Welcome to the best practice workshop

BATTERY TRAINS
Proposed by
the UIC Energy efficiency and CO2 Emissions Sector

Organised by the Sector’s Chairpersons:

Bart Van der Spiegel, Infrabel,

Gerald Olde Monnikhof, ProRail.
Philippe Stefanos, UIC
 BATTERY TRAINS
• The meeting will be recorded.
• Please remain on mute while the speaker is active.
• Please keep your camera off while the speaker is active.

18 March 2021
 Workshop timeline
3

0
10 h First part
0
0
10 h • Arup Robert Davies
2
1
10 h • Transport and Mobility Leuven Christophe Heyndrickx
2
• TUC Rail Paul Tobback
0
11 h Second part
2
0 François Degardin Matthieu Renault
11 h • SNCF
4 Bogdan Vulturescu Benoît Gachet
1
11 h • Siemens Katrin Seeger
9
3
11 h • Eaton Akos Labady
4
4
 ARUP
ROLLING STOCK
Battery Train Procurement

Robert DAVIES
Global Rolling Stock Leader - Arup
UIC battery trains - 19 May 2021 Online Workshop
Rolling Stock
5

Battery train procurement

Operations concept
Solution
Route options
Capacity
Lifecycle
Future proofing
Entry into service
Conclusions
Welcome to Arup
6

Arup is an independent firm of designers, planners, engineers, consultants

and technical specialists, working across every aspect of the built
environment. ​
Together we help our clients solve their most complex challenges – turning
exciting ideas into tangible reality as we strive to find a better way and shape
a better world. ​
We​
• Design quality infrastructure and experiences for people and communities​
• Deliver major programmes and develop high performing organisations​
• Integrate complex new technologies and systems​
• Unlock financial value for investors, asset owners and operators​
• Optimise performance and value from existing and new assets​
Traction battery – operations concept
7

Example modes
Independent Battery Powered
Independent Battery Powered with hydrogen fuel cell
Bi-mode with AC external pantograph Source: RSSB

Bi-mode with DC external pantograph or power rail

Bi-mode with with diesel engine

Rail systems
Light Rail
Metro
Regional and Suburban
High speed and Intercity
Freight
Track Plant and Engineering Trains
 Rolling Stock – Battery Solution
8

Battery power New Build Why battery

• Auxiliary equipment
or • Sustainable
• Traction power
Retrofit ? • Emission neutral
- Independent • Autonomous power
- Bi-mode • (Go anywhere)
• Market driven

Specification
• Performance
• Range
• Capacity
• Charger
• Service life
• Whole life cost
Route options
9

Informed by
Policy
Route demand ​
Feasibility​
Sustainability​
Investment
Whole life cost

Direct costs Indirect costs

Capital investment Carbon emissions
Maintenance Air quality
Energy consumption Potential incentivisation
Operations
Battery capacity
10
Simulation model
Power delivery
Example system capacity Energy capacity
Baseline train with capacity 16 tonne x 8 axles System architecture

I need my battery train to provide a…

Local End of mainline Extended mainline

Shuttle service Branch line service Performance service

Range 45km Range 90km Range 90km

Speed 75 km/h Speed 75 km/h Speed 125 km/h
Battery 250 kWh Battery 500 kWh Battery 1000 kWh
10000 cycles per year 1000 cycles per year 1000 cycles per year
3 ton battery 5 ton battery 10 ton battery
Battery lifecycle
11

Service cycles
Sensitive to depth of discharge
Control system health monitoring
Condition management
End of life recovery
Source: RSSB

Projected Battery Performance Improvements

Supply chain 800 900

Battery Output (Wh/kg)

700 800

System Mass (kg)

Mature battery solutions 600
500
700
600
500
400
400
300 300
200 200
Technology watch 100
0
100
0
Batteries (2-3 years) (8-12 years) (20-25years)

Energy density (Today)

Battery Cell Mass Battery System Mass Wh/kg
Future proofing – investment risks
12

Lifecycle commitment Battery module upkeep

Battery cycle management Refurbishment
Obsolescence management Periodic replacement
End of life recovery
Mode demand
Independent / charger
Bi-mode

Performance potential Long life asset

Technology watch Trains ordered today
Hybrid battery / power device potentially in service to 2060
Battery train – entry into service
13

Mature regulatory approach

Interoperability
Component regulation
Common safety method
Commercial investment
Technical
Performance
Service agreements
Whole life costs
V&V
Traction battery sub-system
Rolling stock system
Rail systems integration
Thank you from the Arup team
14
 Stay in touch with UIC:

Questions
Discussion

Robert DAVIES
Global Rolling Stock Leader - Arup Thank you for your attention.
TRANSPORT & MOBILITY
LEUVEN

