UGTMS – GRD2 – 2000 – 30090 RATP

D12 Final Technical Report

(Publishable)

Contract N°: GRD2 – 2000 - 30090

Status: Public

Date: 19th July 2004

Reporting period: from 09/03/02 to 08/03/04

Version: 1.1

/ / Project funded by the European commission under the transport R&D Programme of the 5th framework Programme

Document Control Sheet

Project / UGTMS – Urban Guided Transport Management System
Title / D12 Final Technical Report (Publishable)
Nature / R: Report
Available languages / E: English
Dissemination level / P: Public
Version / 1.1
Date / 19th July 2004
Number of pages / 42 pages
Electronic reference / Final report_v1.1 19July04.doc
Editor / Authors / Jean-Paul RichardRATP/PDG/DGRI
Jean-Paul Schneider RATP/EST/ISF
Reviewed by/Date / Jean-Paul Richard and Catherine RoggeRATP/PDG/DGRI
QM Visa / Antoinette MorelRATP/PDG/DGRI
Project Co-ordinator / Jean Paul-RichardRATP/PDG/DGRI
Phone: (33) 01.44.68.30.97
Fax: (33) 01.44.68.35.28
Email:
Synopsis / This report is an assessment of the entire project; it consolidates & summarises the work carried out and the results obtained by all the partners through the project, i.e. from the 09th March 2002 to the 08thMarch 2004.
Keywords / Final report - Summary - Outputs

Table Of Contents

1EXECUTIVE PUBLISHABLE SUMMARY......

1.1Objectives......

1.2Description of the results......

1.3Possible applications......

2OBJECTIVES OF THE PROJECT......

3SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE RESULTS......

3.1Work Package 1: Project management (Leader RATP)......

3.1.1The involved staff......

3.1.2The management......

3.1.3External communication......

3.1.4Executive summary of the deliverable D11......

3.2Work Package 2: UGTMS Definition, ERTMS & other review (Leader RATP)......

3.2.1Objectives

3.2.2Achievements and Deliverables......

3.2.3Executive summaries of the Deliverables......

3.3Work Package 3: UGTMS ATP FRS (Leader BVG)......

3.3.1Objectives......

3.3.2Achievements and Deliverables......

3.3.3Executive summaries of the Deliverables......

3.4Work Package 4: Safety & Conformity assessment for FRS (Leader JRC, sub-leaders: TUD, INRETS, UVAL)

3.4.1Objectives......

3.4.2Achievements and Deliverables......

3.4.3Executive summary of the Deliverables......

3.5Work Package 5: Dissemination of results (Leader JRC)......

3.5.1Objectives......

3.5.2Achievements and Deliverables......

3.5.3Executive summary of the Deliverables......

4LIST OF DELIVERABLES......

5COMPARISON OF INITIALLY PLANNED ACTIVITY AND WORK ACCOMPLISHED......

5.1Contractual adaptation......

5.2Activity and actual works......

6MANAGEMENT AND CO-ORDINATION ASPECTS

6.1General aspects......

6.2Management of the project: the "co-team"......

6.3Contact persons for the follow-up of the project......

7RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS......

7.1Results and further developments......

7.2Conclusion......

8ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS......

9ANNEXES......

10Annex 1 – Final Breakdown of the Resources......

1EXECUTIVE PUBLISHABLE SUMMARY

The UGTMS project started the 09th March 2002. It is a 24 months project, which has now reached its end.

1.1Objectives

Main objectives relate to:

  • Definition of UGTMS, functions list and architecture attempt
  • Writing of UGTMS ATP Functional Requirements Specification (FRS)
  • Safety concepts for UGTMS
  • Proposal of a common safety and conformity assessment process.

1.2Description of the results

These objectives were attained by the following deliverables:

  • D9 defines UGTMS, gives operation and system principles, an architecture attempt and a comprehensive list of functions. Short description of functions is a convenient start for FRS writing of non ATP functions.
  • D8 are UGTMS ATP FRS, taking into account the functions required for any mode of UGTMS operation from controlled driving to fully automated “unattended” operation. Full consistency is of course ensured between D8 and D9.
  • D6 performing a preliminary hazard analysis of UGTMS defines common safety concepts for UGTMS.
  • D10 includes a proposal for a common safety and conformity assessment procedure.

1.3Possible applications

We now have the basis for future works completing the FRS set and establishing System Requirements Specification (SRS). This latter step will allow the design of interchangeable UGTMS modules. Some on site integration tests will confirm that the FRS and SRS steps were performed correctly.

