed by the train could not vent from the tunnels except via the station platforms and entrances. ‘A. major retrofit was required. During 1968, the 45,000-ofm fans were replaced with 135,000-cfm fans, which operate 24 hours a day in summer. From 1968 to 1970, 17 blast and ventilation shafts were added in tunnels near some stations and built directly into other stations. These shafts were placed in the areas where high temperatures and velocities had been experienced. As a result of the changes, summer temperatures were reduced to acceptable levels, except for short periods at certain stations. Also, air velocities were greatly diminished, ‘As originally designed, the mechanical ventilation rate was 2.5 air changes per hour, calculated of the basis of the total system. Piston action rate, which the subway. designers originally assumed to be negligible, resulted in fone to two air changes per hour at peak operation. The retrofit increased the mechanical ventilation rate to six air ‘changes per hour. In the planned extensions, the design ventilation rate at peak operation of the mechanical ventilation is expected to be 12 air changes per hour. The retrofit program necessitated extensive investigations both, before and after the changes were made, and much has. been learned as a result. Environmental data from tests both before and after major system changes are available. In the winter, every effort is made to keep all the heat in the subway. With fans inoperative and shafts closed and all ventilation by piston action only, minimum platform temperature is 44F, which is considered acceptable for patron comfort. Because the original design of the subway assumed that piston effect would be negligible with the 30 percent blockage ratio, high air velocities experienced in station passageways and entrances were unexpected. By not having blast shafts at tunnel entrances to stations, the piston-action driven air could be relieved only through the stations. Hence, those station passageways and entrances became, in effect, blast shafts, and excessively high air velocities were experienced at certain station entrances. Sudden unanticipated openings of station doors due to high air pressure were of major concern before the retrofit, and remain a problem at some stations. ‘Montreal's subway stations are estimated tobe IS percent piston-action ventilated, 80 percent fan ventilated, and five percent chimney ventilated. By using all three ‘methods, the stations maintain an average temperature range of 44F to 85F with a relative humidity of 30 to 60 percent. With fans operating in the intake mode, station temperatures during the spring and fall are consistently within the range of patron comfort. The tunnels are ventilated in the same manner as the stations, with long vent shaft spacings, averaging 2,900 ft, between stations. The gratings for these vent shafts are located within buildings and parking areas. Gratings have 60 percent free area. Tunnel air changes six to eight times per hour. Tunnel temperatures range from 44F to 85F with a relative humidity of 30 to 60 percent. The PATCO System Port Authority Transit Corporation (PATCO) is a subsidiary of the Delaware River Port Authority and operates a rapid transit line between downtown Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and Lindenwold, New Jersey.1-12 Digest The service to Lindenwold began in 1969. Outdoor temperature in the area ranges from -6F to 100F, averaging about 56F. Summer outdoor relative humidity varies from about 30 to 90 percent. Ventilation is by piston action only and no fans are Provided. Although all surface stations have air- conditioned waiting rooms, no air conditioning is provided in subway stations. All PATCO transit vehicles are air conditioned, with ten tons of reftigeration employed for each car. The annual temperature range in the PATCO tunnels is estimated to be 40F to 98F. The BART System In 1972, the first “all new” rapid transit system in the United States in recent years began operations in the San Francisco Bay area. The environmental systems for the vehicles, stations and line sections were extensive, even though the ambient outdoor air in the vicinity of most of the subway sections of the system is almost always pleasantly cool. Although the vehicles are air-conditioned, environmental control for stations and subway line sections relies entirely con ventilation. Large vent shafts are provided for each single-track tunnel at each of the station-line section interfaces. Intermediate vent shafts are employed on station-to-station line section subway runs greater than 1,500 fi in length to support the system emergency ventilation criteria, The stations are mechanically ventilated with filtered outdoor air supply delivered through extensive duct distribution systems. For emergency ventilation, reversible vane-axial fans of approximately 140,000 cfm capacity are provided in each shaft with face and bypass dampers. The fan performance characteristics are unique in that the capacity in each direction of operation is identical, At the central control ‘center, all fans are identified on a large display panel and ‘can be operated from this location or locally as required. Newer Concepts As new transit systems are being planned and the older transit systems are being modified or extended, improvement of the environment is receiving increased emphasis. Intense attention is focused on emergency ventilation systems and equipment for tunnel line sections and stations. In the station areas, various types of air-conditioning and airchandling systems are being designed and installed. A concept identified as “spot cooling” is being advanced in the WMATA system. The objective of this concept is 10 ‘maintain a comfortable environment within an invisible envelope of air enclosing only that portion of a