aw april 016 patent pending edition 2
TRANSCRIPT
FenTech
1
FenTech
Rail Transportation Safety : Collision&Derailment Avoidance : Forerunners
Life savers
FenTech
Life-Savers
FeniceTechnologies
via quarto Peperino n°3 00188 Roma Italy tel ++39-06 336 11 880 Fax ++39-06 –336 11 880
mobile +393483252302
Email : [email protected]
Edition April 2016
SF 97 versus
RS 015 ANGEL WINGS
FenTech
2
FenTech ; RAILWAY SAFETY ANGEL WINGS Derivative of patented SF97 system
FeniceTechnologies
via quarto Peperino n°3 00188 Roma Italy mobile +393483252302
Email : [email protected]
www.tortorellasrl.com
http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=16930524&trk=tab_pro
twitter : @capannafc
index page symbol
foreword 3
Section 1 Forerunners ( SF97&AW) 3-8 Forerunner role
Section 2 Angel Wings-RS015(AW) 9 Patent pending
Angel Wings Breakdown of AW specs
9 Patent pending
Angel Wings Industrialization preliminary list 10 Patent pending
A)AW customization & implementation
10 Patent pending
B)Train- AW integration system
12 Patent pending
C) Rail-Track /AW Integration system
12 Patent pending
AW Device on Rail 13 Patent pending
Other key Points
D) AW traction and solutions
Alternative II
16
17
19
Patent pending
Patent pending
Patent pending
VII attachm.nts General Illustrations-Tables 20
Patent pending
VIII attach.nt 2 21
Patent pending
IX IX Conclusions and reminders
21
Edition date &signature 22
NOTE : Patent pending pages are Blank in this edition up to patent registration
FenTech
3
FenTech A Tortorella srl Division
FOREWORD
This presentation is shared in 2 halves :
Section 1 = Forerunners role for Railway safety (both SF97 & Angel Wings)
Section 2 = Angel Wings derivative new invention
SECTION 1 = Forerunners ( F)
Role of Forerunner in
Railway Safety : collision&derailment avoidance
SF97 was registered in 1997 almost worldwide but ,despite its concept received positive evaluation by
the Railway Industry, its introduction in to Int.l Rail Network was frozen due to excess of Gross
Weight ( forced adherence to the rail) non usability of power by pantograph and consequent lack of a
motorization that would allow an adequate independent autonomy and speed of SF97 cart .
Patent registrations SF 97 *
1st patent application : RM97A000706 November 1997
Italian Patent n° 01296127 –B61L – 9-6-1999
European Patent Publication: No.1037788 ( ApplicationNo.989559903.4)
.International Patent Publication: No.W09925598 (Application NO.PCT/IT9800320)
Patents: China No ZL 98811136.5 Australia No 753518 Canada No 2308471 Russia No 2209149 Europe No 1037788 Norge No 20002474 Usa No 6417765
The new Invention (identified as Angel Wings RS 015 ) is a derivative of mentioned
patented SF97 System and is aimed to overcome and resolve the limits of Autonomy, Speed
and Gross Weight while confirming the SF97 and therefore Forerunner target to
improve, enrich and complete the existing Railway Safety Systems.
Forerunner concept -in this Section 1 identified as “F” symbol as representative of both
inventions- is able to implement whether :
A) conventional slow freight trains (whether electric or internal combustion engine
traction) Speed up to 100 Kmh
B) fast trains over dedicated tracks ( Speed up to 350 Kmh )
Technical solutions for both categories A) and B) are based on same principle but with
differences in respective applications
FenTech
4
F scope is to avoid human losses of train passengers or catastrophic damages by
dangerous loads on freight trains due to collisions or derailments.
F represents a worldwide level breakthrough in Safety Railway Systems able to
compensate existing systems limitations and to integrate their functions, as existing safety
systems presently fit only standard operational conditions related to a predetermined (and
therefore “theoretical”) railway infrastructures and systems operating model. F is not aimed
to eliminate and replace existing fixed Systems .
F, in addition to constitute a supplemental automated safety system, is moreover effective
in real time over every adverse variant against standards, when said variant could
trigger accidents, as derailments or crashes, including Driver human fault.
