CEE 408-16 Railcars 5 - ECP Brakes-2020

Electrically Controlled Pneumatic (ECP)
Brake Systems
CEE 408 • ECP Brake Advantages

Fall 2020 • ECP Tests
• ECP Implementation Options
• FRA Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(NPRM) for ECP Brakes
© 2020 Chris Barkan All Rights Reserved CEE 408 - Railcars - 5: ECP Brakes
Electrically Controlled Pneumatic (ECP) Brakes

• Control problems are largely solved if brakes are controlled by electrical
signal as opposed to pneumatic propagation
• ECP brakes enable:
– all cars to apply and release brakes simultaneously
– graduated release
– continuous recharge and less likelihood of loss of air brake pressure
– controlled differential braking of different cars or parts of train
– improved, empty/load brake capability
– improved fuel efficiency
– reduced wear and stress on wheels and brake shoes
– reduce or eliminate many in-train forces, especially slack run-in
– 20% to 40% reduction in braking distance (possibly more)
– which can improve capacity
© 2020 Chris Barkan All Rights Reserved 2 CEE 408 - Railcars - 5: ECP Brakes
Types of ECP Connection System
• Two types of ECP brake systems
1. Hard-wire electrical cable
running the length of the train
• Requires 2nd connector
when coupling (see photo)
2. Radio-based technology
requiring a transmitter and a
receiver installed on the cars
and locomotives
• Includes a receiver in
the locomotive
• Power challenge
• The industry has chosen the hard
wired version thus far and the FRA
rules and regulations are being
developed around the this system
ECP Brake Schematic
New York Air Brakes EP-60 Brake
• Available in stand-alone and overlay configurations

ECP Brake Principle is Not New

• Suggested by George Westinghouse at about the
same time he invented the original, pneumatically
controlled air brake
• Electronics technology of that era was inadequate for
wide-spread use on railroads
• Subsequently developed for use in transit, including
the first subway line in New York City*, and some
passenger systems, but the challenges there are less:
– passengers require higher safety
premium than freight
– capital costs often subsidized
– closed system
– uniform equipment
– single owner
* The original Interborough Rapid
Transit (IRT) line, now the MTA New
York City Subway “1” line
Why it Hasnt Already Happened
• Financial
– ECP brakes are a major capital investment
– On the order of $6 billion for all locomotives and cars
• Operational
– Limited compatibility with current system (i.e. not “reverse
compatible” with conventional air brake system)
– Challenge to operate both ECP and conventional systems
simultaneously during phase-in period
• Institutional
– Majority of costs borne by car owners
– Majority of benefits will accrue to large railroads
– All North American freight railroads big and small would
eventually need to convert
ECP Braking Tests

Overseas Testing North American Testing
• South Africa & Australian • 1995: BNSF testing of ECP on
Heavy-Haul Freight selected unit coal, taconite and
Operations doublestack trains
• 1995: Conrail testing of ECP on one
unit coal train
• 1995: CP testing of ECP on one
intermodal train
• 1998: Quebec Cartier Mining begins
converting its iron ore trains to ECP
• 2000: CSX and Southern Companies
Spoornet* Testing conduct limited tests of ECP on unit
• 23% train energy savings coal trains, but are hampered by
inability to match ECP power to ECP
• 9% increase in capacity
cars
* Spoornet was a South African railroad that is
now known as Transnet Freight Rail. • 2007: NS Testing in Coal Service
Quebec Cartier Mining Railroad ECP Braking Tests
• Gagnon, PQ to Port Cartier, PQ on St. Lawrence River

• Closed system, trains shuttle between mine and port transporting iron ore
• ECP brake implementation less complicated because no interchange with
other railroads
Quebec Cartier Mining Railroad
Gagnon
Port Cartier
• QCMR is isolated from other railroads

• No interchange of equipment so easier to implement
QCM Economic Analysis of ECP Brakes
Estimated Cost Benefit Analysis for Powder River Basin*
• Annual Return on Investment (ROI) of 2.54

*Study conducted for US DOT by Booz Allen Hamilton (BAH)
Estimated US Class 1 Railroad Savings
AAR and FRAs Renewed Commitment to