Expected results are:

  • Drastic costs reduction in a win/win operators/industry strategy
  • “Plug and play” modules allowing shorter timeframes for design, implementation and commissioning.
  • Cross accepted products,
  • designed according to common safety concepts and
  • assessed using a common safety and conformity assessment procedure

2OBJECTIVES OF THE PROJECT

UGTMS global objectives are to:

Objective 1: analyse transfer of ERTMS ATP requirements (directive 96/48 on high speed rail)

Objective 2: define the relevant functional and system requirements specification for all types of urban transport management systems in order to improve interoperability and intermodality,

Objective 3: define open system standards, to allow gradual change towards harmonised systems,
to foster the European market and to reduce Life Cycle Costs (LCC).

Objective 4: propose a common approach for safety and conformity assessment in order to improve the consistency of existing regulations taking into account IT systems.

Objective 5: initiate the premises of a “centre d’excellence” for safety by a Network of Universities.

Knowing that during the last thirty years:

- Automatic train supervision (ATS), automatic train protection (ATP), automatic train operation (ATO), driver-less and / or man-less operation (ATC) systems have been implemented individually on urban railways,

- In consequence suppliers have developed proprietary, country based systems.

At the end of the project, referring to the above objectives, it can be assessed that:

Objective 1:Matrices 1 and 2 of ERTMS benchmarking give the differences between ERTMS functions and the functions needed for UGTMS. D7 spells out and justifies:

  • ERTMS functions that can be transferred without change to UGTMS
  • ERTMS functions that have to be modified before being applied to UGTMS
  • new functions to create for UGTMS

Objective 2: D1 was a first attempt towards this aim, D9 fulfils the objective

Objective 3: D1 and D9 were conceived as open system standards in order to respond to the main market: renewal of existing equipment.

Objective 4: D6 preliminary hazard analysis of UGTMS has defined common safety concepts applicable to IT systems and namely UGTMS. These concepts will be used for definition of the safety objectives for the full automation of an existing line.

D10, using the chosen German, French and English cases, achieved a proposal for a common safety and conformity assessment procedure. This procedure is of course applicable in the context of IT systems. It will be put forward as an informal draft by UITP and UNIFE.

Objective 5:The Network of Universities is successfully working, it has defined a common Transportation Master degree for “Université de Valenciennes et du Hainaut-Cambrésis” and “Technische Universität Dresden” and students are already planning to share their tuition between these two universities. The network has now 13 members, among which universities located in Czech Republic, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy Netherlands, Slovakia, Spain and UK.

3SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE RESULTS

3.1Work Package 1: Project management (Leader RATP)

3.1.1The involved staff

The management of the project and the work performed have been carried-out by:

-the EC thanks to

+ Jean Arnold VINOISHead of Unit

+ Antonio COLAÇOHead of Sector

+ Roberto FERRAVANTEScientific officer

+ Cornelis de GRAAFFinancial officer

+ Britta van den DRIESSCHEFinancial officer

as regards the scientific and financial matters and the follow-up of the project,

-the RATP as Co-ordinator of the project, thanks to

+ the significant involvement of the RATP transport systems division

André PASCAL and Didier BENSE successively Director of the transport systems division,

Jean-Paul SCHNEIDER, Daniel COINEAU, Xavier DENIS engineers in this division

Gérald CHURCHILL, formerly Director of the METEOR line

Jean-Maurice BIDAULT, Director of the railway operation engineering delegation

Michel HENRY, Marianne LEVY and Véronique MIRAMONT engineers in this delegation

Jean-Paul PERRIN, Jean-PierreRIFF and FrançoiseDUCHÉZEAU successively Directors of the CEO’s Research and Innovation delegation

Catherine ROGGE project assistant of this delegation

and when required, by other engineers of RATP, notably Christian BERHAULT

+ the assignment to the co-ordination and management of the project of a specific team

Jean-Paul RICHARD - Co-ordinator

Antoinette MOREL - Engineer in Organisation, Planning, Co-ordination

Chantal MASSARI - Assistant for the organisation and co-ordination

Afida KERDOUCI in charge of the financial control and follow-up

-and all the UGTMS partners - (See the Acknowledgement section)

3.1.2The management

The project has been organised and led in the strict respect of the EC rules, and using all the available relevant information.

Are to be underlined and reminded:

  • The quality plan specifying the details of how the partners should work together and how to draw up the various expected documents,
  • The organisation of the work,

-Splitting of the workpackages into tasks

-Assignment to each task of a task leader who co-ordinates in detail the related works

-Key role assigned to the WP leaders

  • The "administrative" management: follow-up, reminders, organisation of the various technical and Consortium meetings required by the project,
  • The various progress reports:

-The 3 monthly reports,

-The progress reports,

-The mid-term assessment report,

-The present final report.

