Post on 25-Dec-2021
Automation in urban public transportation F eb r u a r y 2 0 1 6
Gautier BRODEO, urban rail expert
CONTENTS
2
WHAT IS CBTC ?
BENEFITS OF AUTOMATED SYSTEMS
AUTOMATION : RATP’s ACHIEVEMENTS
TRENDS AND EVOLUTION OF AUTOMATIION IN THE WORLD
THE USE OF RADIO FREQUENCIES FOR SIGNALLING SYSTEMS
WHAT IS CBTC ?
3
1
1
4
WHAT IS CBTC ?
The new market standard for signaling systems
Most often using radio frequencies for train to track communication
Communication Based Train Control Systems
3
Vital On-board Unit
Safety limit fixed by the vital zone computing unitVital speed profile computed
by the vital on-board unit
Vital On-board Unit
Vital Zone Computing UnitInterlocking
Sends Movement
Authority Limit to trains
Transmits train positionTransmits train position
Radiofrequency
real-time & bidirectional
communication
AUTOMATION RATP’s ACHIEVEMENTS
5
2
2
6
Levels of automation
ACHIEVEMENTS
GOA1 GOA2 GOA3 GOA4
2
7
RATP’s first times
ACHIEVEMENTS
Automated metro is the result of a long story of innovation that began in the 50’s.
Line a m Network
Line p
World 1st GOA4 large capacity metro
90% of metro
network is GOA2
1st ATO
exp.
Line a Lines cfk
1st new generation GOA2 lines, with CAB-Signal (5,9)
1st OCC World 1st automation of an existing line without major traffic disruptions
World 1st First safety critical computerized system
1981: World first GOA4 lines (Japan)
Line 14 1998
8
The first fully-automated large capacity metro
In 1987, RATP proposes a solution to relieve traffic on the RER A. Construction starts in 1992, first tests of the automated system begin in 1995 and the line opens in 1998.
2
9
Line 14 construction ACHIEVEMENTS
TECHNICAL CHALLENGES
• Infrastructure designed for performance : Distance between stations, tracks (straight profile, chain profile )
• Safety criteria allocated on every system component
• Board/tracks data transmission via Magnetic Loops (ATP/ATO : Automatic train protection and automatic train operation)
• Capitalizing on SACEM achievements : encoded processor, industrialization of B method
• Innovations : Video surveillance by radio
Innovation lies above all in the operational management model.
Large capacity
auto. metro
SYSTEM VISION
A whole system to re-think :
• organization (maintenance and operation),
• Passenger service (stations, staff presence),
• And technical systems with new safety challenges
Line 14 automated system prefigures modern CBTC (Communication Based Train Control)
Line 1 2012
10
World first automation of an existing line without major traffic disruptions
Built in 1900, Line 1 is the oldest, fastest and most crowded line of the Paris metro network. It is heavy loaded during rush hours and also off-peak hours, weekends & holiday periods. In 2003, RATP launches an automation feasibility study.
2
11
Line 1 automation ACHIEVEMENTS
A 100-YEAR OLD LINE
Old infrastructures and specific configuration, implying
• Renewal of all the signalling equipment
• Infrastructure adaptation (Energy, tracks, platforms)
• Curved stations management
Double challenge
Automation of a 100-year old line without major traffic disruption
NO TRAFFFIC INTERRUPTION
Automatizing a line without traffic disruption implies strong operational constraints :
• Work shifts of 3 hours per night
• Maintenance works “as usual”
• Mixed mode operation (trains with and without drivers)
Lines 3, 5, 9 2015
12
GOA2 new generation
OCTYS principles….
2
13
New generation GOA2 ACHIEVEMENTS
INTERCHANGEABILITY
MAIN FEATURES
• transmission via free propagation radio @ 5.9 GHz
• System architecture compatible with international standards (IEC62-290 & Modurban)
• Software safety demonstration by
− B Method or
− Formal proof– innovation
Rolling Stock Trainborne ATC
Trainborne Radio
Trackside Radio and Backbone
Computerized Interlocking
OCC (ATS)
PSD (Platform Screen Dors)
Block Relay Signaling
Fixed ATC
Data
Tra
nsm
issi
on
Syst
em
Beacons
4 Separate contract shares for GOA2 CBTC
ADVANTAGES OF THE AUTOMATED METRO
14
3
3
15
4 kinds of improvement ADVANTAGES of Automated metro
Automated system has many benefits.