Christophe Heyndrickx

May 12, 2021

 ELECTRIFICATION AND OTHER
ALTERNATIVES TO DIESEL TRACTION
AN APPLICATION FOR BELGIUM
 Public since 19/2/2021

UIC workshop 19/5/2021 18

 Making rail transport more sustainable

40% of railway lines non-elctrified in Germany, 43% in France

UIC workshop 19/5/2021 19

 Belgian Situation

Genk-Bilzen

A large set of lines around Charleroi-Couvin

Ghent

UIC workshop 19/5/2021 20

 ‘Alternatives for diesel’ in Belgium
• Passenger trains: electrification of lines versus alternatives
• 6 (+1) scenarios:
– Electrification in 2035 (BAU scenario – end of lifetime MW41)
– Electrification in 2025
– Battery train in 2025
– Hydrogen train in 2025
– New diesel train in 2025
Compare with zero scenario (diesel until eternity - 2100)
High and low valuation of emissions (DG MOVE/FPB)

• Freight train: limited energy density + nog viable alternative usin hydrogen (possibly in the
future)
• Quick-scan analyses voor L21c en L204/L55

UIC workshop 19/5/2021 21

 Battle of the T(ra)i(n)tans

Mireo Plus B

Electric (EMU) / Battery (BEMU) /

diesel (DMU) Hydrogen (FCEMU)

UIC workshop 19/5/2021 22

 1. Large impact of maintenance cost
2. Energy cost for hydrogen comparable to diesel at 2€/kg
3. Hydrogen trains most expensive / electric trains cheapest
4. Infrastructure cost battery train 0-40% of ‘standard
electrification’

UIC workshop 19/5/2021 23

 Overall energy efficiency of hydrogen not much better than diesel
Environmental benefits hydrogen comparable for non-CO2 emissions
(PM/NOx/..)
+ Low efficiency & vulnerability fuel cells (replace every 2-3 years)

UIC workshop 19/5/2021 24

 Monte Carlo analysis

Commercial
‘selling point’
hydrogen

Monte Carlo: Generate results using a triangle distribution-> 1000

NPV simulations => proxy for sensitivity and distribution of result

UIC workshop 19/5/2021 25

 Sensitivity for maintenance cost -> ceteris paribus
Large impact for hydrogen & battery train -> not enough to change
ranking

UIC workshop 19/5/2021 26

 Sensitivity for energy cost -> only relevant for hydrogen, but less
than maintenance cost

UIC workshop 19/5/2021 27

 Differences by line

Geraardsbergen
Battery train looks
more interesting

Ronse-Eeklo
Standard
electrification

Charleroi
Battery + partial
electrification may
outweigh high cost
of full
electrification

UIC workshop 19/5/2021 28

 Freight lines
L21c (Genk –Bilzen) very high
NPV due to large time
benefits & bottleneck
situation + electrification of
Mol-Hamont

L204 (Gent N. – Zelzate) used more intensively than

L55 (Wondelgem-Zelzate-Terneuzen)

L204 has a ‘marginally’ positive score for electrication

L55 very negative -> co-benefit with passenger market possible?

UIC workshop 19/5/2021 29

Other solutions for freight transport

UIC workshop 19/5/2021 30

 Dual mode electric/diesel

UIC workshop 19/5/2021 31

 Conclusion
• On European market -> substantial amount of lines presently not
electrified
• In Belgium largely electrified, but limited amount of lines non-electrified
+ freight transport often has substantial problems bridging last-mile
(port lines often non-electrified)
• Market analysis, including substantial sensitivity analysis, shows that
either full or partial electrification of trains is the best solution
• Hydrogen trains in the present analysis show a number of
disadvantages, though this may be compensated in the future
• Freight trains: future in hybridisation, either with hydrogen or with a
dual mode (diesel/electric). Problem -> cost disadvantage + low range

UIC workshop 19/5/2021 32

 DANK U!

UIC workshop 19/5/2021 33

 Stay in touch with UIC:

Questions
Discussion

Christophe Heyndrickx
Thank you for your attention.
 TUC RAIL
INFRASTRUCTURE
INTERFACES
Actual & future battery charging possibilities
interoperability & standards

Paul TOBBACK
Lead Design Engineer & OCL expert
Battery trains Online Workshop - 19 May 2021
 Picture: Alstom

Find the really new kind of rolling stock and look for the differences !

Introduction
Charging station in Paris
Picture: Von Scanné par Claude Shoshany - Collection personnelle, Gemeinfrei,
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=1516434

Picture: Siemens
What about the infrastructure ?

