Railroads are increasingly using new technologies to improve capacity and operating efficiency. To plan their investments and prepare for the implementation of these technologies, railroads must understand their net effect on operations. This requires understanding both the particular aspects of these technologies that affect capacity and the characteristics of the systems into which they are being introduced. Two important technologies in this regard are communications-based train control (CBTC) and electronically controlled pneumatic (ECP) brakes. Each element of CBTC and ECP brakes with the potential to affect capacity was identified, and its effect under various implementation scenarios was evaluated. The potential impact of each element was assessed and compared with the various baseline conditions and conventional technologies to understand the incremental effect. An extensive review of the literature on the subject was conducted in support of these evaluations. CBTC implementation with enforcement braking will generally result in a loss of capacity, but as these systems become more fully integrated, the potential for capacity enhancement improves. ECP brakes will provide benefits under most operational scenarios because of the shorter braking distances and thus the potential for the closer spacing of trains. The two technologies have a potential interactive effect: CBTC may make it possible to more effectively take advantage of one of the principal benefits of ECP brakes: shorter stopping distances. The results for either technology will be route and network specific, so individual railroads will need to conduct analyses to understand the net effect on the capacity of their systems.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Transportation—Invest in Our Future: America's Freight Challenge.AASHTO, Washington, D.C., 2007.
2.
National Rail Freight Infrastructure Capacity and Investment Study.Association of American Railroads, Washington, D.C., 2007.
3.
HarrodS.Capacity Factors of a Mixed Speed Railway Network. Transportation Research, Part E, Vol. 45, No. 5, 2009, pp. 830–841.
4.
DinglerM. H., LaiY.-C., and BarkanC. P. L.Impact of Train Type Heterogeneity on Single-Track Railway Capacity. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2117, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2009, pp. 41–49.
5.
MostafaK. K.Actual Track Capacity of a Railroad Subdivision. PhD thesis. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign, 1951.
6.
American Railway Engineering Association.Notes on the Determination of the Traffic Capacity of Single and Multiple Track Railways. Proc., 1921 American Railway Engineering Association Conference, Chicago, Ill., 1921, pp. 744–759.
7.
Positive Train Control Systems Economic Analysis. Docket FRA-2006–0132, Notice No. 1 RIN 2130-AC03. FRA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 2009.
8.
ECP Brake System for Freight Service. Final Report. FRA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 2006.
9.
Algoma Central Railway, British Columbia Railway, Burlington Northern Railroad, CN Rail, CP Rail, Norfolk Southern, and Seaboard System Railroad. Advanced Train Control Systems Operating Requirements. Prepared for Railway Association of Canada, Ottawa, Canada, and Association of American Railroads, Washington, D.C., April 1984.
10.
DetmoldP. J.New Concepts in the Control of Train Movement. In Transportation Research Record 1029, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1985, pp. 43–47.
11.
Implementation of Positive Train Control Systems.FRA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1999.
12.
Electronically Controlled Pneumatic Brake Revenue Service Tests. Publication DOT/FRA/ORD-99/07. FRA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1999.
13.
Moore EdeW. J., PolivkaA., BrosseauJ., TseY., and ReinschmidtA.Improving Enforcement Algorithms for Communications-Based Train Control Using Adaptive Methods. Proc., 9th International Heavy Haul Conference—Heavy Haul Innovation and Development, Shanghai, China, 2009, pp. 722–727.
14.
Class IA Brake Tests—1,000-Mile Inspection. 49 CFR Part 232.207, 2004.
15.
BlankR. W., McLaughlinB., and PunwaniS. K.ECP Heavy Haul Coal Operations in North America with ECP Braking. Proc., 9th International Heavy Haul Conference—Heavy Haul Innovation and Development, Shanghai, China, 2009, pp. 558–564.
16.
FRA, U.S. Department of Transportation.Positive Train Control Systems. 49 CFR Parts 229, 234, 235, and 236, Jan. 15, 2010.
17.