Encourage Implementation of ECP Brakes
• FRA published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in 2007 to
revise brake safety system standards to encourage deployment
• Will consider interim plans from railroads as well
NS has been operating
and testing an ECP-
brake-equipped
coal train
• NS and BNSF filed ECP-brake
implementation plans with FRA
shortly after the NPRM was
published
• FRA granted authority to operate
these trains
• NS operated their first train under
the waiver in 2007
• 400 coal cars and 30 locomotives
equipped for ECP-brake operation
• NS has been collecting data on
ECP operations compared to
conventional air braking system
NS ECP Test Route Williamson, WV
• Originates at a coal mine in

Williamson, West Virginia
Eden, NC
• Destination is a power plant in
Eden, North Carolina
NS ECP Coal Train
• Passenger car used to house researchers
and railroad employees and employees of
the New York Air Brake Company
• Troubleshooting and performance
monitoring is completed from the
passenger car
ECP Display in the Locomotive
ECP System
in the
Locomotive
ECP Train Line Connection and Hardware
FRA Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)
for installation of ECP Brakes
• FRA published a Noticed of
Proposed Rulemaking on 4
September 2007
• The proposal contained specific
requirements relating to design,
interoperability, training, inspection,
testing, handling defective
equipment, and periodic
maintenance related to ECP brake
systems.
• The document also identified
provisions to the existing
regulations and statutes where
FRA is proposing to provide
flexibility to facilitate the
introduction of this advanced brake
system technology
FRA NPRM – Types of ECP Systems
• Methods of equipping trains with

ECP brakes
– Hard wire electrical cable
running the length of train
– Radio-based technology
requiring a transmitter and
receiver on the cars and
locomotives
• FRA report says that the railroad
industry has chosen the hard wire
approach
• FRA report only addresses cable-
based ECP brake systems
ECP Design Configurations
• Stand-alone systems using only ECP brakes
– ECP cars have no fully pneumatic control valve
– Cars must be operated in entire fleets (fixed consist)
– Operational problems due to lack of compatibility
• Overlay systems capable of operating in ECP and conventional mode
– Cars are equipped with a an ECP Car Control Device (CCD) and a
conventional pneumatic control device
– Must have compatible ECP equipment in locomotive
– Railroad must purchase, install, and maintain equipment for both types of
brake systems
• Emulation systems capable of operating in either conventional or ECP mode
– Have car control device (CCD) capable of monitoring both the ECP system
and the brake pipe
– Can be used with any mix of ECP and traditional pneumatic equipment
– If the electrical signal is present the braking system is ECP-based, and if no
electrical system is present then the valve will monitor changes in brake line
pressure and function like a traditional system
FRA NPRM – Advantages of ECP Brakes

• Simultaneous Brake Application
– Immediate application to all cars in the train
– Immediate release, no string-lining of trains due to slow release of
rear brakes
– Reduction of in-train forces due to slow application and release
of brakes
– Improvements to safety due to slowing the non-derailed portion of the
train in the event of a derailment
• Continuous Brake Pipe Charging
– Currently, brakes can only be fully charged after they have been
released
– With ECP brakes, the train line is continuously recharged reducing
the risk of running out of air
– Allows for more aggressive train handling
FRA NPRM – Advantages of ECP Brakes Cont.
• Graduated Application and Release
– Lack of graduated release has increased fuel consumption
• Braking effort can only be increased during an application
– With ECP, no stops are needed to recharge and reset brakes
• Train Management
– Self-diagnostic functions which may utilize the hard-wired electrical
connection to the locomotive
– Fewer mechanical inspections of train braking systems
– If a serious problem is detected, a brake application will be initiated
– No issues with brake line blockages preventing an application
• Improved Performance
– Shorter stopping distance, longer signal blocks, higher speeds
– Fuel savings due to graduated release
– Maintenance savings due to decreased component wear
FRA NPRM – Regulatory Relief

• FRA encouraged railroads to adopt ECP brakes
– Offered railroads incentives that would improve economics and
railroad operating performance
• Reduced inspection frequency
– Current air brake inspections required every 1,000-1,500 miles
– Intermediate inspection frequencies would be increased to 3,500
miles allowing for coast-to-coast travel
– This intermediate railcar inspection process is labor intensive
• Relaxed required percentage of operative brakes due to increased
level of safety associated with ECP brakes
• Relaxed restrictions on hauling defective equipment
– Under some cases, equipment can be hauled to the destination up
to 3,500 miles
20-Year Benefits and Costs of ECP Brakes
• Assumption of 10-year conversion of unit train equipment (coal, intermodal, etc.)

