The International Simutrans Forum

 

Author Topic: Technical data of multiple units  (Read 312 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Freahk

  • *
  • Posts: 228
  • Languages: DE, EN
Technical data of multiple units
« on: September 23, 2019, 05:04:52 PM »
Here is some work in progress technical data table of relatively new multiple units, as some of the data is currently only guessed.



namepower (kW)tractive effort (kN)vMax (km/h)Power supplyweight (t)Axle load (t)length (m)seatsbrake force (kN)power per engine (kW)tractive effort per engine (kN)Per car enginesNotesSources
Eurostar e300 (16 cars)12200410300750V= third rail, 1500V=, 3kV=, 25kV~75217394750964101734,1666674-2-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-2-4To be exact, power and tractive effort have to be 1/3 at each cab and 1/6 at the cars next to the cabs; Brake force calculated from „A train travelling at 300 kilometres per hour (186 mph) can slow down to stop in 65 seconds, during which time it travels about 2.7 km (1.7 miles); Engine distribution from UIC classification.uic paper en wiki
Eurostar e301 (20 cars)12200410300750V= third rail, 1500V=, 3kV=, 25kV~66517320558868101734,1666674-2-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-2-4Power and tractive effort are the same as for the 20 car train; As break force is distributed over three braking systems (traction motors used as dynamic brakes, aditional wheel brakes at these, disk brakes at unpowered axles), a brake force smaller than the one of the 20 car set and larger than 16/20 of the 20 car set can be expected. So I guessed it at 18/20 of the 20 car set. Engine distribution from UIC classification. Brake force is in a double traction higher than that one of the e320 as the 407 has one additional braking system „Wirbelstombremse“uic paper en wiki
Eurostar e320160006003201500V=, 3000V, =25kV~92117400894129050018,754-0-4-0-0-4-0-4–4-0-4-0-0-4-0-4tractive effort assuming it is the same as DB BR 407 double traction, which is very likely to be at least roughly the same; Brake force calculated from braking rate; English wiki states the train would have 902 seats, whereas german wiki and uic states 894; optionally 1,5kV~ and equipment for Germany can be installed; vMax 220 km/h, 8400 kW at 1,5kV= and 3kV= expected, as this is true for the German Variant of the Velaro family, but I could not find any information about this for the e320. Engine distribution expected to be the same power for each engine. Engine locations from UIC classification.uic paper en wiki de wiki DB BR 407
DB BR 40780003003201500V=, 3000V=, 15kV~, 25kV~454172004857672509,3754-0-4-0-0-4-0-4Not included in the pak; Never operated in Britain, but there were such attempts and it has an approval for the channel tunnel and is prepared for technical equipment for the UK. A double traction of these has higher brake force than the e320 because BR 407 does not have a resistor brake but instead a (stronger) Eddy current brake.Siemens paper de wiki BR 407
IC1253360200Diesel3832204729 car version
IC225435022525kV~226480
Class 1802800200Diesel253117268
Class 2202200200Diesel18693188
Class 2212800200Diesel2831162505 car version
Class 2223970200Diesel162342Not included in the pak; 7 car version
Class 390 (9 cars)510020422525kV~46616218469425172-2-0-2-0-2-0-2-2Tilting;uic paper en wiki
Class 390 (11 cars)595023822525kV~56716265589425172-2-0-2-0-2-0-2-0-2-2Tilting; Tractive effort calculated assuming it has the same engines and gearing as the 9 car setuic paper en wiki
Class 3953360186225750V=, 25kV~26512234030621011,593750-4-4-4-4-0160 km/h in 750V= mode; Avg. Unloaded Axle load 11t, but wee ned max axle load.hitachi paper en wiki
Class 800 (5 cars)168017017725kV~, Diesel2431513031525056056,70-1-1-1-02712 kW, 200 km/h in catenary mode; starting tractive effort should be the same for diesel and electric mode but will decrease sooner in diesel mode due to power limitations; It should also be the same for Class 802. Differences expected to be cause by unprecise acceleration or weight data. Speed taken from Class 802, which is stated to be the same except for a larger fuel tank and without decreased engine powerhitachi paper en wiki railwaymagazine
Class 800 (9 cars)280030717725kV~, Diesel43815130627450560102,20-1-1-0-1-0-1-1-02712 kW, 200 km/h in catenary mode; starting tractive effort should be the same for diesel and electric mode but will decrease sooner in diesel mode due to power limitations; It should also be the same for Class 802. Differences expected to be cause by unprecise acceleration or weight data.; Speed taken from Class 802, which is stated to be the same except for a larger fuel tank and without decreased engine powerhitachi paper en wiki railwaymagazine
Class 801 (5 cars)271217020025kV~, Diesel2301423431525022656,6666670-4-4-4-0560 kW in diesel mode; tractive effort expected to be the same of Class 800;hitachi paper en wiki en wiki class 801 railwaymagazine
Class 801 (9 cars)452030720025kV~, Diesel42114234627450226102,3333330-4-4-0-4-0-4-4-0560 kW in diesel mode; no weight data found. Expected the weight difference in between Class 800 and class 801 to scale linearly with the number of diesel generators; tractive effort expected to be the same of Class 800hitachi paper en wiki en wiki class 801 railwaymagazine
Class 802 (5 cars)271219020025kV~, Diesel25332625022663,30-4-4-4-0not included in the pak; 5 cars; acceleration data differs in between sources(1m/s² to 0,75 m/s²); 2100kW, 177 km/h in diesel mode. Some sources (en wiki) state an acceleration on 1 m/s², whereas others state 0,75 m/s². As electrical engines are the same as for class 800 and class 800 is slightly lighter, 1m/s² does not make any sense. Instead a slightly lower acceleration than class 800 should be expected.en wiki eversholtrail
Class 802 (9 cars)452032920025kV~, Diesel438647450226109,550-4-4-0-4-0-4-4-0not included in the pak; 5 cars; acceleration data differs in between sources(1m/s² to 0,75 m/s²); 2100kW, 177 km/h in diesel mode. Some sources (en wiki) state an acceleration on 1 m/s², whereas others state 0,75 m/s². As electrical engines are the same as for class 800 and class 800 is slightly lighter, 1m/s² does not make any sense. Instead a slightly lower acceleration than class 800 should be expected.en wiki eversholtrail
« Last Edit: September 25, 2019, 01:41:44 AM by Freahk »

