paukert:Layout 1 20/5/08 09:36 Page 5
DIESEL ENGINE EMISSIONS
There is a risk that the requirements of which are never used for shunting limits were introduced without changes by
the Directive, by their rigid nature, could purposes, have idling percentages which 2012, there would be a potential risk of
backfire in the longer term, by keeping are not significantly lower than those of further modal shift from rail to road as
older engines in service rather than other vehicles. the threat of closure of secondary lines
encouraging their replacement with more A comparison of the results with the becomes a reality.
efficient ones. Some fairly simple C1 cycle imposed for DMU engines clearly To demonstrate the railways’
adaptations to the Directive, along the demonstrates that this test cycle is not at commitment to maintain its environmental
lines of existing United States’ legislation, all appropriate for railway engines and a friendly reputation, rolling stock
would offer greater flexibility and give distinction between DMU engines and manufacturers, operators and engine
railway operators an incentive to renew locomotive engines cannot be justified. producers are submitting a common
their motive power fleets more frequently. The survey proved that, firstly, cycle F proposal to the European Commission’s
of the ISO 8178-4 represents the best 7th Framework Programme (FP7).
Suitability of test cycles compromise as a test cycle for railway Up to five prototypes (DMUs, shunters
Currently two different test cycles are to vehicles, and, secondly, that a and main line locomotives) will be
be applied to determine the pollutant differentiation between locomotives and equipped with IIIB compliant engines and
emissions of the railway vehicle engines. motorised trains is not justified for the operated in commercial service. Working
For locomotive engines, the railway- application of the test cycle. together with universities and research
specific F cycle of ISO 8178-4 is to be Although the engines currently in use institutes, an evaluation of the results will
used, whereas the C1 cycle is imposed by in the rail vehicle sector have not been enable the most appropriate methods to
EU 26/2004 Directive for DMU engines. specially developed for railway reduce rail emissions to be determined
With the introduction of the Directive, the applications (with the exception of the which take all factors into consideration.
EC asked for verification of the validity of large US locomotive engines which have a However, the results of the JRC study
the latter test cycle. very small market share in continental and the potential proposed FP7 project
UIC report B 208/RP 6 (published in Europe) they are, however, optimised by offer the opportunity to make appropriate
November 2006) considers the load the manufacturer for use in the railway railway specific amendments to
spectra from eight European railways and sector. This includes adjustment to the 2004/26/EC Stage IIIB emission limits.
reproduces the load spectra of around 1 currently valid test cycle. When engines The common approach adopted by the rail
million operating hours. are optimised for a test cycle that does not operators, rolling stock manufacturers,
Rail vehicles of all types are correspond at all with the actual engine producers and the European
represented, from DMUs through operational conditions, there is a potential Commission has the potential to deliver
main-line locomotives for passenger risk that such engines will exhibit less pollution and more efficient rail diesel
services and shunting locomotives to significantly poorer exhaust behaviour in traction for the future.
heavy freight locomotives. actual operational use.
The current F cycle of ISO 8178-4 is a The regulatory framework needs to
steady state three-mode cycle with 25% consider the characteristics of a niche
rated speed, 15% intermediate load and market for NRMM engines (< 1 %), with
60% idling. It is evident that, on average, a decreasing number of engine suppliers
this cycle is the most appropriate for the for rail applications, to enable the rail
various railway application cases; however vehicle manufactures to develop
the weighting factors for full load and environmentally friendly and cost effective
partial load need to be adjusted. railway solutions.
The idling portion is on average
biography
almost identical to that in the current ISO Recommendations for amended
8178-4 F cycle. legislation
Hans Paukert
The high idling portion of railway Taking into account all these aspects
Mr. Paukert has been the Senior Advisor of
Brakes and Diesel Traction at the UIC since
vehicles is due to their low running vehicle manufacturers along with engine
2004. He studied Mechanical Engineering at
resistance (approximately 10% of a road manufacturers and operators,
the Technical University of Vienna between
1973 and 1981 before taking a post-graduate
vehicle’s running resistance). After an unanimously proposed amendments of
study on Railway Engineering at the Technical
initial acceleration phase, with high load Directive 26/2004. University of Munich, finishing in 1982. Mr.
applied immediately after train start, a The inventory has clearly shown that rail
Paukert worked for the Austrian Federal
Railways between 1985 and 1989, responsible
small load is sufficient to keep the train sector’s contribution to the total emission for the maintenance of pneumatic brake
coasting at a given speed on a level track, amount counts for less than 1%. Even a
devices. He later became responsible for
brake design and construction within the
and to produce sufficient energy for complete electrification of the rail same company before becoming Project
auxiliary drives. Therefore it happens network would not lead to a significant
Manager for brakes and diesel traction at
ERRI in 1993.
that sometimes mainline locomotives, emission reduction. However, if the IIIB
www.europeanrailwayreview.com EUROPEAN RAILWAY REVIEW
l
ISSUE 3
l
2008 75
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116