station, platform area occupied by the subway system patrons, When this objective is achieved by an appropriately designed supply and return air distribution system, the air-conditioning load is limited to that contained within the envelope of air. When trains enter or leave the station, the envelope will be “broken” and the otherwise steady- state load conditions and environmental control cannot, be maintained during this time interval To minimize this disruption of environmental control by the piston action of the moving trains, designs were developed to reduce the effect of piston action air in the station. Cutbacks in the center dividing wall between the dox-tunnel sections at the approaches to each station, along with the use of large, common vent shafts at these locations, are intended to reduce piston-action effects in the station area. In addition, trackway supply or exhaust air systems are incorporated in WMATA station areas to prevent the undercar train heat from affecting the station, platform environment while trains are dwelling in a stati Other forms of air conditioning are being designed into the Baltimore and Atlanta systems and in the new Second Avenue line in New York. These include a variety of supply and return air distribution systems, in which air- handling equipment is generally located in rooms at the ends of the station platform, and air ducts provide distribution of the air along the length of the station platform, with the air discharge being transverse to the platform length. Air ducts are located either at the ceilings or in the normally unused space beneath the platform. In the latter case, vertical branches or risers are employed to discharge the air at appropriate heights above the platform. Different designs have been developed for vent shafts and tunnel configurations at the tunnel-station interface in attempts to control train piston action air and heat flows affecting the station complex. Many of these are described and discussed in Parts 3 and 4 of this, Handbook. The ventilation concept currently receiving widespread consideration (either alone or in conjunction with other air conditioning or ventilation concepts) is the underplatform exhaust system. With this concept, heat is exhausted from the propulsion and auxiliary equipment and the braking elements of a train while it dwells in a station, using the normally dead space beneath the station.Design Process 1-13 platform level as an exhaust air duct. The air is then discharged to the surface by fans. Exhaust air make-up is provided either from an outside air supply duct at the track level or from an overhead air-conditioning or ventilation system, as conditions may warrant ‘The consideration and evaluation of the interaction of the various ventilation and air-conditioning system concepts, and their appropriateness to a given transit system, are all part of the design process performed by the environmental engineer. 1.3. The Design Process In a subway system, the sources of heat emission are primarily the result of electrical energy input and to a lesser degree from metabolic heat released from people ‘The heat may be partially or entirely removed, either by absorption into the surrounding ground (when the ambient subway temperature is higher than the ground temperature) or by release to the atmosphere through natural or piston-action ventilation. Any excess heat not removed by cither process has to be removed by inechanical ventilation (when the outdoor ambient temperature is less than the system ambient design temperature) or by mechanical refrigeration. If none of these latter processes are applied, then the system ambient ‘temperature will rise. An equilibrium temperature will be reached when the rate of heat input to the system is balanced by the rate of heat removal, due to absorption and natural or piston-action ventilation. However, before heating, cooling and ventilation loads in a subway can be evaluated, it is necessary to understand the dynamic behavior of the various parameters affecting the environment and the design process which considers their imterrelationships. Fundamentally, the design process for any heating, ventilating and air-conditioning system examines three ‘major factors: criteria, analysis and control. In subway applications, these three categories imply three questions: (1) what is the optimum subway environment — not only for passengers, but also for operating personnel and equipment; (2) what factors affect that environment — Principally, what are the dynamic nature, source and magnitude of heat and air flows; and (3) what types of system strategies, equipment, or devices can be used to control the environment-influencing factors so as to achieve the desired criteria? It is not sufficient, however, to address the question of subway environmental control solely from the standpoint of designing systems of adequate capacity to satisfy given criteria. On the contrary, it is necessary to achieve, as closely as possible, the overall optimization of the entire rapid transit system concept. The design objectives must bbe geared to obtain the most efficient utilization of our economic and natural resources — capital investment, overall system operating costs, and energy. Criteria The considerations of criteria will influence the magnitude of the environmental systems required for a given installation, and the extent of interaction and interdependence of the environmental control system with other major subsystems such as the vehicles, stations, line sections, operating concepts, etc. The establishment of station and line section ambient temperature criteria, for example, is influenced by the unique transient nature of the exposure of people outside and inside the various parts of a rapid transit system. Other factors such as local socio- economic, demographic, and