sustainability
Article
The Digital Automatic Coupler (DAC): An Effective Way
to Sustainably Increase the Efficiency of Freight Transport
in Europe
Luciano Cantone 1, *, Thierry Durand 2 , Andrea Ottati 3 , Giulia Russo 4 and Roberto Tione 5
Citation: Cantone, L.; Durand, T.;
Ottati, A.; Russo, G.; Tione, R. The
Digital Automatic Coupler (DAC):
An Effective Way to Sustainably
Increase the Efficiency of Freight
Transport in Europe. Sustainability
2022, 14, 15671. https://doi.org/
10.3390/su142315671
Academic Editor: Marco Guerrieri
Received: 14 October 2022
Accepted: 18 November 2022
Published: 25 November 2022
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Sustainability 2022, 14, 15671. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142315671
1 Department of Enterprise Engineering, University of Rome Tor Vergata, 00133 Rome, Italy
2 SNCF Voyageurs, Centre D’ingénierie du Matériel (CIM), 72100 Le Mans, France
3 FSI/Trenitalia, Technical Direction, 50129 Florence, Italy
4 UIC, Rail System Department, 75015 Paris, France
5 Wabtec, Faiveley Transport, 10045 Turin, Italy
* Correspondence: luciano.cantone@uniroma2.it; Tel.: +39-06-7259-7133
Abstract: This paper employs and improves TrainDy software to simulate the in-train forces of single
and coupled freight trains with a Digital Automatic Coupler (DAC), having a length from 740 m to
1500 m and hauled mass between 1600 t and 8000 t. Software improvements have focused on the
ability to natively simulate the electro-pneumatic (EP) brake, which will be a feature of the future
DAC. The various types of DAC and their main features are outlined in the paper. The study shows
that it is also possible to increase the trains hauled mass by using radio communication between
traction units (TUs). The “relative approach” method is used to demonstrate the safety of these new
trains. The paper’s main results are reported in the conclusions and demonstrate the effectiveness
of both technologies in increasing freight transport efficiency, even when applied to coupled trains
where one train is “classic” and the other is equipped with mechanical DAC.
Keywords: TrainDy; DAC; freight; longitudinal train dynamics (LTD)
1. Introduction
It is in the interest of Railway Undertakings (RUs) to increase freight train efficiency
safely. Considering only the longitudinal train dynamics (LTD), i.e., the motion of the vehi-
cles along the track (including the relative motions), there are several ways to accomplish
this task. By increasing the train speed, goods are delivered in less time; since the train
braking distance increases with its speed, this method is effective if the “braked weight” in-
creases. Towards this end, wagons with improved braking features are needed, or existing
wagons should be revamped; alternatively, the train braking distance should be increased.
Another way is increasing the wagon mass: more goods are carried within the same time.
Currently, in many European countries, the maximum mass per axle is 22.5 T; increasing
this mass requires updates similar to those for the train speed increase and an updating
of railway infrastructure to carry the higher wagon mass. A third way is the increase of
train hauled mass by increasing the train length: the efficiency increases in a way similar to
the previous method. The train length increment requires a railway infrastructure update
(e.g., the “sidings” renewal to park the trains temporarily) and a technological improvement
of the rolling stock to avoid train derailments or disruptions caused by excessive in-train
forces. Among these methods, this paper deals with increasing train length and wagon
innovations aiming to increase the permissible longitudinal compressive forces and reduce
the in-train forces.
Most freight wagons are equipped with a simple air brake [1]: this system is char-
acterized by asynchronous braking among the wagons, and those closer to the Traction
Units (TUs) brake first. This asynchronous braking causes in-train forces during brake
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability
Sustainability 2022, 14, 15671 2 of 11

applications [2] (see also [3] for a review on the topic). If the in-train compressive forces or
the Longitudinal Compressive Forces (LCF) applied to a general wagon exceed its permis-
sible value [4,5], the wagon would derail. To avoid this event, which is dangerous both for
people and for goods and infrastructure, and to increase the efficiency of freight transport,
a solution recently investigated in Europe by the Shift2Rail Joint Undertaking initiative is
radio communication among the TUs through two “open call” projects, DYNAFREIGHT
and Marathon2Operation (M2O) [6,7].
Recently, a new, ambitious program has been launched in Europe to improve the
railway sector: Europe’s Rail [8,9]. Among the different activities, this program envisages
the renewal of freight wagons by implementing the Digital Automatic Coupler (DAC).
Depending on its implementation level (briefly discussed in Section 2), a DAC can increase
the wagon’s permissible LCF (PLCF) and alter the in-train forces by substituting the side
buffers and the draw gear with an automatic coupler (see, for example, [10–12] about the
effects of central couplers). Moreover, a DAC can significantly reduce the in-train forces by
introducing the electro-pneumatic brake (EP) or the electronically controlled pneumatic
(ECP) brake (see [13,14]).
Since freight trains have several heterogeneities in terms of length, hauled mass,
wagons type, and payload, the UIC IRS 40421 [15] provides a general method based on
the “relative approach” for assessing the safety of a train against the risk of derailment;
the method is also referenced by the [16]. This paper applies this method to evaluate the
benefits of two technologies capable of effectively increasing freight efficiency: the radio
communication between traction units and the DAC. This evaluation is based on TrainDy
numerical simulations. In 2009, UIC approved TrainDy software for the calculation of
longitudinal train dynamics (LTD) [17] and established the “special group” at that time
consisting of Faiveley Transport (a Wabtec company), University of Rome Tor Vergata,
DB Systemtechnik GmbH, SNCF Rolling Stock Engineering Centre (CIM), Trenitalia, and
Knorr-Bremse SfS GmbH. The “special group” currently has 11 members representing RUs,
industry, universities, and research institutes. TrainDy has been validated by comparing
its numerical results against more than 30 experimental test trials made available by DB
Systemtechnik GmbH, the SNCF Rolling Stock Engineering Centre (CIM), and Trenitalia.
The main characteristic of TrainDy is its ability to solve both the pneumatic problem (venting
of brake pipe and filling of brake cylinders [18]) and the mechanical problem (computation
of the relative distance between adjacent wagons). Its calculation is currently limited to 1D
dynamics; for an LTD simulation implementing multibody, see, for example, [19]. Despite
this, the computational efficiency of TrainDy makes it particularly suitable for studying
new trainset compositions by analyzing the risk of derailment (and train disruption) due to
high LCF or longitudinal tensile forces (LTF) between the vehicles of the train.
It is worth noting that TrainDy has been used in several well-known European projects
and many other industrial projects: in the European Union (EU) Framework Programme 7
with the MARATHON Project and in the EU Horizon 2020 Programme with the Shift2Rail
Joint Undertaking Marathon2Operation project (www.marathon2operation.eu (accessed
on 12 November 2022)).
This paper shows that TrainDy can also simulate trains equipped with a DAC, with
varying degrees of complexity, to extract the maximum possible capacity from the current
infrastructure safely. Section 2 illustrates the essential characteristics of the DAC; Section 3
provides a summary of how TrainDy handles electro-pneumatic brake and mechanical DAC
(only with central coupler); Section 4 gives numerical results of trainsets with (a) radio only, (b)
with mechanical DAC, (c) with mechanical and pneumatic DAC; Section 5 concludes the paper.

