Post on 02-Oct-2020
transcript
TF 455 .S62 v.5 c.1
Report No. UMTA-IT-06-0026-74-12 S.C.R. T.D. UBHARY
SOAC ST A TE-OF-THE-ART CAR
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM Fl NAL TEST REPORT
VOLUME 5: POST-REPAIR TESTING
Boeing Vertol Company (A division of The Boeing Company)
Surface Transportation Systems Branch Philadelphia, Pa. 19142
DECEMBER 1974 FINAL REPORT
Availabili ty is unlimited. Document may be released to the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22151 , for sale to the public.
Prepared for
URBAN MASS TRANSPORTATION ADMINISTRATION Office of Research and Development
Washington, D.C. 20590
NOTICE
This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof.
Technical Report Documentation Page
1. Report No . 2. Governmen t Accession No. 3 . Recip ient ' s Cotolog No .
UMTA-IT-06-0026-74-12
4 . Title and Subtd le 5. Report Date
STATE-OF-THE-ART CAR FINAL TEST REPORT December 1974
VOLUME V - POST REPAIR TESTING 6. Performing Organ i zotion Code
7 . Author's) G. Christiansen, w. 8. Performing O rgan i z a tion Report No.
H. Dunton R. L. Wesson Dl74-10024-5
; . 9. Performing Orgoni zotion Name and Address 10 . Work Unit No. (TRAIS)
Boeing Vertol Company P.O. Box 16858 11. Contract or Grant No,
., Philadelphia, Pa . 19142 13. Type of Report and Period Covered
12 . Sponsoring Agency Nome and Address Test Report Department of Transportation Jan. - April 1974 Urban Mass Transportation Administratio~
Office of Research and Development 14 . Spor,soring Agenc y Code
Rail Programs Branch, Washington, D.C. 20590 15. Suppleme n tary No t es
16. Abstra ct
This document presents the test results for the Post Repair testing of the State-of-the-Art Car. The SOAC has been developed under UMTA's Urban Rapid Rail Vehicle and Systems Program to enhance the attrac-tiveness of rapid rail transportation to the urban traveller with transit vehicles that are comfortable, rel-iable, sa:f e- and- economical.
The purpose of these tests was to show compliance with the SOAC Detail Specification IT-06-0026-73-2 following repairs to the No. 2 Car which had been damaged in an accident on August 11, 1973 at the DOT High Speed Ground Test Center, Pueblo, Colorado and to complete the Simulated Demonstration Testing which had been interrupted by the accident.
This document, Volume V plus the following additional volumes comprise Boeing Vertol Report Dl74-10024, State-of-the-Art car Final Test Report as specified in Section 17.1.4.2 of the SOAC Detail Specification.
Volume I - Component Testing Volume II - Subsystem Functional Testing --
Volume III - Acceptance Testing Volume IV - Simulated Demonstrat~on Test
These well the Detail Specification, -
availab'ie r eports, as as SOAC are from the National Technical Information Service (NTIS) , Springfield, Va. 22151.
17. Key Words 18, Dis!".i_bution Statement
State-of-the-Art Car {SOAC} Availability is unlimited. Document Simulated Demonstration may be released to t he National Post Repair Testing Technical Information Service, Rapid Transit Car Springfield, Va., for sale to the UMTA URRV Program public.
19. Security C lass il. (of th is report) 20. Security Clossil, (of t hi s page) 21, No. of Pages 22. Price
-UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED 57
Form DOT F 1700.7 !8-72) Reproduction of completed poge outhori zed
Ot7 1JO
TF 455 .S62 v.5 c.1
..
,.
•
BOEING YEITOL COMPANY A DIVISION OF THE BOEING, COMPANY
P.O. BOX 16858 PH [ LAD ELPHI A, PENNSY LVANIA 1914 2
NUMBER
CODE IDENT. NO. 77272
D174-10024-5
TITLE STATE-OF-THE-ART CAR FINAL TEST REPORT
VOLUME V-POST REPAIR TESTING
REV L TR
ORIGINAL RELEASE DATE _____ . FOR THE RELEASE DATE OF SUBSEQUENT REVISIONS, SEE THE HEVISION SHEET. FOR LIMITATIONS IMPOSED ON THE DISTRIBUTION AN D USE OF INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS DOCUMENT, SEE THE LIMITATIONS SHEET.
MODEL SOAC CONTRACT DOT-UT-10007 ------- --ISSUE NO. _ ___ _ ISSUED TO: _____ _______ _
PREPARED BY :; # ~,1 DATE /Z · f y..,- /4
APPROVED BY DATE ::ti~7¥ APPROVED BY DATE
7
APPROVED BY DATE
FOR M .:'1 6280 l5l73 ) SHEET iii
Pit:\'! ;:!G [!S
l --
I I APPROV/i,L LTR DESCRIPTI Ot~ DATE
•
iv
CONTENTS
1 .0 INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2.0 COHFIGURATIOI~ 2
3.0 INSTRUMENTATION 2
4.0 TEST PROCEDURES 3
5 .0 7EST RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6.0 COHCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
REFERENCES • . . • • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • 2 5
APPENDIX A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • A-1
V
Figure
4 - l
4- 2
4 - 3
5 - 1
5- 2
5- 3
5-4
5- 5
5- G
5 - 7
'!'able
4- 1
5- 1
5- 2
5- 3
ILLUSTRATIONS
SOAC System Simulator .
SOl\C Monitor Pa nel
Post Repair SOAC Simulated Demonstration Route at HSGTC ...
SOAC Speedometer Calibra tion Low Density Car 1Jo . 1 . . . .
SOAC Speedome ter Cal ibration High Densi ty Car No . 2 . . ..
Co mparison of Time Distance to Stop , Bl ended Service Br a king , with Orig inal Tests . . . . .
Comparison o f Time a nd Distance to Stop , Service Fricti o n Braking , wi t h Origina l Te sts . .
Comparison of T ime a n d Dis t ance to Stop , Emergency Friction Br aking , with Origina l Te sts . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Co~par ison o f High De nsity Car Ride Quali ty vs . Goals , for Original and Post Repair Te sts . . . . . . . ..
Dai ly Hileage Acc uraulatio n Dur i ng S imulated Demonstration 1974
TABLES
Subsyste1t1 Tests r~ccomp lished on Ca r No . 2 • • •
Sur.unary of SOAC Accel e r ation Tes t Da t a
Summar y of SOl\C Dece l eration Test Data
'!'est Run Log- SOAC Simula ted Demonstration 1974
vi
5
6
9
12
13
15
16
1 7
19
21
4
11
14
20
.•
. .,,, "
.. .. :,. .... : ... ~-
State-of-the-Art Cars
vii
' ... . :-..
SOAC POST -REPAIR TESTING
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), Urban Mass Transportation Administration (UMTA), under contract DOT- UT- 10007 has engaged the Boeing Vertol Company to act as Systems Manager of the Urban Rapid Rail Vehicle and Systems Program. This is an integrated program directed toward improving high speed, frequent stop urban rai l systems. The overall objective is to enhance attract iveness of rail t ransportation to the urban traveller by providing service that is as comfortable , reliable , safe and economical as possible.
The objective of the State-of-the-Art Car (SOAC) is to demonstrate the best state - of-the-art in rapid rail car desi gn wi t h two new improved cars using existi ng proven technology. Primary goals for the cars are passenger convenience and operat ing efficiency.
Testing of the SOAC cars at the UMTA Rail Transi t Test Tr ack at the Department of Transportation High Speed Ground Test Center (HSGTC) Pueblo, Colorado star ted i n September 19 72 and was interrupted by a collision of the SOAC cars with a standing gondola car on August 11 , 1973 . The accomplishments to that date included completion of the Acceptance Te sts, Engineering Tests and 1312 miles of the 3000 mi l es of two car operation scheduled under the S i mulated Demonstration Test Program.