climatological conditions should also be considered. Part 2, Human Environmental Criteria, addresses the diverse factors and provides guidelines for establishing the various thermal and aerodynamic criteria of significance to people. ‘The environment found in subway systems embraces ‘many factors, including the patron using the system and the physical surroundings. The physical environment includes factors such as temperature, humidity, ai ‘movement, air quality, rapid pressure changes, noise and vibration levels. The human capacity to adapt to the physical environment varies with each individual as a function of age, type of occupation, organic function efficiency or impairment, and degree of acclimatization. Noise, dirt, vibration and odors are negative environmental factors found in subways. Some of these factors constitute no particular problem for a well-designed, well-maintained subway system, and consequently, this discussion is limited to the more critical thermal environmental parameters. Noise problems in a subway warrant special considerations which are beyond the scope of the aerodynamic and thermodynamic related parameters addressed in this Handbook The subject of heat exchange between humans and their environment is relatively well documented. Most environmental evaluations are based upon thermal factors such as temperature and humidity. Tolerance for warmer environments may be measured in several ways: (1) by the degree of discomfort caused, (2)1-14 Digest by the time clapsed before the onset of negative physiological and psychological symptoms, and (3) by the difference in intensity of discomfort felt by different people. For all people, though, and especially germane to the specific subway problem, the significant fact is the length of time it takes a person to approach thermal equilibrium or a steady-state condition of comfort or discomfort, For the average human being, this is about six ‘minutes. During rush hours, however, when temperatures in the subway system are likely to reach a peak, the patron would probably spend not more than three or four minutes in the station, not enough time for his body to achieve complete thermal equilibrium, before entering a train. It would thus appear that cooling a station to as low as 75F to 78F (a generally accepted comfort value for steady-state occupancy in buildings) would usually be unnecessary as well as uneconomical. The train, however, ‘can be air-conditioned to provide a temperature appropriate for the length of time of the average patron's ride. ‘Temperatures for the tunnel segments should provide a bearable environment for workmen and should be within acceptable limits to ensure reasonable equipment life. Because of the operating conditions within stations and ‘tunnels, the capital and maintenance costs of mechanical and electrical equipment used in these locations have proven to be quite high. Equipment failure problems are caused by temperature extremes, high concentrations of lectrostatically charged dust particles, and by humidity. To some extent, these problems can be alleviated by providing a better environment in which all equipment ‘can operate satisfactorily. The length of time subway passengers are exposed to ‘warmer environments between leaving their air- conditioned place of work and entering an air-conditioned subway car may easily be 15 minutes or more. This 15-minute period assumes a three-minute train headwa three-minute wait for and descent in an elevator at place of employment, five-minute walk to the station, and time to descend into the station, pay a fare and walk to a ‘waiting position on the platform. Thus, on a hot July day, the passenger is well on the way to being at steady-state, physiological conditions by the time of entering an air- conditioned subway car. ‘The ASHRAE “Effective Temperature” is a widely used environmental standard. However, it is not especially pertinent to the environment in a subway system. For example, on a hot day subway temperatures may be 90F to 100F even with ventilation. The Effective Temperature concept was designed for air-conditioned temperature levels at 75F to 80F and is suggested to have poor reliability at temperatures over 90F. Also, subway air temperatures are not steady. They vary not only yearly and daily but even by the minute as trains pull in and out and crowds come and go. In addition, the outside air temperature may be considerably different from the temperature of the internal subway system surroundings. When comfort provisions for the patrons in a subway system are discussed, what then is really meant? Comfort is more than staying on the fringe of the tolerance limit; it means what the patron prefers, is accustomed to, or is willing to tolerate. Air conditioning designers suggest that ir-conditioned spaces, in general, be set at temperatures only 10F to 15F below the ambient to achieve maximum comfort. Sudden cooling of persons entering air- conditioned spaces during summer is unpleasant. It is important to maintain a pleasant, but not chilling, temperature difference between the car and the platform, Certainly, the provision of air-conditioned cars is an improvement in the environment for patrons while in the car. The value of air-conditioned cars may be partially lost, however, for some systems if the platforms are excessively warm and # high temperature differential is, maintained between the cars and the platforms. Patrons centering and leaving the subway cars would then be subjected to a thermal shock. Since people are on subway station platforms for relatively short periods of time, a suitable temperature for a station platform lies between that which the patron has experienced enroute to the station (that is, the outdoor ambient) and the temperature within an air-conditioned subway car. ‘The primary emphasis