2. Digital Automatic Coupler (DAC)

The European DAC Delivery Program (EDDP) from Shift2Rail (S2R) is currently
developing the Digital Automatic Coupler (DAC), intending to increase productivity in
freight operations in a safe way. DAC is the cornerstone of several innovations mentioned in
Europe’s Rail Joint Undertaking (EU-Rail). Among these is the implementation of European
 2. Digital Automatic Coupler (DAC)
The European DAC Delivery Program (EDDP) from Shift2Rail (S2R) is currently de-
Sustainability 2022, 14, 15671 veloping the Digital Automatic Coupler (DAC), intending to increase productivity 3 ofin11
freight operations in a safe way. DAC is the cornerstone of several innovations mentioned
in Europe’s Rail Joint Undertaking (EU-Rail). Among these is the implementation of Eu-
ropean rail control-command
rail control-command and signalling
and signalling (CCS),(CCS),
whichwhich is of central
is of central importance
importance in run-a
in running
ning
safe,aefficient,
safe, efficient, interoperable,
interoperable, robust, robust, cost-efficient,
cost-efficient, and rail
and reliable reliable
servicerailinservice
Europe. inDAC
Eu-
rope.
is partDAC
of theison-board
part of the CCS on-board CCS and
and is expected is expected to
to significantly significantly
improve improve
cross-border cross-
operations
border operationscustomer
and multimodal and multimodal
services. customer
DAC, among services.
otherDAC, among other
characteristics, is ancharacteristics,
enabler for the
isEuropean
an enabler for the
Train European
Control SystemTrain Control
(ETCS) System
moving (ETCS)
block. moving
It aims block. It aims
to transform to trans-
the European
form the European
rail freight system and rail freight
establishsystem
fully and establish
digital freightfully
traindigital freight train operations.
operations.
Dependingon
Depending onthetheDACDAC level
level (see
(see Figure
Figure 1), 1),
DAC DAC maymay reduce
reduce LCFLCF generated
generated in op-in
operated
erated trains.
trains. In the
In the figure,
figure, “AC “AC1” 1”
andand “AC
“AC 2”2” refer
refer toto automaticcouplers
automatic couplers(AC) (AC)that
thatare are
just“mechanical
just “mechanicalDAC” DAC”and andwhich
whichare arereferred
referredtotoas as“DAC2”,
“DAC2”,ininthis thispaper.
paper.As Asaadesign
design
requirement,any
requirement, anylevel
levelofofDAC
DACwill willincrease,
increase,and
andevenevendouble,
double,the thepermissible
permissibleLCF LCF(PLCF)
(PLCF)
ofofthe
thewagons
wagonsto topromote
promoteits itsimplementation.
implementation.“AC “AC1”, 1”,“AC
“AC2” 2”and
and“DAC
“DAC3” 3”are
arethe
thesame
same
in terms of mechanical characteristics and PLCF. PLCF is currently
in terms of mechanical characteristics and PLCF. PLCF is currently assessed using the test assessed using the
test methodology described in EN standard 15839 or the extrapolation
methodology described in EN standard 15839 or the extrapolation rules cited in IRS 40421, rules cited in IRS
40421,are
which which
validarefor
valid
wagonsfor wagons
equipped equipped with classical
with classical (or side) (orbuffers
side) buffers and drawgear,
and drawgear, usu-
usually
ally defined
defined following
following EN EN 15551
15551 andandENEN 15566
15566 standards.Implementing
standards. ImplementingDAC DACfeatures
features
willresult
will resultininaasignificant
significantleap leapforward
forwardin inproductivity
productivityby byreducing
reducingthe thetime
timerequired
requiredfor for
shunting operations and extracting optimum capacity from the
shunting operations and extracting optimum capacity from the current infrastructure. current infrastructure. DAC
implementation
DAC implementation applies traintrain
applies automation to itstototal
automation capacity,
its total e.g., e.g.,
capacity, automated
automated yards, train
yards,
preparation, operation and maintenance, and intermodal
train preparation, operation and maintenance, and intermodal terminals. terminals.

Differentlevels
Figure1.1.Different
Figure levelsofoftrain
trainautomation
automationdepending
dependingon
onDAC
DACtype.
type.