  • The follow-up of the resources consumed for each task, workpackage and by each partner,
  • The control of the cost statements.

Project steering organisation


Project management structure


3.1.3External communication

  • Presentations at congresses and conferences:

30th June 2004JP. Richard LONDON Signalling 2004

9th April 2004JP. Richard École Nationale des Ponts et Chaussées CHAMPS-sur-MARNE presentation

30th September 2003J. Ebel Technische Universität DRESDEN 19th Conference on Traffic and Transport Science

September 2003N. Olthoff & JP. Richard MUNICH presentation to DB

4th 6th August 2003Prs J. Schuette & C. Cassir Seiki University TOKYO IFAC symposium on “Control in Transport systems”

24th 25th June 2003JP. Richard LONDON Signalling 2003

4th 6th June 2003JP. Richard GDANSK CESURA 03

8th May 2003D. Bense WASHINGTON CBTC Conference

16th 17th April 2003J. Martin SEOUL Urban Transports Symposium

4th 9th May 2003JP. Richard & LA. Larsson MADRID 55th UITP World Congress

25th 26th March 2003E. Goddard LONDON Signal-tech Conference

20th 21st June 2002 JP. Richard LONDON Signalling 2002

  • Visitors to RATP

25th June 2004SEMTCAR Rennes visitors, presentation by JP. Schneider

6th April 2004DPP Prague Metro visitors, presentations by JP. Richard & JP. Schneider

3rd February 2003SL Stockholm Metro visitors, presentation by JP. Schneider

  • UITP “Electrical Installations and Safety Systems” sub-committee

25th October 2002Madrid meeting, presentation by JP. Schneider

27th April 2001Vienna meeting, presentation by JP. Schneider

  • Publications

3rd quarter 2004SAVOIR FAIRE article by Jean-Paul Richard, Jean-Paul Schneider & Xavier Denis

Mai 2004Revue Générale des Chemins de Fer article by Jean-Paul Richard, Jean-Paul Schneider & Daniel Coineau

April 2004Contact UTE (newsletter) article by Daniel Coineau

April 2004Entre Les Lignes (Internal RATP newspaper) Jean-Paul Richard’s interview

4th quarter 2003SAVOIR FAIRE (RATP know how reports) article by Jean-Paul Richard, Jean-Paul Schneider & Daniel Coineau

3.1.4Executive summary of the deliverable D11

D11 was sent to the European Commission on 13th July 2004

D11 Technology Implementation Plan

Overview and description of the project and its results

  • Executive summary
  • Overview of all main project results
  • Quantified Data on the dissemination and use of the project results
  • Comment on European Interest
  • Expected project impact

Description of each result

5 sections:

  • Definition of UGTMS, Deliverables D1 & D9
  • Benchmarking, Deliverables D2 & D7
  • Users’ group and Network of Universities, Deliverable D4
  • ATP Functional Requirements Specification, Deliverables D5 & D8
  • Safety and conformity assessment for FRS, Deliverables D6 & D10

For each section:

  • Description of the result
  • Quantified data about the result

Description of their intentions by each partner:

This is main part of the plan, it includes the undertakings of all partners:

  • Renewal projects (operators)
  • Radio transmission (operators)
  • Market (industry)
  • Interchangeability (operators and industry)
  • Safety and conformity assessment (Universities and research centres)
  • Existing standards like EN50128 (Universities and research centres)
  • Educational aspect (Universities)
  • Policy (all)
  • Research (all)
  • LUL added a specific foreword about Public Private Partnership
  • Renewal projects (operators)

All operator partners have a renewal program and extension works in progress. As an example, the RATP renewal program is dedicated to the command/control systems on all lines of the ‘METRO’ (except line 14-METEOR and Line n° 1) in a 25 years time frame. In consequence, RATP has already attributed the contracts for the renewal of signalling, ATP and ATO on lines 13,3,5,9, 10 & 12. RATP plans also to bring Line N° 1 to a full automation status in 2009.

Radio transmission (RATP)

In the recent answers to calls for tender from other operators, the choice that was made is that of a radio transmission based train control system, which is also the current UGTMS proposal.

Another main characteristic of the offers is that no supplier proposes the GSM-R Radio transmission in the “metro” environment.

Technical solutions already chosen by the different properties are diverse. For example, the RATP line n° 13 proposal chosen is an IEEE 802.11 radio transmission in the 2.4 GHz ISM band, this transmission is not the one retained by NYCT for the Canarsie Line project.