Picture: Bombardier
Challenges for the OCL (Overhead Contact Lines) & 37

power supply (energy subsystem)

Legal (EU): TSI’s (Technical Specifications Interoperability)

& (parts of) EN-standards when referenced

Technical: standards (UIC550, UIC552, EN50546,

EN50119, EN50367, EN50388, etc. and their IEC
counterparts)

Legal or technical, these documents were not written for

trains with batteries for traction purposes !!
 38
Legal - Joint Task Force EIM/CER/EPTTOLA/NBRAIL

Kick off 17/03/2021

Up till now participation from different stakeholders like infra managers, railway undertakings,
lessors and Notified Bodies:
• Trafikverket / Bane NOR / Infrabel / SNCF / DB / ÖBB / ČD / RFI / Angel Trains / Sconrail

UNIFE (rolling stock manufacturers) judged it too early to support it already

Despite non-participance by UNIFE a clear interest was expressed during bilateral meetings with
Siemens Belgium and Bombardier, but no priority for ERA (European Railway Agency)
→ unofficial TF, but not forgotten by ERA and the EC (European Commission)
→ please join if interested and contact your representative body

In parallel on technical level:

Cenelec workstream in CLC/SC9XC for a TS on “Railway applications - Fixed installations -
Requirements for charging stations for accumulator electric traction units based on separate contact
line sections”.
➢ Corresponding CLC WG 25 to further work on the scope and draft the proposed way forward
➢ The contact line section is not connected to other overhead contact line systems of electrified
railway lines and is fed separately
Objectives Joint Task Force
39

• Facilitate interoperability and support the EU Green Deal

• Key objective short term:

interoperability requirement proposals for TSIs on short term objectives to allow and
facilitate full charging of trains with batteries, without changing other existing requirements
neither without blocking other modes of operation for battery train charging purposes by April
2021 (for next TSIs 2022 version)

• Long term objectives:

o provide inputs for European standardisation needs
o reduce costs for the ENE subsystem enabled by the usage of battery trains
Key topics Joint Task Force
40

• In order to design correctly the OCL for battery trains while charging, it seems necessary to:
1) define the train needs
2) then work on OCL

1) Power demand from the batteries ?

3 Examples with proposals from Stadler for BaneNOR (15kV AC):

2 MW = BEMU (common example in many countries and tested/in operation already; “Aramis”, FLIRT)
3 MW (385ton train with 7 cars or last mile freight train; “Athos” locomotive = Eurodual)
4 to 5 MW (1200ton freight train; “Porthos” locomotive = Euro9000 with battery tender)

Train operation studied for Norvegian cases, e.g. a 729km line Trondheim-Bodø, to be only partly
electrified over a total of 210km (28,81%, 8 separate electrified sections)
Key topics Joint Task Force
41

• Short term: main issue: actual requirements on Current at standstill for DC systems only (because of
much lower voltages compared to AC systems and thus higher currents to have enough power for
auxiliaries like heating & air conditioning in modern rolling stock)
proposal introduced to include requirements for AC-systems in TSI ENE (energy) and L&P (rolling
stock), but referring to actual limits in the standards → to be discussed with ERA

• A summary of all actual possibilities for charging at standstill & auxiliaries and their limits (2 MW at best):
Key topics Joint Task Force
42

• 4 existing target systems for power supply from the OCL through the
pantographs
• Towards a 5th power supply system: 15kV AC 50 Hz for countries
using already 15kV 16.7 Hz (D, A, CH, SE, N, …) ?
Increasing the frequency on separate charging facilities has a number
of advantages for infrastructure, even regarding the public grid from
which the power is sometimes taken, without major consequences on
rolling stock, thus reducing overall investment costs.

• Plug solutions have limited power, but can be sufficient for slow
charging (≥ 60min), e.g. overnight in stabling yards, using (smart)
multiple socket units and offered as a service, with different
management, metering and invoicing (per kWh or just per hour).

Example from DB Netze

what about the BE case (mostly 3kV DC)?
43

Study TML ! Infrabel & SNCB strategy 2040 !

SNCB: “no H2 please, only EMU (or BEMU)”
Benchmarks Railway electrification in Europe
44

Percentage geëlektrificeerde lijnen EU (Europese comissie – Transport, 2016):

95% (14/280 km niet-geëlektrificeerd)
86% (500/3600 km niet-geëlektrificeerd; 2023, reizigersnetwerk: 96%)
76% (740/3100 km niet-geëlektrificeerd)
72% (1500/5500 km niet-geëlektrificeerd)

57% (12000/29000 km niet-geëlektrificeerd)

53% (19000/41000 km niet-geëlektrificeerd)

34% (11000/16000 km niet-geëlektrificeerd)

 45

L.58
Belgian
network
L.86 L.82
L.122

L.132

Remaining non-electrified main lines for passengers (2023): L.134

• L.86 De Pinte - Ronse (ca. 29km single track, 3 km double)
• L.122 Melle - Geraardsbergen (ca. 29km double track)
• L.58 Gent-Dampoort - Eeklo (ca. 15km single track, 3,5km double)
• L.82 Aalst - Burst (ca. 11km)

• L.132-134 Charleroi - Couvin (ca. 30km single track, 20 double)

140 / 3600 km = 3,9% of the main network
What will the situation be over 10 years ? An OCL is 46

built for 80 years !