Offline jamespetts gb

  • Simutrans-Extended project coordinator
  • Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 18763
  • Cake baker
    • Bridgewater-Brunel
  • Languages: EN
Re: Technical data of multiple units
« Reply #1 on: September 23, 2019, 10:40:13 PM »
Thank you very much for this. What would help very greatly is if you could work out the per vehicle brake force and tractive effort. Ideally, this would be based on the actual tractive effort and brake force for the individual vehicles in question, which may differ from vehicle to vehicle.

However, if the data for this are not available, it will suffice simply to take the tractive effort of the whole train in one particular configuration and divide this among the powered vehicles in the train (e.g. if there are 2 powered vehicles in a set and the overall tractive effort is 100kN, the per vehicle tractive effort would be 50kN). If the powered vehicles do not all have the same amount of power, it would be helpful to apportion the tractive effort in proportion to the power rather than evenly.

Likewise, for the brake force, it would help to have individual vehicle brake forces. These data are unlikely to be available, however, so it will suffice to average the brake force among all the vehicles of a train.

Thank you again for your work on this: it is much appreciated.

Offline Freahk

  • *
  • Posts: 228
  • Languages: DE, EN
Re: Technical data of multiple units
« Reply #2 on: September 24, 2019, 02:59:41 PM »
Aditional technical data

Engine distribution
I will try to add engine distribution over the train, if informations are available.

Brake force distribution
For break force it is in most cases not pretty hard to find out how many brakes of which kind are installed at which car but it is pretty hard to find the brake forces of the different installed brake systems.
Even if one would find informations about it, that data is not pretty useful for modern trains as it is only maximum brake force.
Actual brake forces in such trains are highly software controlled. E.g. a Siemens Velaro (Eurostar e320 for example is one) won't use mechanical brakes at all at high speeds but instead use dynamic brakes. When the train slows down, maximum possible dynamic brake force at this speed will also decrease, so the software will add some mechanical break powerto compensate this to get a constant break force.

It is very unlikely to find such break force curves and even if we would find these, it would be much too complex to simmulate this in Simutrans and would not add up anything to ingame economy.
That given, we should simply evenly distribute break force over the train as this can be expected to be a good approximation for the average break force used of the different breaking systems.

In case of fractal numbers of tractive effort or break force, when dividing total force by the number of cars, we should move forces a bit around in between cars. E.g. for the E300, which has a calculated per engine power of 1016 2/3 kW per engine, this would result in 4067 kW for the power head and 2033 kW for the powered car just behind, causing the actual 12200 kW for the whole train.