of Part 2, Human Environmental Criteria, of this Handbook is on human comfort levels. The information contained in Part 2 will enable the ‘design engineer to establish criteria on the basis of human tolerances ensuring freedom from health hazards and teflecting the aesthetic and comfort requirements of the community. Criteria cover normal and emergency operation in stations, ine sections, vehicles, and ‘miscellaneous structures for temperature and humidity, air quality, air velocity, and rapid pressure change. A new technique for evaluation of appropriate temperature criteria has been developed and is included in Part 2 of this Handbook. In order to evaluate the impact of any criteria on subway system design, the analysis phase of the design process must be applied. Analysis ‘The second phase of the design process is the analysis. The primary element of the analysis entails a thermal energy load, or heat balance. To perform the analysis necessitates,Design Process an identification and quantification of the input heat loads from all sources, most important of which is usually the heat dissipated from train operations. In other words, an analysis must be made of where the heat is in the system and how the air flow created by piston action of trains and/or fans serves to disperse or remove this heat and influence the thermal and aerodynamic load analyses. Until very recently, there has been no reference source for information on making such an analysis. However, design tools have now been developed which provide this information, as described in the Handbook. ‘The evaluation of heat gains and losses for the purpose of establishing the required cooling or heating capacity is a rather complex process, since it involves one or more analyses of the combined aerodynamic and thermodynamic processes which are unique to a subway. However, during the analysis phase of the design process, the impact ofthe other subway system components on the environment, and vice versa, should be identified and Quantified. Trade-off evaluations of other major subway subsystems can then be made (see Sec. 1.4). The analysis phase of the design process, however, is not 4 singular cycle of events. On the contrary, itis more of 8 repetitive process which continues as appropriate to the nature ofthe overall rapid transit system design decisions under consideration. In this iterative approach, the intensity of investigation and evaluation must be in proper telationship to the other systemwide investigations. If the rate of heat emission in a subway is greater than the capacity of the ground or ventilation to remove heat (when the outdoor ambient temperature is below the subway ambient design temperature), then the subway air temperature will rise. Therefore, to begin an analysis, it is necessary to identify the sources of heat emission, All forms of electrical energy input to the subway system eventually are dissipated as heat. By far, however, the greatest source of heat emission in a subway is produced by the operation of the trains. They account for approximately 85 to 90 percent of all the heat generated. In examining the most significant load contributor, the vehicle, several factors are apparent. Heat generated within line sections by trains from their traction, braking, system, and air-conditioning equipment will be at substantially higher rate in subway systems now under construction, or being planned for the future, than exists, {in most systems today. The higher speed and acceleration, 1-15 requirements of the trains necessitate significantly higher Power input and resultant power losses. Of these inputs, the major portion is derived from braking and starting. In fact, braking is especially significant. Some 50 percent of the total heat input attributable to train operation can be assigned to braking, or approximately 45 percent of the total heat input of the subway system. Afler resistor grid temperatures have reached an equilibrium and with short station-to-station, distances (one half mile or less), release of braking heat from dynamic braking resistors is a function of time. Thus, the impact of this thermal load on the station platform is dependent on the time it takes for trains to approach, center, dwell and depart the station area after the brakes have been applied. The heat sink, where it is effective, is # natural cooling mechanism, and s0, ina sense, is the piston action of ‘moving trains where the outside air is cooler than the subway ambient design temperature. In gross and qualitative terms, the effect is simple to explain: the ‘moving train pushes air ahead of it through the subway system and some of the air travels to the outside atmosphere via vent shafis. As the train moves pasta shaft or station, fresh air is drawn into the system behind it ‘Therefore, some cooling is accomplished by exchanging hotter inside air with cooler outside a If it is decided to air condition the stations, steps should bbe taken to limit the heat carried by piston action from centering the space used by patrons. Further, the station ventilation systems should be designed to control the heat- laden air. However, in any case, it is first desirable to have a knowledge of the behavior of air flow in the system before a station thermal analysis is accomplished. Heat transmitted from the tunnels into the stations by the piston action of the trains should be estimated and accounted for in the internal station thermal load. If tunnel heat is not removed, a temperature buildup may ‘occur. Whether or not such a temperature buildup will ‘occur depends, among other things, on the effectiveness of the ground as a heat sink. In general, the effectiveness of the heat sink is a function, of several factors: (1) the diurnal swing of subway air temperature as a consequence of system ventilation, (2) the temperature