Thi s repor t presents the results of Post- Repair Testing of the SOAC Cars during the period January 30th to April 1 0 , 1974 at HSGTC . The objectives were:
(a) Show compliance with the original acceptance criteria
(b) Establish t est data continuity wi th the original HSGTC tests
(c) Compl ete Simulated Demonstration Testing
The tests were conducted in accordance with Re fe rence (1) 1
and include d the following:
• Subsystem Functional Tests
• Acceptance Tests
1 . Refer e nce 1. State-of- the- Art Car Test P r ogram , Appe ndix I , "Test Plan and Proce dures for Pos t-Repair Testing", Document No . D174-10007-1 , Boeing Vertol Company, Philadelphia, Pa. , January 1974 .
1
• Simulated Demonstration Tests
• Engineering Tests
2.0 CONFIGURATION
Acceptance tests were conducted on the two cars individually and as a two-car train. Both cars were ballasted to normal load (AWl) 2 of 105,000 lb, representing light car plus 100 passengers at 150 lb each. The Engineering Tests were conducted at 90,000 lb, 105,000 lb and 130,000 lb car weights. All Simulated Demonstration testing was as a two-car train with each car ballasted to 105,000 lb.
3.0 INSTRUMENTATION
3.1 SUBSYSTEM FUNCTIONAL TESTS
The test and checkout equipment used for t he subsystem functiona l tests were as follows :
ITEM
Osci lloscope (1)
SOAC System Simulator (1)
SOAC System Monitor (2)
MAKE
Tektronix
Garrett/AiResearch
Garrett/AiResearch
The SOAC System Monitors were installed in the cab of each car and remained in the cabs for the acceptance and engine ering tests. The monitor panel contains features to perform several functions:
• Annunciator lights for indication of propulsion and braking events and modes.
• Fault indicator lights
• Calibrated meters for indication of the following :
Armature currents
Field currents
Capacitor bank voltage
Motor voltage
Car speed
Calculated tract ive effort
Thyristor firing command
Tractive effort command
Plus additi onal internal system func tions.
• Te rminals for connecting the above parameters with a recording oscillograph (when required).
2 . AWl - Normal Load Car Weight
2
3.2 ACCEPTANCE TESTING
Testing was conducted without any onboard data recording equipment; instead, a handheld stopwatch was used to obtain car spee ds, accelerations and decelerations from trac kside markers placed at 100 ft. interval s along the right-of-way. The data also served to calibrate the motorman's conso l emounted speedometer and the accuracy of the Automatic Speed Maintaining System (ASMA).
3.3 ENGINEERING TESTING
The test data recording equipment included two (2) magnetic tape recorders and two (2) direct reading oscillographs . They were used to selectively record any 28 test paramete rs including: vertical, lateral and longitudinal accelerations, relative motions, structural strains, ele ctrical voltage s , electrical currents, and car wheel speeds. A separate temperature recorder was used for recording temperatures. Additional details may be obtained from Reference 2~
3.4 SIMULATED DEMONSTRATION TESTING
The SOAC propulsion and braking system performance was monitored through the use of the SOAC Monitor Panels installed in the cab of each car (see description in Section 3.1) .
4.0 TEST PROCEDURES
4.1 SUBSYSTEM FUNCTIONAL TESTS
Tests were performed on those items speci f i e d in Table 4-1, along with additional functional tests of the Propulsi on and Braking Systems, in accor dance with Ref. (1) 4 Section 3. The l atter t e sts were performed on each of the t wo cars, separatel y, sitting in a static position u s ing the SOAC Propulsion Simulator (Figure 4-1) to simulate the system electrical loads , and the SOAC Monitor Panel (Figure 4-2) to check proper functioni ng and sequence of propulsion contr ol events by observing the event lights on the Annunc i ator Panel.
3 . Re f erence 2. Urban Rail Rap i d Tra ns it SOAC Engine e r i ng Te s ts a t Dept of Trans portation HSGTC , Docume nt No . Dl74- l00 26-6 , Volume VI , Bo e ing Vertol Company, Philade l p hia, Pa., May 1974 .
4 . See f ootnote 1 o n p 1.
3
TABLE 4-1
SUBSYSTEM TESTS ACCOMPLISHED ON CAR NO. 2
TEST
Coupler Function a nd Gathering Range (No. lend only)
El ectric Coupl ers Camber Air Comfort End Door Side Door Windshield Lighting, Head and Tail Lights Cab Lights Console Lights Emergency Lights Main Li ghts Wiring, High Pot Main Power Application Trainlines Windshie ld Wiper Horn Public Address Radio
Side Sign Main Propulsion Control & Motor Rotatio n Main/Emergency Brake Handbrake Snow Brake Propulsion Auxiliaries Car Weight
Air Compressor Hostl ing Panel Visua l
TEST DATA SHEET NO. s
A- 2
A- 3 A-4 A- 5 A- 6 A-7 A-8 A- 9 A-10 A-11 A-1 2 A-1 3 A- 14 A-15 A- 16,-17 A- 18 A- 19 A-20 A-21
A- 22 A- 23 A-24 ,- 25 A- 26 A- 27 A-28 A-29
A- 30 A-31 A-3 2
5 . These sheets are containe d in Appendix A of thi s report .
4
;· ;
I -
5
Figure 4-2. SOA C Monitor Panel
6
•
4.2 ACCEPTANCE TESTS
This phase of the test program included the following :
• Speedometer Calibration
• Acceleration
• Deceleration
• Automatic Speed Maintaining System
• Ride Quality
4.2.1 Speedometer Calibration
The true car speeds were obtained from the measured times required for the car to travel a measured course using handheld stopwatches. The desired test car speeds were set by pushing one of the ASMS Push Button controls on the control console. The car speed over the test track was monitore d and r e corded for the Speedometer and the SOAC Monitor Panel Speed Indicator .
4.2.2 Acceleration Tests
Tests were conducted in forward and reverse on each car i ndividually with car weights of 105,000 lb. The test car or train was accelerated on the level tangent track at f ull p owe r (P-sig nal = 1.0 amp). Stopwatches were used to measiire the time to reach 7 00 ft. and the time to reach 60 rnph from a standing start, and the time to accelerate from 5 to 25 mph. Maximum speed was recorded at the end of the course. Additional monitored data included line voltage, armature and field currents from the SOAC monitor panel. Testing with the two-car train was prevented by failure of one of the two auxiliary generators which allowed track line voltage to drop below the minimum required 600 volts.
4.2.3 Dece l eration Tests
Te sts were conducted in forward and reverse on both cars and the two-car train with car weights of 105,000 lb. The test car or train was decele rated at full service rate f or blended and friction only braking, and with emergency braking on the leve l tangent track. Stops were made from 40 and 80 mph. Stopwa tches were used t o measure time required to s top for each braking mode and initial test speed, and the t ime to dece l e rate from 6 0 to 3 0 mph .
7
4.2.4 Automa tic Speed Mai ntaining System
Tests were conducted in forward and reverse on both cars and the two car train with car wei ghts of 1 05 , 000 lb. The ASMS was cycled through all push button speed settings with the Controller in the full power setting (P-signal -1.0 amp) from 3 to 80 and back to 3 mph. The test data included the indicated speeds from the speedometer and SOAC Monitor Panel, and the Armature Current and Field Current for each ASMS speed setting .
4.2.5 Ride Quali ty Tests
The measurement of the car body vibrations related to Ride Quality by Reference 3 6 was accomplished under the Engineering Test Program.