Table got updated
Updated the table with engine distribution and remove acceleration and braking rate columns for space reasons.
Also added class 395, 800, 801 and 802. However, there is some curiosity in between sources. Most state Class 802 is the same as 800 (and 801), except for the diesel engine equipment, which are compared to class 800 not degraded to 560 kW and it also has a larger fuel tank.
However, other sources state it would have a higher acceleration (0,75 m/s² or even 1 m/s²), which makes no sense if it has the same electrical equipment and gearing, it should have the same tractive effort and due to a higher weight, a lower acceleration in electrical mode. For sure, in diesel mode it would have better acceleration on the long term due to higher power but acceleration should usually not be given in the long term but instead in the speed range where the power limitation does not yet kick in.

Also, some trains in the list are not (yet) included in the pak but these finding their data was pretty simple so I included these in case they will be added.

Some physics
Edit: I have fortuitously found a much better explaination of the following section. Railelectrica seems to be an induan railway construction company, so if they don't know how it works, who else would know?
https://www.railelectrica.com/traction-mechanics/tractive-effort/

Some information about that power limitation and acceleration behavior in general:
Acceleration depends on the tractive effort and the weight.
Tractive effort depends on speed and power, however, starting tractive effor will stay constant (apart from, in that speed range very small counter forces caused by air resistance) for a while until it gets limited by power.
At that point tractive effort will start decreasing.
That given, a bi-modal train should have the same tractive effort in diesel and electrical mode.
To illustrate this, here is a usual tractive effort curve. You can clearly see the tractive effort (and caused by this, the acceleration) is constant at low speeds and will decrease when the power limit kicks in.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e3/Schematic_tractive_effort_curve.JPG
Apart from artificial speed limitations, the physically max speeed of a train is reached, when the tractive effort equals the counter forces are mainly caused by wind resistance.

I also want to add, that this is only true for electric traction. For Diesel traction engines this is much more complicated, as these don't have a constant power output and even at low speeds, tractive effort is not constant but instead is a curce depending on engine drive, raising up to some point and decreasing at higher drives. At some drive, the transmission will kick in, which makes the curve even more complicated.

I don't know how  exactly it works for steam engines but I would be really surprised if these provided constant power or even constant tractive effort.


Velaro D/DB BR 407
I also included the Deutsche Bahn Baureihe 407 (German Railways Class 407), for following reasons:
It would not be too unrealistic as it was planned to start connections from Germany and the Netherlands to London using these Trains. This never happened, but the train was designed for this and it still would be technically possible.

More about this story:
In 2012, Deutsche Bahn planned a connection Frankfurt–Cologne–Brussels-Lille-London which should be coupled in Brussels with a connection Amsterdam-Rotterdam-Brusseles-London. Using the DB BR 407. The Train was only once in London St. Pancras for presentation reasons and will never operate in Britain as plans were delayed for years due to a conflict with Siemens, where Deutsche Bahn blamed Siemens for not yet installing the Equipment for journeys to the UK, whereas Siemens states that Deutsche Bahn hat not yet ordered these and Deutsche Bahn responded that Siemens did not yet make an offer for it.
Addditionally as for 2018, the Train still did not get the approval for Belgium and northern France. Due to this and some more problems, Deutsche Bahn had dropped their plans for the near future but still wants to start this service later on.
Anyway the train got the channel tunnel approval in 2013 and designed for technical equipped for journeys to London.
Apart from textures for sure, it is optically the same as a half eurostar e320 and technically pretty close to it.
In fact, technically the e320 is not a full train but two trains coupled with a special coupling in the middle. It technically could (but for obvios reasons is not allowed to) operate as half trains. The seating for sure is different but I could provide per car informations of weight, seating including classes and so on for the DB BR 407. Sadly I don't have such information for the e320.


Eurostar

I just found an exact seating plan of both Eurostar trains, which I used to orientate for seating capacities. However, I don't think we should add all of these cars as there would not be any economical reason for this ingame but I do think that we should do some changes at both trains to improve both, gameplay and further also realism.
https://www.railplus.com.au/cms/uploads/seat_plan_Eurostar-e300.pdf
https://www.railplus.com.au/cms/uploads/seat_plan_e320.pdf

I don't think we should simmulate all of these cars to allow players building the exact real life train, as this would not really add up anything to the gameplay.
However, for gameplay reasons we need at least one more 1st class car for the e320 and slightly changing the seating capacity of existing e300 cars could also be done to match the real seating capacity of a e300 20 car train without negatively affecting gameplay (at least in my opinion)

Eurostar classes
As eurostars three class system is pretty rare in Europe and their first class buisiness service is clearly much better than normal first class service of most european railway companies, we should add this to the game.
I know that both first classes use the same seatings, so we currently can not properly simmulate this but I think changing some `high` class seats to `very high` class and representing the better service as a higher comfort value would do the job.
I don't know how exactly the passenger class distribution is, when the eurostar gets introduced but we should not set too many seats to `very high`class to avoid empty `very high`seats, while `high` class people are still waiting. I guessed a 2:1 ratio.