Renewal Strategy OCL & substations
After 20 years
→mid-life upgrade substation
After 40 years
→renewal substation
→mid-life upgrade OCL
After 60 years
→mid-life upgrade substation
After 80 years
→renewal substation
→re-electrification with OCL ? Partly ??
 When BEMUs and hybrid locomotives are generally 47
used, future simplifications of the OCL network can be
considered

For the remaining 5 non-electrified passenger lines in BE:

• flexibility in scope and timing of electrification

In the long term:

• Avoid difficult/expensive (re-)electrification (tunnels/turnouts…)

→ Better for punctuality and maintenance costs

• Less power demand on weak spots of the network / public grid

→ Less investment needed just for one rush hour train per day
L132 tunnel with interlaced tracks (and many more
obstacles and difficulties)!!
• Possibility to run through earthed route sections
→ Less impact of work possessions/detours

• Possibility to avoid non-profitable re-electrifications (e.g. 12,5km branch line Pepinster-Spa, but which did continue a long time ago !;
electrified >50 years ago)
What part to electrify if not the complete route ?
48

There can be huge differences in cost/km a few km further on a route !

Depends on mainly the terrain for OCL, but on the number of substations
(cost/unit, not per km !) to be built and their specific locations with
possibilities to connect to the public grid (invest in underground cables or
overhead contact lines ?).
Here or here on L132 ?
 Electrification revisited: never forget the H2-option 49
(but that’s another workshop)

L.132-134 Charleroi - Couvin (ca. 50km, the longest non-electrified main line in BE): H2-pipelines in the
immediate vicinity and even crossing the railway network !
And close to the start of the non-electrified part, but a bit further from the stabling yards & workshops !!

HEMU = BEMU with about 30-40% of the battery energy and a FC-range extender !
Key topics
50

→ EVOLUTION of STANDARDS in TSI ENE:

EN50119:2019: new version ! Transpose changes in IEC 60913

EN50367:2020: amendment 2021 finished on 14/04/2021, waiting for comments and vote;
adapted regarding current at standstill

EN50388-1 and 50388-2: still under revision, but including some elements on battery train
operation
 Solutions

e.g. From the actual legal 300A under 1,5kV DC to 500A

Tübingen(D) 15kV AC – 80A/pantograph – ROCL = Rigid OCL 52

https://www.swtue.de/geschaeftskunden/energie/strom/voltap.html
On the INFRA side 53

Reinforced OCL – e.g. SNCF RER C (Dourdan) / Depot Sweden (Västerås) /

Metro Line 5 India (Delhi)

Profile to be added on an existing catenary to better dissipate the heat at the contact point between the
contact wire and pantograph Reinforced OCL
On the RST side 54

SNCF SALTO project (nothing new !):

•At standstill, a mobile copper strip on the pantograph is raised to the OCL
•It is lowered as soon as the train exceed 8km/h
•Under 1,5kV, the equipment was tested up to 500 A and it worked. It could
probably work with higher values.
On the RST side 55

“Kasperowski” contact strips (nothing new again ! Still used e.g. in BE, FR
and CH on older type of heavy pantographs):

But some problems in winter time with frost on the contact wires: Cu melted
because of arcs
On the RST side 56

Use of Cu inserts in the centre of the contact strips

Revue Générale des Chemins de Fer, Decembre 2015, p.15-21
 research/projects

current at standstill : (on going) tests by

RSSB (UK), TU Dresden (D), IfB (Infrabel),
RFI, Ricardo (NL/F), etc.
→ EN50367 Annex A3.

to evaluate possibilities of charging from an OCL (rigid or

flexible) under real circumstances (identify margins between
more common circumstances and rare worst cases)
Overview of ongoing tests on current at standstill 58

Tests TU Dresden: see article Elektrische Bahnen 119

(2021) Heft 3, p.100-109

With plain carbon contact strips, depending on the configuration:

- 140N static contact force instead of 70N as usual in AC systems
- 2 rigid OCLs with a CuAg 120mm² wire, spaced 40 cm apart
it is possible to go from the actual legal 80A to 220A !
→ 3,3 MW under 15kV AC
→ 5,5 MW under 25kV AC !

→ With Cu impregnated carbon contact strips, this can even be improved.

Overview of ongoing tests on current at standstill 59

On contact wire with the reinforcement profile : SNCF test has demonstrated
that it works under 1,5kV up to 1000A during 30 minutes with a pantograph
used on AGC trains (copper contact strips !)
Overview of ongoing tests on current at standstill 60

RFI: from the actual legal 200A to 300A under 3kV DC without need to change
infrastructure ? We would even need 400A !

Infrabel: tests done in January 2021 on twin contact wires: huge margins towards
temperature limits on new flat bottom wires (as required by EN50367 Annex A.3),
but far less on worn wires due to contact force imbalances.