4.3 SIMULATED DEMONSTRATION
This portion of the SOAC Te st Program included scheduled inspection/maintenance procedures and daily two-car train operation over the test track fol lowing a composite route profile of the routes in the five cities where SOAC would be demonstrated: New York, Boston, Cleveland, Chicago and Philadelphia . The route consisted o f " station" stops aver aging approximate ly 1/2 mile apart (ranging from 1/4 mi l e to 1-1/4 miles) where the train stopped , opened the doors, 20 second dwell , closed the doors , and travelled to the next station at the average speeds shown in Figure 4-3. This sequence (in general) was repeated for two circui ts of the oval transit track, then two laps were run at 80 mph . The cars were operated at 105 , 000 lb car weight (AWl).
4.4 CAB SIGNALLING
Cab signalling equipment suppl ied by Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) and AiResearch Manufacturing Company under separate contract was installed and funct ionally checke d out during normal maintenance during the Simula ted Demonstration testing. A tape recording o f the signals supplied through the MBTA running rails was played to a receiver coil mounted ahead of the forward truck and automatic train control response was evaluated . The SOAC Propulsion Control System a utomatica lly responded to the signals by accelerating , decelerating and maintaining speed of the train as called for by the signals.
6 . Reference 3 . De tail Specification for State -of- the - Art Car , Docume nt No . IT- 06- 0026-73-2 , Urban Mass Tran sportation Administration, May 19 7 3 .
8
•
100 55 MPH
110
120
130 C
140 345 50 MPH 340 150 335 330 160 325 320 170
55 MPH
Figure 4-3. 1974 Simulated Demonstration Route at HSGTC
9
4.5 ENGINEERING TESTS
l\n abbrcviiltcd F:nyincer.i.nq Test Program w0s conducted i n accordance with Reference (1) 1 as follows:
Acceleration
Dece l eration-Blended Braking
Power Consumption/Undercar Equipment Temperatures
Ri de Quality
Structures
Interior Noise
Wayside Noise
The number of recorded test data points was greatly reduced f r om the total obtalned during the original test program .
5.0 TEST RESULTS
5 . 1 SUBSYSTEM FUNCTIONAL TESTS
The test results for the items specified in Table 4- 1 wer e recorded on t h e applicable test data sheets along wi t h approved s i gnatures. These are presented i n Appendi x A.
7 . See footnote 1 on p 1.
1 0
5.2 ACCEPTANCE TESTS
5.2.1 Speedometer Calibration
The maximum deviation between the speedometer indicated speed and the calculated speed was 1.5 mph at 80 mph, see Figures 5-1 and 5-2.
5 .2.2 Acceleration Tests
Acceleration from a standing start to 700 ft. ranged from 18.8 to 19.5 seconds with average acceleration from 5 to 25 mph of 2.78 and 2.74 mphps, respectively. Both cars were tested individually and both met or exceeded the specification and/or previous test data, see Table 5-1.
TABLE 5-1
SUMMARY OF SOAC ACCELERATION TEST DATA
SOAC CAR CA.R TEST PARAMETER SPEC. NO. 1 NO. 2 --
Avg. Acceleration (mphps)* 2.74 ** 2.74 2.78
Time to travel 0 to 700 ft. 20 19.5 18.8 from stand 1 g. start (secs.)
Time 0 to 60 mph (secs.) 34 ** 33.8 31. 2
Maximum Speed (mph) 80 80 79
*From 5 to 25 mph
**Previous Data (not a spec. item)
5.2.3 Deceleration Tests
Table 5-2 summarizes the deceleration rates and stopping distances together with the specification requirements or previous acceptance test data. The data for extended service braking , service friction braking and emergency friction braking modes are plotted in Figures 5-3, 5-4 and 5-5 respectively.
11
100
80
..c C. E
al 60
~ (/)
al .., C'O
.!: "O C: 40
.0 C'O
(.)
20
0 0
Speed Setting
Speed Setting
Speed Setting
/
SpeedSe✓O
/
/ 20
/ / ~ ,
/ /
/ /
40 60
True Speed (mph) (Timed on Measured Course)
Run 19 1 1-29-74 Run 194 1-30-74
/
80 100
Figure 5 - 1. SOAC Speedometer Calibration - Low Density Car No. 1
12
100 0 Run 203 2-21-74
80 Speed Setting _/ Re-Test y
.l: Calibration~ C. E , - 60
~ ~ Original Calibration ~
C/)
"O Speed Setting Cl> +-' (1:1 (,)
"O 40 r::
.D Speed Setting (1:1
u
Speed Setting • ~
20 ,. o--.-----~------------.1'------------0 20 40 60 80 100
True Speed (mph) (Time on Measured Course)
Figure 5- 2. SOAC Speedometer Calibration - High Density Car No. 2
13
TABLE 5-2
SUMMARY OF SOAC DECELERATION TEST DATA
SOAC PREVIOUS CAR CAR 2 CAR BRAKING MODE SPEC. DATA NO . 1 NO. 2 TRAIN
Deceleration RatE1S* Blended Service (mphps) ** 3.1
Service Friction (mphps) ** 2 .7
Emergency (mphps) ** 3.2
STOPPING DISTANCE FROM 40 MPH
Blended Service (feet)
Se rvice Friction (feet)
Emergency (feet)
450
450
425
430-445
420 - 440
335-365
STOPPING DISTANCE FROM 80 MPH
3.3
2. 9
-
45 5
457
365
Bl e nded Service (feet)
Service Friction (feet)
Emergency (feet)
2250
2250
2200
1650-1660 1700
1925-2000 1967
1600-1635 1680
*Average from 60 to 30 mph (Car We ight 105 ,000 lb)
**Not a Spec. Item
5 .2.4 Automatic Speed Maintaining System
3. 4
3. 3
3.0
42 3
440
372
1550
1650
1560
ASMS functioned satis f actorily on both cars . All speeds were maintained within one (1) mph of t he button setting.
5.2 .5 Ride Quality Tests
A comparison of the original and the re- test vibration levels, together with the SOAC design goals
3 . 5
2.8
3.3
408
408
349
1539
1653
1503
for vertical and l ateral vibrations at mid- car and aft car center line locations respective ly are presented
14
2000
1600
-;; (1) (1) - 1200 C. 0 ... en 0 ... ~ C: (ti 800 ... -~ Cl
400
0 0
Single Car Car Weight: AW1 = 105,000 lb
NOTES :
1 . Level Tangent Track
2. Zero Wind
3. Deceleration per Figure 2-4 of Detail Spec.
4 . Jerk Limits and Dead Time Included
5 . Data Basis : HSGT C Accept ance T ests - 4/73
l Distance Time
Car No. 1 0 • Car No. 2 D + I 2 Cars ◊ X @
Original Tests
Maximum~ Car Speed 80 mph
/ /
/
----_,,,..,,,../
20 40 60 80 Initial Speed (mph)
Figure 5 - 3. Comparison of Time and Distance to Stop Blended
Service Braking with Original Tests.
1 5
40 u (1)
"' --0 C: (ti
E E
30 0 (.)
(1) .:it! (ti ... f E 0
20 ... LL Cl. s en 0 .... (1)
E
10 i=
0
Single Car Car Weight: AW1 = 105,000 lb
Notes:
1. Level Tangent Track
2. Zero Wind
3. Jerk Limits and Dead T ime Included
4. Data Basis: HSGTC Acceptance Test - 4n3
2000 50
... (1)
1600
~ 1200 C. 0 ...
(/)
0 ... (1) (.)
