EVALUATION OF FOUR DIFFERENT RAIL RAPID TRANSIT PROPULSION SYSTEMS
At UMTA request, APTA evaluated four different propulsion systems. Due to lack of precise estimates for acquisition, maintenance, and traction power savings, this analysis is qualitative and adheres to the guideline that system elements will be compared subjectively, based on known design features and conservative extrapolation. A comparison was made of Garrett's flywheel energy storage, GE's AC propulsion (pulse-width modulation - PWM), Delco's self-synchronous motor, and a regenerative chopper to determine life cycle costs and related factors that would impact on eventual selection and application for revenue service.
Washington, DC United States 20036
Urban Mass Transportation AdministrationUrban Rapid Rail Vehicle and Systems Program
Washington, DC United States 20590
- Greene, F S
- Publication Date: 1976-11
- Pagination: 20 p.
- TRT Terms: Alternating current motors; Analysis; Choppers (Electricity); Costs; Flywheels; Life cycle analysis; Life cycle costing; Motors; Propulsion; Pulse duration modulation; Pulse modulation; Rapid transit; Rapid transit cars; Regenerative braking; Solid state devices; Synchronous motors; Thyristors; Traction; Vehicle power plants
- Candidate Terms: Traction drives
- Uncontrolled Terms: Cost analysis; Propulsion systems
- Old TRIS Terms: Choppers; Electric choppers; Pulse modulated control; Rapid transit railways; Solid state
- Subject Areas: Finance; Public Transportation; Vehicles and Equipment;
- Accession Number: 00167086
- Record Type: Publication
- Source Agency: National Technical Information Service
- Report/Paper Numbers: UMTA/URRVS-77/01 Final Rpt.
- Contract Numbers: DOT-UT-60060
- Files: NTIS, TRIS, USDOT
- Created Date: Oct 29 1981 12:00AM