SNCF/PRoRail (1,5kV DC networks): more tests to be done soon (divergent results)

From previous tests by SNCF:
• Important parameter is the contact surface, more than the contact force
• 2 wires/ 1 wire or 2 strips/ 1 strip, it is not sufficient to divide by 2 or 4, test needed
• The more contact points the better
▪ Increase the contact force increase the contact surface → Favourable
▪ Increase the number of wire increase the contact surface → Favourable (even if spaced a few cm apart)
On the RST side (part 2) – possible future solutions ? 61

Carbon contact strips with integrated Optic Fibre to actively monitor in real
time and under real environmental conditions the temperature of the contact
point(s) instead of the current (and not the contact forces to assess dynamic
behaviour as already done in e.g. the UK)

→ Functional requirement on the critical parameter instead of an indirect one

(but difficult to measure and manage, hence all the tests with divergent
results)
→ Direct and automatic possibility on the trains themselves to cut power
demand at standstill to protect the infrastructure
→ Only if necessary when the passive solutions presented above are not
sufficient
On the INFRA side (part 2) – possible future solutions ? 62

Monitor the temperature of the contact point(s).

This could be needed to avoid tripping by the circuit breaker feeding the
section and send a message to the trains to cut power demand in case more
than 1 train is charging, without individually passing the temperature (or
current) threshold, and there’s too much current demand in total (which in
DC would be surprising compared to traction current, but maybe not in AC).
As for the battery cars, trains may have different 63

battery charging strategies

• a) Long time charging cycle: energy taken from OCL per pantograph corresponds to the
capacity of existing OCLs (300A for 1500 V; 200 A for 3000V; 80 A for AC)
• b) Medium charging cycle: charge in a shorter time, with higher current
e.g. for 1500 V DC: 600 A 5 min, then 300 A indefinitely
• c) Quick charging cycle : charge in 15 min
e.g. for 1500 V DC: 1000 A 15 min, then 500 A 30 min and 300 A indefinitely

→ We need charging management, certainly for multiple trains, considering

State of Charge (SoC) of the batteries, timetable, auxiliaries, etc. Link to
control & command systems to pass coded messages between infra &
rolling stock
→ Pay attention to high inrush currents when switching on !
Hence 15kV AC 50 Hz !!
 Stay in touch with UIC:

Questions
Discussion

Paul TOBBACK
Lead Design Engineer & OCL expert Thank you for your attention.
BREAK
 Break
66

Railways and UIC members are invited to join the

UIC project:

In partnership with the IEC

If interested, please reach out to [email protected]

Restarting at 11h05
 Break
67

Restarting at 11h05

https://uic.org/events/battery-trains

Online workshop coming up next:

September 2021
Call for speakers on stationary energy storage,
contact [email protected]
 Restarting…
68

0
11 h Second part
2
0 François Degardin Matthieu Renault
11 h • SNCF
4 Bogdan Vulturescu Benoît Gachet
1
11 h • Siemens Katrin Seeger
9
3
11 h • Eaton Akos Labady
4
4
11 h
9
SNCF
BATTERY Trains PROJECTS

• François DEGARDIN • Matthieu RENAULT

• Energy project manager at the • Technical manager at SNCF
Innovation & Research Department Voyageurs rolling stock engineering
of SNCF centre
• Leader of the regional hybrid train • In charge of the regional hybrid train
project and biogas feasibility study and regional battery train projects

• Bogdan VULTURESCU • Benoit GACHET

• BEMU project manager at Innovation • Product director high capacity
& Research Department of SNCF regional trains, Alstom
 SNCF
BATTERY TRAINS
PROJECTS
UIC Workshop
Battery trains
19/05/2021
Agenda
71
Solutions portfolio
72
Overview of hybrid train projects
Hybrid train
74
Hydrogen train
75
 BATTERY TRAIN
AGC BEMU PROJECT
UIC Workshop
Battery trains
19/05/2021

Bogdan Vulturescu (SNCF)

Matthieu Renault (SNCF)
Benoit Gachet (ALSTOM)
Fleet: Automotrice Grande Capacité
77

700 trainsets of the AGC family:

- X76500 class: 163 trains 100% diesel
- B81500 class: 185 trains, dual mode (1.5kVdc & diesel)
– 160km/h max, 130/240 places (3/4 coaches)
- B82500 class: 141 trains, dual mode (1500Vdc/25kVac
& Diesel) – 160km/h max, 130/240 places (3/4 coaches)
- Z27500 class: 211 trains 100% electrical

- 2004-2011 Supplied by Bombardier at SNCF

- 2022-2032 Midlife maintenance - to give potential for
another 20 years
Retrofitting principles
78

❑ 20 years old trainsets retrofitting (build before TSI) – first time in Europe !
❑ Diesel propulsion removal and replacement with NMC Li batteries, on both
motor cars (1M T 2M)
❑ Train software modification
BEMU features
79

Autonomy 80km + reserve (20km or 1hour comfort AUXILIAIRES at full power;

autonomy corresponding to only 50% of DoD used !)

Traction Identical to original BGC: 160km/h, 1.8MW under catenary & 1MW under non-
electrified line, braking energy recovery (new)

Battery full charge time 40min (running under catenary or under 25kVAC at standstill)
(400kWh) 60min (at standstill under 1.5kVDC)

BEMU coupling Inter-BEMU & with the rest of the AGC regional non-modified fleet (BGC and ZGC)

DC/DC converter redundancy 4 DC/DC converters, each driving 4 traction battery units (50kWh, 800V) – liquid
cooling

Distance gauge (km) estimation The driver knows, on live, the “equivalent distance” remaining energy
Energy management
80
 81
Relevant area – infrastructure (without any modification)

• 16600km electrified lines in France

• 5100km non-electrified (or partially
electrified) compatible with 80km
BEMU one journey autonomy
(12000km non-electrified lines in
France).