C:
~ 800 Cl
400
Car No. 1 Car No. 2 2 Cars
Distance Time
0 D ◊
• + X
~-/ ·s"'-1> / <:>"
/ / _.,.,.,,.,-:
Maximum Car Speed 80 mph
I _)f_
--0 _..,--.; ____ """'I"' ____ __,.. ____ __,.. ____ .....,_
0 20 40 60 80 Initial Speed (mph)
(.) (1) en -
40 ~ C'C E E 0 u
E 0 ,._
u.. C. 0 ...
ti.)
20 .S
10
0
(1)
E ~
Figure 5- 4. Comparison of Time and Distance to Stop Service Friction Braking with Original Tests
1 6
. .
Single Car Car Weight : AW1 = 105,000lb
Notes:
1. Level Tangent Track
2 . Zero Wind
3. Data Basis: HSGTC Acceptance Tests - 4/73
2000 50
Distance Time 0
1600 Car No. 1 0 • Car No. 2 D + 40 u 2 Cars ◊ X
Q)
"' ""C C: (ti
E -;:;-
! 1200
E 0
30 u C. g
en S Original Tests ~ C:
Q) _:,;: (ti
I ~
• al
* E 0 ~
-~ 800 0
20 u. C. 0 ...
en 0 ... Q)
E
400 Maximum f:'.
Car Speed 10
80 mph
--------Q ➔illiiioi----~---------.... ----- 0 0 20 40 60 80
Initial Speed (mph)
Figure 5- 5. Comparison of Time and Distance to Stop Emergency Friction Braking with Original Tests
17
in Figure 5-6. All vibration levels are below the SOAC design goals with the exception of the vertica l accelration at 15 Hz. This exception at 15 Hz was measured at a corrected true car speed of 94 mph instead of 80 mph as originally programmed. This 15 Hz bending mode is sharply dependent upon speed and a very small difference in speed between the original tests and the retests could account for the differences.
5.3 SIMULATED DEMONSTRATION
The first part of the Simulated Demonstration program was conducted from February 27th to March 13, 1974 with 1555 miles of two-car train operation accumulated in eight (8) days of testing. The second part of the program was conducted from March 29th to April 10, 1974 with 1456 miles of two-car train operation accumulated in five (5) days of testing. See Table 5-3 and Figure 5-7.
The only significant discrepancies were encountered duri'ng the first part of the program. They were:
(1) Broken motor brushes due to high commutator bars. Corrected by grinding the c ommutator .
(2) One slip-slide circuit card failure.
(3) One B (+) short to ground in the airflow circuit.
(4) One (intermittent) short in the P-wire cable.
It was further noted. that there was no gearbox oil leakage through the labyrinth seals. This indicat es that the leakage problem noted during the original test program was solved by installation of the drains as originally shown on the gearbox drawings ·.
5.4 CAB SIGNALLING
An operational checkout of the MBTA cab signal l ing equipment was conducted April 5, 1974. Both cars were checked individually using a tape recorder input to the s i gnal receivers. The SOAC propulsion control system automatical ly responded to the signals by accelerating, decelerating and maintaining speed of the train as called for by the signals.
A signal noise problem was encountered when in the vicinity of the diesel electric locomotive providing track power. The electrical noise generated caused intermittent brake applications. Since this type of 600 v power source will not be · encountered on the transit properties where cab signalling will be used, this was not a cause for concern.
18
~ (.:)
z 0 t<{
a: w ..J w u u <{
..J <{ u ta: w >
z 0 t,<{
a: w ..J w u u ,<{
..J <{
a: w t,<{ ..J
---- . - ------------------------
I I . 1 , _1-.t=cC::-
.09 ~ -~--
.08
. 06
.05
.04
.03
.o~
, - ..
_____ , __
. ---
I I
-- ...
--+
'
! ♦
. J
111 I
lL
. t
I i 1111 I 11 II, 11 11 11 I I I I I Ii I I I I I: 11 li: 1
ft · '!=!£ii: LL' f f{ t'.t fl! ':-ii, .-t' 1=- =:i-:f'!_~- + ~,cc: / ~ ·> I r, ': .::L~= ~ ~ ~ft __:,·~ =:-; " h ~-· ·- 1- •:-=~T:±f---1Et~ ~-~~ ~;f~ ;::;
• i • I
I
" I I
i I
l~--+-1-+-+-br'- .L.!...L!-~I H-++lf--l+ ~H-l+l ....
.011-µ.....1._1,_.L.J.....::i•.;.•~LLJ..+.W..LW.il..:U.l.µLll.LJ.ll,41--l-1..Ll..f-l-J...lljµ.LI.J..j.1.~UJ..4~f,--_l,_..L-L.l....J_I...J...J...l.+.,!-.U..L.l..1..1..U+t,L.U
I I' ~ I II II
1 2 3
NOTES 1. RESILIENT WHEELS 2. 105,000-LB CAR WEIGHT 3. TRACK SECTION I 4. MIDCAR CENTERLINE
.1 ~-~ ~- I ,09 ,.;:.~ ~~-- C
4'-j- -.08 -
I .. ..,...
:.
I .-
4 5 6 7 8 910
FREQUENCY (Hz)
KEY
20 MPH 35 MPH 45 MPH 55 MPH 80 MPH
i . i
,:: T.
:j.: . t
Ii
TEST DATA {) I)
t ~
I I I -~ =
20
RETEST DATA 0 D
~ 6
30
I I I I 11 I I i i 11 I 11-
-L.::. -::: : ~:: .. - --~ - • I. ~- ' . '
~~~- -·r·-·1- - . I T I 1· I I il I ~ I. I I; l ~ ~' ·' l _!I l,•i, .,.11_ I-:-- --~-,-= -- - r . ml I 1,.- • • •. 'i ·. ·, .· ·. Y. ' __ : = ·= ::i.:..i:: ·: t· ' 'I: I ; i I I i •- -r~, t.j... t . ,, - _,..-_._.----1--'--1-- - --'- ... . - __ .., L----- , - I i ia i I' j I! . i LJ' rr-t .... I 1 il.1 ..-,t '--- + . I -r----~-!-t- -1 - i
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30
FREQUENCY (Hz)
Figure 5-6. Comparison of High-Density Car Ride Quality and Goals
19
TABLE 5-3
TEST RUN LOG-SOAC SIMULATED DEMONSTRATION 197 4
RUN NO. DATE MILES RUN
PART (1)
208 Feb. 27 82
209 Feb. 27 182
210 Feb. 28 118
211 Feb . 28 164
212 March 5 172
213 March 6 82
214 March 8 82
215 March 8 18 2
216 March 11 118 217 March 12 118
218 March 12 219
219 March 13 36
PART (2) SUB-TOTAL 1555
233 March 29 1 55
234 April 1 364
238 April 8 364
239 April 9 400
240 April 10 173
SUB-TOTAL 1456
TOTAL 3011 MILES
20
400
300
j! 200 i
100
0
-
-
-
-
- - -
;~ ,
Jr-
--27 28
Feb
' ,~
,; ,,,
' /r<
', , '
',, ,, '
; ,.
5 6 8 11 12 13 March
'_, ,,
29
,K
_, ', r- r-
' '
1 8 9 10 April
I
i I
I
I !
I
i i
I I
Figure 5 - 7. Daily Mileage Accumulation During Simulated Demonstration 1974
21
;· ,I : I,>
5.5 ENGINEERING TESTS
The Engineering Tests were conducted under Contract DOTTSC-580 to show continuity with the original engineering test data. Results of these tests are reported in "Stateof-the-Art Car (SOAC) Post-Repair Engineering Tests at Department of Transporta~ion High Speed Ground Test Center'; Report No. UMTA-MA-06-0025-75-7. The following paragraphs p resent brief descriptions of the test results:
5.5.1 Acceleration Tests
The test results for the post-repair tests are sufficiently close to those obtained from the original tests to conclude that there was no appreciable change due to the repairs.