As DAC is not yet in production, this paper presents an analysis of the first TrainDy
As DAC is not yet in production, this paper presents an analysis of the first TrainDy
simulation results, comparing the efficiency of the various technical means of optimizing
simulation results, comparing the efficiency of the various technical means of optimizing
freight transport by rail. The basis for this comparison is given by trains having length,
freight transport by rail. The basis for this comparison is given by trains having length,
hauled mass, and braking position, allowed by UIC IRS 40421.
hauled mass, and braking position, allowed by UIC IRS 40421.
3. Electro-Pneumatic Brake and Mechanical DAC
3. Electro-Pneumatic Brake and Mechanical DAC
As quickly recalled in the paper introduction, TrainDy is a software that computes
As quickly
the LTD; recalled
therefore, eachinvehicle
the paper introduction,
has just one degree TrainDy is a software
of freedom. that computes
The vehicles exchange
the LTD; therefore, each vehicle has just one degree of freedom. The
forces between them by the draw gear (when the wagons depart from each other) vehicles exchange
and
forces between
the side buffersthem
(whenby the
the wagons
draw gear (when the
approach wagons
each other).depart
These from eachcomponents
coupling other) and the
are
side buffers
modelled as (when the friction
non-linear wagonselements
approach each
with other).loading
different These coupling components
and unloading curves. are
The
mechanical DAC is modelled and simplified, as described at the end of this section. The
calculation of air pressure in brake pipe requires the solution of a quasi-mono-dimensional
fluid dynamic model, which considers the conservation of mass and energy and the balance
of momentum ([18]). This model can study brake application and release. From the air
pressure in the brake pipe, the air pressure in brake cylinders is computed via distributors’
 modelled as non-linear friction elements with different loading and unloading curves. The
mechanical DAC is modelled and simplified, as described at the end of this section. The
calculation of air pressure in brake pipe requires the solution of a quasi-mono-dimen-
Sustainability 2022, 14, 15671 sional fluid dynamic model, which considers the conservation of mass and energy and 4 ofthe
11
balance of momentum ([18]). This model can study brake application and release. From
the air pressure in the brake pipe, the air pressure in brake cylinders is computed via dis-
tributors’
transfer transfer The
functions. functions.
brakingThe braking
forces forces are
are computed fromcomputed from the
the air pressure air pressure
in brake cylinders, in
brake
in cylinders,
agreement with in[20].
agreement
Addingwith the [20].
runningAdding the running
resistance and theresistance
force fromand thethe force units
traction from
the traction units (whether they be traction or braking) is possible
(whether they be traction or braking) is possible to compute the LTD: TrainDy is currently to compute the LTD:
TrainDyinisMATLAB
written currently and written in MATLAB
employs the ode andsolveremploys
ode15s.the ode solver ode15s.
One of the features of the DAC
One of the features of the DAC should be the should be the ability
ability toto vent
vent the
the brake
brake pipe
pipe from
from
several points along the train. This feature is somewhat like that
several points along the train. This feature is somewhat like that of the electro-pneumatic of the electro-pneumatic
brake on
brake on passenger
passenger trains.
trains. The
The current
current version
version of of TrainDy
TrainDy does does not
not natively
natively support
support the the
EP brake, but it can be simulated utilizing a workaround: the wagons
EP brake, but it can be simulated utilizing a workaround: the wagons are substituted with are substituted with
fictitious traction
fictitious traction units with the
units with the same
same wagon
wagon features
features in in terms
terms of of mass,
mass, length,
length, coupling
coupling
and braked weight. Despite this, the TrainDy source code
and braked weight. Despite this, the TrainDy source code has been modified, assigninghas been modified, assigning
the EP
the EP brake
brake feature
feature (for(for braking
braking only)
only) toto single
single wagons,
wagons, replicating
replicating thethe TU’s
TU’s manoeuvre
manoeuvre
immediately in
immediately in front
front ofof them.
them. UIC UIC Leaflet
Leaflet 541-5
541-5 [21]
[21] states
states for
for the EP brake
the EP brake feature
feature thatthat
“the pressure
“the pressure in
in the
the MAP
MAP [Main
[Main Air Pipe] shall be reduced from 5 bar to 3.5 bar over a period of
3.5 to 5 s”. To
To simulate the EP brake brake with
with TrainDy,
TrainDy, the brake system is modelled as a lateral
nozzle connected to the brake pipe of each wagon, with a diameter capable of venting the
locally, in
pressure locally, in compliance
compliance with with UIC
UIC Leaflet 541-5. 541-5. This diameter is a function of the
needed to
time needed to reduce
reducethe thepressure
pressurefrom from5 5bar bartoto3.53.5bar
bar andandthethe wagon
wagon length.
length. TheThetimetime
to
to reduce
reduce thethe pressure
pressure fromfrom 5 bar
5 bar to to
3.53.5
barbar
is aisfunction
a function of of
thethe specific
specific EPEP system.
system. Figure
Figure 2
2 providesa adiagram
provides diagramcorrelating
correlatingthe thenozzle
nozzlediameter
diameterto tothe
thevehicle
vehiclelength
length from
from 77 to 40 m
(step 11 m)
m) totoreduce
reducethe thepressure
pressureininthe thebrake
brake pipe
pipe from
from 5 bar
5 bar to 3.5
to 3.5 barbar in 4.25
in 4.25 s (this
s (this is theis
time used for this paper). This way, it is possible to associate a
the time used for this paper). This way, it is possible to associate a general vehicle with general vehicle with the
corresponding
the corresponding nozzle diameter
nozzle diameterby interpolation.
by interpolation.

Figure 2. Nozzle diameter as a function of wagon length to reduce pressure from 5 bar to 3.5 bar in
the brake pipe. The time for this reduction is 4.25 s.

