ERA EMC Study
Phil Bebbington
Head of T & RS Systems
LLOYD’S REGISTER RAIL
Legislation
28 Member Countries
In the European Rail
Area
“Competence” for
transport policy is
shared between
European Union and
member states –
shifting toward EU
Concern in EU about
fall in rail market share
prompting drive for
commonality.
LLOYD’S REGISTER RAIL
Compatibility in Railways:
Since July 2010 all vehicle authorisations are required to conform to the Interoperability
Directive.”
It does not tell you how to get from a system
•which exists
•has many millions of man years cumulative experience and tradition
•has components that are expected to last at least another 30 years
To
The ultimate goal of one common commercially acceptable vision
of a trans European Railway
But it does allow for a transition
LLOYD’S REGISTER RAIL
EMC Standards
The essential requirements mandate ‘compatibility’ between
all parts of the railway.
Electromagnetic compatibility is implied for both safety and
operational aspects
However
Only two applicable European Norm EMC Standards exist
Standard EN 50121:2006
has five parts and although mentioning that they should be considered it
largely ignores low frequency effects
Standard EN50238:2004 currently has only 1 part
the other two parts will be issued as technical addenda rather than full standards
Neither cover the whole spectrum and both are still open to
‘interpretation’ with no clear definitions of ‘compatibility’
LLOYD’S REGISTER RAIL
Compatibility in Railways: The project
This project aimed to determine the starting point for Electromagnetic
Compatibility in railways
•Who determines EMC
•What current standards are being applied
•How they are implemented
•What other considerations affect the acceptance
LLOYD’S REGISTER RAIL
European Directive
Electrical/electronic equipment must be constructed to ensure:
‘the EM disturbance it generates does not exceed a level allowing radio and
telecommunications equipment and other apparatus to operate as intended’,
‘it has a level of intrinsic immunity which is adequate to enable it to operate
as intended’
‘Has been designed and constructed with regard to the state of the art’
When it is –
Properly installed and maintained, and
Used for the purpose for which it was intended
LLOYD’S REGISTER RAIL
Physical Agents Directive
Physical Agents Directive 2004/40/ECElectromagnetic Fields &
Human Health
This should have been implemented in UK
Law by April 2008.Not yet in force due to
considerations of NMR workers. Currently
due in 2012
Intent adds another consideration to EMC
as railways have sources of both high
voltage and current in close proximity to
humans
LLOYD’S REGISTER RAIL
Remit
• Study to collect and document rules, processes and procedures to verify the
Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC) of railway vehicles in Member States of the
European Rail Area
• Identify the (different) levels of compliance required for various equipment types e.g.
signalling, rolling stock, trackside interfaces etc.
• Identify test procedures and limits.
• Clarify and document the process for the demonstration of compliance in each of the
countries.
• Identify the appropriate authorities concerned with EMC compliance and their roles
and responsibilities.
• Estimate the timescales and budget costs involved in EMC compliance. This included
both documentation requirements and testing/trial costs.
LLOYD’S REGISTER RAIL
Understand the drivers : Technical Perception
Commercial Imperative to get widest acceptance (Cross acceptance) because
market for train equipment is small.
Must be driven by available technology: it can’t drive the technology
COTS equipment in an EXISTING railway environment.
Standards equivalence……….the devil is in the detail
System Issues
LLOYD’S REGISTER RAIL
CE+CE=CE????
Understand the drivers : Information Quality
Different Organisations need different degrees of detail.
Commercial confidentiality for proprietary Information
Burden of Proof can be open ended where no standards
exist
Peer Review, Mutual Recognition and Verification for
non-testable situations
Definitions open to interpretation
e.g. Part B safety certificate
The safety certificate shall comprise:…………and certification confirming acceptance of the
provisions adopted by the railway undertaking to meet specific requirements necessary for the
safe operation of the relevant network. The requirements may include application of TSIs and
national safety rules…………….The certification shall be based on documentation submitted by
the railway undertaking ……………
The following documents must be submitted to enable the safety authority to deliver the
network-specific part of the safety certificate………………………….
— documentation from the railway undertaking on the different types of rolling stock used for
the operation, including evidence that they meet requirements of TSIs or national rules and
have been duly certified.
LLOYD’S REGISTER RAIL
Understand the drivers : Safety
It is almost impossible to divorce technical compatibility from safety
National attitudes and to safety vary widely.