difference between the subway wall surface and the air in the system, (3) the mass flow of the1-16 Digest air in the system, and (4) the surface area of the sink, The deep sink temperature is generally of second order importance, an exception being the case of groundwater migration, An analysis of the piston action and a reliable estimate Of its magnitude is essential to the design of new subway systems or tunnel segments, since it and the heat sink will, determine the degree to which other measures will be needed to meet an established temperature criterion, Unfortunately, the air flows and heat flows in the more complex geometrical configurations associated with subway rapid transit systems are not amenable to a closed- form analytical solution. This finding has led to the recognition of the need for a high-speed digital computer model which can continuously evaluate the piston-act airflows created by a series of trains traveling through a subway system that is interspersed with ventilation shafts and stations. The computer model is known as the Subway Environment Simulation (SES) program. It is described in detail in the User's and Programmer's Manuals in Volume II of this Handbook. ‘The successful operation of the SES computer model has, ‘demonstrated that the simulation of the unsteady air flow and fluctuating environmental conditions in a subway system is now possible and establishes the feasibility of using computer modeling as a design tool for the control of subway environment. In addition to performing the role of a fine-tuned analytical tool when used by an environmental design engineer, the SES program — after appropriate validation — was employed to develop manual computation ‘methods so that variations of major parameters in a system analysis in relation to a given set of conditions could be identified. It has been possible to develop graphical and tabular data from the varied SES runs, are included in Part 3 of this Handbook Accordingly, and with the guidelines outlined in Part 3, analysis of numerous conditions can be approximated without the necessity of programming and running the SES computer program. ‘The Subway Environment Simulation analytical tool is a user-oriented model; that is, both the required input information and the output produced are tailored for use by design engineers concerned with practical environmental problems. This computer model provides 1 dynamic simulation of the operation of multiple trains jin single- or double-track subways, and permi continuous readings of the air velocity, temperature, and humidity throughout the stations, tunnels, and ventilation, shafts. The program output provides readings of the maximum, minimum, and average values for system air velocities, temperatures, and humidities during any preset time interval. The program can also compute estimates of the station cooling and heating capacities necessary to satisfy established environmental criteria, as well as the percentage of time that such environmental criteria are exceeded, A rigorous computer analysis will usually be necessary for comparison and trade-off evaluation of alternative design concepts, or for the final stage of the iterative design process. In the formulative design stages, the manual ‘computation methods detailed in Part 3 will normally suffice. However, an explanation ofthe features of the SES ‘enable the reader to understand some of the various parameters and their interdependence in evaluating the heat flows and air flows unique to a subway system. The SES program comprises four interdependent computation sequences: a train performance subprogram, an aerodynamic subprogram, a temperature/humidity subprogram, ahd a heat sink subprogram. These subprograms use a mutually-shared set of system descriptive parameters. Operating together they provide 8 continuous simulation of the dynamic phenomena which govern the quality of subway environment. The basic organization of this computational sequence is shown on Fig. 13. ‘As may be seen from this chart, the train performance subprogram determines the velocity, acceleration, position, and heat rejection of all trains in the system ‘on a continuous basis. The aerodynamic subprogram uses these computed train parameters to compute continuous values for the air velocity in all stations, tunnels, and Ventilation shafts. In turn, the temperature/humidity subprogram uses these computed air flow parameters, together with the train-heat release data generated in the train performance subprogram, to compute the convective dispersal of sensible and latent heat throughout the system and thereby determine continuously the temperature and humidity at all locations. Finally, the sir velocities computed in the aerodynamic subprogram are recycled to the train performance subprogram and are used to determine the air flows adjacent to the trains, providing ‘8 means to compute the vehicle aerodynamic drag. The subway ventilation and heat load computations from these subprograms, together with data on thermal properties and daily and annual changes in outside conditions, are used by the heat sink subprogram to compute the long- term conduction of heat between the subway air and theDesign Process 1-17 TNuT GENERAL sySTEMDATA Line segmant lengths, erie Sectional rest and pers leit: onsen Program cont parsers ‘TRAIN PERFORMANCE DATA “Track setion data: rade, cureatre, ‘ond mt ‘AERODYNAMIC DATA ‘TEMPERATURE/HUNMIDITY DATA, Subsepment partioning of sytem Localized nest mumidity sources Line spents and wetiltion safes Oury Weisbach fretion ‘actors hee lon ete, Fan cations, operating curves, ed sang arate Skio tition coeticint for ‘Thermal proper of structure, ‘ar sreourding sytem Location) Speed ih ‘eeaieraton imphisec) ‘royale TRAIN PERFORMANCE SUBPROGRAM For each vain operating inthe system, compute: on vehi ( Heat rejection (Buf) Power demand lamps/mote) ‘Tracie efor (/motor HEAT SINK SUBPROGRAM great and venation sat cpm, computes Ai fow et Tempus Emsertre | | Aeseccty tom) omit eat ts) Prete aro fore which ae 1 Liseeion tw ‘TEMPERATURE/HUMIDITY SUBPROGRAM For each ne sbsegment and ventilation shaft ‘bsg, computes | ‘OUTPUT OPTIONS 1. Detaled printout ofall dynamic parameters at speed 2. Summary of maxima; minima snd Specie tine ners with ai condoning or heating {oad eminates 3. Than performance data only 1.3, Parameters and Orgs structure and soil surrounding the subway. This integrated calculation procedure makes possible ‘continuous simulation of the complex interactions among the dynamic phenomena operating in a subway system. ‘The operation of trains provides a forcing function for the air movement in an underground transit system. The ‘energy dissipation from transit vehicles may account for as much as 90 percent of the heat released to the system. ‘Consequently, a knowledge of the location, speed, acceleration and braking characteristics of the trains within the subway system, as well as the time-dependent characteristics of heat release from the major train components, is essential to characterize the rate and location of subway heat release as well as the system air flow regime. The pre-operational computation of tr velocity, acceleration, and position in a given system has long been carried out by ral transit engineers using a classical computational procedure based on track profile ration of the Subway Environment Simulation Model and alignment (grade and curvature), train weight, and propulsion system characteristics. The tedious nature of these computations eventually prompted a number of ‘motor manufacturers and engineering consultants to create computer programs for determining train performance. Although these computer programs vary in their ability to simulate complex operating schedules, all use a computational procedure which follows closely that employed in the classical hand calculation. ‘The new SES train performance subprogram differs from ‘most conventional train performance programs in two ‘important respects: (1) it has been designed specifically to accommodate accurate, continuous computations of the total heat released by trains, passengers, and ancillary equipment such as air conditioning; and (2) it permits the direct computation of the aerodynamic drag acting on ‘each of the trains in the system, using continuously computed aerodynamic parameters. Conventional train1-18 Digest performance programs ordinarily are not concerned with the continuous evaluation of vehicle heat release. In evaluating vehicle aerodynamic drag, these programs ordinarily settle for a semi-empirical relationship based on train velocity and blockage ratio (the ratio of the train frontal area to that of the tunnel cross-section). In Practice, the aerodynamic drag on a train fluctuates con- tinuously as it encounters variable annular air flows resulting from changes in tunnel diameter, ventilation shaft location, mechanical ventilation, and the piston- action air flow from other trains. Therefore, the continuous computation of vehicle aerodynamic drag in the SES represents a significant advance in the state-of- the-art ‘The most important train-related heat release to the system occurs during the vehicle braking cycle, For a train using a dynamic braking system, the speed reduction of the vehicles is brought about by using the motors as Kenerators to produce electrical power. This power frequently is dissipated to a grid of undercar resistors. The rate at which energy is dissipated is approximately equal to the net rate of decrease in kinetic and potential energy of the braking train. The SES program computes this energy loss directly from vehicle deceleration rates, velocities, and total mass. Some of the braking energy is absorbed by friction brakes, and by friction, windage, and bearing losses of the wheels, generators, etc. The SES Program accounts for the grid thermal inertia in computations of the rate at which this energy loss is added as heat to the system air, considering such parameters as the resistor grid physical properties, air turbulence and velocity, and grid temperature, The air flowing through a subway system affects the ‘comfort of subway patrons both directly and indirectly. Air movement is directly responsible for the convective ‘transfer of heat and humidity through the system, and the cooling effects of moving air can directly influence the comfort of personis in vehicles and in station areas. Furthermore, the buildup of excessive air pressures in stations from train piston action may create other problems, such as causing doors at entranceways to swing hazardously. Air flows indirectly influence the heat ‘content of subway air in two respects: (1) the aerodynamic drag on vehicles resulting from air motion relative to the trains affects the power consumption (and heat rejection) of the vehicle motors, and (2) the rate of heat transfer into the surrounding deep heat sink is dependent upon the air velocity at the air-wall interface. Air flows in a subway are generated by two primary sources: the piston action of trains moving through confined tunnels and, in certain cases, mechanical ventilation by fans. As noted earlier, the computation of aerodynamic drag is an essential component of the subway. simplation because this factor determines both the air resistance trains must overcome to accelerate and the amount of energy imparted by the moving trains to the surrounding air. In general, the drag experienced by a train in a single-track tunnel increases with train speed and decreases with frequency of train operation (shorter headway), The aerodynamic equations used by the SES program to describe the air low in subway tunnels resulting from. train