A train
trainconsisting
consistingofofseven
sevenidentical wagons
identical wagons (or (or
coaches),
coaches),eacheach
contemporary
contemporary discharg-
dis-
ing the brake pipe with the same nozzle, is used to draw the diagram in
charging the brake pipe with the same nozzle, is used to draw the diagram in Figure 2. Figure 2. The given
nozzle diameter
The given nozzlecan reduce the
diameter can air pressure
reduce in the
the air BP from
pressure in 5thebarBPtofrom
3.5 bar, at the
5 bar middle
to 3.5 bar, of
at
the middle
4th wagon, in 4th
of the 4.25wagon,
s. Considering
in 4.25 s. aConsidering
lower number of wagons
a lower number in of
thewagons
train, e.g., three
in the or
train,
five,
e.g., and
threemonitoring
or five, andthemonitoring
pressure reduction in thereduction
the pressure 2nd and 3rd in wagon,
the 2ndrespectively,
and 3rd wagon, reducesre-
the computational
spectively, reducestime needed to obtain
the computational time a similar
needed diagram,
to obtain aproviding diameters
similar diagram, slightly
providing
different
diameters(usually
slightly higher).
differentFigure
(usually3 shows
higher).this circumstance
Figure 3 shows thiswhere the differences
circumstance wherearethe
at
most of the order of 2%, and they are magnified just to show their behaviour. Increasing the
number of wagons in the train consist provides a solution less dependent on un-avoidable
numerical approximations. Moreover, since these numerical errors depend on the pressure
wave reflections at the boundaries of the brake pipe, the errors reduce with the increase of
wagon length.
 differences are at most of the order of 2%, and they are magnified just to show their be-
haviour. Increasing the number of wagons in the train consist provides a solution less
dependent on un-avoidable numerical approximations. Moreover, since these numerical
Sustainability 2022, 14, 15671 5 of 11
errors depend on the pressure wave reflections at the boundaries of the brake pipe, the
errors reduce with the increase of wagon length.

Figure 3. Variation
Variationofofnozzle
nozzle diameter
diameter with
with wagon
wagon length
length for different
for different numbers
numbers of wagons
of wagons in the
in the trainset.
trainset.
Polynomials can fit data reported in Figure 2; Table 1 reports the coefficients of these
Polynomials
polynomials up tocan
thefit5th
data reported
order, alonginwith
Figure
the2;commonly
Table 1 reports the coefficients
used parameters of these
to evaluate
a fitting: R2 (R-squared)
polynomials up to the 5thisorder,
a measure
along of how
with thewell the dataused
commonly fit the regressiontomodel
parameters (the
evaluate a
goodness
fitting: 𝑅2 of fit); R2adj (adjusted
(R-squared) R-squared)
is a measure of howshows whether
well the data fitadding additionalmodel
the regression predictor
(the
2
goodness of fit); 𝑅𝑎𝑑𝑗
variables improves (adjusted R-squared)
a regression model. Good shows whetherrequire
regressions addingtheadditional predictor
above coefficients
towards 1.improves
variables The table shows thatmodel.
a regression a 4th order
Goodpolynomial
regressions fit already
require theprovides a suitable
above coefficients
fitting, since
towards it has
1. The theshows
table R2adja. 4th order polynomial fit already provides a suitable
highestthat
2
fitting, since it has the highest 𝑅𝑎𝑑𝑗 .
Table 1. Fitting the diameter of the equivalent nozzle for EP brake, with a discharge time of 4.25 s.
Table 1. Fitting the diameter of the equivalent nozzle for EP brake, with a discharge time of 4.25 s.
p5 p4 p3 p2 p1 p0 R2 R2adj𝟐
p5 p4 p3 p2 p1 p0 𝑹𝟐 𝑹𝒂𝒅𝒋
0.093575 1.6418
0.093575 0.98598
1.6418 0.98554
0.98598 0.98554
−1.2335 × 10−3 −1.2335 0.15155 1.0794 1.0794
× 10−3 0.15155 0.99913
0.99913 0.99908
0.99908
3.2178 × 10−5 −3.2178
0.003502
× 10 −5 0.19929
−0.003502 0.79261
0.19929 0.99979
0.79261 0.99979 0.99977
0.99977
−1.3188 × 10−6 1.5615 × 10−4
−1.3188 ×
−−67.5465
10 1.5615
−3
× ×1010 0.25246 −3
−4 −7.5465 × 10
0.56078
0.25246
0.99987
0.56078 0.99987
0.99986
0.99986
3.2922 × 10−8 −5.1872 × 10−6 3.2745 × 10−4 −0.011078 0.2859 0.44601 0.99988 0.99985
3.2922 × 10−8 −5.1872 × 10−6 3.2745 × 10−4 −0.011078 0.2859 0.44601 0.99988 0.99985

One final remark: even even withwith the current TrainDy modification, the EP brake system
discharges the thebrake
brakepipe
pipebetween
betweenthe the wagons.
wagons. However,
However, as ofasDAC
of DAC levellevel 3,brake
3, the the brake
pipe
pipe discharge
discharge is applied
is applied between
between the connected
the connected wagons;
wagons; thisthis effect
effect is expected
is expected to be
to be mi-
minor,
nor, although
although it should
it should be experimentally
be experimentally measured.
measured.
Within the scope of this paper, the mechanical DAC (AC2) is modelled using the
force/stroke characteristics
characteristicsshownshownininTable
Table2.2.Since
Since DAC
DAC is is currently
currently under
under development,
development, the
finalfinal
the design may be
design maysignificantly different.
be significantly It is important
different. to remarktothat
It is important the same
remark thatequivalent
the same
force/strokeforce/stroke
equivalent characteristics are used for
characteristics side
are usedbuffers andbuffers
for side draw gear coupling:
and draw gear the train’s
coupling:
mechanical
the characteristics
train’s mechanical are the sameare
characteristics whether
the sameDAC2 is usedDAC2
whether or not.isThis
usedisora simplification
not. This is a
introduced to better
simplification evaluate
introduced the effect
to better of the
evaluate theincrement of PLCF
effect of the because
increment of DAC.
of PLCF Conse-
because of
quently,
DAC. see also Section
Consequently, see4.3, trains
also with4.3,
Section EP brake
trainsand withwith
EP DAC3
brake andhavewith
the same
DAC3 mechanical
have the
features
same but different
mechanical PLCF.but
features The PLCF ofPLCF.
different wagons Theequipped
PLCF of with wagonsDAC has beenwith
equipped increased
DAC
conservatively by 50%. These figures should be confirmed by subsequent
has been increased conservatively by 50%. These figures should be confirmed by subse- studies, which
shouldstudies,
quent evaluatewhich
how the PLCF
should changeshow
evaluate as a the
function
PLCFof the curvature
changes radius,of
as a function thethewagon type,
curvature
and the load, but they are considered realistic and conservative by the authors.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 15671 6 of 11

Table 2. Force/stroke characteristics of mechanical DAC.