5.5.2 Decelerati on Tests
The deceleration rates for all the post-repair tests exceeded those measured during the original tests. Even though they exceeded the SOAC specification rates, it was not considered necessary to make any system changes prior to starting demonstration testing.
5.5.3 Power Consumption and Undercar Equipment Temperature Tests
The test data showed that the current and rms values for the motor armature and fie ld at the 90,000 lb car weight were slightly l ess than for the 105,000 lb car weight. A comparison between the post-repair tests and the original tests shows the former to be approximately 12 % less than the latter.
5.5.4 Ride Quality Tests
See Paragraph 5 .2.5.
5.5.5 Interior Noise Tests
The post- r epair measured sound levels, without the a ir conditioning duct silencer installa tion , fall wi t hin the t otal envelope of data measured on both SOAC cars; therefore , the interior noise baseline data base obtained during the original test p rogram is still valid. Additionally, i t is concluded that the air conditioning air duct silencer installation did have a b e nefi c ial effect in providing more uniform sound l evels throughout the car.
22
5.5.6 Wayside Noise Tests
The comparison of post-repair and original test results for the No. 2 SOAC at 90,000 lb car weight with resilient wheels shows substantial agreement after normalizing to a standard condition.
5.5.7 Structure Tests
A comparison of post-repair test results with those from the original tests shows the following:
• The relationships of load levels and phasing are similar to the original test data. No significant differences were noted.
• One of the truck frame strain gages showed strain levels at 80 mph slightly higher than the original data but well below the design criteria for truck loads.
6.0 CONCLUSIONS
6.1 SUBSYSTEM FUNCTIONAL TESTS
All subsystems met specification requirements as shown by the signed data sheets.
6.2 ACCEPTANCE TESTS
• The Speedometer Calibration, Acceleration, and Automatic Speed Maintaining System test results showed that the SOAC cars met or exceeded the SOAC specification requirements.
• The Deceleration tests showed the measured deceleration rates to be somewhat higher than those from the original tests; however, the increases were not considered significant. Stopping distances were within the SOAC specification requirements.
• The Ride Quality test results showed peak acceleration to be in good agreement with previous test data except for the 15 Hz point which was taken at a speed o f 94 mph instead of the programmed 80 mph speed. SOAC Ride Quality Performance is considered satisfactory.
6.3 SIMULATED DEMONSTRATION TESTING
The SOAC Per formance during the Simulated Demonstration Operations totaling more than 3000 miles of two-car train operation was satisfactory with only four discrepancies of a random nature.
23
6.4 ENGINEERING TESTS
The test data obtained from the Engineering Tests shows satisfactory continuity between the data obtained during the original tests and the post-repair tests.
6 . 5 SOAC POST-REPAIR TEST PROGRAM
In conclusion, the overall results for the post-repair t esting were as follows:
(a) Compliance with the original SOAC acceptance criteria was demonstrated.
(b) Test data continuity between the orig inal and the post-repair tests was established.
(c) The 3000 mile two-car operation goal for the Simulated Demonstration testing was satisfactorily reached.
24
REFERENCES
1. State-of-the-Art Car Test Program
Appendix I (Test Plan and Procedures for Post-Repair Testing) ,Document Dl74-10007-l, Boeing Vertol Company, Philadelphia, Pa., January 24, 1974.
2. Urban Rail Rapid Transit SOAC Engineering Tests at Dept. of
Transportation HSGTC, Document No. Dl74-10026-6 (Volume VI),
Boeing Vertol Company, Philadelphia, Pa., May 1974.
3. Detail Specification for State-of-the-Art Car, Document No. IT-06-0026-73-2, Urban Mass Transportation Administration, May 1973.
4. State-of-the-Art Car: Test Prog·ram, Document No. Dl 74-10007-1 B0eing Vertol Company, Philadelphia, Pa., April 28, 1972.
25
APPENDIX A
ACCEPTANCE TESTS
SUBSYSTEM FUNCTIONAL TEST DATA SHEETS s
8 . Te st data sheet forms are reproduc e d from Reference 4 , Stat e of the Art Car Test Program , Document No . D174- 10007-1, Boei ng Ver tol Company, Philade l phia , Pa ,, Apri l 19 72 .
A- 1
GATHERING RANGE AND COUPLEjuNCOOPLE
Test Results
Test Date : ___ ...::;_2_ - .;.../ ...;;/ __ ., ·_ / _ ..
7
_ ~-'-----
Conclusions:
Coupl ers have sufficient gathering range.
Test Data:
Car# ~ ----------
1. Coupl e cars with couplers displ aced to 11A" s i de of Center
#2 End;...__ _ __.;:O.._ .. r;_. _______ _
2. Couple cars wi th couplers displaced to "B" Side of Center
#2 End ___ ~~-1_e_=-· __________ _
3. Couple cars with #2 car rotated 5°.
Tested By:
Approved By
'>,) : fv,} (_' t_· l ') r, '--/ -- (~#1//
(Eng,, .)_~~
Approved By (Q. A.) ---------------
A-2
f\K.
Date :_....;;3;....· _- / 7 - / 1/
Date : - ------- -
r ~
c. ELECTRIC COUPLERS
Test Results ~ /2 ·.,, ~s· 7/ · Test Date :. ___ k--_,,1-_ ..... "-';.....;_._,,1,.._..;._ ____ _
Car # __ '2---__ -__ _
Conclusion:
1. #1 End Hook Operates Yfs 7
2. #2 End Hook and Contact Pins Operate 7 Us
Test Data:
1. Time between operation of uncouple button and operation of
the hook fer,; / Z., . Seconds. ·
~ ~ ;(. ~/ Tested By: i:_~/'1 r ~
Approved :y(Engr.) ~ Approved By(Q.A. ) __________ __ _
A-3
Date 2/4:-.;.,-·/;,,r
Dat e 2-/2_ -5-:'~{//
Date. ______ _
CAMBER (Contd.) Test Results
Test Date : __ /_v_-_/ J_-_)_3 _____ _
Test Conclusion:
Car# ;;L--
1. Car has positive camber Y£..5 --+,-----=:c..----------
A+B Side A B C 2
(3 }]'f}O J-1 'f/O )-1 t..S~ - ;-3, 'f IS'
Tested By: /)t/£.ft!f T/!r,1,J,r,r//v
·-7 /: Approved By(Engr.)_-.,.1::'--_..,,~~--=--·-----· ....;.;.__
Approved By (Q .A.) __________ _
A- 4
J.
C - (A+B) 2 Camber
. )- y-o ,),l/iJ
Date : __ ; _o_-_/_/_-_7_.J_· _
Date: ;J--Jo - 7_]
Date: _______ _
i
i I
I·
l I ! '
. '
,.
>
g. AIR CO?llFORT
--Test Results
v/4)-/zi ;--;
Test Date: Car f k
Conclusion:
1. II A II End unit responds to thermostat w 7 ·
"B" End unit responds to thermostat J/,£5· . J
Test Data: Result
Condition (O-Open, C-Closed)
1. Fresh Air Overhead Thermo. Duct Therm.
35° 70° 72° 74° 75° 76°
C 0 0 0 0 0 Full Overhead and Floor Heat ON.
·--· C 0 0 0 0 C 9 KW Overhead Heat ON Floor Heat ON.
C 0 0 0 0 C Floor Heat ON. 9 K\'i overhead Heat ON.