100% km electrified lines + 42%

km non-electrified lines
Relevant area – Journey operation analyze
82

84% of the journey

distances are les than 80km.
Relevant area – Journey operation analyze
83

❶ Operation modification
❷ New infrastructure
❸ Increase the onboard storage

84% of the journey

distances are les than 80km.
Relevant area – daily operation analyze
84
Daily journey operation analyze
85

X % of these long daily operation

are compatible with our AGC BEMU
(eg. shuttle Lyon ↔ Bourg-en-Bresse daily op).

38 % + X % of the daily operation are less than

80km – compatible with our AGC BEMU without
any infrastructure/rolling stock modification.
Increase the relevant area – Daily operation analyze
86
Increase the Relevant area – Daily operation analyze, 87

round trip exemple

Increase the Relevant area – Daily operation analyze, 88

round trip exemple

 89
First use cases – without any infrastructure modification

300 à 1000 tCO2e avoided/year, annual

emissions of 180 to 650 cars for only one BGC !
Diesel Battery train
~8,5 kgCO2éq/km 0,5 kgCO2éq/km
6 to 10 kgPM/an 0
1 to 3 tNOx/an 0
Marseille – Aix
90
Partners
91
Projet milestones
92
AGC BEMU
93
 Stay in touch with UIC:

François Degardin (SNCF)

Bogdan Vulturescu (SNCF)
Matthieu Renault (SNCF)
Benoit Gachet (ALSTOM) Thank you for your attention.
 SIEMENS
MIREO PLUS
A strong train now becomes even stronger

Katrin Seeger
Siemens Mobility - Head of Battery Technology Commuter & Regional Trains
19.05.2021
The Mireo Plus combines the latest alterna-
tive traction systems with the lightest EMU

2019 2020
Desiro ML Mireo Plus B
Cityjet eco Ortenau
prototype for ÖBB

1900 1909 2017

First battery “Wittfeld- Start of

locomotive Akkumulator- development of
triebwagen” Mireo Plus

2018 2020
Test bench Mireo Plus H
operation of fuel cell prototype with DB

Page 96 Unrestricted | © Siemens Mobility 2021 | SMO RS CR | May 2021

Extensive experience gained during
development and testing

Battery System Hydrogen System

• Active in design of battery systems for mobility applications since • Active in H2 systems since 1960s
2009 • Applications in marine business as well as for electrolyzers laid
• Co-design with experienced partners I-ME Actia and Toshiba foundation to enhance this technology for mobility applications
• Owner and distributor of the battery systems • Experienced partner Ballard Power for development of the next
• Excellent results from passenger operation with Cityjet eco have generation fuel cell system
confirmed a reliable, robust and long-lasting battery system • The new fuel cell system has been extensively tested in a system
test laboratory for > 2000 hours operation to optimize the interaction
between fuel cell and battery system

Page 97 Unrestricted | © Siemens Mobility 2021 | SMO RS CR | May 2021

Desiro ML Cityjet eco in successful passenger service for more than one year
Operation in battery mode Battery capacity Traction power
> 65.000 km 528 kWh Up to 2,6 MW
140 km/h 120 km/h in
in AC-mode battery mode
Range in daily operation
~80 km

Operated in height Achievements

difference of 325 m
• No downtime; high reliability of batteries
No restrictions in hot summertime
detected due to active cooling • Operating parameters could be optimized
Reduced range due • Validation platform for simulation
to active heating (65 km) modeling
Routes throughout
all regions in Austria

07/2017 08/2019 09/2019 12/2020

Start of development Homologation Passenger operation on 11 Trial operation successfully
certificate received different routes throughout Austria completed

Page 98 Unrestricted | © Siemens Mobility 2021 | SMO RS CR | May 2021

Mireo Plus –
For operation on non electrified lines

Electrified lines Connecting electrified lines Last mile No catenary

Mireo Mireo Plus

For electrified lines All Mireo advantages in one hybrid platform with all positive characteristics of the Mireo family:
energy-saving, flexible interior, low maintenance and life cycle costs

Mireo Plus B: Battery solution for lines that are partially electrified; range: 80 – 120 km
Mireo Plus H: Hydrogen solution for long distances without catenary; range: 600 – 1,000 km

2-Teiler: 47 m, max. 130 seats

Pmax Vmax: 160 km/h
Mireo Plus
Pmax: 1.700 kW
DEMU
3-Teiler: 63 m, max. 180 seats High performance: 2 powered bogies
to ensure reliable operation even
Vmax
under challenging conditions