Stroke [mm] 0 9 19 29 34 39 49 53 55
Load [kN] 50 70 130 260 370 490 900 1400 5000
Unload [kN] 35 49 91 182 259 343 630 980 3500

4. Numerical Results
This paper applies the “relative approach” described in the IRS 40421 [15]. The
“relative approach” method compares a new train family with an accepted train family in
terms of LCF by comparing the number of potential derailments of these two families. If
this number is lower for the new train family, it can circulate safely. Trainsets respecting the
IRS 40421 are examples of accepted train families, e.g., G-braked trains (all vehicles brake
in position “G”) having a mass of up to 4000 T and length up to 700 m (TU(s) excluded).
An example of a new train family used in this paper is the one in which a radio-controlled
traction unit works at the trainset end or a train having wagons equipped with a DAC.
The following train operations were used for the comparison: (i) emergency braking
from full acceleration (TEB)—the train operation that is most challenging for LTD and
not likely to occur; (ii) emergency braking (EB). The initial speed for all types of braking
is 30 km/h, since the friction material of the braking shoes is cast iron (a conservative
assumption), and the LTD is enhanced for braking applications from this speed.
For the sake of simplicity and since DAC studies are at an early stage, only one type of
wagon is used for this paper to create the statistical trains; Table 3 shows its most relevant
parameters. The wagon load can vary from zero (empty condition) to the maximum value
(laden condition). Note that wagons equipped with a DAC will most likely have different
characteristics, especially in terms of variation of braked weight with load: the choice of
empty/loaded device is conservative since it is expected to result in higher LCF.

Table 3. Main wagon features.

Time to Reach Time to Reach

Length
Name Tare [t] Type Braked Weight [t] Shoes 95/100% of Max 95/100% of Max
[mm]
Pressure in P [s] Pressure in G [s]
Loaded 53/Empty
Sdgkmss 16.44 15.6 Bogie 2 Bgu 4/4.5 24/28
23/Change 45

Since the time to reach the maximum pressure in brake cylinders (BC) can be different
from the nominal behavior and because this time affects the LTD, this time has been
randomly changed for each train-consist wagon to align the train simulations with the
current wagons’ behavior. Therefore, when the wagon brakes in passenger position (P) or
goods position (G) [22], the time to reach 95% of maximum pressure in BC is uniformly
distributed between 3 and 5 s or 22.5 and 25.5 s, respectively. The time to reach 100% of
the pressure is obtained by multiplying the 95% time by 4.5/4 or by 28/24, respectively for
trains operating in P and G.
This section is divided into four sub-sections. Section 4.1 reports the in-train forces
of trains explicitly admitted by IRS 40421, providing a reference for DAC technology. To
provide another reference for DAC technology and background for trains with mechanical
DAC and train lengths up to 1500 m, Section 4.2 reports the probability of derailment for
trains equipped with radio communication between the TUs compared to those of the
worst trains admitted by the IRS 40421. Section 4.3 reports the probability of derailment
when the wagons are equipped with a mechanical DAC, electro-pneumatic (EP) brake
and DAC3 (i.e., a mechanical DAC + a brake similar to EP). Finally, considering trains
with lengths up to 1500 m and made by coupling two trains, one with DAC2 and another
without DAC, with TUs communicating by radio, this study addresses the better relative
position of DAC2 trains.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 15671 7 of 11

4.1. Reference and Train Statistics

The reference train families for this paper are those explicitly allowed by UIC IRS
40421, i.e., trains with hauled mass in the range (1200–1600) T with Long Locomotive regime
(LL) (the first five wagons and the leading TU are in freight position G, the remaining
wagons are in passenger position P), and trains with hauled mass in the range (1600–2500)
T and (2500–4000) T in G; all with train lengths in (640–740) m but without a DAC or EP
brake. The first two train families are likely to have empty wagons, and this does not
happen for the third train family because of the higher hauled mass. As the results of
the following sections show, the higher minimum hauled mass of the last train family is
beneficial in terms of safety.
Figure 4 part (a) shows a series of dots, each one representing the worst LCF (negative
value) and LTF (positive value) for each train; as it is customary for these analyses, each
train family is represented by 1000 trains, which is a number of trains that provides a
satisfactory evaluation of mean and standard deviation of LCF (as required by [15]). Part (b)
shows the ratios of LCF/PLCF and LTF/PLTF: in brackets, the labels show the percentages
for potential derailment and train disruption, respectively; note that the permissible LTF is
set to 550 kN, as this value prevents fatigue damage to the draw gear. Looking at (a) and (b),
(2500–4000) T trains have LCF like (1200–1600) T trains in UIC IRS 40421 but have a lower
risk of derailment because of higher wagon mass, as also confirmed by the histograms in
(c) and (e). The high probability of potential derailment of the reference trains is the result
of a conservative calculation: (i) the PLCF values in UIC IRS 40421 are conservative; (ii) the
Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW
LTF/PLTF ratio assumes that the wagon subjected to the highest LCF is also running on a
track section with a low radius of curvature; (iii) the likelihood of TEB is low (around 10−4 ).

Figure 4. Reference trains

Figure without atrains
4. Reference DACwithout
or EP brake.
a DAC (a,b) report
or EP brake.the(a,b)
cumulative
report thefrequencies
cumulativeoffrequenci
reference
reference trains (see trains (see
the legends) the legends)
in terms in terms
of LF and Ratio of LFPLCF,
with and Ratio with PLCF,
respectively; respectively;
(c–e) report the (c–e) rep
histograms
histograms of wagon mass forof the
wagon mass
three for the
different three
train different
families (seetrain families (see
the subfigures the subfigures titles).
titles).