* C C C 0 * All Heat OFF
* C C 0 0 * 9 KW Overhead Heat ON Modulated Cooling
* C C C 0 * Modulated Cooling, No Hear
* C C 0 0 * Full Cooling,
2. Layover Therm c~:· Floor Heat ON.
Tested by: 7/A✓.d-- Date 2&-d✓
Approved by (Engr.) _;;)c~,tt ' . . v'jf V
Date 2--/2:~0~
---- Approved by (Q.A.) Date
A-5
i. END DOOR
,3 · I/· .. · /•'!._ 'l'cst Date :~ ________ :.-.--_...--1.L-- Cur # __ ..;;;;C=----
Conclusion:
1. End Door Lock Electrically y..:.=-c · : .... _.. .:.. :·,': . . •. , __ , ; . --~~•, 7 1\ \ 4,
✓:
2. End Door Locl< . Mcchan:l_calJ..y v:> ~ ~,. , . ._. • - •. • • · . • I
j ) 7 3. End Door Unlock Electrically or Mcch,:mically y ,:: .::
/
q_ Enci Door Unlock Electricully from Outside /
s. End Door Latches without assistance
Test Data:
L Opening force __ -_c.-"~-'/ ___ Lbs.
) 2 • . Closing Force -· , i' .
_ _.1 __ • ..._'? ___ Lb?,•
j
Test:cd By l__)._j \~., ,J -¼ . , . 1-/-k /-Approved By (ing{'4// /\ / · · /
Date:
Approved ny · (Q·.'I\.) ____________ _ Date: --- --- .J,
) A:-6
j. SIDE DOOR
Test Results
<J ~)~<✓~-/ Test Date: ___ .>/ __ 2 _7_7~_· _____ _ C # v -ar ------
Conclusions:
l. "A" Side Doors respond to "A" Side Conductnr.' s Panel. u-s 7
2. "B" Side Doors respond to "D" Side Conductor's Panel. YE_s: 3. Side Doors respond to trainline signals. Yi3; >
4. Trninlines respond to "A'' and "D" Side Conductor's Pan.el. f l~5 , ,)
Test Data :
l. Door Open T~ne. _ __./_>,_k _______ Seconds.
2. Door Close 'rime • _ _..2~,.,,,.:..· _0;:;;._ _______ S.econds.
Approved by
/
Tested By :_-_~ , .... v_~ .. :~J .... ~ .... ? .... t:: ...... ,/...,;7--""'--. _· ___ _ (Engr . ) .~--4:::
Date ________ _
Approved by (Q.A.) _____________ _ Date. ______ _
A-7
. . .. , . . .
v·
,
. . ._ . -----·-· . - . • ...;;..,-..$ Test Result SOAC Windshield
' :., •.
Test Date : __ .,...j_. __ ,...;(,_-_.,_/_.:1 · . · ~- -·. ·"' ·· Car#_· ___ ~_: _. ___ _
Conclusions: Windshield can be opened as an emer gency exit._ !(£5 / _,,j~r.....-",..::::...--
Test Data: Bottom
l. LaLch unlock force --=--=----..;;,,:;.__,;... __ 2f, ;· > I lbs . 'x:'
2. Windshield open force ,,. ,, ,, . c . /, / ) lbs .
.. 3. Open Angle l o~ o 0
Tested By: '(,'-·) . C\r "\\ ~~ ( c.i_tl t-1 ) Date: .· J . / :,,, . / 7 n ~, -- - .. Approved by (Eng.) { ' tf-;7?\/'. - ;.,/ Date : ;,, _,
/ .A/ I . ~-· ,,,-· '-- .. '
Approved by (Q .A.) Dat e :
A-8
a.
C
0 -- .
0 -~ -
HEAD AND TAIL LIGHTS
Test Results
Test Date: --------Conclusions:
1. HeacUights functj_on
2. Headlights aimed
3. Back-up lights aimed
4. Back-up lights function
5. Taillights #1 End Function
6. Taillights #2 End Function
Approved ]3y
y.--:-. s
; I
I
Approved By (Q.A.) _________ _
A-9
Car· # __________ _
Date: ______ _
Date:
Date: ______ _
b.
' CAB LIGHTS
Test Results
Test Date: ___ L_:~_---~/~· -~--,--✓~/--'~~--- Car# ___ ~_-____ _
Conclusions:
l. Cab light function independently from car lights. y£ ..5 7 .
2. Cab light level is satisfactory. ___ ~Y __ f;;......~2~---------'-,/
Tested By: ~•
/ / _.//, Approved by (Engr.) ;C"-~ /c', ~
;,-
Approved by (Q.A.) _________ _
A-10
Date : __ 1-__ · ~"-1/..;..7-/1.....:--:..1_,~/ __
..-_2 / / Date:. __ ~v::_· "'-,;;:.L~·. /~ ;;..--~~·~ ~1(';__
7 7 .7
Date : ________ _
c. CONSOLE LIGHTS
_C, Test Results
Test Date:
Conclusions:
. Car ff -------
1. All lumps function. v:.z· _5 -7---:1''--------
.C
( · V
. ~ .
41~ Tested Dy: __ ~ / +-.._'_-...;.,-_ , _____ _
Approved by . ~ - ~//·
(Engr.) N~ /~-/ r - ,
Approved by (Q./\.) ________ _
A-11
\ ~~ - . -. Date: ~ ;,,,;-- -j/
·-;7
i
Date: i -------
J
)
d. EMERGENCY LIGHTS
Test Result
Test Date: ___ ~_✓_-_·/_,_,_1 __ /_~;::/ ____ _ ✓'_/ Car # ___ c ____ _
Conclusions :
l. Fmergency Lights operate satisfactorily __ ~½L....c.../-~~- .-5 ___ _ l
Test Data:
l. Time from 600 V removal to emergency light operation ~:3
2. Fmergency Light battery druin __ ~_'?_,_L-_·~E=---:1\mps.
) ~ •(
Tested By: r I .,. / /,'"• ► ·=:? . J / , • ~
• ~ I - • .
Approved By (En310,(-' · • • L./2 Date:
Date:
Approved By (Q . A.) _________ _ Date: _______ _
' 'r ·,·-__ ,, :.<· .::
_/ /
• I
; ,f2f,/
A-12
Seconds.
e. MAIN LIGHTING
Test Resul t s
Test Date : __ ~_. --'·1-'--~_.,__/2...,,___/ ___ _
Conclusions :
1.
2.
Overhead Lights operate s atisfactorily //<; -7-,,......,.~"-----Inverter Output Voltage j , J... ,. '1 VAC
_ _;;_..,::V'-----
. I 1/'·'U ,0 Hz
3. Inverter Input Voltage JC VDC
Date: d~/2' y'
Date :.:i/2 z-/7/
Approved By (Q.A.) --------- Date : -----
A-13
~ a . HIGH POTENTIAL (Contd.) ·
Tc~t Ht!su.1.tf>
/ Test Date: ___ , _~+4........,..,.__;_, _~ ______ _
I / Conclusions:
Car# _ _,._-~_/ ____ _
1. No. Breakdown in 32 VDC circuits ------------2. No. Dreakdown in 600 VDC circuits ( -----------3. No. Breakdown in 230 VAC circuits ( ' -------------
Test Datn:
l. Minimum insulation resistunce /
_/
2. Hipot Voltage 3 2 VDC circuits
3. Hipot Voltage 600 voe circuits ' ,; / \ J,
IJ • Hipot Voltage 230 VAC circuits /, ,fl(v
Date:
Approved By (Q.A.) ___ ______ _ Date: _______ _
A-14
•
MAI N POWER APPLICATION
Test Results ·
Tes t Date: ?/2_<7{_5~ ------'-------- ---- Car# --------Conclusions:
Motor Alternator Voltage is satisfactory:
Test Data:
1. Input Voltage
2. No Load Condition
a. Input Current
b. Phase A Voltage
c. Phase B Voltage
d. Phase C Voltage
e. Output Frequency
f. Rectifier Output Voltage
3. Loaded Condition
a. Input Current
b. Phase A Voltage
c. Phase B Vo l tage
d • . Phase C Voltage
e. Output Frequency
f . Voltage
Approved By (Q.A.): -------- - ---
A-15
11
). ,. /J
- 'J,,-·-J
{ 0 t 31
- - ------
--------2-- 2--0 - -------
VDC
AMPS DC
VAC
VAC
VAC
Hz
VDC
AMPS DC
VAC
VAC
VAC
t :J r Hz ---=--------3 .{ 5/ VDC --------
Date: z/4,~ q: Date: ;_,;{r;/2c/ Date:
c.
