ERA EMC Study. Phil Bebbington Head of T & RS Systems. Legislation. 28 Member Countries In the European Rail Area “Competence” for transport policy is shared between European Union and member states – shifting toward EU
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
Head of T & RS Systems
28 Member Countries
In the European Rail
“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.
The ultimate goal of one common commercially acceptable vision
of a trans European RailwayCompatibility 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
But it does allow for a transition
The essential requirements mandate ‘compatibility’ between all parts of the railway.
Electromagnetic compatibility is implied for both safety and operational aspects
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’
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
Physical Agents Directive 2004/40/EC-Electromagnetic 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
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.Remit
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 CE+CE=CE????
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.
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
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
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.Initial Approach
Less prone to get bogged down in the detail
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
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
Used commonly available software
Mixed answer formats
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
Result: Information from questionairres and follow-up clarification requests was not enough…