LeeJ.-D., LeeJ.-H., ChoC.-H., JeongP.-G., KimK.-H., and KimY.-J.Analysis of Moving and Fixed Autoblock Systems for Korean High Speed Railway. In Computer in Railways VII.WIT Press, Southampton, MA, 2000, pp. 842–851.
18.
WendlerE.Influence of ETCS on the Capacity of Lines. In Compendium on ERTMS, Eurail Press, Hamburg, Germany, 2009, pp. 211–223.
19.
SmithM. E., ResorR. R., and PatelP.Train Dispatching Effectiveness with Respect to Communication-Based Train Control: Quantification of the Relationship. In Transportation Research Record 1584, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1997, pp. 22–30.
20.
SmithM. E., and ResorR. R.The Use of Train Simulation as a Tool to Evaluate the Benefits of the Advanced Railroad Electronics System. Journal of the Transportation Research Forum, Vol. 29, No. 1, 1989, pp. 163–168.
21.
SmithM. E., PatelP. K., ResorR. R., and KondapalliS.Quantification of Expected Benefits: Meet/Pass Planning and Energy Management Subsystems of the Advanced Railroad Electronics System (ARES). Journal of the Transportation Research Forum, Vol. 30, No. 2, 1990, pp. 301–309.
22.
ResorR. R., SmithM. E., and PatelP. K.Positive Train Control (PTC): Calculating Benefits and Costs of a New Railroad Control Technology. Journal of the Transportation Research Forum, Vol. 44, No. 2, 2005, pp. 77–98.
23.
MartlandC. D., and SmithM. E.Estimating the Impact of Advanced Dispatching Systems on Terminal Performance. Journal of the Transportation Research Forum, Vol. 30, No. 2, 1990, pp. 286–300.
24.
Moore EdeW. J.How CBTC Can Increase Capacity. Railway Age, April 2001, pp. 49–50.
25.
DrapaJ., Moore EdeB., and PolivkaA.PTC Starts to Roll out Across the USA. Railway Gazette International, May 2007, pp. 285–289.
26.
KullR. C.ECP Braking and PTC for Increasing Heavy Haul Railway Capacity. Proc., 9th International Heavy Haul Conference—Heavy Haul and Innovation Development, Shanghai, China, 2009, pp. 551–557.
27.
DickC. T.Impact of Positive Train Control on Railway Capacity. Unpublished Report. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign, 2000.
28.
TwomblyJ.Migration from Conventional Signaling to Next-Generation Train Control. In Transportation Research Record 1314, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1991, pp. 122–125.
HoelscherJ., and LightL.Full PTC Today with Off the Shelf Technology: Amtrak's ACSES Overlay on Expanded ATC. Proc., 2001 AREMA Conference, Chicago, Ill., 2001.
31.
ThurstonD. F.Signaling and Capacity Through Computer Modeling. Proc., International Conference on Computer Modeling for Rail Operations, Delray Beach, Fla., 2004.
32.
AndersonD.Study of the Sensitivity of Predicted Stopping Distances to Changes to Input Parameters.Transportation Technology Center, Association of American Railroads, Pueblo, Colo., 1995.
33.
North American Joint Positive Train Control Project, Docket No. DOT/FRA.ORD-09/04. FRA, U.S. Department of Transportation, April 2009.
34.
Benefits and Costs of Positive Train Control.FRA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 2004.
35.
BarringtonB., and PeltzD.10,000 ft Distributed Power Intermodal Trains. Proc., 9th International Heavy Haul Conference—Heavy Haul Innovation and Development, Shanghai, China, 2009, pp. 673–681.
36.
CarlsonF. G.An Experimental Electric Assist Brake System. In Technology Digest. Report TD94-021. Association of American Railroads, Washington, D.C., March 1994.
BaugherR. W.PTC: Overlay, or Stand-Alone?Railway Age, May 2004, p. 68.
40.
DirnbergerJ. R., and BarkanC. P. L.Lean Railroading for Improving Railroad Classification Terminal Performance: Bottleneck Management Methods. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1995, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2007, pp. 52–61.