Note that 4.2.

the same trains
Traction Unitsareinused
Radioand only the technology (or the brake position) is
Communication.
changed in the following sections: therefore,
Concerning radio communicationthe effectbetween
of each change (e.g.,
TUs, this radio
paper or DAC)
reports the simulati
is enhanced. Thethe LTD, when the train is formed by coupling two long trains with a those
next section shows the existence of other train families safer than total length o
explicitly allowed
1500tom,
operate
without(taking as reference
or with the (1200–1600)
a TU placed T in(the
at the train end LL),label
as the“SW”
aim of
is the
used in this
“relative approach” methodology, envisaged by UIC IRS 40421, is to find new safe trainsets.
Figure 5 illustrates the probability of potential derailment for UIC IRS 40421 (1200
T trains in LL as blue and red vertical broken lines for TEB and EB, respectively.
shows trains in different brake positions, where the TUs communicate via GSMR
LTE (b). It is worth noting that the delay in radio communication between the TUs
sidered randomly variable for each train. For trains equipped with GSMR radios,
action time of the guided TU relative to the leading TU is derived from a Gaussian
bution with a mean of 1.6 s and a standard deviation of 0.16/3 s. This time is th
Sustainability 2022, 14, 15671 8 of 11

4.2. Traction Units in Radio Communication

Concerning radio communication between TUs, this paper reports the simulations of
the LTD, when the train is formed by coupling two long trains with a total length of up to
1500 m, without or with a TU placed at the train end (the label “SW” is used in this case).
Figure 5 illustrates the probability of potential derailment for UIC IRS 40421 (1200–1600) T
trains in LL as blue and red vertical broken lines for TEB and EB, respectively. It also shows
trains in different brake positions, where the TUs communicate via GSMR (a) or LTE (b).
It is worth noting that the delay in radio communication between the TUs is considered
randomly variable for each train. For trains equipped with GSMR radios, the reaction
time of the guided TU relative to the leading TU is derived from a Gaussian distribution
with a mean of 1.6 s and a standard deviation of 0.16/3 s. This time is the time required
to discharge the brake hose at the point where the guided TU is located and is not just
the communication time between the radios. For trains equipped with LTE radios, the
Sustainability 2022,corresponding
14, x FOR PEER REVIEW
Gaussian distribution has a mean of 0.9 s and a standard deviation of 0.045 s. 9
The previous timings are in line with M2O Deliverable D3.3 [23] and they are conservative.

Figure
Figure 5. Trains with 5. Trains
GSMR with
(a) or LTEGSMR (a) or
(b) radio LTE (b)DAC
without radioorwithout DAC
EP brake or EP brake
in nominal modein nominal
(radio mode (
working correctly).
working correctly).

When a third TU Theistrain

placedfamilies
at the 2end × (2500–4000)
of the trainset, T show
therethat
is ait beneficial
can safelyeffect
increase on the hauled m
LCF because the upBP to is
8000
ventedt (with
from a train length
the train end,upand to 1500 m) usingthe
this stretches three TUs
train and with
reducing theall vehicl
brake positions
LCF. In this condition, to have G and comparison
a fair P, respectively, withusing GSM-R
the same train and LTE without
family radio. Even the if this fi
third TU at theshows
end (e.g., 2 × possibilities
several (2501–4000) of T),safe trains with radio
the acceleration phasecommunication,
for TEB operation theyiscan be m
more,2/3
accomplished with e.g.,ofreducing
the maximum the overall length
power: thus,or the
coupling trains with
train families different
employ the lengths
same and ha
power during themasses. An example
acceleration. is given
In fact, by 2is× affected
the LTD (1600–2500) T, LL/P,
by the initialSW, i.e., aoftrain
energy made by coup
the train
before the EB application. Increasing the total power, having three TUs at their maximum in passe
two (1600–2500) T trains, the first in Long Locomotive (LL) and the second
position between
power, the comparison (P) with the a remote third TU;
train families this isofless
in terms safe forces
in-train than the reference
is also UIC IRS 4
affected
by the different(1200–1600)
initial potential T inenergy
EB operation.
(i.e., the A small reduction
couplers of the length
are more stretched and/or the mass o
or compressed).
second train
Therefore, the presence of themakes
thirdthis TUtrain
is notfamily
the onlysafer.difference in the comparison.
The train families 2 × (2500–4000) T show that it can safely increase the hauled mass
4.3.aEP
up to 8000 t (with Brake
train and up
length Mechanical
to 1500 m) DACusing(DAC2)
three TUs and with all vehicles in brake
positions G and P, respectively, using GSM-R
This section demonstrates other possible and LTE radio. ways Even if this figure
of increasing shows mass by
the hauled
several possibilities
ployingof safe
the trains
EP brake with(available
radio communication,
also from DAC3 theylevel)
can beand many more, e.g.,
mechanical DAC (DA
reducing the overall
When length
a train or coupling
is formed bytrains withtwo
coupling different
trains lengths
and onlyand thehauled
mechanical masses.
DAC (DAC
An example is available,
given by 2the × two
(1600–2500)
TUs mustT,be LL/P, SW, i.e., a train
radio-connected made by
via GSM-R orcoupling
LTE. two
(1600–2500) T trains,As theinfirst in Long
Figures 5 and Locomotive
6 shows the (LL) and the second
probability in passenger
of potential derailment position
of UIC IRS 4
(P) with a remote third TU; this is less safe than the reference UIC IRS
(1200–1600) T in LL with dashed vertical lines. Part (a) of Figure 6 shows that 40421 (1200–1600) T DAC2
in EB operation.bles
A small reduction of the length and/or the mass of the second
the safe operation of single trains in the LL regime even if the hauled mass is m train makes
this train family safer.
than 1600 t. As expected, implementing the EP brake solves the problem of train de
ment for any hauled mass and length, as shown by the two train families “2 × (1601–2
T, P EP” and “2 × (2501–4000) T, P EP” in part (b) of Figure 6.
 shows several possibilities of safe trains with radio communication, they can be m
more, e.g., reducing the overall length or coupling trains with different lengths and ha
masses. An example is given by 2 × (1600–2500) T, LL/P, SW, i.e., a train made by coup
two (1600–2500) T trains, the first in Long Locomotive (LL) and the second in passe
Sustainability 2022, 14, 15671
position (P) with a remote third TU; this is less safe than the reference UIC IRS 4
9 of 11
(1200–1600) T in EB operation. A small reduction of the length and/or the mass o
second train makes this train family safer.