Eurostar cars
The following cars and capacities would be a good improvement for ingame economy, oriented at the real life trains:

E300
Power head: no Seats 4067 kW, 137kN
car just behind power head: 48 seats 2nd class, 2033kW, 68kN (4 seats fewer than in reality because coach 5 will have 4 too many)
Second class car: 56 seats, second class
Buffet car: no seats, catering level 4
First class car: 23 1st class, 12 buisiness class

In this case, seat capacity of a 20 car train will exactly match the reality. Additionally, we don't need to add any cars that don't matter for gameplay.
A 16 car train will have a little bit too few seats overall, while having too many first class seats compare to reality.

To be exact (visually and by seatings), we would also need to create the first class cars in the middle of the train, as these have normal bogies at one side instead of Jacobs Bogies. And we could also create 16 car trains with realistic seating, adding a little comfort to that car due to lavatories could compensate the lower seating capacity.
However, I am not sure if this could be balanced to make it economically useful.

E320
Cab car: 27 seats 1st class, 13 buisiness class , powered
first class car: 23 1st class, 12 buisiness class, powered or pantograph
second class unpowered: 76 seats second class, pantograph
second clas powered: 76 seats second class, powered
buffet second class: 32 seats second classs, powered

For some more flexibility, we could also add one more first class car to have a powered and an unpowered version but one of these would be sufficient as usually we have more 2nd class cars than 1st class cars so we can compensate an unpowered 1st class car by an additional powered 2nd class car or vice versa.

More to come
IC125, IC225, Class 180, Class 220, Class 221 and Class 222 data is not yet completed.

As I don't know what exactly "newer multiple units" are, I want to aks If there anything else missing?
Currently I took train names from the UIC table and technical data from elsewhere as the UIC table does not seem to be a pretty relyable source. It differs in many points from most other sources.

Sorry
Further I guess I created this thread in the wrong category. It should be in pak128.Britain-Ex dev.
« Last Edit: September 27, 2019, 12:00:02 PM by Freahk »

Offline Matthew gb

  • *
  • Posts: 227
    • Japan Railway Journal
  • Languages: EN, some ZH, DE & SQ
Re: Technical data of multiple units
« Reply #3 on: September 26, 2019, 11:47:06 AM »
You have been very busy, Freahk, thank you!

IC125 and IC225 are not multiple units though: they are locomotives+carriages+driving van trailers. So if you are just dividing the data by the number of cars, then you may get odd results.

I strongly support the inclusion of the DB class 47 units in pak128.Britain-Ex for the reasons given above.

Offline Freahk

  • *
  • Posts: 228
  • Languages: DE, EN
Re: Technical data of multiple units
« Reply #4 on: September 26, 2019, 12:34:45 PM »
Well I IC125 and IC225 is kind of multiple unit, as its power heads/locomotives are only used in combination with Mark3 coaches.

However, the odd results when just dividing by the number of cars is a good point, also for real multiple units.

Most multiple units in Pak128-Britain-Ex are not restricted to their real-life setups - which is a good design decision as trains in the real world fit to real worlds requirements, so trains in simutrans should be able to fit to ingame requirements, which are not always the same - but this requires us tho handle multiple units the same as normal locomotive pulled trains. We have to give values whenever possible.
As already mentioned, for brake forces this is not possible, for power and tractive effort this is already done and for seatings, for axle loads this would be nice but is not neccessary, for weights lengths and seats I will update the table. However, maybe I should not do this in this thread but instead commit my ods table to the paks git repository, as the table in this forum is kind of limited.
Maybe we should also couple brake forces to cars weights, as heavyer cars require a higher brake force for the same deceleration and also have a higher friction so they can bring a higher force to the rails.


In Pak128.ex multiplr units are not fixed. One can build up most multiple units with any number of cars. That given, we need
I will also split weights and lengths on a per-car basis. If exact

It's BB class 407 ;)
BD class 47 would be a cargo tender steam locomotive, from the naming scheme, if it existed. Hower, a DB class 47 does not exist at all.
« Last Edit: September 27, 2019, 12:03:58 PM by Freahk »