Penalties in law make everyone err on the side of caution
How safe is safe?
Lowest Common Denominator
Highest Possible Principle
LLOYD’S REGISTER RAIL
Initial Approach
Top Down
Less prone to get bogged down in the detail
Assume that the highest level methods used by the individual
countries are in accord with the directives
Each party was initially contacted via a tree-branch questionnaire
that tried to avoid yes/no answers
Assumption:
Each of the parties involved had roles and responsibilities defined
by the procedures and had or would create processes to fulfil the
responsibilities in terms of compliance demonstration to the rules.
LLOYD’S REGISTER RAIL
Initial Approach
Define
Role
The activity of an organisation or individual with a
responsibility towards compliance demonstration
Procedure
The formal interaction required between Infrastructure
Managers, Railway Undertakings and Safety Authorities.
It may include mandatory and non-mandatory parts.
Process
The methods used within each separate organisation that
are used in compliance demonstration.
It may include mandatory and non-mandatory methods.
Rule
The criterion whereby a compliance demonstration is
assessed. Again this may include mandatory and
non-mandatory components.
LLOYD’S REGISTER RAIL
Initial Approach
The ends of each question branch were always aimed at being a
rule which may be applied.
It was envisaged that rules may well be different for safety and for
operational conformity.
e.g. a non-moving train may be safe but does not serve any
purpose
LLOYD’S REGISTER RAIL
The Desired Result
EMC Com plianc e
Role
Role
Role
EMC Com plianc e
Role : RU
Deliver Physical Proof
Proc edure
Role
Proc edure
Role
Role
Procedure : Submit analysis document
Proc ess : Te st
Procedure
Procedure
Proc ess
Proc ess
Process
Plan Test
Plan Test
Perform Test
Evidence from Test
Evidence from Test
LLOYD’S REGISTER RAIL
Process
Result
Threshold Limit
Result
Analyse te st
Analyse test
Implementation
Multilingual
Used commonly available software
Mixed answer formats
Branching structure
Simple questions: Machine translation augmented by local office native speakers
MS Office ,Email or Web based
Not a simple, fixed, structure: needs question trees that react to answer types
Only those branches which are actively needed are created.
Developed in MS Excel
LLOYD’S REGISTER RAIL
Questionnaire Flow
LLOYD’S REGISTER RAIL
Concept
LLOYD’S REGISTER RAIL
Concept
LLOYD’S REGISTER RAIL
Concept
LLOYD’S REGISTER RAIL
Concept
LLOYD’S REGISTER RAIL
Concept
LLOYD’S REGISTER RAIL
Concept
LLOYD’S REGISTER RAIL
Modified Approach
Top Down approach had limitations:
•NSA recently set up in 2009.
•NSA divorced from actual compatibility assessment process.
•NSA often didn’t have relevant EMC experts “on tap”.
Result: Information from questionairres and follow-up clarification requests was
not enough…
Thus, combined approach: Top Down AND Bottom Up
•Convocation of NSA and EMC experts held.
•Interviews with NSA and EMC experts held to gain both sides of “story”.
Result:
•Marriage of information from many sources at once.
•Much more complete set of information obtained.
•Resolution of “gaps” between sides was sometimes necessary.
LLOYD’S REGISTER RAIL
Approach
Top Down approach had limitations:
•NSA recently set up in 2009.
•NSA divorced from actual compatibility assessment
process.
didn’t haveand
relevant
EMC
experts “on
tap”.
Result: Information•NSA
fromoften
questionairres
follow-up
clarification
requests
was not enough…
Thus, combined approach: Top Down AND Bottom Up
•Convocation of NSA and EMC experts held.
•Structured Interviews with NSA and EMC experts held around
graphical interface representations to gain both sides of “story”.
Result:
•Marriage of information from many sources at once.
•Much more complete set of information obtained.
•Resolution of “gaps” between sides was sometimes necessary.
LLOYD’S REGISTER RAIL
For more information, please contact:
Lloyd’s Register Rail
Preston Technology Centre
Marsh Lane
Preston
PR1 8UQ
T +44 (0)1772 272719
F +44 (0)1772 888673
E phil.bebbington@lr.org
ERA Presentation
LLOYD’S REGISTER Rail
The Lloyd’s Register Group
works to enhance safety and
approve assets and systems at
sea, on land and in the air –
because life matters.