4.3. EP Brake and

4.3.Mechanical DAC
EP Brake and (DAC2) DAC (DAC2)
Mechanical
This section demonstrates other possible
This section demonstrates ways
other of increasing
possible the hauledthe
ways of increasing mass by mass by
hauled
employing theploying
EP brake (available also from DAC3 level) and mechanical DAC
the EP brake (available also from DAC3 level) and mechanical DAC (DA (DAC2).
When a train isWhen
formed by coupling
a train is formedtwo by trains andtwo
coupling only the mechanical
trains and only theDAC (DAC2)DAC
mechanical is (DAC
available, the two TUs must be radio-connected via GSM-R or LTE.
available, the two TUs must be radio-connected via GSM-R or LTE.
As in Figures 5As andin 6Figures
shows 5the andprobability
6 shows the of probability
potential derailment
of potentialofderailment
UIC IRS 40421
of UIC IRS 4
(1200–1600) T in(1200–1600)
LL with dashed vertical lines. Part (a) of Figure 6 shows
T in LL with dashed vertical lines. Part (a) of Figure that DAC2 enables
6 shows that DAC2
the safe operation
bles of
thesingle trains in the
safe operation LL regime
of single trainseven if the
in the hauled even
LL regime massifisthe
more thanmass is m
hauled
1600 t. As expected, implementing
than 1600 the EPimplementing
t. As expected, brake solves thethe problem
EP brakeofsolves
train derailment
the problemforof train de
any hauled mass and length, as shown by the two train families “2 × (1601–2500)
ment for any hauled mass and length, as shown by the two train families “2 × (1601–2T, P EP”
and “2 × (2501–4000)
T, P EP”T,and
P EP” in(2501–4000)
“2 × part (b) of Figure
T, P EP”6. in part (b) of Figure 6.

Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 12

Figure
Figure 6. Trains with EP6.brake
Trainsorwith EP brake or DAC2.
DAC2.
A fundamental step forward is provided by DAC3, which is even more effective than
EP, asA illustrated
fundamental in (a)
stepand (b) of isFigure
forward 7. The
provided by part
DAC3, (a) which
of the is
figure
evenshows that the than
more effective LCF
are as
EP, theillustrated
same, if EPin or
(a)DAC3
and (b)areof employed,
Figure 7. The since
partthe
(a)couplers share
of the figure the same
shows mechanical
that the LCF are
features.
the same, The
if EPpart (b) proves
or DAC3 the beneficial
are employed, effect
since the of theshare
couplers higher
thePLCF
same provided
mechanicalbyfeatures.
DAC3
The part (b) proves
in comparison thethe
with beneficial effectused
side buffers of thefor
higher PLCF provided
simulation with justbytheDAC3 in comparison
EP brake: see the
with the side between
comparison buffers used
the for simulation
green and blue with just the
curves orEP brake: see
between the the comparison
light blue and between
the red
the green
curves. and blue curves or between the light blue and the red curves.

In-train forces
Figure 7. In-train forces for
for trains
trains with
withEP
EPor
orDAC3.
DAC3.(a,b)
(a,b)report
reportthe
thecumulative
cumulativefrequencies
frequenciesofofEP
EP
and DAC3 trains in terms of LF and Ratio with PLCF,
PLCF, respectively.
respectively

4.4. Transition Trains

4.4. Transition Trains
For
For the successfulimplementation
the successful implementationofofDAC,
DAC,it it
is is
necessary to reduce
necessary as much
to reduce as possible
as much as pos-
the transitory phase in which some trains have DAC and some others do not. Therefore,
sible the transitory phase in which some trains have DAC and some others do not. There- it
fore, it may be necessary to couple DAC and NoDAC trains and vice versa. Figure 8 clearly
shows that the order of the two trains is irrelevant: in (a) the first sub–train is without
DAC2 (NoDAC), which equips the second sub–train; in (b) it is vice versa. What is essen-
tial is the radio technology between the TUs (LTE is required to obtain an acceptable prob-
 Figure 7. In-train forces for trains with EP or DAC3. (a,b) report the cumulative frequencies of EP
and DAC3 trains in terms of LF and Ratio with PLCF, respectively

Sustainability 2022, 14, 15671 4.4. Transition Trains 10 of 11

For the successful implementation of DAC, it is necessary to reduce as much as pos-

sible the transitory phase in which some trains have DAC and some others do not. There-
may
fore, be necessary
it may to couple
be necessary DAC and
to couple DAC NoDAC trains and
and NoDAC vice
trains andversa.
viceFigure 8 clearly
versa. Figure shows
8 clearly
that
shows thethat
order
theoforder
the two trains
of the twoistrains
irrelevant: in (a) the
is irrelevant: in first
(a) the first subis–train
sub–train without DAC2
is without
(NoDAC),
DAC2 (NoDAC), which equips the second
which equips the second sub–in
sub–train; (b) in
train; it is
(b)vice
it isversa. WhatWhat
vice versa. is essential is
is essen-
the
tial radio
is the technology between
radio technology the TUs
between the(LTE
TUsis required
(LTE to obtain
is required an acceptable
to obtain probability
an acceptable prob-
of derailment)
ability and theand
of derailment) braked
the positions (safe only
braked positions in G).
(safe only A in
relevant consequence
G). A relevant of these
consequence
results
of these results is that radio communication between the TUs is an essential featurethe
is that radio communication between the TUs is an essential feature to facilitate to
migration,
facilitate the at migration,
least beforeatthe implementation
least of DAC3.
before the implementation of DAC3.

Figure 8.
Figure 8. Coupling
Coupling of
of DAC
DAC andandNoDAC
NoDACtrains. trains.InIn(a)
(a)the
thefirst
firstsub–train
sub–trainis is
without DAC2,
without which
DAC2, which
equips the
equips the second
second sub–train;
sub–train; in
in (b)
(b) itit is
is vice
vice versa.
versa.