piston action and from mechanical ventilation are based on the fundamental physical relationships which govern conservation of energy, mass, and linear ‘momentum. Subway air flow is influenced by system geometrical parameters, such as the location, shape, length, cross-section, perimeter, wall roughness, etc. of the stations, tunnels, and ventilation shafts. Air flow is also affected by dynamic parameters, such as train speed, acceleration, location, and headway, as well as ventilation fan operating characteristics. The time-dependent rate of change in air flow is equal to the sum of the sources and sinks of flow energy. Sources include the energy transmitted by the moving trains and by fans. Energy sinks include the flow head loss resulting, from energy dissipation through air friction with tunnel and ventilation shaft walls and at the junctions of ventilation shafts with tunnels or stations, The net difference in magnitude between the energy sources and sinks, and the particular geometric configuration being examined governs the rate of increase or decrease in air flow at any given instant. Where the rate of energy input is equal to the rate of energy dissipation, the air flow will gradually approach steady-state. However, this case is only rarely obtained in an operating subway. The temperature and -humidity of the air throughout a subway system reflect the heat added or removed by underground equipment, trains, and patrons. The temperature and humidity also reflect the rate of heat exchange across the system walls, and the mixing of subway air with external ambient air. The acceleration and braking of trains produces the main source of sensible hheat in an operating subway system; but sensible and latent heat also are added by electrical equipment, patrons, and in certain instances, the surrounding earth. Heat is removed from the system mainly through the expulsion of warm system air through ventilation shafts ‘and by heat conduction across the tunnel walls into the surrounding heat sink. Heat may also be removed or added by mechanical means such as by refrigeration or heaters, respectively, in the stations.Design Process 1-19 In the SES temperature and humidity computations, the system is treated as one-dimensional, meaning that the air temperature and humidity are considered uniform over any cross section. Axial conduction heat transfer in the system air is assumed to be negligibly small in comparison with the heat convected by moving air. A finite difference numerical approximation technique is used for modeling the system. This method requires that the system be divided into a number of geometrical subdivisions of finite length, each of which can be treated as having a uniform cross-sectional area, and which is assumed homogeneous throughout with respect to air temperature, air humidity, wall temperature, and all aerodynamic parameters. Heat is transferred down the length of the system by air low across the boundaries of these homogeneous system sections, which have been named subsegments. to distinguish them from the segments used in the aerodynamic subprogram. As these subsegments are merely subdivisions of the aerodynamic segments, each subsegment will have the uniformity of system geometry and air velocity which characterizes a segment, in ad to its own unique thermal properties. Three fundamental processes can occur to alter the temperature and humidity in each of these subsegments: (1) sensible and latent heat can be added directly from sources within the system, (2) heat can be exchanged across the tunnel walls, and (3) there can be a net change in the heat content between air flowing into the system and air flowing out. ‘An equation for the rate of change in temperature and humidity of each subsegment is therefore a combination, of the analytical expressions for these three processes. The quantity of air flowing into each subsegment at any given time is computed by the aerodynamic subprogram. and this air flow is used by the temperature/humidity subprogram together with values for subsegment temperature and humidity to compute the net difference between heat content of the air entering and leaving the subsegment. Rejection of heat from moving trains, computed simultaneously in the train performance program, is proportioned over the subsegments containing, trains. Next the temperature/humidity subprogram sums. the quantities of sensible and latent heat removal or addition in each subsegment by patrons, auxiliary ‘equipment, and station heating or air conditioning. Latent hheat can be removed from or added to the system by condensation on or evaporation from system walls, although in the case of simple condensation or evaporation, an equivalent amount of sensible heat added to or removed from the system by the program. Finally, the heat transfer across the walls of the system is computed using the wall temperature and a convective heat transfer coefficient which is a function of the subsegment air velocity, density, viscosity, thermal conductivity, and tunnel diameter, ‘During the relatively short-term simulation periods of the SES aerodynamic and —_temperature/humidity subprograms, the surface temperature of the subway structures is essentially constant. However, subway wall temperatures ordinarily experience daily and annual fluctuations because of variations in outside conditions and subway operating schedules. There may also occur @ gradual increase in the average wall surface temperature over a period of years either as a result of prolonged internal temperatures above outside ambient conditions or because of increases in system utilization. These changes in wall surface temperature have a direct bearing on the heat transfer between the subway air and the surrounding structure and earth, known as the heat sink effect. The purpose of the heat