(e.g. over-limits speeding ,unexpected obstacles, railway line deformation, switches malfunction,
systems black-out, terrorist bombing, geophysical events, etc,etc, undetectable by existing systems).
F is moreover a potential “bodywork” for new emerging technologies as satellite
computerized control systems, electronic cartography, etcetera.
Said characteristics and further processing of F elements, entailed to consider F as potential system
able to increase trains density on the rail track thanks to its operational flexibility in safety
regime.
I - F STRUCTURE ( Concept )
1. F cart is a self-moving device remote-controlled by the train and running ahead of the
train at appropriate flexible distance
2. Train-F cart integration system able to drive the F from the train and to automatically
transfer from the F to the train every information or emergency event-impulse, generated
by potential risk causes (as crash or derailment) picked-up from F sensors or incurred to
the F itself while running along the rail tracks (e.g. crash between the F and an obstacle).
3. F self-elimination system: compulsory ejection of the F from the rail track connection ,
aimed to avoid any accidental event owing to the F cart itself, while running ahead the
train and tied to the track.
4. AW on-board recovery system (by the train)
FenTech
5
II F COMPATIBILITY WITH EXISTING RAILWAY TRAFFIC CONTROL SYSTEMS AND
PROCEDURES
First reaction to the F concept is that (as it seems to make trains longer) it would create, in
case of congested rail-networks, additional problems to the traffic management and a
potential impact on trains frequency on the track.
First counter-reaction is the obvious concept that in principle any kind of “cost” should be
counter-balanced by advantages measurement (as passengers life/immunity, material
damages including environment , insurance premiums etc.).
Insertion of F in specialized and dedicated (as High Speed Rails) or low-frequency, long
distance unattended (or not very attended) rail-networks (e.g. Americas, Russia,
Australia or freight-dedicated tracks) appears to be able to contribute maximum
advantages.
Nevertheless preliminary elaborations of technical data have proven that, on the basis of
standard 90” minimum train headway and standard distance of existing safety and
control systems there is not theoretical impact on said requirements due to F insertion
along the track and in the traffic management. See tables in next page (x)
In fact F runs ahead of the train at the distance needed for train emergency braking.
This emergency distance is always lower than the standard distance between trains as per
International traffic control regulations.
Therefore F runs always in a “shady patch” (between 2 trains) in regard to traffic control
systems and therefore cannot be identified as “independent separate vehicle” running
along the rail tracks but just as ancillary extension of the “nose “of train itself .
F is driven and controlled by its “dedicated” train that follows F and does not need
external controls in standard conditions (except back-up systems and/or advanced
integration in fixed traffic control systems).
As per above concept, F shall be “invisible” (as independent vehicle) to Railway control
systems , as it will be considered as an extended “nose” of the train itself within the 90”
head safe distance between two trains (Minimum Head Way).
Special devices are set in to stations or switch areas (e.g. disconnection from rail and
reinstatement of the F in to the train front-head in case of stop).
(x)Following Charts show simulations, computed respectively at 90, 160, 200 and 250
Km/h.
NOTE : Charts are related to both Forerunners SF 97 or Angel Wings
FenTech
6
FenTech
7
FORERUNNERS SF-97/Angel Wings Versus Minimum theoretical distances
existing Control Systems
Mechanical brake Mechanical/Electric brake
Train Speed Km/h 200 250
Equivalence : Km/min 3,33 4,17
: mts/sec 55,5 69,4
Covered distance (mts): 60 sec 3333 4170
: 90 sec 5000 6250
Min train emergency Stop distance mts 1400 3500/4000
Min train emergency Stop equivalence sec. 25” 50/57”
Forerunners own minimum emergency
stop distance (x) mts.