5.
5. Conclusions
Conclusions
The
The paper
paperfocuses
focusesononseveral technologies
several thatthat
technologies cancan
be implemented
be implementedveryvery
quickly, such
quickly,
as radio communication between traction units or within a relatively short period,
such as radio communication between traction units or within a relatively short period, such
as the Digital Automatic Coupler (DAC), to increase freight efficiency and improve the
railway’s green footprint. Radio communication has recently been successfully tested by
the Shift2Rail (S2R) FR8RAIL II and Marathon2Operation (M2O) projects. DAC is being
studied and developed as part of several EU projects. This paper reports the in-train
forces calculated by TrainDy software for different statistical train families. Based on the
application of IRS 40421, these simulations give rise to the following conclusions: (a) radio
communication between TUs is an effective way to increase the hauled mass both with
GSM-R and LTE radio for single and coupled trains (especially if a third TU is placed at the
end of the train); (b) mechanical DAC (DAC2) is an alternative way of increasing the hauled
mass and using P trains instead of G trains; (c) with DAC2, the third TU is not required
to couple two trains and arrive at a train length up to 1500 m; (d) DAC3 (i.e., including
implementation of the electro-pneumatic brake) solves all problems with regard to in-train
forces; and (e) employing DAC2 on just one of two coupled trains (in a transition phase, for
example) requires the use of LTE radio and G trains.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, R.T.; Methodology, G.R.; Software, L.C.; Formal analysis,
A.O.; Data curation, T.D.; Writing—original draft, L.C.; Writing—review & editing, L.C.; Supervision,
L.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 15671 11 of 11

References
1. Wu, Q.; Cole, C.; Spiryagin, M.; Chang, C.; Wei, W.; Ursulyak, L.; Shvets, A.; Murtaza, M.A.; Mirza, I.M.; Zhelieznov, K.; et al.
Freight train air brake models. Int. J. Rail Transp. 2021. [CrossRef]
2. Wu, Q.; Spiryagin, M.; Cole, C. Longitudinal train dynamics: An overview. Veh. Syst. Dyn. 2016, 54, 1688–1714. [CrossRef]
3. Cole, C.; Spiryagin, M.; Wu, Q.; Sun, Y.Q. Modelling, simulation and applications of longitudinal train dynamics. Veh. Syst. Dyn.
2017, 55, 1498–1571. [CrossRef]
4. UIC 530-2; Wagons—Running Safety. 6th ed. UIC: Paris, France, 2008.
5. Krishna, V.V.; Berg, M.; Stichel, S. Tolerable longitudinal forces for freight trains in tight S-curves using three-dimensional
multi-body simulations. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. F: J. Rail Rapid Transit 2020, 234, 454–467. [CrossRef]
6. Krishna, V.V.; Jobstfinke, D.; Melzi, S.; Berg, M. An integrated numerical framework to investigate the running safety of overlong
freight trains. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. F: J. Rail Rapid Transit 2021, 235, 47–60. [CrossRef]
7. Cantone, L. Simulation of freight trains with up to three traction units in radio communication. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng.
2021, 1214, 012039. [CrossRef]
8. Europe’s Rail. Available online: https://rail-research.europa.eu/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/20211216-Master-Plan_agreed-
in-princ_clean.pdf (accessed on 12 November 2022).
9. Europe’s Rail. Available online: https://rail-research.europa.eu/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/20211222_mawp_v1_agreed-in-
principle_clean.pdf (accessed on 12 November 2022).
10. Wei, L.; Zeng, J.; Wang, Q. Investigation of in-train stability and safety assessment for railway vehicles during braking. J. Mech.
Sci. Technol. 2016, 30, 1507–1525. [CrossRef]
11. Mohammadi, S.; Serajian, R. Effects of the change in auto coupler parameters on in-train longitudinal forces during brake
application. Mech. Ind. 2015, 16, 205. [CrossRef]
12. Xu, Z.; Wu, Q.; Luo, S.; Ma, W.; Dong, X. Stabilizing Mechanism and Running Behavior of Couplers on Heavy Haul Trains. Chin.
J. Mech. Eng. (Engl. Ed.) 2014, 27, 1211–1218. [CrossRef]
13. Aboubakr, A.K.; Volpi, M.; Shabana, A.A.; Cheli, F.; Melzi, S. Implementation of electronically controlled pneumatic brake
formulation in longitudinal train dynamics algorithms. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. K J. Multi-Body Dyn. 2016, 230, 505–526. [CrossRef]
14. Chun, T.; Wu, M.; Lu, Z.; Jun, Q. An intelligent method for controlling the ECP braking system of a heavy-haul train. Transp. Saf.
Environ. 2020, 2, 133–147.
15. IRS 40421; Rules for the Consist and Braking of International Freight Trains. 1st ed. UIC: Paris, France, 2021.
16. European Union Agency for Railways. Available online: https://www.era.europa.eu/sites/default/files/library/docs/opinion-
advice/tsi-ope-amoc-tests_checks_braking-v2_en.pdf (accessed on 12 November 2022).
17. Cantone, L. TrainDy: The new Union Internationale des Chemins de Fer software for freight train interoperability. Proc. Inst.
Mech. Eng. F J. Rail Rapid Transit 2011, 225, 57–70. [CrossRef]
18. Cantone, L.; Crescentini, E.; Verzicco, R.; Vullo, V. A numerical model for the analysis of unsteady train braking and releasing
manoeuvres. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. F J. Rail Rapid Transit 2009, 223, 305–317. [CrossRef]
19. Bosso, N.; Zampieri, N. Long train simulation using a multibody code. Veh. Syst. Dyn. 2017, 55, 552–570. [CrossRef]
20. UIC 544; Brakes—Braking Performance. 5th ed. UIC: Paris, France, 2013.
21. UIC 541-5; Brakes—Electropneumatic Brake (Ep Brake). 4th ed. UIC: Paris, France, 2006.
22. UIC 540; Brakes—Air Brakes for Freight Trains and Passenger Trains. 5th ed. UIC: Paris, France, 2006.
23. Marathon2Operation. Available online: https://www.marathon2operation.eu/web/pdf/D3p3%20Test%20Demonstrators%20
with%20DPS,%20LTD%20simulation%20report.pdf (accessed on 12 November 2022).