Better socio-economic performance (GoA4)
Better Safety (GoA2, GoA3, GoA4)
Better functional performance
(GoA2, GOA3, GoA4)
Better environmental performance
Platform screen doors prevent technical incidents and accidents
3
16
Better safety ADVANTAGES of Automated metro
No accident on automated line in Paris.
HUMAN FACTOR
TRACK/PLATFORM INTERFACE
Compared error rates
• Human operator: 10-3/h (10-4/h if well trained)
• Automated system : <10-9/h
CONTINUOUS CONTROL
Signal passed at danger or overspeed are
• anticipated
• controlled
• And leads to emergency stopping of the train
0 accidents
WARNING : The maintaining of drivers’ competences, which are needed during rare automated system breakdowns, is a major challenge.
Losing the barriers between the responsibility of the automatic pilot and the driver can prove to be disastrous.
• Increased ridership
• Better service : less delay-related economic losses
• No more passenger accidents
3
17
Better OPEX ADVANTAGES of Automated metro
ADDITIONAL COSTS
OTHER SAVINGS
• Maintenance of new functions and equipment
DIRECT SAVINGS
• Less staff to operate
• Less maintenance on trains (less traction / braking commutations for instance)
• Energy savings
Return on investment within 15 years (line 1)
Film circulation trains (L1)
• Coasting and dwelling times are precisely controlled
3
18
Functional performance ADVANTAGES of Automated metro
For Paris line 1 when converted to GoA4.
CAPACITY
RELIABILITY
• Reduces headway Line 1 and 14 can reach a headway of 85 seconds
• No more driver cabin (GoA4) : better train capacity
ADAPTABILITY
• Possibility to add more trains instantaneously Example : end of a music show
• Reduced marginal cost of operation (enables to increase the service off peak for instance)
+ 30% capacity
• After an incident, back to normal within minutes
RESILIENCE
Headway of 100s all day long on line 1 during heavy maintenance work on line A during summer
98% satisfied
passengers
TRENDS AND EVOLUTION OF AUTOMATIION IN THE WORLD UITP data from Observatory of automated metro
19
4
99 km
Lille
Osaka
Vancouver
Yokohama Kobe
Detroit
Miami
New York
Jacksonville
1981 1982 1983 1985 1986 1987 1989
PIONEERS ERA: 1980-90
99 km
Lille
Osaka
Vancouver
Yokohama Kobe
Detroit
Miami
New York
Jacksonville
1981 1982 1983 1985 1986 1987 1989
PIONEERS ERA: 1980-90
1991
EARLY ADOPTERS: 1990-2000
Lille
Osaka
Vancouver
Yokohama Kobe
Detroit
Miami
New York
Jacksonville
213 km
Paris
1992
Lyon
1993
Toulouse
1995
Tokyo
Kuala Lumpur
1998 1999
Singapore
2002
Lille
Osaka
Vancouver
Yokohama Kobe
Detroit
Miami
New York
Jacksonville
Paris
Lyon
Toulouse
Tokyo
Kuala Lumpur
Singapore
A PROVEN REALITY: 2000-2010
Rennes
Copenhagen
2004
Las Vegas
2005
Nagoya Hong Kong
2006
Torino
Dubai Taipei
Barcelona
450 km
Lausanne
2008 2009
2010
Lille
Osaka
Vancouver
Yokohama
Detroit
Miami
New York
Jacksonville
Paris Toulouse
Tokyo
Kuala Lumpur
Singapore
A PROVEN REALITY: 2010-TODAY
Copenhagen
Las Vegas Nagoya Hong Kong
Dubai Taipei
Barcelona
São Paulo
Busan
2011
Seoul
2012
Uijeongbu
2013
Yongin
2014
Budapest Rome
737 km
Nüremberg Milano
Kobe Brescia Torino
Rennes
Lyon Lausanne
2015
Daegu
future 2328 km
EXPONENTIAL GROWTH! 2014-2025
AUTOMATION TODAY
AUTOMATION TODAY
Europa New Conventional Lines vs UTO Lines
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
AUTOMATION TODAY
UTO % of km per Country
17
%
15
% 11
%
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
LIL
L2
SIN
CC
L
PA
R L
1
TOR
L1
TOU
LB
NU
E U
2
SIN
NEL
TOU
LA
LYN
LD
/Mag
galy
RO
M L
C
LSN
M2
MLN
L5
/M5
BR
ES M
etro
Bs
LIL
L1
RN
S LA
BC
N L
9-1
0
NU
E U
3
BU
D M
4
BU
S L4
CP
H M
1/M
2
DU
B G
reen
L.