• Does not consider:
– Benefits of increased capacity (Must convert an entire route or corridor
to achieve full benefits)
– Benefits of increased system velocity
• Union Pacific Railroad (UP) estimates that, for each 1 mph (or 5 percent)
increase in system average velocity, UP saves 250 locomotives and
5,000 freight cars
Railroad Implementation of Distributed Power

and 2-Way End-of-Train Devices
• Use of distributed power (DP) in freight trains has
expanded substantially over past 15 years
• Major western railroads are operating more than half
their trains with DP
• Railroads have also increased their use of 2-way
end-of-train (2W-EOT) devices
• Both of these
technologies
substantially improve
pneumatic brake
signal propagation
• Consequent improve-
ment in conventional
braking system
performance
Railroads still interested in ECP brakes, but DP &
2W-EOT reduce marginal cost effectiveness
• Railroads deriving much of the same benefit from DP & 2W–EOT
technologies that ECP brakes would have provided
• Marginal benefits of ECP brakes thereby reduced
• This altered the cost:benefit ratio so it no longer supported the business
case for ECP implementation
• Railroads scaled back their plans to implement ECP brakes because of
high cost and modest benefits
• Meanwhile, DOT FRA still wanted railroads to adopt
• FRA promulgated new regulations in 2015 requiring use of ECP brakes
on “High-hazard flammable trains” (HHFT)
• DOT rationale was that they would reduce energy in derailments due to
faster application of brakes
• Rail industry strongly disputed these benefits due to concerns about the
quality of DOT’s science supporting their position
Congress requested two studies of

DOT assessment of ECP brakes
• US Government Accountability Office (GAO) (Congressional research
office) asked to evaluate US DOT’s assessment of the economic benefits
of ECP brakes
– Found that more research and data were needed
• Transportation Research Board (branch of the National Academies) was
asked to evaluate DOTs testing approach and purported safety benefits
– Found that DOT’s conclusions not well-supported
• Last year, US DOT suspended implementation of the ECP rule
(see Appendix)
• Will Positive Train Control (PTC) create new economic incentives that
favor ECP brakes?
– Once PTC is fully installed, it may enable moving and flexible blocks
– If so, benefits of ECP brakes could be fully realized, once again
altering the cost:benefit ratio.
APPENDIX: Summary of US DOT Proposed
Rule Regarding ECP Brakes
• Enhanced braking to mitigate damage in derailments
• The rule would have required HHFTs to have in place a functioning two-
way end-of-train (EOT) device or distributed power (DP) braking system.
• Trains meeting the definition of a “high-hazard flammable unit train”
(HHFUT) would have to be operated with an ECP braking system by
1 January 2021
• HHFUTs are defined as a single train with 70 or more tank cars loaded
with Class 3 flammable liquids with at least one tank car with Packing
Group I materials
• All other HHFUTs would have ECP braking systems installed after 2023.

CEE 408-16 Railcars 5 - ECP Brakes-2020

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

CEE 408-16 Railcars 5 - ECP Brakes-2020

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Electrically Controlled Pneumatic (ECP)

CEE 408 • ECP Brake Advantages

Electrically Controlled Pneumatic (ECP) Brakes

ECP Brake Schematic

• Available in stand-alone and overlay configurations

ECP Brake Principle is Not New

ECP Braking Tests

• Gagnon, PQ to Port Cartier, PQ on St. Lawrence River

Quebec Cartier Mining Railroad

• QCMR is isolated from other railroads

Estimated Cost Benefit Analysis for Powder River Basin*

• Annual Return on Investment (ROI) of 2.54

AAR and FRAs Renewed Commitment to

NS ECP Test Route Williamson, WV

• Originates at a coal mine in

ECP Display in the Locomotive

ECP Train Line Connection and Hardware

FRA NPRM – Types of ECP Systems

• Methods of equipping trains with

FRA NPRM – Advantages of ECP Brakes

FRA NPRM – Regulatory Relief

• Assumption of 10-year conversion of unit train equipment (coal, intermodal, etc.)

Railroad Implementation of Distributed Power

Congress requested two studies of

You might also like