This reinforces the great importance of FFFIS interfaces between UGTMS system and Radio transmission. That way the radio transmission choice is transparent for the train control system of a given line.

Market (CSEE)

It is mainly renewal oriented, the trend is not any more to implement classical solutions (except, sometimes for reuse in fallback mode) but to use Communication Based Train Control. This trend is in line with the solutions proposed for railway networks like ERTMS.

Interchangeability (RATP)

In general operators tend to introduce the interchangeability concept and the verification of its achievement all along the implementation of the equipment. Calls are organised in order to facilitate the achievement of this policy. The radio Transmission system choice is generally completely opened, and its external interfaces will be described for further evolutions.

As an example, in the last RATP call for tender (“OURAGAN”) and in the related contracts, the concept of “interchangeability” has been introduced. The system has been divided in “lots” where wayside equipment is given to one supplier and the onboard equipment to a different one. This creates the preconditions for a definition of the relevant FFFIS by supply industry. This has paved the way for structuring calls for tender and supply packages in a commonly understandable manner; around those packages, suppliers have already developed compatible approaches leading to more competitive responses with reduced tender costs and lower offer prices.

Interchangeability (CSEE)

In general supply industry partners undertake to exchange needed information in order to support the interchangeability policy requested by the clients.

Safety and conformity assessment (TUD)

Facing the present diversity of approach among the Member States and the inadequacy of some methods to new IT technologies used in the field of urban guided transport systems, Research institutes and Universities will propose guidelines in order to improve the situation, notably at the regulatory or standardisation level.

Existing standards like EN 50128 (TUD)

Their application in the field of urban guided transport systems leads to a blow up of cases combinations in the risk analysis, strategy for simplification will be proposed.

Educational aspect (TUD)

An “interoperability” for student training will be analysed and improved during the coming years aiming at a virtual educational network. Consequently, exchange of students between Universities will be fostered.

Policy

In consequence operators and industry partners will try to introduce UGTMS concepts during the renewal or extension process, as defined in the technical annex:

“Each operator partner has to renew its old signalling equipment and implement new systems (with or without driver) during the next 30 years. The pace of this renewal will be linked at the beginning of this period with investment capacities of the operating companies, at the end of the period, investment will be triggered by availability concerns upon the old system. In any case, the implementation of UGTMS functions will be a line by line piecemeal process, all actions converging towards the global UGTMS system. In this process each operator partner will issue calls for tender with performance specifications allowing industry to answer with UGTMS solutions and operators will choose UGTMS each time it will appear economically viable.”

“Each industry partner will answer to any European call for tender with at least one UGTMS scenario, whenever possible, under technical performances and/or economical criteria.”

“Research institutions and Universities, advisors of Member States or regional authorities will promote the UGTMS guidelines and the corresponding educational evolution.”

Research

All UGTMS partners have participated to the MODURBAN proposal, in response to the item “Next generation affordable urban guided public transport” of the 13th November 2003 Thematic call FP6-2003-Transport-3 in the area of “Surface transport” 2B prepared by DG Research. The main target of the MODURBAN project is to design, develop and test an innovative and open common core system architecture and its key interfaces (this covers Command Control, energy saving and access subsystems), paving the way for the next generations of urban-guided public transport systems. This approach will be applied to new lines as well as to the renewal and extension of existing lines and will facilitate cost-effective migration from driver to driverless operation. This integrated approach will avoid the risk of new rolling stock and subsystems being built from unproven prototype sub-assemblies.

The UGTMS partners have taken leading positions in the MODURBAN project.

3.2Work Package 2: UGTMS Definition, ERTMS & other review (Leader RATP)

3.2.1Objectives

-Build consensus about UGTMS definition

-Build a functions list

-Make an architecture attempt

-Benchmark UGTMS as defined above with recent projects

-Benchmark UGTMS with ERTMS in order to maximise the reusing of ERTMS functions and products

3.2.2Achievements and Deliverables

Consensus is built, a UGTMS team now exists joining all partners, collaborators, irrespective of their nationalities and recognising the different and compatible interests of operators, supply industries, research institutes and universities (win/win strategy).

The necessary visits of equipment in Paris, Madrid, Berlin, London and Lisbon reinforced this team spirit.

Deliverable D1: “First report for a preliminary definition of UGTMS” (functions list, system principles and architecture attempt) was sent in time 9th July 2002.

Deliverable D2: “Preliminary report on benchmarking” (narrative and Matrix 2 highlighting differences with ERTMS and the 6 recent projects benchmarked) was sent with a 3 weeks delay on 29th January 2003.