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