( ~ --.J '-"""
TRAINLINES
Test Rc~ults
Test Date ___ . :.....1 --?~/2 ___ 7_✓ y ___ _
Conclusions:
Car# ------z
1. There is contimrity between fcl end junction box c1nd #2 end
junction box.
2. There is continuity below #2 end junction box and #2 end couIJler .
Test Data :
Door Open "A"
Door Closed "A"
Door Oper. 1'D"
Door Closed 1'B"
Traction Interlock.
EMVl
EMV2
Propulsion Trip Indicator
Snow Brake ON
Snow Brake Indicator
Friction Bruke Indicator
Handbrake Injicator
Brake n+
Slip/Slide Indicator
CSR Co11trol
Crmd Mode
Reset
A- 16
/.. c
\ ,/
Continuity Checked ~
L- --:,,•· .
~ -
. -·· L ..
l -·
I •.
(._ :- -
(. ----i_ - ,,---·
( __ _
·/ ---' / ... -
I (_ • . . . .
/ ---
. I .
C
c. TRAINLINES (Contd. )
'.fest Results:
Forward
Reverse
11 P11 Signal
11 p11 Signal Return
SP2
SPl
Motorman Signal Light
Zone Light
. ( ~ -' ) -
Tested By: ~ ',y · ( . , ~
I
I
. // ~ / /., ··/ . I ,, V I
Approved Dy: (Cngr; __ /:~----'~r~·.,4--¼~~~-3_~--;_>_'r-~--~- ~-¾~-/~J__..,__-_ 71 v
Approved By: (Q .A) ____________ _
A-17
Date <" 4~1/ 7 I
Date )/,f /; V ' I I
Date ________ _
f"°'\ ._, a. WINDSHIELD WIPER ''--
Test Results
µ·1 z-/2/--L,/ Test Date: ___________ _ Car # __ z_--_.-__ _
Conclus ions:
1.
2.
Windshield Wiper Functions __ ~l'-1/"""'/;,,../--"/_· _. _____ _
Windshield Washer Functions ;j,@" - 7..,,,.~,..,.._ __________ _
Test Data:
1. Wiping Frequency W.P.S. _____ .%.---=-----·Max.
2. Air Pressure P.S.I. ___ J:_'- _(/_,,, ____ _
Tested By:_,_~ ...... ½~½""""U"""". --+.·_=--{L=1/~_· ___ _ Date: )-- ~2-h y:·
Approved By (Q .A) Date: _____ _
A-18
HORN
Test Results
Test Date: ___ ._J_✓~/~2~- !_,/;~;~L_-1_· _____ _ / /
Car# ___ ~---------
Conclusions:
1. Horn functions properly __ _,,._1 ""-.f ..... ~"""J_. _____________ _
Test Data:
1. Horn Pressure PSI ~ ,1"" v M ---' ~·~'------ ax.
) Date : __ 1--._h_z_,t __ { __ ~ _t:/ __
·- C ' i Date =--~~7-__..~=/?_7_✓ __ _
Approved By(Q.A.) ___________ _ Date: ________ _
C A-19
c. PUBLIC ADDRESS
~ ~., 'fest Rerrnlts
Test Datc: ___ ~~-~~~-/---k/_,;:~_-~ __ _..;/_-_,_/~-·---~ Car# ___ ~_---____ _
Conclusion:
1. V - .-All speakers balanced. ____ ..,~~----- -_.:,, ____ _ /
2.
3.
Chime circuit functions ____ )..,·-/_.,c_-;......·".:>_. ____ _
Motormans handset functions __ """[/2 __ f:;;:;,;- __ )_. ___ _ /
I
Tested by; . ··.:.J /~- Ji-/7.r1;J= 1/
~ --~-/ ,
Approved by (Engr.) _________ ,;_... _____ _ , , I
/
,{</ Date: -.2 / ':.! i
/ )
/ / Date : ,,,/,.. ..
/
:, ' .
Approved by (Q.A.) Date:
A- 20
d. RADIO
r \.__ Test Results
Test Date: ___ ~/ _ __,;/_~;,_1 __ / _/~/ ___ _
Conclusion:
1. Car #1 receives from and transmits
2. Car #2 receives from an<l transmits
/ ✓,·/ Tested by:_~(-·,,,,,.--.~,~~~(_/ _,,.; ~,r_,., .~/ -·· _·~l/_ /__./"--_-___ _
Approved by(Engr.)~f-_1_._✓_,_%_7~,--· ~,-· ~:_~·~~~~i---~; "7'-
Approved by (Q.A.) _________ _
(;
0 A-21
Car# ---------
to Cnr ~t2 v,,(· ... _,,
to #1 J/2 -- ... Car _ __,,
.•
/ ,/. / D?.t Cl =---."'<~' _ .. ,_--_._ /.:;._.;:;./ ___,,..,,./~· -
/ /
'? / ., / '-, • Dute: , _ _ : ., ----~, __...,.,.__ __ _ Date: _________ _
REV LTR A
C f. SIDE SIGN
Side Sign Operation:
l. Place the following circuit breakers on the LVCBP to the position
indicated:
lOA
lOB
On
On
2. Insert console key into sign key switch and observe that the
curtain moves forward an~ reverse in response to key position.
3. Check operation of both side signs using key.
4. Place the following circuit breakers on the LVCDP to the
position indicated :
Test Results
Test Date:
Conclusions:
10A
lOD
3 · · / / / ~
Side sign operation is satisfactory:
Test2d by:
Approved by
. /&,- /// \ .. / /
{Engr ~ -: X /, -. ,. ?--;...,., (~~
A-22
Approved by (QA):
Off
Off
• ,I
car Number: c .·
-, ., ~ .. -• --·· Date: . .
Date: , /
.; ,// ; _/,;-' ._v
Date:
I •
•
Ml\IN PROP lT l.SION CON Tf{OL ~~ MOTOR HOT/\TION_
TEST RESULTS
/ / .
TEST DATE: ___ .;,..,1_._··__,,/_.__., ..... 4_,,c .... _ /_z_·-__ c-_y_-___ _ CAR ~~ ___ 2 __ ~ __ _
CONCLUSION:
1. Propulsion System Operation Correct V/ 5 7
2. Motor Rotation Correct ~£ 5 . . 7
TEST DATA:
L Direction of Car Movement when Master Controller Key '
is in Forward· Po sition and Control Hand le i s in Pov1er
Position h:-.e-' <- , -· 4,-' if _______ _:;;....;..;;;... __ ____;_ ____________ _
2, Directio'n of Car Movement when Master Controlle r Ke y
is in Reverse Pos ition and Control Hundle i s in Power
Position IC_) - '" /4.: /?_ s .,,,,,_~ ·------=-=:---=:l,.__;~__;;..._..;._ ____________ _
TESTED BY: G , ?:::; A,, ,h'.s · .
. Al'l'.RO~ED PY (ENCtf-~~
APPROVCD DY {Q.A.): _____ _.__ _____ _ • A-23
. ,·.