80
180
Forerunners bogie min preceding distance mts 1400 3500/4000
Standard distance existing control systems mts 4100 5400
Minimum train head way 90” mts
5000
6250
(x) equipped with electromagnetic rail-brakes (deceleration 2 g)
Following chart shows the minimum distance needed by present std control systems compared to Forerunners
at 200 km/h
metres:
0 2000 4000 6000
min distance
SF-97
std control sys
90'head
FenTech
8
III - PECULIAR DIFFERENCES between Forerunners (SF97/Angel Wings) and existing
railway safety systems are :
to work in risk factors non detectable by existing systems as :
obstacle on the track (stones, trees, animals, etc.) or at level crossing (cars, trucks)
unforeseen block of infrastructure (failure, landslips, flooding, icing, etc)
primed bomb explosion (terrorism)
over-limits speeding, unduly warned by fixed signals
malfunction of fixed standard safety systems
train-drivers sudden illness or faint
etc. etc.
allow the train to pre-empt braking or deceleration, avoiding or minimizing crash or
derailment risk in any case and at all events
provide in due advance train-pilots with direct data/information, whether visual
(Videocamera) or radio, or through encoded signals
o o o
In fact, in its running at due distance up-front the train (distance shall be automatically
related to the train speed and its emergency stop distance) the F is able to pre-empt at any X
point every information or event that, in its absence, could be obtained, or occurred at the
train passage, in the same point X only.
The advanced transmission of said information to the train represents, first of all, a “safety
information redundancy” in addition to existing systems but, moreover, allows the train
to stop or reduce its running in advance and, as further advantage, to avoid and pre-empt
risk factors that, in absence of F , would have direct impact on the train itself.
In this last case, when an event shall occur to F (as impact or pre-derailment skid) an
automatic system shall activate the train braking system, meanwhile, at the same time F
shall be ejected outside the track through a suitable on-board mechanism.
End of common presentation of both Forerunners : SF97 and AW-RS015
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FenTech
9
SECTION 2 = Angel Wings –RS015- new Invention
I - Angel Wings (AW) CHARACTHERISTICS PRELIMINARY BREAK-DOWN
FenTech
10
II - from “CONCEPT” to industrialization
Preliminary list of customization :
AW INDUSTRIALIZATION will be developed in following different tasks
A) Angel Wings Model customization & implementation
B) Train- AW integration system
C) Rail-Track /AW Integration system
D) AW Model/cart traction &drive and autonomy
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
A) Angel Wings model/cart customization & implementation list of main issues:
FenTech
11
FenTech
12
B)Train- Angel Wings integration system
C) Rail-Track /AW Integration system
there are two alternative options
FenTech
13
.
FenTech
14
C1) Rail-Track /Angel Wings Integration system : air vortex and solutions
C2) Rail-Track /AW Integration system :
FenTech
15
FenTech
16
FenTech
17
D ) Rail-Track /AW Integration system : traction and solutions
.
FenTech
18
FenTech
19
ALTERNATIVE II ) Rail-Track /AW Integration system
FenTech
20
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VII ATTACHMENTS
-----------------------
FenTech
21
IX Conclusions and reminders
A) Conclusions
Thousand and Thousand of people died or were wounded in several Rail accidents
worldwide.
Material damages were also huge.
Despite technology made giants steps in new Safety Systems against Rail Accidents :
There are accidents that could not ( and
never) be avoided by fixed Systems ( we
have several examples at hand)
There are several poor Countries with
congested traffic that need simple and low
cost solutions to avoid accidents before be
ready to re-design their whole ancient
Railway Network
There are Countries investing in Rail
Advanced Systems ( China – PanArabian
,etc) that could consider Angel Wings as
basic part of their projects saving enormous
amount of Money and building a “new Rail
Safety concept”
Angel Wings is a “low-cost” System that
could be adapted to different cases with
customization .
Fast development of “electric cars” business
could help to develop jointly with
Automotive Industries appropriate “ sister”
technologies for AW-RS015 cart
Reminder Just for consideration : Just as example of Angel Wings potential role in saving lives and avoiding to describe the
story of Rail Disasters and Victims avoidable by its insertion , please remind following
accident in UK
FenTech
22
Mortal train collision 28 february 2001 Selby (U.K.) – HSE interim report
Comparison of graphic layout edited by HSE with a graphic layout including
Angel Wings as “ Life Saver” in Collision & Derailment Avoidance ”
Franco Capanna
Fentech via quarto Peperino n°3 00188 Roma Italy tel/fax +39-06 336 11 880 mobile 3483252302 www.tortorellasrl.com [email protected] http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=16930524&trk=tab_pro twitter : @capannafc
Email : [email protected]
Edited April 2016
Selby crash as happened
without the shield of Angel
Wings
Angel Wings role in
collision avoidance
between Freight Train
and Passenger Train
FenTech
23