Page 99 Unrestricted | © Siemens Mobility 2021 | SMO RS CR | May 2021

The first project of Mireo Plus is
Ortenau network with battery hybrid drive

Contract award

April 2020
Vmax

140 km/h
Catenary-free operation

~80 km
Level platform access
550 mm

Page 100 Unrestricted | © Siemens Mobility 2021 | SMO RS CR | May 2021

The Mireo Plus B meets demanding operational requirements
without a continuous overhead catenary

EMU performance 1 Flexible battery size – long ranges possible

High energy efficiency / low power consumption thanks to SiC 2 LTO technology for long battery life

Charging below overhead catenary and quick charge 3 160 km/h in both overhead catenary and battery operation

Low lifecycle costs 4 Overhead catenary operation at 15 kV/16.7 Hz or 25 kV/50 Hz

4 3

1 2

Page 101 Unrestricted | © Siemens Mobility 2021 | SMO RS CR | May 2021

 The Mireo Plus H is applied in a research project
with DB Regio

120 Mireo Plus H Project start

seats
2-car 23.11.2020
Vmax

160 km/h
Range

Start of trial operation 600 km

2024 Rapid refueling in max.
1,7 MW 15 minutes
traction power

Page 102 Unrestricted | © Siemens Mobility 2021 | SMO RS CR | May 2021

The Mireo Plus H meets demanding operational requirements
without an overhead catenary

EMU Performance 1 Highly efficient fuel cell – long ranges possible

High energy efficiency / low power consumption thanks to SiC 2 LTO technology for long battery life

Vmax 160 km/h 3 Intelligent system for rapid refueling

Low power consumption, e.g. through use of waste heat from

Low lifecycle costs 4
fuel cell for passenger air-conditioning

1
4

3 2

Page 103 Unrestricted | © Siemens Mobility 2021 | SMO RS CR | May 2021

Ambitious targets are achieved through innovative
hybrid traction building blocks

HD8 Next Generation fuel cell Hybrid control software

Optimized operation through
Higher power density predictive energy management

Longer lifetime, lower life cycle cost ~ 5 – 15% energy savings

Higher efficiency

H2 tanks
Modular concept
+10% H2 storage capacity Powerful battery family

Safe chemical cells

DC – DC converter
High-power charging
SiC technology (compact, light
and low losses) Long lifetime

Page 104 Unrestricted | © Siemens Mobility 2021 | SMO RS CR | May 2021

The Mireo Plus B makes the most of the existing infrastructure

Input: 3 ~ AC
10 – 110 kV 1 ~ AC
Output:
50 Hz
15 kV/16,7 Hz
or
25 kV/50 Hz

Battery operation

1 Charging below existing 2 Charging at the recharging section 3 Charging at the recharging
overhead catenary (including at the intersection (including during point at the terminus
during travel) travel) (charging only while
stationary)

Page 105 Unrestricted | © Siemens Mobility 2021 | SMO RS CR | May 2021

Suitable infrastructure is the prerequisite for the
efficient use of the Mireo Plus H

Refueling process
1 Vehicle is connected one car at a 2 Hydrogen is pumped in: 3 Rated pressure is reached at
time to the dispenser: Start of Refueling process the hydrogen tank:
the refueling process End of the refueling process

Rapid refueling in approx. 15 minutes

Continuous data transfer over standardized

interface (e.g. pressure, temperature)

Hydrogen refueling station

Page 106 Unrestricted | © Siemens Mobility 2021 | SMO RS CR | May 2021

 Height[m] Battery load
St.Pölten > Horn > St.Pölten
350 100%

300 90%
80%
250
70%
Case study 200

150
60%
50%
100
40%
50 30%
0 20%
0 0 10 30 39 66 74 82 109 118 138 148 km
Proven in Austria 08:56 09:05
St.Pölten
09:14
Herzogenburg
09:41
Krems
09:54
Hadersdorf
10:40
Gars
10:56
Horn
11:24
Gars
11:59
Hadersdorf
12:10
Krems
12:47
Herzogenburg
12:56
St.Pölten

#years of experience in all weather conditions

Height[m] Charlerloi-Sud > Couvin > Charlerloi-Sud Battery load

350 100%

300 90%
80%
250
70%
200

Feasible in Belgium 150

60%
50%
100
40%
comparable distances 50 30%
0 20%
0 0 3 13 22 28 35 49 54 54 59 73 80 86 90 95 105 108 108 km
comparable height differences (Charlerloi-Couvin) 09:48 10:12
18
10:26 10:31 10:35 10:42 10:31 11:01 11:07 11:52 13:00 13:11 13:18 13:25 13:30 13:35 13:48 14:12

or flat (e.g. Eeklo-Ronse)

comparable electrification ratio on most diesel lines
Height[m] Battery load
Eeklo > Ronse > Eeklo
350 100%

300 90%
Infrastructure characteristics Belgium 250
80%
70%
200
Catenary voltage 3kV DC 150
60%
50%

Maximum 200A during standstill 100

40%
50 30%

Maximum 2400A in motion 0

0 0 20 36 54 55 68 82 83 100 116 136 km
20%

A charging possibility will be required in Couvin

Page 107 Unrestricted | © Siemens Mobility 2021 | SMO RS CR | May 2021

09:48 Arrival time 10:12 Departure time
 Stay in touch with UIC:

Katrin Seeger
Siemens Mobility - Head of Battery Technology Thank you for your attention.
Commuter & Regional Trains
 ON-BOARD ENERGY
STORAGE FOR CATERNARY
FREE SECTIONS

Akos Labady
Sr. Field Application Engineer, Eaton Electrical/ELX
UIC online workshop, 19May2021
 110

products for rolling

stock and infrastructure
 Electric Energy Storage Options - The Ragone-Plot
1000

Fuel cell
Energy Density (Wh/kg)

Eaton offerings for

100 energy storage:
LiIon
PbA • LiIon based systems
• PbA based systems
Batteries • Supercapacitor
NiMh LiC or Hybrid based systems
NiCd
Supercapacitors
10 • Hybrid
supercapacitors

Supercapacitors

1
10 100 1000 10000

Power Density (W/kg)

EDLC aka. Supercaps
• Supercaps are symetrical devices comprised by
activated carbon electrodes at both anode and
cathode sides
• Charging and discharging are electrostatic
processes – no chemical reactions
• Cycle life is practically unlimited
• Charge and discharge can be done at the same
speed and fashion in seconds
• Voltage drops linerarly by the energy delivered
 LiIon batteries
• LiIon batteries are assymetric devices comprising of
graphite anodes and metal oxide cathodes (Co, Mn,
PO4, Fe, Ni combinations)
• Charge and discharge are electrochemical
processes
• Cylce life is limited due to degradation (electrolyte
oxidation, Li oxide buildup on anode and cathode
surface, structural damage etc.)
• Discharge profile is flat, delivering quasi constant
voltage
NEW - LiC aka. Hybrid Supercaps
• Hybrid supercaps are asymetric devices comprise of a
Li doped graphite anode and activated carbon cathode
• The charge movement is done electrochemically mainly
but in significantly lower depht as in case of the LiIon
battery. This results a very high ~500.000x cycle life
and very fast responsiveness to high C rate discharges
• As there are no metal oxides used the hybrid supercaps
are not posing any risk of fire or thermal runaway
Technology Comparison
Li-ion Battery Hybrid Supercapacitor

+Highest energy density +High energy density provides fast recharge in minutes
+Lower self discharge – years +Long life time: 10 years at 20⁰C
+Cost per Wh +Long cycle life: 500k (HS), 250k (HSL)
+Safety: no thermal runaway, short circuit does not
-High current recharge shortens life cause fire
-Higher internal resistance limits power +Simple cell management and charging circuit
-Must manage thermal load +-15C/+70C operating temperature
-Operating temperature range -10 to +40⁰C Low self discharge for longer life when paired to primary
-Require sophisticated battery management system batteries – individual self discharge in months
-Must oversize to reach longer life times >5 years
-Sustainability – rare earth metals ‒Cost per Wh
-Safety to manage
-Cycle life: 3k-10k
Example - overhead line free sectioned line

150ton train
3000VDC line
50km distance between charging lines
50km average speed on main line
300-500kWh stored energy on-board by
LiIon batteries or hybrid supercapacitors

60min 300kW dishcarge followed by 10min 600A recharge

10min 1800kW charge 60min 300kW discharge 20min 900kW charge

 Required energy storage per technology
Hybrid Supercapacitor NMC
(lithium doped graphite / activated carbon) (lithium / nickel manganese cobalt oxide)

Charge voltage = 3800-4000VDC Charge voltage = 3800-4000VDC

Nominal voltage = 3600VDC Nominal voltage = 3200VDC
Min discharged voltage = 2500VDC Min discharged voltage = 2700VDC
Installed capacity = 550kWh Installed capacity = 2160kWh
Theoretical lifetime = 75MAh or 25million Theoretical lifetime = 68MAh or 20million
km assuming ideal cell management and km assuming ideal cell management and
moderate temperature level moderate temperature level
Size = 36m3 Size = 16m3
Weight = 25-30tons Weight = 20-25tons

No actual product displayed

 Advantageus Use Cases

Hybrid SUPERCAP Li-Ion BATTERY

• Can cover 100+km with one charge

• Short distances to cover with stored energy <50km
• More cost efficient solution over 50km
sections
• May be overnight charged to save the
• In case high current available for charging number of charging sections and extend
• In case safety is critical – tunnels/subways battery life
• In case braking energy is more to utilize • Available solution as per 2021
(downhills)
• In case higher acceleration rates are appreciated
(uphills, urban transport)
• When wider temperature either cold or hot is an
issue
 Stay in touch with UIC:

Akos Labady
Sr. Field Application Engineer, Eaton Electrical/ELX Thank you for your attention.
 Stay in touch with UIC:

Slides and recording to be made available on the event page

https://uic.org/events/battery-trains
Call for speakers is open for a workshop on stationary energy storage systems, please
contact [email protected]
Thank you for your attention.