DATE:_'.'.2...._._½__;_1/-+-~_.;..7_J... t(_
DAT!:: ~ Df\Tf.: _____ .....__ __
a. MAIN BRAKE/EMERGENCY/BRAKE
Test Results
Test Date:
Conclusion:
Car# -._, ('
1. There are no leaks (piping) in pneumatic system 7
y ·- -~--;;:- _·~
2. Main reservoir pressure adequate
Test Data:
1. Time for compressor to build main reservoir pressure
(0 to modulate} ?::/1'°'/6( ~ t:' .5- ( . Seconds
2. Compressor Modulation __ _._/ ~..__,.~---~_;_-__ ,_~--psi Cut-in
psi Cutout
3. Leak Test - Air .. , psi/Min.
4. Brake cylinder pressure: #1 End Full Service c. z psi
-/ I. ' • . . ·-"_;
I . I: ~- f l .-{\ I
S. Trip Cock Functions:
11 End Release Time 2--
il End Apply Time /7
Seconds
Seconds
i2 End Full Service 1::;; / -,. psi
i2 End Release Time ,?, I Seconds
#2 End Apply Time / . £ Seconds
il End Load sensor full loa d brake cylinder pre ssure ~: 1/
12 End load sensor full load brake cylinder pressure 1·.c.
, /
Car goes into Emergency _:_yes
psi
psi
no
Trip cock automatically rese ts ~ yes
no
A- 24
•
•
a. MAIN BRAKE (Contd.)
Test Results (Contd.)
6. Emergency valve function: Car goes into Emergency ✓yes
7. Deadman functions:
8:. Emergency brake cylinder
fl
i2
~
r oes into Full Service brae when handle released
'. · yes __ no.
pressure.
End 1 j / ------~------ psi
End 15 .....,;;;_ _____ psi
Time to recharge j/t_ ) ---'~--
Seconds
no.
Tested By: ·::;- / '1--:. . £ -~ /,.,:, / . 7 ' Date: .:? -·/ _ .. · -? ' ,,/
Approved By (Engr.) ~ -/ · ~--~ .~ Date:
Approved By (Q.A.) Date:
A-25 ,
b. HANDBRAKE
Test Results
Test Date: ___ ~.;;_- __ /_✓ ____ / _ · .: / _- __ _ Car# ·--------,,....
Conclus ion:
1. Handbrake functions properly ____ ""/ __ .,,_·- _~_,,,_-_________ _
7 Test Data:
1. Number of pumps for full service application / :::_, ------'------/ 2. Number of pumps for full releuse ________ __._ ______ _
-C\/(1_ ~,------/_ / ~ --Tested By: __ -+',----~-_;__---1'-------L:;__ ___ _
,,_ ·//:0._y Approved L'y(Engr.) _ __._,. __,.,_;.,~~=--.,_ _____ _
Approved By(Q.A.) ____________ _
A-2 6
Date : __ ,.L../4_,,,_<_,..1/,__,,_%_' ...,,/.,._/_
.l , 7 / Date:_,_; _/_/_·_~/~ ;--_~_-·_'· __
Date: _______ _
•
d. SNOW BRAKING
C Test Results
Test Date: ____ .,;: __ ·· /4~.z:....,··"'"/ ..... ?_.../ ___ _ Car # __ -=2~---
Conclusions:
l. Snow brake oper,.,_ted independently from "P" signal ___ '-.Y_-t·_:·7_ ·~--
Test Data:
l. Cylinder Pressure: 7./
A End ----~v~ ____ PSI. ✓ B End ____ u=- _____ PSI.
Tested By : _ _.,.;_/_-z_· /_, - ~- ~_-, ___ £_L_~ ____ _ Date: ___ 3_· ·-✓-✓-~ ---- ,,,.-._.s.·z::_
C Approved By(f.ngr~~ / Date: __ ~ ... ·¼_· ;>~~,..._·4~-- ~¢_·_
Approved By(Q.A~) ________ _ Date: _______ _
A-27
9. PROPULSION AUXILIARIES
'rest Results
I ) /- 1· ,,,1 Test Date: ____ ,_.-__ -_____ ~ ____ _ Car# ---------Conclusion:
1 .
2.
'fl1ere is s ufficient cooling air to the motor alternator~
'Ihc1•e is sufficient cooling air to the traction motors J/J. · ::., 7
Test Data:
1. Motor /1.lternator starts properly , , __ ----------------,
2. i / / Motor Alternator load sheds properJ.y ----.------------3. Motor Alternator cooling air pressure ,e0- ·/ ,....,-f".,( ,,-S4.,c... - · /rsi ,~
,
4. Traction Motor cooling air pressure
I , ..
#1 ? - ,,,/ ps1.· _,...... _____ __._
#2
#3
#4
~ . :J · ?- • ,, / psi
('- ,.3 · I-·.· "/ psi
C- , 3 - k , ,r. psi.
Tested By=--~-~-· __ ·----~ __ \_, _· - -- -~------ Oat e : __ "' ..._°; ____ 0;,...,./4'--"._·.,..~---,
Approved By (Engr .) / ·-£~ ~ / 7r-1 ~; Approved By(Q.A.) __________ _ Date: ________ _
A- 28
•
10. CAR WEIGHT
(.,, Test Results
Test Date: ___________ _ Car# _______ _
Test Data:
Weight #1 End ____________ lbs.
Weight #2 End. ____________ lbs.
Total Weight ____________ .lbs .
•
•
A-29
12. AIR COMPRESSOR
'l'<.:Rt l!csults
Test Date : ____ J_·-.... /2 .... /_t.,._/;.__/_--_7 _____ _ Car# ---------Conclusion:
1. Air con,pressor has sufficient capacity ____ .,.V.._~_-;_.-_. ·_"_.' ___ _ 7
Test Data:
1. Tim~ for compressor to recharge syst em after four (4) successful
brake c:pplications ~ ~-,.,, ,.,., ...:i ,..,I .. ·,: ,: Seconds.
2. Main Reservoir air pressure after one (1) brake cylinder h ose
has been disconnected and brakes applied once /,,.-· ·> , "i / -~ ._. - • psi.
Tested By : ___ c_. _1_/ _ , _ ,,,_.,,,,_::-:._· _/_ . _,!,_:. _____ _ Oat e: d ~ ,.;,- /2 ;( ____ ..,., ____ _ ,
Approved ~ By (Engr ;('~ ~/-7ry . . , Date:
Approved By(Q.A.) ____________ _ Date: _______ _
A-30
•
•
.,
HOSTLING PANEL
Test Results
Test Date: _______ _________ _ Car :tt _______ _
Item 4. "Forward" Position: Yes 4-a) Car moved forward when "Go" button was pressed.
-b) Car braked when "Go" button was released.
-c) Car continued to move forward without braking .
-d) Car braked when "Coast" button was released.
Item 5. "Reverse" Position:
5-a) Car moved backward when "Go" button was pressed.
-b) Car braked when "Go" button was released.
-c) Car continued to move ba ckward without braking.
-d) Car braked when "Coast" button was released.
Item 6. Car uncoupled and coupled satisfactorily using hostler. ..
Tested By: _______________ _ Date : --------
Approved By (Engr.) -------------- Date: -------------Approved By (Q. A.) ------------ Date: --------
A-31
~· - :,-
\ _
NO
14. VI°SUAL
Test Res ults
Test Date =---"~_-_/_-2_-_7____,:;7' __ Car# ---------Conclus ion:
L Car is complete ancl satisfactory for shiprnent.
vcs 7
Tested Dy : ~ Approved By (Engr~~
Date: -------
Date:
Approv0.tl Dy(Q.A.) __________ _ Date: • --------
) A-3 2