sink subprogram is the evaluation of the interdependent behavior of the subway air temperature and the heat conduction in the materials surrounding the subway. Although the short-term simulation evaluates subway air flows and temperatures (on a second-by-second basis, the heat sink subprogram evaluates a phenomenon which is measured in terms of hours, days and years. Thus, this subprogram involves a shift in time scales and the link with the short-term simulation is accomplished through a process involving the averaging of short-term simulation results. The heat sink subprogram comprises two basic analytical formulations. A heat conduction model is used to predict the heat flux profile in the materials surrounding the subway, given as input the daily and annual variations in subway air temperatures. A separate analytical model links the conduction model with the short-term analysis, accounting for the air-wall temperature interdependence as well as extrapolating the short-term results to account for conditions at times of the day and year other than that. considered in the short-term evaluation. ‘The heat sink subprogram is geared to produce as output the wall surface temperature for each of the geometrical subsegments into which the subway tunnels and stations are partitioned, corresponding to the time of the day and year that the short-term simulation is intended. To perform this computation, the subprogram requires data fon structure and earth thermal properties, earth ‘temperature at a point far removed from the subway, and daily and annual variations in outside conditions. In addition, the subprogram requires detailed information on subway ventilation and heat loads. Thus, the use of the heat sink subprogram requires that the aerodynamic and temperature/humidity subprograms first be applied in a1-20 short-term simulation. The SES is organized such that the required data transfers are accomplished internally in the Program: the user can specify that the program execute ‘short-term simulation, transfer the required ventilation, ‘and heat load data to the heat sink subprogram for the detailed heat conduction and wall surface temperature computations; then transfer the calculated wall surface temperatures back to the short-term simulation portion of the program to continue the analysi ‘A limited sampling from the results of a series of conceptual subway environmental control studies (Ref. 4) hhas been selected to exemplify the multi-faceted capabilities of the SES program. Figure 1.4 is a graphical Portrayal of the SES-calculated rush-hour average air temperature distribution through a portion of a subway ‘containing four-track tunnels and both local and express, stop stations. This particular concept relied entirely on train piston action for ventilation, and the high subway Temperatures are a consequence of the heavy system utilization, including 60-mph train speeds and two-minute headway operation on the local and express train routes, in both directions of travel. Of particular interest on this figure is the relationship between air temperature in the ‘tunnels and stations. The observation that the tunnel temperatures are on the average from SF to 10F cooler than the stations suggests that there is a potential for improving upon the proposed ventilation scheme, shown schematically along the locating coordinate, in terms of ventilation air flows between the tunnels and stations, In the output of a typical SES simulation, the average air temperature data illustrated by Fig. 1.4 are accompanied by corresponding average airflow rates and humidities in the system tunnels, ventilation shafts and stations, as well 1s heat load tabulations. These data provide a high degree of visibility and insight regarding the aerodynamic and thermodynamic behavior of a simulated environmental control concept. Even more important, the understanding afforded by these SES results enables the designer to focus quickly on critical problem areas during the synthesis of ‘an overall environmental control concept for achieving the criteria objectives. In situations where even greater detail is needed on aerodynamic or thermodynamic behavior, the SES can be Set up to produce data such as that on Fig. 1.5. This illustration relates their lowin a section of the four-track funnel, and in a contiguous shaft, to train operations on 4 second:-by-second basis, At any instant, the location and ‘movement of all trans in the vicinity of this tunnel and shaft can be pinpointed, enabling a detailed cause-and- effect interpretation of the illustrated air flows. This capability, which applies to temperature and humidity as Digest Average Alt Temporcte [Route [ambient JePortet 10,000 12.860 Fig. 1.4, SES-Computed Rush-Hour Average Air ‘Temperature Distribution well as to air flow, finds particular use in evaluating the impact on the environmental control concept of such Phenomena as train aerodynamic interactions, Figures 1.4 and 1.5 are a brief sampling of the informa- tion provided a designer by use of the SES. The concep- tual studies from which they are drawn span a broad range Of system configurations and operations, forming a broad data base for much of the information presented in Part 3. Control Concept Selection Selection of control concept is the last phase ofthe design Process. In this phase, a determination of the most appropriate environmental control system components is. made by the design engineer. These include the various ‘mechanical heating, ventilating, and cooling systems that are most effective for satisfying the criteria in a given situation. Although no definitive rules canbe Promulgated at this point, in many systems tolerable station ambient temperatures may be met by effective systems of ventilation alone, provided that the architectural and structural features of the system are