PA
R L
14
VN
C C
anad
a L.
SP L
4/Y
ello
w L
.
SEO
SB
L
SIN
Do
wn
tow
n L
.
KLP
Kel
ana
Jaya
L.
DU
B R
ed
L.
VN
C E
xpo
L.
VN
C M
illen
ium
L.
TAI W
enh
u L
.
BU
S B
usa
n-G
imh
ae L
.
DA
E Sk
y R
ail/
L3
DET
DP
M
DU
B P
alm
Ju
me
irah
Mo
HK
G D
RL
JSV
JTA
Sky
way
KO
B P
ort
Lin
er
KO
B R
okk
o L
ine
r
LVG
Las
Ve
gas
MR
MIA
Met
rom
ove
r
NA
G L
inim
o
NY
Air
trai
n J
FK
OSK
Ne
w T
ram
PA
R O
rlyv
al
SIN
Bu
kit
Pan
jan
g
SP L
15
/Pra
ta
TOK
New
Tra
nsi
t
TOK
Nip
po
ri-T
on
eri
UIJ
UL
YKH
Kan
azaw
a L.
YON
Eve
rlin
e
AUTOMATION TODAY
Constructive models: underground vs elevated (# stations)
50 %
50%
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Signaling Solutions: Share of Inductive loops – Radio - Wave
34%
28%
10%
Inductive Loop
RF free propagation
Radio
Guided Wave
Non CBTC
29% Inductive
TRENDS & EVOLUTION
Future Growth
Exponential growth! FUTURE: GROWTH
0
250
500
750
1000
1250
1500
1750
2000
2250
19
80
19
82
19
84
19
86
19
88
19
90
19
92
19
94
19
96
19
98
20
00
20
02
20
04
20
06
20
08
20
10
20
12
20
14
20
16
20
18
20
20
20
22
20
24
1x
>8x
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
1990 2000 2010 2020
x 2 x 2.4
x 3.9
Exponential growth! relative to previous decade FUTURE: GROWTH
Worldwide growth distribution (% of new km’s 2015-25)
FUTURE: GROWTH
2% 3% 10%
26% 29% 31%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Australia North America South America Europe Asia Middle East
THE USE OF RADIO FREQUENCIES FOR SIGNALLING SYSTEMS
34
5
5
35
FREQUENCY BANDWIDTH
CBTC Main criteria for radio frequency selection:
Propagation (either in tunnels and in open air)
Resilience (robustness to perturbations)
Bandwidth (hundreds of kb/s required for CBTC)
Common applications:
Wifi based 2.4 GHz (or 5.1-5.8 GHz)Open band (ISM) but more and more saturated with commercial Wifi, Bluetooth and Zigbee applications
Wifi based 5.9 GHzNot (yet) saturated band but subject to local licensing
LTE based frequencies (4G/5G) Dependency to radio-communication operators
5
36
FREQUENCY BANDWIDTH
CBTC Several EU countries already use radio
communication systems in the 5,9GHz range :
SNCF for freight trains : 5,915 GHz to 5,935 GHz
RATP for Paris subway : 5,915 GHz to 5,935 GHz
SYTRAL for Lyon subway : 5,915 GHz to 5,935 GHz
Copenhagen : 5,925 GHz to 5,975 GHz
Helsinki : 5,925 GHz to 5,960 GHz
Malaga : 5,915 GHz to 5,935 GHz
Lille : 5,915 GHz to 5,935 GHz
All on a limited duration licensing scheme
depending on the local regulation authority
5
37
FREQUENCY BANDWIDTH
The threat :
Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS)
5
38
FREQUENCY BANDWIDTH
ITS include telematics and all types of ommunications
in vehicles, between vehicles (e.g. car-to-car), and
between vehicles and fixed locations (e.g. car-to-
infrastructure)
Already owning the 5.875-5.905 GHz band (decision
ECC(08)01)
With an option toward 5.905-5.925 GHz for future functionalities (confirmed in December 2012)
9
5
39
FREQUENCY BANDWIDTH
Conflicting bandwidth allocation
5
40
FREQUENCY BANDWIDTH Position paper & Spectrum Users Group of UITP
Metro automation is a … - proven - scalable - adaptable … solution that meets the needs of diverse mobility scenarios